Telcos Could Be Liable For Tens of Billions of Dollars For Illegally Turning Over Phone Records
Telcos Could Be Liable For Tens of Billions of Dollars For Illegally Turning Over Phone Records
This morning, USA Today reported that three telecommunications companies – AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth – provided “phone call records of tens of millions of Americans” to the National Security Agency. Such conduct appears to be illegal and could make the telco firms liable for tens of billions of dollars. Here’s why:
1. It violates the Stored Communications Act. The Stored Communications Act, Section 2703(c), provides exactly five exceptions that would permit a phone company to disclose to the government the list of calls to or from a subscriber: (i) a warrant; (ii) a court order; (iii) the customer’s consent; (iv) for telemarketing enforcement; or (v) by “administrative subpoena.†The first four clearly don’t apply. As for administrative subpoenas, where a government agency asks for records without court approval, there is a simple answer – the NSA has no administrative subpoena authority, and it is the NSA that reportedly got the phone records.
2. The penalty for violating the Stored Communications Act is $1000 per individual violation. Section 2707 of the Stored Communications Act gives a private right of action to any telephone customer “aggrieved by any violation.†If the phone company acted with a “knowing or intentional state of mind,†then the customer wins actual harm, attorney’s fees, and “in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than the sum of $1,000.â€
(The phone companies might say they didn’t “know†they were violating the law. But USA Today reports that Qwest’s lawyers knew about the legal risks, which are bright and clear in the statute book.)
3. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act doesn’t get the telcos off the hook. According to USA Today, the NSA did not go to the FISA court to get a court order. And Qwest is quoted as saying that the Attorney General would not certify that the request was lawful under FISA. So FISA provides no defense for the phone companies, either.
In other words, for every 1 million Americans whose records were turned over to NSA, the telcos could be liable for $1 billion in penalties, plus attorneys fees. You do the math.
– Peter Swire and Judd Legum
UPDATE: Many of you had questions about this legal analysis. Peter provides the answers here. We’ll continue to address your questions as this story develops.
UPDATE II: Orrin Kerr agrees with our analysis in the New York Times:
Orin Kerr, a former federal prosecutor and assistant professor at George Washington University, said his reading of the relevant statutes put the phone companies at risk for at least $1,000 per person whose records they disclosed without a court order.
“This is not a happy day for the general counsels” of the phone companies, he said. “If you have a class action involving 10 million Americans, that’s 10 million times $1,000 — that’s 10 billion.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
I’m seeing phone rates going up in the near future.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:28 pmAnyone want to start a really good class action lawsuit?
May 11th, 2006 at 6:34 pmI’m seeing a way to scare these a$$holes out of our personal lives: LITIGATION!
May 11th, 2006 at 6:35 pmIt seems that the telephone companies were complicit in caving in to the NSA, giving them what they wanted, without first going through the courts. The only exception was QWEST, which actually refused to knuckle under to the demands of the NSA. A laudable move by a major corporation.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:36 pmHow do you even find out if you’re one of the million-odd customers? If we called AT&T, do you think they’d tell us? Not bloody likely!
May 11th, 2006 at 6:36 pmBegala on NSA & Net Neutrality:
Here is the actual quote from CNN:
BEGALA:
That’s a very good point.
And the Democrats are going to have to point out that this is a classic Republican move, not a national security move. Big government is getting into bed with big business. We’re talking about AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. AT&T, by the way, wants to take over the Internet and start charging for access to the Internet, which Internet pioneers desperately oppose.
So, now, if you are running AT&T, and the president of the United States comes to you and says, hey, why don’t I spy, why don’t I snoop through your files there, and you want him to give you permission to control the Internet, that’s a really lousy alliance politically for the Republicans, to be seen as big government in bed with big business.
read more here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
May 11th, 2006 at 6:39 pmCall the NSA and ask them if they have been spying on you.
j/k
May 11th, 2006 at 6:41 pmThe Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T on January 31, 2006, accusing the telecom giant of violating the law and the privacy of its customers by collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in its massive and illegal program to wiretap and data-mine Americans’ communications.
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/att/
May 11th, 2006 at 6:42 pmGREAT!!!! - - Calling all DemDONATING trial lawyers!!! LET’s SUE!!!! Thank you TP, for your efforts to assist terrorists and their symapathizers in achieving better access to modern communication.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:42 pmContact your Telco and tell them what you think of them illegally turning over private information to the NSA without a court order.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:42 pmAhhhhh, I love the smell of a class action lawsuit in the morning.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:42 pmI did call AT&T. They said they couldn’t comment on legal matters or matters of national security.
They did give me the number for Qwest, though.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:43 pmDitto #9 - Trial Lawyers, baby! (That is if all the corrupt and indicted Republicans haven’t retained them already!)
May 11th, 2006 at 6:45 pmIn case of litigation, the justice department will probably weigh in on the side of the phone companies. And we know the republican-appointed judges will be “fair”, right?
May 11th, 2006 at 6:45 pmmighty asswipey tidy,
How does it feel so close to the destruction of your entire party. We aren’t scared of terrorists like you are. Chicken shit republicans. Go live in your bomb shelter.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:45 pmWow, Mighty gives TP a lot of power. I didn’t know this little blog of, what did Mighty say, “30 people”, has so much power. WOW.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:48 pm#9
As we have been saying all along MA, what they are doing is illegal. And how many of the millions of people they are gathering data ( illegally ) on have been arested?
They cannot even use the data gathered illegally in court. Kinda like the terrorist that were tortured can’t be tried. Because it is freekin ILLEGAL!!
what drugs are you taking tomake yourself so delusional?
May 11th, 2006 at 6:48 pm#11
that is *exactly* what i was going to say…
May 11th, 2006 at 6:49 pmMighty,
The chances of being run over by a liberal driving a Hummer, are greater than the chances of getting killed by a terrorist.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:49 pm$$ is the only thing they will understand. Sue the bastards!
May 11th, 2006 at 6:51 pmNice work, TP.
the mighty hermaphrodite belches another pre-programmed bushism… a geyser of morning urine, filtered through the mind of a gnat…
it is good to see somethings never change. reminds me of the fjords of norway.
wow….
May 11th, 2006 at 6:53 pmUnreal…
May 11th, 2006 at 6:53 pmSo many corruption and criminal acts.
