Fair & Balanced Reporting?

Many read the headlines in February this year of the US military burning the Koran and it brought world attention.  Here is how the story broke originally:

He said that a preliminary investigation showed that “American soldiers had burned four copies of the Holy Koran.” It was not clear if other copies were damaged but not actually burned. Earlier reports from elders who visitedBagram Air Base on Tuesday and saw some of the Korans indicated that 10 to 15 had been damaged to varying degrees.

The Koran-burning episode offered support for Mr. Karzai’s argument that the Afghan government should take over the American-run detention center in Parwan, where more than 3,000 suspected insurgents are housed, as he demanded in December. The United States has declined, citing legal reasons and saying that the Afghans are not prepared to run the maximum security site.  (NYT 2/22/12)

Here is what really happened:

Acting on suspicions that prisoners were passing illicit notes in the margins of library books, U.S. troops asked an Afghan translator to take a look. The translator concluded, erroneously, that the majority of the library’s holdings were extremist in nature, according to the investigative report.

Prison guards boxed up almost 2,000 of the suspicious books. Of those, 474 were Korans and 1,100 were unobjectionable religious tracts. The remainder were secular volumes, the investigation found.

When Afghan soldiers and guards at the prison learned of the plan to burn the books, they objected loudly. But U.S. troops, responding to miscommunicated orders as well as suspicions about their Afghan allies, transported the materials to a burn pit at Bagram air base.

Most of the texts were rescued at the last minute by Afghan workers at the base, who quickly shut off the incinerator and doused the flames after realizing that the daily trash pile contained Muslim holy books. The military said, however, that “up to 100” Korans and other religious texts were burned.

Afterward, the Afghans so distrusted Americans to properly handle the saved Korans that they hid them under rugs, in closets and even in kitchen microwaves.

The investigating officer, Army Brig. Gen. Bryan G. Watson, said in the report that he found no evidence of “malicious intent to disrespect the Koran or defame the faith of Islam” on the part of the U.S. troops.

“Ultimately, this tragic incident resulted from a lack of cross-talk between leaders and commands, a lack of senior leader involvement [and] distrust among our US Service Members and our partners,” he concluded. (Wash.Post 8/27/12  'U.S. troops tried to burn 500 copies of Koran, investigation says')

The truth was that the military was acting on suspicions of intelligence being passed through materials based on information from the Afghan translator and so they destroyed them.

How is this a miscommunication by  US and the Afghan military?  Yet, the Post still uses the headline 'US troops tried to burn 500 copies of Koran'.  No, the US purposely got rid of illicit material that was extremist in nature that was deemed a national security threat.

What am I missing?

This is just another simple reminder that I truly need look at all sides of a story...

Grace & Peace.

PLW

First-Hand Encounter

'Remember how short my time is' (Psalm 89:47)

Yesterday, driving to a meeting, I witnessed the immediate aftermath of a roll-over accident which eventually would claim the lives of two teenagers, one of which was lying on the road in front of me. 

On the shoulder near an exit ramp of a major interstate through Minneapolis were three bloodied individuals lying on the road next to a smashed front-end of a Toyota Camry.

One of these individuals was a young man, apparently in his teens, covering his face with his hands, blood and scrapes on his body bawling with an expression that only comes from deep, deep pain.  This grief did not appear to be of a physical pain, but one of deep emotional despair.

Another girl was scurrying around moving things away from the third person, who was lying lifeless on the side of the car, apparently thrown from the vehicle.

Many cars had pulled over to the side of the road with cell phones in hand talking to police, etc. to bring assistance to the area.  Brake lights in front of me and stacked cars behind me moving over to avoid the scene.

This provoked my thoughts to how I interact in love to those around me.  One of the great commandments that Jesus gave is to love our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22). I saw many people rushing to the scene to help, call, move, transport, etc. and I was deeply moved by those unselfish reactions.

Why is that so unique in our world today?  I would propose that we have perhaps abandoned or are simply unaware of the first part of Jesus' statement: 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind'. 

