The good news, of course, is that either way, someone detestable is going to lose:

A U.S. citizen once convicted of running a private jail in Afghanistan for terror suspects and torturing them has sued The Associated Press, alleging it engaged in defamation, libel and slander.

Jack Idema, a former Green Beret from Fayetteville, N.C., filed the lawsuit Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan seeking at least $110,000 and other unspecified damages.

Idema, who listed a current address in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., was convicted of charges including torture and operating a private jail and was sentenced to 10 years in prison in Afghanistan in September He was later pardoned by Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and left that country in June.

In his lawsuit, Idema accused the AP of ignoring truths about his work in Afghanistan to generate a "hot salient and torrid story of abuse in Afghanistan" to compete with a CBS story about allegations of torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

He also accused the AP of reneging on promises not to publish photographs and videotaped images provided by Idema or his lawyers unless it obtained publishing rights from his licensing agent, Polaris Images.

Dave Tomlin, AP associate general counsel, said: "The whole lawsuit is nonsense. The claims that reflect on the integrity and professionalism of AP staff are especially outrageous."

That last line, by Tomlin...

It made me laugh.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 01:02 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.

Frankly, Jules, I don't think it is any of those.

I don't think these news organizations are lazy, as they can churn out one story after another on how the Iraq War was a mistake and a failure and by the way, Bush is tanking in the polls.

They aren't stupid, either, or we'd catch them faking the news far more frequently than we already do.

Nor do I think that they're willfully ignorant, as far too many critics have told them precisely what they are doing wrong, and loudly enough that an honest journalist would have certainly heard them.

No, what we are dealing with in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press is the purposeful subjugation of journalism to an anti-Bush, anti-U.S. political agenda.

"DonK," who claims to be a veteran Associated Press reporter, had this to say in the comments of Laws, Sausages, and Journalism:

As a former AP newsperson (15+ years), the deterioration of the AP's product makes me ill. The AP used to concentrate on the facts; Analysis and opinions were clearly labeled. However, under the new administration of Tom Curley, there seems little question that standards for verification have fallen sharply and the emphasis on facts over opinion has all but disappeared. The anti-Bush (and anti-US) tenor of AP reporting these days is appalling and makes me embarrassed for my former employers and some of the people I used to work with, who know better.

Update: In the comments, former journalist Jay K. proves my point (my bold):

it's one thing to make wild a** claims about an anti-bush/anti-america agenda in the press. it's another to explain realities like judith miller and bob woodward. i spent fifteen years as an award winning journalist before making a career change. it is based on that experience that i say if the press was doing it's job, and not just acting as administration stenographers, we would most likely not be in iraq, al queda would probably not be back to full strength, and the cheney administration would have never been elected to office in 2004. perhaps you are confusing editorial pages with journalism. journalists ask hard questions. it seems that in the last six years the only real journalists have been working for the mclatchy papers.

Perhaps unwittingly, Jay K proves my point. He strongly suggests that journalists take the role of activists, and that if they had done their jobs, then, "we would most likely not be in iraq, al queda would probably not be back to full strength, and the cheney administration would have never been elected to office in 2004."

The problem, which "DonK" noted above and another journalist obviously agrees with, is that the media are a special interest group, that is overwhelming aligned with the Democratic Party by 9-to-1 or more.

That the Salon.com readers slobbering in the comments disagree with that assessment does not make that fact any less true.

Update: Heh.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:51 AM | Comments (35) | Add Comment
Post contains 505 words, total size 3 kb.

A little bit of cross-referencing reveals that the photographer "Talal" mentioned in Michael Yon's dispatch Second Chances is Associated Press photojournalist Talal Mohammed.

In "Second Chances," Yon recounts:

To see what the AP might have by way of reliable, mainstream, news resources, on the morning of 07 July, I asked Talal, an Associated Press stringer in Baqubah, if he had heard about the Al Hamari murders, and our conversation went something like this:

“Yes,” answered Talal.

"How many had been killed?" I asked.

"35," answered Talal. Not "about 35", but precisely 35.

"How do you know?" I asked.

"A medic at the Baqubah hospital told me,” Talal said.

“What was the medic’s name?” I asked.

“I don’t know,” answered Talal.

“You didn’t ask?”

“No,” he said. Talal said a doctor told him the same thing, but that he did not know the doctor’s name. He had not asked. Besides which, Talal said, the doctor and the medic were afraid to give their names.

“How were the people killed?” I asked.

“They were shot,” answered Talal as he motioned shooting with a pistol.

“Did you tell someone at AP headquarters in Baghdad?” I asked.

“Yes,” answered Talal.

“Who did you tell?” I asked.

“I don’t know,” answered Talal.

The International Herald Tribune on July 10 makes it clear that Talal's account—an account in which he didn't know the medic or doctor he cited, and didn't bother to ask their names—was received by someone at AP in Baghdad, who felt quite comfortable running the account, not matter how vaguely sourced:

The fight underlines the struggle in Diyala Province, where militants believed to be from Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia have reportedly left mass graves of victims in areas under their hold.

[snip]

Soldiers have found whole streets and buildings wired with explosives, bomb and weapons factories and prisons run by extremists - and, Iraqi officials say, the bodies of 35 people slain by militants and dumped in a village on the outskirts of Baquba.

Michael Yon's solid documentation—the units involved, their commander's names, the exact GPS coordinates of the site, video, and still photographs of the bodies, and a face-to-face meeting between Yon and AP reporter Robert Reid—and we get al Qaeda "reportedly" left mass graves.

In the second graph, through the magic of the AP's Baghdad Bureau, a nameless medic and fearful anonymous doctor are now, "Iraqi officials."

Otto von Bismarck was once credited with stating, "To retain respect for sausages and laws, one must not watch them in the making."

As we gain a greater understanding of how one vague, phoned-in account after another is squeezed into an Associated Press casing and squirted across the wires, we're forced to face the reality that like sausages, many of the "facts" in an Associated Press story are those we'd never swallow for a second if we knew what went into them.

Update: What do you know... it only took a week-long blogswarm, but AP finally published on the massacre documented by Michael Yon.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:59 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 507 words, total size 4 kb.

I see you.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 05:35 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 5 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess got a very interesting email request from Brian at Snapped Shot, who wanted me to take a look at this AFP picture published on Yahoo News.

The caption states that the woman in the photo claims that the bullet in her hand hit her bed during an overnight raid by U.S. forces in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood.

But there are a few inconsistencies in her story, or at least, odd observable phenomena surrounding what she's holding in her hand.

For starters, lets look at an enlarged, cropped version of the photo, focusing on the bullet.

