You've heard it's true, it's the biggest entertainment that ever hit the screen with laughter.
It's the whole shocking story of Hollywood Ripped Bear for the first time.
All mixed up with Peter Beauchamp.
Monday mornings at 9.30, here on WBAI.
On the April 21st edition of the Caribbean and Latin America Report,
a preview of the upcoming elections in Panama and Colombia.
Who are the candidates, the political parties, and what are they proposing for these two countries,
both of which have been in a state of crisis for some time?
Who is supporting singer Ruben Blades, and what is he proposing for Panama?
All this as well as the regional news update.
That's Thursday, April 21st, 10 o'clock p.m., on the Caribbean and Latin America Report,
right here on listener-sponsored WBAI 99.5 FM.
And this is radio station WBAI.
It's 10 o'clock, time for Off the Hook.
The telephone keeps ringing, so I ripped it off the wall.
I cut myself while shaving, now I can't make a cough.
It couldn't get much worse, but if they could, they would.
Bum, diddly, bum, but the best, expect the worst.
I hope that's understood, bum, diddly, bum.
Bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum.
Bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly.
Bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly, bum, diddly.
Well, every now and then, it's good to let the whole theme play out, and that's what we did.
And this is Off the Hook, Emmanuel Goldstein here with you on another Wednesday night.
And one thing we're going to do tonight is continue the discussion we started last week
because it was just such a lively discussion about software piracy,
and that's something that I know is on people's minds.
So when it's on people's minds, it's a good idea to continue with that.
But we also have a couple of other fun facts to pass along,
including some stories from around the world, which you might find humorous, interesting, tragic, funny, what have you.
Here's something that I think is important for all of us to know about.
This is something that came out of Holland only a couple of days ago.
This letter is dated March 28th, but it's only just beginning to be felt over here.
It concerns something that the Dutch government is doing,
and they don't really want it to be known by very many people.
So we're going to disobey that directive right here and let people know what's going on.
This comes from a gentleman named Wim Sonnemans,
who I hope I haven't gotten into trouble by mentioning his name,
but I don't think so because this is being passed over on the Internet,
and this is something that needs to be spread around even more.
In his words,
That's right.
The next step, making it all illegal.
Remember, we've talked about this.
First comes Clipper, and then once nobody uses Clipper, well, how do you enforce it?
You make the rest of it illegal.
Well, it seems like in Holland they're jumping to that already, which is very interesting.
Continuing here,
Your worst nightmare is becoming our reality.
And what makes it worse, the work on the proposal has kept a low profile to avoid public discussions on the matter.
A member of the press interviewed some members of parliament on the pre-proposal.
One didn't know what it was about.
The other one knew something but stated that it did not interest him.
Here in Holland, the public awareness concerning encryption is very low.
Unlike in the United States, the use of computers in the home is not that common.
We will have a hard time convincing our parliament to thoroughly evaluate any proposal concerning encryption that might be introduced.
Assisting the parliament with the technical expertise to get them to truly understand encryption and the implications of legislation will be our main goal.
Well, it's a pretty scary scenario there and something that we need to pass along so people see that this is a multi-step process.
It's not just a theory that things like encryption will be outlawed someday.
This is something that is very much on the agenda of a lot of governments, a lot of people in control.
I'm sure a lot of people within our own government would like to see us troublemakers not have the ability to encrypt things with our own algorithms and our own way of doing things.
It's part of the simplistic way of looking at a problem or perhaps creating a problem where one does not already exist.
So that's something to spread around on the net as much as possible.
I also have, I guess, a bit of an apology that I'd like to communicate.
I'm sorry that I dissed Atari computers last week.
I've gotten a bit of flack for doing that and I guess I'm just not all that familiar with them.
I've never actually played with an Atari computer.
And I guess also I've fallen victim to not having seen them around all that much, assuming that they're just not all that great.
Well, of course, that's not a very good way to look at things, especially from my point of view.
I'd like to read to you part of one of the letters that we received from somebody who's out in Long Island.
I won't give the name because I don't know if they want us to give the name.
I was listening to your BAI broadcast last Wednesday where you said in passing that Atari computers are dead.
Well, that's a pity because you would have liked the maverick, decentralized ethos of the Atari world.
Unlike the corporate hierarchies of IBM, Microsoft, and the high yuppie heirs of the Mac,
you had an Atari, a machine that runs better than the others and on software from around the world,
Germany, France, the UK, Canada, even the US.
It was in most all cases from singular code heads operating out of bedrooms or tiny storefronts,
making up for the incompetence of corporate owners with software,
which was in many cases better and in all cases much cheaper than the major CompuCore.
And you could call up the guy who wrote it if you had a problem.
It was a small world, this, as you say, dead Atari realm.
Funny thing, though, you're kind of wrong.
The Atari world, really, a small ghetto without borders, is still alive.
For example, I'm writing this on an Atari TT, which runs as fast as a 486
and much cleaner than the lard-bottomed IBM architecture.
And next month, a $100 piece of software from Germany is promised to boost its speed
past the 486 to 64 MHz.
I'm typing this note on a ZEOS IBM standard keyboard with a word processor called Le Redacteur,
which was developed in France for the journalist of the newspaper Liberation.
It's faster, smarter, and much more elegant than the Mormon word perfect.
Yeah, and the printout you hold in your hand was generated by a 2P LaserJet 4 600 DPI printer.
Actually, it was a fax, and it was faxed through my super modem.
No matter, my point is that the Atari world is, in its fashion, quite alive.
And more to the point, its marginal, decentralized, non-multinational existence
would, I think, appeal to you, given your interest and approach in 2600 and on WBAI.
And very correct, as far as that kind of thing goes.
Because it's exactly the kind of thing that I guess we need more of.
And perhaps its lack of visibility is a symptom of the disease.
Who knows?
All right, we have this promotional item from...
Actually, it's kind of like a survey.
I'll read you what was left in our mailbox.
Fed up with excessive utility rates, now you can fight back.
Dear friend, you and millions of other New Yorkers, New York citizens, that is,
have to suffer from some of the worst electric and phone rates in the country.
Before now, you just had to take it.
But now, you can do something.
You can join with other citizens in the New York Citizens Utility Board, known as CUB.
CUB was founded to give consumers like you a voice
in determining what are fair rates for your electric and phone service.
Through CUB, you will be able to fight back against unfair utility rates
and push the electric and phone companies to refund the money they owe you
when you and other New York consumers are illegally overcharged on your bills.
CUBs in other states, with the backing of their members,
have brought down rates, saved billions of dollars in canceled rate hikes,
and have won millions of dollars in refunds for consumers.
Now, CUB can do the same for New York, but you must help.
The utilities have many millions of dollars to fight for rate increases,
much of it taken from your wallet through unfair rates.
CUB relies solely on the generosity of individuals such as you.
Fight back against your unfair electric and phone rates by joining CUB today.
And complete with a suggested list of donations.
Not really sure how effective this is.
There's a survey here, though, that's included on this piece of paper.
I would have to say this is kind of a slanted survey.
Please answer the following questions concerning your utility service and charges.
Question number one.
