For starters, a surefire way to annoy trolls. But wait, there’s more:
01/04/07
AP NEWS STORY
Iraq threatens arrest of police captain who spoke to media
By STEVEN R. HURST
Associated Press WriterBAGHDAD, Iraq (AP)—The Interior Ministry acknowledged Thursday that an Iraqi police officer whose existence had been denied by the Iraqis and the U.S. military is in fact an active member of the force, and said he now faces arrest for speaking to the media.
Ministry spokesman Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, who had previously denied there was any such police employee as Capt. Jamil Hussein, said in an interview that Hussein is an officer assigned to the Khadra police station, as had been reported by The Associated Press.
The captain, whose full name is Jamil Gholaiem Hussein, was one of the sources for an AP story in late November about the burning and shooting of six people during a sectarian attack at a Sunni mosque.
Or, y’know, maybe not.
Curt at Flopping Aces has heard from a Civilian Police Assistance Training Team rep who says that:
Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf never acknowledged that there was a Capt. Jamil Hussein assigned to the Khadra station, he confirmed to the AP that there was a Capt. Jamil Ghdaab Gulaim assigned there.
As Bob Owens notes, we have heard that name from Michelle Malkin last December 20th.
We have not heard that name from the AP, though it would explain why the name “Jamil Hussein” was not in the Iraqi MoI payroll records.
Reckless wingnuts that they are, both Curt and Bob are waiting for the CPATT rep to double- and triple-check that Hussein is not in this man’s name at all.
I would, however, caution everyone against jumping to the conclusion that the AP violated its own rules on pseudonymous sources if this man is not a Hussein.
After all, it is also possible that, per Patterico, that Khalaf said one thing to the AP, and another to the CPATT rep. However, the info at this juncture seems consistent with Ms. Malkin’s earlier report.
It is also possible that—again, assuming this is the guy—that Jamil Ghdaab Gulaim always gave the AP a phony name without the reporters’ knowledge. The AP might just be dupes, instead of liars. Jamil just might be a pseudonymous police officer. Nothing disturbing about that possibility.
PS: Before chiming in with the talking points about beating a dead horse, etc., the trolls should just chill. After all, PW regulars are just part of that fringe that thinks news media’s coverage of the situation in Iraq is generally inaccurate. Actually, for all of the problems with the mass media coverage of Iraq, I don’t know that I would go that far.
maybe it’s a transliteration problem? someone needs to get a hearing aid?
Right now I’d have to see a picture of the guy with his arm around Michelle Malkins waist and a Bud in his other hand. Because until then he’s just so many crop circles
heet post about all of PW losing their fucking minds in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Malkin? Did you say Malkin?
uh…uh…uh…uh….
INTERNMENT!1! YOU EVIL FASCIST!!!
Enough of that stupid Jamil story now. Let’s talk about something important like Nancy’s first 100 hours.
/Timmah!
God you are scum…they iraqi govt has already admitted he exists and they have arrested him for telling the truth…I can understand why a scumbag like you would hate that!
Yeah scumbag!!! Don’t you know that the protest banners pointing out the recklessness of the wignuts for “asking questions” have already been printed?
Why won’t you people just believe what you’re told?
Please? I think I can swing some cool cocktail party invites for you if you’ll go along…
Wait, the Iraqi government admitted to arresting him for telling the truth…?
Come back, madmatt! Guide me to the Light!
Do you dipshits not even bother to read the post before you poop the blessed talking point upon the thread? Or are you really that fucking stupid?
I really like the “arrested him for telling the truth” part. Super extra special approved truthiness there, eh mate? Now was that Jamil Ghdaab Gulaim, or did they arrest the guy who still doesn’t seem to exist, Jamil Hussein? If you arrest a man who doesn’t exist, can you still violate his rights?
Ask any moonbat
you happen to see
Who’s oh so truthy?
Why, it’s the AP!
heet post about all of PW losing their fucking minds in 3 … 2 … 1 …
madmatt post about Kark being a scumbag in 3 … 2 … 1 …
There, fixed that.
Hey, madmatt! Nice job living up to your handle! However, remedial reading is down the hall…
Please guys. You’re grasping at straws with your conspiracy theories. At first it was amusing, now it’s just pathetic.
Right on Hank, just like I was telling ‘em! You people better get on board or there will be plenty more mocking where Hank and madmatt came from. Plenty.
The truth has been agreed upon and regardless of your “facts” or any questions you may have, nothing is going to change that. Like for example, Bush is responsible for 9/11 (it was an inside job).
heet post about all of PW losing their fucking minds in 3 … 2 … 1 …
madmatt post about Kark being a scumbag in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Hank post about PW commentators grasping at straws in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Karl, what we have learned here:
1) Trolls never chill, especially when wingnuts tell them to.
