Telecoms barred from disclosing spying (state secrets privilege formally invoked)

[deminks]

WASHINGTON --Three telecommunications companies have declined to tell Congress whether they gave U.S. intelligence agencies access to Americans' phone and computer records without court orders, citing White House objections and national security.

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell "formally invoked the state secrets privilege to prevent AT&T from either confirming or denying" any details about intelligence programs, AT&T general counsel Wayne Watts wrote in a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Qwest and Verizon also declined to answer, saying the federal government has prohibited them from providing information, discussing or referring to any classified intelligence activities.

The Bush administration has said the companies cooperated in good faith because of their patriotism and desire to protect the country in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and should not be punished.

However, last week a Colorado court unsealed documents in the case of former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio, who was convicted of insider trading in April. Nacchio, who is appealing his conviction, maintains the National Security Agency asked Qwest to allow it to conduct electronic surveillance without a court order in February 2001, six months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/10/15/telecoms_barred_from_disclosing_spying/

[Rex]

1. Like I've been saying since 911.

This asshole signed an EO saying that all mass communications would be controlled by the Executive Branch.

[Mojorabbit]

2. Patriotism?

They were unpatriotic to do it.

[Richard Steele]

8. Up is down, day is night, and we have always been at war with Eastasia. nm

[MadMaddie]

3. What are they hiding...the fact that they broke the law?

No the * Administration was asking for this information 6 months before 9/11...yea...LIHOP and MIHOP are sounding more and more like fact.

[robinlynne]

11. The fact that they broke the law WAY before 9-11, and used it 100 times more than they

told congress they would. (They would never phone tap innocent americans....And somehow, congress acts as if it believes that.)

[LakeSamish706]

4. This part to me is incredible!

"Nacchio, who is appealing his conviction, maintains the National Security Agency asked Qwest to allow it to conduct electronic surveillance without a court order in February 2001, six months before the Sept. 11 attacks."

Hmmmm What does that mean for this Administration?

[hootinholler]

5. Court Orders? WTF?

A Congressional subpeona needs a court order to enforce it?

We don't need no stanking court order!

-Hoot

[KoKo]

6. That's what I don't understand, either. Seems most Americans were taught

an "incorrect history" about subpoenas and the power of Congress and our Laws! :shrug:

How can this P-Resident/Squatter defy what even Nixon couldn't? It has to be because they aren't afraid of the LAWS ...they CONTROL IT ALL! :scared:

[kurth]

7. Stalin, Hitler, Mao loved state secrets

[Maat]

9. Grow a spine NOW, Congress!

And, before you act, each of you needs to go read a copy of the U.S. Constitution. You see, Nancy Pelosi (and Co.), there's this concept called "separation of powers." Go look it up, Nancy Pelosi!

AND, this law school graduate says, "Hey, Nancy, go read 'Broken Government' by John Dean. Pay particular attention to Appendix C, which debunks the Unitary Executive garbage."

Geez, these Congresscritters make me mad!

:mad:

[ThomCat]

10. There should NEVER be anything classified out of reach

of our top elected officials and judges. Declaring "National Security" should NEVER be a way of hiding anything from other branches of the government.

This just screams of illegal and unconstitutional abuse of power. x(

[Mojorabbit]

12. I just don't

get why they are not holding press conferences and howling about this.

[Swamp Rat]

13. Joseph Stalin would be proud.