Do you believe that it's fair that New York utility companies
are allowed to charge you with some of the highest bills in the nation?
Well, then how would you answer a question like that?
Yes, no, or undecided?
I don't know. It's a toss-up.
Number two.
Do you think it's fair that you may be charged up to 70% more
than the national average for your phone service?
Oh, yeah.
That's an easy one.
Number three.
Are you fed up with unfair electric and phone rates?
Now, I'm fed up with the fair ones.
The unfair ones I don't have a problem with.
But in any event, all seriousness,
if you want to write to these guys and find out more about them,
their address is Citizens Utility Board,
146 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York.
One, two, two, one, zero.
And perhaps this is a way of getting through the bureaucracy
and actually having some kind of an intelligent response.
Who knows?
Oh, you know, speaking of phone companies
and intelligent responses and things like that,
we told you about the 9X forest last week
where they sent out everybody's calling card numbers in a mailing.
Well, I got the telegram.
I actually found...
It's not really a telegram.
It's a letter from Western Union on behalf of 9X
saying that they're really sorry about mailing out the calling cards like that
and that they're dedicated to serving us
and that they'd never let anything like that happen again
and various, various promises and apologies like that.
So I got that.
And then a couple of days later, I got the original mailing.
And sure enough, my calling card was printed there.
You can look at it by simply folding the handout a little bit
and just peering inside it.
And you can see the four-digit pin.
And it's very, very simple.
You don't even have to open the envelope at all.
So that was quite a revelation,
something that I'm going to hold on to for posterity.
I don't know where it's been all this time the last couple of weeks,
if it's been sitting in the post office,
so everybody can copy down the number before it gets sent out.
Who knows?
But I'll be watching my bill to see if there's any fraud on the bill
and I don't know where the weak point is then.
But you know what else?
9X has these new envelopes.
I don't know if you've seen them.
They look just like the New York telephone envelopes, same color,
and it's what your phone bill comes in.
And it says on the bottom left-hand corner,
important, your telephone bill is enclosed.
But you know what they did?
They put this on all of their envelopes
so that even when they send you something that is not your phone bill,
such as a local itemization list or some other correspondence,
it says your telephone bill is enclosed, even when it's not.
I mean, this is going to be a great company.
I can hardly wait to see what other things are going to happen.
This company has only been around now as our phone company
for less than six months.
I mean, they're always the parent company of New York Telephone,
but 9X as the entity that you write the check to,
that's something brand new.
Oh, it's going to be fun.
All right, we have a fun story here,
and this is a story from India.
And I did some digging around,
and I was able to actually find some appropriate music from it.
I don't know if it's appropriate music,
but it's music from India.
We'll just have to settle for what we can get.
And there's a number of different songs here.
So we're just going to have this playing in the background
while we tell you about this phone story that comes from India.
Fair enough.
Let's start with the music.
Well, I hope that's not too distracting as we read,
but we'll see how it goes.
This story comes from the Associated Press,
and it's entitled,
Telephone Torture Sends Politician on Rampage, Operators on Strike.
This is a true story about modern India.
The villain is the telephone,
taken for granted in much of the world,
but in India regarded as an instrument of torture.
The leading man is a former cabinet minister,
once a powerful politician who defied Sikh death threats,
but a man humbled by the telephone
and a call that wouldn't come through,
even at gunpoint.
26 hours and 20 minutes after booking,
he got the call.
The leading lady is played by hundreds of low-paid,
sari-clad, shrieking operators,
described by the politician as fat, lazy gossips,
drinking tea in a lousy telephone system,
the worst in the world.
Comparing themselves to Kali,
the Hindu goddess of destruction,
the operators went on a three-day wildcat strike.
How do you compare yourself to a goddess
as you're going on strike?
That's something I'd like to know.
Smashing switchboards, crippling service,
and demanding that the politician,
former home minister Prakash Shanseti,
be jailed or held as insane.
Some call the telephone melodrama farce
or soap opera or morality play.
The drama has not been played out,
but this is how it began.
Last Friday at 12.50 a.m.,
Seti, a member of parliament,
decided enough was enough.
He had waited four hours and 20 minutes
and made five pleas to an operator
to get a top-priority lightning call
to Bombay from his home.
He warned the operator he was on his way
to her office and
set off with his son-in-law
and three armed bodyguards
assigned to him
because his life had been threatened.
He was in charge of domestic security
when the army attacked the Sikh's golden temple
in June of 1984.
Seti took his Czechoslovak-made licensed revolver,
explaining later that security rules,
quote,
require me to hold on to my gun,
unquote.
Rushing past guards at the downtown exchange,
the capital's telephone nerve center,
the midnight raider stormed to the ninth floor
and demanded to see the offending operator,
Miss Kieran.
I am a public man with a grouse,
he later said.
This place should be thrown open to citizens
so they can see what a mess the telephone system is.
And that's where accounts start to differ.
Miss Kieran said
she peeked from the ladies' room
and saw a man in a white pajama suit,
drunk, staggering, swaggering, and abusive,
advancing with three guards toward the switchboard.
She said she came out and he grabbed her arms,
waving his revolver and blowing cigar smoke into her face.
Do you know who I am?
Do you want to live in this world?
Witnesses quoted Seti as saying.
I can buy girls like you for five rupees,
which is about equivalent to 40 cents.
They said a male shop steward interceded,
but the 65-year-old Seti roughed him up
and tore his clothes,
then collapsed on the floor for 30 minutes.
Miss Kieran bolted the exit
to keep him there until police arrived.
I'll jump from the ninth floor and die,
but I will have justice,
she told reporters.
Police charged Seti with trespassing,
disturbing the peace,
using filthy and abusive language,
and assaulting a public servant on duty.
He was not arrested, though.
Seti says he was petrified
when operators surrounded him
and wouldn't let him go.
Then he says the shop steward knocked him out.
He got home at 3.30 a.m. Saturday
and says a doctor certified he was not drunk.
But about 4,000 operators and staff
disputed Seti's account.
By dawn, they launched a strike,
demanding his arrest.
Domestic and overseas bookings were paralyzed.
Some emergency police numbers were dead.
Other services were crippled.
Women sat atop switchboards,
twisted their headsets apart,
and shouted,
Death to Seti.
Still,
Seti's fury struck a responsive chord.
India's telephone system is notorious
for inefficiency,
rude operators,
equipment that smacks of bullet cart technology,
and thousands of dead phones.
Frustrated subscribers have been known
to smash telephones.
I hear they got that from us.
The level of inefficiency,
callousness,
and simple insolence
in the telephone exchanges
would drive anyone mad.
The Hindustan Times
editorialized recently.
But the strike was an embarrassment.
Over the weekend,
police and soldiers got involved.
Signal Corps engineers
worked without pause
to repair equipment.
Outside, husbands and boyfriends
waited for their women.
The women dropped notes,
complaining they were locked
on the top floor
unable to eat
or go to the bathroom
because they refused to work.
After two and a half days
on Sunday night,
the government announced
the strike was over
and Seti had apologized.
But many strikers denied it
and so did Seti.
Seti claimed
the government fabricated
a letter over his signature.
The protests subsided on Monday,
but the telephone saga went on.