2) Debate of the facts is replaced derision at the topic.
By their standards all of your hard work was a) useless, b) grasping at straws, c) the work of a scumbag.
All of this, no doubt, is why you wanted to be a poster, n’est pas?
Wait, the trolls here are suggesting the Iraqi government has arrested Jamil Hussein for telling the truth—and we’re engaging in conspiracy theories?
I just don’t get it. Why are you people so afraid of getting to the bottom of things? And why do you so despise those who wish to do so?
A lot of great strawman responses doesn’t change anything.
I will give this board kudos for at least allowing discussion though.
Then instead of the kudos, how about giving us an argument other than the strawman, Hank? You’re right, it changes nothing. Jamil Hussein would agree, if anyone could ever find him.
What’s the strawman response, Hank?
The AP claimed four mosques had been torched, and 6 Sunni worshippers immolated. The source for these stories is supposedly a Captain Jamil Hussein, who the AP says exists—something they have now confirmed, they claim, with Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf. This appears—at first blush, at least—to be at odds with information obtained by Curt at flopping aces, who is quoting a CPATT source (who has been asked to triple check).
The AP, without issuing a correction, has now begun referring to a single mosque burning. The CPATT source is noting that Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf only confirmed the existence of a “Jamil Ghdaab Gulaim.” Karl, Bob Owens, Patterico, et al, have all allowed that Khalaf could just be telling two separate stories. Or it could be that Ghdaab Gulaim used the name Hussein with his AP contacts.
A person since identified is claiming he is not the source for the AP.
Now, I ask you: don’t you have questions about this person’s reliability? He (She, It) is responsible for a number of stories of violence against Sunnis—many of which he (she, it) would not be in position to have firsthand knowledge of, given where he (she, it) was stationed.
This suggests the possibility, at least, that the AP has been gulled. Duped. Reliant upon a bad source. Or that they have been knowingly protecting their source by using a pseudonym that they didn’t acknowledge. Or that they are now trying to cover-up the fact that they have been gulled.
Also possible—as Karl and others tacitly acknowledge—is that the Iraqi Government is engaging in some sort of cover up. If so, what is their motive? Because it seems to me that, should they really be trying to bring together warring factions, they would benefit more from finding and hanging members of “Shia death squads” than they would from trying to cover up evidence.
Which is really what this argument is all about—because the world gets information from the AP, processes that information, and formulates judgments based on that information. And given that one of the stated goals of the insurgency is to manipulate our media, it seems appropriate to ask if they have been successful, and if this is one instance where what they’ve been doing has been uncovered.
The key here being a willingness to ask the questions.
Now. What exactly is YOUR argument, Hank, other than that we are engaging in “conspiracy theories” (can you elaborate? What are those conspiracy theories) and that you find such behavior “pathetic.”
For my part, I’ve heard several times now how our wingnut meddling has put brave truth-teller Jamil Hussein in peril with his vicious Shia overlords. So I’m not sure how making the jump to “the Iraqi police have arrested Hussein for telling the truth!” is much of a leap.
Besides, it’s the leap being made on YOUR side.
So again, I ask you, Hank: what is your argument here? We have spelled out and sourced ours.
1. Whether the Iraqi gov’t has admitted he exists is in dispute. That’s the point of the post. Reading is a skill.
2. The AP report says he “faces” arrest, not that he has been arrested. And the entire AP story suggests the man will not be held unless he is identified by the AP, which I think we can safely say the AP will refuse to do. Reading is a skill.
3. Calling someone a scumbag? No skill necessary.
4. I am accused of spinning a conspiracy theory for a post in which two of the three possibilities I suggest, the AP did not act maliciously. A “conspiracy” generally requires agreement of the parties thereto. Reading is a skill.
Actually, Hank, for it to be discussion there would really have to be a give and take aspect. What you are doing is making assertions and insulting people. But don’t despair, because your ability to not question that which the collective has decided puts you squarely on the side of the angels!
Ah Gee, thanks, man. You know Thomas Jefferson once wrote that dissent is the highest form of patriotism (just ask communists). Of course, a lot of straw grasping wingnuts will tell you he didn’t actually say that, but really those scumbags should stop beating the story to death.
