April 23, 2008


Eric Boehlert starts off his article cracking on warbloggers for the "Jamil Hussein" fiasco, claiming that it imploded. Well, he's half-right: Jamil Gulaim Innad al-Jashami embarrassed the Associated Press when I outed him as a man hiding behind a pseudonym when they swore his "Hussein" identity was real. AP has refused to discuss "Hussein" since I published that story.

Boehlert also wants to attack some bloggers for not covering Bilal Hussein and his release under Iraq's new amnesty law, but isn't it Boehlert himself being deceptive when he "forgets" to mention that 300 other suspected insurgents were given amnesty that exact same day, undermining his thesis that it was Bilal Hussein's innocence, not amnesty, that set him free?


I think he understands what that word means, but not to whom it applies.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at April 23, 2008 11:33 PM

Boehlert also fails to mention the 50 plus fabricated stories attributed to the ubiquitous Jamil Hussein which have also never been addressed by the AP. As usual, Mr. Boehlert is constitutionally incapable of telling the truth.

In the case of Bilal Hussein, he has a slimy new ally in the person of Scott Horton, a person who deals largely in innuendo and rumor as opposed to fact, as seem from his campaigns against Karl Rove and Alice Martin relating to the conviction of Alabama governor Don Siegelman. Horton ranks neck and neck with Glenn Greenwald for frothing BDS and imaginged conspiracies, but presents little if any evidence to back his theories. Rove just handed him his backside last week in a letter to MSLSD. Is there any evidence of what Boehlert attributes to Horton of the judicial review of Hussein's case and is it any different from the review performed of the cases of other detainees? If have not seen any such evidence and would like to see it before accepting the conclusions of such total hacks as Horton and Boehlert.

Posted by: daleyrocks at April 24, 2008 09:48 AM

On the bright side, Charles has some interesting information on this piece up at LGF:

Here’s a telling comparison.

Since the Media Matters Eric Boehlert hit piece on “warbloggers” was posted this morning at 9:51 am Pacific, we’ve received exactly 36 hits from people who clicked one of the two links in Boehlert’s article. (One of them was probably from Keith Olbermann.)


But since Glenn Reynolds linked to our post about Boehlert’s hit piece, at about 5:45 pm Pacific (less than an hour ago), we’ve gotten more than 900 hits from people who clicked his link.

The Instapundit number is going up faster than I can keep track of it. It’s already gone over 1,000 since I started writing this post.

The Media Matters number is staying at ... 36.

George Soros isn’t getting a good return on his Media Matters investment.

Posted by: Pablo at April 24, 2008 05:17 PM
George Soros isn’t getting a good return on his Media Matters investment.
My heart bleeds.


Posted by: C-C-G at April 24, 2008 05:38 PM