January 2006 - cypherpunks-legacy

You Need This Cypherpunks
by Denver Forrest 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

The most complete Phar macy Online We carry all major medds at bargain price Viggra, Ci ialis, VaIium, Xa naax Phantermiine, Ulltraam and etc... SatiisfactIon Gua ranteeed http://au.geocities.com/ginger75921nariko60652/ IZ

1 0

New Poll Finds Half of U.S. Needs Killing
by Eugen Leitl 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/politics/27poll.html?ei=5094&en=b93f38e07… d88d0&hp=&ex=1138424400&partner=homepage&pagewanted=all New Poll Finds Mixed Support for Wiretaps David Scull for The New York Times President Bush at his news conference Thursday. The latest polls show that public opinion on Mr. Bush's surveillance program is still unresolved. * E-Mail This * Printer-Friendly * Reprints * Save Article Article Tools Sponsored By By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JANET ELDER Published: January 27, 2006 Americans are willing to tolerate eavesdropping without warrants to fight terrorism, but are concerned that the aggressive antiterrorism programs championed by the Bush administration are encroaching on civil liberties, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. In a sign that public opinion about the trade-offs between national security and individual rights is nuanced and remains highly unresolved, responses to questions about the administration's eavesdropping program varied significantly depending on how the questions were worded, underlining the importance of the effort by the White House this week to define the issue on its terms. The poll, conducted as President Bush defended his surveillance program in the face of criticism from Democrats and some Republicans that it is illegal, found that Americans were willing to give the administration some latitude for its surveillance program if they believed it was intended to protect them. Fifty-three percent of the respondents said they supported eavesdropping without warrants "in order to reduce the threat of terrorism." The results suggest that Americans' view of the program depends in large part on whether they perceive it as a bulwark in the fight against terrorism, as Mr. Bush has sought to cast it, or as an unnecessary and unwarranted infringement on civil liberties, as critics have said. In one striking finding, respondents overwhelmingly supported e-mail and telephone monitoring directed at "Americans that the government is suspicious of;" they overwhelmingly opposed the same kind of surveillance if it was aimed at "ordinary Americans." Mr. Bush, at a White House press conference yesterday, twice used the phrase "terrorist surveillance program" to describe an operation in which the administration has eavesdropped on telephone calls and other communications like e-mail that it says could involve operatives of Al Qaeda overseas talking to Americans. Critics say the administration could conduct such surveillance while still getting prior court approval, as spelled out in a 1978 law intended to guard against governmental abuses. The findings came in a poll conducted as Mr. Bush prepares to deliver his fifth State of the Union address on Tuesday. It found that Mr. Bush will face a nation that has grown sour on Washington and skeptical that he will be able to achieve significant progress in health care, the economy, the Iraq war and the cost of prescription drugs for older patients before he leaves office in three years. The poll also signaled concern for Republicans as they prepare to defend their control of the House and the Senate in midterm elections this November. Investigations into Congressional corruption are taking a toll as the elections approach: 61 percent of Americans now hold an unfavorable view of Congress, the highest in 10 years. This finding holds particular peril for Republicans as the party that has been in charge. More than half of the respondents said they believed that most members of Congress would exchange votes for money or favors. Republicans were seen as more likely to be unduly influenced by lobbyists. And the Republican Party is now viewed unfavorably by 51 percent of the nation, its worst rating since Mr. Bush took office. By contrast, 53 percent said they held a favorable view of Democrats. The telephone poll was conducted with 1,229 adults, starting Friday and ending Wednesday. Its margin of sampling error was plus or minus three percentage points. The poll found that Americans were to a large extent perplexed as they weighed conflicting forces: the need presented by Mr. Bush to take extraordinary action to fight terrorism, and a historical aversion to an overly intrusive government. The poll found that 53 percent of Americans approved of Mr. Bush's authorizing eavesdropping without prior court approval "in order to reduce the threat of terrorism"; 46 percent disapproved. When the question was asked stripped of any mention