Money laundering and foreign corruption : enforcement and effectiveness of the PATRIOT Act : hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, second session, July 15, 2004.

Shipping list no.: 2005-0044-P.

La cooperación en América del Norte : de las seguridades económica y militar a la bioseguridad (2001-2009)

El nuevo orden internacional derivado de la Guerra Fría se caracterizó por la multiplicación de nuevas amenazas a la seguridad y la construcción de bloques regionales con el propósito de enfrentarlas. Esta investigación plantea que bajo tales circunstancias, en América del Norte, fue adoptada una agenda ampliada y profundizada en materia de seguridad que permitió articular las seguridades económica, militar y la bioseguridad. En este sentido, la configuración de dicha agenda fue posible gracias a la adopción de una retórica neoliberal de seguridad económica desde la puesta en marcha del Tratado de Libre Comercio en 1994, la cual luego del 11 de septiembre de 2001 fue articulada con la agenda de seguridad militar propuesta por el gobierno estadounidense en materia de lucha antiterrorista, que a su turno permitió la adopción de una retórica y unas medidas extraordinarias en materia de bioseguridad, motivada por los ataques bioterroristas con ántrax en EE.UU., el brote de SARS en Canadá y la pandemia de AH1N1 en México.

Library Privacy Policies in 2015: Strategies for Renewed Relevance

In recent decades, library associations have advocated for the adoption of privacy and confidentiality policies as practical support to the Library Code of Ethics with a threefold purpose to (1) define and uphold privacy practices within the library, (2) convey privacy practices to patrons and, (3) protect against potential liability and public relations problems. The adoption of such policies has been instrumental in providing libraries with effective responses to surveillance initiatives such as warrantless requests and the USA PATRIOT ACT. Nevertheless, as reflected in recent news stories, the rapid emergence of data brokerage relationships and technologies and the increasing need for libraries to utilize third party vendor services have increased opportunities for data surveillers to access patrons’ personal information and reading habits, which are funneled and made available through multiple online library service platforms. Additionally, the advice that libraries should “contract for the same level of privacy reflected in their privacy policies” is no longer realistic given that the existence of multiple vendor contracts negotiated at arms length is likely to produce varying privacy terms and even varying definitions of what constitutes personal information (PII). These conditions sharply threaten the effectiveness and relevance of library privacy policies and privacy initiatives in that such policies increasingly offer false comfort by failing to reflect privacy weaknesses in the data sharing landscape and vendor contracts when library-vendor contracts fail to keep up with vendor data sharing capabilities. While some argue that library privacy ethics are antiquated and rendered obscure in the current online sharing economy PEW studies point to pronounced public discomfort with increasing privacy erosion. At the same time, new directions in FTC enforcement raise the possibility that public institutions’ privacy policies may serve as swords to unfair or deceptive commercial trade practices – offering the potential of renewed relevance for library privacy and confidentiality policies. This dual coin of public concern and the potential for enhanced FTC enforcement suggests that when crafting privacy polices libraries must now walk the knife’s edge by offering patrons both realistic notice about the limitations of protections the library can ensure while at the same time publicly holding vendors accountable to library privacy ethics and expectations. Potential solutions for how to walk this edge are developed and offered as a subject for further discussion to assist the modification of model policies for both public and academic libraries alike.

Securitização e política de exceção: o excepcionalismo internacionalista norte-americano na segunda Guerra do Iraque

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Internet Civil Liberties in the U.S. and the Protection of the Modern Terrorist

This capstone examines the civil liberties of the modern terrorist and explicates the right to freedom of speech for terrorist organizations and their use of the internet. Terrorist organizations use the internet to promote ideas, recruit members, organize the flow of information, and coordinate actions. During the war on terror the US Patriot Act became law allowing for U.S. government censorship and surveillance of internet traffic and many believe these acts are a threat to civil liberties. Terrorist organizations have the right to express their views, however unpopular, and censoring or restricting web sites diminishes civil liberties for all, which democracies and liberal societies are founded upon.

