Minority language rights

Minority language rights Introduction The linguistic rights of persons belonging to national minorities are protected by international human rights law. The human rights standards which relate to language rights are varied. Some belong to what is often referred to as hard law. These standards are of a legally binding nature and are mainly contained in treaties. An example of such a standard at the universal level is Article 27 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.9 It is categorical in the sense that it prohibits States from denying persons belonging to minorities the right, in community with the other members of their group to use their own language. (Phillips Rosas, 1995, 13–76) Other examples are Article 19(2) of the Covenant, which guarantees freedom of expression (including choice of language as a vehicle of communication), and Articles 2 and 26, which prohibit discrimination on a number of grounds including language. Article 2(1) of the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights10 similarly prohibits discrimination on the basis, inter alia, of language in relation to the enjoyment of the rights accorded under that instrument. The same prohibition of discrimination on the basis of language is guaranteed by Article 2(1) of the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child11 with regard to the rights accorded therein. Even more exacting is the 1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families which, in Article 1(1), stipulates that the Convention is to be applied to the intended beneficiaries preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin to the e xtent that the notion of _national or ethnic origin may include or be identifiable on the basis of language, so, too, this Convention provides relevant standards. At the regional level, the Member States of the Council of Europe have adopted two treaties which address the issue of minority language rights: â€Å"the 1992 European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages14 and the 1995 Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.15 In addition, Article 14 of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms prohibits discrimination, in the enjoyment of the enumerated rights and freedoms, on the basis of language.† (European Court of Human Rights, 2006, 33) Article 1 of the Convention specifies that the notion of national minorities cover matters of language use. The other categories of standards which also seek to protect the linguistic rights of persons belonging to national minorities are sometimes referred to as soft law. These include instruments such as the 1992 UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (Lewis, 1998, 479-504). Article 2(1) of the Declaration refers to the right of persons belonging to linguistic minorities to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion and to use their own language in private and in public, freely and without interference or any form of discrimination. Although the declaration is relatively specific, it is not of itself legally binding on States (Underdal, 1998, 5-36). The same applies to the Copenhagen Document of the OSCE which, while containing specific provisions constituting political commitments bindin g on all OSCE participating States, these are not binding obligations under international law. At the sub-regional level, the 1994 CEI [Central European Initiative] Instrument for the Protection of Minority Rights (which requires States to sign the document, notwithstanding that it is not a legally binding instrument) provides protections for the use of minority languages. These instruments articulate standards of behaviour which reflect what the respective communities of States intend to be the norm. These soft law instruments are important points of reference for the international community as they express shared values and certain standards to be promoted and respected in relations between the State and persons within its jurisdiction. (Council of Europe, 1994, 94-101) Notwithstanding the significant list of relevant standards, their formulation remains sometimes general and lacking specificity with regard to their precise application in concrete situations. In view of this, and in view of the fact that minority language related problems are confronted on a recurring basis within his work, the High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM) concluded that it would be useful to consult a number of experts of international repute and to ask them to look at the linguistic rights of national minorities in greater depth with a view to developing a set of practical guidelines. The HCNM envisaged that such guidelines, to be based directly and solely on existing international standards, would be extremely useful as States could refer to them when developing and implementing minority language related policies and laws. They could also serve as a reference for the HCNM in his own work. (Van de Kragt Dawes, 2003, 112-22) In the summer of 1996, the HCNM requested the Foundation on Inter-Ethnic Relations (FIER) to take up the initiative of developing such guidelines. The development of these guidelines was not to be an attempt to set new standards; of course, neither the HCNM nor the FIER had a mandate to undertake standard-setting (Underdal, 1998, 5-36). Rather, the guidelines were to constitute an expert interpretation of existing standards which could serve to facilitate the development and implementation of appropriate policies and laws pertaining to the linguistic rights of national minorities. The experts sought to provide interpretation of these standards relating directly or indirectly to the linguistic rights of national minorities while maintaining coherence within the entire system of the international protection of human rights. (Council of Europe, 1994, 94-101) The result of this process is a set of language-related recommendations which focus on a number of spheres of regulation and activity of particular importance to the maintenance and development of the linguistic identity of persons belonging to national minorities (Lewis, 1998, 479-504). The recommendations are divided into the following subject categories: Names, Religion, Community Life and NGOs, Media, Economic Life, Administrative Authorities and Public Services, Independent National Institutions, Judicial Authorities and Deprivation of Liberty. The Explanatory Note which accompanies the recommendations (and is an integral part of the document) specifies the links between each recommendation and relevant international human rights standards. (Hawkins, 1997, 403-434) Separation Of The Public And Private Spheres The Human Rights Committee (HRC) through its General Comments has presented the concept of minority very broadly, embracing non-citizens in the category of a minority. This is a significant development in terms of the new construction of the definition of a minority, particularly given that the HRC is in a position to represent UN practice in some parts (Chen, 1998, 214). The HRCs General Comment on Article 27 states unequivocally as follows: â€Å"The terms used in article 27 indicate that the persons designed to be protected are those who belong to a group and who share in common a culture, a religion and/or a language. Those terms also indicate that the individuals designed to be protected need not be citizens of the State party . . . A State party may not, therefore, restrict the rights under article 27 to citizens alone.† (Human Rights Committee, 1992, 159–181) The HRCs view basically seems to have followed the subjective and objective criteria of the traditional minority definition, but it is a new version of the definition in that it does not require nationality or citizenship of the State of residence. Furthermore, the HRC held: â€Å"In those cases where aliens constitute a minority within the meaning of article 27, they shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion and to use their own language. Aliens are entitled to equal protection by the law. There shall be no discrimination between aliens and citizens in the application of these rights. These rights of aliens may be qualified only by such limitations as may be lawfully imposed under the Covenant.