Seti,
waving a cordless
Japanese telephone,
said,
in India,
you just cannot
get a call through.
I've heard that kind of story
before from India.
It's, uh,
seems to be an ongoing struggle
to make a phone call
over there.
So I guess you can always say
that there's a part of the world
where things are always
worse,
but that's
certainly no excuse
to not try and make things
better, is it?
That's our humorous story
for this week.
And we'll take some phone calls
about the software piracy issue,
uh,
212-279-3400.
Last week,
I guess we don't really
need this anymore,
do we?
Okay.
Uh,
last week we started
talking about a case
that's coming out of,
uh,
Massachusetts
involving,
uh,
David LaMaccia,
uh,
who,
uh,
is being accused
of running a bulletin board
where people are able
to copy software,
uh,
download,
uh,
copyrighted material
and perhaps even
upload copyrighted material.
And he was not actually
charged with software piracy,
but,
uh,
the point I tried to bring out
last week was that
this very much does involve
software piracy
because,
uh,
well,
this whole thing
would not be happening
if,
um,
organizations like the
Software Publishers Association,
um,
were not listened to so much
and people didn't actually
take it seriously
when they say
that somebody who copies
a program that,
uh,
that costs $1,000
is stealing $1,000.
It's obviously
something different,
uh,
not necessarily saying
it's a,
it's a correct and proper
thing to do,
but to say it's analogous
to stealing
is just,
uh,
way off base
as far as I'm concerned.
Um,
there's,
uh,
an interesting article
that we reprinted
in this,
um,
this latest edition
of 2600 Magazine,
which itself came
from the World Press Review,
and it was,
uh,
originally printed
in Malaysia,
and it raised
some very interesting
points on,
on software piracy.
This,
uh,
this came out
well before this whole
case reached the forefront.
A lot of people
are clamoring about,
uh,
the problems
that we're getting
from,
from Asia,
where a lot of software
is,
is copied and pirated,
and,
um,
to the degree
where,
where it's resold
as original material.
Obviously,
that's,
that's a,
that's a very bad thing.
Someone is profiting
from this,
someone is making money
off somebody else's labor,
and that's something
that should not be tolerated.
However,
there is another side
to this,
and that's where people
simply copy software
to use it,
or to experiment with it.
That's a totally
different thing.
That's not,
um,
selling it,
making a profit off of it.
That's simply
gaining access
to something that,
um,
you would never be able
to gain access to
otherwise.
And that's,
that's the crux of the matter.
You would never be able
to gain access to it
otherwise.
Uh,
if that is the case,
who is being hurt
by this particular action?
That's the question
that,
uh,
that we are asking here.
Um,
just to,
uh,
look at this particular article,
and then we'll take
some phone calls
on the subject.
Um,
this is called
Software Piracy,
Another View.
It was written by
Roberto Verzola,
and as I mentioned,
it was originally
printed in Malaysia.
And,
um,
many Manila computer users
copy programs
from computer shops
or from the computer
bulletin board systems
that have proliferated
around the city,
according to this article.
They give copies
of these programs
to friends and colleagues
who in turn give copies
to other friends
and colleagues.
In the terminology
of Western software companies,
they are pirates.
Copying commercial software
and giving it away
to friends and colleagues
is called piracy.
I have seen pirates
in movies,
and they are a mean bunch.
They are villains
who steal,
kill,
and plunder.
At the movie's endings,
when these good-for-nothing
pirates get their just due,
the audiences invariably applaud,
for the pirates
get the punishment
they roundly deserve.
It is no fun
to be called a pirate
or to be treated like one.
I have seen a number
of people who come from
or work for
Western software firms.
They come and visit
this country of pirates
and perhaps make
a little study
of how much they are losing
from piracy
in the Philippines.
Quite a number of them,
I would say,
come to the country
to do some pirating
themselves.
However,
they do not pirate software.
They pirate people.
They pirate those
who write the software.
They pirate our best
systems analysis,
analysts rather,
our best engineers,
our best programmers,
and our best computer operators.
There is quite a difference
between pirating
intellectual property
and pirating
intellectuals
or individuals.
It costs our country
perhaps $10,000
to train one doctor.
Training a second doctor
would cost another $10,000.
Training 10 doctors
would cost $100,000.
In short,
given an original doctor,
it would cost us
as much to make
each copy
of the original.
When the Americans
pirate our doctors,
they take away
an irreplaceable resource
where it takes
more than 10 years
to train a new doctor.
The Philippines
has approximately
one doctor
for every 6,700 citizens.
When the U.S.
pirates this doctor,
it denies
6,700 Filipinos
the services
of a doctor.
And every year,
the U.S.
takes away
hundreds of our doctors.
How many Filipinos
have died
because they could not
get the services
of a doctor in time?
Now, what about
a computer program?
Whatever amount
Lotus Corporation
spent in developing
its spreadsheet program,
it costs practically
nothing to make
a second or third
copy of it.
When Filipinos
pirate the program,
they have not stolen
any irreplaceable resources,
nor would it take
Lotus 10 years
to replace the program,
nor have we denied
any American citizen
the use of the program.
It is still there
for Americans to use.
When the U.S.
pirates our doctors,
it does not take a copy
and leave the original
behind.
Instead,
it takes the original
and leaves nothing behind.
Copying software
is the benign case
of piracy.
Pirating doctors
is a malignant case.
We have been victims
of this malignant form
of piracy
by Western countries
for a long time.
They should be
the last to complain
when they are affected
by a benign one.
This piracy debate
will become even more
important in the future
because advanced countries
are now developing
computer programs
that can mimic
what goes on
in a doctor's mind.
We can say
with some certainty
that the U.S.
will raise a big row
if we pirated
this one program.
In truth,
the terms piracy
and theft
of intellectual property
are emotionally laden,
but they are not
very accurate
descriptions of the act.
Legally,
one might be charged
with violating
the copyright
or patent laws
of a country,
but this would normally
be different
from the crime
of theft
or actual piracy.
Using these words,
however,
automatically connotes
immoral action
on the part
of the copier.
Thus,
in the polemics
against the third world,
piracy and theft
are favorite terms
among advanced countries,
particularly the U.S.
The term piracy
of individuals
can likewise
be used
if one wants
to ascribe
a sense of
immorality
to the act.
This is not to imply,
of course,
that countries
own their intellectuals.
Both intellectuals
and intellectual property
have other
important attributes
aside from simply
being commodities
on the market.
Notwithstanding the fact
that advanced countries
normally encourage
the best brains
of the third world
to work for them
through various incentives
and enticements,
these intellectuals
have their own reasons
for doing so.
Perhaps the chances
for personal
and professional advancement
are better.
Perhaps the environment
is more conducive
to their own temperaments
and predispositions.
Perhaps they are persecuted
in their home countries
and so on.
The Christian Bible
tells of the miracle
of the loaves
when Jesus and his apostles
had only five loaves
of bread
and two pieces of fish
to feed 5,000 people.
Every time I give away
a copy of my favorite program,
I remember the miracle
of the loaves.
Indeed,
how can you be selfish
if you can give things away
and have more
than what you started with?
