News New Sanctions on North Korea Over Nuclear Test

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
New Sanctions on North Korea Over Nuclear Test
Mar 8th 2013, 07:23

Brendan McDermid/Reuters

The Security Council approved stringent new economic sanctions on North Korea on Thursday.

SEOUL, South Korea — Angrily responding to the United Nations Security Council's unanimous decision to impose tightened sanctions, North Korea said on Friday that it was nullifying all nonaggression agreements with South Korea, with one of its top generals claiming that his country had nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles ready to blast off.

Multimedia Feature

Kim Jong-un

The United States envoy to the United Nations, Susan E. Rice, with her British counterpart, Sir Mark Lyall Grant, at the vote.

Matching the harsh warning with a toughened stance, South Korea said on Friday that if Pyongyang attacks the South with a nuclear weapon, the regime of the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, "will be erased from the earth."

Such language marked the most hostile exchange between the two Koreas, still technically at war, since they engaged in an artillery skirmish three years ago.

The verbal warfare represented a clash of nerves between the young North Korean leader, who is building his credentials as  head of his militaristic country, and Park Geun-hye, South Korea's first female president, who considers the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher her role model and has stressed security as her top priority.

While weapons experts say North Korea does not have the technical capability to use nuclear-tipped missiles, that did not stop it from warning of their deployment.

"With their targets set, our intercontinental ballistic missiles and other missiles are on a standby, loaded with lighter, smaller and diversified nuclear warheads," said Kang Pyo-yong, a three-star general and vice defense minister of North Korea. "If we push the button, they will blast off and their barrage will turn Washington, the stronghold of American imperialists and the nest of evil, and its followers, into a sea of fire."

His comment, made during a speech before a mass rally in Pyongyang on Thursday, was carried by the North's main party newspaper Rodong Sinmun on Friday.

In the last few days, the state-run North Korean media has carried a slew of official remarks  threatening to launch "pre-emptive nuclear strikes" at Washington and Seoul with "lighter and smaller nukes," hinting that it has built nuclear warheads small enough to mount on long-range missiles. But U.S. and South Korean officials strongly doubt North Korea has mastered that technology, despite its successful launching of a long-range rocket in December and its third nuclear test last month.

South Korean military officials called the remarks a bluster, designed not so much to threaten Washington as to infuse its population with a sense of both crisis and empowerment as Kim Jong-un's consolidates his grip on North Korea. On its front page, the Rodong newspaper carried a large picture showing North Korea's new generation of mobile missiles.

South Korea's new leader warned that with its behavior, North Korea was only hurting itself.  

North Korea "will collapse in self-destruction if it continue to waste its resources on nuclear weapons development while its people are going hungry," President Park said during a commission ceremony for young military officers on Friday. She promised a "strong response" to a provocation but also offered a cooperative future if North Korea changed.

Also Friday, North Korea said it was nullifying all agreements of nonaggression and denuclearization with South Korea and cutting off the North-South hot line, in retaliation for the U.N. sanctions and the joint military exercises South Korea was staging with the United States.

But beyond North Korea's belligerent statements, it was unclear how, if at all, the country's young and untested leader would react to the sanctions.

Any North Korean military action could end up involving the American forces that have remained in South Korea as it has turned from war-ravaged ruin into one of the most advanced industrialized powerhouses.

The 15-to-0 Security Council vote places potentially painful new constraints on North Korean banking, trade and travel, pressures countries to search suspect North Korean cargo and includes new enforcement language absent from previous measures. But the provisions are in some ways less important than China's participation in writing them, suggesting that the country has lost patience with the neighbor it supported in the Korean War. While China's enforcement of sanctions on North Korea remains to be seen, it may now be more assertive.

"This is not about the words, it is about the music," said Christopher R. Hill, the former American diplomat who negotiated a deal with the North during the George W. Bush administration to dismantle its nuclear facilities — an accord that quickly collapsed. China's cosponsorship of the resolution "suggests that after many years, the screws are beginning to turn," said Mr. Hill, now the dean of the Josef Korbel School of International Studies at the University of Denver.

Still, another North Korean nuclear test is possible, as is another ballistic missile launching or perhaps an armed provocation aimed at South Korea, where the new president, Ms. Park, the daughter of a former South Korean dictator who was known for taking a hard stand with the North, could be forced to respond. Some regarded the North's dire warnings as a signal that some military response was looming.

"The higher decibel of invective is a bit worrisome," said Bill Richardson, the former governor of New Mexico and presidential candidate, who has traveled to North Korea eight times, most recently in January. "It's the highest negative level I've ever seen, and it probably means that the hard-line elements, particularly the military and not the Foreign Ministry, are in control."

On the other hand, Mr. Richardson said, "China is part of a significant sanctions effort, and this may cool the North Koreans down, may temper their response."

It is also possible that the new and isolated North Korean government may have misjudged the reaction to talk of a pre-emptive nuclear attack, wording rarely heard since the cold war ended. It could be another way in which the North is demanding talks with President Obama — only last week Mr. Kim told Dennis Rodman, the visiting former basketball star, that he wanted Mr. Obama to call him. But it could also be a way of saying that North Korea now expected to be treated the way Pakistan is: as an established, if formally unrecognized, nuclear power.