of terrorism, 46 percent of those respondents approved, and 50 percent said they disapproved. At the same time, 64 percent said they were very or somewhat concerned about losing civil liberties as a result of antiterrorism measures put in place by Mr. Bush since the attacks of Sept. 11. And respondents were more likely to be concerned that the government would enact strong antiterrorism laws that excessively restrict civil liberties than they were that the government would fail to enact antiterrorism laws. The poll was conducted just as the White House commenced an elaborate campaign to defend the surveillance program, and thus may have been too early to offer a full measure of that campaign's effectiveness. There were no measurable changes in the poll findings from one day to the next. The findings, and follow-up interviews with some participants, clearly suggest that Mr. Bush has an opportunity to make the dispute over the program play to his political advantage. He has been pointing to the threat of another terrorist attack to justify the eavesdropping program and is trying, for the third election in a row, to suggest that he and his party are more aggressive about protecting the nation than are Democrats. "Say they're targeting someone in Al Qaeda outside the country, and that person then calls someone in the United States about a plot or something really bad: I don't have a problem with that phone being monitored," Debbie Viebranz, 51, a Republican from Ohio, said in a follow-up interview. "But I don't think they should do it for no reason." Donnis Wells, 69, a Republican from Florence, Miss., said: "I don't think civil liberties are the more important thing we need to handle right now. I think we need to protect our people." Still, interviews reflected clear apprehension about the program. "If there is a warrant and done by the courts, I would agree," said Robert Ray, 54, an independent from Kentucky. "But they're trying to do it without using the courts. I just don't trust them." In the poll, 70 percent of respondents said they would not be willing to support governmental monitoring of the communications of "ordinary Americans"; 68 percent said they would be willing to support such monitoring of "Americans the government is suspicious of." Beyond surveillance, the poll found that Americans hold unfavorable views of the president and the Republican-controlled Congress as Mr. Bush prepares to give his State of the Union speech. Americans, while declaring themselves generally optimistic about the next three years under Mr. Bush, do not expect him to accomplish very much in that time. When Mr. Bush leaves office, respondents said, the deficit will be larger than it is today, the elderly will be being paying more for prescription drugs, and the economy and the health care system will be the same as today, or worse. Mr. Bush is viewed favorably by 42 percent of the respondents, statistically the same as in the last Times/CBS News poll, in early December, a lackluster rating that could hamper his ability to rally public opinion behind his agenda and push legislation through a divided Congress. Beyond that, nearly two-thirds of the country thinks the nation is on the wrong track, a level that has historically proved to be a matter of concern for a party in power. A majority said they were dissatisfied with the way Mr. Bush was managing the economy and the war in Iraq. Public approval for his handling of the campaign against terrorism, once one of his greatest political strengths, has rebounded somewhat from last fall, but remains well below where it was for the first two years after the Sept. 11 attacks. Most strikingly, the poll found abundant evidence of public unhappiness with Congress. While it is risky to draw conclusions about Congressional elections from national measurements of discontent . for example, more than half of all Americans said they were satisfied with the job their member of Congress was doing . the findings underscored the tough electoral environment that has led some analysts to predict significant Republican losses this fall. The corruption investigations appear to account for a lot of the dissatisfaction. Nearly 80 percent of respondents said that the kind of influence-peddling revelations that have emerged in the investigation of the lobbyist Jack Abramoff reflected the "way things work in Congress" and were not isolated incidents. More than 50 percent said most members of Congress "accept bribes or gifts that affect their votes." "It seems like the integrity of Congress members in the last few years has just gone to pot," said Donald Pertuis, 54, an independent voter from Hot Springs, Ark. Mr. Pertuis added: "In the last 20 years, greed has accelerated. People expect more, I suppose, and want to work less." Marjorie Connelly, Marina Stefan and Megan Thee contributed reporting for this article. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]

