The recent suit being brought by a Saudi group, alleged to have laundered charity money to Al Qaeda, against the NSA for intercepting their calls is going to be an interesting spectacle. I see the potential (all speculation here) for some serious missteps on the part of the NSA bashers.

We should assume the lawyers in question do have records of phone calls between the lawyers here and some foreign entity believed (and maybe known) to be an Al Qaeda entity. We should assume the NSA did intercept the call and it was used to develop the indictment that the group was a front for Chechen Al Qaeda. This was confirmed by a Washington Post reporter who had accidentally received the same information, and returned it up request of the FBI.

So what we have is the FBI indicting someone based on evidence obtained by the NSA regarding overseas intercepts. And of course there was other evidence such as financial records, and the indictments were reviewed by a judge.

Folks who read this blog understand that the FISA judges have refused, even after 9-11, to consider evidence of Al Qaeda communicating with their agents here in the US if is based solely on NSA intercepts (they are prudes, what can I say). The only time this secret star chamber allows warrants for surveillance and searches (and possibly record searches) is when the FBI has developed independent information that backs the NSA lead (such as financial dealings I would propose).

So, is this a case of NSA spying on Americans without cause? I seriously doubt it. For one thing, the lawyers will not allow anyone to see the contents of the conversations – conversations so damning they led to indictments on aiding and abetting terrorism. So my guess is these folks bringing the suit, just like the admitted Brooklyn Bridge terrorist, are probably guilty to some degree and are on a media trip to undermine Bush (one of an Al Qaeda agent’s orders, especially once they are caught).

Second, the evidence was in the hands of a Washington Post reporter on 2004. Excuse my jadedness, but unless the information opened up an issue for the administration it is highly likely the reporter would NOT be interested in an Al Qaeda operation for money laundering here in the US. That kind of story doesn’t play into their ‘get Bush’ mindset.

So, I would not be surprised if (a) the NSA intercepted this call, passed it the FBI who then investigated and passed this to FISA which kicked off the criminal investigation leading to indictments, or (b) the FBI went to FISA to ask for NSA assistance in monitoring the overseas calls of these people (since the NSA is uniquely capable in this area) as part of a legitimate FISA warrant, or (d) the calls were intercepted without NSA assistance as part of the surveillance of the indicted parties.

Anyway, that puts the odds 3:1 against this being part of the NSA bogeyman fantasy, meaning this will backfire on anyone who latches onto it as an example of Bush harming the country (when he is actually rounding up terrorist enablers as we asked him to do).