DOCSLIB.ORG

October 2, 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
October 2, 2014 Graduate Council Meeting Agenda 204A Evans Library October 2, 2014 1. Discussion Items: a. Graduate Council Elections – Chair and Vice Chair Election b. Approval of Change in Graduate Council Standard Operating Procedures 2. New Course Requests: a. BMEN 622 Bioelectromagnetism b. BMEN 641 Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering c. EDCI 701 Elementary Science Instructional Strategies and STEM Learning d. EDCI 702 Elementary Mathematics Instructional Strategies and STEM e. FSTC 644 Disease Mechanisms of Foodborne Pathogens f. GEOP 631 Seismic Data Processing g. ICPE 601 Environmental Issues of Energy Systems h. ICPE 602 Reservoir Characterization and Modeling i. ICPE 603 Bioenergy j. ICPE 604 Energy Systems Engineering I k. ICPE 605 Energy Systems Engineering II l. ICPE 606 Introduction to Optimization m. ICPE 607 Energy Finance and Economics n. ICPE 608 Beyond Science and Technology: The Role of Policy in the Future of Energy in the U.S. o. ICPE 609 Introduction to U.S. Energy Law and Policy p. ICPE 610 The Global Energy Future q. ICPE 611 Economics of Energy r. ICPE 612 Entrepreneurship in Energy s. ICPE 613 Natural and Shale Gas Monetization: Technologies, Fundamentals, Economics, and Applications t. ICPE 614 CO2 Sequestration u. ICPE 615 Smart Grid Fundamentals v. ICPE 616 Multi-Functional Materials for Energy Conversion w. ICPE 617 Gas Separations for Energy: Fundamentals, Applications, and New Directions x. ICPE 618 Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage, CCUS y. ICPE 619 Nanomaterials Engineering and Energy Storage z. ICPE 620 Thermoelectric Materials and Devices aa. ICPE 621 Thermoelectrics: Fundamentals of Electronic and Thermal Transport bb. ICPE 622 Energy Efficiency in Buildings cc. ICPE 623 Water-Energy-Food Nexus: Towards Sustainable Resource Allocation dd. ICPE 624 Energy-Water Nexus ee. ICPE 625 Integrated Risk Management for Exploration and Production Projects ff. ICPE 626 Safety in Energy Systems gg. ICPE 627 Interfacial Phenomena of Energy Systems hh. ICPE 628 Multi-physics Geomechanics for Energy Application (CO2, fracking, nuclear waste) ii. MEEN 645 Engineering Applications of Solid Mechanics jj. MSEN 636 Damage Mechanics and Failure in Composite Materials kk. NRSC 621 Functional Neuroanatomy ll. PLAN 624 Digital Communication in Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning mm. PLAN 667 Site Planning nn. PSAA 657 Terrorism in Today’s World oo. PSAA 660 Domestic Terrorism: The Internal Threat to America pp. PSAA 667 Principles of International Law qq. PSAA 668 U.S. Law and Homeland Security rr. RDNG 610 Elementary Literacy Instruction for Facilitating STEM Learning ss. RPTS 654 Amazon Field School tt. SCSC 640 Intellectual Property in the Plant Sciences uu. VIBS 621 Functional Neuroanatomy vv. VTMI 604 Amazon Field School (tabled at September 2014 meeting) 3. Course Change Requests: a. PHYS 614 Introduction to Methods of Mathematical Physics b. PHYS 650 Kinetics of Electronic Processes c. WFSC 654 Amazon Field School 4. Curriculum Change Request a. Certificate in Engineering Therapeutics Manufacturing b. Certificate in Quality Engineering for Regulated Medical Technologies 5. Special Consideration Items: a. Administrative Change Proposal for the Master of Science in Engineering Systems Management b. Elimination of the Master of Science Degree in Health Physics c. Executive Master of Science in Energy Degree Program d. Five Year Joint Degree Program for Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Economics and Master of Public Service Administration e. Certificate in Energy f. Certificate in Transportation Planning g. Proposal for Course Prefix Changes to CHLS Courses Last revised 3-31-2014 Graduate Council (GC) Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Purpose: The Graduate Council shall review all curricular requests pertaining to the graduate and professional academic programs, shall be responsible for the quality and development of the graduate instruction and programs and shall advise the Associate Provost for Graduate Studies on all graduate program matters. The Graduate Council shall communicate in writing, through its secretary, its recommendations to the Faculty Senate. Meetings: The GC will meet on the first Thursday of each month. (1) Membership shall consist of one representative from each college and off campus academic unit, who shall be selected by the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees after consultation with the college deans and caucuses (chairs of college graduate instruction committees and associate deans for graduate programs shall be considered for appointment); two representatives of the Graduate Faculty; two graduate students; and the Associate Provost for Graduate Studies as an Ex-Officio member. All faculty members shall be members of the Graduate Faculty. All of the above members except the Associate Provost shall be voting members. In the absence of the appointed member, a substitute may vote on behalf of that unit. The Associate Directors of