DURLY's CORPORATE SPYING DETAILS.. Re: NYTIMES: Yale's Lyme & Corporate Spy, Durland Fish screws up US GPS monopoly

SpinLyme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, governor.rell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
fitzmas@xxxxxxxxx, patrick.fitzgerald@xxxxxxxxx,
modelt1918@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, cohenr@xxxxxxxxxxxx, jdrazen@xxxxxxxx,
letters@xxxxxxxxxxx, Jgerberding@xxxxxxx, lender@xxxxxxxxxxx,
webo@xxxxxxxxxxxx, conndcj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, executive-
editor@xxxxxxxxxxx, managing-editor@xxxxxxxxxxx, news-
tips@xxxxxxxxxxx, the-arts@xxxxxxxxxxx, bizday@xxxxxxxxxxx,
foreign@xxxxxxxxxxx, metro@xxxxxxxxxxx, national@xxxxxxxxxxx,
sports@xxxxxxxxxxx, dvbid@xxxxxxx, brigidcallahan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
trvl@xxxxxxxxxxx, ubinas@xxxxxxxxxxx, mas1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx, jhornberger@xxxxxxx, thomas.carson@xxxxxxxxx,
editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kurtzh@xxxxxxxxxxxx, georgewill@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
horgan@xxxxxxxxxxx, commissioner.dcf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
cohencolumn@xxxxxxx, leonard.boyle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, FalNields@xxxxxxx,
bransfield@xxxxxxxxxxx, vtsherr@xxxxxxxxxxx, mcneilel@xxxxxxx,
oca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
scott.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, governor.rell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
attorney.general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, randall.samborn@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: francam@xxxxxxxx, dr-ahmadinejad@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
eugenerobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx, horgan@xxxxxxxxxxx,
bmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, trvl@xxxxxxxxxxx, rastro18@xxxxxxx,
billcurryct@xxxxxxxxx, thomas.carson@xxxxxxxxx, amcguigan@xxxxxxxxxxx,
rjmurzyn@xxxxxxx, paulcraigroberts@xxxxxxxxx,
sidney_blumenthal@xxxxxxxxx, criminal.division@xxxxxxxxx,
karla.dobinski@xxxxxxxxx, christopher.christie@xxxxxxxxx


Subject: DURLY's CORPORATE SPYING DETAILS.. Re: NYTIMES: Yale's
Lyme & Corporate Spy, Durland Fish screws up US GPS monopoly

Date: Apr 6, 2007 6:34 PM

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/browse_frm/thread/840c198037f17cbc/50e284dfdb611401?hl=en#50e284dfdb611401


1. CaliforniaLyme
View profile
More options Mar 11, 1:18 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.diseases.lyme
From: "CaliforniaLyme" <CaliforniaL...@xxxxxx>
Date: 11 Mar 2007 10:18:19 -0700
Local: Sun, Mar 11 2007 1:18 pm
Subject: Chuck & Trolls Employees of OTRR via ALDF>?
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original |
Report this message | Find messages by this author


This place is tid to ALDF- www.otaotr.com

One of the ALDF board of directors runs it ANother one runs an agency
for healthcare industry. GREAT ties!!!

Red Pfohl
Institutional Sales
OTA LLC / Off the Record Research LLC
Purchase, NY

Directors

Jeffrey Black
Partner
Deloitte & Touche

Thomas P. Farrell
Managing Director
AML Consultants
New York, NY

Durland Fish, Ph.D. **********
Professor
Dept. of Epidemiology & Public Health
Yale University School of Medicine

John Geron
Managing Director
Navigant Consulting Inc.
New York, NY

Tony Langham
President
Langham Research LLC
Katonah, NY

David G. Nichols, Jr.
Attorney at Law
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP

Red Pfohl
Institutional Sales
OTA LLC / Off the Record Research LLC
Purchase, NY

Robert A. Proctor III
Managing Partner
Oak Hill Consultants LLC
Bedford Corners, NY

Arthur C. Romaine
Partner
Neville Rodie & Shaw, Inc.
New York, NY

Marcia C. Saunders
Managing Director
Citigroup
New York, NY

http://www.otaotr.com/research/fieldforce.htm

The Field Force has different and unique capabilities than from OTR's
reporting corps. Consisting of more than 90 "ground troops," in major
U.S. metropolitan areas as well as 20 in Europe, the Field Force is
the eyes and ears in the field for OTR and its clients.

