Morning Edition, July 11, 2008

• Since Sept. 11, the number of spying warrants approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has more than doubled, according to statistics the Justice Department releases each year.

At the same time, the number of criminal indictments against people associated with Islamist extremist groups has dropped by more than half, according to a recent study by the group Human Rights First.

Current and former officials at the FBI and the Justice Department say those two statistics demonstrate a shift in the way the government is addressing the challenge of terrorism. The officials say the pendulum is swinging from a model that favors criminal prosecutions to one that favors more intelligence gathering.

That intelligence does not necessarily culminate in an indictment. In many cases, these officials say, the government is relying on other ways of addressing terrorist plots besides indictments and trials.

Other ways mentioned include friendly visits, deportation ... I'm wondering about intimidation, threats, blacklists and 6-degrees-of-separation.

Apparently there's friction between the prosecution oriented "old" law enforcement FBI versus the "new" intelligence agency FBI. They call it a pendulum ... sounds like a throwback to McCarthy era FBI tactics.

Link on my name.

So glad those equally poorly-thought-out wars on drugs / child porn / sex slavery and whatever #@#$ else -- I forget -- relegated to backburner-ville

Not often an M$M, Fox-induced campaign smear brings joy (see sig)

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1050794,CST-NWS-nuts11.article

Do you never tire of repeatedly demonstrating the you are an inveterate idiot by parroting inane talking points easily refuted by anyone w/ two functioning brain cells!?

Garner a little self-respect and STFU already.

My e-mail has exactly 2000 unopened e-males.

Ask the NSA? It's shocks me. I dreamt. Vet sitting.

The vet was enjoying ice cream with a best friend.

What a forlorn gasp!

The `Nam vet was applying crude-oil to a wood leg.

huh? err. me shut up!

Call the moo cow vet!

A Texan boy pours skim milk in a ten gallon hat.

Don't drink it. Drink Amish raw milk for bowels.

GOPS go to a outdoor drinking well faucet to sip.

Upon seeing a black widow spider? Call 9-1-1!

Glenn,

I have been curious for months now after watching this train-wreck of an administration unfold on this and couldn't think of a more insightful person to ask.

Is it possible that Bush/Cheney would amass all this unitary power only to hand it to a Democratic administration?

Hence, why fight so hard now to legalize this new FISA legislation unless only for legal cover and Telecom immunity.

We hear half serious thoughts of the governtment imposing martial law, delaying elections, at these times it would be very convenient to know everything to know about enemies, foreign and domestic. Senator Feingold implied this administration is involved in nefarious behavior...and that is what he HAPPENS to have been told, who knows outside his briefings.

You see the constitutional abuses piling up, this unquestioed unitary power unchecked by congress, Cheney hell bent on bombing Iran, Glenn, where are we heading? For a long time now, i feel as though i've been watching a story that you just know will have a tragic ending. What is your vision of our near future

Thanks, Joe

Glenn, while I wholeheartedly agree with many of the points that you make in today's and previous posts, you frequently use overly strong and somewhat offensive language to make those points. For instance, in this post's update, you write the words "In a minimally rational world,". These words are unnecessary and could come across as condescending, particularly to those who would not agree with you. They are not part of what would be constructive criticism. While the words are understandable, to make more persuasive arguments I would suggest minimizing such asides and using words that are more commonly agreeable. While this could lead to possibly more droll and less entertaining to read language, it would do more to create a better understanding with those who you (and I) differ.

BTW, you are doing a fantastic job following and being active on this FISA bill issue. I read your blog daily (often hourly). I have pledged to contribute to the money bomb.

The Congress, I mean. Allow me to share a personal story:

A friend of my boyfriend's was visiting New York from an undisclosed midwestern state. My boyfriend asked about his family, particularly a rowdy stepbrother.

He's a congressman now.

Oh, really?

The stepbrother in question sounded like the worst stereotype of a frat boy party dude, plus rich. Like the kind of guy who started the girls gone wild franchise. And he voted for Bush.

But he RAN as a democrat, because, as his stepbrother told us, he knew no republican could ever get elected in his district. He won by outspending the other candidate by some brutal margin.

So what are the lessons of this little true parable? (1) You can't tell nothin bout a person by the little letter after their name. (2) see subject line and (3) PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR LOCAL ELECTIONS.

Another way to look at is from the other side. Kit Bond, a eminently deceitful and seemingly not at all bright senator from Missouri, sings the praises of the bill as he has a big hand in it's authorship. That in and of itself should make one very suspicious about just how well written the bill might actually be.

Here is a link to the ACLU's take on Bond's yakkin' about FISA.

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/35652res20080613.html

Bush ceased resisting the various (and long - needed) add ons to the war supplemental in exchange for the capitulation on FISA "reform"...

Yeah, but what was that? A few billion dollars? For something that will be certain to pass anyway in 6 months? That's a pittance, in terms of political capital. The minimum wage increase was a bigger deal.

If that were really the much-vaunted trade, then it really does go to show how little Congress cares about national security policy and civil rights. So far their point of view seems to remain (and from the Washingtonians I have known I have no trouble at all imagining it) that this is an unimportant triviality. It's just a little back-scratching that Bush needs to get done that can be used to gently twist his arm a little and maybe shake him down for some spare change.

And that alone, to my mind, is a problem.