Media Matters lies about HA’s response to Jamilgate

posted at 6:22 pm on January 6, 2007 by Allahpundit

Here’s what’s cooking on their front page as I write this. I’m surprised they used a good photo of Michelle; the official left-wing Malkin-as-hate-object signal is one of those goofy screencaps from her appearance on Hardball.

It must be because they’re respectable.

mm.png

The headline, “Warbloggers refuse to admit their errors in making fraud allegations against AP,” links to Boehlert’s latest piece. It’s followed by an item about Brit Hume supposedly announcing that the AP’s been vindicated on the whole “Iraq atrocity story.” Alas, that’s not what Hume said, but that’s beside the point. The point is, by starting with that headline and the Hume item, MM wants you to scan the remaining items and think that they’re all examples of warbloggers responding to the news about Hussein’s existence by taking shots at Boehlert to change the subject. E.g., “Hot Air on ‘Boehlert’s disingenuousness.’” See the irony? I reacted to evidence of the Iraqi MOI’s disingenuousness by accusing Boehlert of the same because I can’t admit when I’m wrong. Wingnut.

Except I didn’t. Media Matters’s item about Hot Air links to a post I wrote in December answering Boehlert’s columns on Jamilgate. Why would MM mislead their readers by linking to an old piece that doesn’t address the most recent news instead of to a newer post that does? Because if you read that newer post, you’ll find this:

She [i.e., Michelle] and we were wrong about Jamil Hussein. Whether we’re wrong about the rest of it, too, we’ll see. Apologies, though, to the HA readers for having led you on a bit of a wild goose chase, however well founded and well intended our suspicions were.

Precisely the opposite of the generalization they’re trying to make. Predictably, Boehlert doesn’t quote or so much as mention that paragraph in his new piece, either. And it’s not just me — the items about Patterico, Junkyard Blog, and Rightwing Nuthouse are all from December, too. As Boehlert notes, there are right-wing bloggers who don’t consider this a mistake; why MM would populate its list with old posts from those who us who do is strange and suspicious.

And lest anyone misunderstand, I stand by every word of that post from December. My point there was that the left doesn’t care if this story’s true or not. They simply don’t care, and that’s been borne out by their reaction. Their interest in what happened at Hurriyah and in the other 60+ stories sourced to Hussein begins and ends with its usefulness as a gotcha against the right. One lefty blogger I read actually admitted she didn’t know the details of the case — but felt moved to comment on it anyway. To borrow a phrase from my favorite discredited sock puppeteer, Rick Ellison McEllensburg: this is who they are, and this is what they do. Just like I predicted.

Breaking on Hot Air

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

And I care what they say why?

Ringmaster on January 6, 2007 at 6:34 PM

AP, I do care about drudges new link…

Tacnukes and Tehran, on the next 24!!

Ringmaster on January 6, 2007 at 6:38 PM

I love it… “Warbloggers”.

If that’s what they label Michelle then I wonder what they call Jihadis that murder woman and children?

x95b10 on January 6, 2007 at 6:39 PM

“Warbloggers” is respectable-talk for “Wingnut”.

see-dubya on January 6, 2007 at 6:45 PM

The issue is not only the existance of a source that could not be found, but the accuracy and “spin” that AP puts on “reporting”

In my opinion, the article that indicates Hussein has been found does not clear AP – it brings more questions. Why is this Iraqi in jail for talking to the press? Is he the one who provided the information for AP on numerous articles and is that information accurate? Did the AP verify the information independent of this Iraqi? Was Hussein providing fodder for propaganda that the AP published all to willingly?

The questions about AP are far from over and those questioning their “reporting” do not deserve an apology. If anything AP should explain why they did not provide information, and still refuse to provide information, that can be used to verify the stories they print.

omegaram on January 6, 2007 at 7:00 PM

And I care what they say why?

