Just admit it. Seriously, last week I discussed briefly the Jamil Hussein story and how some right wing blogs are out to prove the AP just made up 61 stories wholecloth. But it hasn’t been a good week for them. Glenn Greenwald has a rather long post on the Jamil Hussein affair, Khamenei’s death, and lonely John Kerry.

The thing about the Jamil Hussein story is that the story regarding the six Shia’s burned to death was corroberated by AP with other sources, it’s just the right wing bloggers that were on the crusade wouldn’t accept it and insisted they were making up the story.

I understand jumping on a story and screwing it up–I’ve done it and done it pretty spectacularly in two instances. The thing is after you realize you screw-up, you just admit it instead of trying to either continue the story as Malkin and others have tried to do. I can understand the initial response waiting for confirmation even, but at some point, when the key evidence of a conspiracy falls apart–and in fact there was never any evidence of such a conspiracy with Jamil Hussein, it’s time to give it up.

For today’s right-wing warbloggers, whose contempt for journalists is matched only by their unbridled hatred of Arabs and Muslims, the AP kerfuffle represented a perfect solution that, at least temporarily, lifted their November blues. By early this month, they had dubbed the scandal “Jamilgate,” with Malkin referring to the AP as “The Associated (with terrorists) Press.” (Get it?)

Keep in mind that in the seven days surrounding the Burned Alive story, hundreds and hundreds of Iraqis were killed in sectarian violence. Here’s a very small sampling, via Reuters, of the bloodshed that flowed around the time of the Burned Alive dispatch:

Mosul — Police said they recovered 14 bodies, including three women, in different areas of Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad. [November 22]
Baghdad — Up to six car bombs killed 133 people in a Shi’ite militia stronghold in Baghdad and a further 201 people were wounded, police said. [November 23]
Baghdad — Baghdad police recovered 30 unidentified bodies around the capital in the 24 hours to late Friday, an Interior Ministry source said. [November 24]
Baghdad — Baghdad police retrieved 30 bodies of victims of violence on Friday and 17 on Saturday, an Interior Ministry source said. [November 25]
Baquba — Police in Baquba, 65 km (40 miles) north of Baghdad, found the bodies of 25 people, including seven teenagers blindfolded and each with a single gunshot wound to the head, in various parts of Baquba in the past 24 hours, police said. [November 26]
Baghdad — Baghdad police retrieved 39 bodies in the 24 hours to Monday evening. [November 27]

To date, warbloggers have not raised serious questions about any of those slayings or the reporting surrounding them. Yet viewing Iraq through the soda straw that is the Burned Alive story, they insist the press, thanks to its pro-terrorist sympathies, is creating the illusion of “chaos” in Iraq.

Whereas readers like you and me might see a completely illogical obsession with the Burned Alive story, given the statistical fact that the Iraqi civil war will likely claim six more victims within the next hour, for the warbloggers the half-dozen fatalities represent something much more important — an exit strategy, a way out of their own man-made disaster that is Iraq. Because warbloggers think they can claim the whole Iraq fiasco was the media’s fault, that the press did the terrorists’ bidding, spread their propaganda, turned Americans against their fighting sons and daughters, and ruined what would have otherwise been a brilliant Bush foreign policy maneuver to spread Western-style democracy throughout a troubled part of the world.

In other words, the press lost the war. Period. And worse, the press lost the war through phony, biased reporting. My hunch is the Burned Alive excitement revolves around the fact warbloggers see an opening to try to raise doubts about, and even dismiss, all the Iraq reporting. “In short, the AP has been relying on a bogus source for much of its reporting on Shia violence against Sunnis since at least April,” right-wing blogger Jeff Goldstein wrote at Protein Wisdom.

The thing is that these fantasies do serve a purpose and a little different than Boehlert points out. Boehlert argues it’s a way out to blame the press and he’s correct in one sense, but in another the Chewbacca defense is perfect because when faced with report after report of chaos and civil war, pretending that there is a conspiracy and concentrating on one piece of evidence that might be wrong allows them to distract themselves and others from the reality that Iraq is a giant shit sandwich which we are savoring.

Never mind that there is a one in 6 billion chance that the blood could be someone else’s blood besides OJ’s on the gate at Nicole Simpson’s place, if the glove doesn’t fit, you must acquit. If we can find one instance of a reporter getting something wrong, the vast conspiracy will be demonstrated even if all the other evidence is still there and uncontested.

The distraction allows the cognitive dissonance to continue. One of the most obvious aspects of the campaign is that no evidence can prove them wrong. There are no falsifiable hypotheses, only faith based claims that look for evidence to support those claims.

Kerry isn’t being shunned by the troops as he was having a conversation with reporters, he was shunning the troops.

