Unmarked chopper patrols New York City from above

[Steve Gardner]

You know, I have had exchanges with a lot of people of the past few years about the the way we're monitored by the authorities, and I've been really surprised at how many have responded along the lines that, "if you've got nothing to hide, why worry?" or "it helps prevent/solve crime".

I tend to respond by pointing out the trend and how the very same justifications can be used to install CCTV cameras in our homes in much the same way as described in Orwell's 1984.

Those same people seem unable or unwilling to contemplate that possibility, yet that's where we're heading - slowly but surely. We're being conditioned to make small concessions over months or years. Eventually, they'll be nothing left to give.

Here we've got a bloody spy helicopter being portrayed in a favourable light because of its ability to "see-but-avoid-being-seen". It can read car number plates and see peoples' faces from miles away. It must surely be able to see in peoples' homes.

Go read 1984 and start getting angry about this kind of creeping paralysis. Unlike Winston Smith, you may not be lucky enough to have a blind spot in your home when the cameras are eventually installed.

Source: Yahoo News

NEW YORK - On a cloudless spring day, the NYPD helicopter soars over the city, its sights set on the Statue of Liberty.

A dramatic close-up of Lady Liberty's frozen gaze fills one of three flat-screen computer monitors mounted on a console. Hundreds of sightseers below are oblivious to the fact that a helicopter is peering down on them from a mile and a half away.

"They don't even know we're here," said crew chief John Diaz, speaking into a headset over the din of the aircraft's engine.

The helicopter's unmarked paint job belies what's inside: an arsenal of sophisticated surveillance and tracking equipment powerful enough to read license plates — or scan pedestrians' faces — from high above the nation's largest metropolis.

Police say the chopper's sweeps of landmarks and other potential targets are invaluable in helping guard against another terrorist attack, providing a see-but-avoid-being-seen advantage against bad guys.

"It looks like just another helicopter in the sky," said Assistant Police Chief Charles Kammerdener, who oversees the department's aviation unit.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly has said that no other U.S. law enforcement agency "has anything that comes close" to the surveillance chopper, which was designed by engineers at Bell Helicopter and computer technicians based on NYPD specifications.

The chopper is named simply "23" — for the number of police officers killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The $10 million helicopter is just part of the department's efforts to adopt cutting-edge technology for its counterterrorism operations.

The NYPD also plans to spend tens of millions of dollars strengthening security in the lower Manhattan business district with a network of closed-circuit television cameras and license-plate readers posted at bridges, tunnels and other entry points.

Police have also deployed hundreds of radiation monitors — some worn on belts like pagers, others mounted on cars and in helicopters — to detect dirty bombs.

Kelly even envisions someday using futuristic "stationary airborne devices" similar to blimps to conduct reconnaissance and guard against chemical, biological and radiological threats.

Civil rights advocates are skeptical about the push for more surveillance, arguing it reflects the NYPD's evolution into ad hoc spy agency.

"From a privacy perspective, there's always a concern that 'New York's Finest' are spending millions of dollars to engage in peeping tom activities," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

Police insist that law-abiding New Yorkers have nothing to fear.

"Obviously, we're not looking into apartments," Diaz said during a recent flight. "We don't invade the privacy of individuals. We only want to observe anything that's going on in public."

The helicopter's powers of observation come from a high-powered robotic camera mounted on a turret projecting from its nose like a periscope. The camera has infrared night-vision capabilities and a satellite navigation system that allows police to automatically zoom in on a location by typing in the address on a computer keyboard.

The surveillance system can beam live footage to police command centers or even to wireless hand-held devices.

"The commander on the ground can see what we're seeing," Diaz said.

On this flight, the helicopter used the camera to look for signs of trouble at several key transportation sites: the decks of Staten Island ferry terminal, the stanchions of the Verrazzano-Narrows Bridge, the giant air vents feeding the Lincoln Tunnel. All of them passed inspection.

Without leaving Manhattan airspace, the chopper also was able to get a crystal-clear picture of jetliners waiting to take off from LaGuardia Airport and to survey Kennedy International Airport's jet fuel lines, which were targeted in a plot uncovered last year.

The chopper has helped track down fleeing suspects, including a recent case of a gunman who had shot his wife in Queens. As officers on the ground worried about how to approach the suspect's car, the camera in the sky hovered overhead, peeked inside the vehicle and found that he had already shot and killed himself.

During Pope Benedict XVI's recent visit, 23 patrolled the skies, at one point receiving a call from officers who had spotted a suspicious man with a camera on a rooftop near the pontiff's residence. Diaz radioed back that it was a false alarm.

"There was a modeling shoot going on," he said.

[artemis]

The positive things the chopper has done do not outweigh its true actions. I dislike that, in order to be 'safe,' we need to be watched and surveyed while simply partaking in our normal, everyday lives. It's nothing to worry about if you don't do anything wrong, no -- however 1984 does definitely come to find, and I find it disturbing that we can be watched with such clarity without even knowing we're being watched. That should not be the security we aim for in this country.

[Steve Gardner]

Hi Artemis,

If you regularly scan through the debates in the ProBoards General Talk board, you'll see I get plenty of negativity thrown my way by the majority of contributors there when I bring this sort of stuff up.

