From The Progressive Review

UNDERNEWS
DEC 4, 2004
FROM THE PROGRESSIVE REVIEW

EDITED BY SAM SMITH
Since 1964, Washington's most unofficial source

E-MAIL: mailto:news@prorev.com
1312 18th St. NW #502 Washington DC 20036
202-835-0770 Fax: 835-0779

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
W E E K E N D E X T R A
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WORD
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One tall and handsome white male anchor with bespoke clothes will
replace another tall and handsome white male anchor with bespoke
clothes. . . Even Tom Brokaw is a little surprised that he has been
succeeded by someone who looks like the love child he and Peter Jennings
never had. - Maureen Dowd




ILLEGAL STRIP SEARCHES AT NATIONAL AIRPORT
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1104/190100.html


WJLA-TV WASHINGTON - ON MONDAY, THE I-TEAM UNCOVERED CHARGES OF SERIOUS
SECURITY LAPSES THERE AND NOW, WE'RE HEARING ABOUT SOME DISTURBING
INCIDENTS RELATED TO PASSENGER SCREENING. . .

Andrea McCarren on-set: IN TSA JARGON, THEY'RE CALLED PRIVATE
SCREENINGS. THAT'S WHEN A PASSENGER WHO SETS OFF AN ALARM IS TAKEN TO
ANOTHER LOCATION AND CHECKED MORE THOROUGHLY FOR WEAPONS OR EXPLOSIVES.
BUT WE'VE NOW LEARNED ABOUT SOME PRIVATE SCREENINGS THAT APPARENTLY WENT
TOO FAR. . .

AGAIN AND AGAIN, TSA EMPLOYEES AT REAGAN NATIONAL AIRPORT -INCLUDING
SUPERVISORS-TOLD US THAT PASSENGERS WERE ASKED TO REMOVE THEIR CLOTHING
AND EXPOSE THEIR PRIVATE PARTS DURING SECURITY SCREENINGS…A CLEAR
VIOLATION OF TSA'S OWN INTERNAL GUIDELINES… OBTAINED BY THE I-TEAM.

TSA Employee: "The look on their face would almost give you the sense
that they felt like they were in a sense being raped. In a sense, being
victimized and to a certain extent, they were."

TSA Employee: "That really incensed me that someone felt that they could
just put on some gloves and they could just violate someone to that
degree."

TSA Employee: "They actually had the passenger remove the clothing that
covered the sensitive area and perform a duck walk to see if something
would fall out."

IN FACT, SOME OF THOSE SO-CALLED PRIVATE SCREENINGS WERE ALLEGEDLY
CONDUCTED IN A VERY PUBLIC PLACE: THIS STAIRWELL…ACCESSIBLE TO OTHER
PASSENGERS AND AIRPORT EMPLOYEES.

TSA Employee: "The private screenings were conducted right in that
stairwell"

Andrea McCarren: Isn't that an inappropriate place to be searched?

TSA Employee: "That's a very inappropriate place to be searched."

TSA EMPLOYEES SAY AFTER THEY COMPLAINED, THE SCREENINGS WERE MOVED INTO
THIS MANAGERS' OFFICE… WHERE THEY ALLEGE, UNSUSPECTING PASSENGERS WERE
EITHER VIDEOTAPED OR MONITORED ON CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION.

TSA Employee: I couldn't believe it! I said is that a camera up there?
And they said yeah.

Andrea McCarren: Do you think the women being strip searched had any
idea they were being videotaped? TSA Employee: Absolutely not

A TSA OFFICIAL INSISTS THE CAMERA WAS COVERED UP AND EVEN DEACTIVATED… A
FACT SEVERAL EMPLOYEES DISPUTE.

Andrea McCarren: You saw a light go on in that camera? TSA Employee:
"Right."

SOME TSA EMPLOYEES ALSO ALLEGE THAT THE PASSENGERS SELECTED FOR
ADDITIONAL SCREENING WERE OFTEN DETERMINED WELL BEFORE THEY REACHED THE
MAGNETOMETERS. Andrea McCarren: "You're saying a passenger would be
stopped for additional screening not because she set off an alarm but
because of her breast size?"

TSA Employee: "Absolutely, Yes"

IN FACT, SHE SAYS SOME SCREENERS EVEN -INTENTIONALLY- SET OFF
MAGNETOMETERS BY KICKING THEM.

TSA Employee: "It leaves supervisors in a very bad spot because if the
manager's enjoying it, then how are you going to tell him to stop them
from doing it?". . .

Mark Hatfield, TSA Spokesman: "In terms of a violation or a criminal
act, something that violates civil rights or the privacy of an
individual, there's zero tolerance for that. And we'll get to the bottom
of that and root out the individuals."

SOME FEMALE PASSENGERS FEAR IT'S ALL PART OF A GROWING TREND TOWARD MORE
AGGRESSIVE SCREENING.

Woman #1: "Sometimes they overdo it. I've been almost stripped,
practically."

Woman #2: "You're sort of treated like a criminal."

