NY Post Exploits Kidnapped U.S. Troops To Push For Expanded Spying Authority
NY Post Exploits Kidnapped U.S. Troops To Push For Expanded Spying Authority
Last month, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told Congress that “a May wiretap that targeted Iraqi insurgents was delayed for 12 hours by attempts to comply with onerous surveillance laws, which slowed an effort to locate three U.S. soldiers who had been captured.”
As Congress works to restore court oversight of the spy program this week, conservatives in Congress have initiated a PR campaign to build support for President Bush’s spying program. Roll Call reports:
Republicans are planning to use the kidnapping and subsequent murder of three U.S. soldiers in Iraq earlier this year to put a “human face” on the issue, the House staffer explained. … Republicans believe using real-world examples of how a weak FISA has put U.S. troops in danger will help galvanize public support for their position.
Marcy Wheeler observes that today, the Rupert Murdoch-owned New York Post embraced this campaign, publishing a politically-charged article reiterating the conservatives’ talking points:
U.S. intelligence officials got mired for nearly 10 hours seeking approval to use wiretaps against al Qaeda terrorists suspected of kidnapping Queens soldier Alex Jimenez in Iraq earlier this year, The Post has learned. [...]
“The intelligence community was forced to abandon our soldiers because of the law,” a senior congressional staffer with access to the classified case told The Post.
In reality, the delay in obtaining the order can largely be traced to the red tape and incompetence within the Bush administration. Here’s why:
1) Gonzales’ DoJ unprepared for battle. Alberto Gonzales’ Justice Department “wrangl[ed]” with intelligence officials on whether there was “probable cause” for surveillance. Filled with inept political cronies, the DoJ said it encountered “novel legal issues” that it hadn’t considered, necessitating a four hour delay.
2) DoJ missing in action. Mired in scandal, Gonzales was speaking to a group of U.S. attorneys and couldn’t be reached for two hours in order to sign off. “Deputy AG Paul McNulty had resigned already; Solicitor General Paul Clement ‘had left the building‘; and the other responsible official, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein was not yet authorized to approve the emergency order.”
3) Emergency warrants obtainable in ‘five seconds.’ McConnell claimed an earlier FISA court ruling requiring warrants for foreign-to-foreign surveillance had caused the lag time. But to “get an emergency warrant, you just have to believe the facts support the application that someone is an agent of a foreign power,” according to a government source. “That takes approximately five seconds to establish if you’re going after an Iraqi insurgent.”
Competence — not unfettered spying power — is what the Bush administration needs.
UPDATE: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) said today the “inexcusable delays in the collection intended to save Specialist Alex Jimenez, Private First Class Joseph Anzak, and Private Byron W. Fouty was the fault of internal bureaucratic bungling by the Bush Administration, not the law.” Read the full Reyes memo HERE.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
U.S. intelligence officials got mired for nearly 10 hours seeking approval to use wiretaps against al Qaeda terrorists suspected of kidnapping Queens soldier Alex Jimenez in Iraq earlier this year, The Post has learned. […]
“The intelligence community was forced to abandon our soldiers because of the law,†a senior congressional staffer with access to the classified case told The Post.
I call BULLSH!T.
In cases where speed is of the essence, the surveillance can be performed without a warrant, and FISA will retroactively grant a warrant if justified.
And that was the FISA court pre-9/11.
The only reason to push for more authority to spy with impunity is to make possible the blanket surveillance of all Americans. In short, it’s a bid to create one of the prerequisites of an authoritarian police state – pervasive surveillance of all citizens.
October 15th, 2007 at 1:54 pmBush needs any cover he can muster given the fact that we now know that he was attempting to spy on Americans well before 9/11. Their excuses are now the equivalent of throwing everything against the wall and see what sticks.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:01 pmAll the Dems have to do is make sure they always state the fact that Bush began spying on Americans five weeks after he was sworn in as POTUS. He didn’t start spying because of 9/11, he started earlier to give Cheney what he wanted: an imperial presidency. All the dems have to do is carry a calendar around with them and make sure everybody knows bush is a liar.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:02 pmCompetence in what the Bush administration ?
Yeah right with all those Regent University ( a third or fourth tier school ) grads !
October 15th, 2007 at 2:08 pmBullshit! It just goes to show you that the spy program is as inempt and the people that control it. Total failure and illegal to boot.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:08 pmIf it were true, they would have gone ahead and spied without regard to any law. But being lying traitors, the spys are using this as George USED Pat Tillman. Once again they use the troops to try to get their way. These so called military men make the military look pretty bad. They care not for their own (or they would have just intercepted and gone on a rescue) but for the next star to be placed on their lapel.