Graduate Studies, one representative of the University Library Council, and one member of the Medical Sciences Library shall serve as non-voting members. In addition, a representative from Curricular Services shall serve and provide advice as a non-voting member. All faculty members shall serve three-year terms. Those serving on a committee as a result of their Texas A&M University position shall continue to serve as long as they are in that position. Student members shall serve one-year terms. A representative from the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies (OGAPS) shall serve as secretary but not have voting privileges. (2) The election for the GC Chair and Vice-Chair should take place during the October meeting for an effective date of 1 January. The chair and vice chair will be limited to one three-year term; the elevation of the vice-chair to chair, though commonplace, shall not be automatic. It is recommended that the Chair and Vice-Chair represent different Colleges. Special elections shall be conducted to accommodate mid-term changes in leadership. (3) The GC shall review all proposed courses, programs, and changes to existing curricula at the graduate level and shall recommend appropriate policies to improve and develop graduate academic programs. An ad hoc subcommittee of the GC (assembled by the Chair) shall review special requests for graduate admission, such as baccalaureate equivalency decisions. All items for review by the GC or GC subcommittees shall be routed through the appropriate colleges for approval. (4) Items requiring vote include New Courses, Course Withdrawal, Change in Courses, Change in Curricula, Administrative Changes and Special Considerations (including new programs, degrees and certificates). These items may be approved, not approved, approved with changes (friendly amendments), referred to an electronic vote (e-vote, see item 11) prior to the deadline to submit to Faculty Senate, or postponed to a certain time (tabled, see item 12). Each item must receive a majority vote to pass. That is, at least half (50 percent) of GC voting members in attendance must Last revised 3-31-2014 approve an agenda item. (5) The College representative or designee must be present to answer any questions regarding an agenda item. If a question arises and no representative is present, then the item will not be considered. (6) Letters of support from all academic programs affected by curricular changes shall be provided to the GC by the department bringing the item(s) forward. (7) Proposed courses in which undergraduate and graduate students meet together at the same time with the same instructor (“stacked courses”) must have an instructor of record that is a member of the Graduate Faculty and the syllabus must clearly indicate the additional work required for the graduate students. (8) New cross-listed courses require individual sets of approval forms. Adding a cross-listed course to an existing course only needs to be considered by the GC if the course is a new course. (9) Approval of research and problem-based credit hours (685 and 691) and exploratory new (special topics) courses (689) do not require the GC approval. (10) The GC shall operate under these rules: Eight working days prior to meeting (e.g., Tuesday prior to a Thursday meeting the following week) all agenda items are due to OGAPS. No later than Monday on the week of meeting all voting and non-voting members will receive the agenda as a digital file easily searched and including all materials necessary to complete an informed review. No Consent Agenda is designated. Rather, all agenda items will be fully considered at the Thursday meeting. Any agenda item may be challenged at the meeting by a motion from a Committee Member with a second from another Committee Member. (11) The Chair and/or Vice-Chair may elect to hold an electronic vote (e-vote) meeting when agenda items are minimal and there are no pending deadlines. An e-vote for a specific agenda item with an extremely tight deadline may also be used as deemed appropriate by the Chair or Vice- Chair and voted by the committee. E-votes by the committee are sent to the Secretary for compilation. The Chair and Vice-Chair are notified and the agenda item either passes or fails based on the e-votes received. (12) The GC may vote to postpone voting on an agenda item (table the item) for various reasons (i.e., no representative present, support letters missing, corrections to form/syllabus, etc.). It is the responsibility of the department to resubmit the postponed item for reconsideration with the updates as requested by the committee. (13) Submissions for consideration by the GC that are not complete or correct by stated GC standards will be returned by the Secretary, in consultation with the Chair and/or Vice Chair. (14) New course requests and course changes involving significant content modification or alteration in course credit hours must include syllabi that comply with current University minimum syllabus requirements (http://curricularservices.tamu.edu). Texas A&M University Departmental Request for a New Course Undergraduate • Graduate • Professional •Submit original form and attach a course syllabus.• Form Instructions I.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anti-Choice Violence and Intimidation
