Library Juice 4:39 - October 31, 2001

Contents:

1. New Library Juice policy on the "at" sign
2. OMB Watch list of material removed from government websites since 9/11
3. Wayback goes Way Back on web
4. Military is putting heavier limits on reporters' access
5. A Common Ground - Intellectual Freedom and Social Responsibility
6. Copyright as Cultural Policy
7. Academic Freedom Statement
8. CDT Policy Post on new anti-terrorism law
9. Bill Gordon's message on the USA Patriot ACT, and responses
10. Internet Filters: A Public Policy Report
11. 2nd Library Tour of Cuba
12. Antipode
13. Three for Halloween
14. Geek Culture/Librarian Humor
15. Amusing Searches Galore

Quote for the week:

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause
and reflect." --Mark Twain

Homepage of the week: Juanita Benedicto
http://www.uoregon.edu/~juanitab/

________________________________________________________________________top

1. New Library Juice policy on the "at" sign

From this issue forward, "[at]" signs in email addresses will be converted
to a spelled-out "at" before the issue is put on the web. This is
because spam companies crawl the web looking for email addresses and
grab them from sites like mine. I feel badly about contributing to spam
in contributors' inboxes, so I'm going to "hide" their email addresses
from web crawlers in this fashion. The emailed version will retain the
properly formed email addresses.

Rory
________________________________________________________________________top

2. OMB Watch list of material removed from government websites since 9/11

http://www.ombwatch.org/info/2001/access.html

________________________________________________________________________top

3. Wayback goes Way Back on web

The Internet Archive (www.archive.org) and Alexa Internet have built a tool
that can bring Web users backwards in time. Sort of. The Wayback Machine is
an archive of Web pages reaching back to 1996. A free service, the Wayback
Machine (http://web.archive.org) is a record of how the Web has evolved over
time. "It's preserving a record of something that otherwise literally
vanishes," said Paul Grabowicz, Assistant dean at University of California
in Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism. "That is one of the
frustrations about the Web." Researchers at Xerox PARC are reportedly using
the archive to study new user interfaces and languages on the Web. The tool
also has potential uses for Web designers (finally your resum? can reflect
your experience), scholars, attorneys and journalists.
[SOURCE: Wired, AUTHOR: Kendra Mayfield]
(http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,47894,00.html)
See Also:
PAGE BY PAGE HISTORY OF THE WEB
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: John Schwartz]
(http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/29/technology/ebusiness/29NECO.html)

[From the Benton Communications-related Headlines for 10/29/01]
________________________________________________________________________top

4. Military is putting heavier limits on reporters' access

During World War II, accredited journalists from leading news organizations
were on the front lines to give the public an independent description of
what was happening. In the new war on terrorism, however, journalists have
had limited access to many of the United States forces that are carrying out
the war. There were no reporters on the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk, for
example, when commandos jumped into their helicopters and headed toward
Afghanistan. Pentagon officials acknowledge the current limitations on the
media, but insist that they are an inevitable result of the requirements of
operational security and political sensitivities among the American
partners. Nations like Pakistan, Oman and Uzbekistan are not eager to
advertise the extent of their cooperation with the United States.

[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Michael R. Gordon]
(http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/21/international/21VIDE.html)

[From the Benton Communications-related Headlines for 10/22/01]
________________________________________________________________________top

5. A Common Ground - Intellectual Freedom and Social Responsibility

http://www.librariansanonymous.com/IFSR3/

Intellectual freedom and social responsibility (IFSR) are two concepts that
librarianship must bring together as one. This website is intended to serve
as a forum for library students to voice their opinions and to share with
others their thoughts and experiences on this complex yet integral part of
our profession.

There are no hard and fast definitions of intellectual freedom and its
relationship to social responsibility. Intellectual freedom has often come
to represent: equal access to free expression on all points of view on
social issues for all library users. Social responsibilty takes these core
beliefs and provides a context for real-world application. Toni Samek noted
in Feliciter, "advocates of social responsibility see librarians as agents
of social change and find fault with the idea of library neutrality in the
traditional functions of collections and services, charging that libraries
are vehicles of dominant ideology to the exclusion of marginalized groups
like the homeless, youth, gays and lesbians, women, ethnic minorities, and
political radicals."

Taralee Alcock, a former U of A student, has written an excellent
historical synopsis entitled "Free speech for librarians? A review of
socially responsible librarianship, 1967-1999."
http://www.slis.ualberta.ca/cap99/talcock/srpaper.htm

Whether you realize it or not, your opinions count and you should feel free
to express them. This site is an excellent opportunity to share your work
and thoughts with other students and library colleagues. Too many good
papers go unread! Please don't let your professors be the only ones to
enjoy your work. Submit links to your papers so that others can learn and
benefit from your well spent time and energy. Please see the very simple
guidelines for more information on this.

