“How many lawyers does it take to rescue our soldiers?”
While the lawyers diddled and fiddled, American soldiers’ lives were endangered. The NYPost has the exclusive:
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.
In the early hours of May 12, seven U.S. soldiers - including Spc. Jimenez - were on lookout near a patrol base in the al Qaeda-controlled area of Iraq called the “Triangle of Death.”
Sometime before dawn, heavily armed al Qaeda gunmen quietly cut through the tangles of concertina wire surrounding the outpost of two Humvees and made a massive and coordinated surprise attack.
Four of the soldiers were killed on the spot and three others were taken hostage.
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.
Nine hours and 38 minutes.
That’s how long it took to hash out probable cause.
“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.”
***
BP posted an FNC report on this a few weeks ago, tipped by Ace.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Bill's Bites
- Stop The ACLU » Blog Archive » Thanks ACLU! Watered Down FISA Laws Fail Soldier
- Old FISA Language Delays Hunt for Soldier for Over 9 Hours at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source.
- A public challange to leftie blogger Chuck Adkins | BitsBlog
- Michelle Malkin » The FISA clock is running out
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Ally McBeal approach, FISA, Iraq
JustOneMinute
» David Gregory To Host Meet The Press (While Hiding From It)
Belmont Club
» A self-made hellRiehl World View
» Georgia Run-offNewsBusters.org
» Four Years Later, Kerry Admits He's a LiberalHotline On Call
» Obama Records Radio Ad For LA House HopefulPoliPundit.com
» US Capitol Visitor Center OpensPower Line
» Newly-Discovered Ballots Boost FrankenHotline On Call
» The Fix: Martinez To Retire
Stuff like this bring back thoughts of the paraphrase of William Shakespeare “kill all the lawyers…kill them tonight!”
I’m sure those three soldiers who were abducted and murdered went to their grisly deaths comforted by the knowledge that no laws were knowingly or unwittingly broken on their behalf.
Political correctness is an irritant, right up to the point where it starts getting people killed. Then it becomes something akin to a self-administered poison.
It is in the military context the same as it is in the business world: if you’ve got the lawyers out front leading, then something has gone terribly wrong with your decision-making model.
This is monumental Bullcrap.
Reading the text of the actual Post article - the soldier’s mother is quoted as saying that she hopes the law gets changed to avoid this in the future…
Think THIS Mother’s face will appear on any of the MSM shows? Not likely - too many anti-war lib Moms already slated.
Just a question here - how much combat experience do these lawyers have? I can only assume that between them they average zero(can’t go into negative numbers here).
Shakespeare had a point, but I might also include the traitors of the Democrap party. Bunch of ignorant idiots who couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag.
This is beyond shameful, it’s treasonous.
So let’s see, Burma, 1944, Merrill’s Marauders come across a communications line deep in the jungle. The Japanese-speaking soldier on loan from the 442nd climbs the tree and taps into the wire. “Captain, guess what the Japanese are planning” he whispers!
“Hold on there soldier, we need to fly a man to Washington to speak with our lawyers before you can tell me anything.”
This is ridiculous. If it’s in a foriegn country, on a cellphone (i.e. a radio and being broadcast into the air),and involves the survival of U.S. servicemembers–it should be fair game no matter where the other end of the call is.
This is another case of a Congressional made law hamstringing the military and getting folks killed. They are more worried about someone stealing Aunt Martha’s cookie recipe than safeguarding the lives of American troops.
But remember, they support the soldiers!
:::rolls eyes:::
AlohaGuy #7
That’s exactly how I’m setting up my WWII wargame.
You do not and can not fight a war with lawyers!
I just don’t understand the logic behind this roadblock!?!
Why would we need a warrant / approval from our justice department / courts when dealing with a battlefield situation?????
This has grown too far out of control.
What ‘evidence’ were we worried about losing? If they would have just listened in without the warrant - and found these kidnappers and our soldiers - were they going to be tried in a criminal court?
Not likely - they’d have been killed in a rescue raid - or taken prisoner and been held as ‘enemy combatants’.
The whole sniveling liberal pant-load namby-pamby argument is hog-tying our military leaders to the point that good men are dying.
THAT is an argument that needs to be made on the Senate and House floors by some Republican with a pair.