    Anti-Choice Violence and Intimidation A campaign of violence, vandalism, and intimidation is endangering providers and patients and curtailing the availability of abortion services. Since 1993, eight clinic workers – including four doctors, two clinic employees, a clinic escort, and a security guard – have been murdered in the United States.1 Seventeen attempted murders have also occurred since 1991.2 In fact, opponents of choice have directed more than 6,400 reported acts of violence against abortion providers since 1977, including bombings, arsons, death threats, kidnappings, and assaults, as well as more than 175,000 reported acts of disruption, including bomb threats and harassing calls.3 The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE) provides federal protection against the unlawful and often violent tactics used by abortion opponents. Peaceful picketing and protest is not prohibited and is explicitly and fully protected by the law.4 State clinic protection laws in 16 states and the District of Columbia, as well as general statutes prohibiting violence, provide additional protection.5 Although the frequency of some types of clinic violence declined after the 1994 enactment of FACE, violence at reproductive-health centers is far from being eradicated.6 Vigorous enforcement of clinic-protection laws against those who use violence and threats is essential to protecting the lives and well-being of women and health-care providers. Abortion Providers and Other Health Professionals Face the Threat of Murder MURDERS: Since 1993, eight people have been murdered for helping women exercise their constitutionally protected right to choose.7 . 2009: The Murder of Dr. George Tiller.
    [Show full text]
  • Planned Parenthood V. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard
    Touro Law Review Volume 29 Number 2 Article 13 October 2013 Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard Alex J. Berkman Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Law and Society Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, and the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Berkman, Alex J. (2013) "Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard," Touro Law Review: Vol. 29 : No. 2 , Article 13. Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/13 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Touro Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Speech as a Weapon: Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists and the Need for a Reasonable Listener Standard Cover Page Footnote 29-2 This comment is available in Touro Law Review: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss2/13 Berkman: Speech as a Weapon SPEECH AS A WEAPON: PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. AMERICAN COALITION OF LIFE ACTIVISTS AND THE NEED FOR A REASONABLE LISTENER STANDARD Alex J. Berkman* ** I. INTRODUCTION On May 31, 2009, Dr. George Tiller was shot and killed at his church in Kansas.1 Prior to his death, Dr. Tiller, one of the nation‘s only late-term abortion providers, was regularly targeted by anti- abortion extremist groups.2 Along with other physicians, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Confronting Anti-Abortion Terrorism After 9/11
    WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA DARE? CONFRONTING ANTI-ABORTION TERRORISM AFTER 9/11 CarolMason* INTRODUCTION Anti-abortion terrorism blatantly exemplifies the contradiction of claiming human rights for the unborn while denying them to women and clinic workers. When so-called pro-lifers' began, paradoxically enough, to kill for life in the early 1990s, pro-choice advocates screamed "hypocrisy," but anti-abortion organizations barely suf- fered. 2 On the contrary, the most militant pro-lifers were embold- ened and began to openly air their apocalyptic ideas that abortion is a sign of the "End Times" of humanity and life itself.3 Few pro-choice organizations understood the significance in the shift away from "res- cue" and toward apocalypse. Feminist scholars were busy examining the fetus as text in popular culture and the public sphere or seeking, in the name of gender analysis, if not coalition building, compromise and common ground among pro-life and pro-choice women. Assistant Professor, Women's Studies Department, University of Nevada, Las Vegas; Ph.D., University of Minnesota. i The term "pro-life" is used herein as a historically accurate label for anti-abortion senti- ment as it has been institutionalized throughout late twentieth-century United States. Specifi- cally, the term is distinguished from "right-to-life" arguments about abortion, and refers to po- litical efforts to use opposition to abortion as a way to promote conservative values and policies. For a fuller discussion of this distinction between "right-to-life" and "pro-life," see CAROL MASON, KILLING FOR LIFE: THE APOCALYPTIC NARRATIVE OF PRO-LIFE POLITICS 15-21 (2002).
