It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


US Plans Case Against AP Photographer

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 08:24 PM

The U.S. military plans to seek a criminal case in an Iraqi court against an award-winning Associated Press photographer but is refusing to disclose what evidence or accusations would be presented.

An AP attorney on Monday strongly protested the decision, calling the U.S. military plans a "sham of due process." The journalist, Bilal Hussein, has already been imprisoned without charges for more than 19 months.

link pending

I didn't post this to BAN because I don't have a hot link except to the news forum on my homepage.

What the heck is going on here? Is this about a photo this guy took? Was he involved in espionage? What did he do to make the US Military so interested in putting him on ice?

Anybody have some background on this story?

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 09:00 PM
Found the link on Newsweek:

Apparently he was allegedly aiding suspected insurgents.

On the morning of April 12, 2006, Hussein was out buying bread for breakfast when he heard a blast on a nearby street in Ramadi, according to the AP investigation. He dashed home and allowed several strangers to follow _ as was customary to offer shelter during unrest in the city. Marines later arrived and used Bilal's apartment as a temporary observation post.

Hussein told the AP he was later taken into custody by the Marines who also confiscated equipment including a laptop and satellite phone. The guests he invited into his apartment amid the chaos were also detained.

On Monday, Morrell said two guests in the apartment that day were "suspected insurgents" and that one of them later was convicted in a court of having a phony ID. It was unclear whether he remained in custody or was released.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

That's all that seems to be solid, the rest of the article highlights the ambiguity of the whole thing. Who knows what the heck is actually going on.

Edit: grammar

[edit on 19-11-2007 by Beachcoma]

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 09:30 PM
Hey, thanks for looking into it. Funny I didn't get any results from Google or Yahoo on it, but the AP story was fresh on my homepage.

If the case against him is about aiding insurgents, then why doesn't the US Military just come out and say it? It seems there may be more to this story. Maybe we will find out what. Maybe we won't.

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 09:48 PM
That they confiscated his equipment and laptop leads me to believe he might have snapped some photos that were incriminating. Otherwise like you said, if the case was so straightforward, why not just go out and charge him?

The AP says various accusations were floated unofficially against Hussein and then apparently withdrawn with little explanation.

That's the most suspicious statement in the entire article.

posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 11:25 PM
i like this part that the AP CEO says..

"The steps the U.S. military is now taking continue to deny Bilal his right to due process and, in turn, may deny him a chance at a fair trial. The treatment of Bilal represents a miscarriage of the very justice and rule of law that the United States is claiming to help Iraq achieve. At this point, we believe the correct recourse is the immediate release of Bilal."

19 months without being charged..!!??? outrageous
but i guess they purposly threw those rights out the window with the military commissions act of 2006

posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 12:29 AM
This stinks.
The US Military is charging him, yet wont advise on what charges, instead refering everyone to the Iraqi-Law system.
Lets be hoenst, Iraq cant function as a society at the moment, what answers will the Law system provide?
CNN released his PHOTO and full name, and the fact he helped out American forces for using his house as a outpost.
He's as good as dead if he's found innocent.

posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 12:45 AM
just a wild shot in the dark but maybe he took photos that were less than flattering of the us military offensive? might be enough right there. everybody knows that the us has made it policy that photo's that might be "harmful" to public opinion (dead americans etc....) not be released by the media......just a thought........

posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 01:46 AM

Originally posted by Beachcoma
That they confiscated his equipment and laptop leads me to believe he might have snapped some photos that were incriminating. Otherwise like you said, if the case was so straightforward, why not just go out and charge him?

Why charge him and risk him going free when they can just lock him up forever?

Him being imprisoned for 19 months without charge is outrageous and something youd expect from a dictatorship or 3rd world country.

posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 12:49 PM
The fact that countless charges against him have been withdrawn, raises eyebrows. Not only has he been detained for 19months without due process, his lawyers have also not been allowed to review evidence against him and any other information regarding his imprisonment.

The U.S abides by the law in convenience, simple as that.


new topics

top topics


log in