The continued flack over the AP story of "Six Sunnis Burned Alive" is bringing up some serious questions about how long has AP been supplying the world with biased and unsourced information:
Michelle Malkin continues to ask AP and others who rely on AP as their single source for the War in Iraq. "Who is Jamil Hussein?"
From Confederate Yankee:
"This developing Associated Press implosion may go back as far as two years, affecting as many as 60 stories from just this one allegedly fake policeman alone. And Jamil Hussein is just one of more than a dozen potentially fake Iraqi policemen used in news reports the AP disseminates around the world. This does not begin to attempt to account for non-offical sources which the AP will have an even harder time substantiating. Quite literally, almost all AP reporting from Iraq not verified from reporters of other news organizations is now suspect, and with good reason. Instead of affecting one show on one network watched by 14 million viewers as Rathergate did, "Jamilgate" means the Associated Press may have been delivering news of questionable accuracy to one billion people a day for two years or more.
In this evolving instance of faux journalism, "60 Minutes" is now potentially 60 billion false impressions, or more.
A principled, professional news organization owes its consumers the truth. To date, the Associated Press, as voiced by comments from officers international editor John Daniszewski and executive editor Kathleen Carroll, has refused to address the rampant inconsistencies in the "burning men" story, produce physical evidence proving their allegations, or produce star source Iraqi Police Captain Jamil Hussein. Arrogantly, they attack the messenger (both U.S military and Iraqi government sources and bloggers), and insist we must believe them, even though they give us no compelling reason to do so, and many reasons to doubt them.'
Commenter Tully from CY:
"In the face of fresh criticism from the New York Post, AP has responded again, huffing and puffing at anyone who would dare question their probity.
It adds up to the same thing as before, with extra vituperation: "How dare you question us, you pajamahadin? We've sent Top Men in to confirm the story! It's a dangerous area, and we're the only ones who've gone there! No one who's gone there questions the story!" (That latter claim, BTW, is completely false.)
What the AP response doesn't do: Produce Jamil Hussein. Provide a single verifiable source for the story. Address the fact that other components of the story have been shown to be completely false (no four mosques involved). Name ANY of the "journalists" whom AP claims later confirmed the story. Provide ANY evidence at all that the alleged incident ever occured, other than additional unnamed and anonymous sources to bolster the Incredible Invisible Jamil Hussein.
Amount of evidence provided by AP to date: Their unsupported word, an invisible and unfindable police captain who cannot even be shown to exist, and a large raft of snotty ad hominem for anyone who questions it. That's it."
NRO has posted a story that relates to all of this Mainsream Media Bias:
A New Media Bias Study:
Two University of Chicago researchers have come out with a new study that connects the media bias of a newspaper to the political leanings of the people who buy it. It's behind a subscription wall, but the New York Times, CBS Public Eye and Slate's Jack Shafer all have interesting takes. Let's look at two beneficial findings of this study: (complete story)
UPDATE: Curt at Flopping Aces (who broke this AP "story" / "fabrication")has a new roundup and updates here and here.
UDATE II: Hot Air has a stinging vidio from Mark Steyn and a new recap here
(Editor's comment to be posted here soon)
Previous:
ASSOCIATED PRESS, MSM CAUGHT WITH LIES
SIX SUNNIS BURNIN'.............
AP vs Centcom
Media Bias in Todays National and World Affairs
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Paging Jamil. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Paging Jamil. Sort by date Show all posts
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Paging Jamil Hussein II
While the "sphere" continues to search for the now infamous Capt. Jamil Hussein, Curt at Flopping Aces has a full scale UPDATE. Also Powerline and Big Lizzards have re-entered the fray.
From Powerline:
The saga of Associated Press source Jamil Hussein continues. Hussein has been cited in no fewer than 61 AP stories, most or all relating to violent incidents in pretty much all quarters of Baghdad. The AP has consistently identified Hussein as a "police captain," and has named two police stations with which he allegedly has been associated.
The controversy began when the AP used Hussein as its chief source for a sensational story about six Sunnis being dragged from a mosque and burned alive by a Shia militia. Doubts were expressed by the Iraqi government, as well as the U.S. Army, about whether the incident occurred, and official Iraqi sources stated further that there is no "police captain Jamil Hussein" in Baghdad.
Michelle Malkin sums up the current state of the search for the elusive Captain Hussein. Suffice it to say that it appears increasingly improbable that such a person exists. Given that he has ostensibly been in frequent contact with AP reporters--frequent enough to be cited as a source at least 61 times--it is hard to understand why the AP is apparently unable to produce him. Also, to the best of my knowledge Captain Hussein has not been used as a source by the AP since the controversy became public. Why not? Will he ever appear as a source again? If not, what inferences can we draw? (complete post)
Dafydd at Big Lizzards draws a parallel to AP's alleged fabrications in the story of a Lieutenant Kije:
In a 1927 short story by Yury Tynyanov, a Russian general is reading a report to Czar Paul I; the czar mishears a word and thinks the general is talking about a "Lieutenant Kije," who sounds like a brave and brilliant fellow. Czar Paul demands to hear more about him.
