After 6 weeks of near total silence on the controversy over the disupted "6 Sunnis immolated, mosques burned" story, AP has now issued a report that recognizes one exists - and it alludes to accusations by unidentified bloggers over the whereabouts of their sole source, one Jamil Hussein. The Iraqi government has reportedly issued a statement that Jamil Gholaiem Hussein "faces arrest" for talking to media.
Curt, at Flopping Aces, Michelle Malkin and Bob Owens have the most recent updates. At the moment, most are willing to to give the benefit of the doubt to the AP;
So it appears Jamil Hussein may be real. Good. that means there is a real person to question regarding 61 mostly uncorroborated stories provided as exclusives by Hussein to the Associated Press.This includes the story that made him (in)famous, where Hussein and the AP claimed 24 people were killed--six by being pulled from a mosque, doused in kerosene, and purposefully burned alive, where the other 18 merely died in an "inferno" at another mosque under attack--during a series of four mosque attacks. In later AP stories, the four mosques trickled down to one, and 18 of the 24 dead mysteriously disappeared, without the Associated Press releasing a retraction or a correction.
More - Gateway Pundit reviews the list of inconsistancies.
The AP’s initial response to questions raised about Capt. Hussein stated that he “had a record of reliability and truthfulness,” neglecting to mention that the AP itself could not verify at least one of his prior claims and had contrary information. Moreover, The New York Times was unable to substantiate the story and reported that some neighborhood residents denied it. Similarly, the Washington Post reported that two local imams denied such an attack took place. Months later, disgraced former CNN exec. Eason Jordan found “conflicting and unconfirmed information regarding whether there’s a Captain Hussein and whether the reported immolation happened.” (I expect the left-leaning blogs that suddenly discover the Jamil Hussein story now will focus on the eeeevil right-wing blogs and largely ignore that The New York Times, WaPo and IraqSlogger were all a part of this particular VRWC.)Posted by Kate at January 5, 2007 1:22 AMWe now know there is a Capt. Hussein, but we pretty much knew that already; he appears to have been a source for al Jazeera before he was a source for the AP. But we are not much closer to knowing who he is—his background, possible biases arising from that background, the origin of his ability to be intimately aware of incidents outside his jurisdiction, why he claimed four mosques were burned, and so on. Nor are these moot questions, as it seems that most of the AP stories sourced to Hussein are not corroborated by other press accounts. Indeed, in this case, there remains no evidence of his claim that four mosques were attacked, and only the word of three anonymous Sunnis that six people were burned alive (one of whom contradicted the first AP story in one respect).
I do not expect the AP to respond to those questions any better than it did questions about Capt. Hussein. With a Gallup Poll showing that most Americans believe that the news media’s coverage of the situation in Iraq is generally inaccurate, you might think they might care more. Then again, why should the AP’s attitude about its Iraq coverage be any different from its usual attitude? AP executive editor Kathleen Carroll gushed over the AP’s coverage of Hurricane Katrina—stories the AP later reported were highly exaggerated, sometimes outright false. Carroll also denied that photos of bodies taken after an Israeli airstrike in Qana, Lebanon, were staged—despite the fact that you can see the staging on video. Despite this, the AP dressed up the photo-op stage manager, Salam Daher, as heroic. It is not a track record that inspires confidence in the AP’s ability to police itself.
Jamil is a personal friend of mine. He is alive and well and living in Scranton, PA. Thats why they can't find him in Iraq. He only pops over to there when the AP needs a story. In fact to save on the cost of air fare, Jamil has been sending in his eye witness accounts by e-mail. His regular job is that of, what else, a cab driver.
Posted by: a different Bob at January 5, 2007 8:22 AMSorry for OT Kate, but...
The December Unemployment rate hit a THIRTY YEAR LOW.
I'm sure that since the CPC has been scrutinized for our poor environmental record, we'll see the press equally applauding such a stunning milestone occuring under the Conservatives watch..........(crickets chirping)..........
Posted by: mitch at January 5, 2007 8:36 AMSorry about the off-topic.
HAVE YOU SEEN THIS NEW CBC TV SHOW??
http://www.littlemosque.ca/
OK, back to the subject,
Many suggest AP was playing rope a dope not revealing Jamil.
An equally plausible theory (if not moreso) is that this guy made the stories up - recal no bodies, funerals, ect. -
and they don't want him available for scrutiny.
Malkin's heading there, and I suspect will get some real answers.
Posted by: mitch at January 5, 2007 8:49 AMWow, so now it's admitted he exists 'eh? And he's wanted for arrest by the Iraqi gov't for talking to journalists? That's a pretty democratic, rational-legal gov't the bush II crew has got for itself in Iraq isn't it? Wanting to arrest people for talking to the media.
I can't be bothered checking out the links you've provided since i've already lost an hour of my life reading other links that crowed about how Jamil Hussein didn't exist. I don't intend to waste still more time reading self-serving blather about supposed "inconsistencies" in his stories.
Once again, i ask you, what is the point of this? Are you trying to say that all media coverage of Iraq is based on fabrications? And that Iraq is actually an undiscovered vacation paradise with no sectarian/ethnic conflict?
