Well, yeah, but it could have happened…
So it looks like Jamil Hussein may have been found and even Michelle Malkin is temporarily reholstering her Popguns of Outrage (possibly because this gets her off the hook from having to go to Iraq where she would spend her sleepless days and nights dampening her panty shields every time someone’s Rice Krispies made a too loud snap, crackle, or pop). One way or the other, I guess we will see soon enough.
Then there are some who aren’t about to let a little reality ruin a perfectly good paranoid fantasy where everyone else is to blame for the Iraquagmire except for the people who planned it and executed it and, goddamit, freedom would be on the march if the facts didn’t keep getting in the way and the bodies didn’t keep piling up in inconvenient ways.
Like this guy:
Whether Jamil/Jamail Hussein exists or not, is a cop or not, speaks the truth or not, has no bearing on the AP’s longstanding failure to serve its clientele and their readers in the manner they should expect. This includes, in the recent past, its unbalanced reporting on the Bush administration, its bizarre presentation of Saddam Hussein as a victim of the United States and the U.N. weapons inspectors, and its burying of key facts in the case against Bilal Hussein, terrorist-approved AP photographer and associate of al Qaeda bombmakers currently in U.S. custody. The arrogant and dismissive response to questions raised about Hussein, however, speaks volumes.
Regardless of the resolution of this Hussein business, the fundamental problem remains. It’s a problem of trust. The just-the-facts, inverted-pyramid news agency, founded over 150 years ago on the novel principle of providing raw, reliable, non-partisan information to newspapers of all stripes, no longer exists.
And of course, nothing quite validates an opinion like quoting a post from Dean Esmay’s blog:
Dean’s world, “So we could be moving from egregiously bad reporting to merely very bad reporting. And as Iâ€™ve said before, the APâ€™s vituperous reaction to the legitimate questions raised really shows their lack of commitment to intellectual honesty in their reporting.
These guys wouldn’t know “intellectual honesty” if it invaded their country, killed their leaders, and coverted them to reality.