<<What has happened is the same functionary who said he did not exist , now says he does, conveniently getting AP off the hook. >>
Well this is consistent with two scenarios, one that AP induced the functionary to change his story in order to cover up for dishonest staff and spare themselves embarrassment. Not only would this be a very foolish course for AP to follow (it risks further and greater embarrassment when the U.S. military with all the power at its disposal uncovers the flipflop and inculpates AP) but it runs counter to the actions of every other news agency or medium that I am aware of, which are to fire the wrongdoer (who is very easily replaceable,) apologize to its readers and move on. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that AP would bribe the functionary to cover for its dishonest employees - - it's illogical, unethical, bad for business, and risks immediate exposure. AND no other news agency or other employer of dishonest journalists has ever, to my knowledge, ever dealt with the situation that way. Probably for the very reasons I just gave.
The second interpretation is that the U.S. military and/or the Iraqi "government" are once again caught in another of their innumberable stupid and pathetic lies to try to cover up yet another instance of their insane violence and atrocities against innocent civilians. This is something that HAS happened before, numerous times, and will happen again, numerous times, as long as the U.S. sends its armed thugs and goons to murder, torture, rob and rape in the Third World. It's an old story, unfortunately, but one that I have no trouble believing, for (a) there is ample historical precedent and (b) it is simple, believable and does not require any stretching of my imagination. Unlike BT's weird theory.