Here we go again, this time from the Washington Post:

Numerous detainees at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba told FBI interrogators that guards had mistreated copies of the Koran, including one who said in 2002 that guards "flushed a Koran in the toilet," according to new FBI documents released today.

The summaries of FBI interviews, obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union as part of an ongoing lawsuit, also include allegations that the Koran was kicked, thrown to the floor and withheld as punishment and that guards mocked Muslim prisoners during prayers.

Not surprising that the Washington Post would come riding to the rescue of Newsweek after the collapse of the original Koran desecration story. But there is very good reason to doubt the contents of this story. Remember, it is well known that Al Qaeda training manuals instruct captured detainees to manufacture allegations such as the desecration of the Koran by by American "infidels." Because of this it is important that any news organization look upon such allegations by Al Qaeda detainees with extreme skepticism. It is not responsible for the Post to jump all all over a story like this so quickly, especially in the aftermath of the Newsweek disaster, based on FBI summaries which cannot be corroborated.

The Washington Post itself admits that the documents contain FBI summaries, and "do not generally provide corroboration of the allegations." But that sure did not stop the Washington Post from rushing it into into a large headline story in its online edition

As with Newsweek, the Washington Post should have asked itself prior to running this story whether, even if the allegations had even the hint of credibility to them, was it a good idea to run it? Would it inflame the Islamic world and harm the diplomatic efforts of the United States there? Would it harm the war effort? Would it cause greater danger for American troops because of Muslim outrage?

And what is the ACLU doing involved with this? How is it that the ACLU has gotten involved with the civil rights of terrorist detainees at Guantánamo Bay?

Many questions just scream out from this story, but the greatest question is why did the Washington Post run it in the first place?

One reasonable answer is that the Washington Post is firing a shot across the bow of the Bush administration, just as the reporters at the White House briefing did with Scott McClellan after the Newsweek fiasco, and is asserting that it is not going to be controlled by a White House that it falsely perceives is trying to manage the media's editorial process.

It is unfortunate that the Post has decided to fire that shot with this story, that will only serve to further inflame the Islamic world against the United States, with all of the resulting negative consequences.