And ... ?

What are we supposed to make of this, tucked away in today's NYTimes article on the Iraqi parliament's election of a Sunni prime minister?

Some lawmakers in the assembly meeting called for the release of detainees in U.S. military prisons, one day after dozens of insurgents attacked the Abu Ghraib prison in western Baghdad with car bombs, gunfire, and rocket propelled grenades.

"Some?" How many? From what faction? What response did they get? Did anyone express an alternative point of view? The paper is pleased to tell us more about the prison ...

Abu Ghraib was at the center of a prisoner abuse scandal that broke out in 2004 when pictures showing soldiers piling naked inmates in a pyramid and humiliating them sexually became public. [Thanks! I'd forgotten.] The resulting scandal tarnished the military's image worldwide and sparked investigations of detainee abuses.

The United States is holding about 10,500 prisoners in Iraq, with 3,446 at Abu Ghraib.

... but it fails to report anything else on these people who would have set free 3,446 insurgents, criminals and other unworthies awaiting trial.

To the NYT: You're supposed to be the elite newsgathering and reporting publication in the world. May I remind you: Who, what, when, where, why. You're welcome.