Conceptualizing American power and security in a post -9/11 security context: Conflict, resistance, and global security, 2001–present

In a post-Cold War, post-9/11 world, the advent of US global supremacy resulted in the installation, perpetuation, and dissemination of an Absolutist Security Agenda (hereinafter, ASA). The US ASA explicitly and aggressively articulates and equates US national security interests with the security of all states in the international system, and replaced the bipolar, Cold War framework that defined international affairs from 1945-1992. Since the collapse of the USSR and the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks, the US has unilaterally defined, implemented, and managed systemic security policy. The US ASA is indicative of a systemic category of knowledge (security) anchored in variegated conceptual and material components, such as morality, philosophy, and political rubrics. The US ASA is based on a logic that involves the following security components: (1) hyper militarization, (2) intimidation,(3) coercion, (4) criminalization, (5) panoptic surveillance, (6) plenary security measures, and (7) unabashed US interference in the domestic affairs of select states. Such interference has produced destabilizing tensions and conflicts that have, in turn, produced resistance, revolutions, proliferation, cults of personality, and militarization. This is the case because the US ASA rests on the notion that the international system of states is an extension, instrument of US power, rather than a system and/or society of states comprised of functionally sovereign entities. To analyze the US ASA, this study utilizes: (1) official government statements, legal doctrines, treaties, and policies pertaining to US foreign policy; (2) militarization rationales, budgets, and expenditures; and (3) case studies of rogue states. The data used in this study are drawn from information that is publicly available (academic journals, think-tank publications, government publications, and information provided by international organizations). The data supports the contention that global security is effectuated via a discrete set of hegemonic/imperialistic US values and interests, finding empirical expression in legal acts (USA Patriot ACT 2001) and the concept of rogue states. Rogue states, therefore, provide test cases to clarify the breadth, depth, and consequentialness of the US ASA in world affairs vis-à-vis the relationship between US security and global security.

Conceptualizing American power and security in a post-9/11 security context : conflict, resistance, and global security, 2001-present

In a post-Cold War, post-9/11 world, the advent of US global supremacy resulted in the installation, perpetuation, and dissemination of an Absolutist Security Agenda (hereinafter, ASA). The US ASA explicitly and aggressively articulates and equates US national security interests with the security of all states in the international system, and replaced the bipolar, Cold War framework that defined international affairs from 1945-1992. Since the collapse of the USSR and the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks, the US has unilaterally defined, implemented, and managed systemic security policy. The US ASA is indicative of a systemic category of knowledge (security) anchored in variegated conceptual and material components, such as morality, philosophy, and political rubrics. The US ASA is based on a logic that involves the following security components: 1., hyper militarization, 2., intimidation, 3., coercion, 4., criminalization, 5., panoptic surveillance, 6., plenary security measures, and 7., unabashed US interference in the domestic affairs of select states. Such interference has produced destabilizing tensions and conflicts that have, in turn, produced resistance, revolutions, proliferation, cults of personality, and militarization. This is the case because the US ASA rests on the notion that the international system of states is an extension, instrument of US power, rather than a system and/or society of states comprised of functionally sovereign entities. To analyze the US ASA, this study utilizes: 1., official government statements, legal doctrines, treaties, and policies pertaining to US foreign policy; 2., militarization rationales, budgets, and expenditures; and 3., case studies of rogue states. The data used in this study are drawn from information that is publicly available (academic journals, think-tank publications, government publications, and information provided by international organizations). The data supports the contention that global security is effectuated via a discrete set of hegemonic/imperialistic US values and interests, finding empirical expression in legal acts (USA Patriot ACT 2001) and the concept of rogue states. Rogue states, therefore, provide test cases to clarify the breadth, depth, and consequentialness of the US ASA in world affairs vis-a-vis the relationship between US security and global security.

Universities, SMEs and innovation frameworks : think global, act local?

Universities are increasingly encouraged to take a leading role in economic development, particularly through innovation. Simultaneously, economic development policy itself is increasingly focused on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), creating overlapping interactions in the roles of government policy, universities and SMEs and the processes of innovation creation and dissemination. This paper examines issues arising from these developments and relating to the key stakeholders (industry, government and universities in particular), the enabling mechanisms (network governance, relevant education, training and learning, and suitable structures), and local and cross-local links. The authors then use quantitative analysis of 450 SMEs in the UK to begin to evaluate the roles of universities and highlight areas for further theoretical development.