According to Roll Call, the Republicans are planning on using the story of the May 12 2007 kidnapping of three soldiers as justification for further declawing of FISA:
Specifically, 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.
As Christy mentioned yesterday, this “human face” ploy just coincidently is backed up with a story in the New York Post by Charles Hurt - "'Wire' Law Failed Lost GI":
A search to rescue the men was quickly launched. But it soon ground to a halt as lawyers - obeying strict U.S. laws about surveillance - cobbled together the legal grounds for wiretapping the suspected kidnappers.
Starting at 10 a.m. on May 15, according to a timeline provided to Congress by the director of national intelligence, lawyers for the National Security Agency met and determined that special approval from the attorney general would be required first.
For an excruciating nine hours and 38 minutes, searchers in Iraq waited as U.S. lawyers discussed legal issues and hammered out the "probable cause" necessary for the attorney general to grant such "emergency" permission.
(snip)
"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.
How very compelling, eh? Except that it is complete bullshit. The ACLU and others have explained how FISA did not block tapping the related calls but there's more ...
When this story of GOP claims that the search was held up while they waited for a warrant surfaced, I was pretty startled since I remember the coverage of the incident and search rather well. It was striking because the events caused a lot of uproar on several fronts. First, there was the claim that the soldiers were taken in an “ambush” – something that both Pat Lang and Larry Johnson critiqued vigorously.
And the reactions in Iraqi sources was scathing – since the response to the kidnapping was a massive and pretty unrestrained series of actions in the area of the attack - beginning not after an "excruciating wait" for lawyers on May 15, but on May 13 and 14.
Reuters reported on May 14:
Backed by helicopters and jets, U.S. and Iraqi troops combed through lush palm groves, searched cars and went door-to-door looking for any signs of the missing soldiers in an area known as the "Triangle of Death". Residents said the town of Yusufiya and surrounding rural areas have been sealed off.
And again on May 14th, one day before the GOP tale claims the search “… soon ground to a halt as lawyers - obeying strict U.S. laws about surveillance - cobbled together the legal grounds for wiretapping the suspected kidnappers” here’s what PBS reported was actually going on:
EDWARD WONG, New York Times: Well, the U.S. military is saying that it's putting a lot of resources into the search for the three missing men. They say that there are 4,000 troops involved in the search, that they're sweeping through villages and towns that are south of Baghdad in this Euphrates River valley area.
And they're using a lot of overhead resources. They're putting out aircraft. They're using surveillance drones, and they're having a lot of helicopters fly over the area. It's not an easy area to cover. There are a lot of palm groves in this area, in villages, as well as tributaries to the Euphrates River, and so they have a lot of work ahead of them.
RAY SUAREZ: Along with that high-tech surveillance I guess goes the more old-fashioned, door-to-door searching?
EDWARD WONG: That's right. There are some areas where they've been going to houses. We understand that they've been arresting groups of people, questioning them. It's very intense at the moment.
Yesterday, we heard reports that they have surrounded the town of Yusufiya, which is fairly rife with insurgents, and that they were not letting people in or out of the town, and that they were going house-to-house there, searching for the abductees.
As Larry Johnson wrote at the time:
The response of U.S. troops in the area–going house to house and taking people into custody–is understandable but counterproductive. The odds are high that we are taking men into custody who had nothing to do with the attackers or the attack. But, by taking them into custody their honor is insulted and they are more likely to support insurgent activities in the future. It is a Catch-22.
Perhaps Mr. Hurt at the Post would like to correct his story about how the constitution blocked the search? His willingness to parrot GOP talking points sure deserves a note from firepups – and you can write him at churt@nypost.com. But first, call and fax the contacts in Christy’s post and made sure your reps are not buying this latest GOP spin.
Video: The Youtube above is of search activities on May 13 and 14th – it was shot by combat photographers. About half way in, you can see the helicopter support for the search. More footage from May 14th and 15th (which given time zone differences is also prior to the warrant discussion at DOJ) is available here.
Update: Read Selise's comment here about the Holt bill and Congressional kabuki. The sleight of hand goes on - and we need to say no.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
2
I do not blame just the GOP for FISA.
OKK what was your answer to Lahoma?
Damn my party for going along with the Republicans for the last seven years.
Steve, are you underestimating yourself today?