In and of itself, the helicopter is not a major issue, in my view. I mean, I do find it disconcerting knowing that thing's up there, monitoring everything, but I accept a lot of people take comfort from the knowledge it's there. My real concern is that it's just another example of this gradual, almost imperceptible erosion of our freedoms that's happening right now.

Is there ever going to be a point at which we collectively say, "enough"? My fear is that, by the time enough of us feel inclined to say "enough", we simply won't have the power to do so.

I know that sounds apocalyptic, but when I think about these sorts of things, I tend to extrapolate.

[Steve Gardner]

Yet another example of how we're being spied upon under the guise of national security.

Collate all the different strands together and it's clear to see we are under a great deal more surveillance than we realise.

Source: The Mirror

Nearly 1,000 people's phone records have been investigated by council snoopers, it was revealed yesterday.

The surveillance powers for tracking terrorists have been used to probe everything from a bogus faith healer to dog smuggling.

A survey of Big Brother spying town halls showed that one council used the powers almost 100 times to monitor private phone calls and emails.

It comes after it was revealed Poole Council in Dorset had spied on a family because it wrongly suspected the parents of abusing rules on school catchment areas.

Last year, councils looked into 936 cases - about who people phoned or emailed - under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

The top off ender was Birmingham city council who carried out 89 checks. Chief legal officer Mirza Ahmad said: " We are using these powers to respond to residents' complaints."

But civil rights group Liberty said: "The law needs to be reformed."

[Steve Gardner]

More of the sort of rubbish that irritates me.

I have had conversations bordering on arguments with people who dismiss the idea that we are having our freedoms gradually eroded. I use the boiling frog analogy because it's a good one, though it's been dismissed as fallacious.

Here's a great example of the boiling frog syndrome at work. Laws set up specifically to address the alleged terrorist threat are being used by some councils to target dog fouling and littering, amongst other things. And, naturally, the council justifies its actions by saying they are supported by the community.

Now, whilst there might appear to be some residence to this, all that's really happening here is that the council's surveillance powers, which are controversial even when used for their intended purposes, are implicitly accepted by virtue of shifting the debate. No longer are we arguing about the merit (or lack of) of the legislation that permits these powers; we're arguing about how to control the way they're applied.

In a few years time, it'll be perfectly acceptable to many people to use them for the dubious purposes outline here, because they will be used to them.

This is exactly what the boiling frog syndrome - or 'function creep' as one Parliamentary Select Committee recently called it - is.

Source: BBC

Councils in England have been urged to review the way they use surveillance powers to investigate suspected crime.

Under laws brought in to help fight terrorism, councils can access phone and e-mail records and use surveillance to detect or stop a criminal offence.

But Local Government Association chairman Sir Simon Milton has written to councils warning overzealous use of the powers could alienate the public.

They should not be used for "trivial offences" such as dog fouling, he adds.

Concerns have been raised about the way some councils have used the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.

Recent examples include a family in Dorset followed for several weeks to see if they really did live in a school catchment area.

Other uses have included examining rubbish to monitor household waste.

In his letter, Sir Simon said: "Parliament clearly intended that councils should use the new powers, and generally they are being used to respond to residents' complaints about fly tippers, rogue traders and those defrauding the council tax or housing benefit system."

Sir Simon identifies dog fouling and littering as examples of two offences in which the act's powers were not "necessary and proportionate".

'Public concern'

Wyre Council in Lancashire has used hidden cameras to catch people who let their dogs foul public places - an action the chief executive Jim Corey said had drawn praise from local people.

"Dog fouling is at the top of their list in terms of issues they want the council to be tackling on the ground, so I know the public are only too pleased to see us catching people," he told BBC Radio 5 Live.

But Sir Simon urged councils to use the powers only for complaints about more serious matters.

He told BBC Breakfast: "I don't think councils are abusing their powers, but there have been one or two instances... where it could be said that perhaps some of the offences being investigated were too trivial to be using surveillance techniques."

He said councils could lose the right to employ surveillance if the act was misused, and suggested that every authority should carry out an annual review to gauge public opinion on the issue.

'Change the law'

Figures released by councils under the Freedom of Information Act show that thousands of people have had their telephone and e-mail records accessed.

COUNCILS USING SPYING POWERS Littering - Bolton Council Misuse of a disabled parking badge - Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, London Dog fouling - Bolton, Derby City, Gateshead and Hartlepool Councils Working while claiming sick pay - Conwy Council Durham County Council was the biggest user of the act - 144 times in the last 12 months (Source: Press Association)

Spy law 'used to fight dog fouling'

It is estimated that about 3,000 people have been targeted in the last year, for alleged offences that included dog smuggling, storing petrol without permission and keeping unburied animal carcasses.

A survey of fewer than 10% of councils, carried out by the Press Association, showed that spying techniques were used 1,343 times.

Civil rights group Liberty welcomed the new advice but said it wanted the government to reform the law, so that only a judge - not a town hall official - could authorise use of the most intrusive powers.

Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti said: "This is about using quite serious powers that are meant for crime, not minor matters."

Conservative local government secretary Eric Pickles said: "We need stronger checks and balances against the potential abuse of such powers to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens from Labour's growing surveillance state."

Dr David Mukarami Wood, from Newcastle University, said surveillance was becoming "normalised" in everyday life.

"I think this is quite dangerous," he said. "We've gone from a situation where surveillance was exceptional a few years ago to a situation where it's now considered to be a normal part of what any public authority, or even private organisations, are doing."