And you're tuned to listener-sponsored, commercial-free community radio, WBAI in New York, 99.5 FM.
Coming up at 10 p.m., City in Exile.
Matthew Finch talks with graphic novelist Graham Rall.
And Peggy Dominique takes a look at the film legacy of the civil rights movement.
Plus, Poison Darts at 10.48.
Stay tuned.
I was arrested by immigration officers.
And basically, I was asked to provide future cooperation.
Across America, more than a score of Muslims are being held in prison without charge.
Why is the Immigration Service selecting these individuals?
Why is secret evidence permitted in our courts today?
In the coming weeks, beginning December 1st, WBAI's Tahrir will speak with these prisoners and civil rights attorneys about abuses against our Muslim community.
Tune in Tuesdays at 9 p.m. to follow this investigation.
That's from 9 to 10 p.m. starting Tuesday, December 1st on 99.5 FM, listener-sponsored radio in New York.
And you're listening to radio station WBAI in New York, thank you very much, where the time is just about 8 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.
Bumbin' Le Bump was the best to stay for worst.
I hope that's understood.
Bumbin' Le Bump!
Bumbin' Le Bump!
Bumbin' Le Bump!
I had a very good evening to everybody.
The program is off the hook.
It's Emmanuel Goldstein here with you.
Isaac's in the studio tonight.
How you doing?
How you doing?
Were you on the road today?
It's one of the worst days I think I've ever seen.
No, I've given up driving since then.
This garbage truck spilled all its garbage all over the Long Island Expressway,
and I had to deal with that getting in here.
Oh, how fun.
Unbelievable.
And then, to top everything else off,
you may have heard some contributions coming in a few seconds ago,
but the parking meters, the high-tech parking meters downstairs,
they're having this, I'm calling it a special two-for-one sale,
where they basically take two quarters for ten minutes
instead of one quarter for ten minutes.
So I put all my money in there, and I realized I only got half the time.
So I've got a real problem because my car is going to expire during my show.
Oh, that's fun.
Yeah.
So what am I supposed to do?
I'm supposed to go down there while I'm on the air?
Yeah, put some music on.
And you know they're never going to believe that.
No.
They'll never believe that.
Well, it is Wall Street.
I mean, a quarter for ten minutes isn't a...
Well, first I tried putting...
Somebody jammed all the meters.
They all say fail on them.
Oh, that's fun.
Yeah, it's some kind of technological problem.
It never happened with the old-fashioned mechanical kind.
So they all say...
You know, I could have parked in front of a failed one,
but I don't know what happens.
You might get a ticket for parking in front of it.
You'll definitely be ticketed.
Really?
Even though it's not working?
Correct.
What are you supposed to do?
Just not park anywhere where they're broken?
Okay.
So I used that logic, and I moved to one that was working,
and then I started noticing that it's not taking the right amount of quarters.
So it's not technically working.
It's just working a little better.
It's working real good for its sake, but it's not working very nicely for me.
And that's...
You know, I really didn't want to talk about parking meters tonight,
but it just happened now.
It's a real crisis in my life because in about 45 minutes, I'm going to get a ticket.
And I've already paid.
I paid double, in fact, what I should pay.
Well, if you give me some quarters, I'll run down.
Well, here's the quarter that Michael Levine left us.
The expert witness guy is quartered there, so be careful.
That's a nice fellow.
Yeah.
I don't know how many more I'm going to need.
It's, you know, might be three for one by the time you get down there.
You can send donations to...
Yeah.
Well, you know, you'd have to get them here pretty fast, actually.
You know, I wish they'd just go back to the way things were,
when, you know, you could see the little dial move.
It never...
Bad things never happen.
Okay, speaking of bad things, boy, it's really hitting the fan now.
That's right.
With just over a month to go before the Kevin Mitnick trial begins,
there are all kinds of allegations now of government misconduct.
It seems, and this just happened a couple of days ago,
it seems that one of the government informants
was working for Kevin Mitnick's ex-lawyer
while he was Kevin Mitnick's lawyer.
Now, that's simply unbelievable, if that's true,
that somebody was reporting to the government
while being in touch with a lawyer that supposedly had information.
Now, this is all still being figured out and debated in the community.
Different lawyers are saying different things.
We have on the phone with us now Kevin Paulson.
You there, Kevin?
Hi.
How you doing?
Good. How are you, Emmanuel?
Okay, Kevin works for ZDTV,
and he is the person who really broke this story
as far as telling the world, telling the net that this is going on,
that Donald Randolph, Kevin Mitnick's current lawyer,
is filing papers alleging that the U.S. government has really misbehaved.
Can you give us more information as to what exactly this entails?
Yeah, well, as I reported in my column at www.cybercrime.com,
at this point all the defense is asking for is more time.
They claim that the government has been late providing the discovery material,
that is, the evidence that they plan on using in the case,
to the defense attorney so that they can prepare their defense properly.
And both attorneys agree on that,
that the government was more than a month late with some of the information,
that other information they have not turned over at all.
And then the other reason for them to ask for a delay in the trial
is because they found about 59 pages, I believe,
of witness statements from Ron Austin,
who I should point out was an old crime partner of mine back in the day.
And some of those statements indicate that Austin was working for Richard Sherman,
who was at that time Kevin Mitnick's attorney.
He is no longer.
And at the same time that he was working for Sherman,
he was still talking to the FBI about Kevin Mitnick.
So they're pointing that out.
And there's nothing in the FBI reports that clearly says that Austin was spying on the defense team.
There's nothing that proves that he was passing on defense secrets to them.
But they certainly have a strong argument that the mere appearance of the thing
is causing them to be given more time to look into it.
Let's just try to put this into perspective on sort of a time frame.
Basically, you have a situation where Kevin got arrested.
He was brought back to California.
Now, at what point does Ron Austin get injected into the equation?
He was in the equation before Mitnick was arrested.
Apparently, Mitnick started calling him from the underground.
And they started talking to each other.
It's not clear at this point how often, how frequently, but they were talking.
I believe their common interest in Justin Peterson was what brought them together.
At some time in that period, the FBI contacted Austin and asked him point blank,
have you heard from Kevin Mitnick?
Put him in the position of either having to refuse to answer,
which would have been awkward for him because he was supposed to be a cooperating witness in my case,
or were outright lying to them, which would have been a felony.