Ringmaster on January 6, 2007 at 6:34 PM

Ditto

By the way, I just took a look at your site… thanks for everything you’ve done/do

/salute

Ugly on January 6, 2007 at 7:02 PM

Um, I didn’t see you mentioned at all in that piece at Media Matters Allahpundit. And I don’t for the life of me know how you can substantiate the claim that “the left doesn’t care if this story’s true or not.” Whose reaction bears this out? The lefts?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:07 PM

…and media matters

Entelechy on January 6, 2007 at 7:08 PM

Um, I didn’t see you mentioned at all in that piece at Media Matters Allahpundit.

Yes, that’s precisely my point. Not only did they suggest on their frontpage that Hot Air refused to acknowledge its error, but Boehlert conveniently neglected to mention my apology in his litany of warbloggers in denial. What didn’t I make clear about that?

Allahpundit on January 6, 2007 at 7:11 PM

I’m still not sure about this guy. Even though the Iraq Interior Ministry claimed he didn’t exist, and now has claimed he does exist, and that an arrest warrant has been issued for his arrest (for talking to the media), he’s been alledgedly talking to the AP as an identified source since 2004. Why hasn’t a filmed interview of this AP source surfaced yet? He’s available plenty since 2004 as a source of all kinds of terrible incidents for the AP, why all of a sudden are they unable to produce him for some film and a positive identification? Why wasn’t this “identified police Captain” issued an arrest warrant for talking to the media for almost 3 years, until now? Just because this thing seemed to be reaching a fever pitch, they now all of a sudden say, “Oh, THAT police Captain Hussein! Pfft… we thought you meant the OTHER polie Captain Hussein. Our bad!”

I’m not buying it, yet.

And now for your daily dose of guilt trip from E&P:

“Back in Iraq, the good news today is that Capt Jamil Hussein really does exist, and the interior ministry’s spokesman has finally and officially confirmed it. The bad news is that they have issued a warrant for his arrest for ‘having contacts with the media.’

“Congratulations, bloggers. He won’t be talking to AP again now.”

Cry me a river liberal bedwetters!

SilverStar830 on January 6, 2007 at 7:11 PM

The curtain has not dropped on this act yet.

I, like the others, could care less what the left says.

Zorro on January 6, 2007 at 7:16 PM

You’re right, he doesn’t acknowledge your apology to your readers, and he should have. But take heart, I think his biggest contention is with “the boss”. Mrs Malkin has been pushing this non story from the beginning, like the Schiavo memo, and Kerry’s self inflicted wounds thing, and updates like “Update (from Michelle): Just to clarify, I’m not apologizing for anything” might seem well, disengenuous at best.

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:20 PM

Cry me a river liberal bedwetters!

SilverStar830 on January 6, 2007 at 7:11 PM

I missed this before my last reply. You sir, are an unamerican idiot. Just thought I should point that out to you before you embarass your family!

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:23 PM

Has anyone mentioned that Jamil Hussein denies being the AP source? Hope this works, follow it to Flopping Aces. Link

R D on January 6, 2007 at 7:30 PM

Worked on the first try. :-)

R D on January 6, 2007 at 7:31 PM

Got Jamil?

Buck Turgidson on January 6, 2007 at 7:36 PM

Nice to see you come out of your hole once in awhile THeDRiFTeR… it reminds me of what we’re fighting against.

But seriously, how does that make me an UnAmerican idiot? I guess your viewpoint(s) makes you what… a ProAmerican idiot? I don’t get it.

SilverStar830 on January 6, 2007 at 7:36 PM

But seriously, how does that make me an UnAmerican idiot? I guess your viewpoint(s) makes you what… a ProAmerican idiot? I don’t get it.

SilverStar830 on January 6, 2007 at 7:36 PM

American democracy is based on an informed electorate. Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you? Sounds more like Saddam’s MOI to me, or Soviet Russia. Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM

So at this late date, the Iraqi MOI is saying they made a mistake? How do we know they are not making another one? I’m thinking ‘credibility’ here. A(w/t)P has no credibility at all, so I ignore everything they spout. Now the MOI has called its credibility into question. Again, why should we believe them now. Remember, we keep hearing (from credible sources) how corrupt the Iraqi police forces are; we’ve also heard how corrupt many of the Iraqi politicians are. And everyone seems to forget: the existence (or non-existence) of Jamil Hussein is not the question. Where are the (six, four, three, ???) burned out mosques? That is the question.