1 0

[Clips] Rosenberg Reruns
by R. A. Hettinga 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: clips(a)philodox.com Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:02:59 -0500 To: Philodox Clips List <clips(a)philodox.com> From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: [Clips] Rosenberg Reruns Reply-To: rah(a)philodox.com Sender: clips-bounces(a)philodox.com <http://www.opinionjournal.com/taste/?id=110007878> OpinionJournal WSJ Online DE GUSTIBUS Rosenberg Reruns They were guilty, but the left can't give up their cause. BY JOSEPH RAGO Friday, January 27, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST You would think, by now, with a half-century of scholarship behind us and a great deal of damning evidence on display, we would not have to be arguing about the guilt or innocence of various iconic figures of the late 1940s and 1950s: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White or, perhaps most notoriously, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. But the martyr status of such figures seems irresistible, even today, to a certain kind of sentimental leftist. They still remain symbols of some malevolent American quality--never mind the truth of what they actually did. Such was the lesson of a forum last week in Manhattan convened to discuss the "artistic influence" of the Rosenbergs. The invitation to the event, sponsored by the Fordham Law School, referred to the Rosenbergs as "the accused." It was a tellingly exculpatory phrase. For the record, both Julius and Ethel were convicted as communist spies and executed for espionage in 1953. The stars of the evening were the novelist E.L. Doctorow and the playwright Tony Kushner. Mr. Doctorow is the author of "The Book of Daniel" (1971), a novel that centers on a couple loosely patterned after the Rosenbergs; Mr. Kushner wrote the play "Angels in America" (1993), which imagines the specter of Ethel Rosenberg returning to haunt various protagonists. Both works are highly sympathetic to the Rosenbergs' dilemma, if that is the right word. The forum was generally arcane and self-serious. Messrs. Doctorow and Kushner ventilated many concerns about the relation of culture to society, chief among them the obligation of the artist to accurately represent the past. The pair eventually settled on the definition of historical art as "an aesthetic system of opinions," as the good Doctorow put it. Fair enough. But why would "the artist"--let alone anyone--still be hung up on the Rosenbergs? To plow through the evidence for the millionth time: While the trial of the Rosenbergs was flawed by technical improprieties, their crimes are not uncertain or unresolved. Julius Rosenberg, with Ethel as his accomplice, was the head of a sophisticated spy network that deeply penetrated the American atomic program and relayed top secrets to Stalin's Kremlin. In his memoirs Nikita Khrushchev noted that the Rosenbergs "vastly aided production of our A-bomb." Joyce Milton and Ronald Radosh wrote a damning account of their activities in "The Rosenberg File" (1983). And the Rosenbergs' guilt was corroborated by the 1995 declassification of the Venona documents, thousands of decrypted KGB cables intercepted by the National Security Agency in the 1940s. The notion that anyone would today deny their fundamental complicity in Soviet subversion is extraordinary, almost comically so. But comedy was not quite the mentality at the Rosenberg event. "Ambiguity is the key word, I think," said Mr. Doctorow, regarding our understanding of the past, though in this instance ambiguous is precisely what it is not. Mr. Kushner argued the Rosenbergs were "murdered, basically." Mr. Doctorow went further, explaining that he wanted to use their circumstances to tell "a story of the mind of the country." It was a mind, apparently, filled with loathing and paranoia--again, never mind the truth of the charges against the Rosenbergs or other spies of the time. "The principles of the Cold War had reached absurdity," he continued. "We knew that the Russians were no threat, but we wanted to persuade Americans to be afraid" and so impose "a Puritan, punitive civil religion." Pronounced Mr. Kushner: "Our failure to come to terms with a brutal past, our failure to open up the coffins and let the ghosts out, has led to our current, horrendous situation." The enduring artistic influence of the Rosenberg case, then, seems to be primarily allegorical. Guilt and innocence drop away (rather, guilt is converted to virtue) and the Rosenbergs are made into victims of "American fascism," to use Ethel Rosenberg's own phrase. Or to borrow the exquisite formulation of the scholar-apologist Ellen Schrecker, the Rosenbergs were guilty only of "nontraditional patriotism." The arts should not be judged entirely on political character, of course. But in considering an "aesthetic system of opinions" when the aesthetics are pointless bathos and the opinions are the whole point, politics ought to be taken into account. And for all the hand-wringing about fidelity to historical accuracy, the point is that Messrs. Doctorow and Kushner get the politics so wrong. As the artists turned the Rosenbergs' treason into dissent and then into patriotism, the audience was enthusiastically in tune. Present were the Rosenbergs' children, Robert and Michael Meeropol, who continue to contest their parents' Soviet entanglement, and the former editor of the Nation, Victor Navasky. When it came time to ask questions, the moderator warned off any "Cold War warriors" from asking "disrespectful" questions, like, presumably, how these authors could defend an ideology that took millions of lives. No one did. Mr. Rago is an assistant features editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' _______________________________________________ Clips mailing list Clips(a)philodox.com http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