While we don't have anything in the camera's frame and we don't know an exact size of the woman's hand to help determine size and scale, we can tell right off the bat that whatever this is, it is not any variation of 5.56 NATO ammunition issued to American forces. The shape is wrong, there are no markings consistent with U.S. 5.56 NATO ammunition, the object in the picture is far too large to be a 5.56 bullet, and quite obviously, it has no discernible jacket.

And while it might be closer in size to the 7.62 NATO chambered for some U.S. weapons systems (including M240 machine guns and M14 rifles), we once again run into the problem of the object's shape being far too rounded for most common 7.62 loadings I'm familiar with (including those generally issued to the military), no jacket, and no markings.

The object is also too rounded in shape (and perhaps too short) to be most the most common variations of .50 BMG bullets I'm familiar with, and quite frankly, only one .50 BMG military loading that I know of comes close.

The M903/M962 SLAP is a tungsten-core saboted 7.62 armor penetrator is the only non-jacketed round .50 BMG-round that I can think of that would have the color this bullet does, lack of markings, the ability to withstand impact with little to no deformation, and the lack of easily observable rifling on the bullet (due to the sabot grabbing the rifling, then being discarded in flight). The problem with this theory is that unless it hit some major masonry on the way in (this armor piercing bullet designed to punch through personnel carriers and vehicles), it would not have been stopped by her bed.

Are there any weapons experts out there who can definitively ID this as a U.S. bullet, or are we looking at something else?

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 03:43 PM | Comments (39) | Add Comment
Post contains 416 words, total size 3 kb.

As noted Saturday, the Associated Press has ceased being a wire service of journalists, and has fallen to become little more than an agency of lazy transcriptionists.

Seeking an excuse to explain why AP would run a faked claim of a sectarian massacre based purely upon hearsay, Associated Press Director of Media Relations Paul Colford attempted to claim that these anonymous sources were reliable (obviously, they aren't) and claim that an American military spokesman supported those claims. He has, despite a specific request to do so, failed to provide the name of the alleged military source.

Further, Colford stated that the Associated Press did not run Michael Yon's Bless the Beasts and Children exposure of a real massacre because:

With regard to Michael Yon, the Iraqi police and the U.S. military – to our current knowledge – have issued no statements to the AP about 10-14 bodies being found on June 29 in a village outside Baquba, even though the military, according to Mr. Yon’s online account, were involved in the discovery.

Ah... no press release, then no story?

Why, then, do we need the Associated Press at all?

Sadly, Colford's transcriptionists could have easily verified the story, if they were so inclined.

I'm sure you remember the old axiom, "A picture says a thousand words." Presented in context, this photo shows everything that is wrong with the Associated Press.

On the right in this photo is Associated Press Special Correspondent Robert Reid in the back of a Stryker in Baquba Saturday morning. He was just 3.5 miles from the site where Iraqi and American forces dug up the bodies of between 10-14 men, women and children that locals say were slaughtered by al Qaeda.

Directly across from Reid, taking this picture, is the man that chronicled the grisly discovery in words and in pictures... Michael Yon.

Yon and Reid spoke about the carnage Yon documented. Reid was within four miles of the gravesite excavated, and had precise GPS coordinates to view the site for himself. And yet, when Reid goes to press what does he write about the massacre Yon wrote about in al Hamira?

Nothing.

Not one word.

American military PAOs know well of the massacre Yon documented, from General Petraeus' PAO Col Steven Boylan, to Brigadier General Bergner's PAO Major Elizabeth Robbins, to LTC James Hutton of MNF-I.

The Associated Press, ostensibly a news-gathering organization, did not apparently ask these sources about Yon's account or what their soldiers had witnessed. Nor did they apparently ask any other American or Iraqi PAOs.

Why?

That is a question the Associated Press doesn't seem willing to answer.

Update: Michael Yon has posted his latest dispatch from Baquba, where he discovers that the number of bodies at at al Hamira (or as he later found out the correct spelling, al Ahamir) may have been much larger than the 10-14 originally thought:

Today, there are indications that the massacre might be much bigger than what I initially reported in “Bless the Beasts and Children.” Shortly after I published “Bless the Beasts and Children,” I asked a local Iraqi official about the village and the graves. The Diyala Provincial councilmen, Abdul Jabar, went on video explaining why he believes that there might be hundreds of people buried in the area, and he said the correct spelling is actually al Ahamir. (Most Iraqis’ names seem to have variant spellings.)

It will be interesting to see if that claim turns out to be accurate.

But this isn't the only item of note by Yon.

While Paul Colford and the Associated Press earlier seem to intone that they had no account of the al Ahamir discovery of the bodies of beheaded, massacred families (and thus, were waiting for military PAOs to drop the story), it appears an Iraqi stringer working for AP was in the area the entire time. He places the massacre body count as being much higher (read Yon for the details), and says he informed AP in Baghdad.

Guess who is at AP HQ in Baghdad? Kim Gamel.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:53 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 689 words, total size 5 kb.

1 I think your frustration lies in an expectation that AP be some kind of fact finding/reporting organization. Once I came to realize that they are nothing more than the a propaganda outlet, the stuff they print no longer bothered me so much. An information outlet can produce news or opinion or they can print news that is selected and written in such a way as it reinforces an overall opinion and that is basically what AP does. They have a political agenda that is pretty clear. Once you accept that, the frustration melts away. Just read alternative sources of news.

Posted by: crosspatch at July 09, 2007 12:32 PM (y2kMG)

2 The military has not issued a press release about the bombing in Amerli, either, yet AP seems to be punching out the headlines about it quite well. I'm waiting for MNF info because I'm just a leeetle bit suspicious that there are fewer than 100 dead, far fewer, and not the 150 that AP is reporting.

Posted by: Chuck Simmins at July 09, 2007 02:54 PM (hASmp)

3 AP's basis for using an unconfirmed story has to do with content. If it's an allegation that women and children were killed by US bombing, it's fair game. If it might tend to reflect poorly on the enemy, or positively on US forces, can't be used. Simple.

Posted by: McCarroll at July 09, 2007 03:55 PM (LcLIn)

4 Crosspatch, The problem is that most people seem to think that the AP et al are still "objective" or "neutral", when in fact they've become captive to one political point of view. And so the nation's perception of the fighting in Iraq gets poisoned by the AP's (and others') lies, and John Q. Public doesn't have a clue. Worse, he doesn't seem to want a clue. So don't just tune the Lame-stream Media out, pass the word around that there's more to these LSM stories than meets the eye or ear.