† (Human Rights Committee, 1992, 159–181) In this context, an attempt to define minority in international law made by Special Rapporteur Eide of the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities84 shows the United Nations approach to the concept of a minority, which is not limited to citizens of the State concerned. He defines a minority as follows: â€Å"For the purpose of this study, a minority is any group of persons ‘resident within a sovereign State which constitutes less than half the population of the national society and whose members share common characteristics of an ethnic, religious or linguistic nature that distinguish them from the rest of the population.† (European Court of Human Rights, 2006, 33) It is critical to note that he effectively replaces the nationality or citizenship criterion with the standard of place of residence. The populations whose members share common characteristics of an ethnic, religious or linguistic nature and have resided in the territory of the States concerned, are the decisive indicators for identifying a minority status (Kusà ½, 2006, 299–306). If this being the case, it would be more cogent to focus on the fact that the members of a minority group should have ‘durable ties with the State in which they live. This requirement is expressed in the word ‘exist in that Article. Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. (Human Rights Committee, 1992, 159–181) And the Vienna Declaration reminds states that Persons belonging to minorities have the right to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practice their own religion and to use their own language in private and in public, freely and without interference or any form of discrimination. (Council of Europe, 1994, 94-101) The Convention on the Rights of the Child states that a child belonging to an ethnic, religious, linguistic, or indigenous minority: Shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of his or her group, to enjoy his or her own culture, to profess and practice his or her own religion, or to use his or her own language. (European Convention on Human Rights, 1998, 765–773) And the preamble to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages motivates and situates the cultural protections included in that document by noting that The protection of the historical regional or minority languages of Europe, some of which are in danger of eventual extinction, contributes to the maintenance and development of Europes cultural wealth and traditions. (European Convention on Human Rights, 1998, 765–773) The Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (CESCR) recommended remedy for concerns about inequalities in the enjoyment of social and cultural rights by minorities is for the state party to: Increase its efforts to preserve regional and minority cultures and languages,, and that it undertake measures to improve education on, and education in, these languages. (Prà ©mont, 1996, 513–514) It is the fundamental presumption of international human rights law that the State must respect the autonomy of the human being by refraining from interfering in specified domains. These are understood to be the private spheres of the individual. At the same time, assuring freedom for everyone according to their own autonomous desires requires that the State order society in such a way as to protect individuals and also to facilitate their initiatives (Lewis, 1998, 479-504). These are understood to be public spheres of legitimate action by the State. The original intention was that the title of the recommendations should make reference to the use of minority languages in the public and private spheres. The recommendations were to be grouped in two categories, one corresponding to the private sphere and the other relating to the public sphere (Buchheit, 1978, 73-79). The experts came to the conclusion relatively quickly that, notwithstanding the conceptual value of this division, it w as not practical for purposes of precise policy formulation to divide the recommendations according to these two categories because it was not possible to categorise each human activity as exclusively belonging to one or other sphere. What might be seen as belonging to the private sphere may in certain situations have serious repercussions on legitimate public interests and hence affect the public sphere. For example, as a rule, correspondence belongs to the strictly private sphere (Underdal, 1998, 5-36). However, if there is any reasonable suspicion on the part of the authorities that the content of the correspondence in question is of such a nature as to threaten the security of the population, the State is entitled to interfere at the risk of violating the right to privacy (Hawkins, 1997, 403-434). The content of such correspondence could be the planning of a terrorist attack or the violent overthrow of the government. In such a case the matter acquires the dimension of legitimat e public interest. Of course, the content of correspondence is to be distinguished from the use of language as a vehicle of communication; in the latter case, there would seem to be no legitimate public interest in either requiring or prohibiting a choice of language. Nonetheless, the example of correspondence illustrates the experts view that it was not possible to approach the process of developing recommendations in a water-tight fashion. (Van de Kragt Dawes, 2003, 112-22) The initial version of the recommendations included one recommendation of a general nature which served to point out that the right of persons belonging to national minorities to use their language should not be made subject to any limitations save those prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society to protect public safety, order, health, national security and morals. The authors of the original text were of the opinion that it would be useful to stress the very narrow scope the State has for limiting the enjoyment of linguistic rights (Kusà ½, 2006, 299–306). Nevertheless, upon reflection, the experts concluded that in a set of recommendations such as these it would be unhelpful merely to repeat in a recommendation the well-known phraseology regarding permissible limitations. In addition, the experts assumed that it is generally understood that few human rights are absolute; most human rights are subject to limitations. Consequently, the effect of including a reco mmendation regarding limitations could inadvertently send a negative signal and would not be in keeping with the spirit of the document as the experts viewed it, i.e. to stimulate a positive and practice oriented approach in the protection and promotion of minority rights (rather than creating impediments or excuses to implementation). (Hurd, 1999, 379-405) Accordingly, it was decided that this particular recommendation would be deleted and that the issue would be dealt with in the general remarks at the beginning of the Explanatory Note. The definition of national minority it was inevitable that at some point early on in the deliberations the issue of what constitutes a national minority (as opposed to any other category of minority) would come up. The issue had been debated at some length in the process of elaborating The Hague Recommendations Regarding the Education Rights of National Minorities (Buchheit, 1978, 73-79). As was the case then, so in this situation: the experts concluded that, although a universally accepted clearcut definition of national minorities does not exist in international law, the fact remains that the mandate of the HCNM makes reference to the national minorities of the OSCE. In this connection, there are sufficient references in the expressed standards and in the evolving jurisprudence of the relevant bodies largely (if not entirely) to settle the question. In particular, paragraph 32 of the Copenhagen Document states the following in its first sentence: To belong to a national minority is a matter of a persons individual choice and no disadvantage may arise from the exercise of such choice. (Human Rights Committee, 1992, 159–181) The overriding concern of the experts was to ensure that by focusing specifically on national minorities the process would not be doing a disservice to other minorities be they (only) linguistic, ethnic, religious or other (Cortell Peterson, 2000, 132-145). They sought to avoid a situation whereby they might inadvertently provide a point of reference to governments which would be looking for ways to limit the linguistic rights of other minorities such as migrant communities (Levy, 1994, 279-312). This concern is given its full expression in the general remarks of the Explanatory Note in which it is stated clearly that The Oslo Recommendations are intended