So he confessed and wound up tape recording surreptitiously Mitnick's calls
and turning over those tapes to the government.
Eventually, of course, Mitnick was arrested after Suto Moshimomura tracked him down.
From what we know at this point, that ended Austin's relationship with the FBI
until they later found out that he was emailing Mitnick while Mitnick was underground without telling them.
So they brought him in for questioning,
and that's when they discovered that he was working for Mitnick's then-defense team.
And the point that Don Randolph, Mitnick's current attorney, makes is
why did they continue talking to him when they knew that he was at least connected to the defense camp?
Well, does it seem likely that he would have told Kevin's former attorney that he had this contact with the FBI?
And at this point, we don't know, at least not based on the court filings,
whether he told Mr. Sherman that he had had that contact or not.
My guess would be that he did.
Richard Sherman is still defending Austin.
To this day, he says that Austin didn't have access to any defense secrets,
and that what he said to quote him was that if Ron Austin is the worst thing Kevin Mitnick has to worry about,
he'd be very impressed.
So, yeah, it seems possible that Sherman did know and that it just didn't trouble him
because he claims, as I said, that Austin didn't have access to any confidential attorney-client information.
Do you think this is something that could jeopardize the entire case against Mitnick?
At this point, it's really too soon to call.
I should point out I have not seen the government's response to any of this.
We'll know a lot more tomorrow when they go to court at 3 p.m.
But at this point, all they're asking for is more time.
They're probably entitled to that.
Frankly, if the government really was a month late with some of the discovery,
that alone might be a cause for a continuance.
Now, tell us something about that.
All the evidence obviously has not been given to Mitnick's defense team.
Yeah, the judge, recognizing the complexity of the case,
ordered that this evidence be turned over a little earlier than normal.
Particularly the witness statements were supposed to be turned over 90 days prior to trial.
And the prosecution was apparently, again, I have not heard their side of this,
but was apparently a month late with that.
That's, you know, one-third of the time that's completely lost.
Again, we don't know why.
We don't know what the government's justification for it was.
There may be more to the story, but it's difficult to see how they could be a month late
and still expect the trial to go on as scheduled.
And then, of course, there's the whole issue of the computer.
I saw in your story, actually, that the government was saying that Kevin has failed to produce a computer
in a timely fashion.
What did they mean by that?
Well, Kevin, Don Randolph, through some very intense, vigilant work,
was able to get a court order from Judge Feltzer allowing him to have a computer
on which to review the electronic evidence in the case.
The judge at one point said there was no way that would happen, but she was eventually persuaded.
What the prosecution in the case said was that they've been diligent with providing discovery and material.
They've already turned over thousands of pages, and they say, hey, it's the defense team that's actually dragging their feet.
Look, they've had the ability to give Kevin a computer for two months now, and they haven't followed up on it.
Kevin still doesn't have a computer.
I can't say that even if it's true that the defense team hasn't followed through as quickly as they could on that,
it really is sort of a separate issue.
It doesn't affect the government's requirements to turn over the evidence at all.
So that would be something that would be between Kevin and his counsel.
Getting back to the Ron Austin angle of this story, one thing that seems to be pretty much an established fact,
in fact, I was in touch with Ron Austin earlier, and he confirmed this,
that they probably learned from him that Richard Sherman was defending Kevin at that point in time.
And as you know, the government was very vehement in their protests against Richard Sherman defending Kevin Mitnick.
In fact, there's some theory that that is the reason why Louis DePayne was indicted,
so that there would be a conflict of interest and that Richard Sherman would no longer be able to defend Kevin Mitnick.
Does any of that seem to make sense to you?
Well, I'm not going to speculate on whether they indicted DePayne just to get Sherman off the case.
And I'm not sure about that timeline at all because one of the FBI reports that was attached as an exhibit to Don Randolph's motion
indicates that Austin told the FBI that he typed a letter to the judge arguing that there was no conflict of interest in Sherman representing Mitnick,
which would mean he already, the court and therefore the prosecution would already have to have known by that time that Sherman was going to represent Kevin.
It's turning into one big long soap opera here.
And, of course, you have Justin Peterson somewhere on the outside escaping justice, running away yet again.
And do you think that's going to enter into this case at all?
I doubt it.
It's sort of an interesting sideshow to the case.
I don't think either side would be particularly eager to use Justin as a witness.
He really doesn't have that kind of credibility at this point, having gone on the run twice now
and been convicted of committing crimes while working for the FBI before.
I'd say probably each side would be eager for the other side to use him as a witness.
Exactly, exactly.
Yeah, he would offer much credibility at this point.
Well, now, what kind of response have you gotten to the story so far?
A lot of encouragement to keep writing about the Mitnick case.
It's something that's been somewhat underreported by the mainstream media.
And I guess that's the beauty of the Internet is you can sort of focus on a niche like that,
and the people that are really interested in following it can do it.
Uh-huh.
Any chance that ZDTV themselves will be covering this?
On TV.
They won't be able to go into the courtroom with a camera because it's a federal courtroom.
But if or when the Mitnick trial happens, they'll be probably giving it the closest coverage that you'll find anywhere.
They're going to be flying down an entire team to report on it every day and to do a commentary.
The commentary will be my part of it.
Uh-huh.
Now, you're a lot closer to the industry.
You talk to people on a daily basis.
What seems to be the prevailing mood as to this whole Mitnick affair?
Is it something bizarre, something justified?
Which industry are you referring to?
Well, that's the computer professional industry, the people that are in touch with ZDTV, Jeff Davis, of course.
I'm not all that in touch with the computer industry, actually.
I couldn't really tell you what the prevailing thoughts are.
I think the people that read my column, at least, from the feedback I get,
the ones that take the trouble to write about it, are generally sympathetic to Mitnick more than the prosecution.
But that could just be a fallout from my own bias.
You mentioned that other media just aren't covering this story.
Do you know why that might be?
There are a lot of stories out there, and there's a lot to cover.
And I think we'll see a lot more interest as the trial approaches.
But perhaps after nearly four years, people are just tiring of reporting on the Mitnick trial being delayed again.
Uh-huh.
Okay, Kevin Poulsen, thanks very much for updating us on that.
Do you want to stay around for some phone calls, or do you have things to do there?
Yeah, I can take some phone calls.
Okay, our phone number, again, is 212-209-2900.
We're speaking with Kevin Poulsen from ZDTV.
