Tuesday, May 16, 2006
I get back to Verizon
"Thanks very much for getting back to me. I only wish your answers had been more responsive.
The cat, so to speak, is out of the bag on this one. Stonewalling me on questions that directly relate to delivery of services is not indicative of appreciation of my business. Ongoing, unrepentant actions of the sort described in the USAToday might very well rise to the level of fraud. The simple fact is that not everything that has to do with the NSA is "highly classified". Attempting to throw that blanket over what would most likely be an abrogation of your statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations could easily be seen as disingenuous.
I would certainly hope that your legal counsel is not banking on an intervention from the federal government similar to action taken in the suit brought by the EFF against AT&T. The scope of the alleged activity in our matter clearly puts this outside of that reprieve.
While I certainly reserve the right to exercise all my legal protections, we have the immediate questions to answer. Being the true patriots and defenders of the Constitution that you are, I understand your reluctance to answer questions concerning this specific matter. But you still can give me the information I need to decide the question of our continuing business relationship. Since you chose to ignore four very specific questions about your delivery of service to me by alluding to the USAToday article, perhaps you would be able to answer this one general question.
Is it the corporate position of Verizon that they would engage in the activities described in the USAToday article without a FISA warrant? Surely that is not classified." ¶ 5/16/2006 12:22:00 AM
The cat, so to speak, is out of the bag on this one. Stonewalling me on questions that directly relate to delivery of services is not indicative of appreciation of my business. Ongoing, unrepentant actions of the sort described in the USAToday might very well rise to the level of fraud. The simple fact is that not everything that has to do with the NSA is "highly classified". Attempting to throw that blanket over what would most likely be an abrogation of your statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations could easily be seen as disingenuous.
I would certainly hope that your legal counsel is not banking on an intervention from the federal government similar to action taken in the suit brought by the EFF against AT&T. The scope of the alleged activity in our matter clearly puts this outside of that reprieve.
While I certainly reserve the right to exercise all my legal protections, we have the immediate questions to answer. Being the true patriots and defenders of the Constitution that you are, I understand your reluctance to answer questions concerning this specific matter. But you still can give me the information I need to decide the question of our continuing business relationship. Since you chose to ignore four very specific questions about your delivery of service to me by alluding to the USAToday article, perhaps you would be able to answer this one general question.
Is it the corporate position of Verizon that they would engage in the activities described in the USAToday article without a FISA warrant? Surely that is not classified." ¶ 5/16/2006 12:22:00 AM
