Update: Big Brother is Watching You II

great followup (0.00 / 0)

may i suggest changing the title to "Big Brother is Watching You II" b/c it shows up better on search engines & also catches the eye better imho.

doing alot of SEO stuff so that's the basis for my suggestion. i'll opst on the admin list.

fantastic diary...

Bush Failed us for 9/11 & Katrina

Delay is NO Martyr

---

by: krazypuppy @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 12:32:45 PM CST

go ahead and change it if you want (0.00 / 0)

i need to jump off the computer for a last minute cram session.

Fudd's First Law of Opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.
-8.25, -5.95

---

by: annatopia @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 14:49:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

i would but (0.00 / 0)

um, is that what you want? ;-)

Bush Failed us for 9/11 & Katrina

Delay is NO Martyr

---

by: krazypuppy @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 14:53:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, I just did (4.00 / 1)

based on Anna's comment above.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 15:01:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

less work for me (0.00 / 0)

as for privacy - over-rated.


Bush Failed us for 9/11 & Katrina

Delay is NO Martyr

---

by: krazypuppy @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 16:38:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for following up. (0.00 / 0)

This is how they succeed - they count on folks not following up.  I say, we flood ATT with suspicious emails!  I know mine is being read because suing the same server, Bulldog's emails are delivered and received on average 4 times sooner than mine.  Just sayin'.

---

by: dksbook @ Mon Feb 19, 2007 at 14:50:29 PM CST

Overload? (0.00 / 0)

This illegal surveillance bothers me a great deal and I have great concerns as to what this data will be used for. That being said, given the immense volume of spam on the internet, does today's technology really permit the NSA to extract information they consider significant given their "big pipe" techniques? It had better be a "big pipe" indeed - I have read that spam constitutes over 90% of email, at least at times.

---

by: darms @ Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 10:33:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Holy cow (0.00 / 0)

you guys remember these guys??

Seven black men living in Miami's ghetto were accused of the sensational crime of trying to get Al Qaida's aid to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales & George Bush got on national television and made a big show of the arrest. FBI & policemen swooped down & the media went into a frenzy to cover this amazing plot. Faux News led the charge.

Remember this was the Friday - a day GOPers habitually release bad news to give people a chance to forget about it over the weekend. Many of us including myself speculated as to why Bushco were making such a big fuss over this. We were suspicious. My diary was the #1 diary on DKos.

For one day THAT FRIDAY the world's eyes were on these 7 black men.

And then they were forgotten. In contrast the British liquid explosives story stayed on the frontpage for days.

Why?!? What were they distracting us from?!?

As it turned out it was this story: George Bush was looking into our Banking records. George Bush was looking into the banking statement of ordinary & innocent Americans!!!

And they arrested a bunch of dirt poor black men in a Miami ghetto who would've said ANYTHING to the FBI informant posing as an Al Qaida operative to get the $50,000 he promised them.

George Bush staged a fake Terror cell arrest to distract the media & world from the Constitutionally illegal spying he was doing in our FINANCIAL bank statements.

It blows my mind when I think about the implications.

And now this Big Brother story. Wow.

Bush Failed us for 9/11 & Katrina

Delay is NO Martyr

---

by: krazypuppy @ Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 15:24:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

NO Surveillance Nation Tell Representatives, GOP more apt to use against Democrats (4.00 / 2)

From: DemocracyNow.org aired Tues. Feb. 20, 2007

MAUREEN WEBB: I want listeners to understand that they have some control over what happens in the future. Our democratic societies are at risk of being turned into surveillance societies over time, and we've got to inform ourselves about what's happening and tell our democratic representatives that we don't want them to pass these laws and these measures.

http://www.democracy...

This transcript is available free of charge

AMY GOODMAN: In Illusions of Security: Global Surveillance and Democracy in the Post-9/11 World, human rights lawyer Maureen Webb argues the new global security system is threatening both American and global security, while undermining democracy worldwide. Maureen Webb joins us now in the firehouse studio. Welcome to Democracy Now!

MAUREEN WEBB: Thank you, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Why did you focus on this as a human rights lawyer?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, I think it's one of the less-examined aspects of the war on terror, and I'm co-chair for a Canadian coalition of civil society groups called the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group. And in 2004, we brought some of the major NGOs working on these issues from around the world: ACLU in the United States, Statewatch in Europe, Focus on the Global South in Asia. And we wanted to look for common patterns that were happening in our countries and see if there was any way that we could collaborate.