Posted by: Hale Adams at July 09, 2007 04:26 PM (pmRe8)

5 McCarroll and Chuck are absolutely correct. The AP is nothing more than a western version of Al Jazeera. Of course that would be the New York Times

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at July 09, 2007 04:29 PM (Lgw9b)

6 Woops that was supposed to read McCarroll and Crosspatch although Chuck has a point too.

Posted by: Capitalist Infidel at July 09, 2007 04:30 PM (Lgw9b)

7 It would be just so nice to poke the AP in the eye with a sharp stick and fill that weasel's helmet with bile and excrescence - and then take all their jobs away. No more coffee and donuts.

Posted by: DirtCrashr at July 09, 2007 05:02 PM (VNM5w)

8 Well, at least in this case the AP decided NOT to cover it rather than to mis-report it. There are other alternatives, such as going directly to your local paper and pointing them to Mr. Yon's generous offer. It doesn't *have* to be on a wire service to get published.

Posted by: crosspatch at July 09, 2007 05:43 PM (y2kMG)

9 Well, what do you expect from AP? They haven't hit us with a "Free Bilal Hussein" screed in a while. Did their favorite jihad insider get sprung, or did he confess? Ap is really hoping that the rule of law does NOT get established in Iraq. They have blood on their hands -- American blood, other Coalition blood, and veritable buckets of Iraqi blood. The Iraqi courts haven't been shy about giving out death sentences. Justice for Bilal Hussein sounds great. Heck, it swings.

Posted by: Kevin R.C. O'Brien at July 09, 2007 06:10 PM (M0UTi)

10 Powers-that-be are doing a fine job of messing things up by themselves. No conspiracy required.

Posted by: John Bryan at July 09, 2007 07:14 PM (yGOyP)

11 When AP doesn't follow its own code of ethics, it is well and fair to point them out as unethical and unwilling to stand up to their own, published standards. AP is not to be trusted without multiple, reliable sources for confirmation on anything. Until they can find their code of ethics and hold themselves to it and demonstrate it, that is how I treat them. An unethical organization with no standards to speak about, and that goes for *everything* they do.

Posted by: ajacksonian at July 09, 2007 08:39 PM (oy1lQ)

12 From a British perspective (I am) I noted that John Simpson of the BBC has a report up on his interview with General Petraeus in Baqubah today on their website. No mention of the massacre of course despite being within 4 miles of the site, just like AP. No surprise with Simpson and the BBC of course, but worth noting the universality of what Bob is commenting on here.

Posted by: John Riddell at July 10, 2007 08:50 AM (j/p6S)

13 John Simpson also didn't mention five roadside bombs (about 20-30 killed, mostly policemen it seems), ambushes killing policemen, a suicide car bomb, 3 civilians deaths by US soldiers, a couple of kidnappings of generals, 12 kidnap murders, a gun battle between IED layers and Iraqi police who caught them, and a handful of tortured bodies in and around Bagdhad. If he isn't going to mention these (Which happened the day of the interview), why on Earth would he mention the Yon story? I know that if it bleeds it leads, but in Iraq there is so much blood splashing about it is hard to see why this story is so exciting. If you want to big up a story about Iraq improvements, why pick one where, basically, US troops arrive too late to save anyone or catch the bad guys, rather than the one above where Iraqi troops catch and engage a bunch of IED layers.

Posted by: Rafar at July 10, 2007 09:19 AM (kkgmI)

14 Just to make it clear look at this page, Monday's security events; http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/3516/Iraq_Security_Developments_-_Monday So why should everyone write about Yon's story when they all pretty much ignore the events in the article above? The descriptions are viceral and the pictures evocative, I'll admit, but, when the stories above are pretty much ignored, what is so special about it?

Posted by: Rafar at July 10, 2007 09:26 AM (kkgmI)

15 John Simpson also didn't mention five roadside bombs (about 20-30 killed, mostly policemen it seems), ambushes killing policemen, a suicide car bomb, 3 civilians deaths by US soldiers, a couple of kidnappings of generals, 12 kidnap murders, a gun battle between IED layers and Iraqi police who caught them, and a handful of tortured bodies in and around Bagdhad. Which of course all happened within walking distance of newly found mass graves, right?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 10, 2007 09:39 AM (bwMN7)

16 "Which of course all happened within walking distance of newly found mass graves, right?" You want to walk 4 miles around there? But no, they all happened that day. And similar happened the day before. And the day before that. And.... In fact Simpson didn't mention any security incidents at all in his piece. Reporters rarely do if you notice. It has become background noise. But he should have mentioned this story because...because what? Does it not seem likely that people aren't shouting about Yon's story because it is a "Dog bites man" story?

Posted by: Rafar at July 10, 2007 10:01 AM (kkgmI)

17 You want to walk 4 miles around there? I'd probably take a jeep with A/C. But no, they all happened that day. Wow - compelling! I'll bet lots of things happened on that day. Within 4 miles of the reporter though? Not so much.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 11, 2007 06:49 AM (bwMN7)

18 "Wow - compelling! I'll bet lots of things happened on that day. Within 4 miles of the reporter though? Not so much." I'm completely missing your point now I suspect. Simpson didn't mention any security incidents at all in his report. It wasn't that sort of report, but this lack of mentioning Yon's story is being stitched into the "The MSM want us to lose" storyline regardless. Just so I can check, while I may not understand your point, you do get mine, don't you? That Yon's story of Al-Q killings is just background noise in terms of a normal day in Iraq.

Posted by: Rafar at July 11, 2007 08:02 AM (kkgmI)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

As most CY readers know, I sent a letter to Associated Press Director of Public Relations Jack Stokes and several of the AP Board of Directors on July 5.

I—along with many other bloggers, and a few journalists, it seems—were curious as to why the Associated Press would so willingly run a poorly-sourced and ultimately false story of a sectarian mass beheading, while passing up the freely-offered, well-documented, carefully photographed eyewitness account of an al Qaeda massacre by noted combat correspondent Michael Yon.

Yesterday afternoon, July 6, I was contacted via email by Paul Colford, Director of Media Relations (not Jack Stokes, another AP fact error) for the Associated Press with his response.

Here are the relevant sections:

APÂ’s initial version of the story about 20 headless bodies in Iraq, reported on June 28, was attributed to two Iraqi police officials who have been consistently reliable sources for AP. They were unnamed because Iraqi police officers often will speak to reporters only if they are guaranteed anonymity, for security reasons.

As is our practice, we kept reporting the story and noted that another police officer, also known to be reliable, had heard the same report of decapitated bodies found on the banks of the Tigris River near the city of Salman Pak, but this officer said a police visit was called off because clashes between police commandos and extremists made the area too dangerous.