Woman #3: "I was like, whoah! You can't do that and the supervisor who I
had been objecting to was standing right there and he said yes, we can."

TSA Employee: "It's very upsetting to see this happen and there are a
lot of screeners that took his job thinking that they could do something
good and many of them have quit and many of them are talking about
quitting now."

Andrea McCarren on-set: SO, WHO INVESTIGATES COMPLAINTS ABOUT TSA
SCREENINGS? WELL, THE TSA DOES! THROUGH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT,
WE'VE REQUESTED ALL OF THE PASSENGER COMPLAINTS ABOUT SCREENINGS AT
NATIONAL AIRPORT AND WILL REPORT BACK ONCE WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

REPORTING LIVE FOR THE I-TEAM, ANDREA MCCARREN, ABC7 NEWS

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DRUG BUSTS
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

COPS OPPOSE DRUG WAR; WHY CAN'T THE POLS?
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/365/aflop.shtml

DRUG WAR CHRONICLE - More than two-thirds of some 300 US chiefs of
police interviewed in a survey conducted for the Police Foundation and
Drug Strategies, a mainstream drug policy research and advocacy group
with a strong emphasis on prevention and treatment that also supports
some harm reduction measures, said that law enforcement has failed to
quell drug use. Released this week, the survey found that 67% of police
chiefs believe their drug enforcement efforts "have been unsuccessful in
reducing the drug problem."

Similarly, while police chiefs surveyed continued to see drug abuse as a
top law enforcement problem -- 63% said it was serious or very serious
in their communities -- they also appeared to recognize that the
decades-long war on drugs requires a radical rethinking. Nearly half of
the chiefs (47%) said the nation's drug policy requires "major changes,"
while 37% called for a "fundamental overhaul."

While some may find these figures surprising, they are supported by a
larger annual survey conducted by the National Association of Chiefs of
Police. In one of a series of questions related to drug policy, that
survey sent out to more than 22,000 police chiefs and sheriffs asks:
"Has the national war on drugs, which has been ongoing for at least 15
years, been successful in reducing the use of illegal drugs?" In the
last annual survey, a whopping 82.3% of respondents said no.

"My old profession isn't as dumb as everybody thinks it is," laughed
former Tonawanda, New York, police officer Peter Christ, a 20-year
veteran of the drug wars who co-founded Reconsider: Forum on Drug Policy
and then Law Enforcement Against Prohibition both pro-legalization.

THE DRUG WAR DISASTER

RADLEY BALKO, CATO INSTITUTE - Today, federal and state governments
spend between $40 and $60 billion per year to fight the war on drugs,
about ten times the amount spent in 1980 -- and billions more to keep
drug felons in jail. The U.S. now has more than 318,000 people behind
bars for drug-related offenses, more than the total prison populations
of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain combined.

Our prison population has increased by 400 percent since 1980, while the
general population has increased just 20 percent. America also now has
the highest incarceration rate in the world -- 732 of every 100,000
citizens are behind bars.

The drug war has wrought the zero tolerance mindset, asset forfeiture
laws, mandatory minimum sentences, and countless exceptions to criminal
defense and civil liberties protections. Some sociologists blame it for
much of the plight of America's inner cities. Others point out that it
has corrupted law enforcement, just as alcohol prohibition did in the
1920s.

On peripheral issues like medicinal marijuana and prescription
painkillers, the drug war has treated chronically and terminally ill
patients as junkies, and the doctors who treat them as common pushers.
Drug war accoutrements, such as "no-knock" raids and searches, border
patrols, black market turf wars and crossfire, and international
interdiction efforts, have claimed untold numbers of innocent lives.

For all that sacrifice, are we at least winning?

Even by the government's own standards for success, the answer is
unquestionably "no." The illicit drug trade is estimated to be worth $50
billion today ($400 billion worldwide), up from $1 billion 25 years ago.
Annual surveys of high school seniors show heroin and marijuana are as
available today than they were in 1975. Deaths from drug overdoses have
doubled in the last 20 years.

According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the price of
for a gram of heroin has dropped by about 38 percent since 1981, while
the purity of that gram has increased six-fold. The price of cocaine has
dropped by 50 percent, while its purity has increased by 70 percent.
Just recently, the ONDCP waged a public relations campaign against
increasingly pure forms of marijuana coming in from Canada.

So despite all of the money we've spent and people we've imprisoned,
despite the damage done to our cities and the integrity of our criminal
justice system, despite the restrictions we've allowed on our civil
liberties, despite the innocent lives lost and the needless suffering
we've imposed on sick people and their doctors -- despite all of this --
the drug trade isn't just thriving, it's growing. Illicit drugs are
cheaper, more abundant, and of purer concentration than ever before.