"This is a tactic they have employed when they don't get their way, when the international community brings more sanctions to bear," said Suzanne DiMaggio, vice president of global policy programs at the Asia Society in New York. "Whether that will happen this time is unclear, given the level of hostile rhetoric," she said. "I'm not sure Pyongyang recognizes that fact." The United Nations vote and North Korea's threat come at a time when, internally, the Obama administration is debating the wisdom of its policy of essentially ignoring the North for the past four years, and responding to any provocations with new sanctions.

According to current and former administration officials, there is a growing discussion within the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon over whether Mr. Kim is using each new test of rockets and nuclear devices to solidify his position with the military, his most important single constituency. "Under that theory," one official who has dealt with North Korea often said recently, "even a firefight with the South Koreans might help him, as long as it doesn't escalate into something that threatens the regime."

In testimony on Thursday before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Glyn T. Davies, the administration's special representative for North Korea policy, argued that the best course was to continue with Mr. Obama's current policy of using tests and provocations to tighten sanctions, and try to starve development of the North's long-range missiles and its effort to design nuclear weapons small enough for those missiles.

Choe Sang-Hun reported from Seoul, South Korea, and Rick Gladstone from New York. David E. Sanger contributed reporting from Washingto.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News The Caucus: Clinton Urges Court to Overturn Marriage Law He Signed

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
The Caucus: Clinton Urges Court to Overturn Marriage Law He Signed
Mar 8th 2013, 02:10

Former President Bill Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 barring federal recognition of same-sex weddings, called on the Supreme Court on Thursday to overturn the law.

Just weeks before the court takes up a case challenging the law, Mr. Clinton said he had come to believe that the law is unconstitutional and contravenes the quintessential American values of "freedom, equality and justice above all." In doing so, he joined President Obama in arguing that the law be overturned.

"As the president who signed the act into law, I have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those principles and, in fact, incompatible with our Constitution," Mr. Clinton wrote in an op-ed article posted on the Web site of The Washington Post on Thursday evening.

The former president's argument reflected a broader shift in societal attitudes in the 17 years since the law was enacted. Mr. Clinton was never enthusiastic about the measure, but he was not on record supporting same-sex marriage at the time and, just weeks before his re-election, he felt he had no choice but to sign it. Still, to make the point that he considered it politically motivated, and to call as little attention to it as possible, he signed it after midnight.

It was an awkward moment for Mr. Clinton, who had done more than any previous president to court the gay community and promote gay rights, but he believed that Republicans were trying to steer him out of what was then the mainstream and damage his chances for a second term. As more Americans have come to accept same-sex marriage, Mr. Clinton has spent the intervening years trying to explain and distance himself from the law. In 2011, he supported a measure in New York legalizing same-sex marriage.

The Defense of Marriage Act defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of a man and woman. It did not ban same-sex marriage in the states, none of which then had made it legal. But the law stipulated that should one or more states eventually authorize it, other states would not have to recognize the validity of such unions. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments against the law on March 27.

In his op-ed piece, Mr. Clinton cast the decision to sign the law in 1996 as a sign of the era. "Although that was only 17 years ago, it was a very different time," he wrote. "In no state in the union was same-sex marriage recognized, much less available as a legal right, but some were moving in that direction. Washington, as a result, was swirling with all manner of possible responses, some quite draconian."

He suggested that the measure might have headed off a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage altogether and noted that only 81 of 535 members of Congress opposed the law. He pointed to a statement he issued when he signed it saying that the measure should not "be understood to provide an excuse for discrimination."

"Reading those words today," Mr. Clinton wrote, "I know now that, even worse than providing an excuse for discrimination, the law is itself discriminatory. It should be overturned."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News On Baseball: Yankees’ Mariano Rivera Is Closing Career With Class

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
On Baseball: Yankees' Mariano Rivera Is Closing Career With Class
Mar 8th 2013, 02:40

Matt Slocum/Associated Press

Mariano Rivera, who has 608 saves, has been described as "the mold everybody works off of." He is expected to announce his retirement plans on Saturday.

PHOENIX

Mariano Rivera after he tore a knee ligament last May.

One of Mariano Rivera's few failures came against Arizona in Game 7 of the 2001 World Series.

The Yankees had been thrashed in Game 6 of the World Series, and their manager, Joe Torre, wanted a clear mind-set for his players before the finale of the 2001 season. He turned to Gene Monahan, the Yankees' trainer for decades.

"I had Geno talk, and he got pretty emotional, about the pride of being a Yankee," Torre said on Thursday, back on the same field here in Arizona. "Mariano, on his own, got up and just talked spiritually about 'It's our game.' "

Hours later, fate reminded Mariano Rivera that he was not in control. When Rivera failed in the bottom of the ninth inning, the Diamondbacks, not the Yankees, won the championship. Even when an outcome seems preordained, baseball can have other ideas.