How can we deny
a good friend
if we can also
keep it for ourselves?
That's the view,
another view
of software piracy,
quote-unquote.
The biblical thing
I thought was rather interesting.
That's something
that a lot of you
may have a problem with
or some of you
may agree with.
I'd like to find out.
212-279-3400.
Give us a call
and we'll see
what kind of effect
this thing happens
on people
as far as
an issue
for the future.
Okay,
let's
go to the phones then.
Good evening,
you're on.
Yeah,
hi,
I just want to talk
about the new...
How do you always
get on the first line?
That's what I want to know.
Have my ways
and I...
No,
how do you...
Because it times out
after...
I know it does,
but what happens...
Yet you always wind up
on the first line.
Oh,
I'll explain it to you later.
I don't have time to...
I mean,
I don't want to take
the time to explain it now
because I know
you don't have time
and you want to talk
about something else.
Sure.
But I just want to know...
I just want to mention
something I've noticed
about the new 411 feature
where it connects you
out of the area.
You will not be able
to use the connect request.
Well,
yeah,
I imagine
it has to know
where you're calling from.
Correct?
Yeah,
but you can only
use the connect request
if you call from
212 or 718.
Because it's part
of a 9X thing
and it's part of
something local,
I imagine.
516 information
from 212,
you won't be able
to use it.
Well,
you know what?
I'll bet one day
you will.
You should try it.
Well,
I would
if I wanted to
throw away money
with the phone company,
but...
No,
no,
you call it
on a pay phone
and then
you call
516-555-212
and they won't
know your number.
But if you call
local
212 or 718,
they will.
And what's
the significance
of that,
though?
I don't know.
That's what
I'm asking you.
Well,
I don't think
it's significant,
so I don't see
the significance
in it.
Well,
you can
stuff them
still by,
you know,
giving them,
asking for credit
and giving them
fake phone numbers
when, you know,
they want to
charge you.
But you can't
get connected
to a number
without putting
money in the phone
or making
the little beeping
noises they like.
Correct?
I know.
Okay.
So I don't think
you're really
getting anything
out of it,
except maybe
you can pretend
you're somewhere
you're not.
Yeah,
you can,
but I was
wondering why
that was.
It's just
something that
has not yet
been hooked
up ladder
wide,
I guess.
Why isn't it
hooked up
when you
call out
of the area?
Why isn't
it?
Yeah.
Because it's
something that
they're doing
on a region
by region
basis.
They haven't
linked the
regions together
yet.
The system
that I'm
talking about.
I'm sorry?
The new
system.
Right.
The new
system has
not yet
been linked
up region
by region.
I know,
but I'm
calling a
region that
has a new
system,
and if you
call us
out of the
area,
it won't
give you
the option
of connecting
directly to
the number.
Right.
It's because,
for instance,
if you call
a place in
another state
that has
caller ID,
it won't
necessarily pass
the information
along.
You're calling
a modern
place,
but the
two regions
have not
yet been
interconnected.
You know,
AT&T gives
a service
where they
can connect
you with
the number
directly for
a dollar?
Yes.
Dial zero
before the
number,
use your
calling card,
and yeah,
you can pay
through the nose
just to call
a phone number.
Well,
if you call
one area
card in 555,
you can do
that.
I don't know
about that.
I haven't
tried that,
but I try
not to call
information
since it
became such
a rip-off.
Right.
Write letters
instead.
Thanks for the
call.
Let's go on
to somebody
else.
Good evening.
You're on.
Hello,
Emmanuel.
Yes,
go ahead.
All right,
listen,
this problem
is that
for commercial
profit,
in other
words,
you know,
a person
who manufactures
software
and says,
please,
if you use
our software,
please pay
us according
to our
terms of
endearment,
you know,
of usage,
then the
concept is
you're going
to pay them
because you're
using it for
commercial profit
and actually,
by using the
software,
you'll be
maximizing your
personal profit,
you know what I
mean?
So why not pay
them?
But there's some
person who wants
friends and says,
look,
Charlie,
Jane,
use my thing
and make a
copy of it
and so forth.
Now,
the point is,
if you
manufactured
software,
Emmanuel,
if you were
the person
who had
the people
working,
the geniuses
who can
figure out
how to do
these things,
which are
incredible,
in my estimation,
and you pay
rent and you
pay salaries
and all these
different things
if you're the
top person,
you have a
right to realize
whatever fair,
shall we say,
fair and ethical
and all these
things.
So, you know,
the fact that
you want to feel
like you're
esteemed by a
few of your
buddies, you
know, that
doesn't give you
carte blanche to
abuse people who
are making your
life easier and
profitable.
Well, I mean,
I've always believed
that people are
entitled to be
compensated for the
work they've done
on a program.
The thing is,
I think the key
word in what you're
saying is fair.
What is fair is
fair whatever they
come up with.
They say a program
is worth $1,000,
is that really
what it's worth?
When you copy it,
are you in fact
taking $1,000 from
them?
That's where I have
trouble with the
logic.
Well, the point is
you may make $10,000
or $1,000,000 using
their program,
isn't that true?
You have endless
possibilities.
Uh-huh.
You may also make
absolutely nothing
from it.
In fact, most people
that copy programs
don't really do
anything with them.
They just copy them
to see what they're
like and then they
forget about them.
All right.
In that sense,
it's not really
copy for profit.
It's just copy to
understand and see
if you can use it.
But if you're
realizing profit,
then you...
Right.
Well, there's a
difference between
the corporate world
and the individual
world.
In the corporate
world, you use a
program and you use
it for profit.
You get something
out of it.
You, you know,
you're using it
for your business.
An individual
probably isn't doing
that.
I'll just show you
how ridiculous the
world is.
You have the wheel.
Somebody in ancient
times conceived of,
oh, why don't I have
a wheel, a round thing
that rotates on an
axle?
And that person is
not getting
compensated, whether
it was a man or a
woman or a child who
conceived of this.
Well, yeah, I think
you're pointing out how
ridiculous this can get.
Yeah.
I mean, the thing is,
we should have a world
where everybody does
everything, you know,
that has to be done,
you know, and takes
care of everything.
A beautiful world
where I've seen the
future.
You know what I mean?
And what do we have?
We have Bosnias and
Arscovinias and an
African situation and the
American situations or
Waco, Texas and so
forth.
And I'll say good
night to you and wish
you for the best.
Okay, thanks for
calling.
Yeah, it's a pretty
interesting point.
And we have to keep
looking at this from
all different views.
But the way it's being
looked at in the
corporate world, I just
do not think applies to
the rest of us.
It just doesn't because
we just don't live by
those rules.
They're not human in
nature.
That's why I have real
difficulty.
Let's hear what other
people have to say.
212-279-3400.
Good evening, you're
on.
Hello, Emmanuel?
Yes, go ahead.
Can you give me some
information concerning
the enhanced 911 system
that 9x is trying to
install?
And I understand that it
is being challenged by
the ACLU as an invasion
of privacy.
Well, enhanced 911 allows
the police department to
get all kinds of
information when you
call them.
It's got nothing to do
with caller ID.
It's a separate system.
