Friday, September 13, 2013
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT FOR WEEK ENDING SEPTEMBER 7, 2013
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT
SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA
In the week ending September 7, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 292,000, a decrease of 31,000 from the previous week's unrevised figure of 323,000. The 4-week moving average was 321,250, a decrease of 7,500 from the previous week's revised average of 328,750.
The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.2 percent for the week ending August 31, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending August 31 was 2,871,000, a decrease of 73,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 2,944,000. The 4-week moving average was 2,953,000, a decrease of 24,750 from the preceding week's revised average of 2,977,750.
UNADJUSTED DATA
The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 228,399 in the week ending September 7, a decrease of 40,250 from the previous week. There were 299,729 initial claims in the comparable week in 2012.
The advance unadjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.0 percent during the week ending August 31, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate. The advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 2,569,200, a decrease of 174,830 from the preceding week's revised level of 2,744,030. A year earlier, the rate was 2.3 percent and the volume was 2,930,825.
The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs for the week ending August 24 was 4,272,741, a decrease of 122,971 from the previous week. There were 5,391,420 persons claiming benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2012.
No state was triggered "on" the Extended Benefits program during the week ending August 24.
Initial claims for UI benefits filed by former Federal civilian employees totaled 1,442 in the week ending August 31, an increase of 193 from the prior week. There were 2,188 initial claims filed by newly discharged veterans, a decrease of 115 from the preceding week.
There were 19,952 former Federal civilian employees claiming UI benefits for the week ending August 24, a decrease of 879 from the previous week. Newly discharged veterans claiming benefits totaled 33,285, a decrease of 469 from the prior week.
States reported 1,454,824 persons claiming Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) benefits for the week ending August 24, a decrease of 39,918 from the prior week. There were 2,223,071 persons claiming EUC in the comparable week in 2012. EUC weekly claims include first, second, third, and fourth tier activity.
The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending August 31 were in Puerto Rico (4.3), New Jersey (3.6), Connecticut (3.4), Alaska (3.3), Pennsylvania (3.1), New Mexico (3.0), California (2.9), Rhode Island (2.9), Virgin Islands (2.9), and New York (2.8).
The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending August 31 were in Oregon (+1,085), Pennsylvania (+725), Nebraska (+609), New Jersey (+537), and Kansas (+394), while the largest decreases were in California (-4,988), Nevada (-2,125), New York (-1,259), Georgia (-1,221), and Florida (-884).
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS REPORT
SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA
In the week ending September 7, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 292,000, a decrease of 31,000 from the previous week's unrevised figure of 323,000. The 4-week moving average was 321,250, a decrease of 7,500 from the previous week's revised average of 328,750.
The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.2 percent for the week ending August 31, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending August 31 was 2,871,000, a decrease of 73,000 from the preceding week's revised level of 2,944,000. The 4-week moving average was 2,953,000, a decrease of 24,750 from the preceding week's revised average of 2,977,750.
UNADJUSTED DATA
The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 228,399 in the week ending September 7, a decrease of 40,250 from the previous week. There were 299,729 initial claims in the comparable week in 2012.
The advance unadjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.0 percent during the week ending August 31, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week's unrevised rate. The advance unadjusted number for persons claiming UI benefits in state programs totaled 2,569,200, a decrease of 174,830 from the preceding week's revised level of 2,744,030. A year earlier, the rate was 2.3 percent and the volume was 2,930,825.
The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs for the week ending August 24 was 4,272,741, a decrease of 122,971 from the previous week. There were 5,391,420 persons claiming benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2012.
No state was triggered "on" the Extended Benefits program during the week ending August 24.
Initial claims for UI benefits filed by former Federal civilian employees totaled 1,442 in the week ending August 31, an increase of 193 from the prior week. There were 2,188 initial claims filed by newly discharged veterans, a decrease of 115 from the preceding week.
There were 19,952 former Federal civilian employees claiming UI benefits for the week ending August 24, a decrease of 879 from the previous week. Newly discharged veterans claiming benefits totaled 33,285, a decrease of 469 from the prior week.
States reported 1,454,824 persons claiming Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC) benefits for the week ending August 24, a decrease of 39,918 from the prior week. There were 2,223,071 persons claiming EUC in the comparable week in 2012. EUC weekly claims include first, second, third, and fourth tier activity.
The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending August 31 were in Puerto Rico (4.3), New Jersey (3.6), Connecticut (3.4), Alaska (3.3), Pennsylvania (3.1), New Mexico (3.0), California (2.9), Rhode Island (2.9), Virgin Islands (2.9), and New York (2.8).
The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending August 31 were in Oregon (+1,085), Pennsylvania (+725), Nebraska (+609), New Jersey (+537), and Kansas (+394), while the largest decreases were in California (-4,988), Nevada (-2,125), New York (-1,259), Georgia (-1,221), and Florida (-884).