I don’t particularly care for lawyers either but it’s the dems in congress that keep the obstacles in the way.
These soldiers lives belong right on the heads of queen Nancy and her merry band of followers.
It is the same old story ever since the begining of this war on Islamo fascists. Dick Cheney said it and got villified. Remember when he said Dems view this as a law enforcement issue and Republicans view it as a war? Look at all of the soldiers and Marines currently under investigation or pending trial fro their actions. You have SF snipers from Afghanistan, the Haditha marines, and we have a local guy, from GA, pending trial for shooting an Iraqi they allege in cold blood. The fact is the guy was wounded, meaning he was engaged in combat with our guys and the soldier claims he did not shoot the guy. This war, just like Vietnam will not be won or lost on the battlefield but rather in the halls of congress.
Thanks to everybody who keeps sending these senile senior citizens back to Washington year after year. The general voting public is just as much to blame as the politicians. Vote these numbnuts out and maybe we can see a change.
If they had been my Soldiers I would have said smack it.No laws,politicians,or lawyers would have stopped me from doing the right thing.I would proudly do my time in jail as I know many others in this country would.
The left side blogs are up in arms about how the Evil Bushies are exploiting the soldiers to sell the country down the river to spy on all Real Americans.
So predictable.
To quote Reagan, our strategy is simple: “They lose; we win.” In war, the lawyers need to step aside and take Congressmen with them.
Politicians are supposed to declare war. Then they should get the !@#$%^&*() out of the way while the Marines, Army, and Navy do their jobs. (Air Force, too, I suppose.)
This is insane. Do we need an “Amber Alert” law for our men and women in uniform?
All kidding aside, this is truly a case where I would rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of my friends.
I sit next to a veteran in my school classes who knew Spc. Jimenez personally (Spc. Jimenez was my buddy’s driver while they served in either Iraq or Afghanistan, I don’t know which), and my buddy says that Jimenez was a great guy and would have done anything for a fellow soldier.
Months ago when this story first broke, all my friend asked us was to pray for the Jimenez family to get through this, and for Alex, in case he was out there and needed it. We all did, and I still do.
I guess my point here is that it’s just hard to think about this again now and realize what this hero might have done for others later in life if these a$$holes had done anything to help save his life when he needed them most.
I just have to ask why there was not a second team that spent the first hour getting the Whitehouse on the phone so that the President could tell Reid and Pelosi that he was going to order the immediate violation of the FISA laws in this instance and that if they had a problem with that, then they were welcome to impeach him.
Exactly, rw.
This is what happens when democrat/liberal/socialist/communists put forth their best efforts to ensure that America loses a war so that they can increase their strangle hold on American politics.
dorian:
Exactly the point…however, I still can’t for the life of me figure out why people want to create a stranglehold on something they have every intention of killing.
If they get their way, there will be no America left to strangle, and their cash cow and the source of their deluded power will be gone.
Haven’t they ever heard that they shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds them??
This all started right after the Mei Lai massacre. That’s when we got into “Rules of Engagement” where someone had to look into a crystal ball and predict the battle scene and tell the men what they could and couldn’t do ahead of time. As with all things, it took on a life of its own. Now the Pentagon is run by lawyers so that Majors can become Generals with no black marks for things like Haditha. Of course the Law of Unintended Consequences always rules the day, but then the lawyers are there to pontificate and assign blame (”DUCK! Incoming memo from legal!”).
This is ridiculous! Why are we fighting a PC war? These two men perhaps could have been found but only God knows what happened to them. I pray they are at peace but I cannot fathom the turmoil their families must be in, especially after hearing this. If we lose this war, this will be one of the reasons.
Additionally, Peolosi and her little resolution is beyond the pale. They support the troops they say. I don’t believe it, no one I know believes it but there are people out there that think this is just peachy keen.
According to an article in the 9/27/2007 Washington Post:
“In fact, the timeline released this week shows that officials in Washington did not begin seeking the warrant until 10 a.m. on May 15 — more than 86 hours after the three soldiers from the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division were reported captured. Authorities had already received approvals for other wiretaps in the case, the timeline shows.”
And let’s remember that FISA allows a warrant to be issued immediately if the target is an Iraqi insurgent. You have up to 72 hours after the fact to go back to the court to prove probable cause.