Madmatt, I totally agree with this:
It’s awful to wish someone to not exist, whether or not that person does actually exist. What if, despite being existentially challanged, that person really, really wants to exist at the very bottom of his non-existing heart? I think it’s heartless (in the sense of lacking a heart rather than the heart not existing)that reichwing fascist s want to say who does and does not exist simply by employing some burgeosie notion of material existence (ie having a mind and functioning body made of matter at our current point in time). And where exactly would Kevin Federline fit in that equation, smarties?
There Karl—I fixed that for you.
Giving Curt’s source absolute credibility over the AP over what Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf did or did not supposedly confirm to the AP is rather credulous given your desire to get right to the truth of the matter.
Until you see something directly attributed to Abdul-Karim Khalaf himself, rather than through someone who “has confirmed” without attribution or quotation, you can’t consider this matter closed to your satisfaction.
Uh, David?
Is that what you’re looking for? Where is this “giving absolute credibility” you speak of and why should AP’s account be given any more weight than Curt’s sources? The AP has a vested interest in this story now. Curt doesn’t. Neither does Eason Jordan who is also unsatisfied with AP’s explanation/summary dismissal of criticism.
I see that my comment has been deleted.
Instead of flogging a dead horse from behind your computers, accusing AP of being “associated with terrorists”, and calling journalists (real ones, not like your ilk) cowards who do not dare go outside the Green Zone to gather the “reality” of Iraq, why don’t you go investigate first-hand what the Jamil story really is all about?
Go to Baghdad with Malkin, the Floppy one, and the other members of your lynch mob. Find Jamil, wherever he is (probably in jail, since the Iraqi Ministry said he would be arrested for talking to the press), interview him, and see for yourself. And if he is dead, you can always go present your condolences to his widow and his children.
Or is it that the lynch mob is too afraid to go to a war zone?
When is Malking going to Baghdad again?
Let’s see how long this post will remain.
Did somebody fire up the Null Reality Generator and transport all of us to Bizarro World?
We’ve got madmatt (truth in advertising) who sows the intellectual equivalent of a drive-by bowel movement, inventing a conspiracy out of whole tin foil and insulting the poster ( I’ve never met Karl but I am reasonably convinced that he is not a scumbag.)
Then along comes Hank, who has, apparently, fallen deeply in love with all things strawman as if that explains the whole kabiddle. Hank, way to bring some strong juice to the table.
This is followed by David I (what the hell is it with Davids, anyway?) (sorry cranky-d) who completely misrepresents the post in an attempt to cast Karl and the rest of us a mindless idealogues.
All of this occurs without the spitting vitriol of Semi-Sweet or hate, er heet.
In the meantime, Jeff writes, what, ten paragraphs laying out the issues that are of concern and why. Doesn’t anybody have reading comprehension any more? If this be troll chillin’ I’m movin’ to West Philly.
SOMEBODY TURN OFF THE DAMN GENERATOR!!
The AP has a vested interest in this story now. Curt doesn’t.
You really think so? Everyone, no matter how good their intentions, has a vested interest–in being right. Hence the stick-to-the-chosen-narrative-and-prospect-for-information-supporting-it practice, the chosen method of information suppliers everywhere (whether they have a blog or write for a newspaper).
BWAAAA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You, sir, are apparantly too self absorbed or just plain stupid to realize that you have just posted the equivalent of, “My Dad can beat up your Dad!”
Why are all of you guys (girls, madmen) sitting on your living room floors kicking your legs and waving your fists while your panties knot around your throats? We’re just asking some questions here. Or is the AP above reproach because of the “truthiness” that it brings to your own preconceived notions of media reliability?
Let me guess: As long as the narrative supports the “catastrophe” meme, the AP rocks, dude!
Yet your hatred shines through like Mrs. Clinton’s unbridled ambition, so white hot that instead of taking a shot at demolishing the arguments you adapt the weak as hell
“chickenhawk” screed in a frothing attempt to not only end the debate in your favor (how very Soviet of you) but to enjoin the wingnuttery from ever engaging in anything like this debate again.
Else I whilst mock your collective manhood/womanhood again!!
Karl’s right. You all need to chill. Stop projecting your longing for disaster long enough to enjoy the conversation, minion! Break down the facts, show Karl to be a purveyor of half-truths and innuendo! Have fun, dude! We do!
Is it just me or has the pursuit of “truthiness” turned so many lefties into Mr. Grumpy Pants.
PS: Thank you, Hubris, for at least debating a point! I would say that the stakes for AP are significantly higher than for Curt or any of the other bloggers, which would explain their defensiveness.
Not likely, and certainly not without any comment on it.
Actually, we are not responsible for the arrest of Bilal Hussein. That accusation emanates from other quarters.