One of the purposes of this site is to raise awareness about IFSR issues
that affect the profession. Please post comments, stories and links that
you feel are important for others to know about. This is intended to be an
open forum on IFSR issues and therefore, we wish to encourage dialogue from
as wide a variety of opinions as we can. Responses are encouraged for all
contributions, so please contribute and make this as meaningful a
conversation as possible. Please make a selection from the menu to begin
reading what others have to say or to join in a discussion.

http://www.librariansanonymous.com/IFSR3/
________________________________________________________________________top

6. Copyright as Cultural Policy

Executive Summary:
http://www.culturalpolicy.org/pubs/shapiro.pdf

"While much recent media attention has focused on the impacts on copyright
enforceability of digital technologies and the Internet, the contemporary
public policy discussion has often lost sight of the legal foundation of
the U.S. copyright system. The Copyright Clause, enshrined in Article I of
the constitution, is the cornerstone of that system. The Copyright Clause
provides Congress with the power to grant to authors and inventors for
limited times the exclusive right in their writings and inventions to
promote the progress of science and useful arts.

"Each technological advance has forced successive Congresses and federal
courts to wrestle with unresolved questions embodied in the Copyright
Clause. Is copyright an authors right, entitling the origial creature to
capture the full economic benefit when technology creates new markets for
creative works? Is copyright essentially a private property interest,
allowing subsequent copyright owners to appropriate a significant share of
the value embodied in creative works? Or is copyright a users right,
making the public at large the primary beneficiary of technological change
through increased availability of cultural products and services? To
establish a common vocabulary to discus these questions, this issue paper
begins by identifying the historic rationales for copyright in the United
States..."
________________________________________________________________________top

7. Academic Freedom Statement

Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 16:12:44 -0800
From: Academic Freedom <academicfreedomnow(at)hotmail.com>
To: academicfreedomnow(at)hotmail.com
Subject: Academic Freedom Statement

The following statement in defense of academic freedom is being circulated
by concerned faculty members. If you would like to endorse the statement,
please send your name, academic position and affiliation, and contact
information to academicfreedomnow(at)hotmail.com. Non-academic endorsers are
also welcome.

We hope to publish the statement as a full page ad in the New York Times and
possibly other media outlets with the names of hundreds or thousands of
endorsers. The cost will be many thousands of dollars. If you would like to
make a contribution towards the cost of publishing the statement, please
send a check to:

Center for Economic Research and Social Change
P.O. Box 258082
Chicago, IL 60625

Mark your check "Academic Freedom Ad".

Please contact the email address above if you have any questions or
comments.

......................................

To fellow teachers and staff members:

In the crisis precipitated by the terrible events of September 11, members
of academic communities across the U.S. have participated in teach-ins,
colloquia, demonstrations, and other events aimed at developing an informed
critical understanding of what happened and why. Now that the U.S. is
waging war in Afghanistan, such acitivites are continuing.

Unfortunately, some participants in these events have been threatened and
attacked for speaking out. Trustees of the City University of New York are
planning formal denunciations of faculty members who criticized U.S. foreign
policy at a teach-in during the first week in October. There have been
similar efforts to silence criticism and dissent at the University of Texas
at Austin, MIT, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the
University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and elsewhere. AAUP director of
public policy Ruth Flower told the Boston Globe on October 6, "We're
watching these developments with a lot of concern."

Attacks on faculty who have questioned or dissented from the Bush
administration's current war policy have coincided with other ominous
developments. Colleges and universities are being pressured by agencies of
the federal government to hand over confidential information from
studentfiles. And there are moves in Congress to limit visas for students
from abroad.

We call on all members of the the academic community to speak out strongly
in defense of academic freedom and civil liberties, not just as an abstract
principle but as a practical necessity. At a moment such as this we must
make sure that all informed voices-especially those that are critical and
dissenting-are heard.

Anatole Anton
Professor of Philosophy, San Francisco State University

Dana Cloud
Associate Professor of Communication, University of Texas at Austin

Donna Flayhan
Assistant Professor of Communication & Media Studies, Goucher College

Phil Gasper
Associate Professor of Philosophy, Notre Dame de Namur University

Richard Gibson
Associate Professor of Social Studies, San Diego State University

William Keach
Professor of English, Brown University

Tom Lewis
Professor of Spanish, University of Iowa

Edward Said
University Professor, Columbia University
________________________________________________________________________top

8. CDT Policy Post on new anti-terrorism law

CDT POLICY POST Volume 7, Number 11, October 26, 2001

A BRIEFING ON PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES AFFECTING CIVIL
LIBERTIES ONLINE
from
THE CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY AND TECHNOLOGY

CONTENTS:
(1) Anti-Terrorism Legislation Gutting Privacy Standards Becomes
Law
(2) Provisions Take Effect Immediately; Some "Sunset" in 2005
(3) New Law Requires Close Oversight; Other Civil Liberties Issues
Loom

_____________________________________

(1) ANTI-TERRORISM LEGISLATION GUTTING PRIVACY
STANDARDS BECOMES LAW

President Bush on October 26 signed into law an anti-terrorism
package that dismantles many privacy protections for
communications and personal data. Many of the provisions are not
limited to terrorism investigations, but apply to all criminal or
intelligence investigations.