Field Force projects vary in size from just a few representatives to
30 to 40 on one project. Some projects consist of observations, while
others entail face-to-face interviews.

The Field Force's capabilities include:

Fast turnaround: When needed, the Field Force is able to return a
project, from assignment to findings, within 24 hours.

Finding confirmation: The Field Force can increase confidence in new
or unexpected findings through direct observation out in the field.

Supplement: Price checks, monitoring and trend identification add
valuable insight to supplement a reporter's research.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kathleen <janmusinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Apr 4, 2007 1:51 PM
To: SpinLyme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, governor.rell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, fitzmas@xxxxxxxxx,
patrick.fitzgerald@xxxxxxxxx, modelt1918@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
cohenr@xxxxxxxxxxxx, jdrazen@xxxxxxxx,
letters@xxxxxxxxxxx, Jgerberding@xxxxxxx, lender@xxxxxxxxxxx,
webo@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
conndcj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, executive-editor@xxxxxxxxxxx, managing-
editor@xxxxxxxxxxx,
news-tips@xxxxxxxxxxx, the-arts@xxxxxxxxxxx, bizday@xxxxxxxxxxx,
foreign@xxxxxxxxxxx,
metro@xxxxxxxxxxx, national@xxxxxxxxxxx, sports@xxxxxxxxxxx,
dvbid@xxxxxxx, brigidcallahan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
trvl@xxxxxxxxxxx, ubinas@xxxxxxxxxxx, mas1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx,
jhornberger@xxxxxxx, thomas.carson@xxxxxxxxx, editor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
kurtzh@xxxxxxxxxxxx,
georgewill@xxxxxxxxxxxx, horgan@xxxxxxxxxxx,
commissioner.dcf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cohencolumn@xxxxxxx,
leonard.boyle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, FalNields@xxxxxxx,
bransfield@xxxxxxxxxxx, vtsherr@xxxxxxxxxxx,
mcneilel@xxxxxxx, oca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
scott.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
governor.rell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, attorney.general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
randall.samborn@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: NYTIMES: Yale's Lyme & Corporate Spy, Durland Fish screws
up US GPS monopoly

WELP, once again we can thank Russia for helping to putting an end to Mossad-Yalie-NYMC
(Durland Fish, Mark Klempner, Allen Steere, Alan Barbour, Gary
Wormser, Robert Schoen,
Larry Zemel, Henry Feder, Lenny Sigal, Eugene Shapiro, Etc, Inc)
Spying, Biotech
& Bioweapons FRAUD, aiding and abetting Israel, and related
shenanigans.

http://www.actionlyme.org/index.htm

US-acquired Russian scientists defraud over the spheroplast form of the spirochete
& bioweapons (HLA) data-mine (This means they are looking for
differences in
genetic susceptibilities to diseases, which has bioweapons value.
Verify independently.):
http://www.actionlyme.org/BOGUS_RUSSIAN_NYMC_ARTICLES.htm

http://www.actionlyme.org/YOUTUBEVIDEOS.htm

GAME OVER, FOOLS.
====================================

The New York Times

April 4, 2007
Russia Challenges the U.S. Monopoly on Satellite Navigation
By ANDREW E. KRAMER

MOSCOW, April 3 - The days of their cold war may have passed, but Russia and
the United States are in the midst of another battle - this one a
technological
fight over the United States monopoly on satellite navigation.

By the end of the year, the authorities here say, the Russian space agency plans
to launch eight navigation satellites that would nearly complete the
country's own
system, called Glonass, for Global Navigation Satellite System.

The system is expected to begin operating over Russian territory and parts of
adjacent Europe and Asia, and then go global in 2009 to compete with
the Global
Positioning System of the United States.

Nor is Russia the only country trying to break the American monopoly on navigation
technology. China has already sent up satellites to create its own
system, called
Baidu after the Chinese word for the Big Dipper. And the European
Union has also
begun developing a rival system, Galileo, although work has been
halted because
of doubts among the private contractors over its potential for
profits. Russia's
system is furthest along, paid for with government oil revenue.

What is driving the technological battle is, in part, the potential for many
more uses for satellite navigation than the one most people know it
for - giving
driving instructions to travelers. Businesses as disparate as
agriculture and banking
are integrating it into their operations. Satellite navigation may
provide the platform
for services like site-specific advertising, with directions that
appear on cellphone
screens when a user is walking, for example, near a Starbucks coffee
shop or a McDonald's
restaurant.

