U.S. intelligence agencies were aware months ago that Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan was attempting to make contact with people associated with al Qaeda, two American officials briefed on classified material in the case told ABC News.
The ABC News piece doesn’t, as I write at the Windy, explain whether, if at all, those connections were shared with the Army. But let’s put this in perspective. from 2001 to 2007 there was an expansive and presidentially-directed constellation of programs, outside the reach of the judicial branch, to collect intelligence about Americans’ prospective connections to extremist organizations. In 2008, Congress and President Bush decided to carve up the 4th Amendment to make the program legally kosher, a move that now-President Obama voted for in the Senate. And, as Marcy Wheeler has documented more thoroughly than anyone else, there remains widespread surveillance of Americans, including what most likely is a very broad datamining program. All of this is to protect Americans from extremists killing them.
And now we learn that with this apparatus in place — with the national-security pointer shifted further away from the civil-liberties region of the dial — a guy goes searching for members of al-Qaeda; and while it’s not known if he made contact or what happened later, he kills 16 Americans on an Army base; and U.S. intelligence had, apparently, some basis for suspicion that this was going on. I stand by my concerns about where Joe Lieberman is going with all this, but an investigation is necessary to determine if the intelligence agencies did, in fact know about Hasan and why his murderous attack nevertheless succeeded. At this point “radicalization” in the armed services — a surely minute and peripheral concern, even after Hasan — is less important than determining why it was that the architecture of surveillance, pushed on the public so heavily as vital to preventing precisely what happened at Ft. Hood, failed us.
Login Here




10 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Spencer, I would give my eyeteeth to be a fly on the wall during the meeetings between DOD and CIA in the coming days and weeks.
Or soldiers got killed, on our own soil, there has to be a ton of anger over at the Pentagon.
Let’s not forget, though, how badly ABC News got played on the anthrax attacks. It wouldn’t be the first time they were lied to in the service of someone’s political agenda.
I’m not suggesting this is massively likely, but it isn’t out of the realm of possibility either.
Very good point. Still, I felt I couldn’t just let this report pass.
Of course, Lieberman will look through the wrong end of the telescope to go Muslim-radical-hunting. What a maroon.
Maybe this is too simplistic an answer but perhaps all this data mining is taking the investigator’s minds off of the ball and overloading them with far more information than they can use. It becomes near impossible to focus on a few needles in such a huge hay stack.
I suspect that where this is headed is that the NSA was aware of Hasan radicalization in terms of being on a long, long list of radical website hitters, so in that regard intelligence services “knew” of his connections from having mined his communications. And the frame will be that the actual investigations or actions that “could have prevented the tragedy” were stymied by civil liberties concerns over how the important data was obtained. They are blessed with the congressionally-approved ability to archive and search every communication of everyone, and it is only the weak-kneed democrats in cahoots with the ACLU that are preventing the FBI from saving us from terrorism. Hoekstra/Lieberman: Now we have a US person who is a lone-wolf terrorist; why should intelligence be forced to minimize and have judicial oversight when lives are at stake?
Thank you, thank you, thank you! That putz Brian Ross has never answered the questions about who played him like a fiddle on that whole Iraq-provided-the-anthrax BS back in 2001. Maybe it’s that same totally awesome source that’s feeding him on this story?
Ross’ history in this matter has been addressed elsewhere; I usually saw it via Glennzilla – see here and here, for example.
Hotshot “journalists” like this – e.g., Isikoff – got former Alamo physicist Wen-Ho Lee put into solitary in leg-irons; no biggie, other than lack of evidence.
Man, this sh*t really pushes my buttons – and not in a good way.
What you definitely won’t hear from proponents of warrantless spying is that dragnet intrusion into the lives of the population as a whole very likely CAUSED the various security agencies to miss Nidal Hasan. Datamining–and all spying that isn’t focused at least to the extent required by a warrant–is bound to produce thousands if not tens of thousands of false “terrorist” hits for every actual bit of criminal evidence. So finding a real criminal this way means sorting through endless false leads.
Those that call loudly for trashing the Constitution forget that the laws aren’t just a protection for the accused. They are the way that we discover the truly guilty. The laws force the police to focus on a likely perpetrator BEFORE starting the investigation. Laws narrow the field. They then force the prosecution to prove a case and show conclusively that a crime happened in the way the government claims.
Lieberman and his Bushist allies want to replace logical, rigorously defined legal tests with technological hearsay and innuendo by datamining because the latter are good politics, not because they are good ways to protect the public.
I missed your comment the first time through, but I am sure that you are right.
Too much data and too little information has always been the biggest problem with datamining. The other is, of course, the readiness with which humans project false, imaginary patterns onto large bodies of random elements.
Datamining has to be the worst way to find criminals that one could imagine. Anyone that doubts me, remember that datamining is, I believe, an invention of America’s marketers. How accurate is the marketers’ version of you? If you are like me, not very.
I think there is a much larger story here: about soldiers’ health, neglect, PTSD, consequences of the wars, failure to take care of and invest in those expected to take care of the rest of us. There are stories today from Camp Carson in Colorado Springs, and Camp Lejeune in South Carolina, of soldiers and marines, returning from combat and killing. Local news sources around bases will have more. It is a national pattern, and one which Vets organizations and others have warned about. It isn’t an issue Lieberman or any of the war party can deal with in its full extent, and it is not a religious story