Originally Posted by Chiefwoohaw
Yes, the were made but they were not admitted.
Quote from the article, "The government did not admit liability or fault but issued a formal apology to Mayfield as part of the settlement, said Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos."
I think it was that if he wasn't a successfull muslims that could possibly be "supporting terroist" then he would not have been under servlience in the first place.
Edit: and yes my free thinking leads me to believe that the Patriot Act is bad.
They admitted they had the wrong guy when they let him free. Saying they "did not admit liability or fault" is just legal mombojumbo to avoid incriminating anyone.
And as I read it the only reason he was under surveillance was because they thought his fingerprints matched one found at a crime scene. If any law enforcment agency thinks it has found a person whos fingerprints match those found at a crime scene, especially one of this nature, I'd certianly hope they would have him under surveillance. It never say's why the FBI had his fingerprints in the first place.