Lawmakers take aim at sex offenders on Internet

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday proposed requiring sex offenders to register their e-mail and instant messaging addresses with law enforcement authorities in a bid to protect children using popular social Internet sites like MySpace.

The legislation introduced in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives also would require the Justice Department to develop a system that would allow commercial social networking Web sites to check members' addresses against individuals listed in the National Sex Offender Registry.

Violators who fail to comply with registering their online communication identities would face up to 10 years in prison under the bill. If the offender was on supervised release from prison, the individual's probation would be revoked.

The measure would also make it a crime for anyone over the age of 18 to misrepresent their age for the purpose of luring a minor over the Internet for illegal sexual conduct.

The move comes as MySpace, owned by News Corp., has boosted efforts to block convicted sex predators from the site. Earlier this month, the families of five girls abducted by adults they met on MySpace sued the company for negligence.

"Many children who access the Internet in a safe environment -- such as their home or school -- forget that they are sharing personal information with complete strangers," said Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), an Arizona Republican and co-sponsor of the bill.

He said MySpace and another popular site, Facebook, have endorsed the measure.

"This bill provides social networking sites, which are an increasingly popular way for kids to connect with their friends, with one more tool to help keep our children safe from dangerous predators on the Internet," said Rep. Earl Pomeroy (news, bio, voting record), a North Dakota Democrat who also sponsored the bill.

The legislation also follows the resignation last year of a Republican House member from Florida, Mark Foley, after ABC News reported that he had sent sexually explicit messages to former teen-age male interns, known as congressional pages.

Sex offender data is currently collected by individual state authorities. MySpace and background verification company Sentinel Tech Holdings Corp. developed a technology that combines those registries to help police track some 600,000 convicted sex offenders.

MySpace struck a partnership with Sentinel in December to create the database and has been using it to identify, block or delete the accounts of known sex predators on its service.

FBI turns to broad new wiretap method

The FBI appears to have adopted an invasive Internet surveillance technique that collects far more data on innocent Americans than previously has been disclosed.

Instead of recording only what a particular suspect is doing, agents conducting investigations appear to be assembling the activities of thousands of Internet users at a time into massive databases, according to current and former officials. That database can subsequently be queried for names, e-mail addresses or keywords.

Such a technique is broader and potentially more intrusive than the FBI's Carnivore surveillance system, later renamed DCS1000. It raises concerns similar to those stirred by widespread Internet monitoring that the National Security Agency is said to have done, according to documents that have surfaced in one federal lawsuit, and may stretch the bounds of what's legally permissible.

Call it the vacuum-cleaner approach. It's employed when police have obtained a court order and an Internet service provider can't "isolate the particular person or IP address" because of technical constraints, says Paul Ohm, a former trial attorney at the Justice Department's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section. (An Internet Protocol address is a series of digits that can identify an individual computer.)

That kind of full-pipe surveillance can record all Internet traffic, including Web browsing--or, optionally, only certain subsets such as all e-mail messages flowing through the network. Interception typically takes place inside an Internet provider's network at the junction point of a router or network switch.

The technique came to light at the Search & Seizure in the Digital Age symposium held at Stanford University's law school on Friday. Ohm, who is now a law professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, and Richard Downing, a CCIPS assistant deputy chief, discussed it during the symposium.

In a telephone conversation afterward, Ohm said that full-pipe recording has become federal agents' default method for Internet surveillance. "You collect wherever you can on the (network) segment," he said. "If it happens to be the segment that has a lot of IP addresses, you don't throw away the other IP addresses. You do that after the fact."

"You intercept first and you use whatever filtering, data mining to get at the information about the person you're trying to monitor," he added.

On Monday, a Justice Department representative would not immediately answer questions about this kind of surveillance technique.

"What they're doing is even worse than Carnivore," said Kevin Bankston, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who attended the Stanford event. "What they're doing is intercepting everyone and then choosing their targets."

When the FBI announced two years ago it had abandoned Carnivore, news reports said that the bureau would increasingly rely on Internet providers to conduct the surveillance and reimburse them for costs. While Carnivore was the subject of congressional scrutiny and outside audits, the FBI's current Internet eavesdropping techniques have received little attention.

Carnivore apparently did not perform full-pipe recording. A technical report (PDF: "Independent Technical Review of the Carnivore System") from December 2000 prepared for the Justice Department said that Carnivore "accumulates no data other than that which passes its filters" and that it saves packets "for later analysis only after they are positively linked by the filter settings to a target."

One reason why the full-pipe technique raises novel legal questions is that under federal law, the FBI must perform what's called "minimization."

Federal law says that agents must "minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception" and keep the supervising judge informed of what's happening. Minimization is designed to provide at least a modicum of privacy by limiting police eavesdropping on innocuous conversations.

Prosecutors routinely hold presurveillance "minimization meetings" with investigators to discuss ground rules. Common investigatory rules permit agents to listen in on a phone call for two minutes at a time, with at least one minute elapsing between the spot-monitoring sessions.

That section of federal law mentions only real-time interception--and does not explicitly authorize the creation of a database with information on thousands of innocent targets.

But a nearby sentence adds: "In the event the intercepted communication is in a code or foreign language, and an expert in that foreign language or code is not reasonably available during the interception period, minimization may be accomplished as soon as practicable after such interception."

Downing, the assistant deputy chief at the Justice Department's computer crime section, pointed to that language on Friday. Because digital communications amount to a foreign language or code, he said, federal agents are legally permitted to record everything and sort through it later. (Downing stressed that he was not speaking on behalf of the Justice Department.)

"Take a look at the legislative history from the mid '90s," Downing said. "It's pretty clear from that that Congress very much intended it to apply to electronic types of wiretapping."

EFF's Bankston disagrees. He said that the FBI is "collecting and apparently storing indefinitely the communications of thousands--if not hundreds of thousands--of innocent Americans in violation of the Wiretap Act and the 4th Amendment to the Constitution."

Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C., said a reasonable approach would be to require that federal agents only receive information that's explicitly permitted by the court order. "The obligation should be on both the (Internet provider) and the government to make sure that only the information responsive to the warrant is disclosed to the government," he said.

Courts have been wrestling with minimization requirements for over a generation. In a 1978 Supreme Court decision, Scott v. United States, the justices upheld police wiretaps of people suspected of selling illegal drugs.

But in his majority opinion, Justice William Rehnquist said that broad monitoring to nab one suspect might go too far. "If the agents are permitted to tap a public telephone because one individual is thought to be placing bets over the phone, substantial doubts as to minimization may arise if the agents listen to every call which goes out over that phone regardless of who places the call," he wrote.

Another unanswered question is whether a database of recorded Internet communications can legally be mined for information about unrelated criminal offenses such as drug use, copyright infringement or tax crimes. One 1978 case, U.S. v. Pine, said that investigators could continue to listen in on a telephone line when other illegal activities--not specified in the original wiretap order--were being discussed. Those discussions could then be used against a defendant in a criminal prosecution.

Ohm, the former Justice Department attorney who presented a paper on the Fourth Amendment, said he has doubts about the constitutionality of full-pipe recording. "The question that's interesting, although I don't know whether it's so clear, is whether this is illegal, whether it's constitutional," he said. "Is Congress even aware they're doing this? I don't know the answers."

Test of Bush's terror-fighting authority heads to higher court

The open-ended detention of an Arab student suspected of being an Al Qaeda sleeper agent is setting the stage for the next major showdown over the scope of President Bush's authority to fight terrorism on American soil.

Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri has been held in government custody for more than five years and has spent the last three and a half years in a South Carolina military prison under interrogation as a presidentially designated enemy combatant.

For 17 months of that time he was held incommunicado, with no ability to consult a lawyer, appear before a neutral judge to test the legality of his detention, or even tell his wife and five children he was alive.

Mr. Marri's lawyers say his confinement by military authorities rather than in the civilian justice system violates both US law and the Constitution.

Lawyers for the government disagree. They say the president is acting within his powers to protect the country from a second wave of terror attacks following 9/11.

Thursday, Marri's case goes to a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Analysts say the dispute may ultimately wind up in the US Supreme Court with a potential landmark ruling on a key question: What rights does a noncitizen legal resident have when the government names him an enemy combatant?

The Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., is the same appeals court that upheld the detention as enemy combatants of US citizens Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla.

But the Marri case is different, his lawyers say. Mr. Hamdi was taken into custody in Afghanistan and Mr. Padilla was detained while attempting to reenter the US at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. Both were said to have taken up arms against the US while overseas. In contrast, Marri was arrested in Peoria, Ill., where he was attending graduate school on a valid student visa.

Unlike other designated enemy combatants, Marri never directly participated in hostilities against the US, his lawyers say. Since he was never a combatant on a battlefield, he – as a civilian lawfully present in the US – cannot be detained by the military as an enemy combatant, they say.

Instead, he must be extended all the constitutional and other protections of the civilian court system, his lawyers say.

"The government's position in this case is stunning," says Jonathan Hafetz, a Marri lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. "If they are right, they can pick up any immigrant tomorrow in this country, lock them in a military jail, and the government would hold the keys to the courthouse." Mr. Hafetz adds, "The government could effectively disappear people."

The administration says in a global war on terror the battlefield can be anywhere, including Peoria. US Solicitor General Paul Clement says Marri associated with the military arm of Al Qaeda, a US enemy, and thus qualifies as an enemy combatant.

"He is a Qatari citizen who allied himself with Al-Qaeda, received funding and training from Al-Qaeda, and traveled to the United States on orders from Al-Qaeda to serve as a sleeper agent and facilitate further terrorist attacks against the United States from within," Mr. Clement writes in his brief to the court. He adds, "Enemy combatants do not earn immunity by crossing our borders to do us harm."

Before the three-judge panel considers such arguments, government lawyers will suggest that the appeals court lacks jurisdiction to take up Marri's case.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 says in part that "No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any [legal] action against the United States ... related to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement" of a noncitizen properly deemed an enemy combatant.

Marri's lawyers say the provision only applies to noncitizen enemy combatants detained outside US borders like those being held at the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, naval base. If the court rules that the Military Commissions Act does apply to detainees held in the US, it would amount to an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, they say.

The Bush administration argues that the new law divests jurisdiction in "all cases, without exception" in which a noncitizen enemy combatant is being held by the US. It applies regardless of the location of the detention, government lawyers say.

Hafetz says that approach threatens to blur the distinction between military and civilian jurisdiction established in a Civil War-era ruling by the Supreme Court.

Soldiers and combatants fall within the military sphere of courts martial, tribunals, and commissions, while civilians are governed by the civilian court system. "It is the essence of our society where civilian rule and civilian institutions are supreme and the military doesn't have the power to go in and arrest people in their homes and lock them in military jails," Hafetz says. "That is what separates a country that is democratic and committed to the rule of law from a country that is a police state."

In his brief, Solicitor General Clement says that after the 9/11 attacks, Congress authorized Mr. Bush to use all "necessary and appropriate force," including detention of enemy combatants, to "protect United States citizens both at home and abroad." The government reads the provision as authorizing detentions both at home and abroad.

In determining Marri is an enemy combatant, Bush concluded in part: "Mr. Marri represents a continuing, present, and grave danger to the national security of the United States."

A declassified affidavit prepared by a US intelligence official says that Marri attended an Al Qaeda training camp between 1996 and 1998. "Marri met personally with Osama Bin Laden and volunteered for a martyr mission or to do anything else that Al-Qaeda requested," the affidavit says.

Marri worked with two senior Al Qaeda leaders prior to his arrival in the US, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, the key moneyman of the 9/11 attacks, the affidavit says. In addition, Marri's younger brother is a detainee at Guantánamo Bay.

Al Qaeda asked Marri to enroll as a student and quietly explore ways to hack into bank records to disrupt the US financial system, the document says. He had also been trained in the use of poisons and was researching poisons similar to the hydrogen cyanide weapon used in a terror attack on the Japanese subway system by the group Aum Shinrikyo, the affidavit says.

Marri arrived in the US with his wife and five children one day before the 9/11 attacks. He had been given at least $13,000 by Al Qaeda, the affidavit says.

Marri's lawyers say much of the information in the affidavit is hearsay. They are asking for an opportunity to challenge the veracity of the allegations in court by investigating whether the intelligence information was obtained from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others through coercive interrogations or torture.

Hafetz says that even if everything the government says about Marri is true (and he stresses that he does not concede that it is true), the central point of his case is that Marri should be charged with a crime and prosecuted, not merely held indefinitely by the military based on an affidavit that has never endured the careful scrutiny of cross-examination in open court.

Earlier, a federal judge in South Carolina agreed with the government that Marri could be held as an enemy combatant based on hearsay evidence contained in an intelligence affidavit. The court said Marri was given an opportunity to present a case that he was wrongly accused, but that he "squandered" that opportunity. Short of making a stronger initial showing that he was innocent, Marri has no right to cross-examine government officials or more deeply investigate the government's allegations against him, the court ruled.

Marri is appealing that decision.

Obesity ads aim to jolt parents

The images are not subtle.

One billboard shows an overweight child's lower legs and feet on a scale next to the words, "Fat Chance," along with a list of the health risks of obesity. A second billboard shows the back of an overweight child and asks, "If that's your kid, what are you waiting for?"

The billboards are part of a $250,000 public awareness campaign that is meant to awaken area parents to the dangers of childhood obesity, said Martin D. Cohen , president of the MetroWest Community Health Care Foundation.

"We need to get their attention," said Cohen, whose foundation will launch the campaign tomorrow.

Susan Green, a 48-year-old Wayland mother of two who served on a task force that helped develop the campaign, said she understands the images may be jarring and even insulting to some parents.

"People are concerned that parents may become upset by it," said Green. "There is the risk of turning some people off, but I'm hoping it won't, and will be the first step toward developing awareness if their child is obese."

The campaign also will include television spots and print advertisements. In addition to the campaign, the foundation has handed out more than $1 million in grants to schools, community centers, and social service groups for fitness, nutrition, and health education programs aimed at reducing obesity.

The campaign is directed at parents, not children, for a reason, Cohen said.

"In targeting children, we [would be] competing with every other advertiser -- all the cereals, the McDonald's, the Pepsi, Coke, and so forth," Cohen said. "But the issues surrounding food are largely controlled by parents. They buy the groceries. They cook the food. They are deciding what's in the refrigerator."

A 2002 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicated that 9 million American children are overweight, three times the number from two decades earlier. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta found that obesity among children ages 2 to 5 has increased 35 percent in 10 years.

Dr. Jerry Wortzman , chairman of pediatrics at the MetroWest Medical Center, said local pediatricians see overweight children with health problems every day.

He said that children whose families have been motivated to change their lifestyles are most successful at returning to a healthy weight. A public awareness campaign that focuses on the serious health effects of childhood obesity could help motivate some families, he said.

"They're not going to change unless they really believe there's a problem going on," Wortzman said.

"Children being overweight is more often not really a marker for behavior issues on the part of the child," he added.

"It's much more likely a marker for behavioral choices that the family is making."

The ads will direct parents to a website, metrowestkids.org , active tomorrow, where they can get information about exercise and nutrition and pose questions to a panel of specialists.

To gauge the campaign's effectiveness, Cohen said, officials will look at website traffic and referrals to doctors, among other measures.

Green said she has tried to set the tone in her own home. She limits television viewing in her house to keep her children active, and gives them sweets only after they've had a full meal.

The rules aren't always followed, she acknowledged, but she hopes that teaching her children healthy habits now, at ages 5 and 6, will help them stay fit for life.

"We are the role models for our kids, and we have to understand how important our influence is," Green said.

Being overweight poses serious health risks for children, including high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, and orthopedic problems, Wortzman said. He also said research suggests that the health risks associated with obesity may lead to a decrease in life expectancy.

The MetroWest Community Health Care Foundation provides about $5 million annually in grants to 27 area communities for a variety of public health programs.

Green said the health risk that gives her the greatest concern is an increase in depression among overweight children.

"It would be hard to see your kids depressed because they look a different way," she said. "That would be something I would hope people would respond to."

Woman Becomes Quadruple Amputee After Giving Birth

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A Sanford mother says she will never be able to hold her newborn because an Orlando hospital performed a life-altering surgery and, she claims, the hospital refuses to explain why they left her as a multiple amputee.

The woman filed a complaint against Orlando Regional Healthcare Systems, she said, because they won't tell her exactly what happened. The hospital maintains the woman wants to know information that would violate other patients' rights.

Claudia Mejia gave birth eight and a half months ago at Orlando Regional South Seminole. She was transported to Orlando Regional Medical Center in Orlando where her arms and legs were amputated. She was told she had streptococcus, a flesh eating bacteria, and toxic shock syndrome, but no further explanation was given.

The hospital, in a letter, wrote that if she wanted to find out exactly what happened, she would have to sue them.

"I want to know what happened. I went to deliver my baby and I came out like this," Mejia said.Mejia said after she gave birth to Mathew last spring, she was kept in the hospital with complications. Twelve days after giving birth at Orlando Regional South Seminole hospital, she was transported to Orlando Regional Medical Center where she became a quadruple amputee. Now she can not care for or hold her baby.

"Yeah, I want to pick him up. He wants me to pick him up. I can't. I want to, but I can't," she said. "Woke up from surgery and I had no arms and no legs. No one told me anything. My arms and legs were just gone."