And, of course, Kevin, you've had your own history in the past, had books written about you, that kind of thing.
So I guess you've seen it from all different angles.
Yeah, you could say that.
Yeah.
All right.
212-209-2900.
If I take the first call, we know who that's going to be.
So we don't want to take that one.
Although we haven't heard that voice in a long time.
Yeah, yeah.
All right.
Let's go over to this line.
And, Kevin, if by chance we lose you, I hope we don't, but just call right back.
Okay.
Because these phone systems are kind of nuts here.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Yeah, hi, Emmanuel.
I did it.
You see, I don't know.
I'm cursed tonight.
Okay, go ahead.
Have your 10 seconds of radio.
Okay, yeah.
One thing about the Kevin thing.
Do you think, Kevin Poulsen, I'm asking, do you think that if Kevin gets out of jail,
and when he finally becomes free, which I know he will soon, do you think he'll do the same things again?
Or do you think he's learned his lesson?
Or, I mean, being in prison so long?
Well, that's a tough call.
I'm not sure anybody could really say for certain either way, but I'd point out first, the man's not getting any younger.
He's already lost four years.
He's probably in many ways a different person now than he was when he was arrested on this.
And another thought is that there were circumstances that led to this whole chain of events,
and it began with, as far as anybody knows, it began with Justin Peterson, a paid government informant,
meeting with Kevin and talking about hacking,
and some say actually sort of getting Mendix hacker gene active again.
There's some real question as to whether, had the government just left him alone,
whether or not he really would have taken this path again.
Yeah, that's actually a very good point, something that a lot of people seem to feel is the case.
In fact, in the film Takedown, I think that's how they rewrote it to open,
that Justin Peterson, or the equivalent, they had to rename him, comes along and kind of entraps Mitnick.
Yeah, well, I don't know if I'd cite the Takedown movies in authority, but...
No, no, I certainly wouldn't either, but you know a lot of people will be in the future,
just like hackers is the definitive word as to what the whole scene is all about.
Yeah, well, at least you were in that.
Well, in a sense, in a very remote sense.
Okay, 212, 209, 2900.
You know, I think a lot of what happens when Mitnick does get out of prison
will depend on how society treats him.
If he's banished from everything as happened before,
where he wasn't allowed to go to computer trade shows and was, you know,
wasn't allowed to get jobs and things like that,
well, what kind of life is that going to lead somebody into?
Frankly, that's actually sort of the excuse that Justin Peterson used for getting into a life of crime.
It's not one that I buy.
When I first got out of jail, I wasn't allowed to, for a full year,
I not only was not allowed to touch a computer,
but I wasn't allowed to get any kind of computer-related job,
and I had to disclose my full criminal history to any potential employer.
I didn't return to a life of crime.
I wound up working at minimum wage, knocking on doors for a living for over a year.
At some point, you have to grow up and decide you just accept what you've been handed
and what you are in some ways responsible for and move on and get through it.
Now, part of your conditions, though,
did that involve not being able to even talk to people about computers?
No.
Kevin's conditions go a little farther than mine,
but still, it's the same thing.
I'm guessing that when he gets out,
he's going to be at the point where nothing is going to be able to drive him back into that lifestyle.
It's not fun.
Well, it's not entirely fun being a fugitive,
and it's definitely not fun going to jail.
And after four years of this,
I imagine that Kevin has probably broken into his last computer.
What kind of effect do you think this is going to have on all those kids out there
that are getting into computer hacking?
Are they going to look at the Kevin Mitnick case?
Are they going to just take up other interests?
You know better than that.
You can't deter hackers. Come on.
Okay, let's take another phone call.
Good evening. You're on the air.
Yes, hello.
Hello. I'm the caller from a couple of weeks.
Nice try, Rebel. Nice try.
But, you know, those voices just don't cut it anymore.
Oh, boy.
Let's go down to the friendly lines over here.
Good evening. You're on the air.
Hello. Did I win? Did I win?
No, you didn't.
Oh, man.
Go ahead.
Hey, I was just asking,
where do you get all this information about the trial and stuff like that?
Kevin?
It's all public record.
Where can I get it?
If you're ever in Los Angeles,
you can go down to the courthouse
and stand in a brief line,
turn in a slip of paper,
show them my D,
and get Kevin Mitnick's entire file.
Eventually what happens,
it winds up on the Kevin Mitnick website.
So, you know,
all these motions and things,
you'll be able to see there.
But if you want to be the first one to get it,
you obviously have to go to the courtroom.
Oh, is there a place on the net where you can find it?
Well, go to www.kevinmitnick.com.
It's not there right now,
but it will be.
And we'll talk about witness statements and things like that.
Yeah, and if you want to see summaries of the information
delivered in a timely, accurate, and fair manner,
check out www.cybercrime.com.
Oh, okay.
Thanks a lot.
Okay.
Take care.
See you.
212-279.
I'm sorry,
I'm giving out the wrong number again.
212-209-2900.
Did I do that before?
Not tonight, but previously.
I gave out the wrong number?
Well, I think I caught myself when I gave out the wrong number.
You're always quiet.
Catch yourself.
All right.
Let's take another phone call.
Let's go over.
I'm afraid of that line.
Let's go over to this one.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Hey, thanks for taking the call.
Pretty funny with that guy with the fake voices.
Thanks to Kevin Polson for the coverage on ZDTV.
It's been tremendous.
And I know it's been referenced on the website
as well as in the mailing list,
the Mitnick mailing list.
I guess the question I had was about the government's response
during your interview.
I listened to the real audio file,
and I heard Kevin Polson use the word bristled
to describe Schindler's reaction,
Prosecutor Schindler's reaction to being asked about the motion.
Did you speak to him personally or over the phone?
I talked to him over the phone.
So you couldn't see a facial reaction?
No, I couldn't.
I'd have been surprised if I saw one.
Schindler is, if nothing else, a very stoic man.
And for him to even say what he did
indicated that he was not happy with the situation.
And he had not yet had an opportunity to read the motion.
Isn't that correct?
That's right.
I believe he'd gotten it,
but had not yet had the opportunity to read it.
And you were the first one to discuss it with him.
Yeah.
Okay, my other question was,
with that in mind,
do you see the government attempting to take action
to remedy this in front of the judge?
