al-AP Makes It Worse

I already linked to Flopping Aces, read his bust of the AP here. Given that, or even aside from it, should this, via the AP, be the main Iraq story in the Chicago Tribune today?

Separately, police and witnesses said U.S. soldiers shot and killed 11 civilians and wounded five on Sunday night in the Baghdad suburb of Husseiniya.

"We were sitting inside our house when the Americans showed up and started firing at homes. They killed many people and burned some houses," said one of the witnesses, a man with bandages on his head who was being treated at Imam Ali Hospital in the Shiite slum of Sadr City. The police and witnesses spoke with Associated Press Television News on condition of anonymity to protect their own security.

The military denies any operation in the area, still the AP feels compelled to print this trash from sources who won't even identify themselves?

The U.S. military said it had no record of any American military operation in the area.

Will anyone hold the AP to account? Or will the above be headlining the MSM network coverage tonight?

Comments

[Nikolay]

"The U.S. military said it had no record of any American military operation in the area."
That's great. U.S. military denies any misconduct, therefore, there was none.

[Buzzy]

I would tend to believe the US Military over AP any day of the week (or Reuters for that matter).

[yyy]

Some people never learn.

There are still numbnuts out there that think Saddam had ties to Al Quada, weapons of mass destruction and was involved in planning 9/11.

I really would have thought Dan would have a better line than slamming the MSM for causing all the trouble in Iraq...

Multilple accounts of a single event occuring in war? No. Say it ain't so.

The military not having any record of something? Gee, that's never happened before either, has it?

The beat goes on.

[Nikolay]

"I would tend to believe the US Military over AP any day of the week (or Reuters for that matter)"
Well, that's your choice. Given the military's record on this thing, it's kind of crazy to do so, but you're entitled to it. Just don't force others to do so.

p.s. And another so-much-hyped story: "there were no people burnt with kerosene!" Because Baghdad Police says so. Common, the police is infiltrated by the militia, but of course it says it is not. Bayan Jabr, the minister of interior (now the minister of finance) said there were no death squads and secret prisons run by his ministry. When he no longer could hide this, he said, yes, there were such things, but it was all so minor and he didn't authorize this.
All those things about "AP enemy propaganda" are just so petty, especially if you compare it to Bush's "we're absolutely winning", "Al-Maliki will make it", "we're making a good progress" and all his other outrageous lies and delusions. Or to propaganda of Glenn Beck's "Iraq: the real story". Or to Powerline using his arithmetical ignorance to prove that Iraq is just twice as bad as Washington DC.
Even if you could prove that this kerosene burning never happened (ever heard of "fog of war"? was ten planes reported to be missing on 9/11 an enemy propaganda?), would it make half a hundred to a hundred of drilled bodies found every day on Baghdad streets nothing? Just read the real story, check "healingiraq.blogspot.com", where he translates messages from the Baghdad's message boards -- it's all very very very bad anyway.

[yyy]

Forget it.

They're still apparently trying to make people believe the chaos in Iraq is just a Big Lie coming from the liberal media.

It's all good over there...if AP/CBS/NBC/NYTIMES/WP would just start reporting the great progress that has been made it would all work out.

Reality is never going to penetrate these buffoon's cloak of denial on the damage they've done to our country, Iraq and the entire ME.

My read of things says that Iran is going to come out of all of this as the big winner.

I guess the domino theory in the ME was right afterall, except the dominos all fell in the opposite direction that the dummies expected.

[Robert Crawford]

So you guys have no problem with the press repeating stories from non-existent sources?

[Dan Riehl]

So you guys have no problem with the press repeating stories from non-existent sources?

They're Liberals. All that matters is what makes them feel all warm and fuzzy, so what if it's wrong?

[Buzzy]

And then there are those who would rather believe AP's phanthom "source" and the MSM's anti American agenda over anything else. Nickolay, your sad 9/11 moonbattery goes well with the stylish tin foil hat.

Actually there is a huge conspiracy involved but it involves those who would rather make up fake news sources and publish fake photographs rather than report the facts.

[Nikolay]

"So you guys have no problem with the press repeating stories from non-existent sources?"

1) What makes you think those sources are non-existent? The fact that someone you believe says so?

2) There's such a thing as "fog of war". Not all the news could be 100% checked in such an environment. I don't blindly buy all the stories that come from Iraq, but I don't buy the "the mess in Iraq is an Anti-American MSM invention" neither.
"We checked the facts and found no evidence that there were six people burnt outside the mosque" is total bullshit, because in such environment you can't be sure that something _didn't_ happen.

