Boardroom Spying Debacle at HP

theodp writes "As word spread that HP was dumping Board member George Keyworth for press leaks, Newsweek broke the bigger story: HP Chairwoman Patricia Dunn was so obsessed with finding the leaker that she authorized a team of independent electronic-security experts to spy on the phone records of calls made from HP Directors' home and private cell phones. Not only that, phone records were obtained via pretexting, the controversial practice of obtaining information under false pretenses. After Dunn laid out the surveillance scheme for the Board last May, HP Director Tom Perkins quit on the spot, characterizing Dunn's actions as illegal and unethical. HP is also coming under fire for playing dumb to the SEC about the reasons behind Perkins' resignation. Perkins, who helped launch HP's computer division in the 60's, has asked the FTC, FCC and the Justice Department to investigate."

Comments

Re:Not really

[gb506]

I don't think tritonman was referring to PlameGate, which was really Rove and Cheney more than Bush anyway.

GreenSwirl needs a dirty swirly since he/she apparently hasn't read the news lately - Armitage was Novak's source. Armitage was anti-Iraq invasion, therefore your Rove/Cheney conspiracy theory went down the drain. Now that the facts are out, babbling on about Rove/Cheney in this instance only makes you look like a fool w/ tunnel vision.

Parent gets modded insightful?!!

[Lactoso]

This poster makes doubtful claims to bolster the veracity of his ranting, but posts it as an AC? How convenient.

Well, I'm actually Al Gore's personal valet and I'm here to tell you that he strangles kittens when he thinks no one is watching. He has baskets of the little cute things delivered to the house every week...

Why can't you simply argue (or villify) on the facts? Why is it that the rabid left insists on making ad hominem attacks? In fact, it appears that is the only type of argument these people are able to make.

There are plenty of centrists that are (or rather, would be) sympathetic to whatever your *actual* point may be, but instead lose faith in the quality of the person making the argument based on a reliance on insults and/or attacks on intelligence/religious beliefs. How can you be for increased tolerance and equal rights when you are so intolerant of anyone who doesn't strictly emulate your thought process?!

To hell with my karma, I'm not posting AC...

Re:An example

[thej1nx]

Brilliant.

An idiot who still buys into this stupid nonsense.

Yeah right. Let us see... so Saddam was getting attacked. He had WMDs. He could have used them.

...But according to you, he said "Nooooo... I am about to lose this war, which I might possibly win, if I use these WMDs I am supposed to have, and which will even get US to get the fuck off my back just like they tuck their tails when China gets mentioned... but that will totally spoil my image. So I will happily lose the war, and not use these WMDs I am supposed to have, even if I don't have anything to lose by using them really".

Sheesh. What a moron.