And then, in light of Judge Felzer's interest in this case,
do you think that the early decision to hear this motion,
namely tomorrow at 3 p.m.,
might foreshadow a dramatic ruling against the government?
There's not going to be any drama tomorrow.
Just straight ahead.
There's going to be some tension in the courtroom, I expect,
among, between both attorneys,
Richard Sherman, who's now representing Luda Payne,
the co-defendant, and Don Randolph.
This motion sort of puts them at odds to a certain degree.
And Judge Felzer once vowed
that she would not give another continuance in this case.
But in the end,
the most dramatic thing that we can expect
is that she either will or will not grant that continuance.
So you don't see any opportunity for Felzer
to rule against the government in this regard,
in light of the informant?
The last that I heard,
the government was opposing a continuance.
So if she allows a continuance,
then that will be a ruling against the government,
or at least against what they want in the case.
Well, that's hardly a victory for Kevin,
because all that means is he gets to spend more time in prison
before he gets a trial.
Yeah, it's a victory for the defense,
because it's what they feel that they need
in order to adequately prepare.
Like how Kevin feels about another continuance,
he'd be in a better position to say than me.
Really?
She's not,
we're not going to see a dismissal
or any sanctions against the government
because of Ron Austin's connection at this point.
if the defense actually turns up something substantial,
indicating that there was some misconduct
on the government's part
and continuing to question Austin
after they knew he was working for Richard Sherman.
If that happens,
then the defense will go back at a later date
and ask for something else,
which could be,
which could range, you know,
from some minor concession
all the way up to a full dismissal of the charges.
And that's when she would have an opportunity
to do something dramatic in the case.
Last issue was,
have you seen the publication by the Post-Gazette,
the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
on prosecutorial misbehavior?
Actually, I did read part of that, yeah.
That looks like a very interesting set of issues
to pursue as you're looking at the prosecutorial behavior
with regard to Kevin's case.
And just in closing,
thanks for all the great reporting on the case.
That's been tremendous.
Can you give us a website for that?
For the Post-Gazette site?
Yes.
It's www.post-gazette.com
And that is post-gazette,
G-A-Z-E,
T like Tom,
T like Tom,
E dot com,
slash win.
Triple dub, eh?
Eh.
Okay.
It works.
How about,
what do you think, Kevin?
Do you think it's a better way to say three W's
other than the way we say it now?
I think at this point we can omit it entirely.
There we go.
Thanks again for all the great reporting.
Okay.
Take care.
Yeah.
A minute entirely.
I kind of like that idea.
Yeah.
All right.
Let's take another phone call.
212-209-2900.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Hi.
Thank you.
Speak up, please.
Okay.
You got to speak up.
That's part of the rule here.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Yeah.
You have to talk about the show like the whole time
about Kevin Mitnick.
Well, do you want to talk about something else?
Well, can't you find something else to talk about?
Well, we can talk about going to another phone call.
How about that?
Good evening.
You're on the air.
Hi.
This isn't a question from Kevin Fulton.
I'm just calling C.
You have to speak up a little bit.
Do you know of any local BBS numbers
in the 718 or 212 area code?
Local BBS numbers.
I don't know.
Are there any BBSs left?
I don't really know, to be honest.
It's a good question, but I don't know.
I think the BBS scene pretty much died a while ago.
Didn't it, Kevin?
Yeah, I think that call came from about 10 years in the past.
You know, that's been happening a lot recently.
I've been getting phone calls from the past.
I don't know what's up with that.
I call Bell Atlantic, and they just hang up on me.
It's the new DMS switches.
Yeah, it could very well be.
Okay.
Hang on a second.
I got to clear the phone lines,
because the way things are right now,
the only way I can hang up on people
is to put them on hold.
Otherwise, I lose use.
So I just have to quickly run through
all the phone lines here,
and hang up on everybody.
And I apologize for that,
but it's necessary.
It's kind of like weeding out the system.
All right.
Now, everybody can call back in.
212-209-2900.
And Kevin, you should still be there.
Uh-oh.
Kevin, are you there?
Hello?
Okay.
Sorry about that.
Okay.
The phone system just isn't what it should be.
So we have a situation now
where people are really starting to rivet attention
onto this, onto the Mitnick case.
Do you think there's going to be more press coverage now?
If it goes to trial,
I expect there's going to be tremendous press coverage, yeah.
From what I've heard,
all the major media outlets plan on at least reporting on it.
And like I said, ZDTV is going to be giving it major focus,
because their news division is entirely focused on computers.
If I could just ask a personal question here.
Now, I know you were on supervised release for a while.
Has that period ended yet?
No, I've got another six months.
Knock on wood.
So you're still technically not allowed to even use a computer.
No.
As with Kevin's restrictions,
mine are,
my probation officer has the ability of relieving them
to whatever degree he sees fit.
So at this point,
it's a bit more complicated.
I am not under a total ban.
Uh-huh.
Because writing for an online service,
it must make things rather difficult.
Yeah.
When I was first released,
there was the question raised
as to whether I could even have a website or not.
Fortunately,
it was eventually decided that I could,
as long as I wasn't updating it myself.
Since then,
things have relaxed considerably.
I think with Kevin Mendick's restrictions,
for example,
when he gets out,
he'll probably be looking at a full year
of a complete ban
on everything that they can ban him from,
including cell phones
and offering computer advice.
After that year,
I would expect that if he gets
a halfway decent probation officer,
they'll start loosening the reins a bit with him as well.
Now, at one point,
you were facing a very long time in prison
because of that whole espionage thing,
but the mood of the government towards you
seems to have changed.
They talk to you.
You interview them.
What is it,
do you think,
that caused that to happen?
Well, my case is over.
The espionage charge was dismissed,
and I've moved on.
I'd like to think that
even though I write an opinion column,
and I always give the government a quote
if they have one to offer.
I always present both sides of the story,
and I think that they probably recognize that.
Now, you've been talking to the prosecutors,
one of the few people actually
that does talk to the prosecutors
in the Mittena case.
What is their overall mood
towards this whole thing,
towards the publicity,
towards the websites
and the internet activity?
Do you sense some sort of impatience,
lack of understanding, hostility?
No, I couldn't really speak to that.
I don't lunch with the prosecutors or anything.
What I get are the quotes and the soundbites,
and their official position is that
outside influence does not affect them
one way or the other.