8 thoughts on “When You Screw Up”
  1. Hi Archpundit,
    Excellent post: agree entirely.
    I’m in the midst of a mopping up operation, picking off one of Malkin’s apologist flunkies over the Hurriyah attacks, the details and petty minutiae of which he is hopelessly obsessed in trying to find some shred of remaining ambiguity to support his queen’s honor.
    So please help if you can. In the article you mentioned additional sources who corroborated Jamil Hussein’s claims on that day; the six immolations, four mosques damaged in varying degrees, etc.
    Could you please supply these links to me? (links other than the (gasp!) AP, I mean)
    I understand this is a wingnut in a bubble and I’m likely wasting my time, but this guy’s on the ropes and the unraveling of Malkin has provided a knockout-punch opportunity which I can’t pass up. In the interests of future foreign policy, the last ember of neoconservatism extinguished, the better.
    I don’t wish to take up comments space with this if it isn’t relevant. If technically feasable, you can send them to the email address I provided in the “Mail (will not be published)” field.
    Many thanks.

  2. I have to admit I don’t, can’t and have even developed severe reactions to first right wing then later all of MSM.
    It’s really a scripted soap opera geared to twelve year olds.
    Bush screwed up. The death toll is what, over 3000 now.
    Is murder an impeachable offense?

  3. Help get this right-wing fool thrown off the air!!!

    Didn’t CNN get the message from the last election….that the American public has rejected the right-wing extremist agenda?
    Why is CNN giving prime-time every night to the ultra-right-wing extremist, Glenn Beck?

    Please take just 10 seconds to click on this link and send a message to CNN telling them we don’t want the airwaves innundated by this idiotic
    low-grade right-wing propaganda!

    http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?69

  4. ArchPundit:

    I look foreward to your upcoming interview of Jamil Hussein.

    Or your review of the ABC interview of Jamil Hussein. Or CBS. Or CNN.

    Think it will be soon? Yeah me either.

    There in lays the ‘thing’ the easiest thing would have been and yet still would be, produce him…let ‘everyone’ see him, see that he is real. Put a face to a name.

    But not only has AP not been willing, or able, to do so, they have also, since this first came up, have not quoted him in any other story.

    Wonder why…Hummmmmm funny that

  5. ===There in lays the ‘thing’ the easiest thing would have been and yet still would be, produce him…let ‘everyone’ see him, see that he is real. Put a face to a name.

    So he’s supposed to make himself a target now? I’m really curious about why Jamil Hussein has to prove he exists by broadcasting his face now? He’s already at danger of arrest and prosecution.

    ===But not only has AP not been willing, or able, to do so, they have also, since this first came up, have not quoted him in any other story.

    Again, is this hard to figure out? Once he became the story the stakes to him became far greater.

    ===Wonder why…Hummmmmm funny that

    It’s funny that you are this dumb. Seriously, this incredibly stupid. He’s been threatened with prosecution after this has been made into a big deal. The thing is, and what you miraculously avoid, is that the major stories this guy gave AP were largely correct. THe biggest error being there was only one mosque attacked. Others verified the story in the neighborhood.

    Beyond that, what is it that one source being bad proves if that were the case? That Iraq is hunky dory? That’s the question that no one on this little crusade can answer. So what? Does it make better if one story is wrong? No one thinks things are going well, so what is the point other than trying to divert attention from the larger problem?

    Thought so.

  6. Why is this man in danger? Why does he risk arrest? He is a police Captain, right? He’s done nothing wrong, right?

    And if by some twist of whatever, he is in danger, why not get him out of the country? Certainly, the AP could do that, could fund that. What a story that would make…all the cable shows, he could even cry with Oprah! Then a book tour, etc. All the while detailing what a horrible mess GW Bush has made of his wonderful homeland.

    Why, oh why, not?

    There could be only one reason…and we all know this If AP could they would…of that there is no doubt at all. None.

    ===so what is the point other than trying to divert attention from the larger problem?

    The larger problem?

    Oh, you mean how the mainstream media is covering the war? Yeah, it is a huge problem, hardly new, their editorializing on the front page, but still…making it up?

    The first thing my nephew told anyone that would listen when he got back from his year there was; “it’s nothing like you see on TV or read in the paper.”

  7. ===Why is this man in danger? Why does he risk arrest? He is a police Captain, right? He’s done nothing wrong, right?

    All government personnel in Iraq are in danger. Have you been paying attention? He hasn’t done anything wrong, but he has broken the law in Iraq which actually does forbid talking to the media by officers. You see, you live in a country with really strong civil liberties protections…he does not. He stuck his neck out and generally didn’t have a problem until the Iraqi government kept getting pounded with questions.

    ===And if by some twist of whatever, he is in danger, why not get him out of the country? Certainly, the AP could do that, could fund that.

    Or maybe he’s a patriot who wants to serve his country. Or he has family he doesn’t want to leave behind. It boggles the mind that you have this perception that he could just leave without any consequences to his family or that perhaps, he thinks what he does is valuable.

    —–Oh, you mean how the mainstream media is covering the war? Yeah, it is a huge problem, hardly new, their editorializing on the front page, but still…making it up?

    And again, as I mentioned, what is it that proving one story wrong does when the other stories around that time were just as horrific? Seriously, the story’s main part is that six human beings were lit on fire during a period in which hundreds were killed. If the story was wrong–and it was confirmed by 4 other sources initially with only one recanting after being threatened, so what? Is Iraq not in a bloody civil war then? What about the 30 some found tortured and killed over the last couple days? Is that fake too?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *