ACLUeless and Journalists Suing NSA For Wiretapping Terrorists

That's what the press release says.

President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or Congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. "The current surveillance of Americans is a chilling assertion of presidential power that has not been seen since the days of Richard Nixon."

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program. The program is disrupting their ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship, and engage in advocacy. The program, which was first disclosed by The New York Times on December 16, has sparked national and international furor and has been condemned by lawmakers across the political spectrum.

I find it interesting who the ACLU got to join as plaintiffs in this case: journalists James Bamford, Christopher Hitchens, and Tara McKelvey, Barnett Rubin of New York University's Center on International Cooperation, Larry Diamond, a fellow at the Hoover Institution, and the NACDL, Greenpeace, and the Council on American Islamic Relations.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program.

The ACLU is perfectly content to undermine US national security during wartime to promote its own agenda, and has a few willing accomplices - including an organization that engaged in terrorist activities on its own (Greenpeace), and one that regularly excuses Islamic terrorism (CAIR). Such lovely company.

Not to mention that there has been precisely zero actual or alleged violations of civil rights. It's all hypothetical. The plaintiffs believe that their conversations may have been intercepted. In the case of CAIR, they might actually have a point - this might actually expose CAIR as a conduit for information, material and monetary support for Islamic terrorists around the world.

It's quite interesting to see how and why these individuals and groups think that they have a right to converse with suspected international terrorists who threaten to inflict mass casualties against the US and Western countries.

First reported by Jay at Stop the ACLU

UPDATE:
Here's the ACLU complaint.

UPDATE:
Others covering this story: AJ Strata, Mac Ranger, Dread Pundit Bluto, Daily Pundit, The Jawa Report, LGF, and All Things Beautiful

UPDATE:
Orin Kerr at Volokh Conspiracy has some additional thoughts, and a companion piece to the NYT article on the effectiveness of NSA surveillance programs. Michelle Malkin and Jeff Goldstein have more.

UPDATE:
Bryan Preston at Junkyard Blog wonders who will connect the dots if we're not able to collect the dots in the first place. The Anchoress rounds up the latest on the wiretapping, weird and wild statements from Democrats, and some history.