The Only Telecom CEO to Say No To the NSA...

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

...has been in jail for four years.

www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6

[Deleted]

  from your link:
 

Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio is currently serving a six-year sentence after being convicted of insider trading in April 2007 for selling $52 million of stock in the spring of 2001 as the telecommunications carrier appeared to be deteriorating.

 Nacchio was prosecuted and sentenced during the GWBush administration. For being crooked and dishonest. To the tune of fifty-two million US dollars.
 It is a total and utter perversion of the Truth to portray him as a martyr in the causes of Individual Liberty and Privacy rights.
  

 
 

[EVT1]

Hope he gets pounded in the ass this evening

[billisonboard]

Jun 15, 2013 16:23:16 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

...

Wondering. Is this because you wish him something positive? Or is this because you believe that all anal intercourse in prison is non-consensual and that rape is an appropriate consequence for those convicted of criminal behavior?

[djAdvocate]

Paul: i am 99% sure that Twitter didn't go along with the program, either.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 15, 2013 15:48:06 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

  from your link:
 

Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio is currently serving a six-year sentence after being convicted of insider trading in April 2007 for selling $52 million of stock in the spring of 2001 as the telecommunications carrier appeared to be deteriorating.

 Nacchio was prosecuted and sentenced during the GWBush administration. For being crooked and dishonest. To the tune of fifty-two million US dollars.
 It is a total and utter perversion of the Truth to portray him as a martyr in the causes of Individual Liberty and Privacy rights.
  

Are you sure about that?

During the trial his defense team argued that Nacchio, 63, believed Qwest was about to win secret government contracts that would keep it in the black.

Nacchio alleged that the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001.

That claim gains new relevance these days, amid leaks by whistleblower Edward Snowden that allege widespread domestic surveillance by the NSA.

Back in 2006 Leslie Cauley of USA Today, citing multiple people with direct knowledge of the arrangement, reported that shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks America's three largest telecoms signed contracts to provide the NSA with detailed call records from hundreds of millions of people across the country.

Cauley noted that Qwest's refusal to participate "left the NSA with a hole in its database" since the company served local phone service to 14 million customers in 14 states.

From USA Today (emphasis ours):

The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard. ...

... the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government.

Nacchio's legal concerns about the NSA program at the time mirror those of civil liberty groups today.

Read more: www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6#ixzz2WKaWiT70

[mollyanna58]

Nacchio alleged that the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001.

So this secret program started before 9/11 and the Patriot Act?

[mmhmm]

... defense team argued that Nacchio, 63, believed Qwest was about to win secret government contracts that would keep it in the black.

So, it would follow that we all should write checks for more money than we have because we "believe" we're about to get more money, so we won't be broke.  Yeah.  That makes sense.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 15, 2013 18:36:55 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Jun 15, 2013 15:48:06 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

  from your link:
 

 Nacchio was prosecuted and sentenced during the GWBush administration. For being crooked and dishonest. To the tune of fifty-two million US dollars.
 It is a total and utter perversion of the Truth to portray him as a martyr in the causes of Individual Liberty and Privacy rights.
  

Are you sure about that?

During the trial his defense team argued that Nacchio, 63, believed Qwest was about to win secret government contracts that would keep it in the black.

Nacchio alleged that the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001.

That claim gains new relevance these days, amid leaks by whistleblower Edward Snowden that allege widespread domestic surveillance by the NSA.

Back in 2006 Leslie Cauley of USA Today, citing multiple people with direct knowledge of the arrangement, reported that shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks America's three largest telecoms signed contracts to provide the NSA with detailed call records from hundreds of millions of people across the country.

Cauley noted that Qwest's refusal to participate "left the NSA with a hole in its database" since the company served local phone service to 14 million customers in 14 states.

From USA Today (emphasis ours):

The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard. ...

... the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government.

Nacchio's legal concerns about the NSA program at the time mirror those of civil liberty groups today.

Read more: www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6#ixzz2WKaWiT70

Isn't it the defense team's job to strongly argue alternative theories to cast reasonable doubt and get their client off?

[Virgil Showlion]

It's all but impossible to judge whether an actual conspiracy exists in these cases. I agree with Paul to the extent that the circumstances of Mr. Nacchio's downfall are suspicious. Beyond that...?

Paul: i am 99% sure that Twitter didn't go along with the program, either.

I thought 100% of the data on Twitter was public domain? There are no such thing as 'private' feeds.

Why would the NSA need specialized access?

Wondering. Is this because you wish him something positive? Or is this because you believe that all anal intercourse in prison is non-consensual and that rape is an appropriate consequence for those convicted of criminal behavior?

I'd like an answer too, because it tends to be the same people decrying the barbarity of capital punishment who revel when men are caged and sodomized for the rest of their natural lives as part of a more 'humane' punishment.

[mmhmm]

I agree with Paul to the extent that the circumstances of Mr. Nacchio's downfall are suspicious.

Are they really?  What do you know about them?

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 15, 2013 21:50:56 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I agree with Paul to the extent that the circumstances of Mr. Nacchio's downfall are suspicious.

Are they really?  What do you know about them?

Mr. Nacchio claimed he believed he was about to win government contracts and that "the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001".

We now know, 12 years after the fact, that the NSA did indeed go to the major telecom companies to institute said surveillance program in the early 2000's.