This is a discouraging story. There are usually two sides to most stories, this is a big constitutional issue. Watch this trailer about Estonia’s Singing Revolution, http://singingrevolution.com; this might put into perspective what’s most important.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:11 pmThese guys couldn’t use the reasonable tools they had and they tried to get bigger, more unreasonable ones.
What is this, the Tool Man Administration?
October 15th, 2007 at 2:14 pmMore lies from a Fascist War Criminal Administration? I am so shocked. They can get them instantly and the courts have up to 72 hours to decide if it is legal. So what’s the problem? Oh I see, they want to spy on political opponents and critics.
Keep em asceered 24/7. Those Brownshirt Lemmings need to lockstep with their dear leader.
Buck Fush
October 15th, 2007 at 2:28 pmI am convinced this administration will exploit anybody and anything to move their agenda, including selling their Kool-aid to the masses.
9/11 has been exploited by the right to an unprecedented degree. It’s been used to allow this administration to grab power never before seen by the executive branch, invade a country having nothing to do with 9/11, and erode personal freedoms here at home just so the BA can tighten their reins on power by spying on everybody else. Now that they’ve managed to destabilize Iraq, they now exploit THAT to get what they want (Al Qaeda in Iraq! Be afraid! Be very afraid!). And now they’re exploiting the deaths of three soldiers to convince Americans that the Fourth Amendment is a bad thing.
And the right is crying “exploitation!” because a family who was helped by SCHIP was willing to say so publicly. Do they truly think we don’t see the hypocrisy here?
October 15th, 2007 at 2:33 pmThis is the same NY Post which had a naked streaker guy on the front page last week. Like this is the biggest story in town, and like no one has seen a naked person in NYC before.
I am so looking forward to watching the Wall Street Journal’s inevitable slide into the dumpster.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:39 pmYes, let’s do put a human face on the Bush Syndicate’s criminal negligence! I say bring it on! Get this shameful situation out in the open where the American people can see it and finally get a clue about just exactly who we’ve got running things in the White House.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:40 pmIf Bush & his regime were spying on all of us prior to 9/11, that may explain why Democrats are folding on pushing through meaningful legislation…
They know Bush & Cheney have damaging information on them. Not only do they know, they have been shown what they have on them.
I hope this is not true, but it sure would explain a lot of the unexplained.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:41 pmLast month, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told Congress that “a May wiretap that targeted Iraqi insurgents was delayed for 12 hours by attempts to comply with onerous surveillance laws, which slowed an effort to locate three U.S. soldiers who had been captured.â€
Excuse me — since when do authorities in this government comply with the law, onerous or otherwise? If locating these soldiers was so important, everything would have been done to accomplish this.
No, I doubt anybody in a position of power gave a crap about these soldiers when they were alive but missing, and they are only useful now to advance the dictatorship. Every patriotic American should be concerned with what’s going on here.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:42 pm“a May wiretap that targeted Iraqi insurgents was delayed for 12 hours by attempts to comply with onerous surveillance laws, which slowed an effort to locate three U.S. soldiers who had been captured.â€
If that’s the case, it was nobody’s fault but their own incompetence. The FISA law allows them to immediately do their survelliance and then come back in 72 hours to get a court order. I wonder why they couldn’t do that?
October 15th, 2007 at 2:45 pmHeh! I love how ThinkProgress derogates this story about the delays that hampered the initial search for kidnapped soldier Alex Jimenez because it appeared in The New York Post and THEN in the very next thread cites a column regarding Justice Thomas in The New York Post as if it is Gospel!
Hysterical!
October 15th, 2007 at 2:47 pmExley, the delays are bogus.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:49 pmHysterical!
Comment by Exley
So Right Wing Loon Exley, why could the Bush Administration not to their spying when they have the right to do it without a warrant in the first place? What stopped them? Do you think it could be because they were trying to create an incident to get people all excited and give away more of their freedoms? What kind of incompetence kept them from their survelliance and then going to the FISA judge for retroactive approval?
October 15th, 2007 at 2:51 pmExley sez:
Heh! I love how you feel you have to post the exact same moronic comment in both threads to get sufficient attention.