Former Telcom CEO: Bush’s Illegal Spying Began Months Before 9/11 Attacks
http://www.crooksandliars.com/
Good thing he was keeping us safe.
demi @ 3
Perhaps some things are better left unsaid. ;0)
EPU’d!!!
CTuttle View this users Facebook profile says:
October 16th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Woohoo! Scottish Haggis, today, on CNN…
Specter:
“I certainly would not give them immunity retroactively on programs that we don’t know what they are…. I think it’s unreasonable to ask us to give them immunity for things we don’t know what they did. If there was a need for it at the time, and if the telephone companies were good citizens and if they supplied information which was important, then I’d be prepared to look at it. But I’m not going to buy a pig in a poke, and commit to retroactive immunity when I don’t know what went on. They’ve kept that from us. That’s a big problem, Wolf.”
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004472.php
I am inching ever closer to advocating the formation of a third party.
Damn you DLC for your arrogant view I have no where else to go.
Finally, the return of the only pundit in DC who speaks for us:
http://freewayblogger.blogspot.....ogger.html
glad to have him back.
CTuttle @ 8
he always talks like that then caves in like a sinkhole
demi @ 3
kiddo shared his impression with me. I was not surprised.
lahoma
Implementing Domestic Intelligence Surveillance
my bold
Elliott @ 12
Leahy was standing beside him…!!! ;-)
Evening all …
There’s an astonishing amount of video from those searches … which sure makes Mr Hurt’s tale pretty absurd.
George W. Bush is laying the foundations for world war. And my stupid party ‘leadership’ will stumble into the trap. There is a shining star within the Democratic party though.
The only ingredient missing is Bibi. And soon that will not be a problem.
If I may take us back a post or two, I’d like to canvas the community on the advisability of suing Verizon. I’ve been a happy Verizon subscriber for about a decade, and I’m not even a tiny bit happy that they have sold me out to the FBI. I have no respect for the FBI (or the NSA), an organization far more concerned with their public image than doing their job, IMO. But, I digress.
I’m considering a suit against Verizon for illegally giving my private information to the FBI (or whomever). I’m thinking that to prove they didn’t (if, in fact, they did not) they would have to show in court whose data they did hand over.
Any thoughts on whether I might have a good day in court with this one?
Siun @ 16
Excellent Post, Siun! Take a gander at my #8…!!!
Hi Siun!
that’s a discouraging video to say the least. I know how I’d feel if my home was invaded. My apartment was broken into once, and I really felt violated.
ps how’s your puppy?
demi @ 5
No it’s the only form of pessimism that I will allow myself in these totally fucked up times.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 18
That is spooky… the Syrian incident would be small potatoes compared to his grand designs…!!!
With respect to Putin’s message today. He is telling our prez not to light the fuse that is Iran.
AP - Russian leader Vladimir Putin met his Iranian counterpart Tuesday and implicitly warned the U.S. not to use a former Soviet republic to stage an attack on Iran. He also said countries bordering the Caspian Sea must jointly back any oil pipeline projects in the region.
CTuttle - sigh, I’ll believe it when I see it, eh?
and what intel requires breaking the constitution?
what a week!
R. Manhammer @ 19
Good luck but don’t hold your breath on succeeding. Law suits have been filed against ATT and IIRC were dismissed because of the secrecy. The requests for info are secret so if you can’t prove you are a party to the case and that your info has been provided, you have no standing to sue so the secret remains secret and you’re SOL.
What does the FISA law have to do with wire tapping Iraqis in Iraq? I don’t get it.
If there is a legal hangup, wouldn’t it be between the Iraqi “government” and it’s arrangements with the US military and US intelligence services? Again, what does that have to do with FISA?
Anyone who accepted money from the Telcos will give them immunity. Hoyer for one got $ from Comcast.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 13
Uhoh… What was the question…??? 8~)
Elliot - nodding … and I assume these videos are pretty well edited since they are the official mil films. I know that word I heard at the time from friends in Iraq was that the roundups were intense and very harsh.
Puppy is good but at the moment irritating - this is the big dog walk time in my neighborhood and he is certain that every dog who walks by the front window is plotting to steal his favorite chewy!
Right now, he’s standing guard at the window - very alert and just ready for trouble! LOL!
encephalopath @ 27
Very good question - since wiretapping two foreign nationals is clearly OK under FISA, there was no reason for this to be an issue at all.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 10
How about Al Gore for Prez running as the Green Party Candidate? It would be a natural fit, wouldn’t it? It would instantly give a third party national recognition, and its historical ecological interests would be a natural backdrop for Gore’s concerns about global warming. Heck, I’d vote for Gore on the Green Party label against any Democratic nominee.
