Federal Agency Collected Extensive Personal Data About Airline Passengers Despite Pledge
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal agency collected extensive personal information about airline passengers although Congress told it not to and it said it wouldn't, according to documents obtained Monday by The Associated Press.
A Transportation Security Administration contractor used three data brokers to collect detailed information about U.S. citizens who flew on commercial airlines in June 2004 in order to test a terrorist screening program called Secure Flight, according to documents that will be published in the Federal Register this week.
The TSA had ordered the airlines to turn over data on those passengers, called passenger name records, in November."
and U.S. Law Officers Seek Library Patron Data
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. librarians say they have been asked at least 268 times since 2001 to give law officers data about readers, despite repeated Justice Department denials that it is interested in patrons' reading habits.
A survey released this week by the American Library Association found the inquiries from law enforcement came formally and informally -- that is, without a formal legal order -- to public and academic libraries. That is despite laws in 48 states and prevailing opinion in the other two that library information is private.
'Now we have solid information that no matter what the Justice Department is saying, they are interested in libraries because they are coming, and not once or twice, but in appreciable numbers,' Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the library association's Washington office, said on Tuesday.
This story vanished off of yahoo from yesterday, but hey while double checking for this post I noticed that the House Approves Flag-Burning Amendment
"WASHINGTON - The House on Wednesday approved a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure that for the first time stands a chance of passing the Senate as well.
By a 286-130 vote -eight more than needed- House members approved the amendment after a debate over whether such a ban would uphold or run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections.
Approval of two-thirds of the lawmakers present was required to send the bill on to the Senate, where activists on both sides say it stands the best chance of passage in years. If the amendment is approved in that chamber by a two-thirds vote, it would then move to the states for ratification.
Honestly, what country am I living in?
Post a Comment