Given that's it's reproduced at National Review Online, you have to be at least a little suspicious:
Speaking through an American interpreter, Lieutenant David Wallach who is a native Arabic speaker, the Iraqi official related how al Qaeda united these gangs who then became absorbed into “al Qaeda.” They recruited boys born during the years 1991, 92 and 93 who were each given weapons, including pistols, a bicycle and a phone (with phone cards paid) and a salary of $100 per month, all courtesy of al Qaeda. These boys were used for kidnapping, torturing and murdering people.
At first, he said, they would only target Shia, but over time the new al Qaeda directed attacks against Sunni, and then anyone who thought differently. The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11 years old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man’s words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, “What did he say?” Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family.
This just reeks of the same kind of fabricated sensationalism as the now-discredited "Kuwaiti babies and incubators" story.
Is there anything to this?
PALADIEA-RELATED AFTERSNARK: No, we're not done here, but you will all note, I hope, how Dave (a man with actual military experience) explained slowly and carefully why the story simply isn't credible, after which "anonymous" -- by way of illogical, childish rebuttal -- deliberately misinterpreted and misquoted him.
You might want to get used to that sort of thing, Pal. I'm betting you'll be seeing a lot of it.