On Saturday, the Yankees will hold a news conference at which Rivera, baseball's oldest active player at 43, is expected to announce he will retire after this season. The news is no surprise; Rivera would probably be retired already had he not torn a knee ligament last May.

But Rivera did not want to leave that way, crumpled to the warning track during batting practice in Kansas City. A career of such dignity and grace deserves a more dignified farewell. A celebration on the mound, and a parade through Lower Manhattan, would be most fitting.

With the Yankees, in the age of Rivera and Derek Jeter, that has always seemed possible. They have captured five championships, four with Rivera on the mound for the last out. In the other, in 1996, Rivera stifled the Atlanta Braves in the seventh and eighth innings of the finale.

"Man, this guy's nasty," said Craig Kimbrel, Atlanta's current closer and a lifelong Braves fan, recalling how it felt to watch on television as Rivera ousted his favorite team. "Look at all these bats he breaks, and he strikes everybody out."

Kimbrel is 24 years old, with 89 career saves. Rivera did not record a save until age 26. Now he has the record, with 608, and Kimbrel smiled and shook his head when asked about it. There is only one Rivera.

"He's kind of the mold everybody works off of," Kimbrel said. "You want to be as good as he is."

Kimbrel met Rivera last winter, at the New York baseball writers' dinner, and Rivera gave him one piece of advice: stay healthy. The saves record could fall someday, maybe even to Kimbrel, with a lot of health and luck. It will not be Rivera's legacy, anyway.

The postseason distinguishes Rivera from every other reliever, before or since. His regular-season earned run average is 2.21. His postseason E.R.A. — in 96 games against the best competition, under the most pressure — is 0.70.

His rookie season was the first in the era of wild-card playoff teams, so Rivera has had more chances than his predecessors. And the Yankees defied the odds with their success, especially early. Executives call the postseason a crapshoot; Rivera, Jeter, Paul O'Neill and the others called it theirs.

"I don't think anybody will get an opportunity to do in the postseason what he did," Torre said. "It's not that somebody may not be special out there; his career is one thing. But to look what he's done in postseason, it's amazing, it really is. He basically made my career."

Torre — who is here for the World Baseball Classic, which starts for the United States on Friday against Mexico — will be in the Hall of Fame someday, with Jeter and, almost certainly, George Steinbrenner. Already, though, Rivera is exalted among his peers.

David Wright, the Mets' third baseman, once beat Rivera in the ninth inning with a long single over Johnny Damon's head at Shea Stadium. He said he would tell his grandchildren about it someday, never mind that it happened in a May game.

"There's certain players that, when you see them, no matter what you've done or how many years you've been in the game, there's a certain awe about them, and I think Mariano has that," Wright said. "No matter if you're a Yankee, a Met, a Red Sox, whatever, you just have the utmost respect for guys like that."

Rivera has been demonstrative in October, memorably bolting from the dugout to the mound in 2003, overcome with emotion after Aaron Boone's home run won the pennant against Boston. But he has never shown up an opponent, never done anything to disgrace the game. He gives respect and gets it in return.

"He knew how good he was," Torre said. "But it was for him to feel and for us to know."

Rivera could always change his mind between now and Saturday. Whatever he says will not be binding, and he has always said that a greater power guides his decisions.

But this is probably it, and last season's injury reaffirmed the truth Rivera discovered here in 2001. The perfect ending can be painfully elusive. Very few get the Ray Lewis story, in which a retirement announcement inspires a final, joyous ride.

Rivera is leaving the Yankees when they seem especially vulnerable and brittle, lacking obvious successors to the champions who came before. The new collective bargaining agreement has blunted their advantage, limiting their ability to spend on amateur talent and enticing them, so far, to be disciplined about payroll.

This is a strange new world for the Yankees, a portal they would rather not enter, if only they had a choice. But for one more season, when they arrive at the ninth inning with a narrow lead, they can turn back time, watch the master at work, and feel safe.

A version of this news analysis appeared in print on March 8, 2013, on page B9 of the New York edition with the headline: Closing With Class.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Diplomat Calls for End to Drunkenness at U.N.

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Diplomat Calls for End to Drunkenness at U.N.
Mar 8th 2013, 03:11

UNITED NATIONS — When the United Nations began renovating its Manhattan headquarters in 2009, one of the first casualties of the construction was the storied Delegate's Lounge, where for decades the delicate work of diplomacy was aided by a good stiff drink.

"My national response is there should be no drinking during business sessions."
VITALY I. CHURKIN
Russian ambassador to the U.N.

The loss of the bar led to protest from diplomats and their staffs, and a temporary outpost was soon established.

That bar is also now gone, but the thirst for liquor at the United Nations is apparently still strong.

This week, an American diplomat offered what he called a "modest proposal" that he hoped would speed along the United Nations' notoriously protracted budgetary proceedings. He asked delegates to put a cork in it.

"The negotiation rooms should in future be an inebriation-free zone," the diplomat, Joseph M. Torsella, said.

So far, there seems little chance the suggestion will lead to any change in behavior.

