mountainpilot ([info]mountainpilot) wrote,
@ 2005-12-27 08:43:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:police state, politics, scawy, war on terror

Clinton did it. Carter did it.
But not like this they didn't. In the first 22 years of the existence of the FISA court, it reviewed 13,102 applications, and exercised it's judicial oversight by modifying only *two*. Since 2001, the Bush administration has made 5645 such requests of the court of which a whopping 173 were rejected. Only when this became tiresome did Bush then decide to skip the judicial process and begin surveillance without a warrant.

So sure, previous (democratic and republican) administrations have asserted this authority before. Though the extent to which it was used remains unclear. What is clear however is that the degree surveillance of Americans by this administration is several orders of magnitude greater than anything we've seen before as well as a willingness on their part to completely ignore the courts when it suits them.




(Post a new comment)


[info]rubberbondage
2005-12-27 05:02 pm UTC (link)
four airplanes were not used as guided missles during Carter or Clinton's Administrations....

all well

wish I could buy my own island in the south pacific and have a harem of slave girls all dressed in latex and leather.....

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]syz
2005-12-27 05:51 pm UTC (link)
four airplanes were not used as guided missles during Carter or Clinton's Administrations....

No, but there were bomb attacks on both the WTC and a government building in Oklahoma.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]rubberbondage
2005-12-28 12:39 am UTC (link)
and for the most part, they were pussies and did nothing about them. There was also the USS Cole etc. and again..... Pussies

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]mountainpilot
2005-12-28 01:36 am UTC (link)
Wasn't McVeigh put to death?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]jamesofengland
2005-12-28 08:02 pm UTC (link)
That wasn't a whole lot of effort.

Set against that, you can't knock Clinton for his lack of assaults on our gun-bearing civil liberties, partly as a response to his view that survivalists were the threat to America's security. He did all he could to harm the supporters of Tim McVeigh (pre-emptively, hence Tim McVeigh's interest in attacking what he thought to be the ATF office, in one of terrorism's all time biggest goofs).

The WTC bombing was less successful than the later attempt and made a smaller impact on the political and cultural landscape (for red and blue states). It was hence less invigorating for the intelligence services than the later alternative.

Carter's foreign policy was beneath contempt, but Reagan also used the power sparingly. My guess is that a lot of this was because there were a lot fewer international communications with the enemy under Reagan. International calls were expensive and most of the soviets being in sovietland, unlike terrorists, who are a little more integrated into the west and find it easy to make cheap phone calls around the world.

My guess, based on those figures, is that the proportion of international calls monitored is not much higher under Bush than under Reagan. The higher portion of requests refused is open to a number of explanations, only some of them bitter. ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]mountainpilot
2005-12-29 07:48 am UTC (link)
My guess, based on those figures, is that the proportion of international calls monitored is not much higher under Bush than under Reagan.

Not sure how you get that.

First 22 years: 13,102 applications.
2001-2004: 5645 applications.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]jamesofengland
2005-12-29 10:36 am UTC (link)
Because I think that the number of international calls made under Reagan was also significantly smaller than the number made under Bush.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]jamesofengland
2005-12-29 11:01 am UTC (link)
According to the FCC, there were more phone calls (33,286,800,000 minutes) in 2001 than in 1980-1988 (29,370,700,000). Pg. 16, table 2.

Bush's figures compared to the first 22 years suggest that he was monitoring 2.36 times as many calls/year.

Bush's figures for calls made suggests there were over 10 times as many calls made per year as under Reagan (we don't have figures for 2003 and 2004, but I'm assuming a similar mild increase). If the figures for the taps were constant over the 22 years, Reagan monitored a portion of international calls that was 4-5 times greater than Bush did. Now, I'm not suggesting that this was the case. Probably a much higher portion came up under Clinton. Still, my point was that Clinton may not have increased enough to keep pace, because Clinton was more focused on domestic enemies, whereas Reagan was focused abroad.

My broader point is that the figures are much less shocking than they look.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

can you believe I'd vote for a dummycrat?
[info]rubberbondage
2005-12-27 05:05 pm UTC (link)
I'd vote fort this guy:

http://governor.mt.gov/

good reviews from my family, who are staunch republicans

(Reply to this)


[info]syz
2005-12-27 06:42 pm UTC (link)
And it's not really clear that Clinton and Carter did it, anyway.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…