By John Raoux, AP

Paul Silas is out as Charlotte Bobcats coach after posting a 32-88 record over two seasons.

By Christian Petersen, Getty Images

Brandon Wood averaged 8.8 points per game as a senior at Michigan State last season.

That’s up 2.5% compared with the same month one year ago.

McCarran officials said Thursday that traffic at the primary airport servicing Sin City is up 3% through the first three months of the year.

Allegiant Air posted the largest year-over-year increase by percentage. Nearly 30% more passengers used the airline in Las Vegas in March compared with the same month last year.

Traffic for Southwest Airlines was flat. Southwest is the airport’s largest carrier.

Traffic on US Airways flights was down more than 15%.

Officials say the airport handled 9.9 million passengers, combined, between January and March.

Doug Kapustin, for USA TODAY

Nicholas May is less than two- years-old, but he’s already been diagnosed with autism.

April 30, 2012, 6:15 AM — The U.S. House of Representatives last week passed the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act despite opposition from privacy advocates, lawmakers and even the White House, which threatened to veto the bill if it lands on the president’s desk in its current form.

Here’s what you need to know about CISPA.

What is CISPA? CISPA is short for the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (H.R. 3523). U.S Reps. Mike J. Rogers (R-Mich.) and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) introduced the bill in the House in November. The bill is designed to bolster cybersecurity by enabling better information sharing between Internet companies and the government. An amended version of the bill passed the House by a 248-168 vote Thursday.

What sort of information sharing? CISPA would allow Internet companies, such as Internet service providers, to monitor their networks and to collect, analyze and share information on any user activities that they believe present a threat to their networks. The law would allow companies to share any information “pertaining to the protection” of their networks with the National Security Agency and other federal agencies. In return, federal agencies would share both classified and unclassified cyberthreat information in their possession to help Internet companies bolster their defenses against cyberthreats.

Who supports CISPA? CISPA has broad support from many technology companies, industry trade groups and lawmakers who say that information sharing is vital to cybersecurity.

Why do privacy advocates and rights groups oppose the bill? Organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Democracy and Technology say the bill is dangerous because it is too vaguely worded. They worry that the bill would allow Internet companies to collect an almost unlimited set of information about Internet users and would allow the companies to share the information with government agencies such as the NSA, without judicial oversight. The law would also allow Internet companies to use a “cybersecurity exception” clause to skirt the privacy protection provided by statutes such as the Federal Wiretap Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

What do you mean by vaguely worded? Critics claim the bill uses loose language to describe cyberthreats, network security attacks, countermeasures, cybersecurity systems, and other crucial terms. They claim the ambiguity can create big problems. For instance, CISPA offers no clear explanation of what activity defines a cyberthreat, although companies would be allowed to monitor and share information about those activities. The language would also allow companies to collect information on almost all Internet communications, and justify it on cybersecurity grounds. Even innocuous activity such as using a proxy server or an anonymizer could be deemed a suspicious activity under CISPA.

Are these the only concerns? No. Opponents of the bill say CISPA would expand the government’s ability to monitor private communications under the premise of cybersecurity. They say the bill would allow data that’s collected to detect and deter cyberthreats could also be used for national security purposes and other law enforcement uses. They argue that Internet companies that share data with the government would enjoy a great deal of legal immunity even when they violate personal privacy rights.

How exactly would it affect me? In theory, the bill would allow your ISP, or an Internet company such as Google or a Facebook, to more easily justify collecting information on all your online activities and share them with the NSA and other federal agencies.

Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in a statement posted Monday on a militant website said it would release Stephen Malcolm if the cleric Abu Qatada were let go. It warned that the British government would be responsible for the consequences if it follows through on a plan to deport him to Jordan, where he faces trial on terrorism charges.

Authorities in Britain have been trying to expel the Palestinian-Jordanian preacher since 2001, but the European Court of Human Rights ruled he could not be deported to Jordan because of a risk that evidence obtained through torture would be used against him there.

Earlier this month, British authorities detained the cleric once again, and at the time said they were close to deporting him to Jordan.