And what we identified was that there were all of these surveillance initiatives that were being introduced, many of them through international forums like the G8, and that all of our governments seem to be working towards this common goal, but that these initiatives tended to be reported very disparately in the media, and nobody had really connected the dots. We thought it was important, because it's really one of the more insidious aspects of the war on terror. It will have long-term effects on our democratic societies and democratic movements around the world.

AMY GOODMAN: You began your book with Maher Arar, with Monia's story, actually --

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: -- with his wife. How did you meet them? You're a Canadian human rights lawyer, and how does that tie in with this global surveillance infrastructure?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, I actually heard about their story on the radio, as a lot of other Canadians did, often when I was driving my kids to daycare in the mornings. And they became very involved in the story, as well. They asked some very pertinent questions. They asked, you know, who has taken these children's papa?

AMY GOODMAN: You mean your kids were asking this.

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes. Who took him? Why did they take him? Why can't they get him back? And at that time, I was working on border issues, on the Canadian-US border, in my job. So, you know, I understood that this was sort of a shocking new development, the disappearance of a Canadian citizen. But it was really my kids that engaged me in this story. And I heard Monia talk about her fear that her children would grow up fatherless, and this is what was driving her in her very dignified, very articulate quest to get her husband home.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you briefly explain what happened? Maher Arar, the victim of "extraordinary rendition," taken by US authorities from Kennedy Airport and sent off when he was headed home from a family vacation to Canada, instead sent off to Syria, where he was tortured, held for almost a year, then sent home. But how did they, in Canada, first start to look at him?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, after 9/11, the US and Canada began cooperating very closely on national security, and joint teams were set up between agencies like the Mounties in Canada and the FBI and we think the CIA in America. These later became formalized as integrated national security teams. But they were working very closely, and there were really no sovereign checks and balances on the way that information was shared. And the Mounties, you know, in testimony before the Arar inquiry, they said that they had been given a mandate of prevention and that they were to take a zero tolerance approach to risk. And this led them to identify what they said was a potential al-Qaeda cell operating in Ottawa and Toronto. And Maher Arar happened to be a -- you know, it's a small Muslim community in Ottawa -- he went for lunch with a fellow that was a target of the investigation.

AMY GOODMAN: This was what year? Like '99?

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes -- no, it was after 2001. They had started -- they were looking at Abdullah al-Maliki before that, but they turned it into a big international terrorism investigation after 2001. And he went for lunch with the guy, stood outside in the rain, talking about where he could buy a good printer for his computer. And he was marked as a person of interest. They had no evidence that he was linked at all to terrorism. It turned out that they had no evidence, hard evidence, that Abdullah al-Maliki was linked to terrorism, either. But from there, they started sharing information with the FBI and the CIA, with no controls over how that information would be used. And in the end, it turned out that when Arar was identified on a passenger manifest list coming from Tunisia to JFK Airport, the Americans grabbed him, and they rendered him to Syria.

AMY GOODMAN: And now, the Canadian government has awarded him $10 million and demanded that the US take him off a terrorist no-fly list, but the US has refused to comply.

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes. And, in fact, the ambassador has told the Canadian government that they have no business to tell the United States who should be on their terrorist list.

AMY GOODMAN: Maureen Webb, human rights attorney and author, is our guest. Her book, Illusions of Security: Global Surveillance and Democracy in the Post-9/11 World. "Global Surveillance of Electronic Communications Records and Financial Transactions" is the name of one of your chapters, and you start with this George Orwell quote, and he says, "It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time, but at any rate, they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live -- did live, from the habit that became instinct and the assumption that every sound you made was overheard." That's from the book 1984. Explain how it is working now.

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, you know, today in modern societies, each of us pretty much have our wires plugged in all the time. There's very little you can do without it being recorded some way in an electronic transaction. So after 9/11, governments, the US pushing them, started to look at the communications of people, the financial transactions of people. The NSA program in the United States is a prime example of this. It was a secret program authorized by the President.

AMY GOODMAN: This is the National Security Agency wiretapping.