I first saw this story this morning on Fox News. The biggest problem we have in the Military since Desert Storm was the requirement to get the freaking lawyers (JAG) involved in target selection. Combat requires split second decisions that result in life or death. Having to call back to HQ to get the JAGs approval to neutralize a target is insane. The JAG that kept the on seen Commander from being able to get things going when you have a man missing is inexcusable. I believe Shakespeare was right!
As Hippocrates said, “First do no harm.” It’s not so much the lawyers, but the bureaucrats too terrified of violating regulations and standard operating procedures to think outside the box when the situation calls for it to do the right thing. Sometimes, the rules must be bent when lives are at stake. As for the lawyers coming to the rescue, if they were given the order “Charge!”, they would whip out their American Express cards.
Can the family sue?
I’ll help.
The problem, Coyote, is that when terrorists abduct our troops there should be no need for “probable cause” at all. Can you imagine how WWII could have been fought & won if such insanities were the order of the day?
The democraps in congress are such a disgrace to our country. An honest press would question their motives…
I wonder if democraps would be willing to wait nearly 10 hours for an ambulance (God forbid) or some other vital service. Heck, we know that they start swinging at the Capital Police if they have to wait in line for 20 seconds!
In law enforcement, we have the principle of hot pursuit. Being on the tail of the bad guys, you see or are told by witnesses, that they have entered a certain building. NO warrant is required to pursue them. For our soldiers NOT to have similar protections during a time of war is unconscionable!
So, let me get this straight. The democrats want to give Al Qaeda terrorist legal rights against being wire tapped, but want to draft a resolution against Rush. Who’s really against the troops?
Thank God I know a couple of lawyers that would have insisted that the RIGHT thing be done - the RIGHT thing. Do what it takes to win a war.
We short of that kind of lawyer in Washington DC.
This is ridiculous.
It is well settled law that everything coming into the country can be searched.
FISA needs to be changed so that it does not apply to communications when one or both of the parties to the conversation are outside the United States.
I’m sure it’s just a matter of time before Al Queda’s warrants start to trickle in and the terrorist attacks will resume. Their lawyer’s are saying that their working as fast as they can and be patient.
Weren’t the democrats fuming about illegal-Bush-wiretaps-of-American-citizens around May, when this incident took place?
Could that political atmosphere in May have contributed to the “legal” delay in this case?
If the democrats are so proud of quashing President Bush on the wiretapping issue, why aren’t they now questioned on this direct outcome of their political efforts?
Because they are too busy trying to shut down our military supply lines and staging bases in Turkey, by pressing an “in your face” vote on Turkish/Armenian genocide 92 years ago.
But don’t you dare question their patriotism.
i find it ironic this is on the same page as a story of you whining about the democrats using children to hide behind.
During exigent circumstances where the lives of our men and women in war are at risk there should not be any obstacles in conducting wiretaps against the enemy who have kidnapped them. Wiretaps should be conducted on the spot while permission is being sought from the duty FISA Judge. “Just do it and say sorry later.”
On October 15th, 2007 at 7:21 pm, scooter56 said:
Scoot, I’ll bite…where’s the irony in dems using children to hide behind and dems screaming about wiretaps, resulting in documented delays in action taken?
yea sccoter, what in the world are you talking about. There’s no irony here.
There is, however, a load of BS in FISA law which is continuing to endanger our troops as they put their lives on the line so that we can sleep at night in a free country.
Any member of Congress who votes to continue this fooishness should be impeached. How is our military supposed to win when their hands are tied. This is crazy.
Possible solution to this unbelievable bulcrap:
Revise FISA procedures to allow simultaneous initiation of tapping and the filing of a warrant request. Don’t have to wait for the damn lawyers then. Maybe also stipulate that any info so obtained can be used only for national security and not criminal proceedings.
Any complaints from the lefties on this????
I am so angry after reading this account. Something must be done with the rules of engagement. Can you imagine a Demo president not wanting to have the Intelligence community asking terrorists questions with a nuke attack looming. Would the Demo president finally make up her mind after a few American cities are fried?. By the way asking terrorists questions are considered torture to these loons. They have no plan to overcome these Islamofacists and they probably don’t want to live under Islamic law here either and what an irony they find themselves in.