I’ve addressed this issue in the Clarence Thomas thread, Exley.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:54 pmExlax supports neo-Nazis. Hell, Exlax IS a neo-Nazi.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:01 pmHiB,
1) And you base that comment on….what exactly?
2) Regardless, the fact is that ThinkProgress dismisses one piece of information based only on the fact that it is reported in The New York Post and then just minutes later touts another article from The New York Post as accurate….
SATYAM: “Why did you post an article from The New York Post as if it were true????”
STAFFER: “Why wouldn’t I? I think it was a good story…”
SATYAM: “Because I just posted an article saying The New York Post in unreliable!”
STAFFER: “Well, why would you do that?”
SATYAM: “Because!”
STAFFER: “Well, I didn’t know that!”
SATYAM: “We look pretty darn silly touting the Post as unreliable in one posting and then in the very next posting say that the Post is reliable!”
STAFFER: “Maybe no one will notice our inconsistency.”
October 15th, 2007 at 3:01 pmI reference post #1 Exley. FISA will retroactively grant warrants in time sensitive cases. Plus they have upto 72 hours to do so. The delays are bogus and you know that. the delay for 12 hours link is from the Washington Post so it’s not just a NY Times story.
This is not some new information regarding FISA. It’s a bogus fear tactic.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:14 pm#1 – Trip – you said it, so I didn’t have to. Thanks.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:22 pmHiB,
No offense but you are getting a little lost in the weeds….What both The Washington and New York Post stories show is yet more evidence that this war has been “over-lawyered.” The fact that there was a 9.5 debate-delay regarding the legality of this communications intercept — especially when the lives on U.S. soldiers were at stake — is inexcusable.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:23 pmLook at Exlax’s stab at humor. So pathetic. Not to mentions it’s a big bunch of spam gunking up the site. Abuse?
October 15th, 2007 at 3:23 pmHeh! Poor Shayne…Doesn’t even ATTEMPT to defend ThinkProgress for citing The New York Post as reliable in one posting and then turning around and dismissing an article on the grounds that it appeared in The New York Post.
Try again, Shayne…And next time, think before you type.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:26 pmThe fact that there was a 9.5 debate-delay regarding the legality of this communications intercept — especially when the lives on U.S. soldiers were at stake — is inexcusable.
Comment by Exley — October 15, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
If a soldier’s life was at risk and something could be done to save his that was otherwise illegal, which is clearly not the case, then the noble thing to do would be break the law and face the repercussions later. But since the whole argument is just a pile of made up crap, maybe you should just stop spreading the manure.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:26 pmCan you even read Exley? TP reports what the Post said in both threads but never supports anything they say. If the Post was reliable would they quote a guy who says Gore is like Hitler. Try getting your head out of your ass long enough to get some fresh air, your brain cells are just about gone.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:29 pmOh how I wish that Congress would just say to the President: “Just get the GD warrant.”
October 15th, 2007 at 3:30 pmThe fact that there was a 9.5 debate-delay regarding the legality of this communications intercept — especially when the lives on U.S. soldiers were at stake — is inexcusable.
Comment by Exley
Excuse me Right Wing Loon Exley, you still haven’t answered the question as to why there was a delay in their survelliance when they had the power to do it without a warrant?
October 15th, 2007 at 3:33 pmThere was no need for any delay. The inept Bush administration bungled it but there was no need for the delay and the attempts to put a “human face” by the republicans is disgusting.
No getting lost in the weeds Exley. I’ve risen above the muck a long time ago.
This is an alarmist issue that is making a power grab. Cooler heads should prevail.
Your stab at NY times means nothing to me.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:40 pmWhy do we need warrants?
After all, a warrant is just a goddamn piece of paper!
October 15th, 2007 at 3:45 pmHiB,
“Your stab at NY times means nothing to me.”
I am not sure to what this is supposed to refer.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:45 pmComment by Exley
What’s the matter Right Wing Loon, can’t you answer the question in #31?
Since you can’t answer that question, you really do need to STFU about this subject. You have nothing to contribute.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:47 pmheh! Bilbo….Setting aside the fact that you cannot seem to write a posting without resorting to intellectually vapid name-calling, I would suggest you read The Washington Post article for your answer….
October 15th, 2007 at 3:49 pmheh! Bilbo….Setting aside the fact that you cannot seem to write a posting without resorting to intellectually vapid name-calling, I would suggest you read The Washington Post article for your answer….