They get your...
When you call them, they
get the number showing up
on their screen.
They also get your name.
They can see a detailed
map of your house if
there's any...
if you've given them
that information, that
is, including if there's
any hazardous materials
stored in a certain
area, perhaps a file
that they have on you
where they've noted if
you've called before and
what you've said and that
kind of thing.
So basically, you call
them and a little screen
pops up and shows them
all kinds of data about
you.
It's basically...
It's advertised as a
way to make things safe
for everybody because if
you call the police and you
can't speak or something
like that and you need
help, they'll know where
to go.
And I guess, you know,
it's also an invasion of
privacy in some ways.
But again, you know, if
you don't want this to
happen, you just don't
call 911.
You call the non-emergency
number.
I think it only becomes a
real invasion of privacy
when this kind of
information is passed on
calls that you don't know
it's being passed on.
You see, if everybody
knows it, I don't really
see it as an invasion
that much.
What do you think?
Are you there?
Well, the only reason I
raised that question was
because of the fact...
Uh-huh.
...was because it was
brought up at a precinct
council meeting last night
by the New York Telephone
Company represented...
I mean, 9X Telephone
representative, as well as
the police at a police
meeting.
And then, finally, they
came out with the
information when I...
that the ACLU...
There's anything really to
be concerned about as far
as our rights under the
Constitution.
Well, yeah, I mean, it's
right to be concerned.
We have to always look to
see if there's any little
hidden provisions in there.
Yeah, that's what I mean.
Right.
For instance, any kind of
information being stored
about us that they really
have no right to know.
Yeah.
And that's why it's
important to take a good
look at these systems and
see just what it is they're
doing, how they work.
Yeah, they're very vague
about it.
Uh-huh.
Well, you can't...
Okay, that means there's
something wrong with the
whole system, then.
If they're not telling you
things about a system that
you're going to be paying
for...
No, they're trying to tell
you, you know, in case
somebody needs care like you
were suggesting before, that
that might be, you know, make
it easier for someone to get
through to 911 in spite of the
fact that they could not
speak or whatever they... the
police would be able to
locate where the person was
calling from, et cetera.
Right.
Well, I mean, if they're not
telling you something, you
have to persist until they
do.
Most of us don't know what
to ask.
Right.
But the only reason that I'm
calling you about it is
because of the fact that in
the course of the
conversation, he indicated
about the ACLU challenging
it.
Mm-hmm.
And I really wanted to
proceed further.
I wanted to know if he...
If this is official, already
installed, does something
somebody have to vote on
it or do our legislators
or whatever it takes to
get something passed?
Mm-hmm.
Well, this is something
that has to be...
You think.
It has to be approved by
the Public Service
Commission.
It has to be approved by
the Public Service
Commission.
Right.
And ultimately, the
Public Service
Commission is supposed to
respond to what people
hear or say.
I see.
In other words, would
you suggest that I, since
I am very much interested in
our rights of privacy, I
discuss it with whether or
not this will come before
our community board.
Mm-hmm.
And...
Well, I think it's
something...
Or do you think I'm kind
of making a mountain out
of a mole?
Well, look.
Look at it this way.
Once this thing is
installed, you will never
get rid of it.
So, I think you owe it
to everybody to make sure
that it's exactly what
you want.
And if it's not exactly
what you want, have them
tailor it to something that
you do want.
And the way to do that is
to learn as much as there
is to learn about it and
maybe go out and see one
in action and see exactly
how it does work and perhaps
make suggestions as to how
it could be better or say
that you don't want these
particular things to be
known about people in your
area.
Yeah.
And that's the only way.
You know, because people
don't do that, that's why
we have things.
I know.
Show up.
So, right away, they
cloak it up with making
it easier about the person
who can't speak for that.
You know what I mean?
Right.
Just like the clipper chip
will protect all of us
against terrorists.
It's not necessarily so.
So, that's why I'm raising
the question.
But you say it has to be
approved by the public
service.
To the best of my
knowledge, that's true.
To the best of my
knowledge.
But then again, they
always make it as
confusing as possible so
people won't challenge it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
But I would go on to
that assumption.
I was the only one that
challenged it.
at a meeting maybe of
at least 100 people.
Well, I'm glad you did
because we have to always,
even if something is
right, they have to be
able to tell you why
it's right.
Yeah.
You see?
Well, as far as I'm
concerned, it's right for
the telephone company.
there's a revenue involved in
there's revenue involved in
all that that, you know,
that they may be getting
from taxpayers or from the
city for, you know, in
cooperation, maybe working
with the police.
Yeah.
Well, there's always revenue
in it for the phone company.
Absolutely.
I raise the question if they
want to, if they think that
this might be an easier way
to track down drug trafficker,
you know, drug guys and
dealers out there that the
telephone company do away
with all these six or seven
or more telephones on every
block in the Midtown area and
in the business areas.
So, you know, we don't need
all those phones.
Mm-hmm.
What for?
Because it's only revenue for
the telephone company.
Well, it's nice to have
phones that work, but I
don't know if that's high
on the list.
But a lot of these phones
are connected outside of
stores.
Right.
Which I understand the
stores actually own the
phones or whatever it is.
Yeah.
And they're used by the
drug dealers.
Uh-huh.
Well, I mean, phones are
phones.
They're going to be used
by all kinds of people,
and you don't solve a
problem by getting rid of
the phones.
Well, you just give more
opportunity for drug dealers
to do their business on the
streets.
Well, I mean, drug dealers
will always have cellular
phones.
You can't outlaw those.
You got them in.
I think we need to look at
the bigger problem.
It's not the phones.
It's the fact that people
have to sell drugs.
People feel they have to
sell drugs.
We shouldn't have a society
where that kind of thing is
necessary in anybody's mind.
I hear you.
Yeah.
Thanks for your call.
Okay.
And good luck.
Thank you.
Keep us informed.
Take care.
212-279-3400.
It's always good to question
authority wherever possible.
Good evening.
You're on.
All right.
Hang on.
How are you?
Hi.
Am I on the air?
Yes, you are.
What's on your mind?
Oh, hi.
I was calling not because of the
issue that you have at hand
like everybody else.
I wanted to talk to you about
Romania.
A few years back, I remember you
came on the air and you said
you went to Romania.
I don't know why.
Curiosity, mostly.
Well, I went there this spring,
last month, as a matter of fact.
After 12 years, I left Romania in 1982
and I moved here.
Uh-huh.
Became a citizen anyway.
I went there to visit after 12 years
and, uh, shocked is, uh, is the least
that I could say about the place.
What shocked you?
Well, basically, like you said,
no lights on the streets, uh,
missing manhole covers, uh, you know.
It looked like, uh, well, first of all,
when I landed on the airport,
there were, like, hundreds of soldiers
with machine guns ready and, uh,
armored vehicles on the tarmac.
Uh-huh.
I thought we landed in Yugoslavia by mistake.
Yeah.
Well, it wasn't like that in 1982
with the dim streetlights and everything?
No, no.
When I left, uh, Romania, um,
Bucharest was, uh, you know,
like ten times cleaner than New York City
on its best day.
Uh-huh.