    [Show full text]
  • A Remedy for Abortion Seekers Under the Invasion of Privacy Tort Rachel L
    Brooklyn Law Review Volume 68 | Issue 1 Article 6 9-1-2002 A Remedy for Abortion Seekers Under the Invasion of Privacy Tort Rachel L. Braunstein Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/blr Recommended Citation Rachel L. Braunstein, A Remedy for Abortion Seekers Under the Invasion of Privacy Tort, 68 Brook. L. Rev. 309 (2002). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/blr/vol68/iss1/6 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Law Review by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. NOTES A REMEDY FOR ABORTION SEEKERS UNDER THE INVASION OF PRIVACY TORT* INTRODUCTION The United States Supreme Court articulated the right to an abortion as a fundamental constitutional privacy right in Roe v. Wade.' The Court stated, "[t]his right of privacy, whether it be found in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action.., or... in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."2 The Court thus defined the constitutional privacy right encompassing abortion as a woman's right to be free from governmental interference in reproductive choice. In exercising this right, some abortion clinic clients, or "abortion seekers," have been photographed by anti-abortion protestors in the vicinity of clinics. Anti-abortion protestors have posted some of those photographs on the Internet. One such protestor, Neal Horsley, maintains a website on which he3 posts the names of abortion providers and clinic workers.
    [Show full text]
  • How the Internet Has Changed Abortion Law, Policy, and Process
    William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice Volume 8 (2001-2002) Issue 2 William & Mary Journal of Women and Article 4 the Law February 2002 Nat Effects: How the Internet Has Changed Abortion Law, Policy, and Process Kari Lou Frank Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmjowl Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons Repository Citation Kari Lou Frank, Nat Effects: How the Internet Has Changed Abortion Law, Policy, and Process, 8 Wm. & Mary J. Women & L. 311 (2002), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmjowl/vol8/iss2/4 Copyright c 2002 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmjowl NET EFFECTS: HOW THE INTERNET HAS CHANGED ABORTION LAW, POLICY, AND PROCESS The issue has invaded state houses, political campaigns, church doctrine, talk shows, newspaper opinion pages, the Internet and even the streets. Most recently, those latter two venues have attracted considerable attention, for protests have escalated from civil demonstrations to deadly violence.' Although abortion in America has remained an issue over which this nation is divided, the methods activists use to voice their views have continued to change and evolve. With the emerging influence of technology, the Internet has become a new virtual stomping ground for abortion demonstrators.2 In the past four years, several cases concerning abortion websites (both pro-life and pro-choice) have been tried in federal court.3 One of the more notorious cases involved a website which, as part of its propaganda, reported the names and addresses of abortion doctors and included a color-coded list of which doctors had been killed.4 Other cases at the crossroads of abortion and the Internet include a 1997 case, Sanger v.
    [Show full text]
  • Abortion Doctor Shot to Death in Kansas Church by JOE STUMPE and MONICA DAVEY
    May 31, 2009 Suspect in Tiller's death supported killing abortion providers, friends say Judy L. Thomas Kansas City Star The suspect in custody for the slaying of Wichita abortion doctor George Tiller was a member of an anti-government group in the 1990s and a staunch opponent of abortion. Scott P. Roeder, 51, of Merriam, Kan., a Kansas City suburb, was arrested on Interstate 35 near Gardner in suburban Johnson County, Kan., about three hours after the shooting. Tiller was shot to death around 10 a.m. inside Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita. In the rear window of the 1993 blue Ford Taurus that he was driving was a red rose, a symbol often used by abortion opponents. On the rear of his car was a Christian fish symbol with the word "Jesus" inside. Those who know Roeder said he believed that killing abortion doctors was an act of justifiable homicide. "I know that he believed in justifiable homicide," said Regina Dinwiddie, a Kansas City anti- abortion activist who made headlines in 1995 when she was ordered by a federal judge to stop using a bullhorn within 500 feet of any abortion clinic. "I know he very strongly believed that abortion was murder and that you ought to defend the little ones, both born and unborn." Dinwiddie said she met Roeder while picketing outside the Kansas City Planned Parenthood clinic in 1996. Roeder walked into the clinic and asked to see the doctor, Robert Crist, she said. "Robert Crist came out and he stared at him for approximately 45 seconds," she said.