As it is death to contradict the czar, the general makes up several wonderful missions and adventures of the entirely fictitious Lieutenant Kije. Soon other commanders join in the fun; eventually, there is an entire cottage industry of Kije sightings, Kije adventures, and Kije romances. Lt. Kije eventually gets married -- and while the czar never seems to run into the fellow himself, the soldiers sure do enjoy all the vodka the czar supplies!
The story was turned into a movie in 1934 by Aleksandr Fajntsimmer, with music by Prokofiev (the music is much more famous than either the movie or the story). (complete post here)
Michelle Malkin has an excellent post up titled Tracing "Jamil Hussein's" footsteps and ignoring anti-blog hatred Please go and read the whole recap.
From AP:
"The Iraq war is one of hundreds of conflicts that AP journalists have covered in the past 160 years. Our only goal is to provide fair, impartial coverage of important human events as they unfold. We check our facts and check again."
"That is what we have done in the case of the Hurriyah attack. And that is why we stand by our story."
Kathleen Carroll, Executive Editor and Senior Vice President. The Associated Press
I certainly hope Ms. Carroll doesn't expect us to start looking back at 160 years of reporting "truthful" events. This may take a little time.
UPDATE: I found this little tidbit of tripe from CBS/AP: (Public Eye)?? :
It appears the "big guns" are circling the wagons and blaming both sides for the bias. (When ya refuse to find fault, always best to point the finger at both sides):
"In that sense, the outlets that exist for the explicit purpose of rooting out bias - liberal or conservative -- don't necessarily help so much. Certainly, biases exist, and sometimes they are reflected inappropriately. But if you're looking hard enough for bias one way or the other, you'll probably find it - maybe even both ways." (complete post)
Major news sources have just as much at stake here for the obvious reasons. With the like's of Mapes, Rather, CNN and Jordan, and now AP, how much of "historical facts" will need revision?
From Powerline:
The saga of Associated Press source Jamil Hussein continues. Hussein has been cited in no fewer than 61 AP stories, most or all relating to violent incidents in pretty much all quarters of Baghdad. The AP has consistently identified Hussein as a "police captain," and has named two police stations with which he allegedly has been associated.
The controversy began when the AP used Hussein as its chief source for a sensational story about six Sunnis being dragged from a mosque and burned alive by a Shia militia. Doubts were expressed by the Iraqi government, as well as the U.S. Army, about whether the incident occurred, and official Iraqi sources stated further that there is no "police captain Jamil Hussein" in Baghdad.
Michelle Malkin sums up the current state of the search for the elusive Captain Hussein. Suffice it to say that it appears increasingly improbable that such a person exists. Given that he has ostensibly been in frequent contact with AP reporters--frequent enough to be cited as a source at least 61 times--it is hard to understand why the AP is apparently unable to produce him. Also, to the best of my knowledge Captain Hussein has not been used as a source by the AP since the controversy became public. Why not? Will he ever appear as a source again? If not, what inferences can we draw? (complete post)
Dafydd at Big Lizzards draws a parallel to AP's alleged fabrications in the story of a Lieutenant Kije:
In a 1927 short story by Yury Tynyanov, a Russian general is reading a report to Czar Paul I; the czar mishears a word and thinks the general is talking about a "Lieutenant Kije," who sounds like a brave and brilliant fellow. Czar Paul demands to hear more about him.
As it is death to contradict the czar, the general makes up several wonderful missions and adventures of the entirely fictitious Lieutenant Kije. Soon other commanders join in the fun; eventually, there is an entire cottage industry of Kije sightings, Kije adventures, and Kije romances. Lt. Kije eventually gets married -- and while the czar never seems to run into the fellow himself, the soldiers sure do enjoy all the vodka the czar supplies!
The story was turned into a movie in 1934 by Aleksandr Fajntsimmer, with music by Prokofiev (the music is much more famous than either the movie or the story). (complete post here)
Michelle Malkin has an excellent post up titled Tracing "Jamil Hussein's" footsteps and ignoring anti-blog hatred Please go and read the whole recap.
From AP:
"The Iraq war is one of hundreds of conflicts that AP journalists have covered in the past 160 years. Our only goal is to provide fair, impartial coverage of important human events as they unfold. We check our facts and check again."
"That is what we have done in the case of the Hurriyah attack. And that is why we stand by our story."
Kathleen Carroll, Executive Editor and Senior Vice President. The Associated Press
I certainly hope Ms. Carroll doesn't expect us to start looking back at 160 years of reporting "truthful" events. This may take a little time.
UPDATE: I found this little tidbit of tripe from CBS/AP: (Public Eye)?? :
It appears the "big guns" are circling the wagons and blaming both sides for the bias. (When ya refuse to find fault, always best to point the finger at both sides):
"In that sense, the outlets that exist for the explicit purpose of rooting out bias - liberal or conservative -- don't necessarily help so much. Certainly, biases exist, and sometimes they are reflected inappropriately. But if you're looking hard enough for bias one way or the other, you'll probably find it - maybe even both ways." (complete post)
Major news sources have just as much at stake here for the obvious reasons. With the like's of Mapes, Rather, CNN and Jordan, and now AP, how much of "historical facts" will need revision?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)