Officials of the New York Police Department - which considers itself at the forefront of counterterrorism since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks - claim the money would be well-spent, especially since the revelations that al-Qaida members once cased the New York Stock Exchange and other financial institutions.

"We have every reason to believe New York remains in the cross-hairs, so we have to do what it takes to protect the city," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said last week at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.

The city already has about 1,000 cameras in the subways, with 2,100 scheduled to be in place by 2008. An additional 3,100 cameras monitor city housing projects.

Homeland Security officials in Washington plan to spend $9.8 million for surveillance cameras and sensors on a rail line near the Capitol. And Philadelphia has increasingly relied on video surveillance.

Privacy advocates say the NYPD's camera plan needs more study and safeguards to preserve privacy and guard against abuses like racial profiling and voyeurism.

The department "is installing cameras first and asking questions later," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

Police officials insist that law-abiding New Yorkers have nothing to fear because the cameras will be restricted to public areas. The police commissioner recently established a panel of four corporate defense lawyers to advise the department on surveillance policies.

"The police department must be flexible to meet an ever changing threat," Kelly said. "We also have to ensure whatever measures we take are reasonable as the Constitution requires. That's the only way to retain public support and preserve individual freedoms."

Lieberman concedes cameras can help investigators identify suspects once a crime has been committed, but argues they can't prevent crime. She cited a 2002 study which concluded that surveillance cameras used in 14 British cities had little or no impact on crime rates - just as they didn't keep terrorists from bombing the London subway system last year.

"The London experience shouldn't be misconstrued that the 'ring of steel' prevents terrorism," she said. "But that's how it's being pitched."

Still, New York police were impressed that their British counterparts drew on 80,000 videotapes to identify and retrace the routes of the subway system suicide bombers and the suspects in a failed follow-up attack.

Timothy Horner, a specialist with the Kroll security firm and a former NYPD captain, said the measures make sense.

"It's not a cure-all, and the department is not thinking that way," he said. "But we really want law enforcement to use whatever tools they can to keep us safe."

Also speaking at the conference, the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice tried to offer reassurance. "I know some of our initial security measures after 11 September have ... led some foreign citizens to believe that the United States is no longer welcoming to them," she said. "We're doing everything we can to improve our visa policy."

Delegates rose and applauded, but whether the system will become more acceptable to the industry and travellers alike is debatable. Controversially, the US authorities are now looking to increase their reliance on biometrics, or biological data.

For example, the US wants to introduce a 10-finger scan at Customs instead of the current index-finger requirement. All fingerprints go through a database of the FBI and Interpol's most-wanted, including known or suspected terrorists and child abusers. (Also targeted are those with previous immigration violations - for all the talk of terrorism, the US is very keen, too, on keeping out ordinary illegal immigrants.) Advocates of the 10-finger scan say it will make it harder for anyone to slip through this net.

Meanwhile, the authorities continue to take an interest in the use of iris-scanning technology, although costs are currently considered prohibitive. Each individual iris is unique, providing a fail-safe means of identification that cannot be burnt or scratched.

James Williams, director of the US-Visit programme at the Department of Homeland Security, argues that measures such as these - far from adding to the burden - will make entry procedures simpler.

"Other countries, like the UK and Japan, are looking at introducing biometrics," he says. "As we provide more information about that [person's] visa through biometrics, it gives more objective measures to the law officers."

All your visa data - fingerprints, date of birth, details of your spouse - are kept by the US authorities for 75 years. The information can be shared with the FBI, border protection officials, immigration authorities and the Department of State.

Critics remain uneasy about the vast amount of information the US demands. But while its immigration process may all seem "a bit Big Brother" - as even Mr Williams's deputy, Robert Mocny, concedes - talks continue between the US and other countries about establishing an "international standard" on biometrics and electronic passports. Indeed, the department is now looking to have a member of staff seconded to the UK.

"It's not just what the US wants to do," says Mr Williams. "We're all in the same global battle against terrorism. It's about moving towards a world where you guard the good people and make it hard for the bad people. I don't care if a fingerprint is in Bali, Madrid or London - if it's a bad guy, all countries should be saying, 'Let's stop him'."

A French delay in producing the new documents - caused by a labour dispute at the state printing firm - had caused a visa logjam for thousands of French travellers heading to the United States.

Interior ministry secretary general Daniel Canepa said the first electronic passports would include a microchip with personal data and a digital photograph of the bearer.

Full biometric passports, also including a digital fingerprint, are to be introduced from 2009.

France's roll-out of e-passports was held up because of a dispute sparked by the interior ministry's decision to ask a private company to produce the new documents instead of the state printing firm.

"The Northrop Grumman team worked vigilantly to help the Air Force deploy two Global Hawks this January," said Jerry Madigan, who leads Northrop Grumman's High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) systems.

"At the same time, we have worked hard to ensure the successful delivery of this Global Hawk. Now, we are looking forward to completing the final assembly and first flight of the next-generation, enhanced-version Global Hawk this year.

"This next-generation Global Hawk will be able to carry 1,000 pounds more payload than the current version, which fulfills one of our customer's most important requirements."

The seventh RQ-4 Global Hawk is scheduled for delivery to the Air Force this summer. The Navy acquired two RQ-4's for their Maritime Demonstration Program.

Global Hawk flies autonomously at an altitude of at least 60,000 feet, well above inclement weather and prevailing winds for more than 35 hours. During a single mission, it can travel more than 10,000 nautical miles from its take-off location, and it provides detailed image-based intelligence on 40,000 square miles, which is approximately the size of Illinois.

To date, deployed Global Hawks have flown more than 5,500 combat hours in more than 250 missions in support of the war on terrorism.

New Jersey's ban prohibits cigar, cigarette and pipe smoking in restaurants, bars, private office buildings and other indoor places, with fines of $250 to $1,000 for people who light up and the businesses that let them. Casino industry officials convinced lawmakers a ban would keep gamblers away and cut into profits earned by the casinos and shared by the state.

The state becomes the 11th to ban indoor smoking. There are similar bans in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

Those who work around cigarette smoke were thankful.

"I'm looking forward to it," said Jennifer Williams, 25, a bartender at The Princeton in Avalon. "You go home smelling awful every night."

The law was passed to cut down on workers' exposure to secondhand smoke, which health officials say claims up to 1,800 lives a year in New Jersey alone.

But many bar owners and Atlantic City casino employees were still furious about the law because of the casino exemption. Casino employees say the law reduces them to second-class citizens whose health isn't as important as that of workers in places covered by the ban.

"I'm outraged that the men and women who work on the casino floor will be breathing smoke, while the rest of New Jersey's work force will not," said Al DeSimone, 44, a veteran dealer.

A coalition of bars, restaurants and bowling alley operators is suing over the ban. On Thursday, a judge rejected the group's bid to temporarily postpone the effective date of the ban, but the underlying lawsuit is still pending.