to strengthen and add to the existing body of human rights related to the use of language and that they were not developed with a view to restricting the real or potential impact of these rights in any way. (Chen, 1998, 214) Stronger links to fundamental rights in both the original background paper and the preliminary drafts of the recommendations and Explanatory Note, those standards of human rights law which make direct reference to language or are very evidently related to language were quoted. In particular, reference was made to such language-specific standards as Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (which refers to persons belonging to minorities as having the right to use their language), Article 30 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (which guarantees the childs right to use his/her own language), Article 2(1) of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (which proclaims the right of persons belonging to the noted minorities to use their own language in public and private) and other language-specific standards contained in regional instruments such as the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the Copenhagen Document (Van de Kragt Dawes, 2003, 112-22). The experts proceeded on the basis that such fundamental rights as freedom of expression and non-discrimination are in any case to be respected and provide the foundation for the other rights. The experts, however, concluded that there was a need for The Oslo Recommendations to make a strong and demonstrable link between language rights and such underlying concepts as the dignity of the human person and the notion of essential equality (Crocker, 1999, 56-66). From these precepts, language-specific rights also connect with other freedoms such as association and assembly. Hence, The Oslo Recommendations stress that the right of persons belonging to national minorities to use their language(s) in private and in public flows from the most fundamental rights and freedoms contained in the international instruments. (Buchheit, 1978, 73-7 9) The Language Of Business The consultation process leading up to the final set of recommendations can be said to have progressed at a generally even pace. The issue of minority languages in business, however, was both complex and controversial enough to slow down the process. As discussion on this issue progressed, consensus began to emerge. The running of a private business was indeed seen by the experts as an activity belonging essentially to the private sphere. Most experts immediately argued that the State is not entitled to impose any undue linguistic restrictions or requirements in this domain (Levy, 1994, 279-312). This point of view, however, was contested by some experts who stressed that such a blanket approach could have unforeseen and unintended consequences in certain circumstances. The example of the Baltic States was put forward as a case in point (Kusà ½, 2006, 299–306). In situations where the language of the majority had suffered under a long period of repression and where that langu age may be said to be in the process of re-establishing itself (as is the case in Estonia and Latvia), such a liberal approach could undermine the overall social interest in having a language of commerce and public administration for the State which is broadly used and, therefore, accessible to all (Phillips Rosas, 1995, 13–76). In the absence of such a broadly known language, it was further argued that the process of State-building and social integration would be negatively affected — with the language of the majority also potentially under threat. The experts agreed that the issue should be looked at in greater detail and entrusted the FIER with the task of researching the matter further. (Van de Kragt Dawes, 2003, 112-22) The practical effect of these legitimate requirements could be that it would be easier, in the long run, for the given enterprise to function in both languages. The other alternative could be for the enterprise to make extensive use of translators which would allow it to meet the requirements of the State without having to change its internal language practices (Cortell Peterson, 2000, 132-145). In any event, the experts felt it was important to underline in the Explanatory Note that the legitimate linguistic requirements advanced by the State in this essentially private sphere must be proportional to the public interest to be served. The State must be reasonable and cannot make unrealistic or discriminatory demands on the owners of private businesses (Hawkins, 1997, 403-434). The problem of arriving at a consensus around the difficult issue of minority languages in the business sector was interesting for what it highlighted in this particular consultation process. On the one hand, the intervention of the advocates who are involved in specific in-country situations served as a kind of reality check with respect to an issue that is obviously a very thorny one in a number of countries. This was a good thing. In the process of elaborating The Oslo Recommendations, the in-put of advocates contributed to making the process more thorough. On the other hand, this experience illustrated clearly a general point. The development of policy guidelines based on international human/minority rights law and intended for general application in a large heterogeneous region such as that covered by the OSCE should not make reference to or be guided by considerations that are particular to a specific context or situation. Of course, in the process of implementation, full account will have to be taken of the specific elements of each situation. Nevertheless, careful consideration of complex domains such as business enterprise reveals that it is both possible and useful to elaborate practical guidelines. (Crocker, 1999, 56-66) When referring to administrative authorities, international instruments refer to the right of persons belonging to national minorities to communicate with the authorities in their own (i.e. minority) language(s). But this right is applicable only in such cases where the minority in question has inhabited the area traditionally or in substantial numbers implying rights exercisable at the local and/or regional level (Hurd, 1999, 379-405). While the notion of traditional clearly indicates a lengthy period of time with established practices (verging on the idea of an acquired right), the notion of substantial numbers implies both quantity and compactness each of which affects feasibility calculations (Lewis, 1998, 479-504). Certainly, corresponding with local authorities in the mother tongue or being able to express one orally at the offices of public administrative authorities and services are important for the advancement of ones interests (Crocker, 1999, 56-66). But while this is not in doubt, the extent to which these may be invoked as rights (with corresponding duties on the State) turns on an evaluation of the facts in the specific situation (i.e. whether the demanding group or person belonging to such a group has inhabited the area traditionally or whether they constitute substantial numbers) (Buchheit, 1978, 73-79). The experts were of the opinion, for example, that if one considers the standards contained in such instruments as the Copenhagen Document (paragraph 34) or the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Article 10(2)) as they relate to administrative authorities, in conjunction with the fundamental principles of equality and non-discrimination, one could conclude that in certain situations (i.e. where minority populations are significant in number and compact in their geographic distribution), local and regional authorities should take steps to ensure that health and social services be provided to persons belonging to the n ational minority in question in the minorities language. The use of the minority mother tongue is particularly important in the sphere of health and social services (Chen, 1998, 214). People must be able to express themselves fully and unequivocally when they are faced with health problems or are in need of counselling or basic services. After much discussion, the experts agreed that the relationship between the persons belonging to minorities and the public authorities goes beyond the right to address authorities in ones own language and to receive a reply in this language (Underdal, 1998, 5-36). In certain cases, it may include the right to receive services provided or administered by the authorities in ones