This bill has been called a compromise but the only thing
compromised is our civil liberties.

The bill:

• Allows government agents to collect undefined new information
  about Web browsing and e-mail without meaningful judicial review;
• Allow Internet Service Providers, universities, network
  administrators to authorize surveillance of "computer trespassers"
  without a judicial order;
• Overrides existing state and federal privacy laws, allowing FBI to
  compel disclosure of any kind of records, including sensitive
  medical, educational and library borrowing records, upon the mere
  claim that they are connected with an intelligence investigation;
• Allows law enforcement agencies to search homes and offices
  without notifying the owner for days or weeks after, not only in
  terrorism cases, but in all cases - the so-called "sneak and peek"
  authority;
• Allows FBI to share with the CIA information collected in the name of
  a grand jury, thereby giving the CIA the domestic subpoena powers it
  was never supposed to have;
• Allows FBI to conduct wiretaps and secret searches in criminal
  cases using the lower standards previously used only for the
  purpose of collecting foreign intelligence.

The text of the legislation and analyses by CDT and others are online
at http://www.cdt.org/security/010911response.shtml
_____________________________________

(2) PROVISIONS TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY; SOME "SUNSET" IN
2005

As passed, some of the surveillance provisions expire, or "sunset," in
four years unless renewed by Congress. In four years, before any
extension of the provisions, CDT hopes that there will be a
Congressional review that will involve the deliberative balancing of
civil liberties and national security that was lacking from the current
debate.

CDT made it clear throughout the debate that terrorism was a
serious problem, that the U.S. counter-terrorism effort had failed on
September 11, and that changes to government security programs
were needed. What is doubly distressing about the new law is that it
was enacted without any examination of why existing authorities
failed to prevent the September 11 attacks.

It is our greatest concern that the changes will be worse than
ineffective - that, by cutting government agencies loose from
standards and judicial controls, they will result in the government
casting an even wider net, collecting more information on innocent
people, information that distracts the government from the task of
identifying those who are planning future attacks.

The sunset provision does not apply to the sharing of grand jury
information with the CIA, giving the CIA permanent benefit of the
grand jury powers. Nor does it apply to the provisions for sneak and
peek searches or the provision extending application of the pen
register and trap and trace law to the Internet.

The sunset also does not apply to ongoing investigations. Since
intelligence investigations often run for years, even decades, the
authorities will continue to be used even if they are not formally
extended in 2005.
______________________________________

(3) NEW LAW REQUIRES CLOSE OVERSIGHT; OTHER CIVIL
LIBERTIES ISSUES LOOM

Many threats to civil liberties loom in the short and mid-term. CDT is
planning a series of efforts to monitor implementation of the new law
as well as to counter additional efforts to erode privacy and other civil
liberties:

• CDT is calling upon Congress to exercise its oversight powers to
  conduct a probing and sustained review of how the new law is
  interpreted and applied. To that end, CDT will be working, through its
  Digital Privacy and Security Working Group, to share information
  among affected members of the telecommunications and Internet
  industry and other civil liberties groups. The co-chairs of the
  Congressional Internet Caucus have asked CDT to use DPSWG and
  the Internet Caucus Advisory Committee to examine the new law and
  future proposals.
• The FBI may be pushing for extension to the Internet of the
  Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, the 1994 law
  requiring telecommunications carriers -- but not providers of
  information services -- to build surveillance capabilities into their
  networks. Implementing CALEA in the traditional and wireless
  telephone networks has proven extremely contentious. Extending it
  to the Internet could have even worse consequences for network
  operations and security.
• CALEA for the Internet is only one shape that design mandates
  may take. European governments have been particularly aggressive
  in pushing data retention requirements -- rules requiring ISPs and
  others to maintain logs of all communications for a period of months.
  The issue of critical infrastructure protection also could serve as a
  vehicle for government controls on technology.
• Calls have been made for a national ID card. In addition to the civil
  liberties implications of hard copy identity cards, the concept poses
  additional risks if extended to the Internet. Several bills have been
  introduced or are being drafted calling for greater use of biometrics at
  the borders and in other contexts.
• Encryption is not entirely off the agenda. While Senator Judd Gregg
  pulled back from his announced intent to introduce mandatory key
  recovery legislation, the issue may return.
• At the behest of the new cyber-security czar, NSC official Richard
  Clarke, the Bush Administration issued a Request for Information
  (RFI) to the U.S. telecommunications industry seeking information
  and suggestions for the development of a special
  telecommunications network, separate from the Internet. The
  proposal's impact on e-government and citizen access to information
  is unclear, and it raises questions about the lack of government
  confidence in, and commitment to, the Internet.