They would say that
the fact that Kevin Metnick
got a lot of publicity from the New York Times,
or that there's a movie being made about him,
doesn't affect their prosecutorial decisions.
And in the opposite extreme,
they would say that the Free Kevin movement
also doesn't affect their decisions.
What is it that you think they want?
What will make them happy
just to put him away for the rest of his life?
Well, you have to understand
it is an adversarial system,
and their role in the system is to prosecute
and to do the worst to him that they can,
just as Metnick's attorney's role in the system
is to defend Metnick
and try to get him out of jail
as quickly as possible.
In theory, those two opposing forces
somehow works out to justice in the end.
I think that's the model
that both sides work from here.
But what is it they actually get out of it?
A promotion? A raise?
A simple satisfaction of a job well done.
I had heard that David Schindler was, in fact,
I heard he was doing things
with Janet Reno, actually,
and was pushing for something more,
I guess, prominent,
maybe involving D.C. or something like that.
These are only rumors, of course,
but I've been hearing things like that.
I hadn't heard anything like that.
It's interesting news.
He's certainly well-positioned for it.
He had a stunning victory,
I believe it was last year
where he successfully prosecuted
the governor of Arizona for fraud.
And the governor lost his office
and actually did some time behind it.
And Schindler got nationwide press for that.
Yeah, I think that's, in fact,
where he wound up posing with Janet Reno
in a picture.
And I'd give anything to get a copy of that picture.
Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me.
It was a huge case.
And when the U.S. attorney for the district
was being considered for a seat as a federal judge,
that victory was her biggest selling point.
It was what people recommending her for that seat
were talking about the most.
Now, about Kevin's judge,
have you ever talked to her?
Oh, no.
You're not allowed to talk to judges, I mean.
Federal judges are not going to give interviews.
Right.
But it seems like she's definitely
kind of biased against Kevin, wouldn't you say?
She has a great reputation.
I believe among both defense attorneys and prosecutors,
she's one of the smarter federal judges
in Los Angeles.
As for whether or not she's biased against Kevin,
I don't know.
I wouldn't make that call.
Well, the feeling I get from reading the testimony
is that she feels Kevin has betrayed her
by getting in trouble again
because she was the judge that he had in the past.
And I just sense kind of some animosity there.
If she's good,
then any personal feelings like that
won't come into play in her decision.
Let's hope so.
All right, 212-209-2900.
Let's take another phone call.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
Yes, I just wondered what information you had
about the Y2K problem.
Y2K.
Well, Kevin, maybe you have some insight
as to what's going to happen.
Last I heard,
it's going to be the end of the world as we know it.
Yeah, the end of the world.
So basically,
it's like another year and a month.
Yeah.
Are you being facetious or...?
We're not facetious here at WBAI.
We bring you the facts as we know them.
Now, Kevin,
maybe you can offer some more insight
as to what to expect, you know.
And what preparations are then you making
if that is your judgment?
Isaac, you know something about this.
About Y2K?
What do you suggest people do?
To prepare?
Worst case scenario.
Absolute worst case scenario.
Anything,
the world explodes from nuclear holocaust.
Well, you can't really prepare for that.
Well, that's what I'm saying.
No, I'm saying,
assuming the world doesn't explode,
what can we do?
Take our money out of banks?
Well, one of the big problems
that people are pointing to
is that if everybody starts running to the banks
and pulling all their money out,
some serious economic impact will occur.
Well, not to the people
that take the money out of the banks, though.
They'll have their money, right?
Conceivably,
if the banks don't run out of money,
you have to remember that banks turn over
about 90% of their actual funds to loans.
So, all of a sudden,
banks are going to start calling back loans
and people are going,
well, you don't know what's going to happen.
They can call back loans?
They can just call back a loan?
Wow.
I'm not an economist, but...
They won't be able to take out...
Yeah, they're...
They'll stop the amount that you can take out.
If it comes to that...
They'll ration out,
you'll be able to get $500.
Right, $500 a day or $500 a week
or something like that,
if it comes to that.
Actually, I have no idea what's going to happen.
I have my own theories and scenarios
and I'm doing preparations in my own way,
but suffice it to say,
it's going to be interesting,
whether it's public panic or otherwise.
Let me ask the caller.
Do you have any theories or, you know, ideas?
I think that it goes from the worst-case scenario,
the nuclear, like what he talked about,
and then also to the other end,
that we won't feel much
and it'll be a small glitch.
But I think it's going to be somewhere in between,
so I think it's definitely...
I'm not going to move to Idaho,
but I'm going to definitely, you know,
have water and extra lighting
and, you know, things like that.
How much water?
What kind of period are we talking about here?
A year.
A year's worth of water.
That's a lot of water.
Yeah, a year's worth of food
and a year's worth of water.
Where are you going to put all that?
Well, I mean, you store it,
and if nothing happens
and I just have extra food and water.
Yeah, you sure do.
Yeah, that's one of the major reasons
why I can't fault anybody,
no matter how dramatic their preparations,
because even if you're moving,
you're generally moving
to a nice home in the country or something.
If nothing goes wrong,
then you haven't lost anything.
You can't really lose.
All right, thanks for calling.
All right.
That's pretty frightening.
I mean, a year's worth of food and water,
that takes up a lot of space.
Yeah.
Yeah, well, freeze-dried
tends to be a little smaller.
I mean, you could get a year's worth
of MREs into a couple of...
Yeah, well, where do you go
to buy MREs around here?
Well, you can hop on the net.
You have suppliers that sell the things.
Actually, a lot of the bulk MRE suppliers
are winding up having their warehouses
going to near as ill.
Okay, here's your assignment.
Next week, bring an MRE into the studio.
You want an MRE?
Yeah, I want an MRE.
Or without a heater.
Oh, boy.
Whatever it takes, you know.
I just want to...
Well, MREs come with heaters, you know.
They come with heaters.
Little chemical heaters.
And, in fact, if you go through
some of the new basic training things,
you learn how to make the heater
into an explosive device.
Well, that's just great.
You know, just in case.
Yeah.
I'm looking forward to it.
I'll say that.
I'm probably one of the few people
that's actually looking forward
to what happens on, you know,
December 31st, 1999.
You have your glass of champagne in hand,
and, you know.
Well, I don't know if I want to be intoxicated
when things hit the fan.
Well, Kevin, let me ask you a question
about the year 2000.
Do you think Kevin will be out by then?