own language. The objective should be to organise and facilitate the delivery of services to the maximum benefit of as many persons as possible not only speakers of the official or State language(s). It was also noted by the experts that persons belonging to minorities are to be assumed to be taxpayers and that public authorities are to be assumed to be acting as public servants responsive to the needs of the whole population (including persons belonging to national minorities). (Kusà ½, 2006, 299–306) The provision of services in the language of a national minority may involve substantial budgetary implications and consequently may provoke a negative reaction on the part of the majority. While having achieved consensus around the potential implications of equality and nondiscrimination in the provision of linguistically sensitive services, the experts pondered how best to approach this matter in terms of recommendations. The experts agreed that, in terms of services, Recommendation 14 should be drafted in general terms. In the Explanatory Note, however, they agreed that the most important services (i.e. health and social services) should be highlighted, but this should not be read as excluding other services or facilities for participation. It is to be noted in this connection that, as a general matter, the exact wording of a recommendation and its correlation with the relevant text in the Explanatory Note is necessary for a full understanding of the views of the experts, especial ly when dealing with issues involving resources. (Levy, 1994, 279-312) Issues such as gerrymandering or the arbitrary modification of a regions demographic composition through the eviction or expulsion of populations were not dealt with in the preliminary stages of the drafting process. It was initially felt that, although these issues are of vital importance to the advancement of the interests of national minorities, they do not necessarily relate to linguistic rights. Nonetheless, during the consultation process the point was made by a few experts that these issues should be addressed. The experts felt that these issues were closely related to the ability of national minorities to achieve and maintain strength in numbers and density in a particular region with consequences for minority language rights. Without attention to these matters, entitlements could be undermined by practices of gerrymandering or forced movements of populations. As a result of these concerns, the section of the recommendations relating to administrative authorities and public s ervices was expanded to include a recommendation regarding the issue of gerrymandering and the arbitrary modification of the demographic composition of regions (Levy, 1994, 279-312). As the recommendations evolved over time such a recommendation seemed out of place and some experts proposed that it be deleted. At the third and final consultation the issue was raised again. The point was reiterated that reference should be made to this question in view of its importance to the survival of minorities. In the end it was proposed and agreed that, although this question should be addressed, it would not be formulated as a recommendation but would be dealt with in the particular section of the Explanatory Note which relates to administrative authorities and public services. (Phillips Rosas, 1995, 13–76) The international instruments relating to the protection of the rights of persons belonging to minorities contain little in terms of these persons access to justice in their own language. Nonetheless, the experts felt strongly that the issue of justice and access to it in minority languages had to be addressed. Hence, The Oslo Recommendations contain four recommendations relating to this issue (Crocker, 1999, 56-66). Recommendation 16 concerns the establishment of independent national institutions such as human rights tribunals or ombudsmen which are meant to provide non-judicial recourses for persons belonging to national minorities whose language rights have been violated. While recognising the importance for minorities of access to such recourses, the experts did not have numerous minority rights standards to which to refer. (Hawkins, 1997, 403-434) Their main point of reference was the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination which stipulates in Article 1(1) that the concept of racial discrimination is not limited solely to race but includes discrimination based also on ethnic origin. Article 6 of the Convention then requires States parties to assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies through competent tribunals and other State institutions against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this Convention. (Hurd, 1999, 379-405) In terms of Recommendations 17 through 19 which deal with minority languages in the judicial process, the experts made reference to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which both deal with the administration of justice in a general context rather than one particular to minorities. More specifically, Article 9 of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages provides a range of alternatives to secure the use of minority languages before judicial authorities (Buchheit, 1978, 73-79). Certain bilateral treaties also expressly entrench such rights. While referring to these standards, the experts sought to link them with other fundamental rights affecting persons belonging to minorities, in particular non-discrimination provisions and the right to an effective remedy. In elaborating especially these recommendations, the experts kept in mind the HCNM specific encouragement to be bold and creative while remaining within the parameters of international human rights law (Cortell Peterson, 2000, 132-145). The experts were

The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner Chapters 10

Before I could process this, Riley roared out an animalistic shriek of rage. He was staring down at the ashy remains on the floor, his eyes bulging in fury. Everyone stood silent, immobile. We'd al seen Riley lose his temper, but this was something different. Riley spun and raked his fingers through a blaring speaker, then ripped it from the wal and hurled it across the room. Jen and Kristie dodged out of the way as it exploded into the far wal, sending up a cloud of pulverized drywal dust. Riley smashed the sound system with his foot, and the thudding bass went silent. Then he leaped to where Raoul stood, and grabbed him by the throat. â€Å"I wasn't even here!† Raoul yel ed, looking afraid – I'd never seen that before. Riley growled hideously and threw Raoul as he'd thrown the speaker. Jen and Kristie jumped out of the way again. Raoul's body crashed right through the wal, leaving an enormous hole. Riley caught Kevin by the shoulder and – with a familiar screech – ripped off his right hand. Kevin cried out in pain and tried to twist out of Riley's grip. Riley kicked him in the side. Another harsh shriek and Riley had the rest of Kevin's arm. He tore the arm in half at the elbow and threw the pieces hard into Kevin's anguished face – smack, smack, smack, like a hammer striking stone. â€Å"What is wrong with you?† Riley screamed at us. â€Å"Why are you al so stupid?† He made a grab for the blond Spider-Man kid, but that kid leaped out of his way. His jump left him too close to Fred, and he stumbled back toward Riley again, gagging. â€Å"Do any of you have a brain?† Riley smacked a kid named Dean into the entertainment center, shattering it, then caught another girl – Sara – and tore her left ear and a handful of hair from her head. She snarled in anguish. It became suddenly obvious that Riley was doing a very dangerous thing. There were a lot of us in here. Already Raoul was back, with Kristie and Jen – usual y his enemies – flanking him defensively. A few others banded together in clusters around the room. I wasn't sure if Riley was aware of the threat or if his rant came to an end natural y. He took a deep breath. He tossed Sara her ear and the hair. She recoiled away from him, licking the torn edge of her ear, coating it with venom so that it would reattach. There was no remedy for the hair, though; Sara was going to have a bald spot. â€Å"Listen to me!† Riley said, quiet but fierce. â€Å"Al our lives depend on you listening to what I'm saying now and thinking! We are al going to die. Every one of us, you and me, too, if you can't act like you have brains for just a few short days!