MAUREEN WEBB: That's right. The domestic wiretapping. And it's really a large data-mining program, which vacuums up almost all of the emails and telephone calls that are made in the United States and sifts through them for specified criteria that state agents believe show terrorist activity is occurring.

AMY GOODMAN: How does it do it?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, you know, this is very sophisticated technology. The NSA and its counterparts in the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia have been searching the cyberspace since 1948. They began looking at telephone calls and, as technology advanced, they kept up with it. But their gazes have always been directed outside their own countries. They have never been allowed to spy inside their own borders. And since it's a secret program, very little is known about it, except that it's a data-mining program where they sift through traffic patterns, looking for key words and traffic patterns. And in the normal exercise of their mandates, they are looking for economic and technical and security intelligence from other countries.

AMY GOODMAN: What is the Echelon system?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, that's the Echelon system that was set up after World War II, and it's this cooperation of the Anglo-American countries. But as I said, it always looked outwards. I never looked inwards. And so, this was unheard of. And in Canada, we seem to have a similar program that's been authorized by our Anti-Terrorism Act. So it seems that other countries also are turning their very powerful foreign security establishments on the loose.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the global registration system?

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes. In the book, I describe the main characteristics of this new kind of surveillance, and I think the aim of this new surveillance regime is first to register populations with biometric identity documents. And the idea is that when you have a biometric identifier for everybody, you have a kind of gold standard for making sure you've got the person that you want. And then you can start to, with greater confidence, link information to that biometric identifier.

Biometrics is the use of biological characteristics that people have, like fingerprints, iris scans, the dimensions of our faces, which the technology records and then stores either in a database or in a microchip, which can be inserted into identity documents.

AMY GOODMAN: And how does it work -- for example, a retina scan -- and are we going to see these be increasingly mandatory?

MAUREEN WEBB: They are increasingly mandatory. After 9/11, they began to biometrically register the more marginal populations. So, for example, under the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, the United States registered all males between the ages of sixteen and forty-five coming from Muslim countries, who were visiting or traveling through the country. And 80,000 men were biometrically registered in this way.

Then biometric registration was expanded to all visitors to the US, then to all people carrying passports, and then recently a de facto national identity card has been introduced in the United States, which is a country, a common law country, which has always resisted the imposition of a national identity card. And now, you have a biometric national identity card.

AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Maureen Webb. Interesting last name for this kind of investigation. You talk about UK e-Borders initiative, German trawling, flawed facts, dirty information and guilt by Google. Start with the last.

MAUREEN WEBB: Guilt by Google, that's not copyrighted. You know, these data-mining programs, what you have to understand is that they're not sifting through masses of information to find known terrorists or people who are suspected of terrorism on reasonable grounds. What they're doing is they're sifting through all this information they're collecting about us all to predict who might be a terrorist. This is predictive technology. And it's interesting. It comes from the private sector.
I was in Chicago recently speaking, and the person who chaired the event was a CEO of a business intelligence company. And he told the audience just how far businesses have gone down this road of collecting every piece of information they can get about their customers and then data mining it and handling it through different technologies. And he spoke about an article that was published in the Harvard Business Review recently, which basically says that you're nowhere as a business unless you're doing this stuff. And this has been imported by the government into the war on terror. It's predictive analysis.

AMY GOODMAN: And what's the problem with this?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, it's very frightening, because, of course, when you're looking at prediction, at preemption, you're not really concerned with accuracy, so that all of the normal protections that we have about our virtual identities, about our personal information, are thrown out of the window. If you're flagged by a data-mining program, you'll never know what information has been used against you, you'll never be able to correct or contextualize it, you won't even know the criteria by which you're being judged, because they are also secret.

So, for example, there's a program that was just revealed about a month ago called the Automated Targeting System Program. And nobody knew that it was operating. In fact, two other programs that were similar to it had been killed by Congress. And this program collects information about people crossing the border, all modes of transportation. It stores it for forty years, and it assigns risk scores to individuals. And a risk score is a statistical rating of how closely your personal information matches the criteria, the secret criteria, that are supposed to protect terrorist activity. And there's no way you can change your risk score, apparently. You can appeal and say, "Well, I'm not the Jane Doe that you're thinking of," and if they believe you, they can note it down, but apparently because you can never change the information, you can never change your risk score.

