Media Bias 21 Jan 2007 10:06 am
Jamil Hussein Revisited
As promised, Michelle Malkin went to Iraq this month and one mission was to understand the events of the AP report on 6 people burned alive / 4 mosques burned story that has received so much attention since it was dramatically reported around Thanksgiving 2006. If you read that story, understand too – there is no morgue at the hospital described in this AP release.
Find Michelle’s report of her Hussein investigation here.
I have posted and linked as much as I think anyone can stand to read on this mess in the Free Jamil Hussein! [note 1/29 this page has been renamed Jamil Hussein Updated] and Media Bias 1 pages to the right of this post.
It should not go unnoticed that neither the NYTimes or the Washington Post could ever independently verify this story, which significantly damages the AP’s credibility for people who want the TRUTH reported out of IRAQ.
It is difficult NOT to see much of the news reported out of IRAQ has another purpose other than fair and accurate reporting.
The rest of this post is from Michelle Malkin’s blog; a very brief summary of Michelle’s findings during her trip to Iraq last week, with a little background…
Bloggers led by Curt of Flopping Aces (floppingaces.net) raised questions about the veracity and existence of Hussein and the information he supplied to the AP. U.S. military officials and the Iraqi government initially disputed that Hussein was employed as a legitimate police officer.
After several weeks of stonewalling by its news executives, the AP published a report quoting an Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman who reversed course and verified Hussein’s existence and employment.
… Bryan Preston and I visited the area during our Iraq trip last week. The “destroyed” mosques all still stand. … summary reports and photos …. filed at the time by Iraqi and U.S. Army troops on the scene… contain no corroborating evidence of Hussein’s claim that “Shiite militiamen grabbed six Sunnis as they left Friday worship services, doused them with kerosene and burned them alive near Iraqi soldiers who did not intervene.”
Contrary to Hussein and the AP’s account, military reports note that Iraqi Army battalion members were on the scene – pursuing attackers, securing the area, calling the fire department, providing support and an outer cordon.
Neither The New York Times nor The Washington Post was able to confirm AP’s story.
2 Responses to “Jamil Hussein Revisited”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
on 26 Jan 2007 at 10:06 pm 1.gshuston said …
I am not sure why Michelle Malkin would question only the AP stories that quote Hussein, as being the dubious stories. From what I am reading I would begin to wonder about the factual integrity of any AP story dealing with the war in Iraq.
The definition of news used to be “the facts ma’am only the facts” to steal a quote from the Dragnet series. Any more it seems more “Wham bam thank you ma’am”
Makes me tired!
on 28 Jan 2007 at 9:59 am 2.Political Football said …
LOL, your last statement conjures images of a street prosititute – ok that makes sense!
I think they (LGF, Michelle et al) are focusing on that one story because THEY don’t yet know the whole story.
The idea of using stringers on the ground with no independent verification of their stories is one thing. The idea of using them and not even looking at the tracks that make no logical sense in their ”stories” is another issue that deserves scrutiny.
1. there was NO outrage about 6 Iraqi’s being immolated (and the imam that was quoted in the first report backtracked when asked)
2. our new friend Jamil was shown to have reported things all over the city with a population of 7 million people, sometimes 30-40 city miles apart.
A Free Press does not mean Free to Lie.