How do we as individuals punish these corporations?
Withdrawal as consumers?
Ugh!!!
I’m simply amazed what people will do for money and perceived power?!?
Spudge, do you have the number for the NSA?
Aphrodite, how’s it going? If you think that TP is helping terrorists, then you must have really been mad at John Ashcroft when he announced that they had been listening to Bin Laden’s cell phone calls via satellite! I’m sure Osama dropped his cell phone like a hot potato then! Hmm, I wonder what ever happened to old OBL? I guess that as long as Bush isn’t concerned about OBL’s whereabouts, then I shouldn’t be worried either.
May 11th, 2006 at 6:53 pm#9
You are so right. The president and his administration can do any damned thing they want, and no one can stop them.
While you are at it, why don’t you post your e-mail logon information here. We promise not to do anything illegal or immoral. Why stop there? Tell us the names of your friends and relatives you’ve called over the past year and their phone numbers. Since the administration probably has this information, why not also tell us where they live?
What? You refuse? But I thought you didn’t have anything to hide.
What’s that you say? You don’t trust strangers? And Bush and the good ol’ boys at the NSA are different how?
May 11th, 2006 at 6:54 pmyea, if i was a terrorist i call up AT&T and ask for a directoy of my fellow terrorists! yea, that’s the ticket!
May 11th, 2006 at 6:54 pmThe paranoia of this Admin is staggering.
…Hey, wait.
PARANOIA?
Isn’t that a sign of Cocaine Addiction?
May 11th, 2006 at 7:00 pmHas W been hittin’ the powder again?
Bummer, I’d hate to see AT&T squirm….
May 11th, 2006 at 7:02 pmTaking legal action to defend the Constitution and all Americans’ civil liberties instead of simply carping, whinning, and talking trash frightens you, doesn’t it? But why?
If you aren’t willing to fight for your own civil liberties and Constitutional rights, you might at least be glad that someone is willing to fight for you.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:03 pmI smell a class action klawsuit.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:10 pmas a former verizon customer, I say sign me up!!
#23
Jane,
Let’s not forget Bush himself informing the terrorists of our activities. I got these from Glenn Greenwald’s blog; I just posted the highlights; the complete info can be found here:
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/ 2005/ 12/ why-is-bush-helping-terrorists-by.html
George Bush, telling terrorists about how we use “roving wiretaps” to eavesdrop on their calls -Columbus, Ohio - June 9, 2005.
George Bush, in 2004, telling terrorists that we are engaging in notice-less “sneak and peak” searches of their apartments - Hershey, Pennsylvania, April 19, 2004
George Bush, alerting terrorists to changes in our techniques for eavesdropping on their cell phone calls - Baltimore, Maryland, July 20, 2005
George Bush, alerting terrorists to the fact that we are eavesdropping on their telephone calls - Baltimore, Maryland, July 20, 2005
George Bush, in 2004, telling terrorists that we monitor them by tracing their “money trails” - Hershey, Pennsylvania, April 19, 2004
George Bush, telling terrorists how the Government monitors their computer communications and obtains their e-mails - Columbus, Ohio, June 9, 2005
George Bush, detailing the threat priorities of the Homeland Security Department - Columbus, Ohio, July 20, 2005
George Bush, detailing security measures taken against threats to American seaports - Columbus, Ohio, July 20, 2005
Finally, Glenn has a link showing that editors of National Review — before the Times ever breathed a word about the President’s eavesdropping “program” — damaged national security and helped Al Qaeda by telling terrorists that we monitor their phone calls, use roving wiretaps, examine their library records, use “sneak-and-peak” searches of their apartments, and read their e-mails.
Mighty A, please feel free to jump in any time. The floor is yours.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:10 pmWow, I want to sign up for QWEST. I want my business going to a company that really respects the customers right to privacy. Then stands firm. Nice. kudos to QWEST.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:12 pmOutstandint research and post. Two thoughts:
1) Go for Skype or Vonage now and cancel your AT&T service. T-mobile is a nice German company for your cell phone.
2) Oppenheimer initially opposed the H-bomb but then when Ulam came up with a feasible way to make it work, the seductiveness of the technology rendered him powerless–he said we had to proceed because it was “technically sweet”. Here we see the confluence of impressive technological gains (the ability to rapidly access, and analyze the most massive data base ever constructed) with the fruits of network theory (the rigorous underpinning of “the six degrees of Kevin Bacon”) and with the nominal excuse of 9/11 it was far too much for Hayden and the NSA technospooks to resist. We have no ethical checks on this agency run amok, and all the soothing assurances of Kit Bond, John Kyle, or Trent Lott will not make it go away. I am with Cafferty and hope Alren Specter stays healthy and finds a little more fire in that elderly belly.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:12 pmThanks, Glenn, I was just about to leave when I saw your comment - excellent!
‘Night!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:13 pmThe phone companies are compelled by law (CALEA) to allow eavesdropping and access to records by law enforcement.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:15 pm“In other words, for every 1 million Americans whose records were turned over to NSA, the telcos could be liable for $1 billion in penalties, plus attorneys fees. You do the math.”
Actually, per point #2:
“The penalty for violating the Stored Communications Act is $1000 per individual violation.”
Per individual violation, not per victim. There are almost certainly multiple violations per person.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:16 pmI hereby retract my “Ditto #9″ - didn’t read the whole thing due to the retardican’s spelling and format errors.
Please forgive me!
I still say the Indicted Republicans might retain all the available lawers in DC.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:16 pmDon’t be suprised folks if there is a back lash by the Right against this back lash from the Left. Every old fart, GOP, dyed in the wool, God fearing, psudeo conservative, will come back with the argument that if you didn’t have anything to hide why should you care if the government tracks your calls. You weren’t using all of your civil liberties any way were you? The boogey men, not in uniform, are still out there.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:17 pmGREAT!!!! - - Calling all DemDONATING trial lawyers!!! LET’s SUE!!!! Thank you TP, for your efforts to assist terrorists and their symapathizers in achieving better access to modern communication.
Comment by mighty aphrodite
Ya those terrorists are soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo scarey compared to the USSR that we must now become the USSR so that the very scarey terrorists dont get us… I am typing this from under my desk….
