The TSA would arrest all of these guys!

Something very odd is going on in the FBI, other federal law enforcement agencies, the Justice Department and perhaps the federal courts too. Most people arrested on charges related to suspected terrorist activities aren’t being prosecuted.

The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, a watchdog group that often concentrates on the Justice Department, examined the records of 6,472 terrorism-connected federal cases started since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Some 64 percent of the 4,910 “disposed of” were not prosecuted; another 9 percent were acquitted or saw charges dropped.

Still, 1,329 convictions is a fairly large number. Of these, though, half received sentences of 28 days or less. Only 5 percent received sentences of five years or more.

Perhaps some ordinary bad guys are being swept up in cases wrongly classified as related to terrorism? (Remember at the time of the London terrorist arrests when Michigan police caught up with a bunch of guys with a trunk full of cell phones? Suspicious? Yes. Terrorists? Hardly!)

The median length for sentences from such arrests before 9/11 — was 41 months. Now, it’s 28 days. Is this is anything other than the usual political snowjob of arresting whoever’s at hand to make yourself look good — and get re-elected?



  1. Uncle Jim says:

    F.I.S.A. is a part of the problem.

    Why is FISA dangerous?
    Most important, FISA powers are broad and vague, and the secrecy of FISA proceedings makes FISA powers susceptible to abuse.

    FISA power extends well beyond spies and terrorists. It can be used in connection with ordinary criminal investigations involving United States citizens who live in this country and who may be charged with offenses such as narcotics violations or breaches of an employer’s confidentiality. 50 U.S.C. §§ 1806, 1825.

    For instance, electronic surveillance under § 1801(f)(1) only reaches wire or radio communications “sent by or intended to be received by a particular, known United States person who is in the United States, if the contents are acquired by intentionally targeting that United States person” and a warrant would ordinarily be required. If the U.S. person is not “known,” or more important, not “intentionally” targeted, it simply isn’t “electronic surveillance” under § 1801(f)(1).

    Note also that FISA expressly contemplates that it will produce “unintentionally acquired information.” § 1806(i). But while this section requires the destruction of such information, it only applies to “the contents of any radio communication,” only if a warrant would have been required, and only if both the sender and intended recipients are within the United States.

    Given these limits, one may presume that “unintentionally acquired information” outside these lines is not destroyed. That would include all “unintentionally acquired”wire or electronic communications.
    Source: EFF

  2. ECA says:

    we have MANy in jail for minor drug charges, for YEARS..
    And these folks get Maz 5 years???

  3. RTaylor says:

    This past June we were cleaning out the attic and was boxing up things for Goodwill. Included in the mix was some old Halloween costumes, which contained a keffiyeh, or Arab head dress. It lead to a discussion that the thing shouldn’t be included with the other clothes because someone may report it as suspicious. I really wanted to scoff it off, but I did throw it in the trash. I could see the possibility that it could lead to a visit by some agency.

  4. Mister Mustard says:

    >>F.I.S.A. is a part of the problem.

    I guess that’s why Dumbya wants to circumvent FISA, and just spy on Americans based on his (and his lackeys’) say-so, with no warrant, no court, no accountablity. That way, they won’t be tempted to abuse his power. Eh?

  5. Uncle Jim says:

    A warrant avoids a lot of problems. As far as circumventing FISA, that says a lot about the whole system. Spying is used to break security, so I don’t think it will increase national security. Good police work is hard and difficult to do right. It requires time and finacial resources and police officers don’t want to arrest people unless there are no other options. Police don’t need to spy if there are other options, which there always are. People are either doing wrong or they are not. You wouldn’t replace all of your local police with spies, because you would compromise your own security doing that. Having a secret police would create all sorts of problems. You end up with a gestapo accountable to nobody with this sort of situation and everybody is a suspect for something or other. Your better option is to use the public, as reporters do, to fill in the blanks. Talk to the cabbies, they see all kinds of stuff the spies may miss. That’s because there are more cabbies than spies and they are everywhere. Cab companies are installing cameras in cabs, so the cab is spying on you. Don’t rob a cabbie because chances are you’ll find yourself in court. They also don’t carry much cash. They aren’t paid as well as a spy. It’s a job and somebody has to do it.

  6. Mr. H. Fusion says:

    police officers don’t want to arrest people unless there are no other options.

    Not really true, Jim. Police get credit for each arrest. The bigger the bust, the bigger the check mark beside their name. What they do not want are the hassles of having their arrest victims released for lack of evidence, police impropriety, or infringing civil rights. They negate a lot more then a good bust does. And god forbid, losing a civil rights law suit can be a career killer.

    For most, what other options are there?

  7. Uncle Jim says:

    I guess a lot police officers might of been a better way to put it. It creates tons of paperwork, which a lot of people like avoiding. There are no other options for paperwork. We were going to have the paperless office with the computer and ended up with more paperwork. The FBI had virtual case file. VCF would help eliminate paperwork. It didn’t work out and cost something like $175 million. I’m not sure of how many careers were killed. A bunch of cash was burned. Paper!

  8. GregAllen says:

    Isn’t it clear? The Bush administration is rounding up a lot more people, indiscriminately, based on dubious charges.

    And Bush wants us to give the government MORE, unchecked, secret power!

  9. ECA says:

    Interesting thought….

    When we are ALL in jail…WHO pays the bills?
    Who buys the corps GOODS…
    We get fed, 3 times aday, and can sit on our butts, until the GOV deciedes we can be free….


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4453 access attempts in the last 7 days.