And SilverStar830: Please don’t feed the trolls. If we ignore (him/her/it), they may crawl back into their hole and infest some other site.

rmgraha on January 6, 2007 at 7:50 PM

Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM

I don’t even have to be an idiot to know that a free press that dispenses falsehoods and lies is worthless.

News2Use on January 6, 2007 at 7:57 PM

Media Matters lies?!?

Oh, wait. That’s nothing new.

See —> “MEDIA MATTERS Watch”: A rebuttal to some of the errors, lies, and misleading work of MMFA

Business as usual at MMFA.

DPierre on January 6, 2007 at 7:58 PM

American democracy is based on an informed electorate. Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you? Sounds more like Saddam’s MOI to me, or Soviet Russia. Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM

One of the expectations I have of a Free Press is that it tell us the truth without spin or rancid injection of their own conclusions.

Now maybe I’ve missed something THeDRiFTeR, but perhaps you can tell us what happened to the six people were burned alive and four mosques were destroyed in Hurriya. I think that you and I would agree that a Free Press is necessary for democracy to exist. But doesn’t the Free Press have an inherent responsibility to get its story straight and to confirm its facts via multiple sources? It has said so on numerous occasions. So why are you so willing to give it a free pass by excoriating anyone who challenges “Big Press” for publishing such a fallacious story?

.

GT on January 6, 2007 at 8:10 PM

“Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you?”

Reporters are nevertheless free to get their news where they want and report it how they want. Don’t you know the difference between “discouraging” someone from doing something, and “forcing” them not to?

“Discouraging” is wanting people to do something and so you ask them to: “force” is when you shoot them if they don’t. Try to keep up.

drunyan8315 on January 6, 2007 at 8:12 PM

One has to question how people like THeDRiFTeR would have faired during WW2.

.

GT on January 6, 2007 at 8:15 PM

Why would MM mislead their readers by linking to an old piece that doesn’t address the most recent news instead of to a newer post that does?

Liberals misleading their readers? I’m shocked!

Next thing you know, they’ll be claiming that minimum wage increases don’t cause unemployment, that socialized medicine is superior to free-market health care, and that rent control doesn’t lead to housing shortages.

Ali-Bubba on January 6, 2007 at 8:21 PM

So why are you so willing to give it a free pass by excoriating anyone who challenges “Big Press” for publishing such a fallacious story?

.

GT on January 6, 2007 at 8:10 PM

Excoriating anyone who challenges “Big Press”? I did nothing of the sort. The commenter delighted in the fact that an Iraqi citizen that dared speak to the press should be arrested. I’ve seen absolutely no evidence that this source is unreliable. Hell, for the past few weeks, I’ve been told by some that he didn’t even exist. That he had been invented by “traitors” and “enablers” and terrorist “sympathizers”. We’re talking about a news organ that has been in existence for over 150 years. A respected organization that has lost people to this conflict. People who have put their well being on the line to shed some light on what is going on there, in my name.

“Discouraging” is wanting people to do something and so you ask them to: “force” is when you shoot them if they don’t. Try to keep up.

drunyan8315 on January 6, 2007 at 8:12 PM

Thanks for that, I’ll do my best.

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 8:23 PM

BTW, I work as a contractor for the government; I am not allowed to speak to the press on work-related matters — all press inquiries have to be referred to the Public Communications office. So yeah, having someone in the Iraqi government (i.e., police) being discouraged from speaking to the press sound very American to me. And of course, only an anti-American bigot would refuse to capitalize the name of the greatest country on Earth.
/troll-feeding

rmgraha on January 6, 2007 at 8:29 PM

having someone in the Iraqi government (i.e., police) being discouraged from speaking to the press sound very American to me.

rmgraha on January 6, 2007 at 8:29 PM

Refuse to capitalize? Jesus. And american police officers are not allowed to talk to the press on work related issues? Uh huh. How else are you gonna feed me, this keeps me outta my hole.