May 11th, 2006 at 7:17 pmSorry about that last post … I went a little crazy with the Os… now if I could only edit it…
May 11th, 2006 at 7:18 pmIf I get $1,000 for every phone call I’ve made since Bush started tapping our phones, I’ll be richer than Bill Gates… you know … maybe those tax cuts for the super-rich aren’t such a bad idea after all …
May 11th, 2006 at 7:19 pm#34 The phone companies are compelled by law (CALEA) to allow eavesdropping and access to records by law enforcement.
But isn’t “law enforcement” supposed to go to a judge and get a, oh, what do you call them thingies that the Framers were on about, “warrant”, that’s the word I was looking for, one of them that warrant thingies? Whew, it’s been so long since I heard they were still using those things that I almost forgot what they were called.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:20 pmObsidian Wings has a great breakdown of the discussions that led Qwest to deny the NSA:
The only major telecom company that refused to participate was Qwest:
“According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest’s CEO at the time, Joe Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA’s assertion that Qwest didn’t need a court order — or approval under FISA — to proceed. Adding to the tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its customers’ information and how that information might be used.
Financial implications were also a concern, the sources said. Carriers that illegally divulge calling information can be subjected to heavy fines. The NSA was asking Qwest to turn over millions of records. The fines, in the aggregate, could have been substantial. (…)
Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest’s lawyers asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, the agency refused.
The NSA’s explanation did little to satisfy Qwest’s lawyers. “They told (Qwest) they didn’t want to do that because FISA might not agree with them,” one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA rejected Qwest’s suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the U.S. attorney general’s office. A second person confirmed this version of events.”
If only AT&T had me in mind when they caved. Does someone have pictures of them doing Karl Rove or something?
May 11th, 2006 at 7:22 pm#41, Obsessed,
With my tens of thousands, I could help stimulate the Economy by buying a 50″ plasma!
See? Spying is actually good for the economy!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:23 pmUnreal…
So many corruption and criminal acts.
How do we as individuals punish these corporations?
Withdrawal as consumers?
Ugh!!!
I’m simply amazed what people will do for money and perceived power?!?
Comment by napu
Hey we are consumers arent we? We got the power of the dollar!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:23 pmAll we have to do is …
1) Stop watching TV
2) Stop shoping at most big stores
3) Stop using any PC/Phone
4) Stop driving cars
5) Stop eating at most resturuants
6) Stop using electricity
7) … nevermind … they got us by the balls. Let the lawyers loose on em I guess…
Ahem. Section 2703c only applies to electronic communication service or remote computer service. This does not include phone calls, which are defined as wire communication. Section 2510 defines them as:
Wire communication, defined as:
Think Progress strikes out. Again.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:24 pmWith respect to your caveat in point number two (”The phone companies might say they didn’t “know†they were violating the law.”): the “state of mind” refers not to whether the defendant knew he was breaking the law (ignorance of the law is no defense), but rather to whether the defendant knew he was committing the act. I.e., did the telcoms know they were turning over phone call info (as opposed to accidentally releasing it, e.g., through an insecure website). So the telcoms have no defense to that point.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:26 pmAnybody know a reputable attorney, well versed in FCC law?
I smell class action lawsuit…
May 11th, 2006 at 7:27 pmI never thought the day would come that the government would get me so angry that I wanted to fly to DC and kick someone’s ass.
I’m a rather calm guy.
If I could get from Michael Hayden up to Bushie in a ring …
May 11th, 2006 at 7:30 pmThe Electronic Frontier Foundation sued AT&T in January for this exact offense of handing data to the NSA. The EFF’s lawsuit provided room for a AT&T whistleblower to come forward, which in turn gave this story much more press (including, I’d argue, this USAToday article, even though USAToday only briefly mentioned the EFF).
The EFF has been fighting these battles for years, fighting against the government’s wanting to know *everyone you communicate with, in any electronic format.* In other cases the EFF has fought the gov’t wanting to track every email communication connection, or the gov’t wanting to ban strong encryption in software. i.e. the gov’t wanting to ban electronic envelopes for your electronic letters.
The EFF also fights corporations, as the AT&T case proves. In other cases they’ve fought companies who illegally want to unmask anonymous or pseudonymous writers. The EFF’s position is that corporations have to prove that someone’s writing is illegal before the corporation can find out who the writer was.
Because I know EFF people personally, I know how the work they do seems like its from a much larger organization. But they’re not that large except in their accomplishments, and they need donations. If you like their work, including all their work which has protected free speech in blogging, consider donating.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:33 pmThink of the benefits. The fines leveed against the telCos could reduce to[he national debt by more than a fifth. Note to self: don’t invest in TelCos until this is resolved.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:33 pmIt’s not about us folks, it’s about them. They being the Christian, baby boomers and what’s left of the WWII generation, Rush Limbaugh, supporters of the Viet-Nam war crowd. They, IE: IRI, hate the filthy Left and don’t give a Rat’s Ass about Gays & Dope Smokin Hippies who wan’t to have abortions and anal sex. That is the cold reality and they will stand beside their man to the end. This is not like winning the Lottery it’s like the prize at the bottom of a $5.00 box of cereal. Red State.com has already made posts how Jimmy Carter was the Worst President ever so don’t expect them to roll over and say OH, My Goodness, You’re sooo right the President is a Tyranical Dictator and the GOP is the party of bribes and Constitutional abrogation.The achilles heel is Alberto Gonzales and John Woo. Federalist 51 , learn it and preach it.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:34 pmThere is a simpler solution than going to court and, I might add, quicker. Altho, I do think that’s a terrific idea. But, first……..Pick up the phone tomorrow and call your stock broker. SELL your stock in these companies. I’m sure there are thousands of people out there who have AT&T, Verizon or BellSouth in their portfolios. Dump it - all of it. Go online and get rid of it. You don’t think that people aren’t doing this already? Yours will be worth less next week than right now. It’s very difficult to penalize some companies for their actions, but this is a ‘no-brainer’. These companies are very vulnerable.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:35 pmIt will be interesting to see how much increased business Qwest receives from this.
Good on ya, Qwest!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:36 pmJohn Yoo, not woo. Sorry just washed my keyboard and can’t do a thing with it.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:36 pmThe only exception was QWEST, which actually refused to knuckle under to the demands of the NSA. A laudable move by a major corporation.
