Jamil Hussein Lives! ... Maybe

The Associated Press' Stephen Hurst writes today that Capt. Jamil Hussein, the AP source on the highly doubtful "burning Sunnis" story, among others, exists, and may be subject to arrest in Iraq for his unauthorized talks to the press.  I've read the report, and frankly it's a little bizarre.  Rather than excerpt the entire story needlessly, I'll wait while you read it.  Come on back after, because I've got some questions.

Done?  Okay.  Let's start with the arrest.

[Ministry of Interior spokesman Brig. Abdul-Karim] Khalaf said Thursday that with the arrest of Hussein for breaking police regulations against talking to reporters, the AP would be called to identify him in a lineup as the source of its story.

Should the AP decline to assist in the identification, Khalaf said, the case against Hussein would be dropped. He also said there were no plans to pursue action against the AP should it decline.

Let me see if I understand this.  The MOI says this is the guy, and the AP writes a story confirming that the man so named is their source.  If the AP declines to identify him in a lineup, then how can anyone be sure this is the guy?

• MOI: We've found Jamil Hussein.
• AP: See, told you.
• MOI: Is this the guy you've been talking to?
• AP: No comment.

You see the problem.  While perhaps unwilling to confirm him for the MOI the AP nonetheless vouches for their source's accuracy.

His first contacts with the AP were in 2004, when the current Interior Ministry and its press apparatus was still being formed out of the chaotic remains of the Saddam-era ministry.

The information he provided about various police incidents was never called into question until he became embroiled in the attempt to discredit the AP story about the Hurriyah mosque attack.

More accurately, the information was never called into question until he was quoted as a source for a highly questionable story.  That's a story that not only bloggers but the NY Times and Washington Post found doubtful.  Confederate Yankee has researched the stories in which Mr. Hussein is quoted, and has been unable to find second sourcing for many of them.  I understand Mr. Miniter's criticism of this research, but with Iraq being THE story and with news organizations crawling all over themselves to report the violence there you'd think that there'd be second sources for more than a small minority of them.

However, the AP claim that his information was "never called into question" until the "burning Sunnis" story might be because that was the first story that AP themselves backed away from slightly, when four burning mosques were found to be only one slightly burned mosque.

Finally, let's consider the AP here.  They've been relying on an Iraqi police captain as a source, and have been satisfied with the accuracy of the information.  Then comes the whopper, the one that no other organization can confirm.  They're standing by their guy when what they'll need to do is provide confirmation of the story's accuracy.  As Curt writes,

In regards to the actual burning of six Sunni's the only thing the AP has to prove that this incident happened are three unnamed witnesses, one Imam who quickly retracted the story, and one police officer named Jamil Hussein.

That's it. 

No names of the victims.  No family members of the victims have been identified.  No one know where the bodies are.  No photographic evidence of a burning.  Nothing other then the word of three unnamed witnesses and a police officer.  In fact other residents denied this happened.

So what's next?  If they want to be vindicated, the AP will need to identify Mr. Hussein for the MOI as their source, and they'll still need to confirm his tale.  And if that one turns out to be false, they'd best crawl into their archives and see if he's told them any other shaggy dog stories.

Others: Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Patterico, Riehl World View, Townhall/MKH