3) There's no real need for "enemy propaganda" in this environment, because facts on the ground are bad enough. Unless you would say that all the Iraqi bloggers are paid propagandists as well. What effect, do you think, this "myth of six burnt men" would have? It's a drop in the ocean anyway, and things will get so much worse before any real discussion about "cut-and-running" will begin.

4) I'm not ready to believe the story about US soldiers killing civilians, although it's funny to discuss this on this blog, where so many people are so much in favor of such actions. The story doesn't claim that it was "unjustified killing of civilians", though. But if this story turns out to be true, it's quite natural that the source chose to remain anonymous.

p.s. All this talk about gullibility is especially funny given how easily people in US seem to have swallowed the story: "Putin silences another dissident, [that claimed that Putin is a pedophile and a mastermind behind 9/11]".

p.p.s. Buzzy: what kind of moonbattery you talk about? To say that military would rather hide any screw-up it has done is not a "conspiracy thinking", but a natural reasoning. It doesn't mean that "military pleads not guilty, therefore it's guilty", but that "military pleads not guilty, case closed" is not right.
Or do you think that it's moonbattery to say that Iraqi minister ran death squads? First, he _did_ ran them. Second, Al-Maliki was the head of the Jihad Office of Islamic Dawa Party around the time they bombed American embassy in Kuwait, so you better have really low expectations about Iraqi Government.

[Purple Avenger]

"1) What makes you think those sources are non-existent?"

Oh they exist all right, they're just working for the enemy.

[Nikolay]

>Oh they exist all right, they're just working for the enemy.

Guys, come on. This "enemy MSM" meme is just insane. Now Riehl calls a guy Saddams's mouthpiece because he said that Saddam had "rubber-stamp parliament" (is that a virtue?) and quoted papers saying that Iraqi war would destabilize the region.
Look at this:

1) You're ready to believe that the rise of level of violence was caused by the "enemy"'s wish to influence to election. That's not some "anonymous source" spewing this propaganda nonsense, but the very Vice President. Nobody calls him on this.

2) Iraqi parliament elects Al-Maliki as the new Prime Minister. Bush sees him as a great friend in a struggle for hope, freedom etc. Democrats that criticize him are called "enemies of democracy in Iraq". Al-Maliki is the guy that worked in the terrorist organization responsible for the bombing of American embassy in Kuwait and for hijacking planes, the organization that pioneered suicide bombings in the Middle East and had Hezbollah as one of its offshoots.

3) When Saddam is sentenced, Al-Maliki says that Saddam is not worth "a drop of blood of martyrs like Mohammad Al-Sadr". Mohammad "kill all the Jews" Al-Sadr being the father of the "most dangerous man in Iraq" Moqtada Al-Sadr. The oh-so-antiamerican MSM passes this on, even though this spells the civil war as clear as anything could spell the civil war.

4) Now when the talks with Iran are inevitable, it's all somehow a fault of leftards. You have no problem with the former terrorist financed by Iran being the head of the free Iraqi state (you have problems with Democrats that try slander this wonderful guy), but "don't dare honor Iran with our talks!"

Oh, sure, "we replaced a secular dictator with Islamic terrorist, freedom is on the march. If only those meddlesome MSM just shut up. We shut down newspapers that print bad news in Iraq, and any bad news in Iraq is an enemy propaganda even if it's true, but why our own MSM refuse just to print our press-releases? Do they want us to win? After all, this battle against international extremists is so important, [and what better way is there to fight extremism than to prop up Islamic terrorists?]"

[Robert Crawford]

--
"We checked the facts and found no evidence that there were six people burnt outside the mosque" is total bullshit, because in such environment you can't be sure that something _didn't_ happen.
--

The burden of proof is on the people claiming it happened. Considering the SOLE SOURCE for that claim doesn't appear to exist, or, rather, isn't who he claims to be, the initial claim is worse than suspect.

[Nikolay]

"The burden of proof is on the people claiming it happened."
I agree. Anyway, AP stands by the story and gives further details: where, when, who, etc.

"Considering the SOLE SOURCE for that claim doesn't appear to exist, or, rather, isn't who he claims to be, the initial claim is worse than suspect."

The army officials made a statement that a certain Capt. Jamil Hussein doesn't exist. This seems to be a thing they will have hard times proving, simply because he _does_ exist. This is a war of words, and eventually the truth will come out. Some people seem to know the outcome of this war, because "Army officials never lie" and "left-wing media always lies". If Capt. Jamil Hussein comes out, this will probably be a mighty blow to "left-wing terrorist propaganda" meme.

If the story turns out not to be true, it will be a serious blow to AP's credibility, indeed. (Don't go with "they don't have any credibility anyway", please).

[prozacula]

once again, riehl makes himself look like a complete nincompoop. a complete ass.

why is it that EVERYTHING dan writes turns out to be bullshit?