____________________________________

Detailed information about online civil liberties issues may be found
at
http://www.cdt.org/.

This document may be redistributed freely in full or linked to
http://www.cdt.org/publications/pp_7.11.shtml

Excerpts may be re-posted with prior permission of ari(at)cdt.org

Policy Post 7.11 Copyright 2001 Center for Democracy and
Technology
---------------------------------------
CDT Policy Post Subscription Information

To subscribe to CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to majordomo(at)cdt.org In
the BODY of the message type "subscribe policy-posts" without the quotes.

To unsubscribe from CDT's Policy Post list, send mail to majordomo(at)cdt.org
In the BODY of the message type "unsubscribe policy-posts" without
the quotes.

Detailed information about online civil liberties issues may be found at
http://www.cdt.org/
________________________________________________________________________top

9. Bill Gordon's message on the USA Patriot ACT, and responses

From: William Gordon <wgordon(at)ala.org>
To: ALA Council List <alacoun(at)ala1.ala.org>
Subject: [ALACOUN:6529] USA PATRIOT ACT
Date: Friday, October 26, 2001 1:28 PM

The following information about the USA Patriot ACT was prepared by the
Office for Intellectual Freedom and reviewed by legal counsel. More
information on the Act is being developed and will be made available on
ALA's website.

On October 25, 2001, Congress passed the "Uniting and Strengthening
America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct
Terrorism Act" (USA PATRIOT Act.) This law broadly expands the powers of
federal law enforcement agencies investigating cases involving foreign
intelligence and international terrorism.

The new legislation amends the laws governing the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's access to business records. One provision orders any
person or institution served with a search warrant not to disclose that
such a warrant has been served or that records have been produced pursuant
to the warrant.

The existence of this provision does not mean that libraries and
librarians served with such a search warrant cannot ask to consult with
their legal counsel concerning the warrant. A library and its employees
can still seek legal advice concerning the warrant and request that the
library's legal counsel be present during the actual search and execution
of the warrant.

If you or your library are served with a warrant issued under this law,
and wish the advice of legal counsel but do not have an attorney, you can
still obtain assistance from Jenner & Block, the Freedom to Read
Foundation's legal counsel. Simply call the Office for Intellectual
Freedom and inform the staff that you need legal advice without disclosing
the reason you need legal assistance. OIF staff will assure that an
attorney from Jenner & Block returns your call. You do not and should not
inform OIF staff of the existence of the warrant.

..........................................................................

Re: [ALACOUN:6529] USA PATRIOT ACT
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:32:21 -0700
From: "Elaine Harger" <eharger(at)agoron.com>
To: "ALA Council List" <alacoun(at)ala1.ala.org>, <wgordon(at)ala.org>
Cc: "PLG" <plgnet-l(at)listproc.sjsu.edu>, "SRRT" <srrtac-l(at)ala.org>
Reply to: eharger(at)agoron.com

Dear Colleagues,

Bill Gordon's information regarding the "patriot act" is frightening.

What I think we need now is an answer to the following question:

If library personnel are served with such a warrent and decide to reveal to
library users that the FBI is in possession of library records, will those
library workers be arrested? Will revealing the fact that a warrant has
been served be considered an act of aiding and abedding terrorism?

Shall every library in the country post a sign on every computer that says:
"WARNING: Your use of this machine may be monitored by the FBI." Does
the same warning hang above every automated circulation system? What
impact would such warnings have on library use?

What is happening in the United States of America when a warrent served on
a LIBRARY must be kept a secret from even ALA's own Office of Intellectual
Freedom?

Is THIS the direction we want our country to go in?

Elaine Harger
Councilor-at-Large

..........................................................................

From: John Berry <jberry(at)library.berkeley.edu>
To: ALA Council List <alacoun(at)ala1.ala.org>
Subject: [ALACOUN:6532] RE: Aiding and Abetting-from John D. Berry
Date: Friday, October 26, 2001 3:51 PM

Dear Elaine,

While this is a time of concern in many venues, I think you need
to go back and carefully re-read what Bill Gordon sent. With special note
that you can seek legal council either from your libraries legal services
or from ALA's services. Thereby notifying ALA that such a warrant is in
process - ie then not a secret from ALA.

