Verizon Communications, the nation's second-largest telecom company, told congressional investigators that it has provided customers' telephone records to federal authorities in emergency cases without court orders hundreds of times since 2005.The company said it does not determine the requests' legality or necessity because to do so would slow efforts to save lives in criminal investigations.
In an Oct. 12 letter replying to Democratic lawmakers, Verizon offered a rare glimpse into the way telecommunications companies cooperate with government requests for information on U.S. citizens.
Verizon also disclosed that the FBI, using administrative subpoenas, sought information identifying not just a person making a call, but all the people that customer called, as well as the people those people called. Verizon does not keep data on this "two-generation community of interest" for customers, but the request highlights the broad reach of the government's quest for data.
The disclosures, in a letter from Verizon to three Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee investigating the carriers' participation in government surveillance programs, demonstrated the willingness of telecom companies to comply with government requests for data, even, at times, without traditional legal supporting documents. The committee members also got letters from AT&T and Qwest Communications International, but those letters did not provide details on customer data given to the government. None of the three carriers gave details on any classified government surveillance program.
From January 2005 to September 2007, Verizon provided data to federal authorities on an emergency basis 720 times, it said in the letter. The records included Internet protocol addresses as well as phone data. In that period, Verizon turned over information a total of 94,000 times to federal authorities armed with a subpoena or court order, the letter said. The information was used for a range of criminal investigations, including kidnapping and child-predator cases and counter-terrorism investigations.
Verizon and AT&T said it was not their role to second-guess the legitimacy of emergency government requests.
The letters were released yesterday by the lawmakers as Congress debates whether to grant telecom carriers immunity in cases in which they are sued for disclosing customers' phone records and other data as part of the government's post-September 11 surveillance program, even if they did not have court authorization. House Democrats have said that they cannot contemplate such immunity without first understanding the nature of the carriers' cooperation with the government.
"The responses from these telecommunications companies highlight the need of Congress to continue pressing the Bush administration for answers. The water is as murky as ever on this issue, and it's past time for the administration to come clean," said Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who launched the investigation with panel Chairman John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.).
Congressional Democrats have been largely stymied in their efforts to have the Bush administration disclose the scope and nature of its surveillance and data-gathering efforts after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Revelations have come through press reports, advocacy groups' Freedom of Information Act lawsuits and Justice Department inspector general reports.
In May 2006, USA Today reported that the National Security Agency had been secretly collecting the phone-call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by major telecom firms. Qwest, it reported, declined to participate because of fears that the program lacked legal standing.
Last month, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy group in San Francisco, obtained records through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit showing that the FBI sought data from telecom companies about the calling habits of suspects and their associates, the New York Times reported. Neither Qwest nor AT&T answered the lawmakers' question as to whether they had received such requests for information.
Yesterday's 13-page Verizon letter indicated that the requests went further than previously known. Verizon said it had received FBI administrative subpoenas, called national security letters, requesting data that would "identify a calling circle" for subscribers' telephone numbers, including people contacted by the people contacted by the subscriber. Verizon said it does not keep such information.
"The privacy concerns are exponential each generation you go away from the suspect's number," said Kurt Opsahl, senior staff attorney with the EFF. "This shows that further investigation by Congress and the inspector general is critical."
Earlier this year, the Justice Department's inspector general found that the FBI may have improperly obtained phone, bank and other records of thousands of people inside the United States since 2003 by using national security letters and exigent letters, or emergency demands for records.
Michael Kortan, an FBI spokesman, said the bureau has suspended use of community-of-interest data "while an appropriate oversight and approval policy" is developed. He added that the inspector general is reviewing the use of those data.
Both Verizon and AT&T suggested in their letters that they already enjoy legal immunity under existing laws. But AT&T said that when the lawsuits involve allegations of highly classified activity, the company cannot prove its immunity claims.
Carriers are facing a raft of lawsuits from individuals and privacy advocates, such as the EFF and the American Civil Liberties Union, for allegedly violating Americans' privacy by aiding the NSA's warrantless surveillance program.
The federal government has intervened, arguing that to continue the case would divulge "state secrets," jeopardizing national security.
The Senate Intelligence Committee could draft a bill this week that includes relief for the carriers. The administration is seeking blanket immunity, which would extend to anyone sued for assisting the government -- not just telecom carriers -- in its post-Sept. 11 surveillance programs.
"It's rare in these situations where there's agreement between the plaintiffs and the defendants -- that there are plenty of protections for telecommunications providers in the existing laws," said the EFF's Opsahl, adding that no new immunity is necessary. "It appears that we both agree that the court should be able to look at the full situation, despite the state-secrets privilege."
In its letter, Verizon said that on occasion, it receives requests without correct authorizations. For instance, it said, it once received a request for stored voice mail without a warrant. The company does not respond until proper authorization is received, it said.
AT&T and Verizon both argued that the onus should not be on the companies to determine whether the government has lawfully requested customer records. To do so in emergency cases would "slow lawful efforts to protect the public," wrote Randal S. Milch, senior vice president of legal and external affairs for Verizon Business, a subsidiary of Verizon Communications.
"Public officials, not private businessmen, must ultimately be responsible for whether the legal judgments underlying authorized surveillance activities turn out to be right or wrong -- legally or politically," wrote Wayne Watts, AT&T's senior executive vice president and general counsel. "Telecommunications carriers have a part to play in guarding against official abuses, but it is necessarily a modest one."
© 2007 The Washington Post
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
21 Comments so far
Show AllHighly recommended, this film contains responses to most of the questions, rhetorical and otherwise, raised in this discussion:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331&hl=en
There must be some reason why the democrats in congress are so useless on this and every other issue. I think that the 9/11 excuse is just a cover for everything else, but why?