This is about the only good move Quest has made in the last 6 years. :-)
May 11th, 2006 at 7:36 pmI’m seeing phone rates going up in the near future.
Comment by Krazny — May 11, 2006 @ 6:28 pm
dsl service too, i’d bet…
May 11th, 2006 at 7:38 pmThe pukes crow that there has not been a terrist attack in 5 years. So, pray tell me, what does that prove? It dont prove that the Bushco eavesdropping plans are working. It means nothing.
Now, someone please ask Bushco how many terrist they have caught by eavesdropping. They have not caught one damn terrist, either here in the US, or overseas, through these methods.
Now, I checked, by telephone, with a good friend of mine who is a special agent with one of the telephone companies involved. I wanted to know if they were crosschecking the numbers that show up on your bill. My source tells me they are mining that information as well.
What this means is that if 415-555-5555 shows up on your bill as a call they have requested the subscriber to that phone number. So they get the name and address of the person whom you called.
I will bet you dollars to donuts that Bushco will deny that this is occuring, but please folks, just use common sense. What good would a list of your calls do without the name and address of the person you called? No good whatsoever.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:40 pm9/11 did change everything. Instead of asking questions and demanding answers, the American people have become as much a bunch of stooges for corporate conglomerates and the new world order as the “leadership” of this nation on all levels. Corporate predators are around because the people want it that way and are more than happy to vote against their own interests and not question those in authority when it is their right. The national association of manufacturers was the begining, but we now have CEO summits that call the shots on how America is to be driven. No tough questions will ever be asked by the corporate owned media.
My take on the first amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
What part of this still exists since the creation of free speech zones, a corporate owned press, and being tagged as a hater of America for asking for answers from those who are supposed to represent the people?
Freedom of $peech
Freedom of the Pre$$
Freedom of A$$embly
Petition government for redre$$ of grievances
They are all gone.
Americans are giving up the most prized possession any people anywhere could ever have had.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:41 pmCongratulations to the people of the last 30 years. In giving the government all powers for safety, we have made it possible to loose both our liberty and safety.
No case can go forward because the evidence is secret. If in 5 years it gets to the Supreme Court they will of course find for the telcos/government.
Next case.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:41 pmFrom tpmmuckraker this quote from Gonzales’ hearings.
Obviously the AG was evasive, misleading and LYING!:
On April 6, 2006, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified before the House Judiciary Committee, and in one exchange, Rep. Gerald Nadler (D-NY) tried to nail him down:
NADLER: Number two, can you assure us that there is no warrantless surveillance of calls between two Americans within the United States?
GONZALES: That is not what the president has authorized.
NADLER: Can you assure us that it’s not being done?
GONZALES: As I indicated in response to an earlier question, no technology is perfect.
NADLER: OK.
GONZALES: We do have minimization procedures in place…
NADLER: But you’re not doing that deliberately?
GONZALES: That is correct.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:42 pm#
GREAT!!!! - - Calling all DemDONATING trial lawyers!!! LET’s SUE!!!! Thank you TP, for your efforts to assist terrorists and their symapathizers in achieving better access to modern communication.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — May 11, 2006 @ 6:42 pm
Your a DIPSTICK IRI, you have no idea what the hell your talking about as usual.
Menwith Hill Station, UK
( 54.0162 N; 1.6826 W )
Menwith Hill in the UK is the principal NATO theater ground segment node for high altitude signals intelligence satellites. The facility, jointly operated with the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), is now capable of carrying out two million intercepts per hour.
Menwith Hill Station was established in 1956 by the US Army Security Agency (ASA). Menwith Hill was operated by ASA from 1958 until its turnover to NSA in June 1966. The Army 713th MI Group remains the Executive Agent for the NSA Menwith Hill field site, which was awarded the NSA’s “Station of the Year” prize for 1991 after its role in the Gulf War. The Air Intelligence Agency 451st Intelligence Squadron (451 IS) as an integral part of Menwith Hill Station (MHS). Inside the closely-guarded 560 acre base are two large operations blocks and many satellite tracking dishes and domes. Initial operations focused on monitoring international cable and microwave communications passing through Britain. In the early 1960s Menwith Hill was one of the first sites in the world to receive sophisticated early IBM computers, with which NSA automated the labor-intensive watch-list scrutiny of intercepted but unenciphered telex messages. Since then, Menwith Hill has sifted the international messages, telegrams, and telephone calls of citizens, corporations or governments to select information of political, military or economic value.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:43 pm~~~~ See Mighty BlowHard Wacko, Their is no reason to do what BUSH is doing, HE IS CREATING A POLITICAL POLICE FORCE.
And that Sheeaht aint gonna happen. Maybe where you come from, capitalist commie world, thats OK, WE DONT PLAY THAT CRAP.
Now take your KHAZAR PHALLIC EDOMITE WORSHIPING ASS BACK TO Mongolia, you Christian Blood Sucker.
NSA Again Violates the Law
By Kate Martin
Director, Center for National Security Studies
(excerpts)
It is illegal for the NSA to obtain records of phone numbers from the telephone companies unless the FISA court authorized it. The Stored Communications Act prohibits the telephone companies from disclosing such information to the government unless they receive a subpoena or a court order for the records. 18 U.S.C. 2702(c), 2703 (c).
If the NSA used a pen register or trap and trace device in real time, it was required to obtain an order from the FISA court, either under the specific pen register provisions, 50 USC 1841 et seq. or under the provisions for electronic surveillance generally, 50 USC 1801 et seq.
If the NSA obtained stored records, rather using a real time pen register, it would have to obtain an order from the FISA court under section 215 of the Patriot Act. That section contained an even lower standard for obtaining information.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:45 pmSELL your stock in these companies.
Comment by BBoop
That Is An Awesome Idea!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:45 pmSELL! SELL! SELL!
Wow - this is so Exciting -
And don’t forget - There is always the ACLU to turn to
May 11th, 2006 at 7:45 pmMAN, I GOTTA START DOING BUSINESS WITH QWEST.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:46 pmDoesn’t matter people, anyway you go the big phone companies still get some of your money because they own all the telephone lines in the country. Even if you go through Qwest or Vonage, they lease the lines from the big telephone companies.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:48 pmSerious question:
Who has standing under the SCA? Can individuals sue? Wow. If so, the class action bar must be pissing in their pants right now. What a gift.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:52 pmI’ve been reading this blog for months and I have a suggestion….why don’t people just ignore mighty aphrodite and her/his ilk? I know it’s difficult…she/he makes us so mad - but, you know we just play into her/his hirsute hand when we respond to her/his bullshit. She/he only comes here to incite people to respond. Ignore this slime bag whose only pleasure is coming to this blog and getting people to respond to the bullshit.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:57 pmmy humble opinion..