Unless you categorically believe Mr. Nacchio's claim is false, then there exists at least a suspicion that he's telling the truth. Ergo, the circumstances of his downfall are suspicious.

[mmhmm]

What I'm doing, Virgil, is going back in time to review what was reported to have happened AT THAT TIME.  I'm looking into the trials, the jury's findings, the appeals, any transcripts I can find, etc.  When I'm through, I expect I'll actually know something about the subject.   It's not in my nature to accept what somebody on the internet says today about an incident that occurred in the past; especially, not if I can find access to actual information from that past.  Until I do, I don't know beans.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 15, 2013 23:07:38 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

What I'm doing, Virgil, is going back in time to review what was reported to have happened AT THAT TIME.  I'm looking into the trials, the jury's findings, the appeals, any transcripts I can find, etc.  When I'm through, I expect I'll actually know something about the subject.   It's not in my nature to accept what somebody on the internet says today about an incident that occurred in the past; especially, not if I can find access to actual information from that past.  Until I do, I don't know beans.

I applaud your dedication.

Personally I have no choice but to operate under the assumption that "Business Insider" is presenting the facts truthfully and objectively. When you've completed your search, let me know what you find.

[mmhmm]

I have the time to research, Virgil.  I'm aware not everyone does.  Sometimes, it takes me awhile, but I'd rather spend the time than make assumptions.  I guess that probably comes from my profession.

I'll try to compile links as I go along and post them here when complete.  That way, perhaps, we can go from information that dates back to the time all this began, rather than try to present what some online magazine blog says as "fact".

[mmhmm]

I forgot I'd bookmarked a USA Today site last night.  Here's the link to a compilation of their coverage of this matter over time:

USA Today - Joseph Nacchio

[EVT1]

Jun 15, 2013 16:31:41 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Jun 15, 2013 16:23:16 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

...

Wondering. Is this because you wish him something positive? Or is this because you believe that all anal intercourse in prison is non-consensual and that rape is an appropriate consequence for those convicted of criminal behavior?

Nope- I think of the rape of corporate criminals in prison as a supplemental punishment for a legal system that handles them with kid gloves- where the crimes and damage they do are not reflected by the light sentencing.  Pretty shitty when you can rob a bank and get 20, but the bank can rob you and pay a fine. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 16, 2013 12:10:04 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I forgot I'd bookmarked a USA Today site last night.  Here's the link to a compilation of their coverage of this matter over time:

USA Today - Joseph Nacchio

USA would appear to agree with Business Insider, per this 2007 article.

[mmhmm]

I haven't finished reading all the articles yet, Virgil.  There's quite a list.  I'm also looking for any transcripts, but no luck, yet.

[mmhmm]

Having taken a look at your link, and reviewing the linked article, I recall reading it.  I don't, however, recall USA Today stating an opinion, one way or the other.  As I remember the article, USA Today simply reported the information they had without attaching their own opinion to it.  I'd have to re-read it to be sure, but I don't have time now.

[billisonboard]

Jun 16, 2013 12:29:54 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Jun 15, 2013 16:31:41 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Wondering. Is this because you wish him something positive? Or is this because you believe that all anal intercourse in prison is non-consensual and that rape is an appropriate consequence for those convicted of criminal behavior?

Nope- I think of the rape of corporate criminals in prison as a supplemental punishment ... 

Thank you for your response. I just wanted to make sure that you were giving your approval for situational rape.  Are there any other situations in which you approve of rape?

[EVT1]

Nope- just corporate/wall street/banker type criminals and maybe child molesters.  And I do not approve of it- it should be investigated and handled like anything else.  But do I give a shit- no.  I was making a joke and you had to make it serious for some reason.

[billisonboard]

Jun 16, 2013 14:38:40 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

... I was making a joke ...

Oh, joking about rape. Sorry I missed that was your intent.



But please help me out here. What is funny about rape?

[Deleted]

 Should one expect "Business Insider" to be sympathetic to the "plight" of those who are prosecuted and punished for "Insider Trading"?

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 16, 2013 20:40:00 GMT -5 @patiencetried said:

 Should one expect "Business Insider" to be sympathetic to the "plight" of those who are prosecuted and punished for "Insider Trading"?

Considering insider trading hurts all investors (which includes the "Business Insider" readership and its staff) except the handful of executives who engage in the trade, BI would either have to be oblivious or masochistic for the answer to be 'yes'.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 15, 2013 22:08:21 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Jun 15, 2013 21:50:56 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Are they really?  What do you know about them?

Mr. Nacchio claimed he believed he was about to win government contracts and that "the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001".

We now know, 12 years after the fact, that the NSA did indeed go to the major telecom companies to institute said surveillance program in the early 2000's.

Unless you categorically believe Mr. Nacchio's claim is false, then there exists at least a suspicion that he's telling the truth. Ergo, the circumstances of his downfall are suspicious.

  This is all I'm saying.  It's all circumstantial- but this is a circumstantial case against him from start to finish.  I personally believe he knew he was in financial trouble as a result of the NSA mess, and he was doing his best to cash out and sock something away before the government murdered his company.  And that, unfortunately, is against the law.  The real people messing with the shareowners was the government.  But then, this is what people need to know about dealing with government- it's why I personally don't.  We don't even do Section 8 housing.