Nothing seems to make any real sense.
Maybe we've been invaded by Martians and the bush regime is spying on them -- not us. Maybe spying on your citizens is a prerequisite for joining the New World Order? Maybe God is a republican and He also hates freedom? I just don't know.
and...
Why is Ben Laden still hiding? He could come out now and write a book? Movie deal? How I might have destroyed the World Trade Center (if I had destroyed the World Trade Center.) I'm sorry in advance if that seemed insensitive.
I do believe the spying on Americans came way before Reagans term by the NSA. Every communications company has a black door, sealed to company employees, that routs all incoming info through to its respective servers, one for business and one for the government. I think its now out of hand only because its giving our secret info to many peoples, not just some select group of NSA agents. Any "Gop-vermin-t" employee could get their hands on your brokers calls now. Blackwater can track your daughter easier! Sorry,... Dyncorp!
I have a different cell phone provider and I seem to get a lot of calls from bill collectors on the day my pay check is deposited.
Also if I get text msg my phone bill is late. Later I will get a text msg for a pay day loan.
I believe a lot of "legitimate" corporations are behind the spam and other kinds of junk offers to rip off the american public.
What do they have to loose sitting up shop overseas where they cannot be prosecuted.
I think they are snooping to get every dollar they can off of unsuspecting people.
" to do so would slow efforts to save lives", reminds me of Oliver North's sanctimonious testimony. He violated the law and subverted this constitutional democracy to save the freedom fighters in another land. These right-wing authoritarians have operated this way long before 9/11, long before Dubya was their figurehead. Who has been around a long time? Spelled D-I-C-K C-H-E-N-E-Y.
What a bullshit police government you've got. The telecommunication companies give customers' private information to the Feds. And this is where it gets funny: instead of protecting the people, Congress is looking to pass a law preventing the people from suing the telecom for violating their rights.
And this is even funnier: people are bravely (you guessed it) doing nothing but taking more shit everyday. Cut the stupid phone line, get another ISP, for God's sake do something; so others will see that at least you're still alive!
It's a trade-off. These deals were cut long ago when these weasels negotiated with the feds for our frequencies. What a deal! We buy the hardware, then pay them to spy for the feds. They read and listen to every word we text or speak, then show 'em where we are to boot via GPS. Verizon and the rest are low-life traders of the American people. Thank God my contract is up with them. If you're reading this Verizon...go to hell.
So, give retroactive immunity to the telephone companies and all the people/companies those telephone companies called, as well as the people/companies those people/companies called?
Immunity for what?
Specter: No Retroactive Immunity for Telecoms
By Paul Kiel - October 16, 2007, 5:50PM
As the ACLU worries that Senate Democrats in the intelligence committee will give retroactive immunity to telephone companies for collaborating with the administration's warrantless surveillance program, the two senior members of the judiciary committee say they won't entertain that without knowing what the telecoms did.
Here's Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and ranking member Arlen Specter (R-PA) speaking earlier today on CNN:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004472.php
The government and the telecom industry r working hand in hand. No surprise right?
It is blatantly illegal. I have Verizon and I would love to join a class action suit against those a##holes.
Corporations + government = fascism. When are people going to wake up?
I dumped Verizon for this very issue.
"The company said it does not determine the requests' legality or necessity because to do so would slow efforts to save lives in criminal investigations."
What? It doesn't determine the legality? Have they no lawyers?
The U.S., a nation of laws. Indeed.
We lost our rights to privacy when we let them record our calls to the phone company customer service and other corporations.
No one should have a record of our calls.
Once we let the begin to errode our privacy they will see it as a green light and continue until the t.v. set will be watching us just like Big Brother.
>>>To do so in emergency cases would "slow lawful efforts to protect the public," wrote Randal S. Milch, senior vice president of legal and external affairs for Verizon Business, a subsidiary of Verizon Communications.<<<
Yes, but it also speeds up unlawful efforts in situations that are phony emergencies. This is why the courts, and not corporate fascists, should be making the decision.
I think the "patriot" act was really written last century. The Telcom criminal spying started in February 2001. The Neo Cons have used 9/11 as an excuse to destroy our republic.
curmudgeon 99,
Why did Bush/Cheney start these programs before 9/11? That is the trillion-dollar question, but I think most here at CD, certainly including myself, never thought for a moment that the surveillance ever had anything to do with terrorism. If Bush/Cheney were not going to protect the ports, chemical plants, or nuclear plants, and never were serious about capturing bin Laden, it is clear terrorism was never much of a priority, except maybe to the extent they could encourage it, hoping another terrorist incident in the US could be used to justify even further movement toward a police state.
But now that it should be painfully obvious to even the most obtuse that the surveillance was unrelated to terrorism, why are the Democrats and major networks not calling for impeachment? Why, now that the "everything changed after 9/11" justification has proved to be baseless, and that we know the surveillance did nothing to stop 9/11, has there not been an outcry throughout the Congress and the media? That may be the 10 trillion-dollar question.
re curmudgeon99 2:38pm
related question: was the "patriot" act really written in its entirety AFTER 9/11??
The big question is why did the government start with these programs BEFORE 9/11?
The company ought to be spending their capital punishing SPAMMERS, not giving their customers the middle finger ! Thank you Verizon for protecting Al Quaida ! With "friends" like Verizon, this country doesn't need enemies !
Boycott is a good tool for dealing with irresponsible behavior towards it's customers. As you read these reports, remember.
One cannot separate big business, big crime and big government in a capitalist system. They share the same interests and are interwoven.