Why am I not surprised?
2007-08-06 06:56:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Charlie 2
·
2⤊
4⤋
NO, Congress (not just the Democrats) expanded FISA. A former head of Fisa has gone on record stating he was appalled at the aptriot act. Accoeding to him, almost all petitions to FISA for wiretaps was approved. Of course, that's because before the petition went to Fisa, the petitioning agency made sure it had it's ducks in a row.
Now we have a system in place whereby FBI field officers can present a so called National Security Letter and get anything they want. This system is not only ripe for abuse, according to the GAO, it was being routinely abused.
2007-08-06 15:25:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Charlie S 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
You got THAT from this?
"The controversial amendment nearly died in debate in Congress, but the White House pressured Congress to remain in session through the weekend to pass the measure before beginning its month-long summer recess, CNN reported.
The amendment is only good for six months until it can undergo debate again. In the meantime, it allows the attorney general or the director of national intelligence to approve electronic surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas without seeking a warrant from a secret Washington FISA court. "
Look, I realize this is really, really, really difficult for you guys to understand, but the "Dems" don't control Congress. They only hold a very slim majority, and votes don't pass or fail on slim majority.
Please educate yourself.
2007-08-06 14:04:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
The amendment is only good for six months until it can undergo debate again. In the meantime, it allows the attorney general or the director of national intelligence to approve electronic surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas without seeking a warrant from a secret Washington FISA court.
did you read the article? I cut and pasted the above from the article.
2007-08-06 13:58:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Wait, that's the FISA Act, not the Patriot Act. Next time try to at least READ the article before making a fool of yourself.
2007-08-06 14:13:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kookoo Bananas 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
They closed a loophole in FISA would allow terrorists and foreign adversaries to evade surveillance. Because of the loophole, the law WAS extending legal protections enjoyed by Americans to our enemies and radical jihadists that are fighting to kill us.
The Bill provides legislation that protects those rights for Americans while denying them to agents of terrorist nations such as from North Korea, Iran, etc.
This was GOOD legislation (for a change.)
2007-08-06 14:04:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by edisonguy05 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
NO.... Congress expanded FISA. Not the Patriot Act.
And Congress is not 100% Democratic party.
Here's a link to the actual text of the bill.
2007-08-06 13:56:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
7⤊
2⤋
1. It was FISA.
2. It's only good for six months so that Rove and his merry band of slanders can't use it against the Dems. when they attack the US again.
3. There were 183 votes against it in the House which included some repubtards.
2007-08-06 14:12:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by GJ 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
Its about time the Dem's got on board with defending this country. It always amazes me that the same people who have a hard time with our government intercepting phone calls that originate overseas are completely OK with the idea of having their luggage searched without a warrant upon re-entering the US after a trip abroad.
2007-08-06 13:59:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
FISA.
It's only good for 6 months. Do you really think that anyone, from EITHER party was going to delay theiir month long vacation?
2007-08-06 13:59:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by angelpuppyeyes 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
u mean fisa..and it for six months...but a tool that is essential to try to prevent another disaster. so really think about it and see if you truly are against that.
2007-08-06 14:02:25
·
answer #11
·
answered by ? 7
·
3⤊
0⤋