And, uh, it was well lit.
And the problem then was that
people had no, uh, you know,
nothing to buy.
They had money in their pockets.
Right.
They were starving with the money
in their pockets.
Now, they have no money
and, uh, you know,
the stores are full of food
and so on and so forth,
but nobody can afford.
And which brings me to my next point
about their phone system over there.
Okay.
Which is, like, a joke.
Um, first of all,
it's, like, really noisy.
There's, like, a huge background noise
when you're talking on the phone.
It, it, after ten minutes of talking,
um, your ear literally hurts.
Really?
From listening.
I don't know what.
And, uh, they have no touchstone.
It's all, uh, pulse, I think.
Uh-huh.
That's true in a lot of countries.
And, uh, the other thing is
that the inflation rate is so high
that the coins that you use
for the phone, um,
are so, um, worthless
that nobody has them in the stores
to give them to you.
Or they won't exchange money,
you know, uh, bigger, uh,
denominations for, uh, for these coins.
So you can't use a public phone over there.
Are the coins regular currency
or are they special phone coins?
Regular coins, but they're, like,
uh, like a penny.
And they're not like we have our,
their, their, their worth is about a penny,
but they're not like we have pennies here.
You know, there's pennies over here
with, uh, the tons,
but over there they don't,
they don't even have them.
Uh, like, the smallest coin
is, uh, uh, about 50 lei.
Uh-huh.
And, uh, you usually can't find this coin.
Usually the smallest one
that people carry is the hundred.
And the hundred doesn't fit
in the slots for the phone.
So people can't use the phones at all?
No, no.
And I mean, the phones,
if you look at them on the street,
they, they look like, uh,
they don't look like they work.
But you, if you pick it up,
uh, you know, you, you,
you'll, you'll get a tone.
Uh-huh.
But they actually work.
They just look,
everything looks in a total state
of disrepair.
It's unbelievable.
Yeah, it is.
It is a scary place, too.
Even though it looks so bad,
I mean, there's plenty of, uh,
Camel cigarette advertisements.
They went so far as to paint
the, uh, Camel logo
in the yellow light,
uh, on the traffic lights.
You're kidding.
No, they, the Camel bought the rights,
I guess, whatever they did.
The yellow traffic lights?
That's amazing.
The light turns, uh, it's red,
and then it turns yellow,
and then green,
or green and then yellow.
Uh-huh.
When it turns yellow,
you see Camel written,
and then the Camel, you know.
But you have to be looking
directly at the light, right?
Or does it cast some sort of a shadow?
No, no, no, no.
You're looking right at the light,
you know, as you're waiting
in traffic to drive, you know,
and you look at the light,
you see, when the light turns yellow,
you see Camel.
Yeah, because in many places,
New York is not one of the many places,
a red light will be, uh,
it'll change to yellow
before it changes back to green.
Right.
Here it changes from red
directly to green.
Right.
So in many cases,
you'd be sitting in traffic
just staring at the light,
waiting for it to change,
and then all of a sudden,
it changes,
and what do you see?
You see Joe Camel.
So he'll be, um,
I guess, uh,
paralleled with, uh,
with being allowed to go,
being allowed to proceed.
Something good.
Right.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Exactly, yeah.
So you go out and have a smoke.
That's, that's what they want you to do.
That's something.
That's something how, uh,
we manage to advertise in places
that, uh,
need so much more.
You guys have, uh,
even surpassed us,
and, you know,
we, we were, you know,
we have the, the,
the heart of advertising
is here in the United States,
and even we haven't done
such a thing, you know?
Uh-huh.
They, uh, they said,
ah, their attitude is,
like, everybody wants to do
some kind of deal,
some kind of business.
They all want to come over here,
and, you know,
they were asking,
all my, my friends were asking me,
oh, come on,
we should start something,
we should do something.
Uh-huh.
You know, we have suits,
we have shoes,
we have,
I said, you people are nuts.
I said, there's shoes
and suits in America
that, that, you know,
nobody wants to buy,
and you want to come over there.
I said, you, you know,
they have no idea.
They, I think what happened
was that,
unlike Hungary
and Czechoslovakia
and these other
Eastern, uh,
black countries,
uh, after they had
their revolutions,
all these companies
went in there
and moved in,
and, uh,
they pumped in a lot of money
into their economies.
Because, unlike
Romania,
these other countries
had some type
of industry
that was actually
putting some kind
of product out before,
so it was worthwhile
for the American companies
or the Western companies
to invest.
But in Romania,
nothing was working
and, uh,
nobody went there.
Well, Chatsesky
was simply obsessed
with paying off
the national debt
and it, it, it,
it starved
the entire country
and you've seen
the effects today
and, and for many years
you'll probably still
see the effects.
Yeah, so,
as a result,
nobody went in there
and, uh,
the place
is in the state
that it,
I mean,
literally,
walking down
the street
at night,
you have to be
extremely careful
because you cannot
see where you're going.
Then the other thing
is,
I've seen these buildings
that Chatsesky
started building.
The House of the People.
Right,
around that area
over there.
Um,
he also built,
like,
many projects
and, uh,
they,
they were left
unfinished,
you know,
the building looks
like it's unfinished,
an unfinished building.
Huge buildings,
yeah.
But surprisingly,
to, to really shock you
is, like,
in the middle of this
building at night
you'll see a,
a light lit up
in an apartment
that actually people
live there.
Uh-huh.
It's like the only
apartment that's lit up
in the whole building
and somebody lives there.
It looks like a totally,
you know,
blown out building,
like,
no,
no windows in some
of the places.
Uh-huh.
And people actually
live there.
And, uh,
from what my relatives
told me is
that they bought
apartments in there
but they have no water,
you know,
the elevators don't work
and stuff like that.
Well,
it's a society gone mad,
unfortunately.
Hopefully,
something will happen
in the near future.
Sir,
we strayed way off the topic
but we're going to have
to move on
to another subject.
All right,
great.
Listen,
I like your show a lot
and, uh,
I listen to it all the time
even though some of the times
I don't understand
most of the things
you talk about
but, uh,
the spirit of it
is what is very captivating.
That's,
that's it,
absolutely.
Thanks very much.
All right,
that's all right.
Keep up the good work.
Take care.
Bye-bye.
Very interesting, uh,
to,
to think about that place
which is, uh,
about as alien as you can get
going over to a foreign country
like that
and just seeing, uh,
a whole different mentality,
a whole different way
of looking at things
and everything,
literally everything
we take for granted here
is just something
totally different over there.
So technology is, uh,
something that doesn't
even enter into it
at that point.
The thing that really
frightens me is
what if a place like that
had high technology
and was able to use it
against the people
like everything else
was used against the people?
That's something
that we always have to be
vigilant about
because, as we mentioned,
technology is something
that, uh,
doesn't go away
once you invent something.
It's always going to be there
so that's why we have to
think very carefully
if we want to, uh,
introduce new forms of it.
All right,
let's go back to the phones
and go back to the topic
of technology, I guess.
Good evening,
you're on the air.
Hey, finally got through.
Yeah, and I think
you deafened a lot of people too.
Oh, oh, that's odd.