"This is roughly the equivalent of when you're a teenager and your parents embarrass you because you got drunk the night before," said Richard Gowan, an expert on the United Nations at New York University's Center for International Cooperation. "I think there is a lot of snickering."

Even as Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has taken steps to curb the unhealthier appetites of New York City's residents — whether they like it or not — the United Nations has stood a world apart. The headquarters is not subject to the city's laws, and for years after smoking was banned all around the United Nations — first in city offices, then in bars and restaurants — delegates puffed away in the corridors and meeting rooms of the General Assembly building. Smoking was ultimately banned at the United Nations in 2008.

Despite the fact that the building continues to be torn apart as it is renovated, walking inside still feels like stepping back in time. The optimism and hope it symbolized as it rose after the wreckage of the Second World War are still evident, as is a certain sense that the mores of that era still apply when it comes to drinking.

"The U.N. has been cleaning itself up physically, but there is still a sort of residual 1950s, 1960s feel to the culture," said Mr. Gowan, whose father was a diplomat. "You do sort of feel that you are sort of stuck in the past."

It remains one of the few places where drinking in the style of a cast member of "Mad Men" is not only accepted but expected.

"As a breed, diplomats are heavy drinkers," Mr. Gowan said, adding that though his father drank in moderation, he knew other diplomats who did not.

Pamela Vandyke-Price, writing in Diplomat magazine, said alcohol and diplomacy have been linked for centuries.

"After the Glorious Revolution of 1688, Whigs and Tories were distinguished by their drinks," she said. "Claret, being a French wine, was associated with the cause of the Tories," she said. The Whigs made drinking wine from Portugal infused with brandy — port — a sign of fealty.

The United States' plea for sobriety was reported on the Web site of Foreign Policy magazine. The article cited anonymous diplomats saying that the most recent budget negotiations, which concluded in December, featured at least one delegate who became sick from too much alcohol.

Part of the problem might have been scheduling the budget negotiations just before Christmas.

"It is an absolutely miserable process negotiating at the U.N. anyway," Mr. Gowan said. And with delegates rushing to get done before the holiday, it is made even worse.

But the battle over alcohol also highlights the bad blood between the smaller member states and the larger, more powerful countries.

The United States, Japan and western European countries provide the majority of the United Nations' budget. And many of the dozens of countries that make up the committee that sets the budget have little financial stake in the negotiations, so partaking of alcohol may seem a good way to endure marathon sessions that can last well into the night. Another round of budget negotiations will be held this month.

In interviews on Thursday, diplomats from several countries declined to comment publicly. But privately, many had suggestions about what countries were the worst offenders.

Some said it was the Canadians and their whisky. Others said the Russians and their vodka. Or, perhaps, the French and their wine?

Mr. Torsella did not respond to a request for an interview, so it remains unknown if any specific alcohol-fueled episode compelled him to speak out.

The Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly I. Churkin, was playful when asked about the notion of a prohibition on drinking.

"My national response is there should be no drinking during business sessions," he said. "After hours is a personal matter. We all have our private lives, don't we?"

A version of this article appeared in print on March 8, 2013, on page A21 of the New York edition with the headline: U.N. Diplomat Calls for End to Drunken Negotiations. Nobody's Proposing a Toast. .

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Philadelphia Officials Vote to Close 23 Schools

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Philadelphia Officials Vote to Close 23 Schools
Mar 8th 2013, 04:01

PHILADELPHIA — Officials on Thursday night approved closing 23 public schools, about 10 percent of the city's total, largely backing a plan by the school district to erase a huge budget deficit and reduce the number of underused schools.

The decision was made after the police arrested 19 protesters, including Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, charging them with disorderly conduct. The protesters blocked doorways into a meeting room in an attempt to prevent members of the School Reform Commission from entering.

The commission, a state-run body that oversees the Philadelphia schools, rejected the district's closing plan for only 4 of 27 schools that were under discussion at Thursday's meeting. The district will vote later on shutting two other schools.

The votes were taken during a sometimes heated three-hour meeting after some 500 protesters gathered outside district headquarters, blocking a major road in central Philadelphia.

The commission chairman, Pedro Ramos, said after the vote that the closings were "excruciating, difficult and emotional for all of us," but that they helped to restore financial stability.

The closings were opposed by all but one of the 32 people who spoke at the meeting.

"The process by which the Philadelphia School District decided on school closures was flawed and must be rejected," said State Representative W. Curtis Thomas.

Teachers at schools that are closing will be transferred, but some other staff members will lose their jobs.

The closings are intended to erase a budget deficit of $1.35 billion over five years.

The district cannot afford to keep open buildings that are significantly underused and in some cases require repairs that would cost millions of dollars, the district's superintendent, William R. Hite, has argued. More than a quarter of the district's 195,000 seats are empty.

The district had first proposed to close 37 of 237 schools, but last month reduced the number to 29 after being persuaded by some parents that the original plan would send their children to dangerous or lower-performing schools.

The plan affects elementary through high schools.

Opponents have argued that children should not be forced to attend schools in unfamiliar neighborhoods where they might be victimized as outsiders, and that academic improvements shown by some schools would be jeopardized by the upheaval.

