A major terrorist plot was thwarted recently when British and American intelligence discovered a group of about 50 people planning to use liquid explosives to detonate several airplanes over U.S. airspace.
Had the attack succeeded, the results would have been so catastrophic that September 11 could’ve been relegated to a miniscule warm-up act. But thanks to the unfettered corroboration between British and U.S. intelligence, the terrorists’ nefarious plans were deprived of their fruition.
Sadly, the next time a group of savage murderers try to attack, we may not be so fortunate, because there are powerful individuals in our country trying to undermine the legitimate efforts of our government.
Recently, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor struck down President Bush’s National Security Agency surveillance wiretapping program, arguing that it violates the rights of free speech and privacy, as well as the separation of powers clause in the Constitution. Taylor lambasted the Bush Administration, accusing the president of trying to siege “inherent power” to violate laws of Congress. The magnitude of this decision will likely result in the termination of a program that has led to the capture of hundreds of suspected terrorists within our borders.
Taylor’s absurd decision is completely unfathomable, because it makes us more vulnerable to future attacks.
Let’s not forget the use of wiretapping by President Bush is fully supported by a majority of Congress on both sides of the aisle. Every member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made up of seven Republicans and seven Democrats, has voiced support for the NSA program, citing exigencies of the war on terror and the program’s constitutionality. In fact, wiretapping was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court as far back as 1928, and as a result, every opportunity to oppose the surveillance program had previously been shot down by the courts.
But apparently facts do not matter to a demagogue like Taylor. Or perhaps she simply chose to “forget” all of the occasions domestic wiretapping has been implemented by our government for the purpose of keeping Americans safe.
She probably forgot about Abraham Lincoln employing wiretapping to eavesdrop on telephone conversations during the Civil War. Or perhaps she neglected to remember Robert F. Kennedy’s monitoring of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1966. And surely she unconsciously decided not to recall Bill Clinton using wiretapping, which led to the capture of Aldrich Ames, a former Soviet spy.
The fact is, virtually every American president has carried out wiretapping since its inception because it’s a constitutionally supported method of keeping us safe. Taylor knows this, but has decided contrary to fact, to reject prior precedent, ignore evidence, and excise logic and reason, showing the exact same blind authoritarianism in which she so unctuously accused the president. It’s frightening that there are powerful individuals like Taylor who care more about protecting terrorist thugs than defending their own country. This ruling was a clear usurpation of the law and a step backward in the effort to keep our nation safe from those who wish to do us harm. Taylor is nothing more than an activist, masquerading as an avatar of the democratic process.
And we will be less safe as a result of her duplicity.
Fellow students, like it or not, we are at war, and sacrifices have to be made. Yet most people in this country seem to be ignoring this fact. Americans love complacency, and only horrific events on the magnitude of September 11 seem to shake us out of our comfortable, ordered worlds. If we are to survive as a nation, we must take a stand against individuals who wish to harm us, especially deceptive, false bearers of jurisprudence like Taylor.
Daniel Webster once wrote, “God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.”
But with incessantly defiant judges like Anna Diggs Taylor undermining our efforts, how can we defend anything?
Send comments to Daniel Lipian at [email protected].
