OIF Seeking Opinions on Information Privacy via Anonymous Survey
July 11th, 2008 by Kathleen HughesThe ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF) is asking librarians to share their opinions and policies on information privacy in an anonymous survey at www.privacyrevolution.org. The results will help shape the strategic direction of OIF’s new grassroots initiative to rally Americans around a set of information privacy standards for the 21st Century. (The campaign was recently kick-started with a $350,000 grant from the Open Society Institute.) On average, the survey takes seven minutes to complete and will remain open through August. For questions regarding the survey, librarians can contact Deborah Caldwell-Stone at .
|
Print this post
July 12th, 2008 at 1:02 am
“The results will help shape the strategic direction of OIF’s new grassroots initiative to rally Americans around a set of information privacy standards for the 21st Century. (The campaign was recently kick-started with a $350,000 grant from the Open Society Institute.)”
In plain English, that means George Soros and the ALA will work together to propagandize the American public on “information privacy standards.” What does that really mean? Consider for example when Judith Krug, leader of the OIF and former ACLU member, said she was sorry a Florida librarian turned in a 9/11 terrorist to the police. She would rather that the Florida law protecting privacy rights in public libraries had been followed and that the terrorist was not reported to police. That’s the kind of “privacy” the ALA is talking about. It is nothing short of protection of terrorists.
The “grassroots initiative to rally Americans” is really a massive propaganda campaign funded with $350,000 from George Soros. Click on my name to see more on this.
Now I expect to be attacked by ALA leaders for making this statement. For some of them, that is their style. For others, it’s silence. For still others, it’s censorship. But before you consider the misinformation you will hear, go to the New York Times and see for yourself what Judith Krug said about the 9/11 terrorist in the Florida public library. “A Nation Challenged: Questions of Confidentiality; Competing Principles Leave Some Professionals Debating Responsibility to Government” by David E. Rosenbaum, The New York Times, Nov. 23, 2001.
Now ask yourself if this form of “privacy,” essentially privacy for terrorists, will be honestly presently to the American public by the ALA’s “grassroots initiative to rally Americans.”
Think for yourselves.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Privacy for American library patrons is essentially privacy for terrorists? What a bunch of bunk! This makes as much sence as Huckabee responding to the Bhutto assassination in Pakistan by asking how many Pakistanians are sneaking into America from Mexico.
What a load of fear-mongering BS.
July 12th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Alan,
Read the NYT article I cited above where the de facto head of the ALA said or implied a librarian should not have called the police on a 9/11 terrorist because he had rights under Florida’s library privacy laws.
Can you imagine library privacy rights taking precedence over national security and the deaths of thousands of people?
I don’t make this stuff up.
Given historical fact as reported in the NYT, and for other reasons, people should be concerned about those who place terrorist rights to privacy in public libraries over national security interests in a way that showed at a minimum callousness for the deaths of thousands. People should be concerned that such a library association is in any way involved with a “grassroots initiative to rally Americans around a set of information privacy standards.” Terrorist rights over national security — a documented interest of the ALA — coming to a neighborhood near you, courtesy of the ALA and George Soros.
Alan, don’t make me the issue. I’m not the one who thinks terrorist rights supercede national security, and I’m not going to guide Americans on how to think about library privacy issues.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
“I would have felt better if she had followed the Florida law.” But Ms. Krug added, “I suspect most people faced with the same situation would have done what she did.”
Oh man! My hart is pounding! I am seething with self-rightious indignation! We better call in a special rendering and pack her off to Git-Mo!!!
PS - I don’t think there is any BETTER organization than the ALA to get involved in a “grassroots initiative to rally Americans around a set of information privacy standards.” I support the right to privacy, and especially for patrons of our public libraries.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Krug says, “I would have felt better if she had followed the Florida law,” and you make a joke about that? Alan, this is not your average library user she is talking about. She is talking about one of the nineteen terrorists who on 9/11 killed thousands of people. And she would have felt better if this terrorist’s privacy rights had been respected? She’s going to lead a “new grassroots initiative to rally Americans around a set of information privacy standards”?
With national media, not me, proving that the ALA favors terrorist library privacy rights over national security, the ALA cannot be trusted to guide Americans on library privacy issues.