Students at the schools to be closed will be transferred at the start of the 2013-14 school year.

Philadelphia is one of a number of major cities that have been closing schools because of falling enrollment, poor academic performance and budget deficits. New York, Chicago and Washington have closed dozens of schools in the last decade and have recently published plans to shutter dozens more.

Public school enrollments are falling as more students migrate to charter schools. In Philadelphia, the proportion of students attending charter schools jumped to 23 percent in the 2011-12 school year from 12 percent in 2004-5, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

School districts are also being hit by state budget cuts. Pennsylvania cut Philadelphia's financing by $419 million this year. Meanwhile, the federal government has provided incentives to close schools that do not measure up to national performance standards.

But some analysts have questioned the efficacy of programs to close schools. The Pew Charitable Trusts said in a 2011 study that no district has reaped a financial windfall from selling shuttered buildings, which are often in declining neighborhoods and hard to sell.

It found 200 vacant school buildings in six cities in the summer of 2011, and said most had been empty for several years.

A study by Research for Action, a Philadelphia-based educational research group, said that most districts that close schools save money by reducing payrolls. It noted that Philadelphia's current plan does not include laying off teachers.

Savings are limited by expenses such as transportation costs for students moved to different schools, demolition of some properties, and a drop in the market value of empty buildings in depopulated areas, the Research for Action study said.

Some community groups accuse school-closing programs of discriminating against black and Hispanic students, who represent the majority in many urban schools.

In January, activists representing six cities including Philadelphia filed a civil-rights complaint with the United States Education Department, which said it would investigate the complaints in Philadelphia, Detroit and Newark, N.J.

A version of this article appeared in print on March 8, 2013, on page A16 of the New York edition with the headline: Philadelphia Officials Vote to Close 23 Schools .

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Suspect in Fatal Crash Arrives in Brooklyn to Face Charges

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Suspect in Fatal Crash Arrives in Brooklyn to Face Charges
Mar 8th 2013, 04:31

The suspect in a hit and run that killed a young pregnant woman, her husband and, later, their newborn son faces additional felony charges, the police said Thursday after he was returned to New York.

Julio Acevedo, left, who is accused of leaving the scene of an accident that killed a young couple and their son, was brought to Brooklyn on Thursday.

The suspect, Julio Acevedo, waived extradition at a brief Thursday morning hearing in Pennsylvania before a Lehigh County judge, and was later handed over to the New York police for the long drive to the 78th Precinct station house in Brooklyn.

After initially arresting Mr. Acevedo on felony charges of leaving the scene of the crash that killed the couple from Williamsburg, the police added more felony charges: three counts of criminally negligent homicide and one count of first-degree vehicular manslaughter. The fact that the couple's son, who was delivered premature immediately after the accident, died a day later allowed the police to add the charge of manslaughter in the first degree.

The police added the manslaughter charge because of the boy's death, but it was unclear whether that charge, more difficult to prove, would be maintained by the Brooklyn district attorney.

"The law is, if the baby is born prematurely and the only reason the baby is born is from his actions, and then dies, he caused the death of that child," said Arthur L. Aidala, a criminal defense lawyer and former assistant Brooklyn district attorney. "All it takes is a breath" from the baby for it to be considered a live birth.

As of Thursday evening, Mr. Acevedo was scheduled to return to court in Brooklyn to face charges of leaving the scene of a crash. The Brooklyn district attorney's office will decide if other charges are warranted as a result of the accident that killed the couple, Raizy and Nathan Glauber.

Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the office of the chief medical examiner, said late Thursday that the couple's child died of "extreme prematurity" because of "blunt force injuries" sustained by Ms. Glauber during the accident.

As Mr. Acevedo awaited arraignment late Thursday night, the other driver in the crash spoke publicly for the first time at a news conference arranged by a taxi drivers' trade association.

Pedro Nuñez Delacruz, a veteran cabdriver, said he had no recollection of the early Sunday morning crash that killed the Glaubers, both 21, who were in his car.

"Before the accident, there is nothing I can remember," he said.

The crash occurred just after midnight on Sunday on Kent Avenue as Mr. Delacruz turned from Wilson Street, which has a stop sign at the intersection.

"I know the area," Mr. Delacruz said. "I've worked in this area for 10 years. I do this five days a week. Of course I'm going to stop at a stop sign."

The police have said Mr. Acevedo, who did not have a stop sign or light, had been driving a borrowed BMW at "more than 60 miles per hour" when it slammed into the driver's side of the cab, owned by Mr. Delacruz.

Mr. Delacruz, a 32-year-old father of three whose wife is pregnant, said that the death of the family had devastated him. "I'm not good," he said in Spanish.

"There is nothing that he did wrong," Fernando Mateo, the founder of the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers, said in a telephone call after the news conference. Mr. Mateo said Mr. Delacruz was in the process of formally transferring his car's paperwork to a new company, Brooklyn Car Service. On the day of the crash, that paperwork had yet to be processed, meaning the car should not have been sent to pick up passengers, the Taxi and Limousine Commission said.