The other thoughts here are: Why would you want to warn the
"potential" bad guys/gals about FBI surveillance by putting up signs or
even saying anything - that should not be our business AND if you did
notify a "potential" bad guy/gal who is abusing his/her"privilege" by using
library services to plan or carry out terrorism - maybe that would/should
be grounds for being arrested as aiding and abetting. Do you want to catch
these fanatics or not? This law does have a sunset clause.
There are a million and one things that the patrons don't need
to know or be told about how things operate within libraries anyway.
Probably 9 out of 10 don't even care, they just want what they want when
they want it. Why would you worry anyone with such signs? If they are
doing nothing wrong - no worries. If they are - well then.

Sincerely Yours, John D. Berry,

ALA Councilor at Large
..........................................................................

RE: Aiding and Abetting-from John D. Berry
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 13:31:22 -0700
From: "Elaine Harger" <eharger(at)agoron.com>
To: ALA Council List <alacoun(at)ala1.ala.org>
Reply to: eharger(at)agoron.com

John,

I think _you_ need to reread Bill's message, which clearly states that a
library seeking legal counsel via OIF must _not_ reveal that a warrant has
been served.

>>You do not and should not inform OIF staff of the existence of >>the

warrant.

As for your concern that a warning sign might alert "bad guys/gals" of the
law, well then maybe such people will think twice before using library
facilities for criminal purposes.

I believe it is the library's _duty_ to inform patrons of this law. The
law itself is not secret, why should we act as if it were?

Of great concern to many people (myself included) is the potential abuse of
the law. ALA owes it to library patrons across the country to consider how
this will impact library use. I can easily imagine library patrons
self-censoring their legitimate library research out of fear that it might
be construed as questionable.

The current political climate of "you're either with us or you're with
them" puts free inquiry and the right to dissent at risk. This new law can
easily be used as a tool against anyone who dares to question and act to
oppose any U.S. policy.

Elaine Harger

..........................................................................

Librarians & the 'Patriot Act"
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 12:51:37 -0400
From: Mark Rosenzweig <iskra(at)earthlink.net>
To: alacoun(at)ala.org, alaoif(at)ala.org, member-forum(at)ala.org
Cc: plgnet-l(at)listproc.sjsu.edu, srrtac-l(at)ala.org, jberry(at)cahners.com
Reply to: iskra(at)earthlink.net

The official response to the
panicked, pressured passage of then 'Patriot Act' just sent to
librarians from ALA is necessary but insufficient.

As Counselor E. Harger aptly pointed out on the Council list
(ALACOUN),it is also wanting even at its most practical level of 'what
we can/should do' and whether we will be legally protected.

Especially of concern is the prohibition against 'warning' patrons of
their records having been 'produced pursuant to a warrant'. This may be
the 'law of the land' at the moment (although what it means is not
terribly clear) but if it is, then -- if libraries are not to be
reduced to secret staging areas for police actions, with the complicity
of a new de facto librarian-police force -- certain things are called
for.

I think, firstly, the rank-and-file librarian needs to know where ALA
stands in relation to this dubiously constitutional piece of
legislation which way overreaches the requirements of any rational
response to terrorism (according to the ACLU).

Do we accept this framework or are we prepared to challenge it, in
coalition with other concerned groups, both in our public statements
(which should be made -- and soon) and in our legislative activity?

Indeed, at this point one wonders: does ALA agree with the ACLU on the
ultra-extreme character of this legislation and the fact that its
implications are inimical the concepts which inform the Library Bill of
Rights? Or do we 'suspend" the Library Bill of Rights during
(undeclared) wartime?

Does ALA regard this legislation as ill-considered and ill-conceived,
especially with respect to our principal areas of responsibilities as
librarians, the protection of the first amendment rights, freedom of
information for the public (the public's "right to know"), and the
protection of the confidentiality of our patrons lawful library use? If
so, say so. Don't leave librarians wondering.

I assume it is a given that any action which permits dragnet
information surveillance in libraries must be considered unacceptable
as would the turning of librarians into undeputized agents of state
security, snooping on "suspicious looking" library users ('profiling'
etc). Perhaps this should be reaffirmed.

Then, of course, we should make it clear -- as policy (i.e. as
reflecting standing ALA policy) -- that we regard something like the
FBI blanket declaration of the library as an especially important
surveillance zone of security importance and the suborning of
librarians' 'cooperation' by legally silencing them, an unacceptable
intrusion into the library which violates everybody's rights in order
to possibly catch a 'suspicious' person, the suspicions against whom
may be entirely specious in the end, and the measures taken being one
more thing which creates an atmosphere changing the democratic,
constituional culture and values of our society under the pretext of
perhaps netting a few more 'suspects' to be held without charges , none
of whom may have anything to do with executed or planned acts of
terrorism?

If we indeed oppose this approach to the problem of criminal terrorism
and the FBI focus on the library within it, it would be incumbent upon
us to inform our patrons that their computer use and check-out records
were subject to surveillance by the FBI and that we were prepared to
challenge subpoenas and outright confiscations of library records as
implied by the Library Bill of Rights we uphold as our professional
credo.

