Image from source, TPMMuckraker.com
The majority of Democratic Senators and Congresspeople voted against it. ALL (I believe) of the Republicans voted for it. It passed, it's law, and for at least 6 months it will stay that way. As I've said, I'm growing steadily more leery of the thing, the more I read about it. Here's a bit of the why.
[Excerpt]
FISA: What Isn't Electronic Surveillance?
By Spencer Ackerman - August 6, 2007, 5:30 PM
Experts are still digesting the revision to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act signed (pdf) by President Bush yesterday, known as the Protect America Act. It's a fairly safe bet, judging by the amount of expert disagreement about the act's provisions, that most members of Congress don't know what they've just passed.
What's clear is that now the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence can now obtain the international communications of U.S. citizens or residents without a warrant provided that such surveillance is "reasonably believed" to be "directed at" persons outside the country. The FISA Court's new, restricted role here is to determine -- up to six months after the fact of the surveillance -- that the government's procedures in seeking the primarily-foreign data is not "clearly erroneous." If it isn't, the surveillance goes forward. . .
Read more at TPMMuckraker.com
The majority of Democratic Senators and Congresspeople voted against it. ALL (I believe) of the Republicans voted for it. It passed, it's law, and for at least 6 months it will stay that way. As I've said, I'm growing steadily more leery of the thing, the more I read about it. Here's a bit of the why.
[Excerpt]
FISA: What Isn't Electronic Surveillance?
By Spencer Ackerman - August 6, 2007, 5:30 PM
Experts are still digesting the revision to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act signed (pdf) by President Bush yesterday, known as the Protect America Act. It's a fairly safe bet, judging by the amount of expert disagreement about the act's provisions, that most members of Congress don't know what they've just passed.
What's clear is that now the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence can now obtain the international communications of U.S. citizens or residents without a warrant provided that such surveillance is "reasonably believed" to be "directed at" persons outside the country. The FISA Court's new, restricted role here is to determine -- up to six months after the fact of the surveillance -- that the government's procedures in seeking the primarily-foreign data is not "clearly erroneous." If it isn't, the surveillance goes forward. . .
Read more at TPMMuckraker.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Have something to say to us? Post it here!