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 8:36 PM

The lesson here is less is more.
It is not the bloggers’ fault that AP is having trouble producing someone who they claimed they used a lot. AP has a lot of chutzpah blaming everyone else for their failure. Funny that AP issues a report, then all their fellow travelers gloat all over it, and quote it, claiming victory, but it’s circular reasoning or circular reporting. AP swings it all right back to AP; AP concurs with themselves and AP is then poised to declare it’s all finished, go home, bye bye. But … that doesn’t satisfy the reality that “Jamil Hussein” hasn’t been presented in the flesh. So, what’s the problem? Jamil is just a pseudonym? Using a different name to protect him? If so, then why didn’t they just say that from the get go? Perhaps because they couldn’t, because …? They can’t or won’t answer that.
Isn’t this the basic summary, in simple terms:
Reader Client: Gee, AP, is that right? My auntie called and said the mosque is fine and no one was killed.”
AP: You are a stupid moron.
Reader client: Ahh. Wait a second. I resent that.
AP: You don’t have the brains to comprehend our work. Get lost.
Reader Client: I just asked if …
AP: Who do you think you are, asking anything of Us?
Reader client: Well, if you are going to be like that, maybe I’ll just go and take a look myself …”
AP: Say what?

Stop apologizing and wait to make a statement until all the facts are in.
Like what Buck up there said: “Got Jamil … yet?”

naliaka on January 6, 2007 at 8:45 PM

Excoriating anyone who challenges “Big Press”? I did nothing of the sort.

Yes, you did.

The commenter delighted in the fact that an Iraqi citizen that dared speak to the press should be arrested.

No he didn’t.

I’ve seen absolutely no evidence that this source is unreliable.

Then there shouldn’t be any problem producing the 6 bodies and the remains of the 4 mosques.

Hell, for the past few weeks, I’ve been told by some that he didn’t even exist. That he had been invented by “traitors” and “enablers” and terrorist “sympathizers”.

And when proved wrong, they were quick to admit their mistake. Remind me. How long did it take the AP?

We’re talking about a news organ that has been in existence for over 150 years.

Yet, all it takes is one Jason Blair, doesn’t it.

A respected organization that has lost people to this conflict. People who have put their well being on the line to shed some light on what is going on there, in my name.

By that measure, we should trust the US military even more so. They tell us that Big Press is full of BS and not reporting the whole story. Now what?

.

GT on January 6, 2007 at 8:47 PM

How else are you gonna feed me, this keeps me outta my hole.

Duh. Bucket on a string, man.

It puts the lotion on its skin…

Slublog on January 6, 2007 at 8:47 PM

Not everything can be Rathergate.

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 9:01 PM

Now that he is found the questions can begin. The issue wasn’t, and isn’t whether or not he existed. The issue is whether or not FOUR mosques were burned and SIX people burned to death on the street. And whether or not Iraqi troops stood by and watched. Finding this guy is only the beginning.

I hope Michelle finds him and asks him to show her the evidence; locations, other witnesses, etc.

I’m still betting the original story is false

Chuck on January 6, 2007 at 9:06 PM

OKOKOK already….

then WHO SHOT JR, d*mmit?

seejanemom on January 6, 2007 at 9:11 PM

Why would MM mislead their readers

You must be kidding? They’re liberals. Nothing much more needs to be said.

RightWinged on January 6, 2007 at 9:20 PM

Don’t you just lay down on this, Michelle and AllahPundit.

I quote myself…

His phone was turned off Thursday and he could not be reached for further comment.

Maybe Iraq is a bit different from the US, but if you are a f—ing police CAPTAIN you don’t go and hide on holiday! You are not a cheating boyfriend, you are the top cop! And FLAGRANTLY breaking police regulations?

Now, they HAVE to be morons over there. I seriously doubt it should be a problem where if you ask someone “Who is Saddam Hussein?” They won’t come back and say, “I don’t know who you mean. Oh, do you mean Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti?” You don’t get to be a Captain without meeting some higher ups, and aren’t WE the ones TRAINING THEM??? There are no class rosters??

She and we were wrong about Jamil Hussein. Whether we’re wrong about the rest of it, too, we’ll see. Apologies, though, to the HA readers for having led you on a bit of a wild goose chase, however well founded and well intended our suspicions were.
AllahPundit, if you are just going to accept this explanation from the AP, you have betrayed my trust.
Mazztek on January 4, 2007 at 9:15 PM

There is so much fishy about this story that I crave Sushi.

Mazztek on January 6, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Has Jamile been found ? All we have agian is one AP article stating that he is under arrest as of thursday ? And that he was home until thursday with his phone turned off.

Again where is the follow up here ? Do we or do we not have a jamil Hussien to talk to now ?

William Amos on January 6, 2007 at 9:46 PM

But take heart, I think his biggest contention is with “the boss”. Mrs Malkin has been pushing this non story from the beginning

Hey drifter have you been even following this story ? The problem isnt with Jamil Hussien existing its if he has been feeding lies to the AP and the ap for publishing it for years now.

In no way shape or form is the AP News off the hook yet.

William Amos on January 6, 2007 at 9:56 PM

Allah and Michelle,

Do you see a pattern here.

It doesn’t matter whether or not the reports from the “Iraqi Police Spokesman” actually came from an “Iraqi Police Spokesman”, or had any basis in reality.

The only issue is whether there is any person in the Iraqi police force named “Jamil Hussein”.

Just like, in RatherGate, the only issue was whether any manner of typewriter in the 70′s could produce a superscript “th”.

Just like, in the war in Iraq, the only issue was whether Iraq had massive stockpiles of WMDs beyond beyond all human comprehension.

dinasour on January 6, 2007 at 10:03 PM

Caught this on Wikipedia (they ahve a section on this whole thing)

Wonder if anyone else knows things ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamil_Hussein

According to a CPATT official, the reason Jamil Hussein’s name wasn’t initially found in police employment records was that he uses the name “Jamil Gulaim” at work, and the name searched for was “Jamil Hussein”, as he is commonly referred to in news stories. A subsequent search using variants of his full name turned up his employment record. Based on the similaries between the names, he may be the “Jamil Ghdaab Gulaim” found by Michelle Malkin’s sources in December.[20]

From Curt of Flopping Aces(the number 20 citation in the above)

http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/01/06/new-twists-in-the-jamil-hussei/

Bill Costlow, the CPATT (Civilian Police Assistance Training Team) representative, has some more information regarding the discovery of Jamil Hussein:

Curt,

Here’s what I can tell you:

1. Media reports about Jamil didn’t use his name as he is known at work so we had trouble finding him (Jamil Gulaim as opposed to Jamil Hussein: the initial query we got from MNFI was for “Jamil Hussein”).

2. The real issue is this: Jamil works in Al Khadra (think of Staten Island) — he’s telling the media about Al Hurriah murders (Think of Queens — it’s a different area of the city):

3. The MOI doesn’t follow AP or any other western media source closely: they are very busy trying to impact the security situation — what raised the issue for them was a request from MNFI Public Affairs to confirm the event actually happened.

Hope this helps,

Bill

William Amos on January 6, 2007 at 10:15 PM

Hey drifter have you been even following this story ? The problem isnt with Jamil Hussien existing its if he has been feeding lies to the AP and the ap for publishing it for years now.

In no way shape or form is the AP News off the hook yet.

William Amos on January 6, 2007 at 9:56 PM

That doesn’t matter to Drifter. By his own admission The Press is Mother, the Press is Father.

.

GT on January 6, 2007 at 10:20 PM

A strange parallel occurs to me:

Consider the Gulf War. The Administration listed many reasons why we needed to go into Iraq, one of which was WMD programs. Despite the fact that WMDs were in fact found, as were programs to produce more in the future, the media kept saying that we didn’t find enough to justify the invasion, completely forgetting all of the other reasons that were stated at the time.

Then there’s Rathergate. The Dextrosphere expressed a plethora of reasons why the documents were suspect, such as the inability of the sort of typewriters in use in NG offices in the 70s being able to produce the specific fonts, which included very specific implementations of proportional spacing and superscript ‘th’. The apologists found examples of expensive typewriters capable of SOME kind of proportional spacing, and other expensive models that could do the ‘th’, and therefore we were wrong.