Comment by a govt servant
Ever see that game where the mole pops up from a hole and you are supposed to hit it on the head with that padded hammer ….
May 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pm“I’m seeing phone rates going up in the near future.”
Comment by Krazny — May 11, 2006 @ 6:28 pm
Well, now see, that’s the cool thing. With people looking for an excuse to abandon those telephone companies over this issue, they’re going to have to keep rates low to keep customers. In other words, they’re going to have to eat it.
Sucks to be them.
May 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pmThis totally makes me sick!!! I almost want to give up using a phone all together now!! But, people here need to ask a more serious question. The NSA knows that the two million or so people that they are spying on probably are not terrorists. What do they really want with all of our personal data? When is this facist regime going to start knocking on peoples doors and hauling them to concentration camps? The police state is now upon us!!!!
May 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pmIt is conceivable that NSA got the administrative subponea from another agency and had the records funneled through that agency (which is a sham).
Actually it’s probably more than conceivable. It probably happened.
But…the party (telcos) that gave the information over would have to reasonably believe the subponea was lawful. It may actually be that the govt offered such subponeas after reaching an agreement with the telcos in order to provide them cover (which is also a sham as it would be after the fact).
They have lawyers who can figure out that the request is likely unlawful and exposes the company to reputation and financial risk.
The NSA, though, has too much leverage with the telcos. If you recall, Qwest (the good guy here amazingly) won a contract that was classified for several hundred million dollars back in the day (00?). Anyway the CEO pumped and dumped and got investigated.
NSA pays these companies to co-operate by giving contracts that probably don’t lead to any real services being performed as specified (ie they get 100 mil but give NSA 1mil in stuff). I always wondered what Qwest was doing with a classified contract.
I’m guessing it was something similar:(
May 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pm[…] Update: the telcos could be liable for many billions in damages. Now, who wants to be the first attorney to form a class for a Class Action? […]
May 11th, 2006 at 8:00 pmWhat is wrong with data mining certain al Qaeda phone numbers for patterns as to whom they call? I would have thought this is a standard wartime intelligence technique. We ARE at war, y’know . . . Or doesn’t that matter to you “progressive” types!?
May 11th, 2006 at 8:01 pmGood Idea, while we’re at war, we’ll just continue to give up all of our civil liberties!!! It’s not about protecting us from terroists. We need protection from them. America is quickly going down the tubes!!! Something needs to be done, we can’t stand for this administration to walk all over the constitution right in front of us. Terror is the pretext
May 11th, 2006 at 8:04 pmUmmm…BSR, your comment is so out of whack with the issue at hand — the illegal obtaining of tens of millions of telephone records, not just those of “certain al Qaeda phone numbers” — that one suspects you care very little about what this is about, and only care about defending your party and power.
Which is pretty typical of Internet Bush dead-enders, if I do say so.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:06 pmIf polls are conducted this weekend, Bush’s approval rating, one would think, should surely dip below thirty per cent. I think Nixon’s low was 29 per cent. With the outrageous spying done with the approval of this corrupt administration, Bush, in theory, should break Nixon’s rating.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:07 pmBSR,
BushCo. is at war with the constitution! The war with Al Qaeda is fiction. Bush and Al Qaeda enjoy a symbiotic relationship.
t-mac
May 11th, 2006 at 8:08 pm“the NSA has no administrative subpoena authority, and it is the NSA that reportedly got the phone records.”
that’s a flawed premise. the data may have been subpoenad by another party then passed to the NSA. perhaps by Mr Gonzalez.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:09 pmWhat is wrong with data mining certain al Qaeda phone numbers for patterns as to whom they call?
Of course, that’s all they’re data mining. Heh. Heh. Heh.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:10 pmRyan,
You’re right. For once. I stand corrected. That doesn’t mean you have to slander me. Your antics are very tiring.
With that said, it still isn’t clear-cut.
2702c is interesting, so is 2701c.
For example, 2702c4 allows for the voluntary disclosure of communications records:
2703 doesn’t even apply, as the government did not require AT&T and the rest to give them the information. They asked the phone companies to give up the information voluntarily, which is why 2702 comes into play.
2701c also provides that the government is not liable here, since:
Thus if the phone companies argue that they believed “that an emergency involving immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person justifies disclosure of the information” then they are off the hook as well.
Regardless, the NSA didn’t do anything illegal here. The only ones liable here are the phone companies, and it looks like they have a loop-hole they can use to justify their actions.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:12 pm“(iv)”for telemarketing enforcement;”
what the hell is that ? anyone hazard a guess ?
May 11th, 2006 at 8:16 pmRyan,
You’re right. For once. I stand corrected.
Comment by Seixon
You should be commended for admiting to wrong… I am starting to think the trolls are getting cracks… this just wasnt happening in the past… before they would get all frothy at the mouth and just couldnt say the words … “I ……stand …….!@#$%^$#!!!.”
May 11th, 2006 at 8:17 pmBlue StateRed - Remember, politically astute progs view themselves as politically correct intellectually superior “sophisticates”. The PC crowd has run Europe into the ground and they won’t be content until they do the same here.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:19 pm150 million disconnects would send the telcos into a tailspin.
The gov wouldn’t know whether to sh*t or go blind.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:22 pmplease sign me up for any class action law suit. i am livid. i am scared.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:22 pmRyan,
Calling me “stupid”, a “fool”, and a bunch of other things are slanderous. Why can’t you just let it go? Try to have a mature discussion for once. I presented a case that it isn’t clear-cut, now you can either disagree with me and try to rebut my points, or you can shut up. Don’t go around calling me names.
Getting the phone companies to give up phone records is not a violation of civil rights, Ryan. If you think so, then that would mean that everyone who buys phone records, such as telemarketers, are violating civil rights. Sorry, that’s not correct.
