JUDGE KEEPS LEAKED NSA CLASSIFIED DOCS FROM FBI!!!

[kpete]

JUDGE KEEPS LEAKED NSA CLASSIFIED DOCS FROM FBI!!!

Judge keeps leaked document from FBI
May show NSA conducted warrantless electronic surveillance on charity.

Judge refuses to give FBI custody of classified document
By Chitra Ragavan and Liz Halloran

Posted 3/24/06

A federal judge in Oregon has refused to hand over for safekeeping to the FBI a classified document that may show that the NSA conducted warrantless electronic surveillance on an Ashland, Ore., charity that the government alleges had ties to Osama bin Laden. U.S. District Judge Garr King sided with charity attorney Steven Goldberg, who argued that the FBI is a defendant in the case and therefore not a neutral party that can be entrusted with the document. The judge instead has temporarily placed the document with federal prosecutors in Seattle until he can make a decision as to how the material should be handled.

Thomas Nelson, who also represents the charity, al-Haramain Islamic Foundation Inc., gave the document to the judge in February as part of a lawsuit he has filed against the Bush administration alleging that the NSA conducted illegal eavesdropping on conversations between charity codirector Suliman al-Buthe and his American attorneys, Wendell Belew and Asim Ghafoor. The intelligence was later used to target the charity, Nelson's complaint alleges.

According to the Washington Post and other sources, Treasury Department officials—who were investigating the foundation for terrorist ties—inadvertently gave a copy of the classified document, marked "top secret" and dated May 24, 2004, to an al-Haramain attorney, as part of a routine disclosure of documents the government was citing to designate the charity as a terrorist organization. In May 2004, the attorney gave the document to Belew and Ghafoor, who also represented the charity. Belew in turn gave a copy of the document to a Post reporter. In November 2004, FBI agents took the document back from Belew and the Post reporter saying it contained highly sensitive national security information, according to the Post.

Nelson won't say how he obtained a copy of the document except to say he did so legally. He asked King to review it under seal, "out of an overabundance of caution," which didn't prove misplaced. Last week, during a conference call with al-Haramain attorneys and Justice Department lawyers from Oregon and Washington, D.C., King noted that a government security specialist had examined the document's classification level and concluded that it had to be placed in a secure compartmented information facility (SCIF). Since his court didn't have such a facility, King offered to send it either to the FBI's SCIF in Portland or to the U.S. attorney's SCIF in Seattle.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060324/24oregon.htm
VIA: http://www.rawstory.com/

[Hissyspit]

1. Oops.

Heh.

[Redstone]

2. There goes a true patriot, that judge. Good for him.

Redstone

[BlooInBloo]

3. And this is HUGE....

... because it's the best shot we have to get proof that gw's NSA has been spying on people it shouldn't have been. Like lawyers with clients, or doctors with patients.

The entire reason the judge wasn't about to trust the FBI with the docs was because they have probative value (against the fbi/exectuive).

There was a good blog post about this somewhere - forget where tho.... :(

[mom cat]

4. K&R

[Rainscents]

5. K & R!!!

[annabanana]

6. very interesting

What is a "secure compartmented information facility (SCIF)" and why is it ok to put the document in the "FBI's SCIF in Portland" at the same time refusing "to hand it over for safekeeping to the FBI."

I am confused.

[formercia]

8. The document cannot be stored

in a facility with a lower security clearance than the document. To do so would be a violation of regulations for the handling of classified information. SCIF classification means that the document is cleared for a specific list of people to read(compartmented).

[NobleCynic]

7. Bloody 'ell

FISA courts would have certainly given the FBI a warrant for wiretapping an Islamic charity. I say this without passing judgement on the wiretapping, but come on. The FISA courts don't exactly refuse wiretapping requests. This is just arrogant and stupid. If there was a case for watching the charity, any evidence the FBI gathered will be probably be exempted from trial. Dumb.

Kudos to the judge for refusing to hand over the wiretapping evidence though.

[formercia]

9. Apparently they 'forgot' to ask for a warrant from FISA. n/t

[Trevelyan]

10. This is Feingold's issue for Censure. Please support him by:

Dear MoveOn member,

Senator Feingold's resolution to censure President Bush for breaking the law is resonating with Americans across the country. With more than 400,000 of us signed onto the petition urging them to support his resolution, Congress is faced with a powerful call for accountability.

In response, the Republican National Committee is already on the attack, running ads accusing Senator Feingold of being "more interested in censuring the President than protecting our freedom."1 They can't defend President Bush's lawbreaking, so they're trying to intimidate dissent by changing the subject.

We need to demonsrate that we're behind Senator Feingold so the media knows how many of us support holding the president accountable for breaking the law. Can you take a moment to write a letter to the editor of your local paper? Our tool makes it easy, all you have to do is click below:

http://political.moveon.org/lte/

As Senator Feingold said yesterday, "The President has broken the law, and the censure resolution I introduced is intended to hold him accountable. Nobody says that we shouldn't be monitoring suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law." 2 This isn't about whether we track terrorists, it's about whether the Republican controlled Congress thinks the president is above the law.

Here are some points to help you with your letter.

This isn't about terrorism, it's about accountability. The president already had the authority to wiretap suspected al Qaeda terrorists and get a warrant days later. But he went around the court set up to prevent abuses and protect innocent Americans—a court that approves virtually all of the wiretapping requests it receives. When the president breaks the law, he must be held accountable.....

[Independent_Liberal]

11. K&R!

This sucker is HUGH! I'm SERIES!

:D