Her 7-year-old son, Jorge, asks his mother over and over what happened to her. Neither she nor her husband has the answer.

"I love her, so I'll always stick with her and take it a day at a time myself," said her husband, Tim Edwards.

The couple wants to know how she caught streptococcus, during labor or after. She doesn't know. She knows she didn't leave the hospital the same.

"And why, I want to know why this happened," she said.

Her attorney, Judy Hyman wrote ORHS a letter saying, according to the Florida statute, "The Patients Right To Know About Adverse Medical Incidents Act," the hospital must give her the records.

"When the statute is named 'Patients Right To Know,' I don't know how it could be clearer," Hyman said.

The hospital's lawyers wrote back, "Ms. Mejia's request may require legal resolution." In other words, according to their interpretation of the law, Mejia has to sue them to get information about herself.

That's the sticking point, the interpretation of the Patients Right To Know act, a constitutional amendment Florida voters passed a little more than a year ago.

Mejia's other attorney, E. Clay Parker, said the hospital is not following the law

"We were forced to file this and ask a judge to interpret the constitutional amendment and do right," Parker said.

Mejia hopes the right thing is done. She said not knowing exactly why it happened is unbearable. She only hopes she'll be able to soon answer her little boy's question, 'What happened?'

"He told me everyday, 'What happened,' and I don't have any answers for that," she said.

ORMC said Mejia is requesting information on if there were other patients or someone on her floor with the streptococcus. They said, if they release that to her, that would be a violation of other patients' rights.

Uncle Sam spoils dream trip to space

LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- Brian Emmett's childhood fantasy came true when he won a free trip to outer space.

But the 31-year-old was crushed when he had to cancel his reservation because of Uncle Sam.

Emmett won his ticket to the stars in a 2005 sweepstakes by Oracle Corp., in which he answered a series of online questions on Java computer code.

He became an instant celebrity, giving media interviews and appearing on stage at Oracle's trade show.

For the self-described space buff who has attended space camp and watched shuttle launches from Kennedy Space Center, it seemed like a chance to become an astronaut on a dime.

Then reality hit. After some number-crunching, Emmett realized he would have to report the $138,000 galactic joy ride as income and owe $25,000 in taxes.

Unwilling to sink into debt, the software consultant from the San Francisco Bay area gave up his seat.

"There was definitely a period of mourning. I was totally crestfallen," Emmett said. "Everything you had hoped for as a kid sort of evaporates in front of you."

With commercial spaceships still under development, it's uncertain when the infant space tourism industry will actually get off the ground.

Still, ultrarich thrill-seekers are already plunking down big -- though refundable -- deposits to experience a few minutes of weightlessness 60 miles above Earth.

A visit to the stars for a black hole in the wallet

And in recent years, space tourism companies have teamed with major corporations to stage contests with future suborbital spaceflights as the grand prize.

The partnerships have interstellar hype, but as Emmett found out, they can get mired in that most earthbound hassle: taxes.

"From a consumer perspective ... I'd be wary," said Kathleen Allen, director of the University of Southern California's Marshall Center for Technology Commercialization. "I'd check to see the fine print."

Since the Internal Revenue Service requires winnings from lottery drawings, TV game shows and other contests to be reported as taxable income, tax experts contend there's no such thing as a free spaceflight. Some contest sponsors provide a check to cover taxes, but that income is also taxable.

"I don't see how an average person can swing that kind of tax payment. It's a big, big bite," said tax attorney Donna LeValley, contributing editor for J.K. Lasser's annual tax guide.

To reduce the financial burden, winners can argue that they don't owe any taxes until their flight lifts off. Another option is working out an installment plan to pay taxes over time, said Greg Jenner of the American Bar Association.

The IRS declined to comment, saying it does not talk about individual matters.

Despite Emmett's cancellation, Oracle said its contest was a success. The software giant is in the process of naming his replacement and still has two other winners on board from Asia and Europe.

That spaceflight will be provided by Space Adventures Ltd., the same company that brokers deals for trips on Russian rockets to the orbiting international space station for a reported $20 million per customer.

Eric Anderson, the company's chief executive, insists that contests are the best way for most people to get into space. He said Space Adventures has given away about 20 reservations through competitions, and the majority of winners are satisfied.

Space contest rules vary widely but generally require winners to undergo astronaut training before the trip and sign a waiver freeing the sponsors from any liability if there's an accident.

Microsoft Corp. is the latest company to dangle a free space ride. This month it launched an elaborate online puzzle game as part of its promotional campaign for its new Vista PC operating system.

The grand prize winner -- to be named this week -- gets a seat with Rocketplane Ltd., which is building a souped-up Lear jet it hopes will ferry passengers to space in late 2009.

The $50,000 check that comes with the prize, which is valued at $253,500, should cover the winner's taxes, said Brian Marr, group marketing manager for Vista.

It's common for contest winners to have to play a waiting game.

Virgin Galactic customer Doug Ramsburg won his ticket in a Volvo sweepstakes during the 2005 Super Bowl.

His family and friends often hound him about when he'll reach the cosmos. After all, Virgin Galactic doesn't have any spacecraft yet.

Even without an itinerary, Ramsburg says he's not worried. He said he's confident in the man tasked to build Virgin's commercial spacecraft -- aerospace designer Burt Rutan, whose SpaceShipOne became the first privately manned rocket to reach space in 2004.

Ramsburg considers the prize a "blessing" but declined to talk about the financial arrangements, except to say the $100,000 check that came with the prize should make him the first free Virgin Galactic passenger.

"You don't have to be a superhero in order to go to space," said Ramsburg, 43, who works in the admissions office of the University of Colorado at Denver.

Back on Earth, Emmett said he has no regrets about turning down his trip and doesn't blame anyone.

"I was, however briefly, a potential astronaut," he wrote last fall in a blog entry titled "Clipped Wings."

File downloading, if not for profit, not illegal in Italy?

According to this report, the high court of Italy ruled that downloading files - be it software, music, or movies - is not illegal if profit is not the motivation. The case in question was a lawsuit against two students who set up a p2p file-sharing network, and who were initially sentenced to one year in prison. But the highest judicial institution in Italy overthrew the decision, and set the two students free.

This is an important decision, because RIAA’s brainwash is lately succeeding in pushing the notion that p2p file sharing is a criminal activity per se. It’s good to hear that judicial bodies in some countries understand that listening to a song on the radio, sharing a mix-tape with a friend, and sharing files on a p2p network - if not for financial gain - do not automatically make you a criminal.

Unfortunately, despite this small victory, this is still an uphill battle in Italy. SIAE (Italian Assocication of Authors - think of it as the Italian RIAA) issued a statement in which it pointed out that within current legislation, which entered into force after this case, file-sharing (even if not for profit) is illegal.

In any case, this might be a good time to remember my old list of all the countries in which P2P sharing can most definitely cost you money, and possibly even your freedom.

No Vista!

While you were sleeping (Bush took over the Government)

United States President stealthily took over the Federal Government last week through a new executive order last week that takes away all autonomy from Agencies, according to public interest organizations.

The order amends a series of previous executive orders that culminated in Executive Order No. 12,866, which the White House has used to give itself the power to review regulations before they can be officially published in the Federal Register.

The new order applies the review power not just to regulations but also to what it calls “significant guidance documents.”

“This order is just the latest in a series of unacceptable power grabs by the Bush administration,” said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen. “President Bush is asserting the right to change the law by executive fiat.”

The group identified three major problems with the new executive order:

First, it requires agencies to get White House approval of many important kinds of guidance for the public, which would allow the White House to create a bureaucratic bottleneck that would slow down agencies’ ability to give the public information it needs.

Agencies use guidance to let the public know how they intend to enforce the laws and regulations on the books.

“By requiring White House approval of important guidance, the White House will insert its political agenda and pro-business bias into every level of agency policy, so that our federal government will handcuff itself instead of the companies that violate the law and put the public in danger,” Robert Shull, Public Citizen’s deputy director for auto safety and regulatory policy, warned.

Second, the new order stresses the concept of “market failure” in its revised command for agencies to state justifications for new regulations for public health, privacy, safety, civil rights and the environment. Market failure is an economics term describing situations in which private markets, left to themselves, fail to bring about results that the public needs.

This order will be enforced by Susan Dudley, a controversial figure the White House is setting up for a recess appointment to become the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House Office of Management and Budget.

She calls herself a "free-market environmentalist," who wants to protect the environment through "market-based incentives."
Based on an evaluation of Dudley’s record in a report released last year, Public Citizen has concluded that in her hands, the market failure provision will become a barrier to the protections that the public needs.

Third, the order requires agencies to develop annual plans for upcoming rulemakings that identify “the combined aggregate costs and benefits of all … regulations planned for that calendar year to assist with the identification of priorities.”

This new requirement will make cost/benefit analysis the central factor in setting priorities for needed protections of the public interest.

“These cost/benefit analyses are notoriously biased against regulation, especially long-term goals such as preventing global warming or cancers that manifest years after exposure to toxic substances,” said Claybrook. “The upshot of this whole executive order is that the White House is already working to undermine not just agencies but also the new Congress’ ability to protect the public.”

“The White House is amending the Administrative Procedure Act by decree, claiming power that belongs to Congress alone. It is an appalling arrogation of power and a slap in the face to the new Congress,” said Shull. “Congress must immediately arrange hearings to hold the president accountable for this affront to the rule of law.”

Woman Faces 40 Years for Porn-Infected PC

Have you ever faced a pop-up that wouldn't go away? You try clicking it closed and another pops up in less than a nanosecond. You grunt in annoyance and reboot the system, annoyed that your anti-spyware program let something slip through.

That's annoying, sure--but the chances are good that your experience won't land you in jail.

Substitute Teacher's Worst Nightmare

Julie Amero, a substitute teacher in Norwich, Connecticut, has been convicted of impairing the morals of a child and risking injury to a minor by exposing as many as ten seventh-grade students to porn sites.

The story is short: On October, 19, 2004, Amero was a substitute teacher for a seventh-grade language class at Kelly Middle School. A few students were crowded around a PC; some were giggling. She investigated and saw the kids looking at a barrage of graphic, hard-core pornographic pop-ups.

The prosecution contended that she had used the computer to visit porn sites.

The defense said that wasn't true and argued that the machine was infested with spyware and malware, and that opening the browser caused the computer to go into an endless loop of pop-ups leading to porn sites.

Amero maintains her innocence. She refused offers of a plea bargain and now faces an astounding 40 years in prison (her sentencing is on March 2).

Apple DRM is illegal in Norway, says Ombudsman

Apple's digital rights management lock on its iPod device and iTunes software is illegal, the Consumer Ombudsman in Norway has ruled. The blow follows the news that consumer groups in Germany and France are joining Norway's action against Apple.

The Norwegian Consumer Council, Forbrukerradet, lodged a complaint with the Ombudsman on behalf of Norwegian consumers claiming that the Fairplay DRM system acted against the interests of consumers. It said that the fact that the technology stopped songs bought from iTunes being played on any player other than an iPod broke the law in Norway.

The Ombudsman has now agreed, according to Torgeir Waterhouse, senior advisor at the Consumer Council.

"It doesn't get any clearer than this. Fairplay is an illegal lock-in technology whose main purpose is to lock the consumers to the total package provided by Apple by blocking interoperability," Waterhouse told OUT-LAW.COM. "For all practical purposes this means that iTunes Music Store is trying to kill off one the most important building blocks in a well functioning digital society, interoperability, in order to boost its own profits."

Waterhouse said that the Ombudsman has written to Apple to say that it believes that Apple's Fairplay system is illegal. "iTunes Music Store must remove its illegal lock-in technology or appear in court," he said. "As of right now we're heading for a big breakthrough that will hopefully pave the way for consumers everywhere to regain control of music they legally purchase."

The Consumer Council believes that Apple has only three options: it can license Fairplay to any manufacturer that wants iTunes songs to play on its machines; it can co-develop an open standard with other companies; or it can abandon DRM altogether.

The Ombudsman has also backed the Consumer Council's claim that the DRM technology is not simply a copy protection scheme. The Council had argued that in restricting consumers' use of music so heavily the technology broke contract law in Norway.

"The Ombudsman has confirmed our claim that the DRM must be considered part of the contract terms and not a copy protection scheme only," said Waterhouse. "This means that under the Norwegian Marketing Control Act the DRM must provide balanced and fair rights to the consumer when they purchase music form iTunes Music Store and similar download services."

"Apple is aware of the concerns we've heard from several agencies in Europe and we're looking forward to resolving these issues as quickly as possible,” Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr told AP news agency earlier this week. “Apple hopes that European governments will encourage a competitive environment that lets innovation thrive, protects intellectual property and allows consumers to decide which products are successful.”

Maine Says Will Opt-Out of De Facto National I.D. Law

Maine's legislature overwhelmingly passed a resolution refusing to implement the REAL ID Act which requires states to standardize their drivers licenses according to federal standards, saying the bill would cost the state $185 milllion, turns the state into an extension of the federal government, and would invade privacy. The resolution also calls on Congress to repeal the rule, which was slid into a defense spending bill in 2005. Though the final standards have yet to be announced, after May 11, 2008, federal agencies won't accept non-compliant identification cards, which if the law weren't changed and Maine opted out would mean that Maine residents would have a very difficult time flying and couldn't enter federal courthouses, among other things.

"This is the beginning of the end of Real ID," said Barry Steinhardt, Director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project. "The Real ID national ID scheme is pointless if one or more states refuse to participate, because the whole premise of the program is the creation of a single uniform national identity document and database."

Since this is only a resolution, Maine has not officially opted out, but the ACLU says statutory language is likely to be passed soon. At the end of the last session of Congress, Senators Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and John Sununu (R-NH) introduced a bill that would rollback many of the rules in the REAL ID Act, a warning shot to the Administration that the issue would be in play in the Democrat-controlled Congress in 2007. Legislators in other states including Georgia, New Hampshire and Montana have also introduced anti-REAL ID bills.

Leaked rulemaking documents that have not yet been authenticated also show that Homeland Security is suggesting that a third party -- likely a private company -- will be handed the job of checking whether an applicant can actually get a license or not.

Joint Resolution Memorializing the President of the United States and the Congress of the United States to Repeal the Real ID of 2005

WE, your Memorialists, the Members of the One Hundred and Twenty-Third Legislature of the State of Maine now assembled, most respectfully present and petition the President of the United States and the United States Congress, as follows:

WHEREAS, the federal REAL ID Act of 2005 mandates an unfunded national driver's license on the people of Maine, and;

WHEREAS, implementation of REAL ID would cost Maine taxpayers approximately $185 million, and;

WHEREAS, the REAL ID national database will invite theft of identity and invasion of privacy, and;

WHEREAS, REAL ID will impose inconveniences and higher taxes on Mainers with no attendant benefit such as protections from terrorism; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED: that Maine State Legislature refuses to implement the REAL ID Act and thereby protest the treatment by Congress and the President of the states as agents of the federal government; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Maine State Legislature implores the United States Congress to repeal the REAL ID Act of 2005; and be it further

RESOLVED: That official copies of this resolution, duly authenticated by the Secretary of State, be transmitted to the Honorable George W. Bush, President of the United States; the Honorable Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff; the Honorable John E. Baldacci, Governor of the State of Maine; Richard Cheney, President of the United States Senate; Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives; and each member of the Maine Congressional Delegation.

Outrageous Injustice

DOUGLASVILLE, Ga. -- There is a cardboard box in Genarlow Wilson's old bedroom.

Despite lacking size, overachieving Genarlow Wilson was being recruited by several college football programs.

It rests on the floor of his empty closet, near the deflated football and basketball. It's filled with things he needed in his old life. Mostly, it's overflowing with recruiting letters, from schools big and small. A "Good luck on the SAT" postcard from the coaches at Columbia. From another Ivy League college, Brown, a note from the football coach: "You have been recommended to me as one of the top scholar-athletes in your area."

There's a questionnaire from the Citadel. A brochure from Elon. An envelope from Sewanee. College after college, all wanting the undersized but overachieving Genarlow Wilson to consider their football programs. One open letter, dated three months before everything in this box became a reminder of a life derailed, invites him to take a campus visit. It begins:

Dear Genarlow,

Here you stand, on the threshold of four of the most influential, challenging, and rewarding years of your life.

Being Inmate No. 1187055
Genarlow Wilson is standing on a threshold all right, at the end of the last hall of Burruss Correctional Training Center, an hour and a half south of Atlanta. He's just a few feet from the mechanical door that closes with a goosebump-raising whurr and clang. Three and a half years after he received that letter, he's wearing a blue jacket with big, white block letters. They read: STATE PRISONER.

He's 20 now. Just two years into a 10-year sentence without possibility of parole, he peers through the thick glass and bars, trying to catch a glimpse of freedom. Outside, guard towers and rolls of coiled barbed wire remind him of who he is.

Once, he was the homecoming king at Douglas County High. Now he's Georgia inmate No. 1187055, convicted of aggravated child molestation.

When he was a senior in high school, he received oral sex from a 10th grader. He was 17. She was 15. Everyone, including the girl and the prosecution, agreed she initiated the act. But because of an archaic Georgia law, it was a misdemeanor for teenagers less than three years apart to have sexual intercourse, but a felony for the same kids to have oral sex.

