Replies

You haven't got your information from reading extensively or minimally, but by being a cold-hearted beyatch. The assumption that this guy deserved what he got is not the kind of thinking that you typically associate with freedom-loving freepers. So the question becomes, what's driving the animus by all against this guy? Why does he not get a presumption of innocence? Especially since the FBI investigated and he did in fact turn up clean. As I said, that kind of presumption of guilt is what Murtha has been criticized for.

The fact is, when this happened last year, I read about it in the papers, looked into it from a number of sources, and reviewed the summaries of the FBI's report. Everything about the guy checked out. Then it got me to thinking: how would I expect to be treated in the same situation. Suppose I went to Iraq to set up a cell phone system, to be a civilian security provider, to assist the petroleum industry, to report on the current situation outside the green zone (like Mark Steyn did) or to make a film that needs footage from Iraq, like this guy did. I could certainly understand getting caught up by mistake, as happened to this guy, and I would excuse a lot of inconvenience. But I would also expect better treatment from my fellow citizens, respectful treatment once they knew I was a citizen AND a US navy vet, a quick investigation, prompt release upon its conclusion, and maybe even an apology for the inconvenience. If that happened to me, I would be inclined to forget about the whole thing.

But, were I to suffer abuse while imprisoned, unnecessarily have to endure crappy conditions, endure an unreasonably lengthy investigation, and be held for a week even after I was cleared by the FBI, I would be inclined to seek redress for that conduct. I have obtained 6 figure settlements for my clients for far, far less of an outrage--for example, a store security guard wrongfully detains an innocent person for several hours in a basement holding room. Our society values very highly the freedom of its citizens, and before you take someone's liberty for even one minute, you better have a good reason. And even if you initially have a good reason, you better not detain them for one minute longer once you have learned facts that negate the initial suspicions.

And were this to happen to me, I would also be dismayed, but perhaps not surprised, by loudmouth wenches on the internet suggesting that I had it coming. I'd figure that they were just bigoted, or possibly not really patriots, but more like statists, or that they have some other derangement that would explain their desire for me to suffer unwarranted harm.

Another case in point:

Ind. couple charged after detaining man (Citizen's arrest backfires)

In that just-posted story, some people were put in jail for briefly detaining a man without the legal right to do so. They face a $10,000 fine and 3 years in prison. America protects its citizens' liberty zealously. People like you don't care about "others", but you will care about it when and if it happens to you.

I didn't say "he had it coming". I'm saying (if he's so innocent), he doesn't deserve money for being so stupid as to go to the most dangerous place on earth to shoot his little film. And he certainly doesn't deserve the right to demand a change is US policy, in a time of war, for that stupidity.

Being such a huge supporter of this country and being so innocent...he should send a check to Rumsfeld and Casey and everyone else he's suing, for his accommodations and protection for two months.

The movie excuse is absurd. There's a million feet of available stock footage he could use to tell his little story.

Call me all the names you want. That's what dupes do.