Pathetic Dems finally grow some cajones...for once

C

Cypress

Well-known member
Weak ass Democrats finally grow some cajones on protecting civil liberties. The House let the ridiculously named "Protect" America Act, expire without reauthorization. Now, the government will have to get warrants to spy on Americans suspected of terrorist links. I thought the House would cave to Bush's "You're all gonna die if you don't do what I want" act. But, they held firm.


Analysts say FISA will suffice

By Sean Lengell
February 16, 2008

Many intelligence scholars and analysts outside the government say that today's expiration of certain temporary domestic wiretapping laws will have little effect on national security, despite warnings to the contrary by the White House and Capitol Hill Republican leaders.

With the Protect America Act expiring this weekend, domestic wiretapping rules will revert to the 30-year-old Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which requires the government to obtain a warrant from a special court to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance in the United States.

The original FISA law, these experts say, provides the necessary tools for the intelligence community to eavesdrop on suspected terrorists.

Timothy Lee, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, said the last time Congress overhauled FISA — after the September 11 terrorist attacks — President Bush praised the action, saying the new law "recognizes the realities and dangers posed by the modern terrorist."

"Those are the rules we'll be living under after the Protect America Act expires this weekend," Mr. Lee added. "There's no reason to think our nation will be in any more danger in 2008 than it was in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080216/NATION/847451166/1002
Click to expand...
 
Damocles said:
It doesn't require them to get a warrant, not before listening it doesn't....
Click to expand...
This is true but at LEAST the acts of the government are reviewable by a judge. Fear your government when they fear a review of their actions. Oh but what am I saying, 9-11 changed everything bok bok
 
Socrtease said:
This is true but at LEAST the acts of the government are reviewable by a judge. Fear your government when they fear a review of their actions. Oh but what am I saying, 9-11 changed everything bok bok
Click to expand...
Okay, reminding people of the retroactive FISA requirements supports something else?

Rubbish.

You people are such partisan hacks that you present everything I say as something more than it is because you WANT me to be saying that.

FISA laws themselves are an intrusion onto our rights. I spoke against this long ago at a time when we were talking about Bush and his intrusions. Increasing the level of intrusion = bad, but intrusion itself also = bad...
 
I am no supporter of FISA either but it atleast had SOME protection. The Bush administration wants no review of their actions. They want to spy on us and not ever have ANYONE know about it. I was ONLY commenting on the fact that FISA had some review instead of none. Sensative much?
 
Damocles said:
Okay, reminding people of the retroactive FISA requirements supports something else?

Rubbish.

You people are such partisan hacks that you present everything I say as something more than it is because you WANT me to be saying that.

FISA laws themselves are an intrusion onto our rights. I spoke against this long ago at a time when we were talking about Bush and his intrusions. Increasing the level of intrusion = bad, but intrusion itself also = bad...
Click to expand...

Damo, the artful dodger...
 
Damocles said:
LOL. WM, the EmoTardBoy...

:D
Click to expand...

You are indeed the artful dodger my brother.

When called on what you profess, you claim humor, satire, or you were just taking the other side for arguments sake .. but you don't actually believe what you said.

Feel free to call me a name, but ...
 
blackascoal said:
You are indeed the artful dodger my brother.

When called on what you profess, you claim humor, satire, or you were just taking the other side for arguments sake .. but you don't actually believe what you said.

Feel free to call me a name, but ...
Click to expand...
When called on what I "profess", upon re-reading it says no such thing. That is a reading comprehension issue and has little to do with what I believe.

Usually if I am arguing the other side I will say so, repeatedly throughout the thread.

Most of the people here have known me for years and would know regardless. However I do try to not express my opinion until I have information. Usually I will ask questions, hoping for others to go deeper into their beliefs and get that information. At that point you are usually trying to inform me of what my opinion is, however I, correctly, inform you that I have yet to express an opinion and that I am asking questions.

That's what makes things confusing. I simply offer information in this thread and people assigned my opinion without knowledge. I then offered my opinion then you and WM tried to call it a "dodge". That is weak. I do not like FISA, and going back to what was already a violation seems to be, pretty much, just as bad. If you are choosing the lesser of two evils you are still choosing evil.
 
Damocles said:
When called on what I "profess", upon re-reading it says no such thing. That is a reading comprehension issue and has little to do with what I believe.

Usually if I am arguing the other side I will say so, repeatedly throughout the thread.

Most of the people here have known me for years and would know regardless. However I do try to not express my opinion until I have information. Usually I will ask questions, hoping for others to go deeper into their beliefs and get that information. At that point you are usually trying to inform me of what my opinion is, however I, correctly, inform you that I have yet to express an opinion and that I am asking questions.

That's what makes things confusing. I simply offer information in this thread and people assigned my opinion without knowledge. I then offered my opinion then you and WM tried to call it a "dodge". That is weak. I do not like FISA, and going back to what was already a violation seems to be, pretty much, just as bad. If you are choosing the lesser of two evils you are still choosing evil.
Click to expand...

I've never seen a perfect candidate, thus all politics is the choosing of the lessor of two evils.

The trick is in the deciding which is the greater evil .. although in the case of George Bush, nothing could have been more obvious.
 
blackascoal said:
I've never seen a perfect candidate, thus all politics is the choosing of the lessor of two evils.

The trick is in the deciding which is the greater evil .. although in the case of George Bush, nothing could have been more obvious.
Click to expand...
Compromising is different than choosing the lesser of two evils.

There are things I would be willing to compromise, others I would not. If I am willing to ignore those things, had I for instance chosen to ignore Bush's spending and nation-building war that he promised never to start and voted for him anyway, then I would be selecting evil.
 
I support FISA courts. They do important intelligence work. But requiring a warrant insures more or less that it's not misused for any other purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top