Weekend Question 2: What About Jamil xxxx xxxx Hussein ‘Captain Tuttle’ (or ‘Major Murdock’) Skywalker?

ANSWER: Glad you asked, because the inescapable conclusion has to be that Associated Press reporting out of Iraq cannot be relied on.

___________________________________

Dafydd ab Hugh at Michelle Malkin identifies the current available options (renumbered by me to save the best for last):

1. Jamil Hussein (under that name) works at Khadra and was AP’s source

This would be the best-case scenario for AP (and for Eric Boehlert and others of his ilk). Alas for them, it seems very unlikely at this point: so far, the only news agency which has reported that Interior Ministry spokesman Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf said that “Police Captain Jamil Hussein” worked at Khadra police station — thus ever so slightly vindicating AP — was (drum roll) AP itself!

This is like shooting craps in the street: the dice roll down the gutter-drain; so you climb down to check, and you announce from the sewer than you made your point and won all the money.

Even if true, as Patterico himself has pointed out a number of times, this still would not be evidence either for AP’s “burning Sunnis” claim or it’s “burning mosques” claim. But so far, AP cannot even surmount the “existence” hurdle… other than by shouting up from the sewer that they made their point.

2. The AP simply had no source at all at Khadra

….. For the elite media to make up sources out of whole cloth is not common, but it’s not unheard of either.

So a reasonable person would ditch the first two, leaving one remaining possibility arising from two scenarios:

3. AP has a source at Khadra, but his name is not Jamil Hussein

(Scenario A) Steven Hurst and his editors at AP were aware that their source’s name was not Jamil Hussein.
If this is the case, then AP was complicit in passing along a false name to the Ministry of the Interior, causing them to erroneously (in this scenario) report that the source did not work at the Khadra police station. At the very least, this is devious practice.

Did AP just forget that “Jamil Hussein” was actually “Mohammed Achmed al-Fruitbat?” Was the purpose to make the MOI look foolish, forcing them to make a statement then correct it later? Or did they not give the real name because there is a problem with the source, and they didn’t want anyone looking too carefully?

If the reason for the pseudonym was entirely honorable — Hurst worried about death threats against the man — then why not simply say “said a source who would only speak on condition that we not name him, due to fear of reprisals”? That would have been honest. Thus, I think we can rule out this honorable reason; and all remaining reasons are disreputable and dishonorable.
(Scenario B) Steven Hurst and his editors at AP were completely unaware that their source had given them a nom de guerre
If anything, this is even worse for AP than Scenario (A) above. If Hurst and his editors were blissfully unaware that their source was giving them a false name — then that can only mean they did not even make a minimalist check on his veracity… not even so much as verifying his identity!

What does this mean? Basically, that anyone can call up an AP reporter in Iraq, claim to be a police captain with a story to tell… and that story — propaganda — will wind up in an AP war dispatch without the slightest checking. Rumor central — and a lovely example of the big-box media’s “multiple layers of editing” in action.

And of course, if they couldn’t even bother to verify “Jamil Hussein’s” name, why trouble to verify any other piece of the 62 stories he told them? The source could have said that Dick Cheney personally few to Baghdad and shot some kids, just for fun… and AP would have run with it that evening.

Dafydd gets to the bottom line:

Thus, of all the possibilities, the only one that means AP acted honorably, responsibly, and professionally is case 1, where there really, really is a police captain, stationed at Khadra and actually named Jamil Hussein, and that this fellow was actually a source for the Associated Press. (shown to be false to any reasonable observer above. — Ed)

Under any other scenario — a source for AP at Khadra but who isn’t named Jamil Hussein, or even no source whatsoever — AP has acted despicably, dishonorably, and has forfeited whatever shreds of trust remained in news consumers …..

Bingo. This is a near R-I-P, with barely a pulse, for Jamil “Captain Tuttle” (or is he posing as “Major Murdock”?) Hussein. As demonstrated, it’s a REAL R-I-P to the credibility of AP’s reporting from Iraq.

______________________________

Previous Posts:
- Jan. 12 — Go Ahead, Tony; Make My Day
- Jan. 9 — While Waiting for a Jamil - xxxxx - xxxxx - Hussein - Skywalker Resolution
- Jan. 5 — Jamil Hussein (Delegated) Update (Late PM: BizzyBlog Resumes Updates)
- Jan. 2, 2007 — I Can’t Believe I’m Reading This (Eason Jordan Calls Out AP on Jamil Hussein)
- Dec. 29, 2006 — Well, Well: Investors Business Daily Weighs in on Jamil ‘Captain Tuttle’ Hussein
- Dec. 12 — Quote of the Day: Why Jamil Hussein and the Fake Sources Story Really Matters
- Dec. 6 — Cute, Very Cute (Jamil Hussein Graphic)
- Dec. 4 — Quote of The Day: Mary Katharine Ham on Why ‘Police Captain’ Jamil Hussein Matters (Plus Other Updates)
- Nov. 30 — Tonight’s Jamil ‘Captain Tuttle’ Hussein and AP (Always Paranoid) Update
- Nov. 30 — Jamil Hussein Update
- Nov. 29 — Burning Six Update: Michelle Malkin Sums It Up
- Nov. 27 — The Burning Question (Figuratively and Literally): Is Reliance on Bogus and Compromised News Sources Slanting Iraq Coverage?