Now there’s the Jamil-eon situation. We have asked how this ‘source’ could have knowledge about the 60 AP stories in which he is named, and when the IMoI said he didn’t exist, added that to our list of questions. Now that they say he does exist, somehow all the other questions are no longer relevant. Never mind that the person who they say exists has not been positively identified by any AP personnel as their source, and most likely will never be.

Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you?

Um, no. Iraqi civilians are perfectly free to talk to journalists. But government employees are not. This is not exactly a new thing.

I am forbidden by my (private sector) employer from talking to the press about anything relating to the company. If a reporter called me and wanted to talk about the company, I’d refer him to our PR department. Capt. Hussein is accused of violating a similar rule that his employer has. He may also be accused of making up stories for the AP. We shall see.

The Monster on January 6, 2007 at 10:55 PM

American democracy is based on an informed electorate. Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you? Sounds more like Saddam’s MOI to me, or Soviet Russia. Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM

You could not be more wrong, and laughably so.

Let’s start with a foundation. Jamil Hussein, giving full acceptance that he exists, and is the man who has provided sourcing for 61+ stories to the AP, is still a single source, THE ONLY SOURCE for every one of those 61 stories. You would think that in at least a few, if not most, of those stories there would have been others providing information about the events.

AP has not fact-checked ONE of the stories through alternate sourcing or on-the-ground verification. So the FACT remains that with only a couple of side-story exceptions, none of what Jamil provided to the AP has been, nor can be corroborated.

Turning up a warm body as the previously identified source doesn’t make the stories one bit closer to true or accurate. The only vindication Hussein’s existence provides the AP is vis-a-vis the implication that they fabricated the stories in their own offices. It in no way proves that one word offered up by Hussein is valid. There is a long way yet to go before these stories can be labeled good.

Next, the arrest warrant. Why arrest a news source? I can think of several possible reasons in a place like Iraq, but only two that make sense. If the provisional government believes Jamil’s stories to be bogus, he has been tacitly supporting the insurgency, and some parts of the world take sedition seriously, unlike the U.S. today. Or, if you’re a government mole, and part of your work is having someone like Hussein push bogus stories to hurt the nascent Iraqi democracy, you’d want him put away after he was exposed, to keep him from saying where his orders came from. I can’t come up with one reasonable scenario where he’d be arrested for providing the truth.

As to SilverStar830 responding to E&P’s hyperbole with “Cry me a river, liberal bedwetters!”, you of course take the insanely twisted perspective that this constitutes a suppression of free speech, rather than a step toward correcting two years worth of lies that have made the situation in Iraq worse, and damaged support for our military here, again through lies. Your comments leave others with the impression that you care much more for the soon-to-be discreted “police captain” than for the truth, or how his lies affect our war-fighting ability.

Freelancer on January 6, 2007 at 10:55 PM

Media Matters is a shill for the far left. When’s the last time they admitted to errors as you have many times?

When you’re wrong, you admit it. When MM is wrong, they obfuscate.

spmat on January 6, 2007 at 11:00 PM

American democracy is based on an informed electorate. Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you? Sounds more like Saddam’s MOI to me, or Soviet Russia. Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

THeDRiFTeR on January 6, 2007 at 7:42 PM

You could not be more wrong, and laughably so.

Freelancer on January 6, 2007 at 10:55 PM

Well, it is THeDRiFTeR.

ReubenJCogburn on January 6, 2007 at 11:18 PM

Wait now Jamil is claiming that He ISNT AP new;s Source to the IM ?

Doesnt that now mean that the AP is lying about Jamil ?

From my pet Jawa

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/

MOI officials have now Question Jamil Ghlaim at MOI Headquarters. Ghlaim continues to deny speaking to AP or any other news outlet.

William Amos on January 7, 2007 at 12:56 AM

A month or so later the AP has finally found an Iraqi named Jamil Hussein, but he denies being the AP’s source.