† This was nothing like his usual lectures and pleadings for control. He definitely had everyone's attention. â€Å"It's time for you to grow up and take responsibility for yourselves. Do you think you get to live like this for free? That al the blood in Seattle doesn't have a price?† The little clusters of vampires no longer seemed threatening. Everyone was wide-eyed, some exchanging mystified glances. I saw Fred's head turn toward me in my peripheral vision, but I didn't meet his gaze. My attention was focused on two things: Riley, just in case he started to attack again, and the door. The door that was stil closed. â€Å"Are you listening now? Real y listening?† Riley paused, but no one nodded. The room was very stil . â€Å"Let me explain to you the precarious situation we are al in. I'l try to keep it simple for the slowest ones. Raoul, Kristie, come here.† He motioned to the leaders of the two largest gangs, al ied for this brief moment against him. Neither of them moved toward him. They braced themselves, Kristie baring her teeth. I expected Riley to soften, to apologize. To placate them and then persuade them to do what he wanted. But this was a different Riley. â€Å"Fine,† he snapped. â€Å"We're going to need leaders if we're going to survive, but apparently neither of you is up to the task. I thought you had aptitude. I was wrong. Kevin, Jen, please join me as the heads of this team.† Kevin looked up in surprise. He had just finished putting his arm back together. Though his expression was wary, it was also unmistakably flattered. He slowly got to his feet. Jen looked at Kristie as if waiting for permission. Raoul ground his teeth together. The door at the top of the stairs did not open. â€Å"Are you not able, either?† Riley asked, irritated. Kevin took a step toward Riley, but then Raoul rushed him, leaping across the long room in two low bounds. He shoved Kevin against the wal without a word and then stood by Riley's right shoulder. Riley permitted himself a tiny smile. The manipulation wasn't subtle, but it was effective. â€Å"Kristie or Jen, who wil lead us?† Riley asked with a hint of amusement in his voice. Jen was stil waiting for a sign from Kristie as to what she should do. Kristie glowered at Jen for an instant, then flipped her sandy hair out of her face and darted to stand on Riley's other side. â€Å"That took too long to decide,† Riley said seriously. â€Å"We don't have the luxury of time. We don't get to fool around anymore. I've let you al do pretty much whatever you feel like, but that ends tonight.† He looked around the room, meeting everyone's eyes, making sure we were listening. I held his gaze for only a second when it was my turn, and then my eyes flipped back to the door. I corrected instantly, but his glare had moved on. I wondered if he'd noticed my slip. Or had he seen me at al, here beside Fred? â€Å"We have an enemy,† Riley announced. He let that sink in for a moment. I could tel the idea was shocking to several of the vampires in the basement. The enemy was Raoul – or if you were with Raoul, the enemy was Kristie. The enemy was here, because the whole world was here. The thought that there were other forces out there strong enough to affect us was new for most. Would have been new to me, too, yesterday. â€Å"A few of you might be smart enough to have realized that if we exist, so do other vampires. Other vampires who are older, smarter†¦ more talented. Other vampires who want our blood!† Raoul hissed, and then several of his fol owers echoed him in support. â€Å"That's right,† Riley said, seeming intent on egging them on. â€Å"Seattle was once theirs, but they moved on a long time ago. Now they know about us, and they are jealous of the easy blood they used to have here. They know it belongs to us now, but they want to take it back. They are coming after what they want. One by one, they'l hunt us down! We'l burn while they feast!† â€Å"Never,† Kristie growled. Some of hers and some of Raoul's growled, too. â€Å"We don't have a lot of choices,† Riley told us. â€Å"If we wait for them to show up here, they wil have the advantage. This is their turf, after al . And they don't want to face us head-on, because we outnumber them and we are stronger than they are. They want to catch us separated; they want to take advantage of our biggest weakness. Are any of you smart enough to know what that is?† He pointed at the ashes at his feet – now smeared into the carpet and unrecognizable as a former vampire – and waited. No one moved. Riley made a disgusted sound. â€Å"Unity!† he shouted. â€Å"We don't have it! What kind of a threat can we pose when we won't stop kil ing each other?† He kicked the dust, sending up a smal black cloud. â€Å"Can you imagine them laughing at us? They think taking the city from us wil be easy. That we're weak with stupidity! That we'l just hand them our blood.† Half the vampires in the room snarled in protest now. â€Å"Can you work together, or do we al die?† â€Å"We can take them, boss,† Raoul growled. Riley scowled at him. â€Å"Not if you can't control yourself! Not if you can't cooperate with every single person in this room. Anyone you take out† – his toe nudged the ashes again – â€Å"might be the one who could have kept you alive. Every one of your coven that you kil is like handing our enemies a gift. Here, you're saying, take me down! â€Å" Kristie and Raoul exchanged a glance as if they were seeing each other for the first time. Others did the same. The word coven was not unfamiliar, but none of us had applied it to our group before. We were a coven. â€Å"Let me tel you about our enemies,† Riley said, and al eyes locked on his face. â€Å"They are a much older coven than we are. They've been around for hundreds of years, and they've survived that long for a reason. They are crafty and they are skil ed and they are coming to retake Seattle with confidence – because they've heard the only ones they'l have to fight for it are a bunch of disorganized children who wil do half their work for them!† More growls, but some were less angry than they were wary. A few of the quieter vampires, the ones Riley would have cal ed tamer, looked skittish. Riley noticed that, too. â€Å"This is how they see us, but that's because they can't see us together. Together, we can crush them. If they could see al of us, side by side, fighting together, they would be terrified. And that's how they're going to see us. Because we're not going to wait for them to show up here and start picking us off. We're going to ambush them. In four days.† Four days? I guessed our creator didn't want to cut it too close to the deadline. I looked at the closed door again. Where was Diego? Others reacted to the deadline with surprise, some with fear. â€Å"It's the last thing they'l expect,† Riley assured us. â€Å"Al of us – together – waiting for them. And I've saved the best part for last. There are only seven of them.† There was an instant of incredulous silence. Then Raoul said, â€Å"What?† Kristie stared at Riley with the same disbelieving expression, and I heard muttered whispers around the room. â€Å"Seven?† â€Å"Are you kidding me?† â€Å"Hey,† Riley snapped. â€Å"I wasn't joking when I said this coven is dangerous. They are wise and†¦ devious. Underhanded. We wil have power on our side; they wil have deception. If we play it their way, they will win. But if we take it to them on our terms†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Riley didn't finish, he just smiled. â€Å"Let's go now,† Raoul urged. â€Å"Let's get 'em out of the picture fast.† Kevin growled enthusiastical y. â€Å"Slow down, moron. Rushing into things blind isn't going to help us win,† Riley chided him. â€Å"Tel us everything we need to know about them,† Kristie encouraged, shooting Raoul a superior look. Riley hesitated, as if deciding how to word something. â€Å"Al right, where to begin? I guess the first thing you need to know is†¦ that you don't know everything there is to know about vampires yet. I didn't want to overwhelm you in the beginning.† Another pause while everyone looked confused. â€Å"You have a little bit of experience with what we cal talents.' We have Fred.† Everyone looked at Fred – or rather they tried to. I could tel from Riley's expression that Fred did not like being singled out. It looked like Fred had real y turned up the volume on his â€Å"talent,† as Riley cal ed it. Riley cringed and looked away quickly. I stil didn't feel anything. â€Å"Yes, wel, there are some vampires who have gifts beyond the usual super strength and super senses. You've seen one aspect in†¦ our coven.