I’m not sure the Constitution guarantees Americans the rights to use a telephone service, but you can argue that it does if you want. Apparently the Constitution says all kinds of things in between the lines… ;)
Gerald,
I will always admit when I am wrong, unlike certain others……
May 11th, 2006 at 8:24 pmAnother problem: Share holder lawsuits are going to kill these companies. I wouldn’t be surprised to see congress pass legislation to make their actions retroactively legal. The impact on this is so large and wide.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:28 pmI suggest the following be appended to your sig file on any e-mail sent by you. It’s on all of mine, sans the corporate one, because we’re prohibited from any form of political opinion at work.
NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant or notice, and certainly not without probable cause. They may be this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:29 pmRyan,
The government did not legally compel Qwest to help them. Qwest was never taken to court for not following 2703c, namely because the NSA was not legally requiring them to give up the records. As for “blackmail”, the government is not legally bound to provide Qwest with any contracts if they don’t want to, especially classified ones.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:29 pmHow to sue your phone company:
#1) Go to your local district court and file a small claim action for $1000 for “Illegally providing phone records to the NSA” Costs about $30.
#2) The court clerk will stamp your claim and give you a Case Number and a court date.
#3) Serve your phone company by mailing the stamped claim by registered mail. Costs about $5.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:32 pm#4) Attend the court hearing. A lawyer from your phone company MUST show up to defend. If they don’t show up, you will win $1000 by default. If they do defend, you’ll at least get a chance to have your say on the record, and you might win. BUT, either way, just think how much we could cost the phone company if just 10,000 of us did this? The cost of just defending these cases would make the phone company think twice about playing ball with the feds. For an added bonus, send a copy of the claim a week before your court date to the local newspapers and you might even stir up some press.
Doh, that should read:
NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may have read this email without warning, warrant or notice, and certainly not without probable cause. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President.
I had incorrectly typed “They may BE this without….” scratch that. Should have been “They may DO this without…”
Sorry for the typo.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:32 pmAphrodite,
May 11th, 2006 at 8:34 pmIf you’ve got nothin’, just say so.
So, Bush&Co learned the lessons of the past, when they tried to get authority for illegal activity, they were denied by Coomey, and by none other than Ashcroft, so they did it anyway and learned not to ask for permission any more.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:36 pmThey just do as they want, don’t tell, don’t ask.
It’s the NIKE defense: Just do it.
So what about cell companies like T-Mobile?
May 11th, 2006 at 8:40 pmThe Administration is in clear violation of at least one and perhaps two laws. Here’s my analysis of the NSA fiasco.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:41 pmI am extremely angry over the recent disclosure that Verizon has been sharing personal information with the federal government without any warrant or subpoena issued.
I have been a long time customer of Verizon and now as I approach the end of my two year contract with your company, am beginning to wonder why. Your company doesn’t have the gonads to refuse like Qwest Communications did. You just rolled over? is that it?
Maybe it’s time to take our business elsewhere. I expect an explanation and don’t make it mealy mouthed please.
Sincerely,
Celeste & Michael
p.s. we are wireless and residential customers
May 11th, 2006 at 8:41 pmStart mounting that Class Action suit today!
May 11th, 2006 at 8:42 pmHey, Blue State Red, the “war” we are in is the same as the “war” on drugs. I.e. - not a REAL war, it is RHETORICAL one. Congress never issued a Statement of War. Last time they declared that was during World War 2. So, just shove it. I assume you have nothing at all to hide, huh? You are squeaky clean! Every single phone call you have made over the past 6 years has been recorded, Bubba. Never ever once slipped up? Hmmm?
Think hard. When the government turns into a fascist dictatorship, when will you be the one that’s picked up? Who will speak out for you…. hmmm?
By thinking in those terms, you begin to see that your line of thought is ill-informed. Do you know for sure that none of those “wrong numbers” you’ve been recieving recently aren’t Al Quaeda? What are you hiding, hmmm?
May 11th, 2006 at 8:42 pm:) coming to you on my QWEST DSL line…yay!!!!! This CANNOT go away…
May 11th, 2006 at 8:43 pmRyan,
Take a deep breath. Even if you think I am the dumbest person in the world, you can keep it to yourself. I don’t think I speak only for myself when I say that such name-calling only ruins any productive mood in a debate and gets tempers flaring. Your temper seems to be flaring 24/7, which is unfortunate.
Just as I suspected, you read in between the lines of the Constitution. The Constitution doesn’t say what you just did here, but I guess you feel compelled to twist the words of the 4th amendment as you please. Here is the 4th amendment:
Would you like to point out to me where it says that phone conversations and phone records logged with a service provider are protected? I don’t see it.
Actually, what you’re doing is generalizing the 4th amendment well beyond what it says to apply to anything you see fit. That’s not how it works. Adults don’t go around calling people names, start acting like one.
It’s not blackmail. The government can decide on certain requirements for all companies that want to apply for contracts, and if the companies do not meet the requirements, they will not be considered for a contract. Is that blackmail? No, it’s not. Blackmail is when you force someone to do something when they are in a position where they have to do it. Qwest doesn’t have to get classified government contracts.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:44 pm#70-”my humble opinion..” - Comment by a govt servant
**** Let me guess - another “hard” working government bureaucrat? SIEU?? I know reading the same tired “progressive” garbage is a way to wile the hours away while you’re on the taxpayers dime…
For the rest of you paranoid progs - why not call on your brothers & sisters in the Communication Union? DemDonating Class Action Attorneys provide a wonderful service - for themselves…
May 11th, 2006 at 8:45 pmI haven’t had the time to read all of the posts, but, if I wrote to the Freedom of Information Folks, I assume they’d have to provide a list of all of those who had been spied on? Over?
May 11th, 2006 at 8:45 pmAphrodite apparently can’t make cogent argument in the slightest. I’ve read better posts on Yahoo.com from Bushies.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:47 pmI’ve already contacted the Mississippi branch of the ACLU. I didn’t know where else to start, but this sounds right up their alley. I’d urge others to contact their state HQ’s.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:49 pmChanging companies now.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:52 pmOn one of these threads, someone pointed out that this information can be shared with FBI, CIA, DEA and any government agency. So, right now, you think you are safe, but will you be safe tomorrow? They have your information, and can review any call you had in the past 5 years.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:52 pmAlso, it has been noted somewhere here that AT&T and Bell own all the switching equipment and other hardware (excuse me for not understanding the technical) so even if you change companies, you will still be doing business indirectly with the same companies involved.
