Politics from the Palouse to Puget Sound

Monday, October 15, 2007

"How many lawyers does it take to rescue our soldiers?"

"It should be zero." A nauseating tale of how journalists, lawyers and Democrats helped terrorists escape with kidnapped 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.

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.

Thank you Harry Reid. Thank you Nancy Pelosi. Thank you New York Times.


Truth said...

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

They hate us because of our freedoms, why would we want to give the terrorists what they want?

Michael said...

It wasn't our liberties that were threatened. It was the terrorists' liberty we wanted to impose upon.

Truth said...

Agreed, but the point I was making was that while red tape can (and in this case did) get in the way of decisive military action, to eliminate all of the red tape (in this case civil liberties) in the name of defeating terrorism can be just as harmful.

Adam J. Niehenke said...

To contrary, you want to blaim Bush for killing our soldiers, for leading them into harms way. Well atleast he arms them with the best of everything we can give them. Heck if the dems had there way, it would be two people to one gun, when he dies pick up is weapon. FDR suspended rights in WWII and look where we are now. HOLY COW!! we made it, all this big bang theory baloney was false. I don't see how you can justify your position when soldiers lives could of been saved. Don't tell me you, you support the troops, but are against the war.....