† He was careful not to say Fred's name again. â€Å"Gifts are rare – one in fifty, maybe – but every one is different. There's a huge range of gifts out there, and some of them are more powerful than others.† I could hear a lot of murmurs now as people wondered if they might be talented. Raoul was preening like he'd already decided he was gifted. As far as I could tel, the only one around here that was in any way special was standing next to me. â€Å"Pay attention!† Riley commanded. â€Å"I'm not tel ing you this for entertainment.† â€Å"This enemy coven,† Kristie interjected. â€Å"They're talented. Right?† Riley gave her an approving nod. â€Å"Exactly. I'm glad someone here can connect the dots.† Raoul's upper lip twitched back over his teeth. â€Å"This coven is dangerously talented,† Riley went on, his voice dropping to a hushed whisper. â€Å"They have a mind reader.† He examined our faces, looking to see if we got the importance of this revelation. He didn't seem satisfied with his assessment. â€Å"Think, guys! He'l know everything in your head. If you attack, he'l know what move you're going to make before you know it. You go left, he'l be waiting.† There was a nervous stil ness as everyone imagined this. â€Å"This is why we've been so careful – me, and the one who created you.† Kristie flinched away from Riley when he mentioned her. Raoul looked angrier. Nerves strained universal y. â€Å"You don't know her name, and you don't know what she looks like. This protects us al . If they'd stumbled across one of you alone, they wouldn't realize that you were connected to her, and they might have let you be. If they knew you were part of her coven, there would be no delay in your execution.†

1920’s USA Sources Coursework Essay

(1.) In source A, we see a cartoon of ‘Uncle Sam’, the symbol of America, looking at a picture of life in the USA from years before. I think that the cartoonist is trying to show how American life in the 1920s (when the cartoon was drawn) is so much different to American life in earlier years which is shown in the picture on the wall. We can see that many characters that represent different aspects of 1920’s life in the USA surround ‘Uncle Sam’. For example, there are three women with the words ‘Scandal’, ‘Materialism’ or ‘Divorce’ written on their dresses, and the words ‘Easy money’ in the smoke of Sam’s cigar. The word scandal refers to the presidency of Warren G. Harding, when many instances of corruption occurred. For example, Harding’s close friend, Charles Forbes, was thought to be responsible for the suspicious disappearance of $200 million from the Veteran’s Bureau account, of which he was the director. During Harding’s term in office, this case of blatant fraud (and others) was unknown to the general public. However, by the time Source A was drawn in 1925, Calvin Coolidge had become president and these scandals were uncovered to the public. The word materialism refers to people’s changing attitude towards their own wealth, mainly due to the economic boom. After the First World War, the USA had gained status as the richest nation in the world. This was because it had not suffered physically or financially from the war, unlike its European counterparts. In fact, America was receiving vast amounts of money through re-payments from countries they had given loans to during the conflict. Also, America’s politics helped to shape the way that people earned and spent their money. With the Republicans in power, the nation learnt to exercise the policy of ‘laissez-faire’, which literally translated means ‘let it be’. In other words, people were able to build up their own businesses freely, safe in the knowledge that the government would not interfere too much or put up high taxes. In actual fact, taxes were decreased to encourage Americans to spend their wages on luxury goods, such as refrigerators or cars. High tariffs on exported goods from overseas meant people were more likely to buy products made in America, thus boosting the country’s industries. People began to care more and more about their own wealth, and found that they had more money at their fingertips. This ties in with the words easy money, which refers to the Stock market. With more money in their pockets, Americans were always on the look out for ways in which they could invest it and even increase it. The Stock Exchange and property market provided the perfect outlet for this. Not only did professional stockbrokers play the market, but also the normal working public, who found they could make ‘easy money’, as it says in the cartoon, by simply buying stocks. However, the people who did this were not loyal to the company they bought them from, as they usually sold them as soon as the prise had risen. Another big change that occurred in this time was the role of women in society. The fact that the women in the cartoon are flappers, shows how by 1925, women were beginning to become independent and outspoken. They smoked, swore in public, and even rode motorcycles. The woman with the word divorce on her dress emphasises this point as well. In the 1920s, the divorce rate rose as women began to live their own lives without depending on men for support. So, what was the cartoonist’s message? Personally I think that he/she was trying to show how much the USA had changed from the times when â€Å"pioneers lived simple lives in log cabins†. The fact that ‘Uncle Sam’ is gazing at the picture and saying, â€Å"Ah, those were the days† is showing that, in effect, America yearns for the way that life used to be before everything became so materialistic and money-orientated, even though he himself is sitting in the ‘seat of luxury’. (2.) In source B, we see a photograph of two Negroes hanged from a tree whilst being surrounded and watched by a crowd of white people. Source C is an extract from a newspaper, which describes in detail the lynching of another Negro in a separate incident. These two sources are similar in some ways and different in others. There are a number of ways that we can see this. Firstly, both sources show a similar reaction from the crowd to the actual lynching. B shows the crowd looking up at the bodies enthusiastically, and even one man pointing to them as if to show to the camera something he is proud of. There does not appear to be anyone looking distressed or upset by the incident, with most ‘spectators’ looking joyous and pleased. Both sources show the crowd to be diverse (obviously within the same ethnic group), with people of all ages and both sexes. Source C also describes the crowd’s reaction as being happy at the Negro’s fate. In fact, the crowd seemed to be even more enthusiastic in the second source than in the first one, â€Å"†¦. joined hands and danced around while the Negro was burned†. But ultimately, both sources show the different crowds to be in approval of the lynchings. However, one difference between the two sources is who actually committed the lynching in each case. In B, we can only see what appears to be normal, white cillivians in the crowd. There does not seem to be any members of the Ku Klux Klan in their usual white ‘uniform’. Therefore, independent bigots could have simply done the hanging in the first source, in an almost spontaneous fashion. In comparison, Source C seems to have been a more planned event, organised by the Ku Klux Klan. The fact that the extract says that there was more than 500 people present and that people were travelling from other cities by car just to see the lynching gives us the impression that it was highly publicised within the ‘racist community’. We can not tell the exact number of people at the hanging in source B, but we can assume that it was probably not as many as in the second source. Another difference between the two sources is that, obviously, one is a photograph and one is a newspaper extract. If I were to choose, I would probably say that a photograph (source B) gives a more accurate impression of an event than an account (source C) of somebody who was simply present at the time. This is because a photograph is taken at the time and can not be changed. Whether or not the photographer was racist does not make any difference because, generally, the camera does not lie and is not biased, depending on the context. But the newspaper extract was written after the event and is therefore less accurate, because the writer could have forgotten important details or even written the account in an unfair or biased way. (3.) Source F is a photograph showing a crowd of people demonstrating