Okay, so what's up?
Sorry about that.
Well, first of all,
I'm calling you
from a Plantronics headset
which is a really
fabulous convenience.
Oh, it's, it's,
it's a good sound quality.
I'll say that.
Just a bit loud.
Oh, gee, sorry.
There is a knob
but I'd have to,
I'd have to spend
a little time to...
No, it's okay.
Our engineers have adjusted
for the, uh, sound boost there.
Groovy, um,
you know,
I was one of the exchanges,
uh, that got the call return
and the, and, uh,
the Busy Buster function
before it was documented
and advertised.
Repeat call, yes.
Right.
Um, and now I use
those features all the time
and I don't seem
to be charged for it.
I think you probably are
somewhere.
You look in your bill,
it doesn't say anything?
Well, I'll tell you,
my girlfriend is also
in Brooklyn.
Uh-huh.
Gets a little thing
in her bill saying
you used this feature
this many times
and it's 75 cents a pop.
Right.
I don't get anything like that.
Do you subscribe?
Do you subscribe
to the feature itself?
Because if you do,
you, you, you get charged
a set amount
no matter how many times
you use it.
Right, and that would be
documented on my bill.
It would be,
but not as prominently.
Well, but it's not.
I mean, I inspect my bill.
Uh-huh.
They haven't tacked anything
onto my custom package,
you know,
which includes touch tone.
Right.
How long have you
had this service?
Since I heard it
on your show.
Really?
You first started,
yeah.
Well, that's something.
Maybe, maybe,
in fact, you are,
I mean,
this is a company
that mails out
calling cards
and tells people
to keep them secret
and, uh,
and, uh,
and prints,
this is your phone bill
and envelopes
where it's not
your phone bill,
so it's possible
they could make a mistake.
Yeah, I think so.
But if I were you,
I would not tell anybody
where you're calling from
because, uh,
they'll fix it right away
if you do.
Well, you know,
it's funny because
I was wondering
what would I do
if you asked me?
Yeah.
Oh, no,
I would never ask
something like that.
You know what?
I decided that
I would actually tell you.
No, don't tell me.
Don't tell anybody.
No, you're not asking
and I'm not telling
and I'm glad you're not asking.
I will not ask
a question like that
because that's,
that's private information,
you know?
Who am I to pry?
That's right.
Right.
So, anything else
on your mind?
Yeah, uh,
a couple of things
about the piracy issue.
I really like that editorial
and I think,
to get a little,
get just slightly
philosophical here.
Okay.
The concepts of ownership
that we assume
or that many people assume
are sort of givens
are really more
a product of technology.
They're not the absolutes
that some people
are led to believe.
You know,
we have had years
of a given technology.
Copyright was really
built around print
and now that there's
new technology,
people are trying
to cram the old issue
of ownership
and make it fit
this new world
and it's,
I hope,
I don't have a lot
of faith in this,
but I hope that
the thinking
about this
will slowly evolve.
Yeah,
it just doesn't,
it doesn't match,
you know?
The old thinking
does not match
with the new ways
because it's different.
It's totally different.
It's really hard
to get out of it.
I think something
that we all do.
Every time you hear
the word theft
or stealing software,
you have to correct
the person and say
it's not,
that's not what
the definition says.
Stealing is when
you remove something
and you're not
removing something
when you copy something.
It's different
and maybe it's wrong
in some way,
but it's not theft.
I think it's going
to take a long time
for that to change
and we have years
of laws that are
on the book.
Yeah,
I just hope people
don't get sent to prison
for copying files.
I mean,
although people already have.
Len Rose was sent
to prison for just
such a thing.
Who was?
Just another person
for copying supposedly
AT&T,
software.
Actually,
a few people
have been sent
to prison
for things like that.
Things that could not
have benefited them
in any way,
but AT&T
or other companies
said that they were
worth millions of dollars.
So therefore,
to an uninformed judge,
it seems like this person
is stealing millions of dollars.
So there's a real problem
with that kind of thinking.
It can be misinterpreted
and people can wind up
suffering for it.
Right.
And the software companies
are not the people
that are suffering.
There was another thing
on my mind.
I don't know
if we have enough time
for it.
And you have to tell me
if you decide
this is irrelevant.
Okay.
Years ago,
I worked for
General Telephone
in California.
Okay.
Many years ago.
And I discovered
a few things.
They're not really
valid today.
This is kind of like
a nostalgic trip.
but they really stuck
with me.
One of them was
the phone man's handset,
the phone person's handset,
which has special
alligator clips
designed with kind of
a pin cushion contact,
which enabled you
to clamp onto a phone wire
without leaving a trace
that you clamped there.
Can you picture
what I'm saying?
Are you familiar with this?
Well, yeah.
You sort of stick it
into the mesh of wires.
You stick it into
the skinny,
one clamp
to each of the
skinny pair of wires
that applies
to one phone number.
Well, the idea is
you don't make any noise
when you spy
in a conversation.
Not only do you
not make any noise,
but you don't make
any physical dent
in the insulation
that anyone can see.
Right, and you don't
draw any voltage.
In other words,
if nobody's on the phone,
you don't get a dial tone,
you just get a hum
until an incoming call
comes in.
I think so, yeah.
Yeah, those are used
by the phone company
quite a bit
to test lines.
But, of course,
they can be used
for all kinds
of nefarious purposes
as well.
Right, and that's
exactly why
it stuck with me.
Uh-huh.
And another thing
that happened,
which may be even more
esoteric
and maybe not
of interest to you,
I was hired
like as a summer job
and one of the things
we were doing
was running cables
to provide phone service
for a marina.
Uh-huh.
And the wire
was such that
to strip the insulation off,
there was no way
you could do it
without getting a lot
of like tar
and grease
on your hand.
Uh-huh.
In other words,
this was the kind
of primitive technology
that could defeat
someone who had
one of these handsets,
for instance.
Yeah.
And it just occurred
to me,
okay, maybe this is
a great cable
because it goes
underwater
and it's really durable,
but boy,
you know,
it seems like
a highly secure cable
as well.
I don't know
if you've heard
of any other
such things.
Well, it's not
the first time
I've heard
something similar
to that.
But we're out
of time,
unfortunately,
so I'm afraid
you have the last
word tonight
as far as
this kind of thing
goes.
Thanks for the stories.
Thanks for the comments.
Sure.
Great show.
Okay, take care.
Okay.
And yes,
we're out of time
once again.
This is Off the Hook
and we'll be back
again next Wednesday
night at 10 o'clock
talking about
probably some other
issue that has
come up
because issues
are always coming
up in this world.
I've noticed that.
If you want to
write to us,
our address is
Off the Hook,
care of WBAI,
505 8th Avenue,
New York,
New York,
10018.
We do like to see
all kinds of
interesting news items,
stories such as
the one from India
and anything else
that you feel
might be an issue
that you'd like
us to discuss.
Please send it on in
and we'll look at
everything that we get.
Stay tuned for a
rebroadcast of the
evening news.
This is WBAI,
New York.
Good night.
We'll be right back.
Good evening.
In the news tonight,
President Clinton
calls on NATO
to expand its role
in Bosnia.