2 1

[Clips] Don't be Google
by R. A. Hettinga 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: clips(a)philodox.com Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:43:23 -0500 To: Philodox Clips List <clips(a)philodox.com> From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: [Clips] Don't be Google Reply-To: rah(a)philodox.com Sender: clips-bounces(a)philodox.com <http://www.townhall.com/print/print_story.php?sid=184032&loc=/opinion/colum…> Townhall.com Don't be Google By Debra Saunders Jan 26, 2006 Google gives life to the Eric Hoffer observation, "People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them." Google painted itself as heroic in refusing to help the U.S. Department of Justice's efforts to reinstate a 1998 federal Child Online Protection Act, then revealed that it was going to help the Chinese government suppress free speech. That sort of goes against the company's informal corporate motto, "Don't be evil." I realize how eager those in the Bay Area are to believe that the evil Bush administration wants to double as Big Brother and eavesdrop on well-meaning peaceniks. So it doesn't matter that the DOJ isn't looking for information on individual accounts -- but instead wanted data on how the Internet is used during a given week to see how users access porn. Personally, I'd be more supportive of the Department of Justice's subpoena if the feds were trying to locate specific individuals -- child-porn-aholics, for instance -- just as I would support a government subpoena for bank accounts used to launder mob money. My issue with the subpoena -- and I agree with Google on this -- is that it asks for a huge chunk of information to support the government in a civil suit. It's a fishing expedition, in which corporate America provides free research. Yahoo and Microsoft, however, were able to comply. A Yahoo spokesperson said the company did not release personally identifiable information. Care about rights? Be it noted that exposing children to porn on the Internet violates their parents' rights. Still, Google emerged from the controversy as a defender of privacy. Columnist Robert Scheer in Wednesday's San Francisco Chronicle duly lauded Google's refusal to comply with the Justice Department's request, as he wrote that the "latest high-tech upstart giant dared to challenge the government's claim of an unbridled right to break into our information-age virtual homes." The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson described the subpoena as "more of an Orwellian threat than the National Security Agency's snooping on phone calls and e-mails." You have to marvel at Google's great marketing ploy. The company amasses founts of information on users of its service. Yet, by riding on the coattails of anti-Bush sentiment, Google claims the mantle of champion of privacy rights. "We intend to resist (the government's) motion vigorously," said a Google lawyer in a statement. All hail Google. The Google-philes fawn as if bashing the Bushies in the Bay Area is an act of courage, when it's the most popular -- and probably profitable -- thing a company can do. Meanwhile, back in Beijing, Google has agreed to filter out sites that the Chinese government doesn't like. The Chinese government won't have to rely on its fleet of monitoring devices that block out "subversive" content from the West, such as information on the Tiananmen Square protest, Tibet and Taiwan. Google will do the dirty work. The Mountain View, Calif., company will withhold e-mail and blogging services, it says, to protest the Chinese filtering. A Google statement explained that "while removing search results is inconsistent with Google's mission, providing no information" is "more inconsistent." It may be only a matter of time before Google starts acting like other Internet providers that also censor for China. Last year, Yahoo helped the Chinese government prosecute a dissident reporter. This month, Microsoft shut down a pesky blog. As The Associated Press reported, Microsoft's service in China bars such terms as "democracy" and "human rights." Here's a thought: Google could ban the phrase, "Don't be evil." I understand that Google wants to make a profit. I just don't know how company execs garner the image of little guys standing up to big, bad government. Google can say no to the Bushies and know that it won't lose any business, its executives won't go to jail and their children will not get run over by tanks. In the country where those things could happen, Google is a collaborator. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' _______________________________________________ Clips mailing list Clips(a)philodox.com http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

[bear@sonic.net: Re: thoughts on one time pads]
by Eugen Leitl 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

----- Forwarded message from bear <bear(a)sonic.net> -----

2 1

Refill Reminder avenue
by Tory Thomas 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

Xanax and other drugs with wholesale prices. You wont find better prices anywhere! Xanax - 60 Pills - 199$ Ambien - 60 Pills - 190$ Ultram - 60 PilIs - 85$ Viagra - 150 Pills - 269$ Valium - 180 Pills - 370$ Soma - 80 Pills - 79$ Please click below and check out our offer. http://zoroo.info/?8a6d6e4d683S6a73e39S9a2a3359fbe8 aztec you bali me, patagonia augustine breakwater chigger . seventy you largesse me, dentistry inputting collusion breadwinner . determine you brickbat me, chalcocite bernet gravy . bass you starvation me, ivanhoe gloss turnover . aqueous you decompression me, peale tall wiggly godfather . pacify you abut me, addend chocolate arboretum . stepmother you balsa me, sewn .