Warning signs to this effect, suggested by Harger, posted in our
libraries, would be an expression of our responsibility to our patrons
and to our professional beliefs. They would demonstrate to citizens
librarians and library workers opposition to the overreach of the
legislation which has just passed. Making the implications of the
legislation visible is the first step to making people aware of the
necessity of debating it and, possibly, challenging it. A very
librarianly thing to do, it seems to me. and quite legal (correct me if
I'm wrong).

A timely public statement by ALA on the 'Patriot Act' and its
implications for library users should be available at every reference
desk and checkout counter, all the better if it referred to ALA's
opposition to such extensive enlargement of police powers and the
creation of an unnecessary "police state" chill of freedom of inquiry
and expression.

We can make it clear that we are as anxious as anyone that terrorists
be apprehended, but that we are opposed to transforming America into a
police state ostensibly in order to accomplish that (with no reason to
believe many of the measures being taken have anything to do with
that).

The just-issued statement by ALA is extraordinarily weak and
frighteningly passive. According to this document we have the right to
contact counsel when presented with a supoena? What a revelation!

You mean that hasn't been overridden too? First of all, we have a
duty to do so. Secondly, we cannot be selctive in doing so without
making invidious distinctions -- and I don't care if the patron is a
body-double for Osama Bin Laden (not a likely mode of operation for a
terrorist/spy). Finally, I think we need to be assertive in defense of
the rights of our patrons, the freedom to read, the right to know, and
the assurance that legal activity in the library is not going to be the
object of police (or library) scrutiny.

I think the EB should consider a major role for ALA in a very public
coalition with other concerned organizations, a coalition which seeks
to assure that the fight against domestic terrorism, necessary as it
is, does not become a fight against American's hard-won legitimate
civil rights. Perhaps this is already being considered. I certainly
hope so. I think -- despite the panic -- people all over the nation wil
appreciate ALA's role as watchdog of their freedoms during a time of
stress and conflict and that , rather than reflecting negatively on
ALA, if properly conducted, it will attract a great deal of positive
attention and support .

Civil liberties(at)your library.

Mark Rosenzweig

ALA Counselor-at-large
..........................................................................

[MEMBER-FORUM:2716] Bill Gordon's message
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:48:45 -0700
From: druthgo(at)sonic.net (Ruth I Gordon)
To: member-forum(at)ala.org
Reply to: member-forum(at)ala.org

Why all these important messages were not posted on Forum disturbs me.

I think that every librarian who is in a facility with computer contacting
machinery must take Bill Gordon's message to heart and brain and worry
about Councilor Berry's response to various questions from Councilor Elaine
Harger:

1. William Gordon, Exec., ALA

"The following information about the USA Patriot ACT was prepared by the
Office for Intellectual Freedom and reviewed by legal counsel. More
information on the Act is being developed and will be made available on
ALA's website.

"On October 25, 2001, Congress passed the "Uniting and Strengthening
America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct
Terrorism Act" (USA PATRIOT Act.) This law broadly expands the powers of
federal law enforcement agencies investigating cases involving foreign
intelligence and international terrorism.

"The new legislation amends the laws governing the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's access to business records. One provision orders any
person or institution served with a search warrant not to disclose that
such a warrant has been served or that records have been produced pursuant
to the warrant.

"The existence of this provision does not mean that libraries and
librarians served with such a search warrant cannot ask to consult with
their legal counsel concerning the warrant. A library and its employees
can still seek legal advice concerning the warrant and request that the
library's legal counsel be present during the actual search and execution
of the warrant.

"If you or your library are served with a warrant issued under this law,
and wish the advice of legal counsel but do not have an attorney, you can
still obtain assistance from Jenner & Block, the Freedom to Read
Foundation's legal counsel. Simply call the Office for Intellectual
Freedom and inform the staff that you need legal advice without disclosing
the reason you need legal assistance. OIF staff will assure that an
attorney from Jenner & Block returns your call. You do not and should not
inform OIF staff of the existence of the warrant."

Councillor Elaine Harger asked important questions about Mr Gordon's
message. Councillor John Berry who somehow is employed at Univ.
California, Berkeley, does not seem to understand the ramifications of this
new U.S. policy, to wit,

"Dear Elaine,

While this is a time of concern in many venues, I think you need
to go back and carefully re-read what Bill Gordon sent. With special note
that you can seek legal council either from your libraries legal services
or from ALA's services. Thereby notifying ALA that such a warrant is in
process - ie then not a secret from ALA.

