Shoreshthe drift report · all case files
Case file

2005 Quran desecration controversy

The word “terror” appeared 1 times in this article's opening at its peak in 2010. Today the opening carries none. 2 remain further down the article, where a reader arriving from a search result does not go.
Measured, not asserted. Every count, date and revision on this page was taken from Wikipedia's own history and checked against the live article. The words quoted are theirs.
Machine-checked against the full current article on 2026-08-02. “terror” appeared 1 times in this article's opening at its peak. Today the opening has none; the body has 2.
We saved snapshots of this article over twenty years; you are reading the 2010 one. Red dashes: removed from Wikipedia since. Pale dots: rewritten; the numbered note shows what it says now. 1 tap a number or a side note to jump between them
The opening as it read in 2010

2005 began when Newsweek's April 30 issue contained a report asserting that U.S. prison guards or interrogators had deliberately damaged a copy of Islam 's holiest book, the Qur'an .1 A week later, Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in The New Yorker , reporting the words of Pakistani politician Imran Khan : “This is what the U.S. is doing—desecrating the Koran.” This incident caused upset in parts of the Muslim world. 'For five days, nothing.2 Then, on May 6th, Khan, in a press conference in Islamabad, waved a copy of the offending issue and thundered, “This is what the U.S. is doing—desecrating the Koran.” And, rhetorically addressing Musharraf: “This war on terrorism is self-defeating if, on the one hand, you are demanding that we help them”—that is, us—“and, on the other hand, they are desecrating the book on which our entire faith is based.” Khan’s remarks were broadcast repeatedly throughout the Muslim world.3 The riots began on May 10th; in Afghanistan, seventeen people died and more than a hundred were injured.' The Newsweek article, part of which was subsequently retracted, stated that allegations that U.S. personnel at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp had deliberately damaged a copy of the book by flushing it in a toilet in order to torment the prison's Muslim captives had been confirmed by government sources.4 The Newsweek article stated that an official had seen a preliminary copy of an unreleased U.S. government report confirming the deliberate damage. Later on, the magazine retracted this when the (still) unnamed official changed his story. A Pentagon investigation uncovered at least five cases of Qur'an mishandling by U.S. personnel at the base, but insisted that none of these were acts of desecration. The Pentagon's report also accused a prisoner of damaging a copy of the Qur'an by putting it in a toilet. In 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union , suing under the Freedom of Information Act , secured the release of a 2002 FBI report containing a detainee's accusation of ill-treatment, including throwing a Qur'an into a toilet. This specific accusation had been made on several occasions by other Guantanamo detainees since 2002; Newsweek' s initial account of a government report confirming it sparked protests throughout the Islamic world and riots in Afghanistan , where pre-planned demonstrations turned deadly. A worldwide controversy followed. The Newsweek affair turned the spotlight on earlier media reports of such incidents. Accusations of Qur'an desecration as a part of U.S. interrogations at prisons in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Guantánamo Bay had been made by a number of sources going back to 2002.

This is Wikipedia's own text, saved in our repository. Their copy of it is revision 347594095.
Today
“terror” appeared 1 times in this article's opening at its peak. Today the opening has none; the body has 2. Read the current article and compare.
2005201020152020Oct '232025
terror011000
Counts in the opening at each snapshot. Green: the word gained ground. Red: it was cut. Grey: no change.

Sections that no longer exist

Present on 6 October 2023, absent today. A heading can vanish because the section was deleted or because it was renamed or merged, and we have not separated those here, so treat this as a list of what to check rather than a verdict.

  • US military findings 1,635 characters
Struck red text is no longer in the article; dotted amber text was rewritten. Every revision id links to Wikipedia's copy; the text shown is our own saved copy. Data: /data. Wikipedia text is CC BY-SA; quoted for the record; not affiliated with Wikipedia.

← back to the drift report