Slashdot Mirror


Verizon Employees Fired For Snooping Obama's Record

longhairedgnome writes "The curiosity in President-elect Barack Obama's phone records came with a high price tag for Verizon Wireless employees. According to CNN, the workers who snooped on Obama's phone records have been fired. 'This was some employees' idle curiosity,' a company source told CNN and added 'we now consider this matter closed.' Justice served? What about legal possibilities?" Can we expect anyone who followed a warrantless wiretap from the Bush administration to also be fired then? I mean, they violated our privacy as well.

12 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. Justice Served by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can we expect anyone who followed a warrantless wiretap from the Bush administration to also be fired then? I mean, they violated our privacy as well.

    No, you can expect President Bush to be fired for ordering the wiretap.

    1. Re:Justice Served by ScentCone · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, you can expect President Bush to be fired for ordering the wiretap.

      Unfortunately, we can't expect people like Nancy Pelosi - who has always been fully briefed on such things - to be fired for being such a hypocrite about it.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Justice Served by AmericanGladiator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, you can expect President Bush to be fired for ordering the wiretap.

      No, you can expect President Bush to be fired because his term is over and it's time for him to GTFO. The Republicans were fired by the American people, although most of them hold key positions near Obama (keep your friends close, and your enemies closer).

      I would expect you to complain about Obama now, too. He voted in favor of extending the warrantless wiretapping legislation when in the Senate. I would expect him to continue the status quo. If you don't rail against him I would infer you care less about privacy and more about your favorite politician.

    3. Re:Justice Served by rhsanborn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Republicans were fired by the American people, although most of them hold key positions near Obama (keep your friends close, and your enemies closer).

      Or maybe he's keeping qualified people with diverse opinions close so that he doesn't pigeon-hole himself with people who tell him things he already knows. Several of the background stories on him covered his period at the Harvard Law Review where he upset many people because his election to that post didn't give all the open positions to people of the same political affiliation. He's doing the same here.

    4. Re:Justice Served by aaandre · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Being a hypocrite is a requirement of the job. Being caught committing illegal activities should get someone fired, though. Polititians being above the laws of the people is at the core of corruption and lack of accountability. Leads us back into monarchy, where the King's word is law and the King is above the law.

      Who keeps the government accountable? One minute of choice every four or so years certainly does not work very well.

  2. Not likely illegal by travisd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would it be illegal? Disclosure, yes. But these were VZW employees who were given the ability to look at records as part of their job. VZW's policy though is that they only look at records that they have a reason to - for customer service, billing, etc.

    Unless they turned these over to an outside party (media, government, etc) then there's probably nothing illegal happening. Completely different from the wiretaps.

    It's amazing though that the employees are still dumb enough to not realize that their actions, even if they don't change anything, can be tracked.

  3. How many? by evanbd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apparently it's pretty easy to snoop on a random person's phone records over there. How many employees have snooped on someone less noteworthy -- a friend, a possibly cheating spouse, etc.? Are there policies in place to catch more mundane privacy invasions and fire those people as well, or does it only matter if the person in question is politically relevant?

  4. Ironic... by nebaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have generally been an Obama supporter, but was very disappointed that he voted for telecom immunity in the FISA bill last year. Apparently it is ok for corporations as a whole
    to snoop on your calls, but not for individual employees to snoop on his. (Note: I am not condoning the action of the employee, it just seems interesting at what level justice applies).

    --
    Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
  5. Re:National security and terrorists by Xtravar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you ask John McCain, he'll tell you that Obama pals around with terrorists. Perhaps this was a case of national security!

    --
    Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
  6. Re:No. by R2.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's clear that Obama is doing the best he can to not be a criminal, excluding lobbyists from his administration for example. Maybe give the guy a chance before you call him an outlaw? Jeez....

    Are you kidding? We berate ALL politicians here - why does Obama get a pass?

    Oh, I forgot - he's for Change. And apparently was born without original sin...

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  7. Re:No. by Danse · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think you fail to understand the difference. The Imunity wasn't a free pass to say this was a good action. It was saying the government cohorsed you into doing this illegal action, as the government put pressure to do an illegal deed (AKA. Intrapment) they shouldn't need to suffer the legal reprocussions from it.

    First of all, please use a dictionary. Second, it's not like these corporations can be tricked into doing something illegal. They have packs of lawyers roaming their halls who have been dealing with FISA cases for decades. They know the law better than the government does most likely. They knew what they were doing wasn't legal. They did it anyway.

    Your traffic analogy is very flawed. Nobody is harmed by traffic being directed the wrong way as long as it is controlled by someone. Happens all the time when there is construction. It's more like a cop asking you to do something that you know is illegal, such as shooting someone. You know it's illegal, no matter what the cop says, and once you've done it, you can't take it back. Why would you do it?

    --
    It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
  8. Re:No. by jasper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Always attack never defend has become the new debate style in American politics. This was brought on by news commentators making outrageous claims and forcing the opposition to defend and legitimize the claim.

    Cry about it all you want, but instead of attacking people you don't like, try defending the ones you do. You just get pushed around by bad logic, strawmen, and people that really don't care if they lie.