The Phoenix Network:
 
 
 
About  |  Advertise
Adult  |  Moonsigns  |  Band Guide  |  Blogs  |  In Pictures
 
Media -- Dont Quote Me  |  News Features  |  Talking Politics

Ring of fire

The deadbeat FBI fails to pay its phone bills and jeopardizes its wiretapping program
By HARVEY SILVERGLATE  |  January 23, 2008

080125_freedom_main

An ugly squabble between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the nation’s biggest phone companies has, in one nasty blow, recast the image of all the entities involved. It will now be difficult not to think of the FBI as a deadbeat and hypocritical agency, nor of the phone giants as disloyal and hypocritical dollar chasers, thanks to a problem concerning payment for the FBI’s wiretap program.

The reason that the nation’s top phone companies stopped spying on their customers, it turns out, was not due to a sudden fit of conscience, ethics, or loyalty. Rather, when the FBI stopped paying its phone bill for wiretapping services, the phone companies stopped performing their patriotic duty, ceased serving their government masters, and focused instead (dare we say predictably?) on their corporate pocketbooks.

(Recall that the companies had relied on a claim of patriotism when seeking to defend themselves against criticism and lawsuits for unlawful invasion of customers’ privacy. This was the telecommunications industry’s mantra when it lobbied Congress for immunity from such lawsuits.)

And so we are wronged once again, this time by the knowledge that our telecommunications providers betrayed us not out of idealism nor duty, but for money.

The FBI, by not paying its bills for wiretapping services, likewise put the lie to the notion that our national security depends upon warrantless snooping. Yeah, it’s a great weapon for detecting terrorists in our midst, say the Feds, but not worth paying for. And then, when the FBI found it necessary to defend its disastrous bookkeeping — something the Department of Justice (DOJ) has indicted many an individual or corporation for — it sought cover from a supposedly “independent” outside auditor that turned out not to be quite so independent.

But we’re getting ahead of our story.

Patriots for hire
After years of vocal protest, privacy advocates at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) finally got their wish: part of the federal government’s warrantless surveillance program has begun to unravel. The major telephone companies announced on January 10 that they would no longer cooperate with the FBI’s wiretapping program. One would think that civil libertarians are rejoicing over the news. But the more one learns about the true reasons behind the wiretapping program’s partial demise, the more disillusioned one becomes.

First, let’s consider the craven and profit-driven actions of executives at AT&T Corp., BellSouth Corp., and Verizon Telecommunications. All three companies complied with the hyper-secret National Security Agency’s unprecedented order to build a vast database of customer calling records sometime after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, even though the agency had not obtained a wiretap warrant in accordance with the rather clear procedures set out in federal-communications privacy statutes. A fourth telecom giant, Qwest Communications, refused because of “a disinclination on the part of the authorities to use any legal process,” according to a statement released in May 2006 by an attorney for the company’s former chief executive, Joseph Nacchio. In 2005, in what many legal pundits have called a retaliatory prosecution, Nacchio was charged with insider trading. A jury convicted him on 19 of 42 counts and he faces six years in prison, pending appeal.

1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |   next >
Related: A spate of phony ‘terror’ plots, William Lemmer: Coming home, Pressing the case, More more >
  Topics: News Features , Politics, U.S. Politics, George W. Bush,  More more >
  • Share:
  • Share this entry with Facebook
  • Share this entry with Digg
  • Share this entry with Delicious
  • RSS feed
  • Email this article to a friend
  • Print this article
Comments
Ring of fire
Sean Barlett is a stud and a half whose writing makes me want to go out and suplex the 1st perosn I meet!
By fossman on 05/24/2007 at 2:06:25
Ring of fire
Considering I hadn't read the Phoenix since my college days in the late '70's and we all remember those ads in the back :) Someone sent me this, so I took a look around. Nice site, I bookmarked it, although I didn't see "those" ads online. ;) Anyway, congrats to Sean on a excellent article! I saw flashes of Hayward Hale Broun and Shirley Povich in the descriptions of the wrestlers. I'm more of a casual wrstling fan, but this was so juicy that it was the closest thing to being there on a sultry summer night, beer and catcalls at the ready. I hope this is not the last of what shows to be a promising sports writing career.
By patkeepsie391 on 05/29/2007 at 5:18:42

ARTICLES BY HARVEY SILVERGLATE
Share this entry with Delicious
  •   FREE SPEECH AGAIN QUASHED AT HARVARD  |  October 21, 2009
    It should come as no surprise to readers of “Freedom Watch” that yet another instance of political, intellectual, and academic censorship has sprung up at Harvard, the self-touted pinnacle of higher education.
  •   THE GATES CASE ISN'T ABOUT RACE  |  August 05, 2009
    The weeks-long hubbub over the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis "Skip" Gates Jr. by the Cambridge Police Department has centered on race, understandably, for two reasons: 1) the African-American population has suffered inequitably in its relations with law enforcement across this country, and 2) a race story is easier for the media to tell — and to sell.
  •   MUZZLE AWARDS: COLLEGIATE DIVISION  |  July 10, 2009
    In a 1957 Supreme Court decision upholding the free-speech rights of university professors ( Sweezy v. New Hampshire ), Justice Felix Frankfurter quoted prominent South African scholars on the importance of academic freedom.
  •   GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY  |  June 24, 2009
    The US Supreme Court's June 18 decision denying prisoners access to DNA testing — a procedure that could reliably prove innocence — adds to the high court's decades-long shameful record on criminal-justice issues.
  •   ROBOJUDGE  |  June 11, 2009
    Judge Stephen Breyer, Bill Clinton's latest pick for the Supreme Court, has attracted support so broad that it spans ideological and political differences.  

 See all articles by: HARVEY SILVERGLATE

MOST POPULAR
RSS Feed of for the most popular articles
 Most Viewed   Most Emailed 



  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
thePhoenix.com:
Phoenix Media/Communications Group:
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
Copyright © 2009 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group