Most of the world has given up on you sorts of deluded people and the discredited governments you still worship.
You're only making yourselves look increasingly foolish with this strident nonsense.
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=21816
Posted by: thwap at January 5, 2007 8:54 AMThwap..if you really had been reading the links (highly doubtful..)you would have come to the conclusion that there is a pretty serious disinformation campaign going on, and a lot of the so called "news" of massacres, bombings, sectarian violence etc. has been made up..
Why should a man (or men) not be held accountable for sowing the seeds of more real violence by the highly partisan nature of these actions?
I won't hold my breath waiting for self policing of the various news agencies in regards to this matter, nor will i be surprised if there are indeed many Jamil Husseins...
Posted by: kursk at January 5, 2007 9:11 AMthwap - for your sake I hope you never get hit by a speeding locomotive or some such thing because you will never see it coming. Just like you can't see the glaring inconsistencies and outright lies attributed to Jamil Hussein. You call us "deluded"! All you have to do is wake up and smell the coffee. Look at the trail of discredited story after discredited story. Maybe the issue isn't so much whether Jamil exists or not but whether he and the AP are engaged in a pattern of deception when it comes to reporting events in Iraq. That there is gross inaccuracy in the AP reporting is without question. It is so blatant that one can easily be forgiven for believing that deliberate deception is at play here. At least give us credit for that.
Posted by: a different Bob at January 5, 2007 9:16 AMThe structure of thwap's comment is typical of a particular closed perspective.
He's not interested in the reality or not of Jamil Hussein or the validity or not of the stories attributed to him. Data about Iraq is irrelevant to him. Why?
He has a closed point of view which has nothing to do with facts, with reporting, with the veracity of data or the MSM. It is this point of view that paints his perspective, completely, like a whiteout.
He's a typical anti-Bush conspiracy buff. Everything in Iraq was peachy Before Bush and now, it's a mess; and the Iraqi gov't is run by Bush, and, so on.
In another typical finale, he moves into the 'Most of the world supports my view and not your view'. You'll find that Appeal to The Public a constant in most leftist views. Since they ignore facts and research about validity, they rely on mob consensus.
Is Jamil Hussein real? Are there several of him? What really matters is that his data has, again and again, been proven false.
Posted by: ET at January 5, 2007 9:41 AMBy the way, read Michelle Malkin's extensive post and links.
Jamil Hussein may exist; in fact, it's a common enough name that there may be many Jamil Hussein's.
He may or may not be a police officer, who is, by police rules and regulations, forbidden from talking to the press. Like us, the Iraqi police have specific officials assigned to provide the press with details.
This police officer with that name, may or may not be the 'same' Jamil Hussein referred to in AP reports.
But that's not the real issue. The real issue is the veracity of the reports about incidents in Iraq attributed to Jamil Hussein. They have been reported as invalid. That's what matters.
Posted by: ET at January 5, 2007 9:49 AM"Many suggest AP was playing rope a dope not revealing Jamil."
Or in other words "we didn't mean to be idiots, but we were tricked into it."
Posted by: Jose at January 5, 2007 9:52 AMOT. Dion told Kwan he had to choose, and could not work with the PM on issues re Muslims. That shows Dion has no interest in what is best for Canada. Perhaps if he could speak english, he would not have his words mangled. Nice catch for Harper, and maybe in future Dion will not go public with his problems. Wonder how many other in the liberal party that will move.
Posted by: mary T. at January 5, 2007 10:26 AMHey, thwap... thank you; we needed that.
I have always thought that it is really a GOOD thing that Fox News gives the left a venue to open it's heart and mind to public scrutiny ( by being 'Fair and Balanced and inviting on all those talking heads, consultants, and political strategists to expound on the left's side of the issue).
Likewise, the comments section here, and in other places. The more the public is exposed to the left's kind of thinking, and your kind of thinking, the better.
I believe the more the public hears of the convoluted reasoning, the blatant hypocrisy, and the in-your-face disregard of the facts that seems to typify the rants of the far left the better. It advances the point in time when the general 'thinking' public finally goes HUH!
Keep up the good work and exposure. At the least the conspiracy offerings from the far left are consistent AND dependable.
Posted by: Yoop at January 5, 2007 11:02 AMThe real story here is Jamil Hussein's motives in fabricating his story. Knowing full well that his story would ferment rage with the Sunni community, was he trying to cause more instability by provoking retribution? So here you have a local stringer with a possible agenda, dubious journalism credentials, no supervision, and a major wire service that with impunity presents this slop to a global audience. Even worse, presenting a bogus story that could get people killed because of it.
thwap, you have revealed yourself as an idiot with your comment "Once again, i ask you, what is the point of this?" Holding AP and all news sources to an ethical standard is the point.