AMY GOODMAN: I'm looking at your section on shutting down independent media, where you write, "The current risk assessment climate has led to international cooperation in shutting down independent media outlets. In October 2004, two computer servers were seized by the FBI from the England office of the Texas-based internet company Rackspace. The servers were hosting the websites of independent media centers. The seizure was reportedly made under a UK-US mutual assistance treaty of 1996, but on the request of Swiss and Italian police."

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes, yes. And that's just one illustration of how closely security agencies are cooperating around the world today. And, for instance, the United States has signed an agreement whereby it has access to all of Europol's information about EU citizens. So some very sensitive information about EU citizens --

AMY GOODMAN: Europol?

MAUREEN WEBB: Europol, the European police.

AMY GOODMAN: Interpol?

MAUREEN WEBB: Interpol is bigger. Europol is for Europe. And so, dozens of American agencies now have direct access to this information, which was previously kept in European hands with European checks and balances. The INSET, the Integrated National Security Enforcement Teams, that I spoke about in the context of the Arar affair, under ordinary mutual assistance agreements, formal requests have to be made between the countries to obtain information, and there's all kinds of checks and balances that go with that. They make sure that the information is reliable before they pass it on. They make sure that they know what the other country is going to do with the information. But with these integrated teams, the information just flows informally between the agencies that are working together.

AMY GOODMAN: You also talk about it being open season on individuals and groups challenging repressive regimes. How so?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, you know, this whole new paradigm of terrorism is being embraced by countries around the world and used in repressive regimes to rebrand opponents as terrorists. And these people are often put on international lists. There are sort of new brutal tactics that can be used against them, because it's become an accepted paradigm, this idea of terrorism. But it really -- you know, I'm not saying that there's not a thing popularly known as terrorism, but it's being used politically to really paint as black-and-white complex historical and civil conflicts.

AMY GOODMAN: You write about how in Tunisia the lawyers of people charged with terrorism are being charged with terrorism themselves.

MAUREEN WEBB: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, how do people protect themselves, as we travel either abroad or just at home, as you go on the internet, as you buy things at stores with credit cards? And how does credit cards fit into this?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, credit cards, the records are handled by companies, and the companies are subject to the USA PATRIOT Act, and the USA PATRIOT Act allows the FBI to issue administrative subpoenas, known as national security letters, without any judicial oversight.

AMY GOODMAN: Can companies resist?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, they can, I suppose, but they're gagged from telling anybody about the very existence of the order against them. And most companies aren't resisting. In fact, many companies are just handing over the information when they're asked. I think, you know, about 175 universities in the United States handed over information about their students without any request for a subpoena. As you mentioned, scuba diving associations handed over disks with information on two million members. And we know that companies, airlines were handing over information to the Transportation Security Administration.

AMY GOODMAN: And, of course, telephone companies.

MAUREEN WEBB: And telephone companies. Four out of five of the major telephone companies in the US handed over their records to the NSA for this domestic spy program. And they did it for money.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, for money?

MAUREEN WEBB: Well, it was a contract under which they were paid to hand over this material.

AMY GOODMAN: We have thirty seconds. What do you think is the most important thing to leave listeners and viewers with?

MAUREEN WEBB: I want listeners to understand that they have some control over what happens in the future. Our democratic societies are at risk of being turned into surveillance societies over time, and we've got to inform ourselves about what's happening and tell our democratic representatives that we don't want them to pass these laws and these measures.

AMY GOODMAN: Maureen Webb, I want to thank you very much for being with us. Maureen Webb is the author of Illusions of Security: Global Surveillance and Democracy in the Post-9/11 World.

---

by: Help Gore Reverse Climate Collapse @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 16:36:39 PM CST

this should be a diary of it's own (4.00 / 1)

i love amy goodman.  she's one of the last honest journalists in america.

Fudd's First Law of Opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.
-8.25, -5.95

---

by: annatopia @ Tue Feb 20, 2007 at 17:56:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Big Brother Continues to watch (4.00 / 1)

RE: In support of H.R. 1026 - Re-opening the hearings into ongoing COINTELPRO-like surveillance.