Who here has claimed to be a journalist, DA? The Devil would have a smarter advocate, I’m sure of it.
Ardolino is over there, Malkin and Preston are on their way, Yon is going back, Roggio is just back, Inghram has been, Hannity has been, O’Reilly has been, etc. Did you have a point of some sort?
Can you actually hang a wire service? You wouldn’t happen to have instructions for that, would you? I’m assuming you’d have to tie a special knot for something like that.
That may be impossible, as he might not exist. No one has produced any evidence of his existence. But since you’re convinced, maybe you should saddle up and root him out.
Certainly, you’d be better at that with all of your sincere concern. Do you need help packing?
Who’s getting lynched again?
I believe she’s en route.
I’m going to go with “In perpetuity”. Your shelf life will be much shorter, I’m guessing.
Yes, I do. Curt is merely asking questions and comparing the available information. He’s investigating. The AP has taken a stand that it now must defend, and they have 61 filed news stories that depend on it. Curt doesn’t stand to lose anything if Jamil Hussein materializes tomorrow and retells the 4 Mosque-B-Que with a half-dozen Sunni Crispies story. The AP has all sorts of problems if Capt. Hussein is as imaginary as he currently appears to be.
Because Curt is, you know, just a blogger. Who takes them seriously?
It’s the knot of Tyranny, Pablo. The Knot of Tyranny!!!! Truthiness is the first to fall!!!
Nobody deleted any comments that I’m aware of.
David —
Try clicking the links. The name of the CPATT source is Bill Costlow, and he attributes the denial directly to Ministry spokesman Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf.
Devil’s Advocate’s entire rant is too silly to address at length. Both it and DA are cartoons. And Hubris, once again, is here to show how truly dispassionate he is. Instead, he comes off sounding condescending as all get out. Which is not unusual, because that is HIS “stick-to-the-chosen-narrative-and-prospect-for-information-supporting-it” signature: that most people other than he are simply trying to work backwards from their own ideological bent.
I think it would be more kind (and less condescending, Hubris) to say that, though of course people have a vested interest in being right, some of them are quite willing to forego that interest and let the facts take the story where it goes, regardless of any previously-chosen narrative.
Which is why the facts, as they come, keep getting laid out here. I don’t know whether the AP was duped, has been correct all along, is now covering its own ass, was engaging in improper protocol, has been lying, was lazy, or is simply mistaken. What I do know is what’s been laid out.
And again, I think it far more generous to allow that people are prospecting for information because they are interested in the truth—and because they think the truth matters, particularly when policy decisions are at least potentially dependent upon the kinds of information we receive—than it is to suggest that they are simply trying to show that they have been right all along.
From what I’ve seen so far, the AP has been less than willing to own up to its own previous reportage. Curt? Not so much.
If this is the case, wouldn’t it be expeditious for Jamil to turn himself in and then be released when the AP fails to confirm him as a source? I mean, if a warrant has been issued, isn’t Jamil responsible for enforcing warrants? …being a police officer and all… It seems he could easily face sure and certain punishment for failing to turn himself in knowing that a warrant had been issued. I don’t get it.
I don’t think it’s condescending to assert that bloggers are subject to the same potential foibles as other providers of news/commentary.
I remember back in 2004, when in various comment threads I was defending the blogosphere against triumphalism in the wake of the Rather story. Now, though, I think those allegations were somewhat prescient. The blogosphere isn’t the market-driven, self-correcting machine with truth as the commodity that some would portray.
Which is not unusual, because that is HIS “stick-to-the-chosen-narrative-and-prospect-for-information-supporting-it†signature: that most people other than he are simply trying to work backwards from their own ideological bent. [emphasis mine]
What a strange thing to say–where did I say that I was exempt when I said “everyone”?
I’m sorry that I come across as dispassionate; I’ll try to include more foam-flecked insults next time. I can’t help it if I’m chillin’.
Shhhhhhhhhhhh, happyfeet
The horse is dead. Don’t disturb him or DA will call you a keyboard coward, Hank will prop strawmen on your porch, David will misrepresent your views and disparage you (all at the same time,) Hubris will attempt to point out your ideological bias (but chillin’, man, chillin’
while madmatt, well, ‘nuff said.
Back away from the festering corpse…
I think it’s great that you think the regular MSM is market corrective Hubris. Someone should tell Pinch & the LAT.
BJ – DA is right – I am way too cowardly to go to Baghdad to nail this down – for starters, I’m afraid my boss would think I was nuts… but it really isn’t adding up.
It seems like in the Jan 4 article the AP helpfully informs the Interior Ministry that Jamil is fully aware there had been a warrant issued for his arrest. A warrant he would himself be obligated to enforce.