Call logs from Brooklyn Car Service list several pickups by Mr. Delacruz for the company that night, but none after 11:04 p.m.

Mr. Delacruz said he did not pick the Glaubers up on the street, but he did not say what company sent him.

Mr. Acevedo, 44, who is unemployed and had a pending court date at the time of the crash on a drunken-driving arrest, told the judge at his extradition hearing in Pennsylvania that he lived with his mother in Brooklyn. He said his last job was maintaining vehicles for a bus company.

Scott Brettschneider, a lawyer retained by Mr. Acevedo on Wednesday, said it was up to the prosecution to provide evidence of criminal behavior behind the wheel if they sought to bring stiffer charges than leaving the scene of an accident causing injuries (or, in this case, deaths), a felony. "Other than a horrible accident, there has to be more than that," he said in a telephone interview before the arraignment.

Mr. Brettschneider said he had previously given legal advice to Mr. Acevedo during his time in prison. Mr. Acevedo, who has struggled with alcohol, has a history of serious crime and served more than eight years in prison for a 1987 killing.

The severity of the crash had led to calls — from many in the Orthodox Jewish community, to which the Glaubers belonged, and beyond — for the police and prosecutors to aggressively pursue the driver of the BMW.

Prosecutors with experience handling vehicular cases said proving criminality beyond leaving the scene would depend on a careful reconstruction of the crash and whether either driver violated posted signs, speed limits or other traffic regulations like texting or drunken driving.

"I think we have to see what the prosecution has," Mr. Brettschneider said. "They have to prove everything."

Ravi Somaiya contributed reporting.

A version of this article appeared in print on March 8, 2013, on page A20 of the New York edition with the headline: Crash Suspect Faces More Felony Counts.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Bits: Technology Turns to Tracking People Offline

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Bits: Technology Turns to Tracking People Offline
Mar 8th 2013, 02:49

Following people online, with cookies, tagged pixels and even voluntarily given information, has been a big business. Now much of the same technology is moving into the physical world.

A company called Euclid Analytics uses the Wi-Fi antennas inside stores to see how many people are coming into a store, how long they stay and even which aisles they walk. It does this by noting each smartphone that comes near the store, feeding on every signal ping the phone sends.

"Three years ago, I went to the Stanford mall in Palo Alto and could count about 30 percent of the people there" by listening for Wi-Fi signals, says Will Smith, the company's chief executive. "Now in San Francisco, it's about 60 percent. In Atlanta or Charlotte, it's 40 percent."

Using the information, retailers can tell whether someone walked by the store, whether a customer came in and how long the visit lasted. If it is a big store, with a couple of Wi-Fi antennas, the owner can start to see where in the store someone went.

Euclid is three years old and has about 100 customers, including Nordstrom and Home Depot. It has already tracked about 50 million devices in 4,000 locations.

The big initial use is the so-called bounce rate, or the percentage of people who come into the store who leave without making a purchase. But the technology also helps stores make sure that there is enough sales help or that enough registers are open. By seeing how people move in a store, retailers can also better determine where to place low-profit and high-profit items.

Mr. Smith says Euclid has more data than it gives to customers. It gives its customers only anonymous data in a collected form, so individuals won't be targeted. Stores using the technology may also put stickers in their windows telling customers they are being monitored and allowing them to opt out

It's likely, however, that over time Euclid and its partners could add an opt in feature, where people choose to be recognized, the way registered Amazon.com customers are greeted when they come to a site. Then people might be offered, say, free parking for staying 20 minutes in a store, or they could get a discount for visiting three times a month.

Computers are already recognizing people moving around, both voluntarily and involuntarily. Mr. Smith was talking about his company at a conference in Santa Monica, Calif., held by the Montgomery & Company investment firm. Down the hall, a company called Omnilink, which makes ankle devices for people under home arrest, talked about plans to expand into monitoring elders, children, workers on their own in the field and the infirm.

"Personal tracking is burgeoning," said Kelly Gay, Omnilink's chief executive. "It only takes one child to go missing or one person falling off a wall for us to see growth." The company has just started moving away from judicial monitoring, but it is seeing quick results: It tracks about 15,000 people on the judicial side (a very profitable business, with revenue of $140 a month a user), and it has 35,000 people who are voluntarily tracked.

Both are likely to increase, Ms. Gay says. On one side, prison overcrowding and tight budgets make it likely that more felons will do time outside the walls. On the personal side, the aging baby boom population makes it likely that there will be an increase in dementia, so people will require more monitoring.

But who needs ankle monitors when you have a smartphone? Ms. Gay's presentation was well received. Mr. Smith was mobbed with bankers willing to lend him money and entrepreneurs wanting to work with his monitoring business.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Facebook Shows Off News Feed Redesign

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Facebook Shows Off News Feed Redesign
Mar 8th 2013, 01:16

Jim Wilson/The New York Times

Mark Zuckerberg introduced the redesign at Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., on Thursday.

