Quote:
Originally posted by socalpunX:
Quote:
Originally posted by InfX708:
[b]
The only reason we would detain him over there is because the Iraqis caught him committing a crime. I think it shows quite a bit of professionalism on their part to have turned him over to us rather than keep him in an Iraqi jail.
Would a curfew violation or other crime that would have caused the Iraqi police to detain him be reason enough for the FBI to need to interview a suspect? Does the Iraqi police bring in the FBI to interview all detainees?

Why, if he was in fact detained and held by the Iraqis for a crime wasn't he charged or at least why isn't such a charge being made public?

The Defense Department is still denying that they had him in custody. They would admit only that he had been interviewed by the FBI and he had contact with U.S. MPs while in the Iraqi jail. They are contending that he was solely in the custody of Iraqis although he was supposedly released by the Iraqis after his family filed a lawsuit in U.S. court.

Quick quesiton, InfX708:

Did you see , hear of or have any contact with any Isreali intelligence in Iraq?[/b][/QUOTE]

The report said he had an Isreali stamp in his passport. I'll check the Iraq visitors guide tonight, but I believe that having an Isreali stamp in your passport is illegal in Iraq. I do know that you were not allowed to fly into Iraq from Isreal. So, yes, it would not be inconceivable for the FBI to want to interview an American traveling into Iraq on his own arrested with an Isreali stamp in his passport. I don't think the Iraqi police "bring in the FBI" in any case. Doesn't quite work that way. More likely, the IPs told the MPs that they had a US civilian in their custody. There are several US govt agencies weorking in Iraq. Perhaps the circumstances surrounding his arrest caused the FBI to want to look into things.

I did not have contact with any member of any foreign intelligence service, that I know of, while there.
_________________________
300,000 miles, and counting