'WIRE' LAW FAILED LOST GI: 10-HOUR DELAY AS FEDS SOUGHT TAP TO TRACK JIMENEZ CAPTORS IN IRAQ

New York Post ^ | October 15, 2007 | CHARLES HURT, Bureau Chief

[Doctor Raoul]

'WIRE' LAW FAILED LOST GI

10-HOUR DELAY AS FEDS SOUGHT TAP TO TRACK JIMENEZ CAPTORS IN IRAQ
By CHARLES HURT, Bureau Chief

October 15, 2007

WASHINGTON - 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.

This week, Congress plans to vote on a bill that leaves in place the legal hurdles in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act - problems that were highlighted during the May search for a group of kidnapped U.S. soldiers.

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.

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.

Finally, approval was granted and, at 7:38 that night, surveillance began.

"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 many lawyers does it take to rescue our soldiers?" he asked. "It should be zero."

[frankenMonkey]

President Bush needs to tell Congress to go straight to hell on this. The Courts are already on his side. He needs to act like the Commander-in-Chief that he is.

The president bailed out on our guys long ago...

[RasterMaster]

And yet the fools in the JACKASS party as well as a few RINOs like Goober Graham want to extend the rights of citizen to foriegn terrorists as well as bring them into this country for a "fair trial" (more income for slimy lawyers).

If it were ACLU lawyers hanging from the bridge, you know damn well that the scumbag DUmocrats would be singing a different tune.

[SECURE AMERICA]

Until a majority of our Politicians accept the fact that we are involved in WW3, these things will continue to happen.
The terrorist KNOW they asre in WW3. They started it. They want it. They can not destroy civilization unless they war against all civilization.
We are not involed with people in criminal acts, a Police Action, a Peacekeeping mission or another nonsense PC term for WAR. We are in WAR

[BOBTHENAILER]

Picture perfect post.

[penowa]

"But it soon ground to a halt as lawyers..."

LAWYERS on the battlefield! This is so outrageous, no parent should consider allowing his child to serve until it's changed.

[TomGuy]

In your vitriol to castigate Democrats, you missed the actual story.

The NSA (which is a part of the Executive Branch) called the lawyers.

"...lawyers for the National Security Agency met and determined that special approval from the attorney general would be required first."

The lawyers discussed the situation for nearly 10 hours with the Attorney General (who is part of the Executive Branch).

"Finally, approval was granted [by the Attorney General, who is part of the Executive Branch] and, at 7:38 that night, surveillance began. " [edit added]

The situation had nothing to do with the Democrats. It was fully the ineptitude of the NSA/Attorney General to render a decision without first having 10 hour of listening to attorneys.

==

Recall a similar incident with attorneys regarding the situaion in Afganistan in the early days of the WoT. The military were about to 'take out' the one-eyed Mullah, but the JAG decided to talk about it. When a 'go ahead' was finally issued, the Mullah was long gone.

Recall another incident where attorneys were consulted regarding a collective of al-Qaeda attending a funeral. The attorneys prohibited any attack because civilians were in the general area.

[Sacajaweau]

If 9-11 didn’t teach you that time is of the essence...then you’re an idiot.

[nutmeg]

Thank you, Doctor Raoul, for this thread.

Posted by Diogenesis in #19 (thank you, Dio):

"WASHINGTON - 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..
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.
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.
Finally, approval was granted and, at 7:38 that night, surveillance began.
"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."

[lilycicero]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/20/national/main2956093.shtml

Add some more hurt to this story.

Link to Jimenez’s wife deportation.

[Raycpa]

Yes, it is the fault of the Democrats along with the extreme libertarians who have no concept of what we are facing. Without the law, there would be no call to the NSA.

[Raycpa]

" a senior congressional staffer with access to the classified case told The Post.

How long before this guys disclosure of classified information becomes the issue rather than the responsibility of congress?

[Mr. Silverback]

The door to DU is on your left, punk.

[Alter Kaker]

Smells like BS — under present law there is no requirement for a warrant or probable cause or anything of the sort to wiretap Iraqis. I think someone’s confused here.

[roses of sharon]

I read the story, and remember the Afghanistan story.

I also know which party is UnAmerican, protects our enemies, aid and abets are enemies in war time FOR DECADES, sides with tyrants and commies, FOR DECADES.

Which party battles in Congress for laws protecting the enemy, which party protects criminal rights, which party prevents enemy interrogations, which party has the media to call the President a war criminal, liar, murderer, and a trasher of the Constitution if he doesn't follow the advise of attorneys, which party is supported by the Bar Association, which party is supported by trial attorneys, which party is supported by JAG, which party is supported by the ACLU....and on and on.

But you know all that I'm sure.

Don't fret, your guys will soon have all branches...just a few more months and your messiah will take office, and all will be well again!

[Alter Kaker]

This story just doesn't make any sense.

FISA only applies to US territory. Since the terrorists were in Iraq, FISA did not apply to them and the NSA delay makes no sense.

Somebody obviously did foul up here, but I've seen no indication it was Congress.

[dalebert]

Ya they dont want surveillence but they want illegals to run free in the country.

[proudmilitarymrs]

words fail

Pray for our troops people, they surely need it against the Democrats and their evil.

mrs

[McGruff]

The lawyers discussed the situation for nearly 10 hours with the Attorney General (who is part of the Executive Branch).

I learned in school many years ago that the legislative branch makes the laws. Has that changed?

The situation had nothing to do with the Democrats...

You are so wrong I can't believe you posted that.

[FocusNexus]

You ignored a key part of the article:

"The FISA law applies even to a cellphone conversation between two people in Iraq, because those communications zip along wires through U.S. hubs, which is where the taps are typically applied. "

[dalebert]

This story needs more face time in the press but wont get it. Just like they wont cover anything that matters. Right now I am wondering how many of them own oil stocks.