AP photographer freed by US military after 2 years

[maddezmom]

Source: AP

BAGHDAD - The U.S. military released Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein on Wednesday after holding him for more than two years without filing formal charges.

Hussein, 36, was handed over to AP colleagues at a checkpoint in Baghdad. He was taken to the site aboard a prisoner bus and left U.S. custody wearing a traditional Iraqi robe. He was smiling and appeared in good health.

"I want to thank all the people working in AP. ... I have spent two years in prison even though I was innocent. I thank everybody," Hussein said after being freed.

AP President Tom Curley said Hussein "is safely back with AP and his family, and it is a great relief to us."



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080416/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_photographer_freed;_

[brooklynite]

1. I'm confused -- what about the "irrefutable evidence"?

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. military says it has "convincing and irrefutable" evidence that an award-winning Associated Press photographer is connected to the insurgency in Iraq.

The photographer, Bilal Hussein Zaidon, faces charges in the Iraqi Central Court based on the evidence, Pentagon officials said Monday.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell and other U.S. military officials would not say directly what charges he faced. They referred reporters to the Iraqi court system.

CNN, November 19, 2007

[Barrett808]

3. That was like the "slam-dunk" case for Saddam's WMD

You know, Bush mob lies.

[truth2power]

5. "irrefutable evidence" It's kinda like

the "evidence" that Rummy had that all those at Gitmo were "the worst of the worst".

He (Rummy) knew this even though they hadn't been adjudicated as guilty of anything.

See? There's statutory law, common law, and Rumsfeld-made law.

* * *

As an aside - I suppose one of the conditions of Zaidon's release is that he not speak of his experiences to anyone. Wouldn't want the whole world to know about another of the US Govt.'s fsck-ups. x(

[Igel]

7. This is recycled news.

The "convincing and irrefutable" evidence is meaningless if the court won't hear the case, or, more accurately, dismisses it as irrelevant. The missing explanation, from all of last week (therefore at least six layers down in the memory hole), is that Bilal's covered by the amnesty that the Iraqi government approved a month or two ago.

The remaining point of suspense last week was that the US Army said it would review whether to comply with the Iraqi court's order, that there might be something else to nail him for. The only real new part is that the US decided to comply.

It's spun differently, and with the explanation for the case's dismissal it sounds like a lack of evidence. Now, there may not have been enough evidence to convict; all we have is the US's assertion that it did, the willingness of the Iraqi court to consider the case, and the reporter's (and AP's) assertion that, sight unseen, the US did not have enough evidence.

[Barrett808]

2. Rec for good news. n/t

[Amonester]

4. he should sue the sh*t out

no. make that: he must sue

problem is: taxpayers will have to foot the bill, not the guilty mfers occupying the WH

[NM Independent]

6. So,

what does this guy get in return for two years of his life in a cell?

Injustice means nothing to anybody anymore.

[struggle4progress]

8. An Iraqi, he did such a good job of covering the carnage, that he helped the AP win a Pulitzer

It sounds like the Bushistas accused him of terrorism just to shut him down

So if anybody's wondering why there's so little news coverage of Iraq ...