Well, there has been a new twist in the illegal NSA wiretapping saga. Of course, with all of the scandals and crimes coming out against the Republican Crime Cartel every day, it is tough to stay focused on just one.
However, in a court filing earlier this week, a now-defunct Saudi charity has filed suit against the NSA in the US District Court in Portland, Oregon alleging
[the NSA] illegally wiretapped conversations between the leaders of an Islamic charity and two of its lawyers. The charity, Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, had been accused of aiding Muslim militants, though charges were later dismissed.
Unfortunately, they are not the cleanest plaintiff - but still something that bears watching, since we know that there is a balance between protecting civil liberties and keeping us safe.
More below:
First, a bit of background on this charity as they seem to have somewhat of a history with the US government. Besides the fraud indictments against it and two of its officers for funneling money to Chechen fighters (that were later dismissed), we have the all-too-familiar charges of "terrorist ties" that dragged their name through the mud and were also subsequently dismissed. Plus, the charges were dismissed when the organization shut down. So, again, not the cleanest of plaintiffs, but there is some history here and a bit of a twist to this particular suit.
According to prnewswire.com, we have the following (no surprise that it is the Washington Times involved though):
Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. (AHIF), an Oregon-based non-profit organization dedicated to explaining that Islam is a religion of justice, peace, and mercy, and committed to the promotion of peaceful co-existence among persons of all faiths, welcomes the retraction and apology by The Washington Times. These were published on page A3 of its November 24, 2003 issue and on its web edition.
Following its September 15, 2003 story, entitled "Oregon Non-Profit Investigated for Terror Ties," the editors of The Washington Times were shown numerous inaccuracies in the story by AHIF's Washington, DC-based lawyer, Lynne Bernabei of Bernabei & Katz, PLLC. The mistakes were made notwithstanding Bernabei's full cooperation with the reporter prior to publication.
"We are pleased that the Times recognizes its factual errors," stated Bernabei.
Such allegations are not new, according to AHIF board member Soliman Albuthi. "In 1998, the PBS news show Frontline retracted a story when presented with the facts that Al Haramain was not linked to any terrorist act in Africa," stated Albuthi. "While the actual settlement with PBS is confidential, it was a victory not just for AHIF and our charitable work but for the truth," he added.
"In these sensitive times, we must be more careful about what we state publicly. I am delighted that the Times printed the retraction," said Pirouz (Pete) Sedaghaty, a member of AHIF's board of directors. "Our organization has always been committed to condemning terrorism. Such stories are a disservice to the principles of AHIF which stated its active opposition to terrorism in its founding articles of incorporation in 1999."
So, despite cooperation by AHIF's attorney regarding the story BEFORE it was published, the Moonie-Times STILL ran a factually incorrect story. Again, I think that it would have been MUCH better if the first high profile suit was brought by someone that didn't have such a spotty and questionable past. That being said, I think it has been much discussed that things can be done legally in order to monitor and track those who are aiding and abetting criminals and terrorist organizations. And it has also been much discussed here that there are instances of wiretapping and electronic surveillance for political purposes.
But, back to the case at hand. While other cases have been filed, this one is the first to use the government's own documents of intercepted conversations and e-mails as the reason to suspect NSA surveillance. According to today's WaPo,
The lawsuit contends that [former director of AHIF] al-Buthe's conversations with people in the United States were illegally intercepted. In May 2004, the suit says, government officials provided al-Buthe -- apparently by accident -- copies of conversations he had with attorneys Wendell Belew and Asim Ghafoor.
Later in 2004, the FBI demanded the records back, according to a source familiar with the case.
Tom Nelson, an attorney for al-Haramain who filed the suit, declined yesterday to confirm the existence of any classified records or tangible evidence buttressing the suit.
However, court records show, Nelson filed a motion to place material under seal as part of the suit Tuesday, and made a formal request to the judge overseeing the case to review the unspecified documents privately.
Now, what jumps out here is why government officials, ESPECIALLY those who are doing illegal things, provide proof (even by accident) of such illegalities? Is it stupidity? Is it a lack of controls? And frankly, which is worse?
The suit, while seeking damages for the plaintiffs, is also formally requesting that the NSA electronic surveillance program be shut down. Of course, we know what happens when the Executive Branch is told to do something.
Some key excerpts from the CBS story linked above:
[The suit] alleges the NSA did not follow procedures required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, and failed to obtain a court order authorizing electronic surveillance of the charity and its attorneys.
Dave Fidanque, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union chapter in Oregon, said the complaint is similar to other lawsuits the ACLU has filed recently.
"The law couldn't be clearer on this issue,'" he said. "Not only is the NSA's spying program unauthorized by federal law, but we suspect that conversations of thousands of Americans have been subjected to illegal surveillance by the NSA."
The U.S. Attorney's Office in Portland had not yet seen the lawsuit but likely would be unable to comment, based on national security concerns, said Barry Sheldahl, spokesman for U.S. Attorney Karin Immergut.
The chapter of the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a defunct Saudi Arabian charity, was established in Ashland in 1997 as a prayer house that also distributed Islamic literature.
The chapter was indicted in February 2004 for allegedly laundering $150,000 in donations to Chechnya in 2000. Attorneys for the Al-Haramain chapter have insisted the money was used only for charities, but federal prosecutors claimed the money could have been used to assist Muslim militants.
Prosecutors later asked a federal judge to dismiss the charges against the Ashland chapter, which was granted over the objections of attorneys for Al-Haramain, who wanted the government to show what evidence it had against the charity.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the two Washington attorneys and the Al-Haramain chapter by three Portland civil rights lawyers: Steven Goldberg, Zaha Hassan and Thomas Nelson.
"This case will show how the illegal program was implemented and used to the injury of United States citizens and charities," Nelson said. He declined to elaborate, saying evidence was likely to be sealed by the court.
The lawsuit also names the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control, alleging it relied on information the NSA obtained without a warrant to designate the Al-Haramain chapter in Oregon a "specially designated global terrorist" in September 2004. It says the former parent charity in Saudi Arabia has never been designated a terrorist organization.
So the plot thickens. I think that we will likely see a flood of additional suits, and it will be interesting to see how NSA and Dear Leader will defend the fruits of their illegal and unconstitutional labors.
