No chicken hawks

The Washington Times Weekly - - National -

The As­so­ci­ated Press is up in arms over the Iraqi gov­ern­ment’s im­pend­ing trial on ter­ror­ism charges of AP stringer-pho­tog­ra­pher Bi­lal Hus­sein.

The pseudony­mous blog­ger at the Jawa Re­port (, who goes by the name “Rusty Shack­le­ford,” notes why the Iraqis might sus­pect him of aid­ing al Qaeda in Iraq, dryly ob­serv­ing, with a posted ex­am­ple and a link to more at Michelle Mal­lkin’s Web site, that “Bi­lal Hus­sein, how­ever, was able to get dozens of pho­tos of al Qaeda fight­ers — many of them posed.”

But then came the punch line: Pre­vi­ous Jawa Re­port cov­er­age blew Mr. Hus­sein’s cover when he was ar­rested.

“Ap­par­ently, Bi­lal Hus­sein had been picked up in a raid in which he wasn’t the tar­get. That tar­get was a known al Qaeda oper­a­tive, Hamid Ha­mad Motib, and bomb-mak­ing ma­te­ri­als were found in the house. Hus­sein was ar­rested and taken to Abu Ghraib, but no one knew who he was. [. . .] He had been sit­ting in Abu Ghraib for a month, and no­body re­al­ized that he was the AP pho­tog who had snapped dozens of staged pho­tos with al Qaeda fight­ers. [A Jawa Re­port reader] was in Abu Ghraib as an in­ves­ti­ga­tor work­ing on an un­re­lated case when he saw Bi­lal Hus­sein and rec­og­nized him from the ex­ten­sive cov­er­age we had on The Jawa Re­port.

“He re­ported it up the chain of com­mand and within days Bi­lal Hus­sein was trans­ferred to a dif­fer­ent fa­cil­ity, [the Naval Crim­i­nal In­ves­tiga­tive Ser­vice] got in­volved, and even­tu­ally a crim­i­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tion opened on him. He ends the e-mail with: ‘thanks to you guys [. . .] you re­ally are mak­ing an im­pact on the [the war on ter­ror] [. . .] you can claim credit.’ ”

“Any­one wish to com­plain about the ‘chicken-hawk’ blog­gers now?”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.