Comment by Exley
Hey Right Wing Loon Exley (I call them as I see them), there nothing in the Washington Post article that shows anything other than incompetency on the part of the Bush administration as the reason for the delay. They know they have the right to immediately spy without getting a court’s approval. If they put some rules into affect that stopped that from happening, it is the fault of the incompetent Bush Administration not of the law and the way it is written. Nothing in that article showed that anything different would have happened if the Bush Administration had the unfettered ability to spy on us without ever getting a warrant.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:54 pmThese criminals will say whatever it takes to jam that traitorous FISA bill down our throats.
Everything changed after 9/11…right. The articles over the weekend about Qwest Communications and pre-9/11 US citizen eavesdropping prove otherwise.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:56 pmThere was an 86 hour delay before they started the request. I don’t see where Exley has a leg to stand on.
What’s your beef here Exley? Are you mad at the Bush adminstration for delaying so long, or mad at the Bush administration for bungling it once they started the request.
Any way you look at this it’s a failure by the Bush administration.
October 15th, 2007 at 4:06 pm#25 Exley:
No offense but you are getting a little lost in the weeds….What both The Washington and New York Post stories show is yet more evidence that this war has been “over-lawyered.†The fact that there was a 9.5 debate-delay regarding the legality of this communications intercept — especially when the lives on U.S. soldiers were at stake — is inexcusable.
Typo there. You misspelled “mis-lawyered”. Godd thing that SNAFU’s gone, eh?
Cheers,
October 15th, 2007 at 4:20 pmand like a fart in the wind, Exley vanishes.
October 15th, 2007 at 4:32 pmThe fact that there was a 9.5 debate-delay regarding the legality of this communications intercept — especially when the lives on U.S. soldiers were at stake — is inexcusable.
Comment by Exley
What is inexcusable is not using the clause where they can set up the tap imediately and they have 72 hours to ask for the warrant, since it was an emergency. That is why the clause exists in FISA.
Their excuse is BS, because they can’t even seem to follow the law as it is currently listed.
Geez, Exley, read the law and get back with us again after reading it.
October 15th, 2007 at 4:53 pmHiB,
You must have missed this:
“The intelligence court ruled earlier this year that warrants were required for foreign communications that passed through telephone or Internet exchanges inside the United States, even if both parties were overseas, according to administration officials. That led to the requests for FISA orders in the Iraqi case, officials said.”
Thankfully, that absurd ruling has been overruled by statute with the FISA revisions (Revision which you undoubtedly opposed)….Now, however, we see the Democratic leadership wanting to once again impose those restrictions….It is fortunate that they don’t have the votes to do so.
October 15th, 2007 at 4:56 pmComment by Exley — October 15, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
What part of, “they have 72 hours after setting such taps in place to ask for the warrant, in case of emergency”, do you not understand?
That makes their point and yours moot.
October 15th, 2007 at 5:05 pmAnd just like that, HiB vanishes.
October 15th, 2007 at 5:18 pmAnd just like that, HiB vanishes.
Comment by Exley — October 15, 2007 @ 5:18 pm
But I have not.
October 15th, 2007 at 5:20 pmAgain, the whole point made by the Post and exley is moot according to the law:
TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 36 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1805 Issuance of order
October 15th, 2007 at 5:27 pm(f) Emergency orders
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, when the Attorney General reasonably determines that—
(1) an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing such surveillance can with due diligence be obtained; and
(2) the factual basis for issuance of an order under this subchapter to approve such surveillance exists;
he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if a judge having jurisdiction under section 1803 of this title is informed by the Attorney General or his designee at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ emergency electronic surveillance and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance.
#42 Exley:
You must have missed this:
“The intelligence court ruled earlier this year that warrants were required for foreign communications that passed through telephone or Internet exchanges inside the United States, even if both parties were overseas, according to administration officials. That led to the requests for FISA orders in the Iraqi case, officials said.â€
Except it didn’t. This is a lie.
50 USC § 1801(f)(2):
“the acquisition by an electronic, mechanical, or other surveillance device of the contents of any wire communication to or from a person in the United States, without the consent of any party thereto, if such acquisition occurs in the United States, but does not include the acquisition of those communications of computer trespassers that would be permissible under section 2511 (2)(i) of title 18;”
Thankfully, that absurd ruling has been overruled by statute with the FISA revisions
Care to cite the actual ruling?