Did you notice this was not a major story until we “warbloggers” were “proven” wrong? Now what do they do? Their eagerness to discredit our pursuit of the truth may just backfire. I don’t see this story getting any smaller now that Jammie’s been “found.” If I’m wrong I’ll gladly eat moonbat crow. I say there is blood floating in the water. This will be a scandal for the AP.

Buck Turgidson on January 7, 2007 at 1:36 AM

American democracy is based on an informed electorate. Iraqi’s are now being discouraged to speak to the press. Official news only. Sound american to you? Sounds more like Saddam’s MOI to me, or Soviet Russia. Being an idiot, I depend on a free press. Don’t you get it?

This is more huffpo mentality. ANYTHING that can potentially damage americans, and thereby damaging Bush, is gleefully celebrated by the misguided left. The bad guys (BTW, THeDRiFTeR, they would be the ENEMIES of this country) want nothing more than to foster this kind of anti-american reporting in the media. Your demands to have intimate knowledge of all these “crimes” spread all over the world exposes many proclivities of the traitorous mindset. Here are two….

1) It pre-supposes that our troops are just a supressed story away from becoming an unruley mob killing everyone in sight. WRONGO!!! Our troops do not need constant supervision by the moonbat media types. They are for the most part honorable, decent men and women who police any kind of break in ethics within their own group through military channels. It is rare that serious breechs in the rules of engagement are discovered by the media first. The stories are mostly broken because there is already an ongoing military investigation. Believe it or not, there is a middle ground that can be occupied by a news organization that protects our troops AND is faithful to accurate reporting.

2) It gives aid to the enemies of this country. Well pardon me, but your insatiable need to know “the truth” cannot supercede the mission in Iraq and thereby the safety of our troops there. Especially on questionable stories that have logical explanations which are based on a general belief that our americans troops are, by a huge majority, decent people.

The free press is one thing, but the press which is a tool for the extremists to defeat this countries will to fight is an entirely different thing.

The misguided thinking of the left views the latter as the epitome of journalism. And YOU are promoting that thinking.
If you are sooooo in love with the “truth” why don’t you spend some time at the USAID site (http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/ there is a PDF link on that page which lists SOME the success in Iraq) and report to us all the success stories in Iraq? There is plenty of truth there that should make your little heart all a flutter.

Since you are sooo proud of the free press, I look forward to your reporting to the group of all the good things happening in Iraq.

csdeven on January 7, 2007 at 9:36 AM

You must be kidding? They’re liberals. Nothing much more needs to be said.

RightWinged on January 6, 2007 at 9:20 PM

Not all liberals are Dishonest. That sort of blanket accusation does not help the discussion.

The fact that the media lies so consistently is not completely inidicitive of how all liberals are. Just because the media and the people it chooses to hire are complete spinsters (whose reason for lying is obviously to support their own cause and suppress any information that would support the opposition) doesn’t mean being liberal makes you a liar.

Just means you don’t see the value in individual responsibility, and freedom from government intrusion. Of course, ignorance and dishonesty … which is more dangerous?

I’ll leave that up to whoever.

;)

One Angry Christian on January 7, 2007 at 9:43 AM

And american police officers are not allowed to talk to the press on work related issues?

In most situations American police ARE NOT allowed to speak to the press without authorization. American police use a formal spokesperson for dialog with the press. All statement are given with the prior approval of the police department in question.

Any member of a police department that does not have approval to speak with member of the press on work related matters can expect to receive administrative punishment, up to and including removal from their jobs for statements they made to the press. This has happened numerous times in numerous departments across America.

RedinBlueCounty on January 7, 2007 at 2:21 PM

Hey Allahpundit, here’s an article that acknowledges your apology. Hope that chears you up.

THeDRiFTeR on January 7, 2007 at 9:13 PM

Hey Allahpundit, here’s an article that acknowledges your apology. Hope that chears you up.

No mention from Alternet of any of the outstanding questions about Hussein, huh?

Shocked, shocked, I tell you.

Allahpundit on January 7, 2007 at 9:23 PM

Drifter, do you leave comments on some of the other sites? How about finding out for us why Alternet and some of the others don’t mention any of the outstanding questions about Hussein…

Just a thought.

RD on January 8, 2007 at 1:01 PM