Even Qwest who wisely chose not to submit to pressure and blackmail.
The phone company monopoly was broken twenty years ago, only to have regrouped in recent years, and now are in bed with the govt.
beavercleaver,
Well, since the NSA only got phone numbers, and not names, I’m not sure you’d get very far with a FOIA to get a list of people…
May 11th, 2006 at 8:52 pmignore mighty aphrodite and her/his ilk? I know it’s difficult…she/he makes us so mad - but, you know we just play into her/his hirsute hand when we respond to her/his bullshit. She/he only comes here to incite people to respond. Ignore this slime bag whose only pleasure is coming to this blog and getting people to respond to the bullshit.
my humble opinion..
Comment by a govt servant
Ever see that game where the mole pops up from a hole and you are supposed to hit it on the head with that padded hammer ….
Comment by Gerald Gibson — May 11, 2006 @ 7:58 pm
OMG, the first real laugh I’ve had all day!!!! thanks.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:56 pmIf anyone is considering changing phone service, I would like to suggest Working Assets. They are a company concerned with social and liberal causes and are also publishing Glenn Greenwald’s latest book. Even though they are located in Pa., they are able to provide service for me on the West Coast.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:59 pmThis is wrong, sorry folks.
2701(c) Exceptions.— Subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to conduct authorized—
(1) by the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communications service;
That is, if the phone company authorized the access, it’s not an offense.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:04 pmI agree that you cannot “force” anyone to do anything, they just decide to take the consequence, which could be death.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:09 pmSorry - this is OT, but…
May 11th, 2006 at 9:13 pmSo much for “supporting the troops.”
http://www.rawstory.com/ news/ 2006/ Army_recruits_allege_injuries_punished_with_0511.html
An Army program for recruits injured in basic training has been charged with physical abuse and medical neglect, according to a report in Friday’s New York Times……..
#116, Marie. My divestiture history is a big foggy, so I can be completely wrong, but back in 1986 when Judge Green ordered the breakup of the ATT system, it included the “lines”. So, in effect, in 2006, the lines are no longer owned by ATT. Pre-divestiture they were “leased lines” and still ATT property and for a while shortly after divestiture this was still true. Not so today.
However, today, ATT is releasing to the NSA captured information from “peering links,” which connect AT&T’s infrastructure to other telecommunications networks, potentially giving the NSA access to information traversing “the whole country, as well as the rest of the world.” So if you’re an ATT customer and accessing something another telecommunications company “owns”, it’s being sent on.
So much for what ATT stood for when they started way back when. Kind of like the USA back in the old days; Customer (citizien) information was private and protected at all costs. I wish every telecom company had a Nacchio at the helm.
Theresa (a former ATT employee - pre and post divestiture)
May 11th, 2006 at 9:14 pm#2 - Please include my name!
May 11th, 2006 at 9:16 pm#99 - This should be done for ALL the companies that disclosed the records. Any calls you made to a customer of any other offending telco, was reported to the government by them.
Even as a Qwest customer, I have been thusly raped numerous times.
I say we coordinate the filings. Swamp the fucking system. This must stop.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:18 pmSorry, my previous post was a response to #91.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:20 pm“That is, if the phone company authorized the access, it’s not an offense. Comment by grytpype”
I suggest you re-read that section. Because the semicolon was used without an OR conjunction, both the authorization of the company and the customer are required before an exception is granted. Legal language is often based on this sort of subtlety, so it’s easy to miss this. The ‘AND’ is implied in these sorts of conditions unless OR is used as was the 3rd condition.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:26 pmRyan,
Olmstead vs. the United States huh. Alright, this was the Court’s opinion:
Sorry, friend, but the Constitution doesn’t cover that. This is why federal laws were passed to govern these types of things, since the Constitution does not cover it.
As for you claiming not to be having a temper in this discussion, why do you keep USING ALL CAPS? Why do you keep using inflammatory language? Sounds like you’re pretty riled up to me.
Just because the Constitution doesn’t guarantee something doesn’t mean other laws don’t, something it seems you have entirely forgotten. If what you said were true, there wouldn’t have been any need for the FISA laws of 1978.
You are quite possibly the most inflammatory person I have ever encountered on the internet. No, it is not blackmail. Qwest was not coerced or extorted into giving up their records. Blackmail is when someone wants you to pay them not to release pictures of you. If you don’t do it, it will cause you harm of some sort. Qwest will not be harmed by not doing as the NSA says. They won’t get classified contracts, but that’s not the same as getting harmed.
Blackmail entails that you will end up harmed in some manner by not doing what someone says. Not receiving a contract is not harming, as it was not something you were entitled to, or something that was yours.
It appears you don’t seem to understand what blackmail entails.
I mean look. If a cell-phone operator comes to me and says “hey, pay us $50 or you won’t get to use our network” is that blackmail? No, it’s not. I haven’t lost anything by saying no. Of course, I won’t gain the ability to use their network, but I am no worse off than I was before I said no. Blackmail entails you being harmed physically or economically as a direct result if you do not do what the person blackmailing you says.
Qwest isn’t harmed by not getting contracts in the future that they had no right to. In fact, the government can require cooperation from companies who want certain types of contracts. Such as with Iraq contracts, companies had to agree to non-disclosure agreements about the contracts for security reasons. Obviously if there was a company that did not follow these rules earlier, they would not be considered.
I’d say that you are projecting onto me the inverse of what you are: paranoid.
Why in the hell would the NSA want to do anything other than what they are supposed to do? We’re talking about a huge agency here. So all the people of the agency are interested in you talking to your friend about your cat? Seriously, I don’t follow the logic.
I’m not saying that it is impossible that the NSA has misused the information, but for you and others to just assume that they are is just abrasive. Why doesn’t this skepticism rule your entire life? The credit card companies, the phone companies, the IRS, every company that has information about you… couldn’t they misuse your information as well? Yes, they could. So why don’t you scream out allegations about all of them like you are at the NSA?
Oh, I know why, because Bush is president. That is the only reason. Do you know what the Echelon Project was? Clinton and the NSA were conducting surveillance of all kinds of stuff. Did you care then? Probably not - Clinton was president.