Posted by: penny at January 5, 2007 11:21 AMThe real story here is Jamil Hussein's motives in fabricating his story. Knowing full well that his story would ferment rage with the Sunni community, was he trying to cause more instability by provoking retribution? So here you have a local stringer with a possible agenda, dubious journalism credentials, no supervision, and a major wire service that with impunity presents this slop to a global audience. Even worse, presenting a bogus story that could get people killed because of it.
thwap, you have revealed yourself as an idiot with your comment "Once again, i ask you, what is the point of this?" Holding AP and all news sources to an ethical standard is the point.
Posted by: penny at January 5, 2007 11:22 AMLeftoid New York Times writer on the "Burning Sunnis" incident:
Hi Tom,
You ask me about what our own reporting shows about this incident. When we first heard of the event on Nov. 24, through the A.P. story and a man named Imad al-Hashemi talking about it on television, we had our Iraqi reporters make calls to people in the Hurriya neighborhood. Because of the curfew that day, everything had to be done by phone. We reached several people who told us about the mosque attacks, but said they had heard nothing of Sunni worshippers being burned alive. Any big news event travels quickly by word of mouth through Baghdad, aided by the enormous proliferation of cell phones here. Such an incident would have been so abominable that a great many of the residents in Hurriya, as well as in other Sunni Arab districts, would have been in an uproar over it. Hard-line Sunni Arab organizations such as the Muslim Scholars Association or the Iraqi Islamic Party would almost certainly have appeared on television that day or the next to denounce this specific incident. Iraqi clerics and politicians are not shy about doing this. Yet, as far as I know, there was no widespread talk of the incident. So I mentioned it only in passing in my report.
Best, Edward Wong
Read more at http://patterico.com/
I also saw a blurb somewhere this AM that Jamil Hussein actually worked for Al Jazeera before switching to feeding AP all the juicy gossip. Hmmmmmm, Al Jazeera and AP sharing sources - a bit suspect wouldn't you think?
Posted by: Helmer Fudge at January 5, 2007 11:38 AMah come on people we all know its the green helmet guy.
Posted by: spike at January 5, 2007 11:42 AM
I am not buying it, AP has had 6-weeks to purchase, produce and manufacture a one " Jamil Hussien. "
There is no doubt in my lil world that AP, CNN, Reuter's and the NYT are walking lock-step with the Muslims to destroy America.
It's just to obvious.
Show me one of these publications that will insult a Muslim ?
So let me get this straight.
The reports of violence in Iraq are MSM fabrications?
So, if there really is no violence in Iraq, no Shiite vs Sunni civil war, then I expect we will soon hear a call from this blog for the troops to return home.
No need to send troops to prevent violence that isn't happening, or prevent a civil war threat that doesn't exist.
"There is no violence in Iraq, and we have to send in more troops to fight it."
Posted by: No Yards at January 5, 2007 6:06 PM"So let me get this straight. The reports of violence in Iraq are MSM fabrications?"
Does someone else want to shoot down this strawman, or shall I.
Please, "yards" - comments like that don't even begin to insult our intelligence - because they're so busy insulting your own.
Posted by: Kate at January 5, 2007 6:14 PMI see, so this is all about a single instance of supposed MSM fabrication and you really do accept that the effort in Iraq is a failure (or as Bush would put it, "success that isn't coming fast enough, or effective enough".)
Come on, don't be such a BSer. Obviously the reason this story is such a big issue with the right is because you though it was your big chance to prove that the MSM was one big lefty propaganda machine. Opportunity blown, get over it.
Even if the story is false, it would be because Hussein is lying, and not because AP or the MSM is biased ... heck, the MSM printed all the other crap that turned out to be lies from the right (WMD capable within 48 hrs, Al Qaeda connections, Aluminum tubes, yellow cake, etc.) Never heard right wingers complain about them printing those lies.
And who could blame them for jumping on a story like this, after all, they are probably so bored stuck behind the gates covering the USA military's great "successes" rescuing kittens out of trees in the "green zone".
I haven't raised any "strawdogs", there's noting "straw" about the fact that you people are speaking out of both sides of your mouth on this issue ... one side saying that there is so much violence and hatred between the Iraqi factions that the US military needs to stay and keep everyone from killing each other; and out the other side refusing to accept any report of violence as anything but a lie from the "liberal media".
Pick a freaken side and stick to it ... is Iraq a violent place that needs US military intervention, or is it a peaceful country where the MSM is lying about the violence to make Bush look bad?
Posted by: noyards at January 5, 2007 10:36 PMI'll type slowly so's that you dipsh_tz understand, ...
I'm the guy who said all along that Jamil Hussein existed, while wasting an hour of my life reading your tripe about how the AP made him up.
Turns out that I was right and you all were wrong.
And now, i'm NOT going to read your pathetic attempts to talk about this man's "inconsistencies" and "fabrications."
If you people had any sense of decency, you'd pull up to that heaping feast of crow that you've so lovingly prepared and have at it.
But you don't and you won't of course.
But thankfully, more and more people are wising up to how thoroughly, lamentably stupid you are, and aren't buying it anymore.
By the way, ... Kate? Your reply to Mr. Yards made no sense whatsoever? You been huffing that gas again, ur whut??
Posted by: thwap at January 5, 2007 10:46 PM