Afterward, the state legislature changed the law to include an oral sex clause, but that doesn't help Wilson. In yet another baffling twist, the law was written to not apply to cases retroactively, though another legislative solution might be in the works. The case has drawn national condemnation, from the "Free Genarlow Wilson Now" editorial in The New York Times to a feature on Mark Cuban's HDNet.

"It's disgusting," Cuban wrote to ESPN in an e-mail. "I can not see any way, shape or form that the interests of the state of Georgia are served by throwing away Genarlow's youth and opportunity to become a vibrant contributor to the state. All his situation does is reinforce some unfortunate stereotypes that the state is backward and misgoverned. No one with a conscience can look at this case and conclude that justice has been served."

Wilson's mother, Juanessa Bennett, certainly doesn't understand. She has just bought a new house the next county over, hoping that a change of scenery might do her good. The past few years have been hard on her.

"You think, what in the world could I have done to God to make him punish me like this?" she says. "Am I that terrible a person?"

"It was like I had everything one day, and the next day I didn't have anything," Wilson says.

Her home feels empty without her son in it. He's not there to enjoy the five burgers for five bucks on Tuesday at the Sonic Drive-In, or chatting away on his telephone late at night. Now, she can only think about the past three years of their lives, and how everything is so different from before.

She points to a picture above her fireplace. There's a grinning 3-year-old boy in the frame, posing with big alphabet blocks.

"He was cute, huh?" she says, quietly.

She looks at the picture, but doesn't cry. There aren't many tears left. After it first happened, she says she cried so much she got an eye infection. Bumps broke out on her face, brought on by worry and grief.

"You need to stop stressing," the doctor told her.

She asked him how exactly she might do that.

"He didn't have an answer," Bennett says.

Now, she's numb. Now, she can only remember the boy he was and pray that when his ordeal is finally over, some of that boy will remain.

The image of a bright future dimming with each passing day is what infuriates so many people. Wilson should be held up as an example of a kid who was making it. His life should be protected by society, not destroyed. He was a good student, with a 3.2 grade point average. He was popular, the school's homecoming king, liked by students and teachers. He never got into any trouble with the law. He was a track and football star. His last two years, he was the defensive back assigned to cover Calvin Johnson, the former Sandy Creek High star who went on to Georgia Tech and is now projected as a top pick in the NFL draft. Wilson studied film, trying to figure out how to outsmart a better and taller athlete. He did well, coaches remember, limiting Johnson to four catches in two games.

Three years later, sitting in their office overlooking the field, finishing up another workday, Wilson's old coaches also remember a good but not great high school player who would have played college ball. They remember his last game, in the playoffs, way down in south Georgia. He got hit so hard on a kickoff return that he ended up spitting up blood on the sideline. The trainer shined a flashlight in his eye, figuring he had a concussion. Wilson grabbed his helmet, determined to go back in the game. He went to the hospital instead.

From drinking to smoking pot to acting like a cocky star athlete, Wilson now cringes at some of the mistakes he made in high school.

He admits he wasn't perfect. Far from it. He drank. He smoked pot. He'd been sexually active since he was 13. And a month or so after that final playoff game, he and some buddies were plotting a New Year's Eve bash. His mama heard them whispering in his bedroom that afternoon. She knew kids whispering usually meant trouble, so she went in and looked those boys up and down.

"Don't do anything stupid," she warned.

Something Stupid
Genarlow Wilson and his friends checked into the Days Inn right off Interstate 20. At some point in the night, according to court documents and evidence presented at trial, some girls came over to party with them. Bourbon and marijuana were consumed. One of the young men turned on a video camera.

Later in the evening, a 17-year-old girl began to have sex with the young men, first in the bathroom, then on the bed. Genarlow is captured on tape appearing to have sex with the girl from behind. Her hand is clearly visible on the floor supporting herself. Witnesses said she was a willing participant.

The next morning, the girl awoke in a stupor, wearing nothing but her socks. She called her mother and said she had been raped. Police came to the room after sunrise and took the revelers in for questioning. Genarlow had already gone home -- he didn't want to miss curfew -- but the video camera remained.

On tape, the cops saw a 15-year-old girl, a 10th-grader, performing oral sex on a partygoer and, after finishing with him, turning and performing the act on Genarlow. She was the instigator, according to her mother's testimony. Problem was, the girl was a year under the age of consent. Local prosecutors called the act aggravated child molestation, following the letter and not the spirit of the law, which was designed to prosecute pedophiles.

A week later, on the first day of the second semester of his senior year, the police went to the school and arrested the boys. Wilson was charged with four felonies and taken from the building in handcuffs. Not long before, he'd been in the newspaper for being all-conference in football. Now, he was on the front page, branded a rapist and child molester.

"It was like I had everything one day," he says, "and the next day I didn't have anything."

For the next eight months, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade, who likes to wear an American flag in his lapel and play to his law-and-order-loving base, dangled plea bargains. The other boys didn't want to risk a jury, and one by one each took an offer and went to prison, including the other football player arrested, Narada Williams, who accepted five years with the possibility of parole.

In Douglas County, according to law professors following about the case, admitting sins and begging forgiveness -- not insisting on your innocence -- is the road to mercy. Williams is already out of jail, in part because McDade wrote a letter to the parole board, praising Williams for being the first to plead guilty and "take his medicine." As for Wilson, McDade called him a "martyr" in the media.

If he had accepted the plea bargain, Wilson would've had to register as a sex offender and wouldn't have been permitted to live in the same house as his younger sister.

Wilson refused to admit to being a child molester. If he pled to or was convicted of any charge that put him on the sex offender registry, he couldn't live at home with his younger sister. He wouldn't accept that, so he waited for his trial.

The Saturday before it began, his last weekend as a free man, Wilson tried out for a local semi-pro football team. He wanted to be that other person once more, the one who could outrun all of life's problems. For two glorious hours, he sprinted and jumped and dived. When it was over, the coaches were impressed. They traded cell phone numbers, just another opportunity that would soon pass him by.

Two days later, in February 2005, Genarlow Wilson walked into a courtroom. Two charges already had been dropped, and it was clear from the first witness that the rape charge wouldn't stick either. The aggravated child molestation, though, was on tape. Genarlow tried to defend himself against the assigned prosecutor, Eddie Barker.

"Sir," Wilson told him, "you don't even know me. I understand you're just doing your job, sure, but I mean, how would you feel if you were my age and you were put on the stand with these serious charges at this young age? I have a little sister. Why would I molest anyone, sir?"

"I'm not on trial here, Mr. Wilson," Barker said. "You're the one who did these acts, not me."

The day before the trial was expected to end, in the last night he'd ever spend at his home, Wilson went to a church down the street and asked the preacher to pray with him. He awoke early the next morning. He knotted his tie carefully and went to the courthouse. The trial finished that afternoon, and the jury came back with "not guilty" on the rape but "guilty" on the aggravated child molestation.

He looked at the forewoman. She was crying, seeming to understand they'd just undone a promising future. Indeed, when the jurors found out there was a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence, several were incensed. The prosecution told them to write a letter, then moved on to the next case.

Genarlow Wilson put his head in his hands and wept.

Deputies yanked him from his seat. Not long after, Prisoner 1187055 found himself in the predawn darkness, riding in a bus, surrounded not by his teammates but by murderers, thieves and rapists. Some were headed to the penitentiary for the second or third time.

A scared kid looked out the window as the bus chewed up pavement. He didn't know what it was going to be like, only that he didn't want to go.

Doing Hard Time
Wilson moves to the rhythm of the prison now, up early with the shift change, tidying his cell, sitting down to rest before chow, wearing white pants with a blue stripe. It has been 23 months.

These walls and bars haven't taken his youth, though. Not yet. When he smiles, it's the same one from that old photo on his mom's mantel. Bennett wonders how her son has managed to keep that light in such a dark place and how much longer he can hold out.

With nothing but time, he has taken stock of his old life. He doesn't like the person he was back then, the cocky star athlete with the world as his yo-yo. When he thinks about the kid on that videotape, with a Pittsburgh Pirates hat cocked just so, he cringes.

"It's embarrassing to me," he says. "You see yourself. ... 'Man, I acted like that?' "

He has followed his appeals from behind bars. He watched as the state legislature changed the law that put him there, then declined to make it retroactive, for reasons that still boggle the mind. That was a dark day.

He watched as B.J. Bernstein, his new attorney, filed a petition for writ of certiorari, asking the Georgia Supreme Court to review the case. The petition was denied, then set aside, then denied again, then appealed, then denied again. Those were darker days.

The first time the Supreme Court voted on Genarlow's case, it was 4-3. The four judges who voted against the black teen were white. The three judges who voted for him were black.

"I don't understand the Supreme Court," Bennett says. "Do these people not have hearts? Can they not look and see this isn't right?"

In its decision, the Supreme Court called Wilson a "promising young man," a paragraph that he has read a thousand times. All the e-mails Bernstein gets in support of him, he has those, too. He reads them over and over, reminding himself that he once had a future and, one day, might have it again. It's not easy.