MENLO PARK, Calif. — Hoping to tame the blizzard of information that has turned off many users and discouraged some advertisers, Facebook on Thursday unveiled a major makeover of the home page that greets users when they log into the site.

A screenshot of Facebook's redesigned news feed.

The new design of the Facebook News Feed presents bigger photos and links, including for advertisements, and lets users see specialized streams focused on topics like music and posts by close friends.

The changes are designed to address the company's two most vital challenges: how to hold on to users at a time of competing, specialized social networks and how to draw more advertising dollars to please Wall Street.

Mark Zuckerberg, the company's co-founder and chief executive, said at a news conference that he wanted Facebook to be "the best personalized newspaper in the world." And like a newspaper editor, he wants the "front page" of Facebook to be more engaging — in particular on the smaller screens of mobile devices.

The topic-specific News Feeds could well persuade users to spend more time scrolling through various streams of content. And the redesign will offer bigger real estate for advertisers, including more opportunities for brands to feature bigger pictures, which marketers say are more persuasive than words.

Facebook's proprietary algorithms, which try to guess what every user will want to see, will continue to filter the items that show up on each person's main News Feed. And users will be able to drill down into specific topics they are interested in, akin to the sections of a newspaper.

For instance, they can switch over to specialized feeds that are focused on just the music they are interested in, or they can scroll through a feed that consists of posts from the pages of products and people they follow — a bit like Twitter. If they want to see everything that their friends have posted, they can choose to do that, too; those posts will rush down in chronological order, without any filtering by Facebook's robots.

Facebook introduced the new design to some users of the Web version of its service on Thursday, and will extend it to all Web users and to mobile apps in coming weeks.

It's unclear how users will react to the changes; in the past, major design changes have often been greeted by complaints, at least initially.

Investors seemed to welcome the new look. Shares of Facebook rose 4.1 percent on Tuesday, to $28.58. But the company's stock price remains substantially lower than its $38 initial public offering price last May.

Facebook is clearly hoping the new format will encourage users to stay longer on the site. At the news conference to announce the changes, officials offered examples of content they hoped would be compelling: photos of a cousin's babies on one area of the page, Justin Timberlake concert news on another, a list of stories your friends liked on National Public Radio on still another.

"The best personalized newspaper should have a broad diversity of content," Mr. Zuckerberg said. "The most important stuff is going to be on the front page," he went on. "Then people have a chance to dig in."

The announcement met with swift praise from the advertising industry. In addition to bigger ad formats, the redesign's specialized content streams could keep users glued to the site longer, marketers said.

"This will result in more time spent over all on the Facebook News Feed — and of course, increase engagement with content and ads," said Hussein Fazal, chief executive of AdParlor, which buys advertisements on Facebook on behalf of several brands.

Facebook executives suggested that there would be no immediate changes to the number of advertisements that appear on the News Feed.

Julie Zhou, the company's design chief, said only that ads would be more visual. "Everything across the board is going to get this richer, more immersive design," Ms. Zhou said.

The redesign is also a nod to the ubiquity of mobile devices, which a majority of Facebook's one billion users worldwide use to log into their accounts. Pictures will show up bigger in the News Feed. And there will be larger images of maps and links to articles. In that way, the new look is a nod to other social networks that are seeing viral growth, like Pinterest, which is built around large pictures.

The new News Feed emphasizes the importance of photographs, which are one of Facebook's most underexploited assets. Mr. Zuckerberg said that half of all News Feed posts are pictures, compared with about a quarter of all posts a year ago. Every day, 350 million pictures are uploaded to Facebook by individual users and brands.

The new design is virtually identical on the desktop and on tablets and cellphones.

Colin Sebastian, an analyst at Robert W. Baird, said that the changes were positive for the company. "We see this as more likely enhancing the longer-term value of Facebook for both users and advertisers rather than adding materially to financial performance in the very near term," he said.

Users weighed in on Twitter.

"Not sure if @facebook is merchandising our attention or Zuckerberg cares about our reading habits," Daixin Neill-Quan, a self-described Boston University senior, posted after the news.

Others pointed out that Flipboard, a popular app, already offers a personalized newspaper in which users choose the topics and publications they are interested in.

Siva Vaidhyanathan, chairman of the media studies department at the University of Virginia, said the redesign could help educate users as to just how much Facebook's algorithms filter what they see on what they think of as their social network.

"Users will at least be under less of an illusion that what's happening on Facebook is merely a function of what their friends are doing," he said. "Facebook is the puppet master of our social network."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions

News Can a Friendly Washington Be a Productive One?

NYT > Home Page
HomePage
Can a Friendly Washington Be a Productive One?
Mar 8th 2013, 01:24

Olivier Douliery/Getty Images-Pool

Senators on Wednesday at the Jefferson Hotel, where they had a friendly dinner and discussion with President Obama.

WASHINGTON — For all they fail to agree on, Republicans in Congress and President Obama have come to see eye to eye on at least one thing: four years of relatively little contact is no way to run the country.

So for about 90 minutes on Wednesday night, a dozen senators and the president gathered on neutral territory — a private dining room at one of this city's most elegant hotels — and tried to work out their frustrations over beef and wine.