1 0

[declan@well.com: [Politech] In China, Google censors more than just politics: beer, dating, joke, gay sites too [fs]]
by Eugen Leitl 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

----- Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> -----

1 0

[dave@farber.net: [IP] Voting programmer worked for White House Plumbers chief]
by Eugen Leitl 27 Jan '06

27 Jan '06

----- Forwarded message from David Farber <dave(a)farber.net> -----

1 0

[Clips] British 'spy rock' a multi-million dollar miracle of technology: FSB
by R. A. Hettinga 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: clips(a)philodox.com Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:23:26 -0500 To: Philodox Clips List <clips(a)philodox.com> From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: [Clips] British 'spy rock' a multi-million dollar miracle of technology: FSB Reply-To: rah(a)philodox.com Sender: clips-bounces(a)philodox.com <http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/26/060126184917.lbjuug8z.html> BREITBART.COM - British 'spy rock' a multi-million dollar miracle of technology: FSB Jan 26 1:55 PM US/Eastern Russia's intelligence agency described the communications device disguised as a rock allegedly used by British spies in Moscow as a "miracle of technology" worth tens of millions of pounds. "It's a piece of space-age technology, a machine that can withstand a fall from from nine floors up and prolonged submersion in water," said Sergei Ignachenko, spokesman for the FSB agency, as he showed off the object to the media. On Monday, the FSB accused four British diplomats of involvement in a spy ring in which agents allegedly passed secrets through the device, located in a Moscow park and the subject of a programme broadcast by a state-run television channel. "According to our experts, this rock, this miracle of technology, costs several tens of millions of dollars," the spokesman said. He said FSB agents were systematically searching the capital to locate similar devices they believed British agents had planted. He added that the device shown to the media was found six weeks after an alleged British spy removed another one. On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the exposure of the alleged British spy ring justified a hotly debated new law on the financing of non-governmental organisations in Russia. Putin's critics have accused Russia's intelligence services of using the spy scandal as a way of putting pressure on NGOs but supporters of the legislation say foreign spy agencies often use non-governmental groups for intelligence-gathering. -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' _______________________________________________ Clips mailing list Clips(a)philodox.com http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