Other people's lives have moved on.

He has corresponded with Williams, his co-defendant and old high school teammate. Williams is enrolled in college now.

Wilson sat in prison and watched Calvin Johnson, the guy he once covered, become the best college receiver in the country and a soon-to-be millionaire.

"That has made my ambitions higher," Wilson says. "That makes me want to succeed even more because I don't want to be left behind."

The Halls of Power
In Atlanta, Bernstein makes her rounds at the state capitol. It's the first day of the legislative session and men in power ties click their wingtips over marble floors, lobbyists back-slapping each other in their little groups.

"He's sitting in jail," she says. "He's in jail every day they're sitting around chatting."

When Bernstein met Wilson, who had a different attorney for the trial, she saw that light in his eyes and didn't want prison to extinguish it. Truth is, she's a rescuer. One of her cats she found on the interstate. She stopped her car in the rain on a six-lane highway to save it. In her heart, she wants to save the world, starting with Genarlow Wilson. That means working pro bono, even as every small check the firm earns goes straight into the operating account. That means figuring out this strange power-brokers' dance.

It's frustrating work. No one involved believes Wilson should be in jail for 10 years.

The prosecutors don't.

The Supreme Court doesn't.

The legislature doesn't.

The 15-year-old "victim" doesn't.

The forewoman of the jury doesn't.

Privately, even prison officials don't.

Yet no one will do anything to free him, passing responsibility around like a hot potato. The prosecutors say they were just doing their job. The Supreme Court says it couldn't free him because the state legislature decreed the new law didn't apply to old cases, even though this case was the entire reason the new law was passed. One possible explanation is that Bernstein, an admitted neophyte at backroom dealing, simply didn't know enough politics to insist on the provision. That haunts her.

The legislature still could pass a new law that would secure Wilson's freedom, so Bernstein is pushing hard for that. One such bipartisan bill was introduced this week, pushed by state Sens. Emanuel Jones, Dan Weber and Kasim Reed. This is Wilson's best shot.

"I understand the injustice in the justice system," Jones says, "and when I heard about Genarlow and started studying what had happened, I said, 'This is a wrong that must be righted.' Everyone agrees that justice is not being served."

Afterward, Bernstein can file a writ of habeas corpus, which could get him out of jail, but those are legal Hail Marys. She's a true believer, but if the legislature denies this latest attempt, she knows she might not be able to save Genarlow Wilson. Until it's over, nothing's off the table. Not even simple positive thinking. Sitting at a midtown-Atlanta Chinese restaurant on a lunch break from all the political wrangling, she picked up her fortune cookie, smiled thinly and said, "Gimme a good one: Genarlow will be free."

She's still working every angle, from the capital to cookies, riding up an elevator to the 53rd floor of an Atlanta high-rise to see David Balser, the attorney who got Marcus Dixon out of jail. The Dixon case was similar: As an 18-year-old, he had sex with a 15-year-old girl and was sentenced to 10 years before the conviction was overturned.

Sitting in a conference room overlooking Stone Mountain, Balser listens. The light shines off his gold cufflinks, the high-thread-count shirt hanging perfectly off his shoulders. He's got a little salt in his pepper and a Virgin Islands tan. They talk media strategy. They talk last-ditch plans, including a constitutional amendment returning pardon power to the governor. When they're done, Balser walks Bernstein to the elevator.

"I think less is more, B.J.," he says. "You've got to get him out and solve the world's problems after that. Just get him out."

"I'm trying," she says.

"I have faith in you," he says.

Letter of the Law
Every story needs a villain, and in this one, the villain's hat has been placed squarely on the head of Barker, the prosecutor and a former college baseball player. Barker doesn't write the laws in the books to the left of his desk. He simply punishes those who break them.

"We didn't want him to get the 10 years," he says. "We understand there's an element out there scratching their heads, saying, 'How does a kid get 10 years under these facts?' "

In Barker's eyes, Wilson should have taken the same plea agreement as the others. Maintaining innocence in the face of the crushing wheels of justice is the ultimate act of vanity, he believes.

"I understand what he's saying," Barker says. "I think he's making a bad decision in the long run. Being branded a sex offender is not good; but at the same time, if it made the difference between spending 10 years as opposed to two? Is it worth sitting in prison for eight more years, and you're still gonna be a sex offender when you get out?"

Barker is quick to point out that he offered Wilson a plea after he'd been found guilty -- the first time he has ever done that. Of course, the plea was the same five years he'd offered before the trial -- not taking into account the rape acquittal. Barker thinks five years is fair for receiving oral sex from a schoolmate. None of the other defendants insisted on a jury trial. Wilson did. He rolled the dice, and he lost. The others, he says, "took their medicine."

While Bernstein works on every possible legal solution, the Douglas County District Attorney's Office has the power to get Wilson out of prison. If the prosecution wanted, this could all end tomorrow. The D.A.'s office says Bernstein hasn't asked. Bernstein says she has. Not that any legal he said/she said matters. Only the prosecutors' opinion does, and according to at least one legal expert, prosecutorial ego is more of a factor in this case than race. The folks in Douglas County are playing god with Genarlow Wilson's life.

"We can set aside his sentence," Barker says. "Legally, it's still possible for us to set aside his sentence and give him a new sentence to a lesser charge. But it's up to us. He has no control over it."

The position of Barker and the district attorney, McDade, who refused to comment, is that Wilson is guilty under the law and there is no room for mercy, though the facts seem to say they simply chose not to give it to Wilson. At the same time this trial was under way, a local high school teacher, a white female, was found guilty of having a sexual relationship with a student -- a true case of child molestation. The teacher received 90 days. Wilson received 3,650 days.

Now, if Wilson wants a shot at getting out, he must throw himself at the prosecutors' feet and ask for mercy, which he might or might not receive. Joseph Heller would love this. If Wilson would only admit to being a child molester, he could stop receiving the punishment of one. Maybe.

"Well," Barker says, "the one person who can change things at this point is Genarlow. The ball's in his court."

Hanging On To Hope
Back at Burruss, Genarlow Wilson is standing against the wall, looking out through the glass of the control room, peering between the bars, watching his attorney and another visitor leave. He has had plenty of people who want to talk to him, including a group of concerned legislators who plan on visiting this week, which finally feels like a real step toward freedom. Problem is, they always go home after an hour or two. He stays behind.

The worst is when his mom comes. She visited on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, bringing him news of the outside world and a smile. She told him about the new house she bought, just over the Cobb County line, finally out of Douglas. She doesn't want him moving back there when he's released. Saying goodbye, though, kills him. He watches her go and is taken back to his cell, where he can just imagine her in her car, imagining him in this prison.

"When she leaves, a part of me leaves," he says. "I just have to get myself back together because we've got a long way to go. I try not to think about doing the whole 10. I'm putting claims on going home this year."

Hope is all he has left. He believes in a system that has failed him. He believes in those powerful men down in Atlanta. He believes in the kindness of others, and in the skills of Bernstein. He lets her work, spending most of his days in the prison library, reading all the books he can. Sometimes, he pretends he's a character, living in a fantasy world, not in a cellblock.

When the weather's nice, he can run laps around the yard, as if he's still on a football field, chasing down future first-round picks. The burn in his lungs feels like a time long past. It feels like freedom.

He looks through the windows just a moment more, sadness in his eyes, then turns around. Wilson stares down the hall of his prison, waiting on a day when he can go home.

"I've got a real good feeling about what's going on," he says. "I feel like 2007 is it. This is my year."

His mom has the house ready for him because any day now, her baby's coming back. She just knows it. Over past the dryer, that's his new bedroom. She picked it because it's close to the garage, so he could come and go as he pleases. She thought he deserved that.

Everything's set, in case it's tomorrow. She left the rapper posters rolled up, figuring a man would be coming home. She set out his football trophies and his high school diploma, to remind him what he used to be. She hooked up a television and a stereo. An alarm clock is on the nightstand, so he can get himself up for school. Even the bed is made.

The only thing missing is her son.

In Praise of Security Theater

By Bruce Schneier

While visiting some friends and their new baby in the hospital last week, I noticed an interesting bit of security. To prevent infant abduction, all babies had RFID tags attached to their ankles by a bracelet. There are sensors on the doors to the maternity ward, and if a baby passes through, an alarm goes off.

Infant abduction is rare, but still a risk. In the last 22 years, about 233 such abductions have occurred in the United States. About 4 million babies are born each year, which means that a baby has a 1-in-375,000 chance of being abducted. Compare this with the infant mortality rate in the U.S. -- one in 145 -- and it becomes clear where the real risks are.

And the 1-in-375,000 chance is not today's risk. Infant abduction rates have plummeted in recent years, mostly due to education programs at hospitals.