I don't know if he'll have gone to trial by then.
I mean, this has gone beyond
anyone's wildest dreams, I think.
You know, when he first...
Do you remember where you were
when he first got caught back in 1995?
Me?
Yeah.
Yeah, I was in the Federal Detention Center
in Los Angeles, where he is now.
That's a circular way of things happening, isn't it?
Yeah, I'm amazed, too.
I'm disappointed that his motion for bail
wasn't even aired in court.
I read it.
It was brilliantly argued.
The defense had a really strong, compelling argument,
and the judge wouldn't even allow them
to argue it in court,
and then the Ninth Circuit upheld that.
It happens all the time.
That's the nature of the federal system,
but it disappoints me every time.
Well, now, what do you say to people
who reason that Kevin was a fugitive?
He's a flight risk.
Therefore, you can't give somebody like that bail.
The whole purpose of bail is to let people out of jail
who have not been convicted of a crime
who are potential flight risks.
That's why it's called bail.
Instead of an OR,
or instead of just letting them go,
they put up something in order to secure their appearance.
Kevin failed to turn himself in
while the feds were looking for him,
but he never jumped bail.
He never agreed to appear.
It's sort of a different situation.
I don't think anybody who really looks at this
would think that Kevin would go underground
and allow his family, for example,
to lose a house
just so he could have the privilege
of being caught by Tsutomu Shimomura again
and thrown back in the slammer.
I've talked to his grandmother on numerous occasions,
and she said that she would put up her house,
and I know that they have a very close relationship,
and he'd never do anything to hurt her.
So it just seems like they ignore all that, though.
It doesn't mean anything to them.
They can keep him there without bail,
so that's what they're going to do.
Yeah, and again, that's the nature of the beast.
The federal system, it's very hard to get bail.
And you see people do time
that surpasses the guideline sentence for them,
that surpasses more time
than they could actually be sentenced to
because they can't get bail.
Now, you are in the MDC,
the place where Kevin is right now,
and he's been there for four years.
What's it like?
It's not the worst jail I've been in.
The food is decent, though it's microwaved.
It's relatively clean.
There's not a lot of violence,
but it's still jail,
and because it's in the city,
it's basically indoors.
That's the simplest way of thinking of it.
He's spent about three and a half years now indoors.
There's no yard at all?
There's a small patio with a mesh fence
where the sky would normally be.
That's as close to outdoors as he gets.
So for all this time,
he hasn't actually gotten the breath of fresh air.
Yeah, you could put it that way.
That's unbelievable.
Hey, do you remember the mobile station across the street?
Oh, yes.
Now, we waved at Kevin from there.
In fact, it seems a lot of relatives of prisoners go there
to basically glimpse a part of the hand of the person there
that they're not allowed to visit.
Did you have situations like that?
Do you know situations like that?
I was in a different wing.
I did not face the mobile station.
I faced the train station across the street.
So, no, I was deprived of that.
But you knew of the mobile station.
Oh, everybody knows about the mobile station.
Wow.
Okay, 212-209-2900.
We're speaking with Kevin Paulson live on the radio here.
And right now, you're in Washington, D.C., actually.
Yeah.
But you're usually out in California.
Yeah.
Okay.
Let's take a phone call.
Let's go over here this time.
Good evening.
You're in the air.
Hi.
Speak up, please.
Hi.
Can you hear me?
Barely.
Okay, first, hi to everyone on IRC.
And also, I recently read the book Takedown.
And can you explain about what are the major things wrong with this book?
We only have about 17 minutes left.
But basically, the book is extremely one-sided as far as turning Kevin into the bad guy.
Is that stuff just completely untrue?
Like what it claims that he did?
Well, yeah.
Or is it unproven?
It has never been proven, and in fact, Kevin has never been charged with actually breaking
into Tsutomu Shimomura's machine.
And that's the whole basis of the book.
The whole basis of the book is that premise that Kevin was the person behind it.
And, you know, apart from that, you've got, you know, Shimomura's menu of where he goes
all throughout the country on his search for Kevin.
And, you know, all this.
I'm talking about writing styles here, so I won't even get into that.
But, yeah, the facts are very biased.
I'm sorry?
What are the current charges against him?
Well, actually, Kevin, you probably have a better handle on that than me.
It's what exactly they are.
He pleaded guilty to possession of access devices in the form of cellular phone numbers or codes,
identification numbers.
He's already served the time for that.
So that's history.
That happened back in North Carolina.
Data and boot backdick and Uziism and SquireDap own you.
Okay, fine.
I don't know.
I think whenever someone says IRC from now on, we should just move on to the next call.
Something about the intelligence level of people on that thing.
As far as the charges, Kevin, there are how many charges against him right now?
25 counts.
Basically, he's charged with breaking into a bunch of Internet computers.
I believe one university, at least one, maybe two ISPs, and some cell phone manufacturers and downloading proprietary software.
His only real sentencing exposure to speak of, under a straight guideline calculation, he's already done far more time than he could be sentenced to.
But the government has sort of upped the ante by saying that he caused over $80 million in losses by copying that proprietary information.
That's sort of the light at the end of this long, dark tunnel, and that light is coming from a freight train.
If they're able to assess an $80 million loss for copying information, and that's upheld in the appellate courts, it would mean that copying something without permission is exactly equivalent to stealing the amount of money that was invested into producing that information.
Well, it sounds like what they're saying is copying this information, no matter what you do with it, and he didn't do anything with it, copying information is exactly the same as destroying it, right?
Right, destroying it and totally depriving the owner of any value of it.
I mean, to me, that's a really fundamental question.
It's the most interesting thing that's going to come up in this case.
Everything else, the Ron Austin thing, the Justin Peterson thing, all the motions about electronic discovery, although very important,
they're all going to pale in significance to that question.
Is copying something the same as actually depriving the owner of it?
And that's what we're looking at at the end of all of this.
Now, as far as the actual $80 million value, we're talking about analog cellular software,
which was already on the way out when this whole thing started.
It can't be worth that much.
And if you look at the records of the companies, and you can do this on the Kevin Mitnick website,
you'll see that there was never any acknowledgment of this made to the shareholders that such a massive loss had been incurred.
Well, let's face it.
I mean, let's speak frankly here.
Copying something isn't the same as stealing it.
I'd like to think that, yes.
When you steal something, and I believe in intellectual property.