    [Show full text]
  • The "True Threat" to Cyberspace: Shredding the First Amendment for Faceless Fears
    THE "TRUE THREAT" TO CYBERSPACE: SHREDDING THE FIRST AMENDMENT FOR FACELESS FEARS Robert D. Richards* Clay Calvert** "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First thoughts whirling together to form a truly "unin- Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit 4 the expression of an idea simply because society finds hibited, robust, and wide-open" marketplace of 1 the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." ideas. That notion ended abruptly in February, When the late Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. 1999 when a Portland, Oregon jury ordered over wrote that passage in 1989, admonishing the $100 million dollars in damages against the cre- 5 Texas state legislature to avoid passing a flag-dese- ators of an anti-abortion World Wide Web site, cration thus triggering the next major battle over just how law simply because citizens there objected 6 7 to burning the national symbol as a form of pro- much protection speech in cyberspace deserves. test, he reminded the nation that the Constitution was not created to reflect the current conscious- FREEDOM OF SPEECH V. FREEDOM ness of the majority. Indeed, the powerful nature OF CHOICE of the First Amendment 2 lies in safeguarding mi- nority viewpoints, which at times can be distasteful Like so many constitutional skirmishes before to mainstream society but should co-exist to en- it, this one presents some unsavory elements, such 3 sure a vigorous national discourse. as graphic images of botched abortions and fetal For a time, the internet appeared to provide a parts." However, the more pernicious political in- safe haven for both mainstream and radical vective found on the challenged web site-The * Associate Professor of Journalism & Law and Co- 4 New York Times Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuremberg Files: Testing the Outer Limits of the First Amendment
    The Nuremberg Files: Testing the Outer Limits of the First Amendment MICHAEL VITIELLO* The NurembergFiles, an anti-abortionwebsite with both graphicimages as well aspersonal information about abortion doctors, lists the names of abortion doctors, their addresses, and other personal information, noting the healthy abortion doctors in black type, "wounded" abortion doctors in gray, and murdered persons with lines through their names. Together with "wanted" posters of abortion doctors, a magazine promoting and celebrating abortion clinic violence, a yearly banquet honoringthose imprisonedfor acts of abortion violence, and a book about the use offorce againstabortionists entitled "A Time to Kill," the members of the American Coalition of Life Activists (ACLA) maintained that these expressions were entitled to full First Amendment protectionaspurelypolitical speech, spoken in opposition to abortionrights. This FirstAmendment defense was rejected by the U.S. District Court of Oregon in Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists, finding that the defendants' conduct was a true threat of violence in violation of the Freedom ofAccess to Clinic EntrancesAct of 1994 (FACE), requiringboth legal and injunctive relief In the face of much criticism of the verdict, criticism focused on the FirstAmendment protection of such volatile speech, Professor Vitiello argues that ifthe Brandenburg test of incitement to imminent lawless action allows prohibition of any speech, it would allow the prohibition of the speech ofACLA. Professor Vitiello argues that, viewed in its entirety, within a context of abortion clinic violence that the defendants supported, encouraged, andpromoted, the speech of ACA falls outside the bounds of protected First Amendment speech, and is properlysubjected to civil andcriminal penalty.
    [Show full text]
  • Bachelor Thesis
    Západo česká univerzita v Plzni Fakulta filozofická Bakalá řská práce EXTREMIST CHRISTIANS IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY Barbora Turková Plze ň 2014 Západo česká univerzita v Plzni Fakulta filozofická Katedra politologie a mezinárodních vztah ů Studijní program Mezinárodní teritoriální studia Studijní obor Mezinárodní vztahy – britská a americká studia Bakalá řská práce EXTREMIST CHRISTIANS IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY Barbora Turková Vedoucí práce : David Eugene Franklin M.A. / PhDr. Ivona Mišterová, Ph.D. Katedra anglického jazyka Fakulta filozofická Západo české univerzity v Plzni Plze ň 2014 Prohlašuji, že jsem práci zpracovala samostatn ě a použila jen uvedených zdroj ů a literatury. Plze ň, duben 2014 …………………………….. Barbora Turková Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor David Franklin M.A. for his useful help, advice, and guidance in the process of my writing. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 2. EXTREMISM ........................................................................................................... 4 3. HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS .......................................................................... 7 3.1 Overview of American extremism ................................................................................................. 7 3. 2 First Amendment ........................................................................................................................ 12 3. 3 Second Amendment ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nealhorsley-Fbi1.Pdf