My love for God, who deeply loves me, should compel me to act in love to other people, unconditionally. 

It is my hope that this action in my life becomes more and more automatic and doesn't require the events of a tragedy to move me to action.
 
Grace & Peace,
PLW

Above the Law

Exhibit A: read this article on Jon Corzine, the head of MF Global who, as it turns out, will likely not be criminally liable for the disappearance of $1.6 BILLION of customer funds.

In the securities world, there is a term called 'commingling' or 'rehypothecating'.  This is where, in the case of a brokerage outfit, the firm allow both brokerage assets to be used together with the customer assets for operations, etc. In the United States and Canada, this law is strictly prohibited.  Regulation in the UK is more lax.  However, it appears that Mr.Corzine, even though he admittedly violated the law, will not be prosecuted for it.

James Giddens, the trustee overseeing the MF Global's liquidation, has now accounted for all $1.6 in customer funds that were used by MF Global to try and keep the failing company afloat.  Corzine stated that he didn't know what happened and that it wasn't his intent that the company money be combined with client assets

Why is this brash violation allowed by Eric Holder? I think it's because he feels the people that pay his salary are like this:




Is it because there is a certain class of people in society that no matter how bad they are, they are above the law and it's sword of justice?  Or is it because our law lacks teeth or at least, the teeth it once had has been removed (see Glass-Steagall).

Is it fair to allow a person to go free when he knowingly disobeyed the law in order to save his reputation and company (and many jobs too I get it), letting others pick up the pieces from his destructive decision-making?

Certainly, this doesn't seem fair.  Nor does the governments apparent dismissal of it promote in my mind any kind of justice.

This raises an interesting biblical question in my mind:  Is God a God of fairness or justice?

It certainly wasn't fair that Esau had the birthright stolen from his brother, nor was it fair to Uriah the Hittite who had his life taken while in service of the King who was the one committing adultery to his wife?

Also interesting that the Bible includes accounts of the sinfulness of man, our shortcomings, our passions, desires, faults etc.  Yet, God's love for us remains constant and never-ending.

In the end, although difficult to understand, God is sovereign and things happen within the confines of his authority and I rest in confidence there.

However, is difficult to overcome my sense and desire for fairness when observing such egregious situations.

PLW

Chick-fil-A

For those of you not in the know, the CEO of Chick-fil-A has publically stated this:

The company invests in Christian growth and ministry through its WinShape Foundation (WinShape.com). The name comes from the idea of shaping people to be winners. It began as a college scholarship and expanded to a foster care program, an international ministry, and a conference and retreat center modeled after the Billy Graham Training Center at the Cove. "That morphed into a marriage program in conjunction with national marriage ministries," Cathy added. Some have opposed the company's support of the traditional family. "Well, guilty as charged," said Cathy when asked about the company's position. "We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. "We operate as a family business ... our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that," Cathy emphasized. "We intend to stay the course," he said. "We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

Unfortunately, the media has determined that because Mr. Cathy is pro-marriage (mand and a woman) he is a bigot, when in fact Mr. Cathy is simply stating that he is in favor of the biblical definition of marriage. So, rather than the gay-marriage supporters speaking out against the Bible, which would be more appropriate in my opinon, gay marriage supporters are championing not only a media campaign against a company that has a storied tradition of Christian values (evidenced by it not operating on Sundays in observance of those beleifs) but more importantly, against a company and person that never made any comment about gay marriage in the first place. Using the logic of the gay supporters, those in favor of divorce should also be appalled at his statement regarding being 'married to their first wives'. Ridiculous. However, and to their credit, the gay rights activists (LGBT American population of around 9 million Americans (4%) according to most gallup polls) continue to sway public opinion despite being an overwhelming minority. That would be an interesting study, I suppose, as to why LGBT Americans have persuaded policy makers in such a dramatic fashion when the actual constituents that the lawmakers represent is such a small number. Is it fear of being labled a bigot? Fear of offending people because of your personal beliefs? Or is it because a majority of Americans are indifferent to the issue? Grace & Peace