I believe in copyright, okay?
I know it's an unpopular position for a hacker to take, but copyright infringement or looking at a trade secret is not theft.
You have not deprived the original owner of it in any way.
And in Kevin Mitnick's case, it's like a really pristine example of that,
because apparently he didn't pass it on to any competitors or use the information in any way.
And this $80 million argument is premised on the idea that somehow he caused these companies losses just by siphoning off that data
or just by copying it and looking at it.
And it's basically the same reasoning we saw in the Craig Neidorf case, which has since been discredited by other appellate courts.
Where a $79,000 document was actually valued at $14?
Right.
Now, I think it's also based on the premise that the average person won't know what this really means
and will just believe whatever they're told.
So they'll say, $80 million, boy, that's serious.
You've got to lock that guy up without really thinking about what, you know, it's really all about.
Yeah.
It's unbelievable.
And again, it's a precedent.
If they're able to actually succeed in doing this, they'll do it again.
It'll become practice.
You know, copying a file can actually get you in trouble.
Now, if Kevin had done something like, you know, sold it, you know, to the East Germans or something like that
or who knows who, you know, anybody, had he made a penny from it or done anything, spread it around,
been malicious in any way, okay, you might have something there.
Still not $80 million worth of damage, but it's something.
And they don't have that.
They have nothing.
All they have is the fact that he copied a file.
Yeah, and again, that's a big issue, and we're not going to get to it until the end of all these proceedings.
It's a sentencing issue.
And we'll see both sides addressing it, getting things on the record during the trial.
But in the end, we won't really know what's going to happen until Kevin Menick is sentenced, assuming he is.
How do you think the whole evidence thing is going to be resolved,
where we have 10 gigs of evidence here that Kevin's not allowed to look at or hasn't been allowed to look at?
How is that ever going to be resolved?
How is he going to look at all that information?
Well, you know, 10 gigs sounds like a lot of information,
but I'm assuming that a lot of it are copies of programs, things like that,
where you really don't have to look at every single byte.
I don't see why, if they got a reasonable continuance and Kevin got his computer,
I don't see why he wouldn't be able to go through it
and provide some sort of report to his attorneys on what's in there,
particularly if they get an expert to help them in that process.
They should.
One would hope that the court would pay for an expert to work on this,
if not full-time, at least 20 hours a week up until trial,
because that's the kind of resources that they're going to need.
And, of course, we always are interested in finding experts
that would be able to help in this case.
Of course, as you say, we hope the court would pay for that,
but it's possible they won't.
Maybe people that are out in California already might want to volunteer some time
and do something really good.
So if you know such a person or if you are such a person,
please email us, OTH at 2600.com,
and we'll pass it on to the right people and hopefully do some good.
All right, 2-2-209-2900.
Let's take another listener phone call.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
Yeah, Howard Stern rules.
Sorry?
Howard Stern rules.
That's the wrong station, you know.
You expect us to hang up on you for saying that,
but, you know, we're not going to because we want to see what else is on your mind.
Sorry?
You do butt sex.
Okay, maybe we'll hang up on you now and move on to this call over here.
Manually got it all over, Howard.
Yeah, you know, we have more listeners, too.
A lot of people don't realize that, but I looked at the figures.
We have more listeners.
Go ahead.
Look it up yourself.
You'll see.
Good evening.
You're on the air.
I'd just like to get them mad.
Yes, I have three questions, actually, two about the trial.
Okay, let's start with those.
All around the news is saying that Kevin Mitnick is the most infamous hacker in history.
I want to see what Kevin Poulsen thinks about that.
Yeah, Kevin, are you the most notorious hacker in history?
I guess it depends on who you ask.
Certainly, Kevin has gotten more press than me.
If that's the definition of infamous, yeah, I'd say he is.
And also, a second question, which book do you think I should buy that would clearly say the truth about what really happened with the trial?
Which Kevin Mitnick book?
Yes.
Read all three.
Yeah, that is a wise choice because that way you can decide for yourself.
And keep in mind, none of them are going to have any information about the trial because they were all written about four years ago.
All right.
There will be new books, I'm sure.
All right.
And on the third one, is there going to be a hope anytime soon?
We hope so.
We do.
But, you know, it depends on a lot of things, a lot of people getting together.
And we need to sort of revitalize the community in New York so we can organize things like that.
All right.
But come to the next 2600 meeting.
We'll talk about it.
All right.
I'll be there.
All right.
Thanks.
Bye.
Thanks for calling.
And we have a few more minutes, so we're going to take a few more phone calls.
We're on the phone now with Kevin Poulsen, who writes for ZDTV.
Tell us something about the whole ZDTV operation out there.
How's it all tied together?
Oh, it's terrific.
I mean, as somebody who, let's just say, is not a frequent Internet user, I might be overly impressed.
But the way their cable TV network meshes with their website is pretty impressive.
And their news broadcasts, in addition to going out over their cable network, are webcasts in real time.
And for each of the stories on the news broadcast, they have more detailed versions that you can see on the web.
So, I don't know.
Maybe that's a routine.
But from what I know about it, it's pretty cool.
It sounds sort of like what MSNBC tried to do a few years ago.
Yeah.
In fact, ZDTV actually had a show on MSNBC many years ago called The Site.
Oh, that was the ZDTV show.
That's right.
It was.
Yeah.
And that sort of, I think, led to them launching this network.
Uh-huh.
They canceled that.
That was the one with Clifford Stoll in it, right?
Was Cliff Stoll in there?
I think he was.
I think he was, too.
Yeah.
It was an interesting show.
I'll say that.
All right.
Let's take another phone call.
212-209-2900.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
Okay.
Well, you weren't off the hook.
Let's go over to this one over here.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
All right.
That's Off the Hook.
That's, yeah, they got the right idea.
It was Off the Hook.
Definitely Off the Hook.
All right.
Let's, uh, shall we try over here?
We haven't been over in this region for a while, so let's try this line over here.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
I just wanted to mention there's never going to be a nuclear war in 2000.
This is why we don't go.
I just want to mention this.
What?
I just want to mention one thing.
You were talking about the nuclear war.
You have one second.
Mention the whole thing in one second.
Okay.
One second.
There can't be a nuclear war because there's no more nuclear, long-range nuclear missiles in
the United States or Russia.
If you want to read USA Today, there was an article last week.