Sales of G.P.S. devices are already booming. The global market for the devices
hit $15 billion in 2006, according to the GPS Industry Council, a
Washington trade
group, and is expanding at a rate of 25 to 30 percent annually.

But what is also behind the battle for control of navigation technology is a
fear that the United States could use its monopoly - the system was
developed and
is controlled by the military, after all - to switch off signals in a
time of crisis.

"In a few years, business without a navigation signal will become inconceivable,"
said Andrei G. Ionin, an aerospace analyst with the Center for the
Analysis of Strategies
and Technologies, which is linked to the Russian defense ministry.
"Everything that
moves will use a navigation signal - airplanes, trains, yachts,
people, rockets,
valuable animals and favorite pets."

When that happens, countries that choose to rely only on G.P.S., he said, will
be falling into "a geopolitical trap" of American dominance of an
important Internet-age
infrastructure. The United States could theoretically deny navigation
signals to
countries like Iran and North Korea, not just in time of war, but as a
high-tech
form of economic sanction that could disrupt power grids, banking
systems and other
industries, he said. The United States government's stated policy is
to provide
uninterrupted signals globally.

G.P.S. devices, in fact, are at the center of the dispute over the Iranian seizure
of 15 British sailors and marines. The British maintain that the
devices on their
boats showed they were in Iraqi waters; the Iranians have countered
with map coordinates
that it said showed they had been in Iranian waters.

Russia's project, of course, carries wide implications for armies around the
world by providing a navigation system not controlled by the Pentagon,
complementing
Moscow's increasingly assertive foreign policy stance.

The United States formally opened G.P.S. to civilian users in 1993 by promising
to provide it continually, at no cost, around the world.

The Russian system is also calculated to send ripples through the fast-expanding
industry for consumer navigation devices by promising a slight
technical advantage
over G.P.S. alone, analysts and industry executives say. Devices
receiving signals
from both systems would presumably be more reliable.

President Vladimir V. Putin, who speaks often about Glonass and its possibilities,
has prodded his scientists to make the product consumer friendly.

"The network must be impeccable, better than G.P.S., and cheaper if we want
clients to choose Glonass," Mr. Putin said last month at a Russian
government meeting
on the system, according to the Interfax news agency.

"You know how much I care about Glonass," Mr. Putin told his ministers.

G.P.S. has its roots in the American military in the 1960s. In 1983, before
the system was fully functional, President Ronald Reagan suggested
making it available
to civilian users around the world after a Korean Air flight strayed
into Soviet
airspace and was shot down.

G.P.S. got its first military test in the Persian Gulf war in 1991, and was
seen as a big reason for the success of the precision bombing
campaign, which helped
spur its adoption in commercial applications in the 1990s.

The Russian system, like America's G.P.S., has roots in the cold war technology
to guide strategic bombers and missiles. It was briefly operational in
the mid-1990s,
but fell into disrepair. The Russian satellites send signals that are
usable now
but work only intermittently.

To operate globally, a system needs a minimum of 24 satellites, the number in
the G.P.S. constellation, not counting spares in orbit.

A receiver must be in line of sight of no fewer than three satellites at any
time to triangulate an accurate position. A fourth satellite is needed
to calculate
altitude. As other countries introduce competing systems, devices
capable of receiving
foreign signals along with G.P.S. will more often be in line of sight
of three or
more satellites.

Within the United States, Western Europe and Japan, ground-based transmissions
hone the accuracy of signals to within a few feet of a location -
better than what
could be achieved with satellite signals alone. The Russian and
eventual European
or Chinese systems, therefore, would make receivers more reliable in
preventing
signal loss when there are obstructions, like steep canyons, tall
buildings or even
trees.

Still, a Glonass-capable G.P.S. receiver in the United States, Western Europe
or Japan would not be more accurate than a G.P.S. system alone,
because of the ground-based
correction signals. In other parts of the world, a Glonass-capable
G.P.S. receiver
would be more reliable and slightly more accurate.

American manufacturers that are dominant in the industry could be confronted
with pressure to offer these advantages to customers by making devices
compatible
with the Russian system, inevitably undermining the American monopoly
on navigation
signals used in commerce.

In this sense, the Russians are setting off the first salvo in a battle for
an infrastructure in the skies. Russia sees a great deal at stake in
influencing
the standards that will be used in civilian consumer devices.

