From a wire service story:
Military officials said Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi citizen, was being held for “imperative reasons of security” under United Nations resolutions. AP executives said the news cooperative’s review of Hussein’s work did not find anything to indicate inappropriate contact with insurgents, and any evidence against him should be brought to the Iraqi criminal justice system.[...]
Hussein is one of an estimated 14,000 people detained by the U.S. military worldwide _ 13,000 of them in Iraq. They are held in limbo where few are ever charged with a specific crime or given a chance before any court or tribunal to argue for their freedom.[...]
Hussein has been a frequent target of conservative critics on the Internet, who raised questions about his images months before the military detained him. One blogger and author, Michelle Malkin, wrote about Hussein’s detention on the day of his arrest, saying she’d been tipped by a military source.
Carroll said the role of journalists can be misconstrued and make them a target of critics. But that criticism is misplaced, she said.
“How can you know what a conflict is like if you’re only with one side of the combatants?” she said. “Journalism doesn’t work if we don’t report and photograph all sides.”
I hate it when I can see both sides of the story. It is so very tempting to insert a rant here about censorship via the use of detention to attempt to mute the views of critics. However, if an individual is aiding and abetting the folks who are attacking you, detention makes sense.
I would feel better about this if the government were a bit more forthcoming on what’s up with this photographer.