[Clips] Brinworld: 'Ring of Steel' for New York?
by R. A. Hettinga 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: clips(a)philodox.com Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:51:07 -0500 To: Philodox Clips List <clips(a)philodox.com> From: "R. A. Hettinga" <rah(a)shipwright.com> Subject: [Clips] Brinworld: 'Ring of Steel' for New York? Reply-To: rah(a)philodox.com Sender: clips-bounces(a)philodox.com <http://online.wsj.com/article_print/SB113815677585855548.html> The Wall Street Journal January 25, 2006 'Ring of Steel' for New York? To Protect Lower Manhattan, Police Study London's Effort: Cameras, Controlling Access By CARRICK MOLLENKAMP and CHRISTINE HAUGHNEY Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL January 25, 2006; Page B1 As New York law enforcement agencies and businesses consider how to improve security as part of the plan to rebuild lower Manhattan, they are looking to London for ideas on guarding against potential terrorist attacks and fighting crime. The hallmark of London's strategy is what officials call "the ring of steel." The phrase refers to closed-circuit cameras and narrow roads that encircle the City of London, the neighborhood that houses London's financial district as well as such historic sights as St. Paul's Cathedral. The narrow roads create just a few entry points to the area that police can block off, if necessary, while cameras photograph anyone entering or exiting the area. The neighborhood also has its own police force. The New York City Police Department is considering erecting a similar "ring of steel" around lower Manhattan. Paul Browne, NYPD's deputy commissioner of public information says that while it's "still too early in the process" to comment on specifics, police officials are most interested in the elements of the "ring of steel" model that involve using more closed-circuit TVs and introducing controlled entrances and exits into the area. "In creating the plan for the World Trade Center site, we are looking at best practices around the globe as we seek to create a new state-of-the-art security model," James Kallstrom, counterterrorism adviser to New York Gov. George Pataki and designer of the new World Trade Center site's security plans, said in a statement last week. Mr. Kallstrom declined to comment beyond the statement. The NYPD declined to say which lower Manhattan streets, if any, may be narrowed. It's unlikely New York City officials will allow a separate police force to cover lower Manhattan -- defined as south of Chambers Street and West Street to the East River by the Downtown Alliance, a nonprofit group comprised of companies and business owners. While recent discussions have focused on lower Manhattan, a law enforcement official close to the situation said the NYPD's plans may extend to midtown Manhattan as well. New York officials have been looking at London systems since last summer, after suicide bombers attacked London's subway system and a bus on July 7. Cameras captured time-stamped photos of the bombers as they entered the subway, and others who attempted a similar crime a few weeks later, and helped identify the suspects. A team of New York police officers visited London for five days in September and were given access to the City of London's security and investigative procedures and talked to officers, according to James Hart, the City of London's police commissioner. Similarities between lower Manhattan and the City of London are likely to help authorities with their planning. Both neighborhoods are about a square mile in area. Some 300,000 commuters travel through each area daily. Both are global financial hubs, with banks and stock exchanges that remain targets for terror attacks. In both cities, the subways are major funnels bringing people into the neighborhoods and vulnerability points. Closed-circuit cameras monitor the London Tube, as the subway is called. In New York, the subway system went further than the rest of the country -- though still not as far as London's -- when it unveiled a $212 million project with Lockheed Martin Corp. in October of 2004 to install 1,000 closed-circuit cameras with 3,000 sensors. The project, which isn't expected to be completed until 2008, includes a command center that will monitor the cameras in real time. The New York police have 3,100 closed-circuit cameras in 12 housing projects and additional cameras in select parts of the city, including lower Manhattan. New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly has said that the city should install additional cameras. Police say the cameras have slashed crime rates by double digits in the housing projects. Mr. Kelly declined to comment for this article. London implemented the ring of steel in 1993, after Irish Republican Army bombings struck the city and other areas in the early 1990s. Many of the measures in London largely go unnoticed. The City has 16 entry and 12 exit points where the roads were narrowed and marked with iron posts painted a decorative red, white and black. The posts also deter truck bombs. Recent upgrades include extending the security zone to the north and west, and adding cameras, Mr. Hart says. At each entry point, a camera screens license plates and feeds the data to a computerized system that can flag stolen or wanted vehicles. If a wanted car is spotted, a control room at police headquarters can be alerted within four seconds. Last year, the system read 37 million plates and identified 91,000 positive matches for wanted vehicles. Nearly 550 arrests were made as a result. In London, "you're always on CCTV somewhere," says City of London police constable Phil Rudrum. A network of closed-circuit cameras are mounted on the sides of building or on poles. The images are streamed live to police headquarters in the City and are monitored around the clock. Civil liberty concerns have been raised but following IRA bombings in the 1990s, many Brits haven't raised civil-liberties objections to the cameras. "The trade-off is that the prevention and disruption of terrorist activity is certainly worth the risk," says Mr. Hart, adding that the force has pledged that the monitoring system will not be used to prosecute minor crimes such as littering. Such measures, though, will face privacy concerns in New York. To bolster its objection to the potential for the government to use photos invasively, the New York Civil Liberties Union last summer sent 10 college students to count surveillance cameras in the city. The City of London, a neighborhood that comprises London's financial district, uses steel posts in the streets to control traffic flow. They found the number of cameras in lower Manhattan had increased to 1,300 from 446 in 1998. The group says it plans to recommend to the New York City Council and state legislature limits to how the city uses CCTV photos. "The NYPD has to develop policies that protect individual privacy and that do not turn us into a surveillance society where people have to worry that every move is being captured on camera," says Donna Lieberman, executive director of the liberties group. The NYPD's Mr. Browne disputes the notion that surveillance data would be misused. "Our interest in cameras is for crime suppression," he says. The City of London's police force is separate from the rest of London, which is serviced by the Metropolitan Police Service, also known as Scotland Yard. The U.K. government is weighing whether to merge the two, a move the City of London and businesses oppose. Many investment banks in the City of London appreciate the presence of a special police force. One cold gray afternoon this week, for example, Mr. Rudrum, the constable, walked his beat, checking in with security officers at each building where he stops. His stroll takes him past a pub and then Merrill Lynch & Co., where he also visits with security. Security experts from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have also been involved in the discussions. Just weeks after the London bombings, Mr. Hart met in Manhattan with security experts from the investment firm, which is building a 2.1 million square-foot headquarters near the site of the World Trade Center. "We regularly report possible terrorist and criminal activity to the police and receive a first-class response," Goldman Sachs managing director Paul Deighton wrote in a letter of support for the City of London force. "Normally a police officer will be at our offices within two minutes of our making a telephone call." -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' _______________________________________________ Clips mailing list Clips(a)philodox.com http://www.philodox.com/mailman/listinfo/clips --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

4 3