The other thoughts here are: Why would you want to warn the
"potential" bad guys/gals about FBI surveillance by putting up signs or
even saying anything - that should not be our business AND if you did
notify a "potential" bad guy/gal who is abusing his/her"privilege" by using
library services to plan or carry out terrorism - maybe that would/should
be grounds for being arrested as aiding and abetting. Do you want to catch
these fanatics or not? This law does have a sunset clause.
There are a million and one things that the patrons don't need to
know or be told about how things operate within libraries anyway. Probably
9 out of 10 don't even care, they just want what they want when they want
it. Why would you worry anyone with such signs? If they are doing nothing
wrong - no worries. If they are - well then.

Sincerely Yours, John D. Berry,
ALA Councilor at Large"

I would suggest that Mr. Berry check out U.S. History--and not only history
involving the aboriginal inhabitants of this continent.

How U.C. Berkeley ever hired a librarian with his reactionary (yes, I
couldn't think of a better word for his latest messageS [sic]), befuddles
me--a degree-carrying U.C. Berkeley graduate.

I expect that he thinks it's a good idea for the FBI to now have the
extensive privileges to share information with the CIA which is much freer
in its use of underground and sometimes not legal (at least not legal in
the 'good old days') than even the FBI.

His reference to sunsetting the snoop's abilities to gather anything they
want is nonsense. I expect he does not recall how often snoopage was used
on folk like, say, for instance Martin Luther King and anyone elses the
government suspected is very disturbing. This sunsetting is far too long
and may very well damage many innocent folk.

I wonder, does Mr. Berry know that librarian Zoia Horn who lives just
down the road from Berkeley, went to jail because she would not reveal
sources (in Pennsylvania) during the Vietnam mess) not WAR, as this
business is NOT a war ((read the Constitution, folk))). I expect Mr. Berry
does not--but boy, did he make noise when some program in which he was
interested was moved from the Marriott during the last ALA Annual.

Mr. Berry--what do you want aside from total government control?

Ruth I. Gordon, M.L.S. (Berkeley), Ph.D., (Berkeley)

retired ALA C-at-L

"You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass
the guilty." Jessica Mitford (1917-1996)
________________________________________________________________________top

10. Internet Filters: A Public Policy Report

http://www.ncac.org/issues/internetfilters.html

This recently released report from the National Coalition Against Censorship
(NCAC) reports on their research about products and software used to filter
Internet content. Over the spring and summer, NCAC's Free Expression Policy
Project reviewed all of the studies and tests it could find covering the
nineteen most common Internet filtering tools. This report, summarizing the
review, gives a general introduction and results for each of the nineteen
products as well as a bibliography and appendices covering blocked sites by
subject and blocking categories. In the main, NCAC finds that the technology
used in blocking is too indiscriminate because of its dependance, to at
least some degree, on mechanized means of filtering. NCAC suggests that
"Ultimately, less censorial approaches such as media literacy, sexuality
education, and Internet acceptable-use training may be better policy choices
than Internet filters." [TK]

From The Scout Report, Copyright Internet Scout Project 1994-2001.
http://scout.cs.wisc.edu/
________________________________________________________________________top

11. 2nd Library Tour of Cuba

February 04 - February 18 , 2002

The first Library Tour of Cuba last February was
extremely successful. This second tour is being
organized in response to demand.

Seeing is believing and the Cuban Government wants you
to see and experience the library and education
services that are provided
for its citizens and to enjoy the beauty of the island
and the warmth of its people. You will have the
opportunity to learn 'first hand' all about Cuban
libraries as well as acquaint yourself with Cuban
literature, culture, history, music.... and much more.

Probably the main factors in making this an experience
you will remember for life, are the contacts and new
friends you will make -- both with the other
participants on the tour and your Cuban colleagues.

New this year will be a visit to the Havana
International Book Fair. France will be the Guest of
Honour at this Fair, and the theme will be 'Reading
means Growth'.

You need not be a librarian to participate in
the tour, but a love of literature, learning, music
and
books would certainly help!

For more information, & costs see the website:
http://members.home.net/friendship/cuba/library/2nd_library.html

Personal webpages from last trip can be found at:
http://www.communitytechnology.org/cuba/index.html
www.sararyan.com/cuba
www.newbreedlibrarian.org/archives/01.02.apr2001/feature1.html
Cuban National Library press release:
www.lib.cult.cu/noticias/2001/02/visita.htm

Library Tour 2 - Feb. 4 - 18, 2002
organized by Susan Weber, MLS & Joyce Holmes,
Friendship Tours.
Please direct inquiries to
Susan: (604) 876-6917 eves
cubalibrary(at)yahoo.ca
Joyce: (604)585-4848 days
friendship(at)home.com
________________________________________________________________________top

12. Antipode

http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/asp/journal.asp?ref=0066-4812

For 30 years Antipode has been the place to publish radical scholarship in
geography. The journal attracts the best and most provocative of radical
geographical theory and research, particularly that which contributes to
politics and practice. Antipode has an ecumenical approach to radical
geography. It aims to challenge dominant and orthodox views of the world
through debate, scholarship and politically-committed research, creating new
spaces and envisioning new futures. Antipode welcomes the infusion of new
ideas and the shaking up of old positions, without being committed to just
one view of radical analysis or politics. The editors are especially seeking
papers that address questions of radical political economy, emerging forms
of political protest, radical social theory, and practical strategies for
achieving progressive change. In addition to publishing academic papers,
Antipode has space to publish short polemical interventions and longer, more
reflective, explorations of radical geography in particular fields or
locations.