    This document is made available through the declassification efforts and research of John Greenewald, Jr., creator of: The Black Vault The Black Vault is the largest online Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) document clearinghouse in the world. The research efforts here are responsible for the declassification of hundreds of thousands of pages released by the U.S. Government & Military. Discover the Truth at: http://www.theblackvault.com U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C. 20535 December 22, 2016 MR. JOHN GREENEWALD JR. FOIPA Request No.: 1362670-000 Subject: HORSLEY, OTIS O’NEAL, JR. Dear Mr. Greenewald: Records responsive to your request were previously processed under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Enclosed is one CD containing 41 pages of previously processed documents and a copy of the Explanation of Exemptions. This release is being provided to you at no charge. Documents or information referred to other Government agencies were not included in this release. For your information, Congress excluded three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records from the requirements of the FOIA. See 5 U.S. C. § 552(c) (2006 & Supp. IV (2010). This response is limited to those records that are subject to the requirements of the FOIA. This is a standard notification that is given to all our requesters and should not be taken as an indication that excluded records do, or do not, exist. For questions regarding our determinations, visit the www.fbi.gov/foia website under “Contact Us.” The FOIPA Request Number listed above has been assigned to your request.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimes Against Reproductive Rights in California
    Crimes Against Reproductive Rights in California California Senate Office of Research May 2001 (Revised January 2002) Prepared by Gregory deGiere Forward: In the seven months since the California Senate Office of Research first published this report, the Legislature has passed and Governor Gray Davis has signed Senate Bill 780 by Senator Deborah V. Ortiz. SB 780 as of January 1, 2002, enacts two new laws, the California Freedom of Access and Clinic and Church Entrances (or California FACE) Act and the Reproductive Rights Law Enforcement Act, incorporating some of the options that this report suggests. Those interested in the text, legislative history and committee analyses of SB 780 can find more information at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov. This revision makes several corrections, adds several additional references, and expands on several points contained in the first edition. May 2001 Dear Senate Colleagues: Here is the cold reality of crimes against reproductive rights in California today: o We lead the nation in arsons and bombings at reproductive health care facilities. o More than half of surveyed California abortion providers responded that they were targets of anti-reproductive-rights crimes between 1995 and 2000 – a period of relative calm, which may be ending. o Some of the most violent fringes of the extremist anti-abortion, anti-government, white supremacist, anti-Semitic, and anti-gay movements appear to be coming together, as demonstrated by the 1999 homophobic murders and synagogue and clinic arsons in Redding and Sacramento. o A federal court in March ruled that it is perfectly legal to post Web sites that target and give their names, photographs, spouses’ names, and home addresses.
    [Show full text]
  • BOP-CTU-1.Pdf
    UNCLASSIFIED // FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY / LAW ENFORCEM ENT SENSITIVE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS COUNTER TERRORISM UNIT August 10, 2009 INTELLIGENCE SUMMARY INTELLIGENCE ANALYSIS AND LANGUAGE TRANSLATION FOR INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC TERRORIST INMATES (09-015) LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE: This information is the property of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and may be distributed to state or local government law enforcement officials with a need-to-know. Further distribution without BOP authorization is prohibited. Precautions should be taken to ensure this information is stored and/or destroyed in a manner which precludes unauthorized access. International Terrorism Name Reg. No. Facl COJ STG Affiliations ARNAOUT, Enaam 14504-424 THA ILN Int Terr B al-Qaida CMU Comm Cat 2 On July 31, 2009, inmate Arnaout received correspondence from K. Siddique, P.O. Box 356, Kingsville, MD, 21087. The correspondence contained a handwritten note which indicated Siddique had received inmate Arnaout’s letter of July 15, 2009. Siddique also stated he published an internet magazine. In closing his letter, Siddique stated, “I am still puzzled what happened to my first letter, it didn’t come back.” Arnaout Analyst Paul Kelly Contact 304-264-9923; [email protected] UNCLASSIFIED // FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY / LAW ENFORCEM ENT SENSITIVE Page 1 of 38 UNCLASSIFIED // FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY / LAW ENFORCEM ENT SENSITIVE Name Reg. No. Facl COJ STG Affiliations HAMMOUD, Mohamad 16448-058 THA NCW Int Terr B Hizbollah CMU Comm Cat 2 On June 23, 2009, inmate Hammoud placed a telephone call to phone number 0119613545985, located in Lebanon, and spoke to a male individual identified as, “Hajj,” possibly one of his brothers.
    [Show full text]