Looking at the evidence of AP deception in Iraq

Austin Bay reviews the evidence that the AP used a bogus source for a story that could not be confirmed by the US military or the Iraqis.

...

The U.S.-based Website FloppingAces (floppingaces.net) has published an email from MNCI to the AP that states "no one below the level of chief is authorized to be an Iraqi police spokesperson." The email also addresses the story of the Sunnis being burned alive: "... neither we nor Baghdad Police had any reports of such an incident after investigating it and could find no one to corroborate the story. ... We can tell you definitively that the primary source of this story, police Capt. Jamil Hussein, is not a Baghdad police officer or an MOI (Ministry of the Interior) employee." The letter is attributed to U.S. Navy Lt. Michael Dean.

I contacted CENTCOM's Baghdad press office and received an email confirming that Hussein is not a policeman nor does he work for Iraq's MOI.

FloppingAces noted that the AP has quoted "Jamil Hussein" in at least eight stories since April 2006.

So who is Jamil?

At this point we really don't know. The AP hasn't provided definitive details. Jamil's "burning Sunnis" story now appears to be rather dubious smoke. However, its horrifying headline has magnified a perception of sectarian terror, one advantageous to Saddam's "former regime elements" and al-Qaida terrorists.

MNCI could be wrong, but the distinct possibility exists that the AP has been misled by its own stringers or duped by an enemy propaganda operation. If Jamil is another "Jimmy," the AP's story -- as a weapon in a war of perception -- is far more damaging than Janet Cooke's Washington fiction.

...

So what is the AP's response to this charge? They standby their unsubstantiated report. Like a hot check artist who thinks he can cover his bad check by writing another one they went back to "Jamil Hussein" who says the same thing he said before.

...

"The attempt to question the existence of the known police officer who spoke to the AP is frankly ludicrous and hints at a certain level of desperation to dispute or suppress the facts of the incident in question," AP International Editor John Daniszewski said in a statement e-mailed to On Deadline this afternoon.

He added that "we have conducted a thorough review of the sourcing and reporting involved and plan to move a more detailed report about the entire incident soon, with greater detail provided by multiple eye witnesses."

"The police captain cited in our story has long been known to the AP reporters," Daniszewski wrote.

"The AP stands by its story."

...

What is missing from this story? The AP has failed to produce evidence that the source they have identified actually is who he says he is. The Centcom statement said that the source was unknown to them and to Iraqi authorities. Nothing in the AP story indicates any contact with Iraqi authorities to verify that their source actually works for the government. They did nothing to prove that the source is who they say he is and that he is connected to the Iraqi government. They use other "witnesses" but do not talk to officials at the morgue to verify that the bodies actually exist and that they were burn victims.

The Associated Press has lost substantial credibility for its reporting before this incident because of the association of some of its stringers that appear to put them contact with the enemy. There was also questionable reporting in the Israeli war with Hezballah and with the Palestinians. This response to the questions about its source for this story seems much more desperate than the desperation they are charging against the bloggers who raised the question. The bloggers have no reason to be desperate. They are not the ones whose reputation is at issue. AP needs to find some sources in an official capacity if they are going to stand by this story.

Michell Malkin also takes the AP to task. Both the Iraqis and Centcom say the source is not a police officer. So far the AP provides no proof that he is. Malkin also lists other questionable sources for AP stories. The AP has not responded on those sources either.

Riehl World View raises more questions about the AP attempt to regain credibility. Again one of the witnesses has an interesting history in previous AP stories. Say Anything also looks at the AP mess.