It seems improbable that multiple harassment and intimidation incidents can occur multiple times a day, for 6 years, in two different states without the knowledge of, participation in and protection of rouge elements of law enforcement, including federal agencies. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to conclude that the high rate of occurrences eliminates coincidence as an explanation. Sadly one is left with only one conclusion, that warrant less surveillance, in the form of criminal menacing, harassment under the color of authority, reckless endangerment, and using vehicles as deadly weapons, are illegal COINTELPRO/MKULTRA tactics http://www.icdc.com/... finalreportIIIa.htm employed by government intelligence agencies against innocent citizens, such as my wife and I, for purposes of denying us our First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

The military precision of these daily warrant less attacks upon us, indicate a depth of resources, personnel and planning that can only be the acts of government intelligence agency/ies. Our "usual suspect" is the FBI because of its responsibility for the constitutionally abusive COINTELPRO program; born of a need to "over-protect", based on a dangerously paranoid and authoritarian Bureau culture. Other agency/ies involved may include the CIA, perpetrators of the horrendous MKULTRA malevolencies. http://www.ifilm.com... I can say without fear of contradiction that the arrogance, repetitiveness and psy op quality of the attacks directed against us are the calling cards of intelligence agencies. Furthermore, I am confident the interstate nature of our targeting places our situation within the domain of Congressional oversight.

My wife and I, have clean criminal background reports. We have purposely purchased a home seven doors from our local police department. My wife has repaid her student loan. I have been fingerprinted for FBI background checks required for joining our neighborhood mobile patrol and Sunday school teaching (with my wife). Why are we targets of unwarranted, and arguably East German STASI-like, police state abuses?

It seems the answer to that question could be found in Winston Churchill's definition of a fanatic and appropriate to concluding that, democratic governments employing fanatics in their intelligence agencies, are sowing the seeds of their destruction, by encouraging "those who can not change their minds, and will not change the subject". In a war against asymmetrical enemies such as international terrorists, who study our culture and it's self-destructive foibles, fanatic personality types, in positions of pubic trust, are easily distracted and mislead, while having their eyes taken off the ball. Our targeting is only the tip of the iceberg. The cost to our country for this extremist behavior is already enormous and the meter is running.

I cannot emphasize strongly enough the need for your support of H.R. 1026; the re-opening of the investigation into ongoing offenses against the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments by COINTELPRO-like surveillance of innocent U.S. citizens. http://www.judibari....

---

by: &thenameofthemovieis @ Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 10:40:45 AM CST

welcome randi rhodes listeners! (4.00 / 1)

we've got something special for ya.  click here:

http://texaskaos.com...

Fudd's First Law of Opposition: Push something hard enough and it will fall over.
-8.25, -5.95

---

by: annatopia @ Wed Feb 21, 2007 at 17:39:19 PM CST

Working for Change and As You Sow--Tell AT&T and Verizon We Want Our Privacy Rights (0.00 / 0)

http://www.workingfo...

Tell AT&T and Verizon: Come Clean on Privacy Rights

Contributed by As You Sow

The shocking assaults on our privacy rights and basic civil liberties by our federal government (in close collaboration with some large telecommunication companies) has inspired shareholders to get involved and demand corporate leadership in customer privacy rights.

USA Today first reported that AT&T and Verizon voluntarily provided customer phone records, emails and communications data to the National Security Agency (NSA) without requiring a court order. This alleged program has generated dozens of lawsuits against AT&T and Verizon seeking billions of dollars in damages. One federal judge has already ruled the release of records to be in violation of the law. Thus far, AT&T has remained silent about accusations that it gave customer information to federal agencies without a warrant, and Verizon has not denied suspected actions of its long-distance carrier MCI.

Corporate responsibility champion As You Sow, along with other institutional shareholders, have now filed shareholder proposals asking for transparency and accountability from AT&T and Verizon. The proposals request that AT&T and Verizon issue public reports on their privacy policies and the ramifications of allegedly releasing customer data without a warrant or court order.

As owners of publicly traded corporations, shareholders have a right to vote on issues they feel are vital to preserve their company's reputation, protect the long-term value of investments and maintain customer privacy. AT&T and Verizon should not un-democratically obstruct shareholders' voices; they should present the As You Sow-sponsored resolutions to shareholders and support their adoption at the spring 2007 shareholders' meetings.

Call to action:
Tell the CEOs of AT&T and Verizon to adopt the "Privacy Rights Protection Report" resolution.

Deadline:
ongoing
Additional Information:
We urge you to personalize the letter to express your own views, especially if you are a customer or a shareholder of AT&T or Verizon. To see copies of the full resolutions and for additional shareholder action ideas go to: www.asyousow.org.