And you know what, I could care less if the government wants to listen to me talking to my friend about cars or some other garbage. If they really want to waste their time, then that’s just sad. I don’t see why they would, so therefore I assume that they aren’t wasting their time doing such moronic things.
Of course, you and others are obsessed with making Americans feel like their every move is being watched by Bush so that you can scare them into voting for Democrats in November. I find that a bit disingenuous and pathetic to be quite honest. You are overblowing everything, assuming the worst about anything that might involve Bush, even all the Americans who are working at the NSA to protect us from terrorism.
You don’t care. All you care about is getting Democrats into power, and you’ll do just about anything to get there. I find that disgusting.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:33 pmSounds like a great class action lawsuit case. Sign me up!!!
So, Bush and his admnistration lied to us (U.S.) again. They said they were only spying on telephone calls where at least one end was overseas and possibly connected to al Qaeda. Apparently, they were spying on hundreds of millions of U.S. citizens in some huge, secret data-mining operation…which would put even Richard Nixon to shame. Of course, Nixon would have pulled the same stunt if he’d had the computing power at hand that is available into today’s modern computer age.
And Bush once again claims that everything he’s done, as far as surreptitious surveillance on U.S. citizens, is only done after court approval. Liar. And the “appropriate” people in Congress have been notified of their illegal surveillance program, according to Hayden. Of course, we believe that. Especially after we just learned that the list of who’s “appropriate” in Congress is even classified so no one will discover exactly who the congressional culprits are who signed off on this illegal surveillance program…and kept it secret even from other members of OUR Congress.
The Republicanoids cannot be trusted. And what is a Republicanoid? It’s a cross between a Republican and hemorrhoids. Ouch.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:33 pm[…] all gonna be rich! Permalink| […]
May 11th, 2006 at 9:34 pmThis isn’t about the communications. It’s about the communications records. That’s why it’s section 2703 that applies.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:34 pmHave a look at this. This is hysterical. www,totalitarianrepublic.com
May 11th, 2006 at 9:37 pmRyan,
Wrong. Do I need to go through a grammar lesson? Here’s two sentences:
1. A, B, or C.
2. A, B, and C.
What do these two sentences mean? You seem to think that they mean:
1. A and B or C.
2. A and B and C.
Wrong. They mean:
1. A or B or C.
2. A and B and C.
Seems the only one in need of an English lesson is you, Ryan.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:39 pm[…] LINK […]
May 11th, 2006 at 9:39 pmJudd,
Wrong. The telcos were not being “required” to give up the records, thus section 2703 does not apply. The government asked them to voluntarily give up the records, thus section 2702 applies.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:41 pmI bet there are law firms burning the midnight oil tonight researching this. Could be the mother of all lawsuits.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:45 pm“Seems the only one in need of an English lesson is you, Ryan. Comment by Seixon the STUPID”
Legal language is DIFFERENT than standard english. This is like that STUPID RANT you did on lambert’s site. Your IGNORANCE OF LEGAL LANGUAGE is all that you demostrate SON. Get a CLUE, you’re just TOO STUPID to be here.
And as for your post on the ‘required’, that’s YET ANOTHER FALSE PREMISE you’ve posted.
Stick to Herring Eating contests - you clearly are alergic to ‘legal’ issues.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:46 pmI Love my State!
Seattle PI poll
Was Qwest, the regional phone company serving much of Western Washington, right to refuse to turn over customer phone records rountinely to the National Security Agency?
89.2%
Yes
10.8%
May 11th, 2006 at 9:48 pmNo
Please resist the urge to say “You do the math.”
May 11th, 2006 at 9:51 pmJudd,
You’re a good man, I gave up on Seixon weeks ago. I think he must speak english as a second language, because basic linguistic issues that are typically taught in junior high escape the poor b@st@rd.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:56 pm#90: The government did not legally compel Qwest to help them. Qwest was never taken to court for not following 2703c, namely because the NSA was not legally requiring them to give up the records.
Odd, that. You would think that if this program was so important, they would’ve legally compelled Qwest to assist. Unless, of course, they couldn’t.
May 11th, 2006 at 9:59 pmJudd,
I second what Ryan said. This guy is,…well,… a dope!
May 11th, 2006 at 10:00 pmBut I guess that’s why they are called “trolls.”
[…] Telcos Could Be Liable For Tens of Billions of Dollars For Illegally Turning Over Phone Records “(1) It violates the Stored Communications Act…. […]
May 11th, 2006 at 10:03 pmSexion, your disengenous “understanding” of the law is apparant…no US government entity is allowed to use the threat of cooersion..ie denial of future government contracts to enforce a request….that is a form of blackmail because cooperating gets a financial benefit where not cooperating denies that benefit, what part of this do you pretent not to understand….
May 11th, 2006 at 10:03 pmI sold my Verizon stock, and bought Quest instead!!! The Symbol is “Q”.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:04 pmI was thinking about this shit today… we sue them, and they turn right around and get it back by raising our rates… we have to penalize them in some other way…
May 11th, 2006 at 10:05 pmSeems to me to boil down to “manly manlyness”. The big tough “Manly” Republicans think it would be sappy not to be able to “coerce” others. “Manly Men” just take what they want and whuddiagonnadoaboutit!
May 11th, 2006 at 10:08 pmOn a related note–I have a year left on my cell phone contract. I contacted Cingular today via email and asked if they would let me out of my contract because they are in breech of the privacy clause in their agreement. It will be interesting to see how they respond.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:08 pmSo, TPM Muckraker says that AG Gonzales may have lied just the teeniest bit when he testified in Apr. that this wasn’t happening. Good thing he wasn’t sworn in….
May 11th, 2006 at 10:09 pmI just sent the Chief Ethics Officer at Qwest a letter of support. Sad, but I thanked him for not violating Qwest’s own privacy policies.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:10 pm[…] They may have violated the Stored Communications Act. And FISA doesn’t give them any cover. […]
May 11th, 2006 at 10:12 pmI want my thousand dollars.
May 11th, 2006 at 10:12 pmwas thinking about this shit today… we sue them, and they turn right around and get it back by raising our rates… we have to penalize them in some other way…
Comment by Pete Bogs
No, Pete,
May 11th, 2006 at 10:12 pmThe way the competition is now, it’d be corporate suicide to raise rates!
Isn’t it beautiful?!!?
BUSH AT 29%