Slashdot Mirror


Phone Companies Refuse to Give Congress Data on Spy Program

JohNNy1+4 writes "Several US telephone communications firms are refusing to answer the questions of a congressional panel about spying on American citizens. The panel is making an inquiry into Bush administration tactics in the years since 2001, but has been stymied by the administration's claim that releasing that information would be illegal. As a result Verizon, AT&T, and Qwest have declined to answer the panel's queries. '"Our company essentially finds itself caught in the middle of an oversight dispute between the Congress and the executive relating to government surveillance activities," AT&T Inc. General Counsel Wayne Watts said in a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee that was released today by the panel.'"

19 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. Don't blame me! by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was just following orders!

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    1. Re:Don't blame me! by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Insightful
      > I was just following orders!

      "If AT&T has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear!"

      What's the over/under on cliches from tired totalitarian regimes for this session of testimony? I've got $10 riding in today's "Totalitarian Bingo" game and I still need a "Papers Please", "(n, canonically Five)-Year Plan" and a "Little (colored, canonically Red) Book" to win.

    2. Re:Don't blame me! by quixote9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly. Verizon even said that they never checked the legality. I'm sure they'd have the same attitude if I spied on my sister because "my brother-in-law made me do it."

      Idiots.

      Venal idiots.

      Venal, cowardly, criminal idiots.

  2. What oversight dispute? by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't the US Constitution clear on the point of oversight, giving Congress the ability to investigate and even remove the president, but not the other way around?

    Or is the US truly near its nadir and soon "el Presidente" will be running everything, unopposed.

  3. Anyone else... by Jarjarthejedi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anyone else find it amusing that they'll give information on everyone else to the government, but not themselves? That game me a little, sad, chuckle

    --
    There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
  4. Contempt of Congress by apparently · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since when is it up to a subpoenaed third-party to make claims regarding oversight between branches of government? Find the fuckers in contempt of congress, and stop dragging this shit out already. We'll see how quick they start talking as they're frog-marched out by the Sergeant at Arms.
    Stop and delay, stop and delay, eh, fellas?

    1. Re:Contempt of Congress by rk · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wait, contempt of Congress is a CRIME?! Oh, hell, I'm in deep shit, 'cause I have nothing BUT contempt for those asshats. ;-)

  5. Re:I hate to say it, but they're right. by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and why shouldn't it have this oversight?

    That is because it is their role. In order to legislate, they have to be able to determine the facts to adjust the legislation accordingly. That is why they have very broad investigative powers. Also it is the role of Congress to oversee the Executive, and if necessary investigate it and even remove the President, if the investigation warrants it. Note that the Constitution provides no means for the Executive to remove Congress.

  6. How the...? by twifosp · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It's too bad these Reps won't have the balls to send subpoenaes to the CEO's of these companies, drag them in front of congress, and find them in contempt of congress for refusing to comply.

    The American government no longer matters. Welcome back to the Fuedal ages everyone! CEO's and boards are the land owners, lawyers are the knights. Get back to work you serfs.

    1. Re:How the...? by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well I mean... yah.

      Have you ever looked at the term "Wage Slave" and thought of how apt it really is?

      I mean, sure, you can do what you want and say what you want. However, you like to eat don't you? Well, unless you raise and slaughter your own, that takes money. Want money? Well I guess you could start your own small buisness and drum up clients among your fellow free people... but realistically, for most, it means being someones wage slave.

      Wage slave show up at 8 am. Wage slave, wear clothes according to this policy.

      All the money is in the hands of the upper class, and the lower classes are lucky to slurp up what they can. Wages are balanced against social order, pay people just enough to be too comfortable to revolt.... have enough wage slaves under you, and you get the ear of congress. Thats not enough? Get together with a bunh of other upperclassmen and collectively get the congresscritters ear (its cleaner that way).

      Overall mass media is capable of keeping things too confusing and spreads the idea that its all rigged and your vote doesn't matter anyway. Put up two nearly identical puppets who are both wholly owned subsidieries of some federation of corperations.

      Make the people feel they are getting what they deserve because nobody is willing to stand up en mass, all while making issues too confusing and convoluted for anyone to get such a mass to stand up in the first place. Toss in a few wedge issues to get people a bit worked up over something that doesn't actually matter, to blow off the steam. And voi la.... you have a system of wage slavery that lets everyone pat themselves on the back for how free we are.

