Judge's Ruling About Warrant-less Wiretapping Mostly for Show

The ACLU has been clamoring about the invasion of privacy by someone they love to demonize, George W. Bush. As part of the "it's all Bush's fault clan" the ACLU filed suit about what they allege was President Bush's use of the NSA for warrantless wiretapping.

The President justified it saying it was to target terrorists or related activity and the ACLU protested anyway.

The reality dear citizens is far less obvious and definitely not addressed by the timid and mostly controlled mainstream press.

Ask yourself if you were to build some kind of damn, say the Hoover Damn, would you call it complete after you dumped the first truckload of cement? In essence, this is what

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit did when she became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program. On August 17, 2006, Diggs said it violates the rights to free speech and privacy as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. "Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion.

Many scholars and political activists will heave a sigh of relief now that they believe the entire program has been exposed. Nothing could be further from the truth.

According to an article in Newsmax, "The government argued that the program is well within the president's authority, but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule".

A Brief Recap

Since the first week of December 2005, mumblings began about how the NSA and the Bush Administration conspired to invade the privacy of US citizens under the premise of protection against terrorism.