First, I am opposed to Congress keeping the restrictions in FISA that only enable and encourage our enemies. These guys are smart enough to know that if one of their relays runs through a US switch or server, the government is going to be slowed down or stopped.
With that said, I am not buying the statement that it took “lawyers” over 9 hours to get their act together while mens lives hung in the balance.
I seem to recall, as mentioned above, that FISA does have a provision to put the tap in place and seek a warrant after the fact. If that is indeed the case, the report is not telling the whole truth. That would mean that SOMEONE had the ability to order the tap and get things moving. For whatever reason, that someone punted and chose to follow the safer path of getting the warrant first.
I think we need to be careful here. While those of us on the right are correct to point out the flaws in the examples used by the liberal sect in advancing their causes, we should take additional care to insure that what we use to support our ideas will survive intense scrutiny. If we don’t, then it impacts our credibility.
Someone needs to play the adult here, and it is obvious those on the left are too busy looking for busses to throw children under that they cannot be bothered with that responsibility.
Hopefully, the NY Post’s version of the story will hold water, but I have some serious reservations about that.
What do you get when you put a hundred lawyers in a tank full of pirhannunas?
A well fed & happy
group of fish and a good start in trimming the population of useless lawyers 
Here’s what I hope for all you idiots here that continue to bash attorneys:
1. I hope that, when your parent dies, you have to struggle and fumble your way through the probate system because no estate attorney will take you as a client.
2. I hope that, when your child gets sick because of exposure to lead paint, no attorney, whose actions will punish the company that knowingly poisoned your child and thus prevent other companies from doing the same, allows you to join their class action.
3. I hope that your small company fails because you, as a layperson, do not understand the myriad of laws and regulations that affect your business.
4. I hope that you, when arrested (justly or not) are interrogated illegally and have your rights trampled on by the police because no criminal attorney will represent you.
5. I hope that you, when rear-ended by another motorist, end up getting screwed over by the driver’s insurance company that will trick you into taking far less money for settlement than you deserve because no personal injury attorney will talk to you.
Actually I do not hope any these things because it would be a grave injustice. And injustice is what lawyers dedicate their lives to preventing.
Let me preface this next part by saying that there are clearly some unresolved questions as to what exactly happened in this situation. And I do not pretend to be an expert in FISA. However, even viewing this in the light most favorable to MM, I do not understand the attitude.
There are obviously some posters who understand the fact that lawyers do not make the law, they are just sworn to uphold it. But not everyone, including our host, apparently. You claim to hate “activist judges” who supposedly make law instead of following it. However, when the attorneys here insist that the law (however misguided you feel that law may be) be followed and that people don’t take it into their own hands, you all vilify them.
If you don’t like the law, change it. Don’t take cheap shots at those whose only job is to uphold it.
People have been doing this for years Chap, take a joke and lighten up.
There is a difference between a lawyer joke (heard em plenty of times) and not so subtly accusing lawyers of the death of three soldiers because they “diddled and fiddled”. MM was certainly not cracking an innocent lawyer joke when she wrote that. Nor is the misdirected hate being spewed at attorneys in general in the comments a “joke.”
Hogwash, but typical.
Delusional/disingenuous/abysmal reading skills (take your pick), but typical.
Of course that is what she was saying:
She cites favorably:
As if, gasp, obeying the law is the problem and not the law itself.
If you were to take a survey of how many people in the house and senate are lawyers and add to that the number of lawyers on each congressman/senator’s staff, I think you would find that lawyers do make the laws. And then we are forced to call on them to interpret (at every level of government) and then save us from the net results.
If we didn’t have lawyers creating rules of engagement laws, we wouldn’t need lawyers to tell our troops when they can shoot.
Walterc,
True that many lawyers become politicians, and a knowledge of the law may certainly help one write them, but their role in each position is decidedly different. Just as many lawyers become judges, but one is supposed to advocate for the client and the other is (ideally) unbiased and objective.
And certainly one does not need to be a lawyer to be a politician. So if you TRULY want to criticize the law makers, blasting lawyers seems a very indirect, inaccurate and inefficient way of doing so.
Just as an FYI, I could find one cite that mentioned 40% of the 109th Congress were attorneys, a large percentage but not a majority. That was the only stat I could find quickly.