However, the police in east Baghdad told the AP that the bodies had been recovered and were en route to the Baghdad morgue.

In addition, a U.S. military spokesman said that U.S. aircraft had spotted what appeared to be bodies on the banks of the Tigris north of Salman Pak.

On June 30, the AP, along with other news organizations that had been following the story, reported that the U.S. military had declared the reports of 20 beheaded bodies to be untrue.

With regard to Michael Yon, the Iraqi police and the U.S. military – to our current knowledge – have issued no statements to the AP about 10-14 bodies being found on June 29 in a village outside Baquba, even though the military, according to Mr. Yon’s online account, were involved in the discovery. We have consistently reported on atrocities committed by insurgents in the Baquba area.

In a war that has claimed the lives of five AP journalists, including three since last December, we take seriously our role in reporting the news reliably and fairly despite the dangerous environment.

This is my response, emailed to Mr. Colford.

Mr. Colford,

Let's be blunt about what you mean when you claim, "Iraqi police officers often will speak to reporters only if they are guaranteed anonymity, for security reasons."

The fact of the matter is that because so many Iraqi police officers were leaking false information to the media—the Associated Press being the single greatest offender—the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior earlier this year slapped a gag order upon all active duty Iraqi police officers not formally designated as press contacts in an attempt to cut down on inaccurate information and purposefully planted propaganda.

AP's most infamous police source, Jamil XX-XXXXXXX [named redacted for blog publication], known to the world by the pseudonym Jamil Hussein, was one of many police officers told point-blank not to provide stories to the press. XX-XXXXXXX was cited in particular as an example of a particularly bad source, as 38 of 40 stories sourced to him by the Associated Press could not be verified by any other news agency or government source as having actually occurred, and the vast majority of those stories coming form outside of his precinct, where he would have no direct knowledge at all.

When you state that you keep their names hidden for security reasons, you mean nothing more or less than that you are trying to keep their named hidden so that they will not be arrested and thrown in jail for violating their orders and Iraqi law.

You claim that these two anonymous police sources have been reliable in the past.

Sir, I hope that the Associated Press is a little more worldly than to fall for one of the oldest propaganda/intelligence tricks in the books. Dime-store spy novels are full of stories of spies and secret agents that pass along little truths to establish trust, in order to deliver disinformation once they are trusted. Apparently, the Associated Press has not learned that lesson.

In this instance, your two distant sources were quite wrong, as was your source who told you that the decapitated bodies have been recovered.

Further, I'd like for you to provide me the name of the U.S. military source who you claim said bodies were found on the banks of the Tigris, so that I can ask him myself precisely what information he relayed.

Interestingly enough, you seem to be claiming that you need to have some sort of press release from the U.S. military to run with Yon's story.

What an interesting double standard the Associated Press has incorporated.

You'll run a false sectarian massacre based upon hearsay evidence from anonymous police officers that are violating their own orders, as absolute, unequivocal fact, without any official comment or support whatsoever,

-BUT-

When you are offered—free of charge—a story citing named U.S. and Iraq officers and named U.S. and Iraqi units, taking party in the discovery and recovery of bodies from an al Qaeda massacre by perhaps the most well-regarded and highly respected combat correspondent of the entire war, with copious photo evidence, you suddenly need an official military press release before even considering it?

Perhaps I'm not a professional journalist, but I do know that if a journalist hears something interesting--say, an account of a massacre just a little more than three miles way--than he shouldn't wait on a press release before springing into action. He should immediately start asking questions. If he's going to merely rely on press releases, he isn't a journalist, he's a transcriptionist.

Your reporter Sinan Salaheddin was merely a transcriptionist for a pair of anonymous sources that the U.S. military seems to regard as insurgent propagandists. I would like your assurances that these sources will never be used again, and that Salaheddin, who has used disreputable sources such as XX-XXXXXXX in the past, will have his work more thoroughly vetted before publication, and that AP's Baghdad editor, Kim Gamel, who has also been know to publish stories from questionable sources, be more thoroughly supervised as well. Quite franky, I think their continued pattern of behavior in publishing poorly-sourced and ultimately false stories should warrant their termination, but I am not in the position to make that call.

I do know, Mr. Colford, that AP Special Correspondent Robert H. Reid is presently no more than a few miles for the site of the massacre that Yon reported.

Perhaps Reid will be viewed with more credibility than Yon and his multiple eyewitnesses and photographs, and perhaps as much as the insurgent propagandists with whom the Associated Press continues to place so much trust.

As noted above, Michael Yon told me via email this morning that AP Special Correspondent Robert H Reid is in Baquba, and I think he has pretty good evidence supporting that claim:

That's Reid (right) in the back of a Stryker armored vehicle just 3.5 miles from the scene of the ambush Michael Yon documented in Bless the Beasts and Children. Hopefully, he'll get the story out about the massacre at al Hamira, even though al Qaeda is suspected, and this doesn't fit the sectarian violence storyline AP seems to prefer.

Update: AP's/Mr. Colford's response to my rebuttal:

We have nothing further beyond yesterday's response.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 11:37 AM | Comments (28) | Add Comment
Post contains 1285 words, total size 8 kb.

As many of you know, I sent an letter on July 5th to the Associated Press Director of Media Relations Jack Stokes and members of the Board of Directors. This letter asked "when does a massacre matter?" and asked Stokes and the AP Board why they were willing to run the suspicious claims of distant anonymous sources as fact in reporting a mass beheading that sounded sectarian in nature, but had not taken up Michael Yon on his offer to run--free of charge--a first-hand, eyewitnessed, videotaped and photographed account of an al Qaeda massacre discovered by Iraqi and American troops.

Yesterday afternoon, Mr. Paul Colford announced himself in the opening of his response to my questions as the new Director of Media Relations at the Associated Press. He indicated he would like a call or email acknowledging his response.

I acknowledged that I got his email and told him I'd respond within the next day, and also asked if he wasn't the third person in that role this year. Linda Wagner, an accidental source of useful information during the Hurriyah/Jamil "Hussein" scandal, quietly decided that she needs to go back to college and resigned from her position not very long afterward.

Since then, as the screencap below shows, Jack Stokes has been listed on the AP's Contact page as their new Director of Media Relations.

Mr. Colford responded:

The third person in this position?

Not at all.

My predecessor, Linda Wagner, was the AP's first director of media relations.

I am the second to hold the position.

Jack Stokes remains with the AP, working for me. His title has always been media relations manager.

I then sent Mr. Colford the link to the Associated Press Web site Contact page, which has shown Jack Stokes as the Director of Media Relations since at least late April.