Nonetheless, if the dorks in the maladministration DoJ thought that FISA applied, there was no problem either:
“McConnell told the committee today that restrictions derived by the FISA Court this year on wiretapping foreign-to-foreign communications that pass through the U.S. prevented the NSA from surveilling Iraqi insurgents who had kidnapped U.S. soldiers for 12 hours. But the source, who is privvy to the timeline of the incident, says “internal bureaucratic wrangling,” and not court-based restrictions, were responsible for the lag time. “To get an emergency warrant, you just have to believe the facts support the application that someone is an agent of a foreign power,” the source says. “That takes approximately five seconds to establish if you’re going after an Iraqi insurgent.”
“Why did so much time elapse before the surveillance? Top Justice Department officials needed to approve the emergency order. But according to the source, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was out of town; Deputy AG Paul McNulty had resigned already; Solicitor General Paul Clement “had left the building”; and the other responsible official, Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Wainstein was not yet authorized to approve the emergency order. Wainstein testified today, but demurred from answering questions about the incident in open session.”
Glad to clear that up.
Cheers,
October 15th, 2007 at 5:40 pmsniff, sniff, sniff. FISA states that in severe circumstances a warrant can be retroactively applied. I believe the lives of soldiers would fall into this catagory. This is complete BS that the bush admin. didn’t expedite the wiretapping but will blame non existent restrictions in this case.
You have no argument Exley but yet you stammer on. The bungling is entirely a Bush admin, internal clusterfu@k. Your fear will not rule the day.
You want to give up freedoms for safety but what you fear is baseless. This country stands strongest when we follow the constitution. Not this administration.
October 15th, 2007 at 5:43 pmSignatures needed !
ImpeachBush.org
October 15th, 2007 at 6:37 pmthis is absurd. why would they need to tap phone lines anywhere outside iraq to deal with this? are we really supposed to be so naive to think that whoever kidnapped these soldiers was making international calls trying to get mapquest directions on where to take the soldiers next? ludicrous to even think phone lines passing through the us would be involved..
October 15th, 2007 at 7:15 pmMike McConnell, liar.
They have forever had 48 hours to proceed with taps before going to the FISA court. Congress in about 2002 extended that period to 72 hours. What McConnell must be saying is that they squandered the 72 hours and had to pull the plug until the court approved the tap. That is not the fault of the law, it is a sign of gross incompetence — or business as usual with this gang of incompentents.
October 15th, 2007 at 8:53 pm“…self loathing zionist ExLax ‘phony jew’! Thank goodness you are of the RECESSIVE Jewish genes, like Kristol, and Leo Strauss – and that your Nazism is almost non-existent among REAL JEWS!”
Wow…RHF’s meltdown into paranoiac, anti-Semitic rantings is truly frightening (and pitiful) to behold…His twisted, prejudiced ranting should be reported as ‘abuse,’ but I think it is more important that his fellow “progressives” see the hatread he spews.
October 15th, 2007 at 11:04 pmI wouldnt be as hard on you as he was Exlexlia, but do you think he’s paranoid to suggest neocons espiouse the beleifs of strauss (including his “noble lie”)?
October 15th, 2007 at 11:20 pmlittle evidence of Jihadists in the USA…
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/15/terror.study/index.html
October 15th, 2007 at 11:21 pmCJ,
RHF’s paranoid spiral into anti-Semitism have nothing to do with political philosophy, the University of Chicago, or Straussianism…It is simply about RHF’s disturbing proclivity to resort to paranoid anti-Semitic rantings when faced with someone with whom he disgrees politically….
October 15th, 2007 at 11:41 pmWell Exlexia I don’t think its paranoid to call the Kristol Meth kids Zionists using Straussian logic, as they clearly are. I think its a shame that Zionism has hijacked and wrapped itself in the flag of Judaism to such a degree that
the two have become virtually inseparable in the minds of many people.
Whether these label applies to you I don’t know. Probably not. Personally I think your bizarre infatuation with Al-Queda doesnt necessarily come from the same twisted logic that Kristol Meth + co espouse. I think though, even if what RHF said wasn’t completely accurate, its wrong to call someone paranoid simply because they believe someone other than arabs engage in conspiracies. After all, what is Al-Queda but the ultimate stateless conspiracy, right? I am correct in saying you would label Al-Queda as a group of conspirators, right?
Exley, do you consider yourself racist for asserting that people who beleive non-arabs engage in conspiracies are paranoid?
Why do you think jewish people are unable or unwilling to engage in conspiracies just as much as arabs do?
October 16th, 2007 at 2:59 am