So why are hospitals bothering with RFID bracelets? I think they're primarily to reassure the mothers. Many times during my friends' stay at the hospital the doctors had to take the baby away for this or that test. Millions of years of evolution have forged a strong bond between new parents and new baby; the RFID bracelets are a low-cost way to ensure that the parents are more relaxed when their baby was out of their sight.

Security is both a reality and a feeling. The reality of security is mathematical, based on the probability of different risks and the effectiveness of different countermeasures. We know the infant abduction rates and how well the bracelets reduce those rates. We also know the cost of the bracelets, and can thus calculate whether they're a cost-effective security measure or not. But security is also a feeling, based on individual psychological reactions to both the risks and the countermeasures. And the two things are different: You can be secure even though you don't feel secure, and you can feel secure even though you're not really secure.

The RFID bracelets are what I've come to call security theater: security primarily designed to make you feel more secure. I've regularly maligned security theater as a waste, but it's not always, and not entirely, so.

It's only a waste if you consider the reality of security exclusively. There are times when people feel less secure than they actually are. In those cases -- like with mothers and the threat of baby abduction -- a palliative countermeasure that primarily increases the feeling of security is just what the doctor ordered.

Tamper-resistant packaging for over-the-counter drugs started to appear in the '80s, in response to some highly publicized poisonings. As a countermeasure, it's largely security theater. It's easy to poison many foods and over-the-counter medicines right through the seal -- with a syringe, for example -- or to open and replace the seal well enough that an unwary consumer won't detect it. But in the '80s, there was a widespread fear of random poisonings in over-the-counter medicines, and tamper-resistant packaging brought people's perceptions of the risk more in line with the actual risk: minimal.

Much of the post-9/11 security can be explained by this as well. I've often talked about the National Guard troops in airports right after the terrorist attacks, and the fact that they had no bullets in their guns. As a security countermeasure, it made little sense for them to be there. They didn't have the training necessary to improve security at the checkpoints, or even to be another useful pair of eyes. But to reassure a jittery public that it's OK to fly, it was probably the right thing to do.

Security theater also addresses the ancillary risk of lawsuits. Lawsuits are ultimately decided by juries, or settled because of the threat of jury trial, and juries are going to decide cases based on their feelings as well as the facts. It's not enough for a hospital to point to infant abduction rates and rightly claim that RFID bracelets aren't worth it; the other side is going to put a weeping mother on the stand and make an emotional argument. In these cases, security theater provides real security against the legal threat.

Like real security, security theater has a cost. It can cost money, time, concentration, freedoms and so on. It can come at the cost of reducing the things we can do. Most of the time security theater is a bad trade-off, because the costs far outweigh the benefits. But there are instances when a little bit of security theater makes sense.

We make smart security trade-offs -- and by this I mean trade-offs for genuine security -- when our feeling of security closely matches the reality. When the two are out of alignment, we get security wrong. Security theater is no substitute for security reality, but, used correctly, security theater can be a way of raising our feeling of security so that it more closely matches the reality of security. It makes us feel more secure handing our babies off to doctors and nurses, buying over-the-counter medicines and flying on airplanes -- closer to how secure we should feel if we had all the facts and did the math correctly.

Of course, too much security theater and our feeling of security becomes greater than the reality, which is also bad. And others -- politicians, corporations and so on -- can use security theater to make us feel more secure without doing the hard work of actually making us secure. That's the usual way security theater is used, and why I so often malign it.

But to write off security theater completely is to ignore the feeling of security. And as long as people are involved with security trade-offs, that's never going to work.

http://www.furelise.com/

Man kicked off flight for Bush-bashing T-shirt

CANBERRA, Jan 22 (Reuters Life!) - An airline passenger barred from a flight for wearing a T-shirt labeling President Bush a terrorist has threatened legal action against Australia's flag carrier Qantas.

Allen Jasson, 55, an Australian IT expert who lives in Britain, was stopped from boarding a London-bound Qantas flight at Melbourne Airport last Friday for wearing what the airline said was an offensive T-shirt.

Airline staff said the T-shirt of Bush with the tagline "World's number 1 terrorist" could have upset other passengers and demanded it be changed for another.

But Jasson, who had earlier traveled on a Qantas domestic flight wearing the Bush T-shirt, said his right to freedom of speech had been infringed by Qantas.

"I am not prepared to go without the T-shirt. I might forfeit the fare, but I have made up my mind that I would rather stand up for the principle of free speech," Jasson told Australian media on Monday, adding he would seek legal advice.

Qantas issued a statement saying comments made verbally or on a T-shirt which had the potential to offend other travelers or threaten the security of aircraft "will not be tolerated."

Fox tests nation's fifth-grade knowledge

PASADENA, Calif. - Every parent's nightmare - being exposed for not knowing what's in your kid's school textbook - will soon play out on national television.

Fox announced Saturday that it is making a new game show, "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" that will air sometime later this year, perhaps as early as the spring.

Adults will compete in a quiz based on questions from elementary school textbooks. Actual elementary school students will be on hand as "experts" for the adults to consult with.

"While most game shows measure how smart you are, this is a show that will measure how dumb you are," said Peter Liguori, Fox entertainment president.

Fox won a competition with other networks to buy the idea from Mark Burnett, executive producer of "Survivor," perhaps because Liguori - not too modestly - said he was the only chief network television executive to answer all six questions from the show correctly.

Venezuela's Chavez tells Washington "go to hell"

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Sunday called the U.S. secretary of state "my little girl" and told Washington to "go to hell" after it questioned his plan to seek special powers to legislate by decree.

Chavez, a Cuba ally re-elected by a landslide in December, this month launched a campaign to consolidate power by nationalizing key industries, seeking expanded executive powers and pushing for unlimited presidential re-election.

A State Department spokesman on Friday described Chavez's proposal to allow presidents to rule by decree as "a bit odd" in a democracy.

"That is a sacrosanct legal authority of Venezuela. Go to hell, gringos! Go home! Go home!" Chavez said during his weekly Sunday broadcast. "We're free here, and every day we'll be more free."

Chavez also took on U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has described Chavez as a "negative force" in the region.

"Hi Condoleezza, how are you? You've forgotten about me, my little girl," said Chavez, who last year called President George W. Bush "the devil" during a U.N. speech.

Venezuela's legislature this week is expected to give its final approval to the Enabling Law that would grant Chavez 18 months to decree legislation.

'CERTAINLY ... A BIT ODD'

The former soldier has said he would use the expanded powers to end the autonomy of the nation's central bank, create a national police force and boost state control over the nation's oil industry, which provides around 11 percent of U.S. oil imports.

State Department spokesman Tom Casey on Friday said the legislation by decree proposal was "a sovereign right of Venezuela but certainly ... a bit odd in terms of a democratic system."

Chavez also plans to alter the nation's constitution, rewritten in 1999 following a campaign Chavez himself led, to boost state control over the economy and remove a two-term limit for presidents.

He said he additionally plans to create new luxury taxes and raise Venezuela's rock-bottom gasoline prices -- currently around 13 cents per gallon -- and use the proceeds to finance community development groups.

Chavez in 2001 decreed a package of 40 laws that paved the way for a sweeping land reform measure and higher taxes for oil companies. The move galvanized the country's fledgling opposition, which accused Chavez of authoritarianism and staged a botched coup six months later.

The government says previous Venezuelan administrations used the Enabling Law, though opposition leaders say they reserved the law for emergency measures rather than divisive reforms.

Chavez frequently describes the United States as a decadent empire and has promised to roll back Washington's influence in Latin America.

The United States has criticized his close relationship with U.S. foes including Cuba,Iran and Syria, charging he has used the nation's oil wealth to meddle in the affairs of neighboring countries.

< That last part almost makes me want to laugh, or cry. Of all the nations in all the world who use their wealth to meddle in the affairs of, not just neighboring countries but, countries across the breadth of the planet (because we have the wealth to do so at that scale), the US is by far the worst. >

Unnecessary Taser Use at Antiwar Demonstration

Rule by decree passed for Chavez

President Chavez has vowed to deepen his "Bolivarian revolution"

Venezuela's National Assembly has given initial approval to a bill granting the president the power to bypass congress and rule by decree for 18 months.

President Hugo Chavez says he wants "revolutionary laws" to enact sweeping political, economic and social changes.

He has said he wants to nationalise key sectors of the economy and scrap limits on the terms a president can serve.

Mr Chavez began his third term in office last week after a landslide election victory in December.

The bill allowing him to enact laws by decree is expected to win final approval easily in the assembly on its second reading on Tuesday.

Venezuela's political opposition has no representation in the National Assembly since it boycotted elections in 2005.

Pledge

Mr Chavez approved 49 laws by decree during the first year of his previous term, after the assembly passed a similar "Enabling Law" in November 2000.