It said, had the Cold War still been around by the year 2000, there could have been accidental
nuclear war.
What do you mean there's no more long-range nuclear weapons?
The last missile was imploded last year.
The last missile was imploded last year.
Hello?
Hello?
I'm not even going to value this with a comment.
Yeah.
I don't know either.
Kevin, do you know anything about long-range nuclear missiles?
I know, but it's quite a relief to hear that.
Yeah.
Well, it's not a relief knowing the source, but...
My last job was with a peace group where we worked for a nuclear disarmament.
I'm glad to see we finally won.
Yeah.
It would have been nice if they told us.
You know, last I heard, there's still plenty of nuclear weapons out there and there's a big
threat because a lot of people don't know where they are.
Well, the Russians are trying...
Well, the former Soviet states are having problems trying to keep track of what they
had, and both nations really are yet to fully comply with the START II Treaty back in 1980
or 90-something.
You've got India and Pakistan and Israel with nuclear weapons.
Well, those aren't ICBMs.
Okay, but they...
I'm assuming Rebel is talking about ICBMs, but I don't know how warm they are in the bullpen
over here anymore.
When they explode over your city, it doesn't really matter what the source is.
It doesn't really make a difference if a bomber dropped it or anything else.
Exactly.
Let's take one more phone call.
Good evening.
You're on Off the Hook.
Hello, Emmanuel.
How are you doing?
Hi.
Going back to what Rebel said, and I can't believe I'm actually, like, talking about Rebel.
I hate that guy.
Yeah.
It's...
Well, we don't hate him.
We love everybody.
But go ahead.
Yeah.
Well, nuclear weaponry isn't really a threat because, let's be honest, no pilot is going
to take his bomber in the year 2000 and fly it over some country and drop bombs.
No, but they're all from space.
Yeah.
Well, intercontinental ballistic missiles no longer exist.
That much is true.
And most fighter pilots aren't that stupid to all of a sudden take their planes and, like,
fly them and drop atomic bombs in the year 2000 when they're going to know that this
is going to be a threat.
Well, people do silly things, though.
I tend to agree with the caller.
This is a very, very, very, very, very unlikely scenario.
But it's possible.
All right.
We're really wandering away from the topic of the show, and we're also wandering away
from the time that we have that happens all the time around here.
Kevin, let me give you a chance to wrap the whole thing up and tell us what we can expect
in the weeks and months ahead.
You know, if there's one thing we've learned about this case is we don't really know what
to expect.
The odds are pretty good that the defense is going to get another continuance, and then
the next trial will probably be set for May.
May?
Oh, my God.
There's still a possibility that there'll be some sort of settlement.
You have to remember that most federal cases do end in a settlement.
What's the percentage?
It's some outrageous percentage.
I've heard 90 percent, but I don't have an official, or 95 percent, I don't have an
official source for that.
But it's without a doubt the vast majority of them.
Well, the conviction rate is something like 99 percent.
Yeah.
Well, that can be a little misleading, too, because if somebody's charged with 100 things
and they plead guilty to one, it's still considered a conviction.
But in any case, I think things are going to be interesting.
It's an interesting case to me, not just because of some of the issues.
We've already seen the electronic discovery issues, and we have the big one coming up
of the $80 million loss.
But also because Menick is really the last of the old school hackers.
He wasn't just an Internet hacker.
He didn't just use off-the-shelf software.
He had that comprehensive range of skills where he could social engineer somebody on the phone
while cracking their computer from his PC, and he could get into pretty much anything that was accessible
that he chose to target.
And we don't see a lot of that anymore.
I think it's going to be the last of the really big, dramatic, old-school hacker cases,
and it's worth some attention.
Wow, yeah, it certainly is.
And just the final part of this whole soap opera, do you think Agent Steele will be caught?
Oh, yeah.
He's always caught.
We're kind of taking bets on that on the Internet, but we'll see.
Are there people actually betting he's not going to be?
No, people are betting as to when and where.
Okay.
Give me in on the pool.
Okay, we'll contact you about that.
Give you the answer.
Okay.
All right, Kevin Paulson, how can we read your articles in the future?
Try www.cybercrime.com.
Okay, sounds good.
Well, I thank you very much for joining us tonight,
and look forward to reading your material in the future.
Yeah, thanks for having me, Emmanuel.
Okay, take care.
And I also want to thank you for, again, making that journey out from Queens to join us here tonight.
It's a long, hard journey.
It is.
It is.
I made it today.
Oh, my God, we forgot the car.
Oh, jeez.
Can you run downstairs and put a corner in my car, please?
Yeah, let's see.
Oh, boy.
This is horrible.
We'll let you know next week if I got a ticket.
That would really suck if I got a ticket, you know.
I can't believe none of the listeners called to remind me.
Anyway, so Emmanuel Goldstein will either be in prison next week or a lot poorer.
We'll see.
Until next week.
Good night.
Expect the worst.
I hope that's understood.
One minute, no!
I'll call you next week.
Bye-bye.
Goodbye.
Bye-bye.
I wear garments touched by hands from all over the world
35% cotton
Make this a real holiday season of conscience
by helping end child labor and sweatshop abuses.
On Thursday, December 10th,
the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
at 4.30 p.m.,
there'll be a rally and candlelight walk for conscience
starting in front of Nike Town at 57th Street
between 5th and Madison Avenues.
Down to Rockefeller Center, 49th Street, just by the tree,
we have to keep demanding that they respect the human and worker rights
of the workers who are making the products that we buy around the world.
So please join us.
For more information, call the National Labor Committee,
the People of Faith Network,
at 212-242-3002.
212-242-3002.
On sale for 20% discount.
All my hands clean.
I was arrested by immigration officers and basically I was asked to provide future cooperation.
Across America, more than a score of Muslims are being held in prison without charge.
Why is the Immigration Service selecting these individuals?
Why is secret evidence permitted in our courts today?
In the coming weeks, beginning December 1st,
WBAI's Tahrir will speak with these prisoners and civil rights attorneys
about abuses against our Muslim community.
Tune in Tuesdays at 9 p.m. to follow this investigation.
That's from 9 to 10 p.m. starting Tuesday, December 1st
on 99.5 FM, listener-sponsored radio in New York.
This is WBAI 99.5 FM in New York.
Coming up, Tahrir.
This is WBAI 99.5 FM, listener-sponsored radio in New York,