Then, for the first time I can recall, the Associated Press issued an immediate and unquestioned correction:

At the very least, this shows that have the capability to correct their inaccuracies, if not the inclination.

As for the fake massacres the Associated Press will report, and the real massacres they won't, I'll address Mr. Colford's response, and provide my rebuttal sometime in the very near future.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 08:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 381 words, total size 3 kb.

The response to my letter to the Board of Directors of the Associated Press and AP Media Relations Director Jack Stokes was overwhelming, and apparently, continues to grow.

I noticed in the comments to my post (and some of those linking to it) that many people seem genuinely interested in writing to the Board of Directors of the Associated Press directly.

According to the Associated Press, this is their Board of Directors:

William Dean Singleton – Chairman

Vice Chairman and CEO

MediaNews Group Inc.

Denver, Colorado

Gary Pruitt – Vice Chairman
Chairman, President and CEO
The McClatchy Company
Sacramento, California

R. Jack Fishman
Publisher and Editor
Citizen Tribune
Morristown, Tennessee

Dennis J. FitzSimons
Chairman, President and CEO
Tribune, Co.
Chicago, Illinois

Victor F. Ganzi
President and CEO
Hearst Corporation
New York, New York

Walter E. Hussman Jr.
Publisher
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
Little Rock, Arkansas

Julie Inskeep
Publisher
The Journal Gazette
Fort Wayne, Indiana
jinskeep@jg.net

Mary Jacobus
President and Chief Operating Officer
The New York Times Regional Media Group
Tampa, Florida

Boisfeuillet (Bo) Jones
Publisher and CEO
The Washington Post
Washington, D.C.

Mary Junck
President and CEO
Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Davenport, Iowa

David Lord
President
Pioneer Newspapers, Inc.
Seattle, Washington

Kenneth W. Lowe
President and CEO
E.W. Scripps Company
Cincinnati, Ohio

Douglas H. McCorkindale
Retired Chairman
Gannett, Co. Inc.
McLean, Virginia

R. John Mitchell
Publisher
Rutland Herald
Rutland, Vermont
john.mitchell@rutlandherald.com

Steven O. Newhouse
Chairman,
Advance.Net
New York, New York

Charles V. Pittman
Senior Vice President-Publishing
Schurz Communications Inc.
South Bend, Indiana

Michael E. Reed
CEO
GateHouse Media, Inc.
Fairport, New York

Bruce T. Reese
President and CEO
Bonneville International Corp.
Salt Lake City, Utah

Jon Rust
Publisher
Southeast Missourian
Co-president, Rust Communications
Cape Girardeau, Missouri
jrust@semissourian.com

Jay R. Smith
President
Cox Newspapers, Inc.
Atlanta, Georgia
Jay.Smith@coxinc.com

David Westin
President
ABC News
New York, New York

H. Graham Woodlief
President, Publishing Division
Vice President,
Media General Inc.
Richmond, Virginia

You'll note that I only have four active email addresses (inserted above) for the 22 directors... several email addresses that I once had appear to have been changed, and some of the emails I sent yesterday bounced.

My letter had a chance of getting to just four members of AP's Board of Directors and AP Media Relations director Jack Stokes, if that email was not screened and summarily deleted by a "helpful" administrative assistant somewhere along the line. To date, I've had no response whatsoever by anyone at the Associated Press.

Sadly, I'm crunched for time today, and cannot hunt down the email addresses, phone and fax numbers, and mailing addresses of these 22 board members myself...

I'm wondering if someone out there can do what I cannot.

If you can track down this information, please post what you have found in the comments. I'll then update the list above. There seem to be quite a few of you who are highly upset with how the Associated Press keeps repeating a pattern of false stories without so much as a retraction or correction, and ignoring real stories.

You deserve a chance to take your complaints to the very top.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 07:59 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 525 words, total size 4 kb.

Very brave, don't you think?

Is it simply a defect in the character of Palestinian militants that they use a wall of civilian youths to discourage Israeli soldiers from returning fire?

In most other parts of the world, I'd expect "freedom fighters" to attempt to protect their own civilians, encouraging to leave the area of hostilities, perhaps even endangering themselves to protect the people for which they claim to be fighting.

This thought is perhaps merely a western notion, as this kind of civilian abuse—can it really be called anything else?—is well-documented and frequently observed in Gaza.

All too often, this abuse leads to the headlines and photos the militants so obviously crave:

The journalists covering the conflict (here, Ibraheem Abu Mustafa of Reuters) refuse to provide the context of how a child could have been injured in a clash against Israeli forces, nor do they ever chide the Palestinian militants for endangering children and other civilians for using them as nothing less than body armor.

It is perhaps something approaching a miracle that in this engagement stretching back to yesterday, that nearly all of the dead on the Palestinian side have been Hamas and allied militants, including the Hamas field commander in central Gaza.

Israel, of course, gets little to no credit for their very selective use of force by the world media, perhaps due to the fact that most of those reporting for the Associated Press, Reuters, and other news agencies comes from men with names like Irbahim Barzak, Ibraheem Abu Mustafa, Nidal al-Mughrabi, Mohammed Abed, and others that might be culturally less inclined to see such restraint.

Nope, no inherent bias on display, at all.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:25 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.

I just sent the following to Associated Press Director of Media Relations Jack Stokes and the Associated Press Board of Directors.

When does a massacre matter?

I ask this question, because on Thursday, June 28, The Associated Press—and to a lesser extent, Reuters, and a small independent Iraqi news agency—ran stories claiming that 20 decapitated bodies had been found on or near the banks of the Tigris River in Um al-Abeed, a village near Salman Pak, southeast of Baghdad, with sectarian violence strongly implicated.

There were no named sources from this story from any media outlet, and the two anonymous Iraq police officers cited in the widely-carried AP account were nowhere near the scene of the alleged massacre, with Um al-Abeed being roughly 12 miles from the southeast edges of Baghdad, and Kut being 75 miles away, respectively. Further, in the Associated Press story by Sinan Sallaheddin, the massacre claim itself was purposefully distanced for the dubious location of the anonymous police officers by an account of a bombing in Baghdad.

This claimed massacre never happened, and was formally repudiated by the U.S. military on Saturday, June 30, who ascribed the claims to insurgent propaganda. To date, the Associated Press has refused to print a retraction or a correction for this false story, just as it has failed to print a retraction for previous false beheading stories.

Apparently, correcting misinformation you've disseminated ranks low on the list of Associated Press priorities.

At the same time, the Associated Press has refused to run the story of a verified massacre in Iraq discovered on June 29 and supported by named sources, eyewitness statements, and photographic evidence provided by noted independent journalist Michael Yon in his dispatch, Bless the Beasts and Children.

I would like for the Associated Press to formally explain why they are willing to run thinly and falsely sourced insurgent propaganda as unquestioned fact without any independent verification, but refuses to publish a freely offered account by a noted combat corespondent that some consider this generation's Ernie Pyle.

Is it because the massacre documented by Yon was conducted by alleged al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists, and could not be ascribed to sectarian violence? It certainly could not be because of cost, as Yon has offered both his text and pictures to any and all media outlets free of charge. It could not be because of a question of validity, as his account was photographed, videotaped, and witnessed by dozens of American and Iraqi soldiers, some of them named, who could easily be contacted by the Associated Press for independent, on the record confirmation.

Why is the Associated Press willing to run the claimed of a false massacre on June 28, but unwilling to report a well-documented and freely-offered account of a massacre that was discovered just one day later?

I await your response with interest.

Actually, I don't expect a response at all, but if they should respond, I'll be sure to publish it.

Sadly, I think Glenn's source is correct.

07/06/2007 Update: Actually, it's a non-update: 24 hours after sending the letter above to various Associated Press directors and their director of media relations, the Associated Press has not responded in any way, shape, or form.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 09:12 AM | Comments (38) | Add Comment
Post contains 547 words, total size 4 kb.

1 AP == AQ Propaganda

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 05, 2007 09:54 AM (CmXp+)

2 Glen's source is blunt, but frighteningly accurate. The media is like the husband who comes home and beats his wife because he gets picked on by his boss. Wikipedia: Displacement (psychology)- In psychology, displacement is a subconscious defense mechanism whereby the mind redirects affects from an object felt to be dangerous or unacceptable to an object felt to be safe or acceptable. For instance, some people punch cushions when angry at friends; a college student may snap at their roommate when upset about an exam grade. Displacement operates subconsciously and involves emotions, ideas, or wishes being transferred from their original object to a more acceptable substitute. It is most often used to allay anxiety. In scapegoating, aggression is displaced onto people with little political power such as minority-group members. Displacement can act in a chain-reaction, with people unwittingly becoming both the victim and perpetrator of displacement. For example, a man is angry with his boss, but he cannot express this so he hits his wife. The wife hits one of the children, possibly disguising this as punishment (rationalization). The child kicks the dog. Though displacement is usually used to refer to the displacement of aggressive impulses, it can also refer to the displacement of sexual impulses.

Posted by: BohicaTwentyTwo at July 05, 2007 10:40 AM (oC8nQ)

3 Very unusual -- I'll be looking for a reponse as well...

Posted by: Orlin at July 05, 2007 01:44 PM (wrRbk)

4 I'd be more interested in discovering how much stock in AP is owned by Saudi Arabians. Also, how many of the upper management staff are of Middle Eastern origin.

Posted by: RebeccaH at July 05, 2007 01:51 PM (A5s0y)

5 RebeccaH: I think you're confusing AP with Reuters. The Associated Press, according to their own account "is a not-for-profit cooperative, which means it is owned by its 1,500 U.S. daily newspaper members. They elect a board of directors that directs the cooperative." They are owned by their newspaper members, so they are owned by the people who own local newspapers: Dow Jones, Gannett, the Times Company, Times-Mirror, etc. etc. Reuters on the other hand, is indeed owned by a private company in which stock can be purchased, and I think - but have no source to cite - that there is a strong Saudi connection. http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/08/institutional_failure_at_reute.html

Posted by: Ko Rection at July 05, 2007 02:05 PM (9J3GN)

6 Don't hold your breath waiting for a response from those lying fools, unless you look good in blue. AP won't report anything they believe puts a positive light on the Bush administration and a negative one on the enemy. They obviously have chosen sides, and it ain't us, folks.

Posted by: MacCarroll at July 05, 2007 02:07 PM (LcLIn)

7 Thanks for staying on top of this. The AP will eventually have to acknowledge the al Hamira massacre if people keep up the pressure. "This generation's Ernie Pyle"? Yes. I agree. I hope the AP responds. Best, Michael

Posted by: MichaelB at July 05, 2007 02:25 PM (fnd+P)

8 Why don't we ALL start emailing them about it?

Posted by: DaveS at July 05, 2007 02:33 PM (1R6cr)

9 Unbelievable.

Posted by: Orson at July 05, 2007 02:43 PM (cpxvj)

10 AP, Reuters... let 'em rot. No informed intelligence grants either one a grain of credibility. Whoever's interested can garner all relevent reporting, complete with links, directly off the Web. Old media --print and TV-- are worse than useless, incompetent propagandists for murderous Islamic terrorists, like Yeats' "Leda and the Swan" (qv). Over decades now, insolent twerps miscalled "journalists" have devalued "network news" well below zero. How odd, that no competitor has arisen to provide integrity and talent... maybe Michael Yon could start an agency.

Posted by: John Blake at July 05, 2007 02:51 PM (A6Y0s)

11 I guess they figure that it evens out in the end: to them, one massacre is pretty much like another, so the one they wrongly reported makes up for the one they didn't report. http://shieldofachilles.blogspot.com

Posted by: John Rohan at July 05, 2007 02:54 PM (2rUVY)

12 I just sent the following to Associated Press Director of Media Relations Jack Stokes and the Associated Press Board of Directors... Would you care to share their email addresses (or did you go snail mail)? The only email on their site -- "For general questions and comments;or to contact a specific employee" -- is an 'info' address ... which, I strongly suspect, is deleted unread.

Posted by: Paul in NJ at July 05, 2007 03:13 PM (LLXHh)

13 What about the simpler explanation that the decapitation stories are simply far more sensational than what appears to be just another terrorist attack in a country that has seen so many?

Posted by: jim at July 05, 2007 03:27 PM (LxkVn)

14 What about the simpler explanation... So fake sensationalism trumps actual news? Sweet.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 05, 2007 03:38 PM (gQtXT)

15 As noted above, the AP is a co-op owned by media companies. These Media companies own your local newspapers. I suggest we print the above letter, with permission of course, and forward it to the advertisers in our local papers. Advertisers like the car company that flys that huge American flag. Lets see if those flag waving companies will truly support America and boycott newspapers that use AP to dessiminate al Queda propaganda.

Posted by: Joel Mackey at July 05, 2007 03:57 PM (tGm4a)

16 The real reason that AP does not retract their false stories is because there is no price to pay for spreading falsehoods. if papers refused to buy their product, if politicians kicked AP out of press conferences, and if consumers refused to buy their product until they cleaned up their act, then they would change so fast it would make your head spin.

Posted by: Harry at July 05, 2007 04:00 PM (C/Uhe)

17 ...you should try emailinging it to the A.P. hacks AND cc: as many members of congress as possible at the same time. Maybe if twenty or thirty Reps and Senators, probably none of whom are the least aware of this pattern of deceit by the AP, contact them there will at least be some public acknowledgement by A.P. of it's indefensible misrepresentations and bias.

Posted by: bubba at July 05, 2007 04:42 PM (r0Bun)

18 I'm asking this not as a taunt but as something I really don't understand, having been following events only loosely: why does the media fail to follow Yon's reliable report of a massacre, while at the same time reporting another, false, massacre story? It seems to contradict the notion that there is a basic interest to hide or report such stories.

Posted by: John at July 05, 2007 04:50 PM (jnh3V)

19 "What about the simpler explanation that the decapitation stories are simply far more sensational than what appears to be just another terrorist attack in a country that has seen so many? Posted by: jim at July 5, 2007 03:27 PM " Mate, read Michael Yon's dispatch - many of the victims, including children, were beheaded. there is a gruesome photo just of the heads.

Posted by: pete m at July 05, 2007 05:08 PM (BM+uj)

20 Ko Rection: I think, too, there might be some confusion between Reuters and UPI. UPI used to be owned by an Arab corporation which included some Saudis, but mostly Lebanese and, if I recall, some Libyans. But that was at least 10 years and probably five sales ago. I don't know who owns UPI these days but the organization has clearly seen better days. It seems to be shifting its operations to the provision of video imagery. Reuters (and Agence France Press) make use of a large number of local stringers and full- and part-time local staffs in their operations outside the UK. This allows them to get far more placement for stories with bylined names that look familiar to local media (and therefore that media's readership). Whether this is direct cause/effect for the slant of some stories or represents a real difference in how the same story is seen from different vantage points is left to the student to determine....

Posted by: John Burgess at July 05, 2007 05:27 PM (T84VL)

21 why does the media fail to follow Yon's reliable report of a massacre, while at the same time reporting another, false, massacre story? It seems to contradict the notion that there is a basic interest to hide or report such stories. Yon's story doesn't damage Bush, indeed it helps make his case.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 05, 2007 05:44 PM (gQtXT)

22 Whats the difference between a catfish and AP? One is a slimy, foul-smelling bottom feeder, and the other is a fish.

Posted by: Dave at July 05, 2007 07:34 PM (FViNA)

23 Er. . .actually, the mainstream media is more like the completely unharmed wife, who is not only allowed to make false accusations of abuse against her innocent husband and get away with it, but even profit from doing so. The sadly ironic part is how that far superior analogy does not even appear on the radar of most commenters or readers directly because of years of exactly the same kind of biased propaganda by the same mainstream media. A similar lying favoritism is consistently shown towards wives and mothers in particular and females in general, in comparison to the near-universal blaming, condemnation and dehumanization of husbands and fathers in particular and males in general. Even the conservative cartoonist team Cox & Forkum engaged in father-bashing this last Father's Day, characterizing fathers as being more interested in the tax write-off benefits their children provide than in being loving and caring fathers -- see http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/001133.html , and http://www.johncoxart.com/2007/06/sketch_book_2.html#comments The mainstream media treats the troops, republicans, conservatives, and so on much as it consistently treats men in general, and just as graphically differently from how they treat the communist dupe protestors, democrats, liberals, and so on, and women in general. I think that the less that people use examples straight out of that same mainstream media axis of bigotry -- against the troops, republicans, conservatives, and men in general -- to illustrate their points, the better off we'll all be. At the very least, let's not further reinforce their influence over us by repeating their bigotry for them. Please.

Posted by: Acksiom at July 05, 2007 08:41 PM (kRpz5)

24 Advertisers provide essentially all the income that news providers get. They choose the providers based on circulation figures. AP sells news stories that may or may not be true. False news stories do not reduce circulation any more than true news stories raise circulation. They just need to be stories about whatever is in style this week. The newspaper doesn't even need to worry about being sued because that is AP's problem. Retractions are a pain in the neck and embarrassing. So they don't happen. Or if they do, they are buried where they don't get noticed. Think about the way western journalists work. They go to a different country and sit in a hotel. If they were to go to where things were happening, they might get shot. So they pay "stringers" to tell them things that the journalists don't check on. The journalists write it down, send it in and get paid. The editor,who may have never met the journalist, much less the stringer, rewrites the story so it looks better. He adds a picture and sends it to newspapers. Another editor makes sure that it fits in the paper between furniture, Frosted Sugar Breakfast Bombs and disposable diapers. This frequently involves cutting something crucial out. So, the story goes from the stringer to the journalist to the editor to the other editor to the reader. What are the odds that it is accurate? The stringer never reads it, and he is the only one with who can judge. There is little evidence to suggest that these stringers are devoted to the truth, a lot of evidence to support the idea that they have agendas, and none at all that they are adverse to picking up a couple of bucks with a bogus story. The hometown newspaper owned by Conglomerated Media has a staffer who thinks that the stringer is wrong. What can he do? The local management doesn't have the authority to fire AP or send his own correspondent overseas. Nobody cares whether the stringers are correct except for news junkies like you and me.

Posted by: Yaakov Watkins at July 05, 2007 09:52 PM (Na8Fq)

25 Sinan Sallaheddin is responsible for another piece of fiction CLICK HERE Seems to be a pattern here. Maybe some investigation is in order.

Posted by: Roguewarrior100 at July 05, 2007 10:46 PM (ii74p)

26 The AP's e-mail addressing protocol is "first initial""last name"@ap.оrg. So Jack Stokes' e-mail address is jstokes@ap.оrg and you can deduce the rest of them from that.

Posted by: Gaius Obvious at July 05, 2007 11:32 PM (8sXg5)

27 Not to go too off-topic of this worthwhile letter and thread, but Acksiom, you make an excellent point, and I appreciate the consciousness-raising. My heart goes out to all American men and boys in these emasculating times.

Posted by: Carol at July 06, 2007 12:21 AM (w/9Fe)

28 Most of the media make up a self selected elite in western societies. As such, they are separated from (and consider themselves above) ordinary folks and their opinions and experiences. urthermore, too many are "professionals" - meaning people who take journalism courses from leftists and "progressives"/transnationalists and then, without even experiencing the real world, proceed to tell us everything from their "enlightened" perspective. All too often, they develop what they call a "narrative" about an event and then stick with it in the face of all evidence. Naturally, a narrative which satisfies their inborn biases is chosen - one which casts conservatives and especially Bush in a bad light. Try to imagine what America would be like with a balanced and responsible media. It wouldn't remotely resemble what we have today.

