But, really, if the American people don't think the Executive could have obtained court warrants to carry out these actions supposedly intended to "protect" them from crime... What are they saying, that a judge can't recognise clear and present danger when they see it, or that there was really no evidence to support the claim that these actions were taken as "protection"?
Maybe the American people would like a taste of UK-style surveillance state, for "protection"... Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
Of course communications are tapped in the UK as well. It's just that no one admits to it. And it can't be used as evidence in court without at least some token nominal legal oversight - which makes it less of a free for all than in the US, where the Preznit has decidered he can listen to anyone for any reason and it's okay for (here comes the cliche...) national security reasons.
But if you have nothing to hide you won't be wiretapped. Honest! Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
Perhaps the change in the rules signal that President Bush no longer trusts British intelligence? Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