Now the president says an Enabling Law is a key step in what he calls an accelerating march toward socialism.

He has said he wants to see major Venezuelan power and telecoms companies come under state control.

Mr Chavez also called for an end to foreign ownership of lucrative crude oil refineries in the Orinoco region.

Critics of the president accuse him of trying to build an authoritarian regime with all institutional powers consolidated into his own hands.

But, National Assembly President Cilia Flores said "there will always be opponents, and especially when they know that these laws will deepen the revolution".

Campaigning for the elections last year, Mr Chavez vowed he would strengthen his "Bolivarian revolution", named after the 19th-Century Latin American independence fighter.

Officers destroy tents; Mayor backs melee

ST. PETERSBURG - The city of St. Petersburg's battle against its homeless residents escalated today when police slashed their tents to the ground and threw them away.

Homeless bystanders stood by and watched in shock, many with tears streaming down their faces.

"This is sickening," said Viola resident, whose tent was cut up and thrown out.

The plan was put together by the mayor's office, and the city police and fire departments.

Fire department personnel and police showed up around 4 p.m. near the intersection of 15th Street and 15th Avenue North.

Earlier this week, homeless residents were told they were okay to set up their tents at that location.

But city officials said the tents were a code violation and a fire hazard.

Fire/rescue personnel closed off the street, then about 25 officer went to work with boxcutters.

They cut the tents to ribbons, and then threw some away, but left some on the ground.

They didn't move any of the belongings inside the tent.

The homeless nearby watched in shock.

One man was bent over, in tears.

"What are we, dogs?" said Wilson.

Where "Check Please" Is Your Call

Restauranteur Denise Cerreta at her cafe in Salt Lake City, UT, One World Cafe, where customers are invited to barter and pay what they think the meal is worth.

Deciding between the spicy peanut stew and the pesto chicken, or the squash soup and the avocado, chicken, lime soup, are not the only decisions tempting patrons at the One World Caf� in Salt Lake City and the SAME (So All Might Eat) Caf� in Denver. They must also decide what the meal is worth.

These pay-as-you-can cafes have missions that are unapologetically altruistic — call it serving up fare Robin Hood style. "Our philosophy is that everyone, regardless of economic status, deserves the chance to eat healthy, organic food while being treated with dignity," explains Brad Birky, who opened SAME with his wife, Libby, in October. Customers who have no money are encouraged to exchange an hour of service — sweep, wash the dishes, weed the organic garden — for a meal. Likewise, guests who have money are encouraged to leave a little extra to offset the meals of those who have less to give. "We're a hand up, not a handout," says One World owner Denise Cerreta, who prides herself on the fact that everyone can afford a meal at her caf�.

adSetTarget('_blank'); htmlAdWH('93224389', '88', '31'); adSetType('');

An epiphany scribbled out on a cocktail napkin on a plane ride gave birth to SAME caf� (www.soallmayeat.org). Both Brad and Libby had been searching for a meaningful way to give back while making a living. Admitted volunteer junkies, they had been serving and eating with homeless shelter residents for the past eight years. "We loved the service aspect of giving to the community and attacking the issue of hunger," says Brad. "Plus we both love to cook." When they found out about One World, they flew to Salt Lake City to learn how it was run. Cerreta, in turn, spent a month helping the Birkys prepare for opening. One World has had more than 25 inquiries from others around the country interested in starting a similar caf�. Recently, the caf� formed a nonprofit www.oneworldeverybodyeats.comaimed at helping others replicate such a venture.

The cafes' clientele is as diverse as the from-scratch buffet-style dishes. Attorneys and CEOs, students, seniors and soccer moms, as well as those down on their luck are among the 150-200 customers that dine daily at One World. Sniffling from a cold, Mike Dega, an environmental engineer, came in looking for comfort food. "I feel like I'm getting a whole new set of nutrients here as opposed to processed food — plus all the spices and flavors here are a real turn-on."

The caf�s' business models have won fans among the city's well-to-do residents, many of whom regularly dine there. At One World, patrons have given Cerreta a car, bought new dishes, arranged to professionally clean her carpets, supplied new tile for the restaurant bathrooms, and donated property for an organic garden and funded a new irrigation system for it. Last week, a gentleman left a $50 bill next to an empty bowl of soup at SAME. Since opening, one man has regularly come in and left money on the counter without eating, stating "I was blessed today so I though I'd pass it on." He's homeless.

Because customers decide on their portion sizes and the fact that most of the food is fresh (as opposed to stocked), very little food is wasted. At the end of the day at One World, only one garbage can needs to be emptied. "I can come in here and eat a ton after a (construction) shift for lunch and pay what I can, and then my mom, who eats a lot less, can just get the amount she wants and pay what she feels is fair," says regular Justin Wood, 25, who is sipping coffee and eating dessert with his mother on a Friday afternoon.

Paying the check by honor system has its risks; there are always those who will exploit the opportunity and eat for free — perhaps more so in big cities. At Babu, an Indian restaurant in New York City, the pay-what-you-feel-is-fair method resulted in too many people getting a free meal. One Friday night, a rowdy group of 10 young Indians walked in and took over the restaurant's large central table. Their response to no prices was to leave no money; not even a tip for the wait staff. Babu now states their prices. Birky at SAME has yet to notice anyone not paying. And Cerreta has had to approach only a few people, including one group of diners that paid nothing over several visits. She pointed out that by not paying they were stealing from her. They ended up contributing.

Deciding what to pay can give some diners indigestion. So Birky suggests they consider three things: How much did you eat? How much would you pay for that elsewhere? And what is fair to your own budget?

Once you're satisfied with the prices, the brie, cranberry and chicken pizza will taste even better.

What you can restrict: children

You can pass laws restricting TV murder and mayhem to certain hours, demand parental advisories on CDs, ban the rental of blood-and-guts videos and games to minors but you'll never stop violent material from being timeshifted, downloaded, burned, ripped or somehow landing in the hands of kids with access to electronic equipment.

And there's a good chance that kids have that access right in their own rooms – with their parents' blessing.

According to the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center, 57 per cent of kids aged 8 to 16 have TV in their rooms while 39 per cent have gaming equipment.

That was seven years ago. Imagine the stats now with computers, mobile phones, PVRs, iPods and other gadgets that can be used to watch, listen to or play entertainment.

So the truth is, yesterday's recommendations on media violence put forward by a well-meaning coalition from trustee, parent, teacher federation, principal and student organizations representing both Ontario's public and Catholic systems, are as realistic as the exploding heads on Nintendo, c. 1985.

Which is to say, not at all.

At their news conference, coalition leaders acknowledged that "legislation is rarely a perfect solution" – and yet they pressed for changes to the laws.

It's not enough that the industry has self-imposed hours of 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. when "programming which contains scenes of violence intended for adult audiences shall not be telecast."

The coalition wants Parliament to amend the Broadcasting Act "to establish a watershed hour of 9 p.m." – to enshrine it in law.

As if that would ever happen under the let-the-market-reign Conservatives.

Besides, how does one define violence?

Does the news count?

What's more, 9 p.m. here is 6 p.m. in B.C. Thanks to timeshifting, fans of CSI in the GTA would have to wait until midnight to see the re-enactment of the latest gruesome murder.

Unless of course they caught it on the originating U.S. channel – and there would be no stopping that since, under the current simulcasting rules, Canadian signals can only replace U.S. signals if the programs play at the same time.

Then there are the U.S. channels such as TBS that are never simulcast.

Get the violent picture?

There's more.

How many children got the latest video game for Christmas? How many dads play carjacker games with their sons? How many moms take advantage of their children's media addictions to do chores or relax?

How many families watch TV movies together? How many of those flicks are family-friendly? How many parents take advantage of the parental controls on digital boxes? How many "POS" – parents over shoulder – are there when daughters are in chat rooms?

As for CDs, well, do kids even pay for music any more?

Exactly.

So when the coalition "strongly recommends" that Queen's Park passes a law for an "age-based classification system for music recordings" it's just pasting a tiny R-rated sticker on a bursting e-dam.

Fact is, you can put great big billboards on these products and parents will still buy them – partly because they're truly unaware of the deleterious effects of so much daily media exposure (of any kind), partly because it's the path of least resistance, partly because parents really want the stuff for themselves.

Where the coalition gets it right is on the subject of media literacy, both for children and parents. There can never be enough education in an age of behemoth merged and converged media corporations that cross-promote their products on multiple platforms.

Some material is already available for download on the Ontario Public School Boards' Association site.

But parental support, and the accompanying research, have been out for decades. In the 1990s, the industry and the federal broadcast regulator spent millions on studies to raise awareness and to formulate codes of ethics.

Still, the problem persists.

Which means the solution lies in one place alone.

The power switch.

You have the power.

Use it.