The market for satellite navigators is growing rapidly. Garmin, the largest
American manufacturer, more than doubled sales of automobile
navigators in 2006,
for example, and in February it showed a Super Bowl ad that was seen
as a coming
of age for G.P.S. navigators as a mass market product.

Jeremy D. Ludwig was one consumer who said he would be willing to pay a slight
premium for a device equipped with a chip capable of processing
Russian navigation
signals.

He recounted a recent trip on Interstate 25 in Colorado, when, he said, he was
dismayed to discover the G.P.S. device on his BlackBerry had
inexplicably lost its
signal, just as he was trying to decide which exit to take into
Denver.

"If you don't know which exit to take, you're already lost," Mr. Ludwig, an
art student, said in a recent telephone interview from Colorado
Springs.

That kind of attitude is what Russia is banking on even as it also takes a stab
at making consumer receivers - so far without much success. But the
Russian goal
of diversifying navigation signals used in commerce will be achieved,
Mr. Ionin
said, even if foreign manufacturers simply adopt the Russian standard,
and even
if Russia's own attempt to make consumer devices fails.

To encourage wide acceptance, Mr. Putin has been pitching the system during
foreign visits, asking for collaboration and financial support.

Now, only makers of high-end surveying and professional navigation receivers
have adopted dual-system capability.

Topcon Positioning Systems of Livermore, Calif., for example, offers a Glonass
and G.P.S. receiver for surveyors and heavy-equipment operators. Javad
Navigation
Systems is built around making dual-system receivers, with offices in
San Jose and
Moscow.

Javad Ashjaee, the president of Javad, said in an interview that wide adoption
was inevitable because more satellites provided an inherently better
service. "If
you have G.P.S., you have 90 percent of what you need," he said.
Russia's system
will succeed, he said, "for that extra 10 percent."

Adding Glonass to low-end consumer devices would require a new chip, with associated
design costs, but probably not much in the way of additional
manufacturing expenses,
he said.

Already this year, in a sign of growing acceptance of Glonass, another high-end
manufacturer, Trimble, based in Sunnyvale, Calif., introduced a
Russian-compatible
device for agricultural navigators, used for applying pesticides, for
example.

Whether consumer goods manufacturers will follow is an open question, John R.
Bucher, a wireless equipment analyst at BMO Capital Markets, said in a
telephone
interview.

Garmin, which has more than 50 percent of the American market, has not yet taken
a position on Glonass. "We are waiting," Jessica Myers, a spokeswoman
for Garmin,
said in a telephone interview.

For most consumers, she said, devices are reliable enough already. Growth in
the industry is driven instead by better digital mapping and software,
making what
already exists more useful. Garmin's latest car navigator, for
example, alerts drivers
to traffic jams on the road ahead and the price of gas at nearby
stations.

At home at least, the Kremlin is guaranteeing a market by requiring ships, airplanes
and trucks carrying hazardous materials to operate with Glonass
receivers, while
providing grants to half a dozen Russian manufacturers of navigators.

Technically precise they may be, but even by Russian standards, some of the
Russian-made products coming to market now are noticeably lacking in
convenience
features.

At the Russian Institute of Radionavigation and Time in St. Petersburg, for
example, scientists have developed the M-103 dual system receiver. The
precision
device theoretically operates more reliably than a G.P.S. unit under
tough conditions,
like the urban canyons of Manhattan.

With its boxy appearance, the M-103 resembles a Korean War-era military walkie-talkie.
It weighs about one pound and sells for $1,000, display screen not
included. To
operate, a user must unfurl a cable linking the set to an external
antenna mounted
on a spiked stick, intended to be jabbed into a field.

"Unfortunately, we haven't developed a hand-held version yet," said Vadim S.
Zholnerov, a deputy director of the institute.

Home

* World
* U.S.
* N.Y. / Region
* Business
* Technology
* Science
* Health
* Sports
* Opinion
* Arts
* Style
* Travel
* Jobs
* Real Estate
* Automobiles
* Back to Top

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

* Privacy Policy
* Search
* Corrections
* RSS
* First Look
* Help
* Contact Us
* Work for Us
* Site Map







Previous | Next | Back to Sent
Write Message ( Plain | Color and Graphics )

Email Addresses from Address Book or enter nicknames (separated by
commas)
To
Cc
Bcc
Subject

Save a copy to your 'Sent' folder. Spell Check Message
Attachment


(10MB message size limit)

© 2007 EarthLink, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Members and visitors to the EarthLink Web site agree to abide by our
Policies and Agreements
EarthLink Privacy Policy

.