FISA
How would you update FISA, if at all? Discuss today's Blowback.
Comments will close after two weeks.
From the Los Angeles Times
| Advertisement |
|
|
The Latest | news as it happens
- A note on Money & Co.'s expansion - Money & Company 11/16/2009, 8:36 p.m.
- Randy Carlyle's post-game quotes from Pittsburgh - The Fabulous Forum 11/16/2009, 8:28 p.m.
- Kings rally past Panthers - L.A. Times - Sports 11/16/2009, 8:25 p.m.
- Ducks fall behind early, never recover vs. Penguins - L.A. Times - Sports 11/16/2009, 8:25 p.m.
- Boyle Heights food vendors try to survive as city crackdown intensifies - L.A. Times - California | Local News 11/16/2009, 8:23 p.m.
Save more than
Really, Joe? So if you are visit Paris, France, and the Paris police search the room where you are staying at, you can argue before a French court that the search violated your Fourth Amendment rights?
Michael Ejercito @ 1:52 PM PST, Feb 27, 2008
Issa consistently votes to support the Bush's failed policies. He shows no leadership as Bush subverts the Constitution, squanders our treasury, sends our men and women off to fight a misguided war without real support such as armored Humvees, abuses the military and stretches it to a breaking point. He bullies citizens when they testify before Congress, as he did with Valerie Plame and the widows of the Blackwater employees killed in Falllujah. I run for Congress to unseat Issa, restore respect for the Constitution and ensure oversight over the Administration. See the campaign website at www.roberthamiltonforcongress.com.You can help!
Robert Hamilton @ 12:34 PM PST, Feb 26, 2008
FISA as currently configured is all you need to perform electronic surveillance on an individual or group of individuals. The critical element in FISA is it requires the barest minimum of judicial review. Without such oversight, the government is free to scan broad categories of communications, such as overseas calls. This is clearly unconstitutional. It is time for Americans to find their courage and decide that it's better to preserve our values and live with the possibility of a terriorist attack (which will always exist) than to surrender our cherished rights and live in a police state.
R. Perry @ 6:38 AM PST, Feb 26, 2008
How come the first comment listed refers to comments? How can the first person to comment refer to people who commented after him? Please explain that.
Chris @ 9:18 PM PST, Feb 25, 2008
I don't know Darrell, I read the amendment and it says: Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Nothing about citizenship, location, or what the suspicion is. Just "the people". I guess that activist judges must have over the years injected their own biases to come to the interpretation you offer. Joe
Joe Cotey @ 6:18 PM PST, Feb 25, 2008
The comments here are not surprising. Some people just can not tell the difference between wiretapping a drug dealer in America and a terrorist in Afghanistan.
Michael Ejercito @ 4:28 PM PST, Feb 25, 2008
CIA who has created all this mess. One should read the book by Zbigniew Brezinskis in his book Total War where we dumped 500 million & later Saudis poured millions of dollars in Pakistan. Later during our darling Bhutto created Taliban which was used by Pakistanis as branch of their army. This has penetrated all layers of Pakistanis life including their army. The short term advantage is root of this entire problem. There has not been any one who has been able to occupy Afghanistan in its history and will never be. Pakistan is failed nation and these are all bandages which will fail. We will have millions of them loose. Haven can help us.
P R Shah @ 12:57 PM PST, Feb 25, 2008
Well it looks like Issa took one on the chin here. All that has to be said was said above. Glad t o see the fear mongering is losing steam.
shiner @ 12:19 PM PST, Feb 25, 2008
This spying is not "narrowly targeted" at terrorists. We have seen proof that it is not - see Mark Klein's testimony and records on the existence of Room 641A. The PAA says the government does not need to get a warrant to verify that the target is legitimate. Why do you think we're the terrorists, Rep. Issa? Why are you so afraid of court supervision of government spying? What are you trying to hide from us? Your fear-mongering, distortion of the facts, and disrespect for our Constitution and our liberties is shameful. Please resign.
Andrew Joseph @ 11:03 AM PST, Feb 25, 2008
Judging from the lack of comments, I can only infer that no one reads the LA Times. Count me as one of them from here on out.
Chris @ 10:08 AM PST, Feb 25, 2008
Next