Abu Qatada, whose real name is Omar Mahmoud Mohammed Othman, has been described in both Spanish and British courts as a leading al-Qaeda figure in Europe and a threat to national security. He was first detained in Britain in 2002.

“We offer the British government an initiative to release its citizen Stephen Malcolm …. who is our prisoner, if it allows Sheik Abu Qatada to leave to one of the Arab Spring countries or any other country of his choice where he guarantees his freedom and, rights and dignity,” it said.

Elections held in the aftermath of the pro-democracy uprisings that have swept the Middle East in the past year have resulted in Islamist-dominated parliaments in Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt.

Malcolm was kidnapped along with a Swedish and a Dutch national in Timbuktu in November. He also holds South African citizenship.

The terror group expressed hope that the British government would deal with the offer with “objectivity, reason and wisdom” but threatened that Britain would be responsible for the consequences if he is handed over to the Jordanian government.

Britain has not commented on the proposal. A British official speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of his job said, “We don’t engage with terrorists in these matters.”

Al-Qaeda denied Abu Qatada has any ties to it, but said it was defending him because of allegiances to a “Muslim brother” should come ahead of other ideological concerns.

The group argued that Abu Qatada’s case proves that Britain does not protect human rights or justice.

“How come the Sheik was jailed for years merely for exercising his right to express his opinion and beliefs, in words and writing,” it said.

The cleric spent six years in jail in Britain, although he has never been charged with any crime. Earlier this month, he was detained again, and British authorities said at the time that they were close to deporting him. Jordan has said it will guarantee Abu Qatada a fair trial and that no evidence obtained through torture could be used in any trial.

The al-Qaeda statement alluded to the possibility of torture in Jordan, saying the country has a record “full of unprecedented crimes against Muslim prisoners.”

The review, part of a continuing examination of how economic conditions are affecting law enforcement by the Police Executive Research Forum, found that 56% of the 700 responding agencies reported that the poor economy is driving an increase in domestic conflict, up from 40% of agencies in a similar survey in 2010.

Domestic violence is not a separate category of crime tracked in the FBI’s annual crime report, which has recorded a sustained decline in overall violence since the financial collapse in 2008. But the survey concludes that police are responding to more reports of domestic incidents, regardless of whether charges are filed.

In Camden, N.J., police responded to 9,100 domestic incidents in 2011, up from 7,500 calls in 2010.

Camden Police Chief Scott Thomson said it was “impossible” to separate the economy from the domestic turmoil in the city where unemployment is 19%.

Thomson said domestic-related aggravated assaults increased nearly 10% in 2011 from levels in 2010. The chief said the department has been tracking the calls closely because of the time and personnel they draw from a force that has been depleted in the past two years with layoffs of about 200 employees, another consequence of the poor economy.

“When stresses in the home increase because of unemployment and other hardships, domestic violence increases,” Thomson said. “We see it on the street.”

Eugene, Ore., Police Chief Pete Kerns said troubling increases in assaults have coincided with the timing of the financial crisis and the slow recovery. In 2011, aggravated assaults increased to 234, up from 188 in 2010. Simple assaults also were up in 2011 to 1,552, from 1,440 in 2010.

Kerns said, more of the assaults are taking place in residential communities in addition to nightclubs and other traditional trouble spots.

The police survey appears to corroborate findings in 2009 by the National Domestic Violence Hotline. Katie Ray-Jones, president of the hotline, said that financial stress was a factor in “intensifying and escalating” reported abuse.

Chuck Wexler, executive director of the research forum, a Washington-based law enforcement think-tank, said police have been expressing concern about rising calls related to domestic strife for at least the past two years.

“You are dealing with households in which people have lost jobs or are in fear of losing their jobs,” Wexler said. “That is an added stress that can push people to the breaking point.”

Scott Olson, Getty Images

Lisette Barraza hands a shopper her merchadise in a bag displaying the new store logo at a JCPenney store in the North Riverside Park Mall in Illinois Feb. 1, 2012.