Like alcohol prohibition before it, drug prohibition has failed, by
every conceivable measure. Isn't it about time for America to take a
hard look at its drug policy?

http://www.cato.org/dailys/12-02-04.html

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ECOLOGY
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

THE RISE OF GREEN BUILDINGS
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=3422965

ECONONOMIST - Most people are not used to thinking of large buildings as
vast, energy-guzzling machines. But that is what they are. In America,
buildings account for 65% of electricity consumption, 36% of total
energy use and 30% of greenhouse-gas emissions. So making buildings more
energy-efficient could have a significant impact on energy policy, notes
Rebecca Flora of the Green Building Alliance, a group that promotes
sustainable architecture. That is a key goal of the “green architecture”
movement, which is changing the way buildings are designed, built and
run.

Proponents of green architecture argue that the approach has many
benefits. In the case of a large office, for example, the combination of
green design techniques and clever technology can not only reduce energy
consumption and environmental impact, but also reduce running costs,
create a more pleasant working environment, improve employees' health
and productivity, reduce legal liability, and boost property values and
rental returns. . .

There are many ways to reduce a building's environmental impact.
Consider the 48-storey Condé Nast Building at 4 Times Square in New
York, for example, which was designed by Fox & Fowle Architects. . .
Special glass allows daylight in to reduce the need for interior
lighting, keeps heat and ultraviolet rays out, and minimises heat loss
in winter. Two natural-gas-powered fuel cells provide 400 kilowatts of
power, enough to provide all the electricity needed at night, and 5% of
the building's needs during the day. The hot-water exhaust produced by
the fuel cells is used to help heat the building and provide hot water.
The heating and cooling systems, located on the roof, are gas-powered
rather than electric, which reduces energy losses associated with
electrical power transmission. Photovoltaic panels on the building's
exterior provide up to an additional 15 kilowatts of power. Inside the
building, motion sensors control fans and switch off lights in
seldom-occupied areas such as stairwells. Exit signs are illuminated by
low-power light-emitting diodes. The result is that the building's
energy consumption is 35-40% lower than that of a comparable
conventional building.

30 St Mary Axe, designed by Foster and Partners, is also packed with
energy-saving features. In particular, it uses natural lighting and
ventilation wherever possible. The façade consists of two layers of
glass (the outer one double-glazed) enclosing a ventilated cavity with
computer-controlled blinds. A system of weather sensors on the outside
of the building monitors the temperature, wind speed and level of
sunlight, closing blinds and opening window panels as necessary. The
building's shape maximises the use of natural daylight, reducing the
need for artificial lighting and providing impressive long-distance
views even from deep inside the building.

The highest-profile green building currently on the drawing board is the
Freedom Tower, which will be built on the site of the World Trade Centre
in New York. The architects, Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and Studio
Daniel Libeskind, have incorporated environmental design features
throughout the huge complex. The main tower, which will rise 1,776 feet,
will include solar panels and a wind farm, the turbines of which are
expected to deliver around one megawatt of power, enough to provide up
to 20% of the building's expected demand. Like other green buildings, it
will rely on natural light and ventilation, and energy-efficient
lighting. . .

Going green saves money by reducing long-term energy costs: a survey of
99 green buildings in America found that on average, they use 30% less
energy than comparable conventional buildings. So any additional
building costs can be recovered quickly: according to the USGBC, the 2%
increase in construction costs required to achieve a LEED gold rating
typically pays for itself in lower running costs within two years. The
traditional approach of trying to minimise construction costs, by
contrast, can lead to higher energy bills and wasted materials.



THE DECLINE OF GLACIERS AND SEA ICE
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update32.htm

EARTH POLICY INSTITUTE - By 2020, the snows of Kilimanjaro may exist
only in old photographs. The glaciers in Montana's Glacier National Park
could disappear by 2030. And by mid-century, the Arctic Sea may be
completely ice-free during summertime. As the earth's temperature has
risen in recent decades, the earth's ice cover has begun to melt. And
that melting is accelerating. In both 2002 and 2003, the Northern
Hemisphere registered record-low sea ice cover. New satellite data show
the Arctic region warming more during the 1990s than during the 1980s,
with Arctic Sea ice now melting by up to 15 percent per decade. The
long-sought Northwest Passage, a dream of early explorers, could become
our nightmare. The loss of Arctic Sea ice could alter ocean circulation
patterns and trigger changes in global climate patterns.

DEAD ZONES INCREASE
http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update41.htm

EARTH POLICY INSTITUTE - Worldwide, there are some 146 dead zones—areas
of water that are too low in dissolved oxygen to sustain life. Since the
1960s, the number of dead zones has doubled each decade. Many are
seasonal, but some of the low-oxygen areas persist year-round.

SELF-EMPLOYED INCREASE

MORE THAN 17.6 million Americans work for -- and by -- themselves
according to a new Census Bureau report that found the number of small
firms without employees jumped 3.9 percent in 2002. [San Francisco
Chronicle]

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WORDS
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

NEW GOP SYMBOL

READER MICHAEL POBER says he got this from a 'Tex-czech friend and
student:' "The Republican National Committee announced today that the
Republican Party
is changing its emblem from an elephant to a condom. The committee
chairman explained that the condom more clearly reflects the party's
stance today, because a condom accepts inflation, halts production,
destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you
a sense of security while you're actually getting screwed."