Aside from the issue of how to handle the check, what was described by all as a convivial dinner raised difficult questions about how effective the new White House campaign to woo Republicans will be and whether Mr. Obama, even at his most contrite and conciliatory, can bridge the gap between two parties that remain deeply divided over fundamental questions of policy and the role of government.

Lawmakers in both parties say the president's efforts may make him a few new friends, but he is not going to change ideologies. Others privately complained that convening such a high-profile meeting seemed like an effort to distract from his failure to help forge a solution to avert the automatic budget cuts that went into effect last week.

Asked Thursday morning about the president's new social schedule, Speaker John A. Boehner chuckled before saying he hoped the talks would produce real compromise.

"After being in office four years, he's actually going to sit down and talk to members," Mr. Boehner said, his voice rising in feigned disbelief. Still, he added in a more serious tone, "I think it's a sign, a hopeful sign. And I'm hopeful that something will come out of it. But if the president continues to insist on tax hikes, I don't think we can get very far."

Those who have studied the relationship between presidents and Congress doubt seriously whether Mr. Obama's latest outreach will yield much.

"It's a rather shallow notion," said George Edwards, a political scientist at Texas A & M University and an expert who has written extensively on presidential power. "You're not going to get committed conservatives to change their long-held ideological commitments because you play a round of golf or invite them to the White House."

Or treat them to an expensive dinner, for that matter, experts said. The senators, as is their custom, did most of the talking on Wednesday night. They were grateful to Mr. Obama for the invitation, though they told him they wished he had reached out earlier, instead of first going on a campaign-style cross-country tour accusing Republicans of obstruction.

Mr. Obama's tone was amenable, and he kept his comments brief. "I don't think he came there to say, 'Here's the way it's going to be, and I need you to get in line,' " said Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska, who estimated that Mr. Obama spoke only about 10 percent of the time. "I think he was saying the opposite."

They urged him to talk tougher on the need to bring down the cost of programs like Medicare. "You are in the bully pulpit," Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said he told the president. "You can be honest with the American people and lay those facts on the table because that is what it's going to take."

Around 8:30 p.m., Senator John McCain of Arizona, the self-appointed timekeeper, interrupted to say that they had exhausted their allotted hour and a half and should let Mr. Obama be on his way. "The president's a busy guy," he said.

And with that, they went their separate ways into the cold, damp Washington night.

Next week Mr. Obama will take the extraordinary step of traveling to Capitol Hill to hold four separate meetings with members of Congress — one with Democrats and one with Republicans in each chamber. The last time he visited the Capitol to meet with the House Republican conference was January 2009; with Senate Republicans it was May 2010, though the president has met with them on occasion since. And on Thursday, Mr. Obama hosted a lunch at the White House that included Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, the House Budget Committee chairman.

One popular theory that has gained currency in recent years is that Washington would be a much more civil and productive place if there were more bipartisan social gatherings like the one the president held on Wednesday. With members of Congress spending so little time in Washington — most flee back to their districts on Thursday after the week's legislative business is done — the kinds of bonds that foster cooperation and collaboration have failed to grow.

But political scholars say that bipartisan camaraderie is no substitute for the most crucial factor in advancing a president's agenda: large majorities in Congress.

"Stories about dramatic interaction between big personalities make for excellent reading, but they do tend to downplay the structural constraints against which that drama is playing out," said Andrew Rudalevige, a professor of government at Bowdoin College. "What does the Congress look like? Who holds seats? And what does public opinion look like?"

A closer look at the record of the president who is considered the most effective Congressional negotiator in modern times, Lyndon B. Johnson, shows that his success can be attributed as much to circumstance as to his famous powers of persuasion and intimidation.

Much of the Great Society legislation — laws that created the Medicare, Medicaid, the National Endowment for the Arts and financed public schools — passed Congress when Democrats commanded supermajorities in both houses in 1965 and 1966.

But after the Republicans picked up dozens of seats in the next Congress, weakening those majorities considerably by 1967, Johnson had a more difficult time. In battles that mirror today's big policy debates, he had to swallow considerable cuts in domestic spending before he could persuade Congress to pass a 10 percent income tax surcharge to help pay for the Vietnam War. And he failed to persuade Congress to create a national gun registry after the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy.

"Did Johnson just forget how to do it? No," Dr. Edwards said. "He didn't have the votes."

Members of both parties complain today that the president's outreach has been distant and dismissive. And they often cite Mr. Obama's immediate predecessor, George W. Bush, as being especially effective in his first term because of a productive relationship with a divided Congress. But political scientists note that two of Mr. Bush's signature achievements — the tax cuts and sweeping authority to combat terrorism — were won at a time when the president had soaring approval ratings and the political winds of Sept. 11 at his back.  

Still, many members of Congress acknowledge that there is nothing quite like taking a call from the president. And while he may not ultimately prevail on them, they always listen.

"Without these overtures, nothing would happen," said Senator Susan Collins of Maine, who took one of those phone calls on Monday. "It's not a sufficient step. But it's a necessary step."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions