Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Jamilgate: Many Jamil Husseins, not so many Capt. Jamil Husseins; Update: Map added

posted at 8:20 pm on December 18, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Armed Liberal did yeoman’s work but the results, alas, didn’t match the hype. Here’s what we now know, or what we think we know:

1. There’s a Sgt. Jamil Hussein at Yarmouk police station who’s rumored to be an ex-Baathist and former employee of Uday Hussein.
2. There’s a Col. Jamil Hussein at Abu Ghraib.
3. There’s a Capt. Jamil Ghdaab who might or might not be the real source of the AP story.

Maybe tomorrow there’ll be more. AL did find out something important, though:

In the meantime two different sources in Hurriyah confirm that at least two of the mosques in question are just fine, are standing strong, a couple of bullet marks on them, but that’s nothing out of the ordinary. We also hear that they are closed for worship from fear of retaliatory attacks. There are two other mosques there that were claimed to have been attacked (the claim was later reduced to one) and we’ll see if we can get some pictures of them all, at which point we’ll have some facts to report. I’m also hoping to get more of a local response to the core story – about the six who were allegedly burned to death.

That’s the first independent confirmation I’m aware of that the original AP story was wrong in a key respect. Remember? November 24th:

The Mahdi Army militiamen, armed with machines guns and rocket-propelled grenades, swept through Hurriyah neighborhood near an Iraqi army post, burning four mosques and several homes, and attacking worshippers as they left Friday services, said police Capt. Jamil Hussein.

The AP didn’t mention the mosque burnings in its second story about the kerosene incident; so far as I know, they haven’t deigned to address the subject again, either by way of retraction or to stand by the original report. As far as they’re concerned, I guess, they never reported it.

In the meantime, See-Dubya’s curious: if, as Kathleen Carroll asserts, “no one” has questioned Jamil Hussein’s accuracy, how’d this end up in an AP article back in June?

According to Capt. Hussein of the al-Yarmouk police station, gunmen opened fire on a minibus in Dora’s predominantly Sunni Arab Mahdiya neighborhood. He said 11 people were killed, but Al-Yarmouk hospital reported receiving only two bodies from a shooting. It was unclear if the victims were Sunni or Shiite. There was no one available at Baghdad’s main morgue to confirm if it had received any bodies.

No matter. Whether the story happened the way the AP said it did is entirely irrelevant to the other side. I commented at length about it on Patterico’s site last night; rather than reproduce the whole thing here, I’ll send him some traffic by asking you to click and read it over there. Ragnar made a similar point today at the Jawa Report, wondering why the left would rush to the defense of a corporation that might be guilty of making an already horrendous situation in Iraq look even worse than it is. He’s speaking rhetorically, I think.

I’ll leave you with Bob Owens, who’s brandishing an elephant-sized pair of cojones in calling for apologies and resignations when we’re not even sure yet who Jamil Hussein is.

Update: See-Dubya wrote a post to accompany the map he drew up, but he didn’t have to. Res ipsa loquitur.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

Does Greg Mitchell know any recipes for crow?

I hear yes.

Good Lt on December 18, 2006 at 8:42 PM

Allah, I don’t think that calling for retractions and resignations is uncalled for at this point. The AP has charged the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police with turning a blind eye to sectarian-based terror attacks, and has utterly failed to support that claim. They have claimed that four mosques were destroyed, and two dozen killed, all based upon the word of a primary source they cannot verify as legitimate after three weeks on this story, and two previous years of association.

They have essentially called the U.S military and our Iraqi allies liars, and haven’t been much kinder to us for asking them to provide evidence of their claims.

They have had three weeks to come up with physical evidence to support their charges and their sources, and they have utter failed across the board. I’d argue that resignations and retractions are due, if not overdue, at this point.

Bob Owens on December 18, 2006 at 8:49 PM

Unless our own government gets the nads to take on this issue on,they have gotten away and will continue to get away with it.We have leakers of national secrets right here that walk away scott-free,and AP makes more cash from writing propoganda for the Arab states to no longer care if we catch them or not.Keep pounding away but I am to the point where I do not think they really care that much.

bbz123 on December 18, 2006 at 8:56 PM

As many times as AP has called for the resignations and firings of Republicans who’ve screwed the pooch (so to speak), doesn’t it seem only right for them to can a lying or overly-gullible reporter?

Don’t you think, that in the spirit of transparency, they should put together a blue-ribbon panel that will advise them on what went wrong and how to prevent the same lapses in the future? Maybe Lee Hamilton is available.

cmay on December 18, 2006 at 9:27 PM

Sounds like another “Blue Helmet” guy Only this one is Iraqi.

William Amos on December 18, 2006 at 10:33 PM

Carroll at a minimum should be gone from the A(w/t)P over this fiasco. Then the reporters who just got promoted probably need at least some (unpaid) vacation time to think about the ethical aspects of their jobs.

Lord Nazh on December 18, 2006 at 11:42 PM

Ragnar made a similar point today at the Jawa Report, wondering why the left would rush to the defense of a corporation that might be guilty of making an already horrendous situation in Iraq look even worse than it is.

Why would the left rush to the defense of a corporation that might be guilty of making an already horrendous situation in Iraq look even worse than it is? Easy. They want our side to lose. They want America to lose face in front of the entire world. Any other easy questions?

rmgraha on December 19, 2006 at 5:07 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.