Contact information and links for advocacy group(s) working on this issue:

As You Sow
http://www.asyousow....

………………………..
http://www.asyousow....

Corporate Social Responsibility 
  Telecommunications Privacy Rights
Corporate Social Responsibility Program
Aligning Mission and Investment
Shareholder Advocacy
Power of Proxy Voting
Current Resolutions
Special Initiatives
Resources
• Overview
• Shareholder Action
• AT&T Contact Information
• Verizon Contact Information
• Recent News
Take action with our partner Working Assets!

NEW! Ransacking Liberty: The Phone Companies and the NSA

http://corporatewatc...

A SPECIAL REPORT on Corporate Watchdog Radio

Listen to Program Director Conrad MacKerron and Professor Christopher Pyle of Mount Holyoke College speak to the implications NSA spying programs on U.S. citizens' constitutional rights and corporate responsibility.

Overview

News reports of AT&T, Verizon and other phone companies sharing customer data with the National Security Agency without obtaining a warrant as required by law are alarming. There is a long history of abuse of surveillance by intelligence agencies. Public figures like Martin Luther King and John Lennon as well as countless other citizens were monitored during the Vietnam war by J. Edgar Hoover's FBI for no reason other than their opposition to government policies. Today, technology enables surveillance which is at once more intrusive and less apparent than ever before. Ensuring Americans can communicate privately in the absence of probable cause is more important than ever.
We are mobilizing the investment community to press AT&T and Verizon to protect this critical freedom. To support this action see below.

Press release, resolutions, and letters:
• Press Release
• AT&T Resolution
• Verizon Resolution
• Shareholders' Letter to AT&T
http://www.asyousow....
• Shareholders' Letter to Verizon

Shareholder Action

AT&T and Verizon customers, shareholders and concerned citizens can make their voices heard and put pressure on these telecommunication companies to have more transparency, accountability and leadership regarding their customer privacy policies. Companies cannot afford to ignore customers and shareholders or have a tarnished reputation.

If you are an individual shareholder, you can have more of an impact by calling, sending a letter or faxing the CEO, or the main investor relations contact. Contact information for the two companies is listed below for AT&T and Verizon.

  Sample letters (MS Word): AT&T Letter, Verizon Letter

Non-shareholders click here ( http://www.workingfo...  )
to go to our partner Working Assets' alert page to send a note to the CEO asking him to adopt As You Sow's "Privacy Rights Protection Report" resolution.
In Spring 2007 before the shareholders' meetings there will be further opportunities for action.

AT&T Inc.
Office of Chairman of the Board and CEO Edward E. Whitacre Jr.
AT&T Inc.
175 E. Houston, Room 1300
San Antonio, TX 78205

Phone: 210.821.4105
Fax: 210.351.3553

AT&T Investor Relations
Dru Cessac
Phone: 210.351.2058
Email: drucilla.cessac @att.com
Verizon Communications
Office of the Chairman of the Board and CEO Ivan S. Seidenberg
Verizon Communications
140 West Street, 29th Floor
New York, NY 10007

Phone: 800.621.9900
Fax: 212.719.3349

Shareowner inquiries
Marialina Dominguez
Executive Director, Shareowner Services
Email: marialina.h.dominguez @verizon.com

Verizon Center
One Verizon Way
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920

Voice Mailbox: 212.395.1525
Fax: 908.630.2651
Recent News
• USA Today: NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls (5/11/06)
• CNet: Anger grows over NSA surveillance report (5/11/06)
• CBS News: Verizon Sued For Giving Records To NSA (5/12/06)
• NY Times: Qwest's Refusal of N.S.A. Query Is Explained (5/12/06)
• FoxNews: Verizon- We Didn't Give Customers' Call Records to NSA Either (5/16/06)
• Cox News Service: House Committee Demands Information On NSA Surveillance (6/22/06)
• NY Times: With Power Set to Be Split, Wiretaps Re-emerge as Issue (11/10/06)

---

by: Help Gore Reverse Climate Collapse @ Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 02:22:22 AM CST

Please diary this. (0.00 / 0)

It's worth the extra attention.

Make it an Action Item diary.

Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

---

by: boadicea @ Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 08:59:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]