Bob in HI
Siun @ 25
KagroX mentioned that Art.I was b*tch-slapped by Art.II… on DKos…!!! ;-)
bobschacht @ 32
that’d be cool! *g
Siun @ 30
he’s just keeping you and yours safe!
I wish we could help keep the Iraqis and Afghanis safe!!
CTuttle @ 33
that made me laugh out loud!
tw3k @ 34
Heh, it would splinter the Dems and usher in Ghouliani…!!!
encephalopath @ 27
That’s what I thought.
And why do they need permission to wiretap but they don’t need permission to destroy the area? Are they mixing up FISA with their torture legislation? Did they mean that they weren’t allowed to torture someone so that’s what caused the delay?
Siun @ 31
Exactly.
Here’s a test:
Premise: Some Iraqis in a war/occupation zone kidnap our troops. What do you do?
Correct answer: Wiretap random telephone conversations by and between Americans, in America.
Makes sense (to someone, somewhere).
CTuttle @ 37
hill will do that all on her own ;)
They are idiots and liars, and so are the “journalists” who believe them.
And “comedians” as well — I’m looking at you, Jon Stewart, after your fawning interview with Tony Snow.
Elliott @ 14
Nice to know that betrayal on an individual basis of our privacy rights comes with a price schedule. Hey, I wonder if the Feds group the requests, they get a discount?
McCain singing a war on Iran song on tweety …
he loved the Israeli mystery attack on Syria
Marcus Aurelius @ 39
The new one is that they can’t get warrents because half of Justice is under investigation and the other half AWOL when they need someone to sign the papers.
Toby Wollin @ 42
lol, buy one get one free.
The winds are cool and harsh tonight on the plains and the tall grass prairie. And our warriors will be the ones left standing.
lahoma
OK, 1st thing, this story from the “Post” is complete bullshit
Why do I say that?
Oh, because the conversations that are carried by cell phones travel by electro-magnetic transmission ie … radio waves … which can be picked up any regular old signal man worth his salt.
This story is Bullshit.
They don’t need a “tap” taking place in the freakin U.S.
Complete and utter BS
Frontline/Cheney/tonight/PBS…check your listings..8PM Texas.
LS @ 48
I’m afraid to watch it alone!!
siun - thanks for all the background. i’d forgotten that incident… .but now, that you’ve reminded me, iirc this was something that Wayne White talked about… the crazy over the top response meant either that our soldiers were already dead or that the people making decisions didn’t care if they were killed.
p.s. thanks for the link to my comment this morning. i just went and reposted my main three fisa comments of the day in the last thread.
Siun @ 31
At some point, they channel through the U.S. which is the reason for modernizing FISA. But, this story reeks. No one should believe this bull.
1) We have been in Iraq as the conquering and occupying authority for five years and can’t intercept terrorist cell phone calls there? WTF?
2) If we really knew they were using cell phones, then we would have specific enough information to insure no American’s info would be intercepted and, being only foreign-foreign at that point, nothing else was needed. Problem is, what they wanted to do was just randomly troll everything from everyone to see if they might stumble into something useful. This nice little story the Rethuglicans are going to shill with is a complete lie. They would not know the truth if it crawled up their rear in an airport stall.
3) Did someone forget about the 72 hour exigent circumstances provision? Almost makes you wonder if the Cheney/Bush DOJ was more interested in setting up a tragic scenario to use as fodder to finish eliminating FISA and the Fourth Amendment than they were saving the soldiers. Who could have predicted they would be so cynical?
4) Even if you make it past items 1-3, why didn’t one of those tough guy, patriotic, do anything for the troops, Republican Daddies just do the right thing and have the balls to accept any consequences? They all jaw in reverence about Jack Bauer, but not a freaking one of them has the balls to be Jack Bauer; when its crunch time, they are always yellow backed cowards of the highest order, never willing to join the battle themselves. They must have all been drunk in a Texas gutter, had “other priorities”, or been suffering from a pilonidal cyst that day.
TeddySanFran @ 41
He was also easy on Lynne Cheney and Andy Card … but I thought allowing them to speak
showed their negatives more distinctly than anything Jon could have said.
