We’ve covered the story of Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi stringer for the Associated Press who was on cozy terms with terrorists, most recently here. Hussein was arrested in the company of terrorists and has now been charged with giving material support to terrorist groups. An investigating judge in Baghdad has the case and will decide whether there are sufficient grounds for prosecution. If so, he will refer the case to be heard by a three-judge court.
The Associated Press has backed Hussein unreservedly, and other media organizations have joined in calling for his release, even though 1) they don’t know what the evidence against Hussein is, and 2) his own photographs, as we have pointed out more than once, demonstrate that he is, at a minimum, on friendly terms with terrorists and is viewed by them as a sympathetic conduit for their propaganda.
On Sunday, Harper’s published the most over-the-top defense of Hussein yet, by one Scott Horton. Horton argues that Bilal Hussein is the John Peter Zenger of Iraq, and that the Iraqi government’s prosecution of Hussein (actually, in Horton’s telling, Iraq has nothing to do with it, and the prosecution is entirely the work of the U.S. military) is analogous to the British prosecution of Zenger in 1735. I’m not making this up; Horton writes that “Iraq
-
-
Most Read on Power Line
Donate to PL
-
Our Favorites
- American Greatness
- American Mind
- American Story
- American Thinker
- Aspen beat
- Babylon Bee
- Belmont Club
- Churchill Project
- Claremont Institute
- Daily Torch
- Federalist
- Gatestone Institute
- Hollywood in Toto
- Hoover Institution
- Hot Air
- Hugh Hewitt
- InstaPundit
- Jewish World Review
- Law & Liberty
- Legal Insurrection
- Liberty Daily
- Lileks
- Lucianne
- Michael Ramirez Cartoons
- Michelle Malkin
- Pipeline
- RealClearPolitics
- Ricochet
- Steyn Online
- Tim Blair
Media
Subscribe to Power Line by Email
Temporarily disabled
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.