      Free....to do as we are told.

      -Steve

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  7. In other words... by sweatyboatman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our lawyers are pretty sure we broke the law and complied with an illegal order. But they're also pretty sure that Congress doesn't have the balls to confront the White House about this. So, complain all you want, but we'll being skiing in hell before we testify before Congress about this.

    --
    It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
  8. Scumbags by Experiment+626 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh sure, now they stand up to a request from the government and refuse to fulfill it on the grounds that it would be "illegal". Maybe they should have given that response to the NSA instead of saving it for Congress.

  9. What a convenient time to become moral by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why yes I raped you, but telling that to the jury would just violate your privacy, so I won't. Ain't I a nice guy.

    These companies violated the law, and now claim that confessing to that, violates the law?

    I shot you in the head, but I won't take you to the hospital in a car because well, I don't have a driving license and I don't want to break the law.

    The sooner this US goverment is taken down and replaced the better. I guess it is clear how republicans think, screw a girl IMPEACH, screw the nation, you are a hero!

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:What a convenient time to become moral by Obsidian+Butterfly · · Score: 5, Funny

      All we have to do is get somebody to give Bush a blow job.

      Any Republican congressman want to volunteer?

  10. Even Easier by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Very simple....

    Seems to me that if the law doesn't allow congress to pull their corperate charter for this, then the law needs to be fixed.

    Loss of limited liability would either sink them or change their tune right quick.

    -Steve

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  11. Big surprise by smashp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Phone Companies are letting the government use their equipment to spy on Americans. In Return they mega corporations will get support from certain members of congress and the executive for supposed "Pro Business" regulations. These "regulations" will cement these corporations and give them government supported monopolies and allow the Telecoms to govern and regulate themselves. In Essence, they have entered into an unholy alliance with the US government. Greed is enabling, Power is corupting. You are witnessing the Rise of Pure Fascism in the US.

  12. Re:I hate to say it, but they're right. by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And it would mean the end of the US as a Republic and an official beginning of the Empire.

    Which is precisely what happened to Ancient Rome. The Republic of Rome was effectively dead by the time Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus had fully consolidated their positions, but for the following several hundred years most Roman citizens politely pretended otherwise. I am not suggesting that this will happen to us, but it is wise to learn the lessons of history.

  13. Corporate Executive by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Congress can file contempt charges against the telcos refusing formal requests, but those contempt charges have to be prosecuted by the Attorney General. Who is, of course, in Bush's pocket, chosen to protect illegal programs exactly like the one these telcos helped Bush violate. We don't even have an actual AG right now, but whoever is in the job will run interference against justice - obstruction of justice, but the bureaucratic kind that's even harder to get the Department of Justice to prosecute.

    That logjam is one reason why Congress should have impeached Gonzales, the illegal wiretapping program's primary defender. Trying his impeachment would have given Congress power to force the telcos to turn over the evidence, without relying on the Justice Department whose head was on trial. In fact, it's still not too late to try Gonzales, even though he's out of office, as there is clear precedent in US law. William Belknap was impeached after he resigned (like Nixon, he resigned to escape impeachment).

    Or, better yet, cut off the snake's head: impeach Cheney. Or cut out its forked tongue: impeach Bush.

    Or leave it all to politics as usual, and leave the telcos and the next government with these same abusive powers. And watch the country continue to go down the drain, sacrificing both wealth and freedom on the altar to fruitless imperial power.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  14. Re:Ah...Yes wiretapping by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 4, Informative

    Firstly, you're insane or ignorant if you think the Watergate Hearings were some sort of witch hunt. I suggest you read some transcripts of the Nixon archive tapes before regurgitating that BS. Nixon decided to leave office when his OWN PARTY told him the game was over. I wish he still would have been criminally prosecuted for his REAL abuses of the Constitution.

    Secondly, steering a Senate investigation into a President's extramarital affair is damned straight a witch hunt, especially in the context of the "Arkansas Group" and the BS Troopergate story. And, the Clinton impeachment vote wasn't along party lines. Even some Republicans weren't stupid enough to vote for it.

    Third, Clinton didn't perjure himself. Go research the Clinton perjury myth.

    But thanks for rehashing the same uninformed myths about our political history that reveal the widespread ignorance that gets us into debacles like Iraq.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!