LS @ 48
I’ll save you an hour … Shorter Cheney: “I am omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent !”
bmaz @ 52
brilliant
Even if they channel through the US, there’s no block to tapping when they are both foreign nationals. At least that’s what the ACLU etc say.
And Selise - yep, the whole search episode was very strange. I certainly understand the no man left behind loyalty but this was a massive sweep using 4,000 troops a day for quite a while. It felt like something more was in play but I never figured out what.
bobschacht @ 32
Hear, hear!
ReElect President Al Gore 2008!
Accept no substitute, h/t punaise
Petrocelli @ 53
never mind, I promised Christy I’d behave.
bmaz @ 52
((((( bmaz )))))
I wish you were stuck with Harry Reid in an elevator for an hour or two …
Petrocelli @ 53
Agreed. Either have them on in such a way that they expose themselves (which Snow and Cheney did), or don’t invite them. I thought Jon did superbly with the “material” he had, and they both showed their asses.
Petrocelli @ 59
perhaps we could arrange that
…in a legal way
newtonusr @ 60
((((( newtonusr )))))
CTuttle might need some TLC after tonight’s game … *g*
Elliott @ 49
10pm KQED Bay area
Elliott @ 61
… and toss in Hoyer & Pelosi … bmaz would still have the advantage …
Petrocelli @ 62
LOL!
I’ll alert the rest of the pups to “be generous to a fault…”
Siun @ 56
I believe you. Now, going to do a little more investigating because I thought that was the main reason that it needed to be addressed.
There is no way I am going to let these so called “centrist” (a code word) Democrats force me to roll over.
Petrocelli @ 64
Backstage assumes you folks are referring to a nice game of…
Hearts
And Hillary, you’ve got 12 months to ’see the light’.
Siun @ 31
There are some foreign-to-foreign communications that get routed through switches in the US. Congress never intended these to be subject to FISA, but reportedly, a FISC judge said if they go through the US, they are subject to the FISC and warrant requirements. The sole justification for amending the prior FISA was to make clear these communications were not subject to FISA. But the revisions enacted in August went further than that small clarification and exempted communications involving those persons legally inside the US, effectively gutting FISA.
Petro, Mi Amigo! Vas Los? Have you ever seen this Canuck Blog…
http://saundrie.blogspot.com/
Petrocelli @ 64
Don’t forget the moneyed “front runner” please.
The Lurking Mod @ 68
bmaz is the epitome of “words can move mountains!”
All lies that surrounds the need for the gutting of FISA sounds like an act of desperation…maybe the need for some sort of cover ups.
Bmaz - thank you, perfect!
Petrocelli @ 62
I’m not too thrilled with Wakefield taking the mound tonite…!!!
Elliott @ 49
We can watch it together on Late Night and hold hands here at the Lake.
Bob in HI
Alecia @ 74
Corrected.
Everything is legal when you can change the law after the fact.
Lord bless the day I no longer have to hear one word. “Hillary”.
TeddySanFran @ 63
I figure it will be like watching a really scary episode of the Twilight Zone…nightmares an’ all.
CTuttle @ 71
Um … he’s now understanding that Harper and his ilk are not using Canadian principles to guide their policies ?
Oklahoma kiddo @ 79
Fixed.
Great post Siun.
One question — do the repiglican congresscritters know that the Post story is wrong/misleading/propoganda/shit?
Petrocelli @ 81
He had some newer posts on it, I just couldn’t get it to refresh…!!!
Phule @ 82
Something wrong with the study of hotels?
john in sacramento @ 47
Here’s one way
CTuttle @ 76
As a disinterested party, I don’t care much about Wakefield. But even this late in his career, he can be simply mystifying on occasion.
Phule @ 82
She’s a Democrat, a US Senator from New York, and undeserving of any comparison to the leader of the Third Reich, especially on a progressive blog. I think it’s insane to buy into false rightwing memes about Hillary, including that “play on words” about her name. Please don’t bring it around here again.
TexBetsy @ 83
Question number two: do they care?
You’re not referring to me are you?
Phule @ 82
707!
bobschacht @ 77
OK, thanks
let’s point out, LOUD AND CLEAR
the fisa law CANNOT prevent searching where there is ANY link to national security
the president can at any time and at will begin his search and apply for the warrant long after
fisa prevents NOTHING but stealing…it documents searches and that is what the administration does NOT want to happen because documenting their stealing will make it harder to steal
(((BMAZ)))
from my house to yours