<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fed Register notice on ATS draws WaPo&#8217;s attention</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hlswatch.com/2006/11/03/fed-register-notice-on-ats-draws-wapos-attention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hlswatch.com/2006/11/03/fed-register-notice-on-ats-draws-wapos-attention/</link>
	<description>News and analysis of critical issues in homeland security today.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:20:20 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Homeland Security Watch &#187; ATS-P controversy still simmers</title>
		<link>http://www.hlswatch.com/2006/11/03/fed-register-notice-on-ats-draws-wapos-attention/comment-page-1/#comment-27275</link>
		<dc:creator>Homeland Security Watch &#187; ATS-P controversy still simmers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:59:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hlswatch.com/2006/11/03/fed-register-notice-on-ats-draws-wapos-attention/#comment-27275</guid>
		<description>[...] The controversy over the passenger component of the Automated Targeting System has simmered over the past month (see my previous posts here and here) in the media and the blogosphere, with the latest feud centering around whether a provision in the FY 2007 appropriations acts prohibits the risk assessment function of the ATS-P. Privacy and civil liberties groups have argued in the past week that it does. DHS has started to fight back against these charges in the media, as exemplified by Sec. Chertoff&#8217;s quotes in this National Journal piece by Shane Harris. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The controversy over the passenger component of the Automated Targeting System has simmered over the past month (see my previous posts here and here) in the media and the blogosphere, with the latest feud centering around whether a provision in the FY 2007 appropriations acts prohibits the risk assessment function of the ATS-P. Privacy and civil liberties groups have argued in the past week that it does. DHS has started to fight back against these charges in the media, as exemplified by Sec. Chertoff&#8217;s quotes in this National Journal piece by Shane Harris. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