He hints he wants
ground troops sent in.
The House of Representatives
speaks out on race
and the death penalty.
And in New York,
gays and lesbians
take on the New York Post
while vendors
take on the mayor.
With these and other stories,
I'm Jose Santiago
in New York
with Verna Avery-Brown
in Washington.
And this is the news
for Wednesday,
April 20, 1994.
First to Washington
for the Pacifica
National News.
NATO has given
tentative approval
to broadening
airstrikes in Bosnia
to include
the six safe havens.
A final decision
has been delayed,
pending advice
from the military.
In Garajda,
Bosnian Serbs
are continuing
to bombard the town.
This morning,
shells were hitting
at the rate
of one per minute.
Earlier today,
the director
of the main hospital
said Serb tanks
were only 100 yards away
and firing directly
at the hospital.
In his words,
this is not a war anymore.
It's slaughter.
Massacre.
UN workers say
at least 10 people
are dead
and more than 15 wounded
after three rockets
hit the hospital.
Elsewhere in Bosnia,
Serbs released
some of the UN observers
who'd been detained
after last week's
airstrikes on Garajda.
And Serb troops
returned.
18 anti-aircraft guns
seized yesterday
near Sarajevo.
Human rights groups
are charging.
The Peruvian military
is indiscriminately
killing civilians
in its latest offensive
against the Shining Path.
Doug Stinson reports
from Lima.
Accounts are trickling
out of the Huaga Valley
in central Peru
that civilians
are being targeted
in the Peruvian Army's
assault on Shining Path
strongholds.
Survivors say
helicopter gunships
are firing on villages
and ground troops
are torturing
campesinos
caught in the fray.
The National Human Rights
Coordinator,
an umbrella organization
of Peruvian human rights groups,
has taken testimony
from eyewitnesses
indicating as many
as 100 people
have been killed
by Peruvian military forces
over the last week.
There has been
no official comment
from the Peruvian government.
The International Red Cross
and other independent observers
have been denied access
to the combat area,
previously considered
to be in rebel hands.
The Shining Path
is said to control
drug traffic
in the Huaga Valley,
the center of
Peruvian cocaine production.
The Human Rights Coordinator
will release
detailed testimony tomorrow,
but is withholding
the identity
of the eyewitnesses
out of concern
for their safety.
For Pacifica Network News,
this is Douglas Stinson
in Lima.
The Clinton administration
wants to show
its stepping up
enforcement
of safety regulations.
This week,
the Labor Department
issued one of its
largest fines.
It charged
a tire company
failed to follow
proper safety procedures
for maintenance workers,
resulting in the death
of one worker
and the maiming
of several others.
In response,
the Oklahoma Tire Factory
shut down
rather than obey
a Labor Department
directive aimed
at improving
its safety procedures.
A court restraining order
on the Labor Department
directive led the company
to allow workers back
for last night's
11 o'clock shift.
Carrie Hulsey
reports from Oklahoma City.
Oklahoma City
Dayton Tire Plant
workers are back
on the job
from the plant
shut down
Monday afternoon
after an announcement
by U.S. Secretary
of Labor Robert Reich
declaring the plant
an imminent danger
to employees
and fining the company
$7.5 million
for safety violations.
The fine
and Reich's visit
to Oklahoma City
were prompted
by the investigation
into a worker's death
last October.
The judge says
evidence concerning
Dayton's compliance
to OSHA safety regulations
will be heard
in open court.
The trial is set
to begin May 10th.
For Pacifica Network News,
I'm Carrie Hulsey
in Oklahoma City.
A new study
on breast cancer
backs previous research
that removing a lump
can be at least
as effective
as removing
the entire breast.
Published in the Journal
of the American Medical Association,
the study of nearly
6,000 breast cancer patients
found women
who had a lumpectomy
or removal of lumps
plus radiation
were at least
as likely to survive
five years
as women
who had a mastectomy
or complete removal
of the breast.
A 1990 report
had encouraged
lumpectomies
but had used
some fraudulent data.
And those are the stories
topping the news.
The death penalty
took center stage
in the debate
on the National Crime Bill.
By a tiny margin,
the House kept alive
a measure
that would allow
the use of statistics
in detecting
whether the death penalty
is being meted out
unfairly to African Americans.
And today's debate
was typical
of the highly partisan battle
that is brewing
over the issue.
Pacifica's Don Rush
has this report.
The crime bill
adds nearly 70
new capital offenses
to the federal law books
and they raise fears
that the death penalty
would weigh
even more heavily
on minorities
in this country.
So today,
black and Hispanic lawmakers
pushed hard
for what is called
the Racial Justice Act.
The measure
would allow a judge
to use statistics
to determine
if the death penalty
were being sought
in a racially discriminatory manner.
Democrats did make
one concession
on the floor.
They agreed not
to make the measure
retroactive,
a complaint heard
often from Republicans.
On the floor,
House Majority Leader
Richard Gephardt
fought for votes.
He told his colleagues
that the act
was necessary
for the American people
to have faith
in their legal system.
Keep their faith.
Allow there
to be a proper inquiry
into discriminatory practices
in the death penalty.
But Republicans
charged that the measure
was an attempt
to end the death penalty.
Critics note
that African Americans
make up the bulk
of those facing
capital punishment
on the federal level.
But Connecticut
Representative Gary Franks,
the only black Republican
in the House,
said this did not justify
what he called
a quota system.
What do we tell
that mother
whose child
was murdered,
Mr. Chairman?
I'm sorry,
Mrs. Jones,
if a white man
had been accused
of killing your daughter,
he would be subject
to the death penalty.
But a black man
was charged
with the murder,
and because there are
too many blacks
on death row,
it would be difficult
to give him
the death penalty
if convicted.
But that was not
very convincing
to D.C. Delegate
Eleanor Holmes Norton.
There is no check
on the prosecutor today.
He chooses blacks
for death.
Allowing the defendant
to try to show
that that is the case
is the only check
on him.
Do not turn your backs
on documented racism.
When the dust settled,
the Racial Justice Act
had withstood the assault,
unlike last year.
The record of the crime bill
is mixed at best.
The House has expanded
the so-called
three strikes
and you're out provision.
That measure would send
a criminal defendant
to life in prison
without parole
on a third violent offense.
Under Republican prodding,
the House version
allows one of those strikes
to be a serious
drug conviction.
Efforts to streamline
the right of appeal
were also withdrawn
after conservatives
expressed fear
that it might eliminate
the death penalty.
The reason?
The measure required
top-notch legal representation
for criminal defendants.
Said Michigan Democrat
John Conyers,
an influential member
of the Black Caucus,
were in an era
of very mean-spirited
attitudes about getting tough.
There's no doubt
that politics
is playing a key role
in the ongoing battle.
And it is clear
that the president
has stolen a classic
Republican issue.
And Republicans
have been frustrated,
complaining that
Clinton and the Democrats
have not gone far enough.
Indeed, Arkansas Democrat
Blanche Lampert noted
that she had gotten
her hands on a memo
from one Republican
who recommended
his colleagues
vote against
in the Senate.
The nível of theemic
people
who rated
a relieved