on the behalf of Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, taken in April 1927. How useful would it be for a historian who was studying the case of the two imprisoned immigrants? We can see in the photograph that there is quite a large crowd of people, which gives the impression that the majority of Americans supported Sacco and Vanzetti. However, that is not strictly true. Although the two accused men did have many supporters who protested against their impending execution, most normal American people agreed with it. This was mainly due to the American public’s fear of Communists or ‘Reds’ as they were commonly called. Since the Russian Revolution in 1917, people had started to believe that communism was spreading and would eventually reach the USA. This caused the number of immigrants brought to America to be limited, and any that did come were discriminated against. This seems to be case with Sacco and Vanzetti. In hindsight, it appears that the two men were used as †scape-goats’ for a crime they possibly did not commit. Being Italian immigrants made them an easy target, and it was unlikely that the American public would believe their word against the American legal system and police. However, is this shown in the photograph? Without background knowledge of the subject, it would be hard to tell by the photograph whether most people were supportive of Sacco and Vanzetti or not. The photograph is quite misleading, as it seems as though the majority of the American public was on their side, which was not the case. Although I can not tell for sure, I believe that the people in the photograph are other immigrants, who were generally the only people that supported the two men. This was because most immigrants felt that the discrimination against Sacco and Vanzetti could easily happen to them one day in the future. But this is not necessarily clear from the photograph. However, it could be useful to a historian as an example of the minority that did support them. (4.) I do not believe that the cartoon in Source E is very useful at all. This is for a number of different reasons. Firstly, Nazis produced the cartoon. This means that it is biased against the USA, and would therefore not provide a fair or accurate view of American life. Even if some aspects of the cartoon were true, they would undoubtedly be used in a misleading way. This is why propaganda can never be used as an accurate impression of something. Secondly, as the cartoon was made during the Second World War, it is intended to show what American life was like during this time (1939-1945). So therefore it does not show what life was like in the 1920s. Also, many of the examples of American life used are loosely true but are used inaccurately. For example, the ‘body’ (which is supposedly meant to represent the USA) is shown as having the head of a Ku Klux Klan member. This could be interpreted that the Klan were very dominant throughout the whole of the USA as they are seen as being at the head of it all. This was not true. A registration of cars increased. This means that more cars were made because there was a bigger demand for them, and more cars were bought because people had more money to spend. Also the sale of radios greatly increased in this decade. These statistics certainly help to support Hoover’s claim that America was winning the battle over poverty. Source J also emphasises the point that during this era, the country began to spend more money on luxury goods, such as big houses and cars. However, the same two sources also show us that the opposite was also true. Not everyone in the USA was making a lot of money, as shown in source I. When compared to the $1246 that Californian fruit farmers made per month in 1929, the South Carolina’s farmers pay packet of only $129 per month seems very measly. This is one example of how not everybody did well in the 1920s. This was mainly due to overproduction of goods; in other words, more food was produced than could be sold. Also, due to the high tariffs put on American exports, the food could not be sold in Europe. Source J also points out that the America people had become so obsessed with making money that it would eventually be the death of them; â€Å"I think the country was in greater danger during the twenties†¦more money every year for everyone†¦Suddenly everybody owned a motor car†¦All we needed was to make more automobiles and build bigger houses.† We must also remember that Hoover made the speech in source H during the Presidential Election campaign. This means that he was obviously going to say something that would encourage the general public to have faith in the Republican government and to help get him in to the White House. Therefore it might be an exaggerated or ‘sugar-coated’ form of the truth, which most politicians seem to have a talent at expressing. (6.) Source K is a song written in 1971 for an American television show. It is about how much better life in the 1920s was than the present day (i.e. when the song was written). Source L is an extract from a history textbook about how the majority of Americans in the 1920s did not live the ‘high life’ and were, in fact, very poor and facing unemployment. At a first glance we can see that source K is not completely accurate about life in the twenties. In the first line it mentions ‘Glenn Miller’, a bandleader who is described as playing, ‘Songs that made the hit parade’. This is actually incorrect, as Glen Miller was a bandleader in the 1930s and 1940s, not the 1920s. It also mentions Herbert Hoover, which seems quite strange as he was only President for one year of the twenties, 1929. It is examples like these that seem to jeopardise the accuracy of the source. Also, the fact that it was written in 1971 makes me believe that it is less reliable than something that was written closer to the time. Also, I get the impression that the song is slightly sarcastic and comedic, as opposed to being a reliable account of 1920s American life. It is because of this that it could be easily misinterpreted. For example, the line that says, â€Å"Freaks were in a circus tent† could be referring to the time when people were highly suspicious of immigrants and hence Attorney-General Palmer ordered for many suspected socialists to be deported. But this is not very clear. Also the line that says that everybody was content is not very true. Many people were very poor in the twenties, and times were very hard for some people, such as farmers. Also, Negroes were still being treated as third-rate citizens and were often discriminated against. Also, the song is an opinion, so does not represent everybody’s views. Source L however seems much more accurate. Because it was written for a history textbook it is more likely to show a reliable viewpoint on 1920s life. Especially since it contains an example of an actual fact, as opposed to an opinion (i.e. that job insecurity was on the increase for the over 35s). It is much more realistic than source K, for example using words such as ‘vast numbers of Americans’ instead of words like ‘everybody’ as seen in the first source. So, in my opinion, Source L shows a more reliable impression of 1920s life than source K. (7.) From looking at all the sources, it is very hard to draw a straight conclusion as to whether the 1920s was a ‘golden age’ for Americans or not. To decide, I will look at all the sources again. Firstly, it is evident that economically, America did extremely well in this decade. In source I we see that within three years (1926-1929) the number of cars produced each year had increased by over 1 million. We also see that within eight years (1920-1929) the number of cars registered had been increased by nearly three times and that within seven years (1922-1929) the amount of money spent on radios increased by $764.5 million. So what does this tell us? This basically shows us that the 1920s were the beginning of the age of consumer power. People began to have more money to spend on luxury goods, so in turn more were produced. This lead to the growth of industries in the nation. However, the ever-growing capitalism in the USA did not reach everyone. Source L shows us how there was still many people without jobs. Source I supports this fact by showing how there was a wide range of wages all over the country, ranging from just $129 per month to $1246 per month. Also, there was a great deal of intolerance in America. Sources B and C show in great detail how Negroes, in particular, suffered from intolerance.