Again:
The speculation is that he has already been arrested. But, if so, was he arrested for talking to the media or for failure to discharge his duties as a police officer? If the former, we are assured he will soon be free and frolicking in the meadow with the other Jamils, but if the latter, it could be a very long time before Jamil does much frolicking. The question I’m left with is, which would best serve the AP’s interests?
I think it’s great that you think the regular MSM is market corrective Hubris.
When did I say that?
I will be glad to visit Baghdad to find out about the Jamil and his whole existential crisis, provided someone will pay my way, including first class airfare, a substantial per diem, and five star hotel accomodations. Also, in keeping with the Democratic war strategy, I won’t technically be Baghdad, but just over the horizon in Grand Cayman or maybe Amsterdam. Please contact me via email so we can work out a funds transfer.
Knock it off, Hubris. Parts of the blogosphere are self-correcting; others are not. You can decide which sites to read (and which newspapers, etc) based on how honest you think are the people doing the posting.
You don’t have to “say” it, Hubris. Point is, you implied, by dint of your recognition of such failings attributable to humans (failures that you must believe others are incapable of seeing as clearly as you), that you have a bit more insight into how things work psychologically than do those who are, well, not you. This could be because such blind souls simply can’t find their way out of the Matrix the way you can, or it could be a potential foible of all humanity—in which case bringing it up is much like observing that all bloggers or purveyors of information are susceptible to developing sinus infections or hemorrhoids.
The point is not what is potential. The point is, do you think they are indeed engaging in such actions? Why won’t you commit rather than casting aspersions in so roundabout a fashion?
It’s not that you come across as dispassionate, Hubris. It’s that you work some damn hard at trying to present yourself that way. Even now, you reveal yourself with your either or: apologize for being so coldly scientific when you could be joining the ranks of the foam-flecked. What was it Hannibal Lecter says in Silence of the Lambs—something like “don’t you think this randomness seems a bit too random?”
There’s a lesson in that, if you’re willing to take the word of a fictional serial killer.
Anyway, at some point you have to stop and make an argument. You seem now to be content to wander from site to site showing how assertions are not facts, and that arguments contain assertions. And that we are all guilty of asserting—often because we have an entire warehouse of context to draw on.
This is true. But if you aren’t interested in reading hypotheses, you shouldn’t be reading opinion journals. Unless, of course, your purpose is to set yourself apart from such crass and amateurish ramblings by constantly pointing out that they are mere speculation, often set in motion by some kind of belief.
Which, duh.
This answers a lot of questions:
http://jamilhussein.com/
Hubris
You really didn’t. I exported it as a possible extension from what you did say. The great thing is that with the new rules we are operating under my assertion is granted the power of truthiness based on either the power of the collective will, or in this case the power of my unchecked ego.
Honestly, if you want to take a break, I can handle both sides of our conversation.
“Try clicking the links. The name of the CPATT source is Bill Costlow, and he attributes the denial directly to Ministry spokesman Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf.”
Clicked and read, top to bottom, before I posted. No attribution, just (paraphrasing here) “guess what the source confirmed? [Insert whatever].” The source may have spoken to Abdul-Karim Khalaf or to the janitor, he does not say—if he did say, that would be attribution.
However, you’re right, I misrepresented your post as giving absolute credence to this source. I regret the error and apologize.
happyfeet: I can’t stop laughing. Everything that I read at that site echoes in my head with Borat’s voice.
heh
Give me a break, Jeff. This started when I responded to this:
The AP has a vested interest in this story now. Curt doesn’t.
I made the argument that this specific statement wasn’t true, and explained why I thought so.
The point is, do you think they are indeed engaging in such actions? Why won’t you commit rather than casting aspersions in so roundabout a fashion?
Jesus, it’s not casting aspersions–it’s suggesting to get some perspective, that blogging and mainstream reporting/opinion writing are not as different as people seem to think (as evidenced by the specific comment to which I originally responded).
You don’t have to “say†it, Hubris.
Intentionalism, I hardly knew ye.
OT: NPR is reporting that “The Mahdi Army is rumored to be distributing grenades to every family in Sadr City…” Does this strike anyone as a bit odd, hand grenades not being particularly useful as a defensive weapon…
Moreover, running “Sadr City grenade” through Google News yields absolutely nothing to corroborate this rumor. Maybe people are reluctant to think AP would just make things up, but NPR?
Jesus happyfeet. In my neighborhood the only thing they distribute is girl scout cookies. And those little capitalistas expect payment.