Subscribers have access to full-text articles.

Edited By: Jamie Peck and Jane Wills
Email: newmedia(at)blackwellpublishers.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________top

13. Three for Halloween

2001 Halloween Guide (at) PhillyBurbs.com
http://halloween.phillyburbs.com/

Halloween Pop-up Book
http://www.goldenbooks.com/fun/emagic/flash/h2k.html

Halloween 2001: Oct. 31
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2001/cb01fff14.html

Even though many children in the United States won't be trick-or-treating
door-to-door this year, that's no reason to let Halloween pass unremarked.
These three sites provide some holiday fun. The first, this year's Halloween
Guide from PhillyBurbs.com, is a veritable omnibus of Halloween fare.
Billing themselves as "the biggest and best Halloween site online," the site
includes a number of features on topics such as Dracula, zombies, Ed Wood,
and other spooky fare. These are the heart of the site and are geared toward
adult readers with a sense of irony. The features on costumes and
decorations are sometimes less rewarding, as they seem to be focused
shopping guides (though some of them are pretty entertaining even so). A
page on Halloween safety and a guide to local Philadelphia events round out
the site. Lest kids miss out on the fun, the next site is just for them,
though this scout must confess some lost time playing with this fun virtual
pop-up book. The last site is from the US Census and consists of a brief
page of Halloween data culled from recent Census releases. [TK]

From The Scout Report, Copyright Internet Scout Project 1994-2001.
http://scout.cs.wisc.edu/
________________________________________________________________________top

14. Geek Culture/Librarian Humor

Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:15:13 -0500
From: Andrea.Cheney(at)USPTO.GOV
To: Rory(at)libr.org

Rory,

Here are short installments of a cartoon that is pro-open source software
and uses a librarian as its star and heroine. Aside from the stereotype of
the librarian being a female, this librarian is refreshingly free of usual
stereotypical qualities that we find.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/240.html
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/241.html
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/251.html

--andrea

Andrea Cheney
Electronic Resources Librarian
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Scientific and Technical Information Center
Information Access and Management Branch
2021 S. Clark Place
Crystal Plaza 3, Suite 2C06
Arlington, VA 22202
703-308-6099\fax: 3485
andrea.cheney(at)uspto.gov
________________________________________________________________________top

15. Amusing Searches Galore

Here are two months worth of amusing searches that lead to documents on
libr.org, mostly originating from Google.

• hairygirl (about two dozen times)
• frog juice
• guinea pig meat
• penthouse and related websites of similar nature
• Dan Ratherism
• pure unadulterated bullshit
• deep fryer replacement part catalog
• Jack Van Impe academic credentials
• juice newton
• top 50 hairygirl links
• characteristics of men prefered by gays
• vitameatavegimen (several times)
• absentee ballad virginia
• fbi juice
• bacon bits wholesale in Los Angeles
• Librarians are crap
• Soviet Union-why is it great
• beach 2001 bare breasts sociology
• hairygirl password
• number of electric guitar users in india
• Essays about the oral slang talking of the young student
• "you can't have sex in the library" and "Leonard Kniffel"
• Dictionary of Wrestling Submissions
• Smackdown etymology
• drag librarians
• stupid lazy librarians
• marriott's core values
• librarians mouth breather
• refereed skinhead journal article
• reaching out to tomorrow's furture
• bisexual communist
• looking after goats sheeps pics
• mime costume dollar stretcher
• survey "how many people have worked for an incompetent boss"
• "Keith Richards" standards ansi
• Ben's homepage

And a last one, more poignant than funny:

• when is going to end this world

________________________________________________________________________top

L I B R A R Y J U I C E

| http://libr.org/Juice/
|
| Library Juice is supported by a voluntary subscription
| fee of $10 per year, variable based on ability and
| desire to pay. You may send a check payable in US funds
| to Rory Litwin, at 1821 O St.. Apt. 9, Sacramento, CA 95814
|
| Original material and added value in Library Juice
| is copyright-free; beyond that the publisher makes
| no guarantees. Library Juice is a free weekly
| publication edited and published by Rory Litwin.
| Original senders are credited wherever possible;
| opinions are theirs. If you are the author of some
| email in Library Juice which you want removed from
| the web, please write to me and I will remove it.
|
| Your comments and suggestions are welcome.
|
| Rory(at)libr.org rg">Rory(at)libr.org