Security Methods to Protect Your Privacy Essay - 707 Words

Security Methods to Protect Your Privacy Privacy and security issues have become one of the top concerns among computer users in today’s market. It has become a game of survival of the fittest in protection of your security. The only true way to defend yourself is knowledge. You should prepare your self against hackers, spammers and potential system crashing viruses and web bugs. Lets focus on how you can protect yourselves from the would be thieves. There are several ways to protect your information from the outside world; you just need the ammunition to do it. Because this has become a focal point for computer and Internet user’s, many companies are capitalizing on a growing industry and producing software packages to†¦show more content†¦Another very affective technique that is similar to URL encryption is JavaScript filtering. JavaScript filtering enables you to surf JavaScript based sites securely by filtering the active code tat is on the website your visit. This minimizes the exploitation of hacker, other companies, websites and unwanted advertisers on your computer. This software is designed and produced by Netscape. OS shielding, has become another popular method of prevent unwanted people from gaining access to your information. OS shielding conceals your operating system making it difficult for hackers to hack into you computer without knowing your computer’s operating system and it’s configurations. Your operation system is the system that runs your computer and the applications within it. If hackers and cyber stalkers cannot attack your operation system then they cannot steal your information. This also prevents them from unloading potentially damaging viruses and web bugs. With the help of a virus scanning software like Norton, your system will be virtually impenetrable. Another effective method of preventing people from gaining access to your information is control your cookies. Cookie control blocks cookies from being planted on your computer, so online advertisers, spammers and or hackers cannot track your Internet paths. This is effective because it allowsShow MoreRelatedHow Technology Has Become Increasingly Globalized And Is Now A Key Utility1491 Words   |  6 Pagesendangering the user’s privacy online and offline. While online users should assume partial responsibility to better inform themselves and expand their knowledge of how much control they have over their information with the addition of having an understanding of what is being done with the collected data, the fault ultimately lies with those that push for more user transparency online when the significantly advancing surveillance and tracking of online users’ information violates their privacy and further reducesRead More Internet Privacy Essay699 Words   |  3 Pagesabout privacy and security? Im not a criminal or a terrorist. Ive got nothing to hide. These are things that most people think. They also believe the internet is much more secure and that their personal information is only available to them, whereas this is actually quite wrong. There are more reasons to want to protect your privacy than can be named. The important principal is that you have a right to privacy as long as that right is used within the bounds of the law. Seeking privacy shouldRead MoreInternet Technology, Marketing, and Security (Ebay)1703 Words   |  7 Pagesout in the market and new/old movies. When you make a purchase on eBay, the agreement of the purchase is made valid. It lists the item you ordered, shipping address, cost of the item, and payment options. PayPal is the preferred method of payment due to the great security they have in their system. You can also use any major credit card as well. `One of the ways eBay market itself is by using commercials to gain awareness to the website. They use a popular item and build a commercial around thatRead MoreA Day That Changed The World s Opinion On The Safety Of Air Travel1217 Words   |  5 Pagesperson would have said they felt airport security was adequate. B. However, 13 years later the security debate continues as to whether we do enough to protect the passengers, or if flying is any safer than it was before the terrorist attack. II. Everyone wants flying to be safe, but the question is what is each person willing to invest for their safety. A. Is there a proper balance of time and money? B. When does a security screen become an invasion of privacy? C. Should passenger profiling be allowedRead MorePCI Compliance Analysis1055 Words   |  5 Pagesa business is working to protect their valuable information by adhering to Payment Card Industry, PCI compliance mandates. What is PCI Compliance? All major credit card issuers must adhere to the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS). This is a mandated compliance standard established by the Payment Card Industry Security Council. This standard applies to any business no matter how larger or small that accepts credit card payments. This standard protects cardholder data and reducesRead MoreRecommended Organizational Policy Changes Of The European Union998 Words   |  4 Pages(Microsoft changes Bing s privacy policy, 2010). The biggest offenders for malware on the internet is image and video searches on the web. Sophos reports that 92% of search-driven malware attacks is obtained from Google and Bing image searches. (Pearce, 2012). In a world of personalized online services, establishing and maintaining user trust and responsible use of data is critical. Users expect appropriate and relevant content and advertising while also protecting their privacy when they use any searchRead MoreBecoming Extinct As We Transition Into A Computer Based World1422 Words   |  6 Pages Good morning everyone, my name is Linda Cobb. I am so please to see all of your wonderful faces that came out to support us today. It is an honor to stand before a great audience. I want to communicate with you a few of the issues concerning patient’s data with privacy and security. Now, when a patient comes into a healthcare facility seeking professional care, they are trusting that the physician will deliver it. When this patient leaves the hospital they also want to be confident that their documentationRead MoreRisks And Risks Of Security Essay1346 Words   |  6 Pages SECURITY Concept of Security However, risk is the likelihood of something bad happening, security help to minimize risks. There is a need to recognize how risk can result from a threat. Some of the common threats are as follows: I. Unintentional threat—natural disasters like flood, fire or snow storms or equipment failure like power failure or network failure. II. Intentional threat---includes theft of laptops, software or data and fraud which translates to unauthorized access to data. In the worldRead MoreEffective Privacy And Security Safety1442 Words   |  6 PagesHealthcare Privacy Officer Computers have become the database and communication in healthcare, and enable healthcare to make technology advances. Healthcare has come a long way with computers changing nursing and healthcare to become more business-like. Since there is a lot of stored confidential, and protected health information, security issues can arise. Health information should only be accessed by direct caregivers. Employees behavior online in the workplace impacts performance and can haveRead MoreAnalyzing The Past, Present And Future Of The Congressional Attempt At The Health Care Reform1704 Words   |  7 PagesAnalyzing the past, present and future of the congressional attempt at the health care reform. Originally presented to congress was the Health Security Act in 1993, which was not enacted until June 2014. The Health Security Act started the foundation for patient privacy and the security of an individual’s health information. As the years passed the Health Security Act became quickly out dated and needed to be updated to complement the sudden progression of current technology advances. Congress was presented