Posted by: John Moore at July 06, 2007 12:41 AM (GjLhO)

29 Of course one could copy some of AP subscribers' advertizers with CY's post, supra.

Posted by: BigGeorge at July 06, 2007 01:27 AM (A5s0y)

30 Linked and dugg.

Posted by: K T Cat at July 06, 2007 08:38 AM (KDU/K)

31 I'm going to bring down all manner of verbal abuse on myself by observing two points: 1. The AP report is not demonstrated to be false by the evidence given here. That evidence consists of a) a challenge to the reliability of the sources; and b) a denial by the US military. This suggests to me that the report is unreliable -- but not false. I looked up the AP report and it is difficult to ascribe any political motive to it. The report states: "Sporadic clashes had been under way in the Salman Pak area for several days, between Interior Ministry commandos and suspected insurgents, the Kut officer said. It was unclear whether the discovery of the bodies was related to the recent fighting." 2. The report by Mr. Yon is equally unreliable in its attribution of the massacre to al-Qaeda. While the massacre itself is undeniable, the attribution to al-Qaeda comes from anonymous sources. The only strong conclusions we can draw here are that a) there was definitely a massacre as reported by Mr. Yon, but we don't know who did it; and b) there might have been a massacre as reported by the AP, but that report is unreliable. I note that the Web has lots of chatter about this story, but it strikes me as a tempest in a teapot. There's no evidence here to support any conspiracy theories. I apologize for using a false email address, but until I have established that there aren't any dangerous wingnuts here, I'd rather play it safe.

Posted by: Erasmussimo at July 06, 2007 09:29 AM (ef3yj)

32 I think it is because Yon is not inside the MSM network. To give credit to Yon would be giving credit to the NSM [New Stream Media] and they say the MSM always does the heavy lifting in news. Also the NSM has become the place to get accurate news and it along with radio have become very powerful. Witness the Illegal Alien bill in the House. This is part of the culture wars that have been going on. Yon does not fit the agenda of the MSM and it's "reporting". Also this New Media needs it's own acronym. I just thought NSM because it was quick, easy and a slam on MSN so how about a contest?

Posted by: Darrold at July 06, 2007 10:50 AM (Ctj6k)

33 Erasmussimo seem to want to know how we can know that the AP-recorded massacre was fake, and how we know the massacre Michael Yon wrote about in "Bless the Beasts and Children" at al Ahamir was real. The first is rather easy to answer: we know that the Associated Press account of 20 decapitated bodies on the banks of the Tigris is false because--hang on to your hat--there was not so much as a single decapitated body on the banks of the Tigris river where the massacre allegedly took place. Local Iraqi police couldn't find them, not could their American advisors. Nor could helicopter search teams that swept the area repeatedly. It simply never took place, just like previous stories of mass decapitations that never occurred. As for whether or not al Qaeda committed the massacre Yon documented, I'll like Mike answer that himself: Like many things in Iraq, the question of whether or not the murderers were al Qaeda is flawed from beginning. Al Qaeda is not a union, it doesn’t issue passports. What is al Qaeda but the collection of people who claim to be al Qaeda? Those responsible for murdering and burying those bodies in al Ahamir (or al Hamira) had the markers of al Qaeda, the same al Qaeda that had boastfully installed itself as the shadow government of Baqubah. The al Qaeda who committed atrocities in Afghanistan, New York…the list is long. As for al Ahamir, the massacre “walks like a duck.” It happened in duck headquarters. The people here say the duck did it. The duck laughs. The Associated Press ran a poorly-sourced story because it fits their conception of what we should expect in Iraq, and helps to refresh the narrative with which they are most comfortable. Likewise, the massacre Yon uncovered eats into their preferred story of a war where we're only in the way of sectarian violence, and al Qaeda largely doesn't exist except because we are there. We weren't in al Ahamir, and yet, al Qaeda struck anyway. That is a reality they'd much rather avoid.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at July 06, 2007 11:37 AM (HcgFD)

34 Confederate Yankee, thanks for filling in additional information on the search efforts. Where did you get that information? It seems to me that, inasmuch as the date of the massacre is indefinite, the discoverers of the bodies would most likely have buried them immediately, in which case a perfunctory search would have found nothing. I'm not claiming that this is what in fact happened; we just don't have enough information on this to draw any conclusions. Perhaps AP should have written more uncertainty into their story. Again, I see no reason to impute dark motivations to their story. As to the role of al-Qaeda in the other massacre, the only evidence presented is that the massacre "looks like" an al-Qaeda operation. That's pretty slim evidence. How does an al-Qaeda massacre differ from a Shia massacre or Sunni massacre? What are the "marks" to which Mike refers? Like the Um al-Abeed massacre, we just don't have enough information to draw any solid conclusions.

Posted by: Erasmussimo at July 06, 2007 11:50 AM (ef3yj)

35 the discoverers of the bodies would most likely have buried them immediately And then promptly forgot they did it, failed to note an identifying marks or ID so relatives might be subsequently found, carefully disguised the fresh graves so nobody would notice them, and then faded into the woodwork, right? Sure, I can buy that.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 06, 2007 11:53 AM (gQtXT)

36 I repeat myself: I'm not claiming that this is what in fact happened; we just don't have enough information on this to draw any conclusions.

Posted by: Erasmussimo at July 06, 2007 12:12 PM (ef3yj)

37 Erasmus, The sources are really, really bad. Let's just say they are very clearly rumor-based. It's a friend of a friend story if there ever was one. Also, the body burying objection falls apart on examination. Bodies decompose and begin to reek quickly in hot weather. Have you seen the Mythbusters episode about Jimmy Hoffa? They buried two pigs in concrete, and the smell rose up extremely fast despite the thick concrete. Only a layer of silicone sealer kept the odor down. If the bodies were taken elsewhere, there would have been some other record or evidence. (Decapitation creates a large bloodstain) The AP was careful not to lie or omit the sources, but I think the reporter must not have wanted to wait for more verification or to run with an uncertain headline

Posted by: OmegaPaladin at July 06, 2007 01:34 PM (c24eK)

38 Let's just say they are very clearly rumor-based. It's a friend of a friend story if there ever was one. Most definitely! This one is just too vague to draw any strong conclusions from.

Posted by: Erasmussimo at July 06, 2007 07:15 PM (ef3yj)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

More on "Decapigate," as posted exclusively at Pajama's Media.

Note that the deception was worse at some levels and at some news outlets than first thought, and that oddly enough, only one news outlet actually had editors that were "fair and balanced" on this particular story.

The original CY post the broke the story is here and the follow-up containing the official denunciation is posted here.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 06:27 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.