In today’s issue (Arabic), al-Ghad published an apology on the front page. Here is the gist of it.
Al-Ghad said Raed al-Banna was not the car bomber of al Hilla and apologized for publishing information without checking it. Al-Ghad apologized as well to the Iraqi people for publishing this information. The paper also condemned the attacks on Sunni and Shia Iraq and stated their support and solidarity with the Iraqi people. Okay at least they apologized, this makes me feel much better. Perhaps I will change my mind about boycotting them.
Also in al Ghad, a Jordanian official denied (Arabic) that the Hilla bomber was Jordanian.
In addition, the father of the alleged bomber sent a letter (Arabic) to al-Ghad that in essence denied his son’s role in al-Hilla, saying that his son left Jordan to work and that he received a phone call informing him that his son was killed in Mosul. He denied organizing what the paper called "a martyr’s wedding" and condemned the attacks on Iraqis. The father said he only received people in his tribe conference hall that had heard the news that his son was killed in one of the districts of Mosul. He also said he plans on suing the satellite stations that ruined his image and that of his family.
The lesson of this fiasco: Irresponsible journalism can result in national scandals. Advice to al-Ghad: Train your journalists!
Before I go, I just discovered a NY Times story following up on these events. Their version follows out much of what I’ve written here, adding some pictures and curious quotes. The full text is also available on the newswire.
natasha, even fired is a little harsh in my opinion. unless he has a trend of making up fake news i dont think his whole career should center around this one article which may have been based on miscommunications. all that will happen now is that he’ll be thrown in jail for the embarassment and then harrassed or tortured.
there should be accountability and responsibility and something tells me those two words were uttered by the king when he visted the editor in chief a few days ago.
linda, you could be right but i doubt he’s got any kind of information.
in general, i think this article sucks but it does bring to the surface those two words again “responsibility” and “accountability” and throw in “integrity” too. they may seem mundane but i believe they are the most crucial thing to come out of this mess simply because we are begining this new era of free press in jordan and this experiment calls for the aformentioned elements to be reviewed extensivly so that when such cases happen we dont have to call king abdullah to the rescue, who im sure has much better things to do such as trying to stabalise the country.
Natasha, fired is worse than prison…
Okay you guys,
Have you heard of Jason Blair of the NY TImes? A reporter who made up pratcially all of his stories? Unfortunately, things like this happen.
Natasha and Nas, the reporter could be in jail because he may be withholding information. The same thing would happen in America if there was a story the government was investigating, or if it went to court and a reporter withheld info a judge ordered him or her to tell. This maybe the case with this reporter. Maybe he has sources who told him the story and he did not want to reveal thenm because he promised to keep them anonymous. Who knows.
And did Iraqi officials identify who the bomber is yet? I am sure the bomber’s body was blown up all over the place but i am sure they can find something to indentify him. What if this Jordanian guy did not even do it and hes somewhere secluded and does not watch tv or watch the news. who knows.
I would also like to know if there are more pictures of the “martyr celebration” other than the one that was posted, because if therer is only the one that was posted, it does not prove anything. In fact, it looks like a medallah. who knows. that is te problem here. nobody knows anything. Darn it, where’s Woodward and Bernstein when you need them.
Nas,
I agree with you, the reporter should not have been arrested. He should have been questioned then fired along with the page editor who approved the story.
im getting a dan rather flashback.
well parts of this story are starting to make some sense. if this obituary was taken out then im expecting that the father, upon recieving the phone call, concluded the following…his son had underwent a martyr operation which killed americans. the events that followed are based on the logical conclusions that were drawn from that phone call.
hubby, about the quote ure refering to, it was in all probablity something that was lost in translation. had this man killed an occupational force he would’ve been deemed a martyr.
i dont understand why the reporter is in prison, thats one thing the dosnt make sense to me. and as for the son in question, no evidence has verified it was him in the first place other than a phone call that was also placed to the neighbours.
something tells me this may be the cruelest prank phone call ever made.
People remember:
1) It has not been confirmed that the bomber was Jordanian.
2) The father is grief-stricken it may be that he was wishing his son was a martyr.
3) Beheadings are not confined to Mosul. Neither are executions. In fact, members of the Iraqi Interior Ministry’s police force have taken to executing women they deem to be prostitutes. This is the force trained by…you guessed it Uncle Sam.
Savak, anyone?
It’s is strange that the New York Times article makes no reference to Mosul. (What was he doing in Mosul, beheading people per chance?)
I don’t know why reading the article in the NYT makes the story all the more tragic. How did this well-to-do family not challenge a religious viewpoint that allowed their son to become a mass murderer?
Wake up Jordan.
More on the Jordanian terror connection
The NYT’s Dexter Filkins has an interview with the family of the alleged Jordanian al-Hilla suicide bomber. They deny ever celebrating their son’s “martyrdom” and express shock and horror that their son, Raed Mansur al-Banna, may have been involved in …
A martyr is anyone dying outside their country? Is what the father told the NYTimes correct? It sure seems that for those interested in a heaven full of virgins and wine it’d be an easier choice to move to the Bahamas and die of old age as a martyr than to strap explosives to yourself. But that might just be me. Is the father making this up or do you suppose it’s a bad translation?
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark! This apology from al-Ghad is certainly appropriate and necessary. But this new take on the story does not fly with me. This article was supposedly motivated by an advert taken out celebrating the martyrdom of this guy. Now the family denies culpability for what it says, “he died in Mosul” they say. Well, someone should find the reporter that wrote this story for al-Ghad and find out a bit more about this. Someone is lying.
I’ve encountered good and bad journalists in Jordan. But I can’t imagine a journalist that would make up this entire story. The idea that he went to Salt, visited the family during some “event” and got quotes from the brother … it seems an amazing bit of creativity. I can only imagine someone being paid/put up to do such a thing. I can’t see the motive for it.
Al-Banna’s father says it was just some sort of a wake. Something is definitely fishy. Also, my wife reports to me that last night Aljazeera ran a comment from the father, looking very stiff, where he read or stated something that seemed mighty “produced” about the whole situation.
The NY Times article has a couple of very interesting comments from the family:
Without a doubt there is reason for embarrassment over this whole issue on a multitude of levels. There should have been an editorial team prepared to check and hold such a story if it was in fact bogus. But of course, it misses the larger issue. If, in fact, this guy did carry out this attack, that is a terrible, terrible thing that al-Ghad should have reported. How could it have occurred? That’s a story in itself; what’s the motivation (the story provided one that should be investigated: 9/11, becomes religious, hanging out with jihadis, etc).
I don’t agree with Nas on much, but I do agree that what was necessary here was even-handed coverage of the events. That was the major problem with the story from the get-go: it seemed to condone and even celebrate the actions, moving from article to propaganda.
No, no. I don’t think we have the full story here. But, as has proven the case the world over, a new story has surfaced and now the truth will become ever increasingly difficult to divine.