-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [Fwd: FW: Secrecy News -- 02/09/05 (IF) [related to
Geospatialinformation]]
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 05:47:33 -0500
From: robert L Cerra <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
To: Maps and Air Photo Systems Forum <[log in to unmask]>
------------------
I have enjoyed the Maps list and look forward to
reading the messages. I have always listened to the people who post
because I can readily see that maps are their business. With regard to the
recent posts on making satellitte photos and geospatial information readily
avaialble to the public I thought I might offer my persepctive.
I spent 30 years in law enforcment and security in
both the public and private sector. I was involved in almost every phase
teaching, investigations and intelligence gathering. Prior to 9-11
investigators took advantage of the vast amounts of information that the
federal governemts collected and used it to help solve crimes, in fact
satellite photographic databases were used. I won't bore you with other
examples. After 9-11 it would be foolish to assume that other people
interested in attacking the US are not using the same sources of
information. Politicians and map professionals that discuss terrorist
investigations are akin to me discussing maps, I and they are clueless.
Senator Fiengold wants to weigh in on search
warrants and how they should be constructed. Senator Feingold has probably
never seen a search warrant or an affidavit in support of one. I can
assure you, after serving hundreds of them, that they contain bits and
pieces of information that are only significant when in combination. The
venacular is the totality of the circumstances.
Regards
Bob Cerra
I think it would be a great idea to eliminate all
the distracting lines that run up and down and left and right on all the
maps that
I see !
> [Original Message]
> From: Johnnie D. Sutherland <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2/10/2005 2:49:10 PM
> Subject: [Fwd: FW: Secrecy News -- 02/09/05 (IF) [related to
Geospatialinformation]]
>
> Sent to Maps-L by Scott R. McEathron <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aftergood, Steven [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 12:31 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Secrecy News -- 02/09/05 (IF)
>
>
> SECRECY NEWS
> from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
> Volume 2005, Issue No. 15
> February 9, 2005
>
>
> ** TWO VIEWS ON PUBLIC ACCESS TO GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION
> ** IN CONGRESS
> ** NEW FROM CRS
>
>
> TWO VIEWS ON PUBLIC ACCESS TO GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION
>
> Are remote sensing data that are collected by the government through
> satellite and aerial reconnaissance a public resource that should be
> more fully and openly exploited in the public interest? Or should
> public access to such information, already limited, be further
> curtailed in the name of combating terrorism?
>
> Each of these conflicting views informs policy proposals that are now
> pending in Congress and the executive branch.
>
> Geospatial data that are acquired for scientific and national security
> purposes "also can have important applications to help meet societal
> goals," according to a bill introduced in the House of Representatives
> last month by Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO).
>
> "The full range of applications of remote sensing and other forms of
> geospatial information to meeting public sector requirements has not
> been adequately explored or exploited."
>
> Rep. Udall's bill is intended "to encourage the development and
> integrated use by the public and private sectors of remote sensing and
> other geospatial information."
>
> See H.R. 426, The Remote Sensing Applications Act of 2005, introduced
> January 26 and referred to the House Science Committee, here:
>
> http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/hr426.html
>
> In contrast to Rep. Udall, who seeks expanded access to and use of
> geospatial information, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
> (NGA) is considering a proposal to withdraw various categories of
> aeronautical information from the public domain (Secrecy News,
> 11/18/04).
>
> Where Rep. Udall sees the public as a potential "customer" that is fully
> capable of making productive use of government data, the NGA seems to
> view public disclosure of such unclassified data first and foremost as a
> potential threat. It is a fundamental difference in orientation.
>
> NGA was recently asked to reconsider its attitude towards public access
> in an open letter from Kansas University map librarian Scott R.
> McEathron.
>
> "I encourage you to think more broadly in your assessment of 'the
> threat,' and the collaboration that will be necessary to prevail in
> this 'war on terror'," he wrote to NGA Director Gen. James R. Clapper.
>
> "I urge you to recognize and exploit the informal collaboration that is
> already happening between government, industry and higher education in
> the production, analysis and distribution of geospatial intelligence.
> Withdrawal of information and data products from the public will only
> serve to cripple these collaborative efforts," Mr. McEathron wrote.
>
> A copy of his January 28 letter to Gen. Clapper, reposted with
> permission, is here:
>
> http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/01/nga013105.html
>
> The public comment period on the NGA proposal extends through June 30,
> 2005.
>
>
> IN CONGRESS
>
> Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) yesterday introduced three bills that would
> amend the USA Patriot Act. The proposals would limit so-called "sneak
> and peek" searches (S.316); restrict government access to library,
> bookseller and other records (S. 317); and modify the authority to
> intercept computer communications (S. 318). See:
>
> http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/s316-318.html
>
> A bill to require public disclosure of U.S. firms such as Halliburton
> that indirectly conduct business with Iran was introduced in the Senate
> by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). "The bill would require the Treasury
> Secretary to publish a list of the United States companies whose
> subsidiaries continue to do energy deals with Iran.... My view is that
> an informed American public is best equipped to hold these companies
> accountable." See:
>
> http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2005/s299.html
>
> The rules of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence were
> published in the Congressional Record February 8 and are available
> here:
>
> http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2005_cr/hpscirules.html
>
>
> NEW FROM CRS
>
> In accordance with congressional direction, the Congressional Research
> Service does not permit direct public access to CRS publications. But
> the following new and updated reports were obtained by Secrecy News.
>
> "U.S. Military Operations in the Global War on Terrorism: Afghanistan,
> Africa, the Philippines, and Colombia," February 4, 2005:
>
> http://www.fas.org/man/crs/RL32758.pdf
>
> "Protection of Classified Information by Congress: Practices and
> Proposals," updated January 5, 2005:
>
> http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS20748.pdf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
> Federation of American Scientists.
>
> To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
> [log in to unmask]
> with "subscribe" in the body of the message.
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> OR email your request to [log in to unmask]
>
> Secrecy News is archived at:
> http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html
>
> Secrecy News has an RSS feed at:
> http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.rss
>
> _______________________
> Steven Aftergood
> Project on Government Secrecy
> Federation of American Scientists
> web: www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
> email: [log in to unmask]
> voice: (202) 454-4691
|
