Larisa Alexandrovna: Military To Charge AP Photojournalist? (w/ Updates)

[Hissyspit]

http://www.atlargely.com/2007/11/military-to-cha.html

Military to charge AP photojournalist?
UPDATE AT BOTTOM

Not only is this whole thing strange, it is really disturbing given how little the AP defense team has from the US military and how much the right-wing blogs appear to have been given. Let's begin first with the news:

"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.

A public affairs officer notified the AP on Sunday that the military intends to submit a written complaint against Hussein that would bring the case into the Iraqi justice system as early as Nov. 29. Under Iraqi codes, an investigative magistrate will decide whether there are grounds to try Hussein, 36, who was seized in the western Iraqi city of Ramadi on April 12, 2006.

Dave Tomlin, associate general counsel for the AP, said the defense for Hussein is being forced to work "totally in the dark."

The military has not yet defined the specific charges against Hussein. Previously, the military has pointed to a range of suspicions that attempt to link him to insurgent activity.

The AP rejects all the allegations and contends it has been blocked by the military from mounting a wide-ranging defense for Hussein, who was part of the AP's Pulitzer Prize-winning photo team in 2005.

Soon after Hussein was taken into custody, the AP appealed to the U.S. military to either release him or bring the case to trial — saying there was no evidence to support his detention. However, Tomlin said that the military is now attempting to build a case based on "stale" evidence and testimony that has been discredited. He also noted that the U.S. military investigators who initially handled the case have left the country."

So we are clear, the US military has held him without charge for nearly two years. The US military refuses to provide the AP defense team with any information, including what charges he is being held for, the evidence that the US military has to support his continued imprisonment, and they also refuse to have a military tribunal see this evidence, instead opting to have him tried in an Iraqi court.

Now let's go over to the right wing blogs for a moment on this case:

- snip -

Even more strange is that this blogger actually claims to be responsible for the charges soon to be brought against the photojournalist:

UPDATE: Holy crap, The Jawa Report credited with Bilal Hussein prosecution?!?!

- snip -

UPDATE:

Apparently Shiksa Malkin is also taking credit for "breaking the story" about this photojournalist and cites sources (LMFAO):

In April 2006, I broke news about our military’s detention of Associated Press stringer Bilal Hussein–whom sources in Iraq told me was captured by American forces in a building in Ramadi, Iraq, with a cache of weapons–and continued to follow the case here, here, here, here, here, here, and here since he was taken into custody. The AP has waged all-out war on the military, demanding that the troops charge or release Hussein. Well, now, the military is about to bring criminal charges against Hussein…and the AP is still, of course, crying foul.

Sources in Iraq told her that he was captured with a "cache of weapons?" Ah, Shiksa apparently does not get how she is not a journalist. A journalist does not simply write the talking points faxed into them by pals over in the US military "communications" outfit.

A journalist might start off using this as a tip, question the motives of the person leaking, and investigate the veracity of the claims OBJECTIVELY and only THEN publish their report presenting all of the evidence available.

A journalist does not start with the assumption that the person leaking to them is doing so a). truthfully and b). for the right reasons. A journalist does not publish talking points as news and inject their own avid support of one position. A journalist does not claim that something is absolute fact based on evidence they have not seen, information they do not have, based solely on what a single source tells them.

The fact that a known racist, liar, and pro-concentration camp advocate - Malkin- has anything to do with this story gives the US military position even less credibility. Clearly Malkin and her mental-all stars (the Malkinites) are being used to launder domestic talking points, once again.

MORE

[ananda]

1. Well, the agenda seems to be..

.. to pressure AP into sticking with the program.

Ugghhh.