Computerworld - The U.S. House of Representatives last week passed the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act despite opposition from privacy advocates, lawmakers and even the White House, which threatened to veto the bill if it lands on the president’s desk in its current form.

Here’s what you need to know about CISPA.

What is CISPA? CISPA is short for the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (H.R. 3523). U.S Reps. Mike J. Rogers (R-Mich.) and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) introduced the bill in the House in November. The bill is designed to bolster cybersecurity by enabling better information sharing between Internet companies and the government. An amended version of the bill passed the House by a 248-168 vote Thursday.

What sort of information sharing? CISPA would allow Internet companies, such as Internet service providers, to monitor their networks and to collect, analyze and share information on any user activities that they believe present a threat to their networks. The law would allow companies to share any information “pertaining to the protection” of their networks with the National Security Agency and other federal agencies. In return, federal agencies would share both classified and unclassified cyberthreat information in their possession to help Internet companies bolster their defenses against cyberthreats.

Who supports CISPA? CISPA has broad support from many technology companies, industry trade groups and lawmakers who say that information sharing is vital to cybersecurity.

Why do privacy advocates and rights groups oppose the bill? Organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Democracy and Technology say the bill is dangerous because it is too vaguely worded. They worry that the bill would allow Internet companies to collect an almost unlimited set of information about Internet users and would allow the companies to share the information with government agencies such as the NSA, without judicial oversight. The law would also allow Internet companies to use a “cybersecurity exception” clause to skirt the privacy protection provided by statutes such as the Federal Wiretap Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

What do you mean by vaguely worded? Critics claim the bill uses loose language to describe cyberthreats, network security attacks, countermeasures, cybersecurity systems, and other crucial terms. They claim the ambiguity can create big problems. For instance, CISPA offers no clear explanation of what activity defines a cyberthreat, although companies would be allowed to monitor and share information about those activities. The language would also allow companies to collect information on almost all Internet communications, and justify it on cybersecurity grounds. Even innocuous activity such as using a proxy server or an anonymizer could be deemed a suspicious activity under CISPA.

David Altshuler, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School: “When it comes to obesity, for the vast majority of people, there’s no one gene that makes a difference. There’s many, many genes, dozens, perhaps hundreds … each of which has a small effect on the obesity in the population, but which add up to a susceptibility when exposed to this environment we live in, for getting more overweight or not.

“There’s no doubt that genetics, the DNA that we inherit from our parents, affects how much we weigh. There’s also no doubt that the environment we live in affects how much we weigh. There’s no nature vs. nurture. There’s nature and nurture.

“When it comes to smoking or drinking, people generally have to go cold turkey. But fundamentally we have to eat. You know, people can’t stop eating. This calls for a somewhat lonely journey of self-control. We underestimate how hard it is to change your behavior, not once, not for a week or a month till you’re cured, but to change it every day for the rest of your life.”

Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: “If you go with the flow in America today, you will end up overweight or obese, as two thirds of Americans do. The weight of the nation is not healthy. And to get it healthy, we’re all going to have to do our part.

“We are seeing changes. They’re not gonna be overnight, they’re not quick, but they’re happening. And they are going to help control the weight of the nation.

“Fifty years ago, tobacco was ubiquitous. And I think in 50 years we’ll see the ubiquity of unhealthy foods today in a similar light.”

Kelly Brownell, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University: “There’s this relentless and powerful marketing of foods. You’re basically taught that you can eat everywhere, you can eat every hour of the day and that there’s something gloriously wonderful about eating foods that are high in sugar, fat and salt.

“They (food companies) have so many billions of dollars at stake in their profits that they’ll do everything they can to fight the changes that are really necessary to help address the world’s obesity problem.

“You might despair at this and say, ‘Well, what can we do about it because these companies are so powerful?’ That’s what was said about the tobacco companies 30 and 40 years ago and look what happened to them. … So if the tobacco industry can be taken on successfully by the public health world, then I don’t see any reason why the food industry can’t be the same.”

Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health: “If we don’t now take this as a really serious, urgent national priority, we are all of us individually and as a nation gonna pay a really serious price.”