In a written statement criticizing Judge Taylor’s ruling, [Republican Speaker of the House Dennis] Hastert defended the wiretapping operation and said that “our terrorist surveillance programs are critical to fighting the war on terror and saved the day by foiling the London terror plot.”

His office declined to elaborate.

Maybe if we stopped “saving the day” so often more terrorists would get charged with actual crimes and be behind bars.

Great! Do you have any links to support that claim? The article said “U.S. picked up the suspects’ chatter and shared it with British authorities”, if the NSA now has a warrant to listen in on “chatter” which is non-specific conversations, then I guess the whole warrant-less “spying” debate is irrelevant?

On behalf of matt t, here’s a link:

In the days before the alleged airliner bombing plot was exposed, more than 200 FBI agents followed up leads inside the United States looking for potential connections to British and Pakistani suspects. The investigation was so large, officials said, that it brought a significant surge in warrants for searches and surveillance from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret panel that oversees most clandestine surveillance.

One official estimated that scores of secret U.S. warrants were dedicated solely to the London plot. The government usually averages a few dozen a week for all counterintelligence investigations, according to federal statistics.

Rhonda said to me:

“Yes sir, keep applauding your brilliance…”

My reply: “You, sir, have egg on your face.”

As far as I am aware, there were no reports of any tangible contributions by the U.S. prior to the Time story. So I don’t feel much urge to hang my head in shame at my previous statements that we contributed nothing to averting this plot.

It is also very clear that the U.S.’s main role was to force a premature ejaculation that may well cause many suspects to escape significant charges. I will have more on this tomorrow.

That intelligence was gathered through warranted surveillance.

Great! Do you have any links to support that claim? The article said “U.S. picked up the suspects’ chatter and shared it with British authorities”, if the NSA now has a warrant to listen in on “chatter” which is non-specific conversations, then I guess the whole warrant-less “spying” debate is irrelevant? Furthermore, Sarabeth has been saying since this broke that the US has had nothing to do with the foiled plot yet this appears to refute her claim, does it not?

It’s not entirely clear to me what Rhonda meant.

What I meant by my comment is that this judge is now potentially stopping the very mechanism that triggered the terror plot bust. We should be careful what we celebrate and wish for….

U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group’s communications

That intelligence was gathered through warranted surveillance.

U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group’s communications

Yes sir, keep applauding your brilliance…