If a suspected terrorist mis-dialed your number any time in the past two years, the FBI is on your case and, if the phone company had had the technology, they might have been investigating everyone you know.
A Congressional committee learned yesterday that Verizon has provided customers' telephone records to federal authorities in emergency cases without court orders hundreds of times since 2005 in addition to the thousands obtained through subpoenas and court orders.
Moreover, the FBI wanted to know not only about the person making a call, but all the people that customer called, as well as the people those people called. The only reason they didn’t get it was that Verizon doesn’t keep data on this "two-generation community of interest."
To conceal the widening net of spying on innocent Americans, the Bush Administration has put up a brick wall of “state secrets” defenses, but as the enormity of surveillance, lawful and otherwise, becomes clearer, Congress is pressing for answers.
Some years ago, I received an apologetic letter from a law enforcement agency about a monitored phone call to my home from a friend of my teen-age son who was being investigated for selling marijuana. Apparently state law back then required notification about every such invasion of privacy.
We’re living in a different country now.
Showing posts with label phone records. Show all posts
Showing posts with label phone records. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
D. C. Madam: More Discreet Than the Media
It’s easy to see now why Deborah Jeane Palfrey did so well in her chosen profession. She is a model of sensitivity.
When the so-called D. C. Madam decided to make her phone records available to journalists as a public service, Ms. Palfrey was too trusting and naïve to realize that media people don’t have the scruples of madams.
Sending out 54 discs to news organizations and bloggers, she insisted that the list not be published in its entirety. But Ms. Palfrey’s attorney says “we got calls and e-mails saying there wasn't any security on the coding and the numbers were going to be all over the place.”
Ms. Palfrey, “concerned about manipulation of the database with false and misleading information,” published the list on her own web site to maintain the integrity of her records.
Despite all her precautions, the repercussions have started. Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana issued a statement last night apologizing for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared.
Ms. Palfrey seems befuddled by all the commotion, since she insists she operated a "legal, high-end erotic fantasy service" and that women who worked for her signed contracts in which they promised not to have sex with clients.
You just can’t trust anybody these days.
When the so-called D. C. Madam decided to make her phone records available to journalists as a public service, Ms. Palfrey was too trusting and naïve to realize that media people don’t have the scruples of madams.
Sending out 54 discs to news organizations and bloggers, she insisted that the list not be published in its entirety. But Ms. Palfrey’s attorney says “we got calls and e-mails saying there wasn't any security on the coding and the numbers were going to be all over the place.”
Ms. Palfrey, “concerned about manipulation of the database with false and misleading information,” published the list on her own web site to maintain the integrity of her records.
Despite all her precautions, the repercussions have started. Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana issued a statement last night apologizing for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared.
Ms. Palfrey seems befuddled by all the commotion, since she insists she operated a "legal, high-end erotic fantasy service" and that women who worked for her signed contracts in which they promised not to have sex with clients.
You just can’t trust anybody these days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)