U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S REMARKS ON REGIONAL SHALE OIL AND GAS TRANSITIONING
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
World Shale Oil & Gas
Remarks
Robert F. Cekuta
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Energy Resources
Latin America Summit
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Session One: The Bigger Picture
“A Game-Changer for Latin America? Defining the Region’s Shale Potential by Global Comparison”
Good morning. Fellow panelists and distinguished guests, it is a pleasure to be here at the Latin America Summit of the World Shale Series. We are here today to examine the potential impact of gas resources in the region and globally. Unconventional gas, and shale gas in particular, have dramatically changed the energy landscape in the United States, and there is no reason to think that the United States is the only place where this resource can be developed safely and responsibly. This tremendous sea change in accessible energy resources has strong implications not only for our geopolitical relationships and economy, but also for our ability to address shared environmental goals.
I would like to talk a bit about what we have learned and in particular, highlight the political and policy challenges which exist as the United States transitions from being a net importer of energy resources.
Our dialogue this week in Buenos Aires represents one of a number of elements in the ongoing, close cooperation between the United States and Latin America on energy sector issues – whether it is the creation of complimentary energy efficiency standards for appliances throughout North and Central America or the promotion of electrical grid interconnections through the hemispheric Connecting the Americas 2022, we look forward to building strong and long-lasting partnerships in the Americas.
It is extremely appropriate that we are meeting here in Buenos Aires to discuss unconventional oil and gas development in Latin America. The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s 2013 World Shale Report notes Argentina has the world’s second-largest estimate of technologically recoverable shale gas resources. Other Latin American countries, such as Mexico, Colombia and Brazil, also hold potentially significant amounts of unconventional hydrocarbon resources. These resources will contribute profoundly to countries' economic growth as well as to world energy supplies and global energy security – if developed in a responsible and environmentally sustainable manner.
Changes At Home
I would like to discuss some of the changes which have propelled the United States into becoming a net exporter of natural gas. Over the past five years there has been a surprising transformation in the energy landscape of the United States. A few years ago, experts projected the United States would have to import approximately 64 percent of our natural gas needs by 2035. However, we have now initially begun to export some LNG, due in no small part to the “shale gas revolution” in the United States. Current projections estimate that unconventional gas – including shale gas, tight gas, and coal-bed methane – could make up more than 75 percent of U.S. natural gas production and that U.S. gas production could reach 33.14 trillion cubic feet in 2040.
Industry in the United States – and some foreign firms – have seen expanding supplies and lower prices as another positive factor for future economic growth in my country. The shale gas boom is attracting interest in industries such as steel, glass, and cement production, supporting the contention of a number of studies that low-priced natural gas can be a feedstock catalyzing a renaissance in American manufacturing, or what European Union Commissioner for Energy, Günther Oettinger called the “re-industrialization of the United States.” Unconventional oil and gas development is currently projected to create, directly or indirectly, almost 2.5 million jobs and add $350 billion to the U.S. GDP by 2015.[1]
The question many people are asking is can the experience of the United States be duplicated elsewhere? We think it can. Technological breakthroughs in horizontal drilling and multi-stage hydraulic fracturing have been essential in tapping and developing unconventional gas. But new technology is only one part of this success story.
Producers in the United States are able to capitalize on factors like a well-functioning market, attractive investment frameworks, extensive pipeline networks and other infrastructure, and an experienced and capable workforce from the conventional upstream side of the industry.
We would be remiss in discussing the shale gas revolution if we didn’t also mention the financial requirements and climate necessary for unconventional oil and gas development to flourish. Single unconventional wells can cost twice as much or more than conventional wells. Up-front exploration and initial production costs are high relative to conventional costs, and high depletion rates after initial production require continuing capital expenditures to maintain and increase target levels of shale gas or oil production. An attractive fiscal regime has been essential to the success of unconventional resource development in the United States.
Global Potential for Unconventional Gas and Oil Development
These developments are not confined to the United States, but have significant ripple effects on third party gas markets. We have seen this in terms of LNG from Qatar and Trinidad and Tobago once destined for the United States now going to other markets. As these imported LNG supplies were diverted from the United States and provided European markets with lower priced gas and meaningful competition to more expensive pipeline gas from Russia.
Looking forward, we anticipate that growing global supplies of gas could result in gas prices being de-linked from oil, as has already happened already in the United States. One possible outcome could be further reducing the power of gas transportation monopolies to use natural gas exports as a political lever.
Unconventional resource development is also changing the tenor of our engagement with major energy exporters. A few years ago, our dialogue with OPEC and other major producers was based almost exclusively on our oil import needs as the world’s largest importer. Discussions in international meetings now look at the declining import needs of the Americas, the rising import needs of Asian and non-OECD markets, and the growing number of new oil and gas producers. Patterns in the global energy trade are already changing, and the implications of these changes are important for energy producers and consumers alike.
Other countries have been watching these developments and wondering if they can replicate the U.S. experience. Numerous countries have reached out to the United States and have participated in international meetings on the subject sponsored by academic institutions or international organizations like the International Energy Agency. We welcome these discussions and see it as important to share what we have learned, what we are learning, and the things we wished we had known earlier on.
Challenges to Unconventional Gas and Oil Development
While recognizing the energy security benefits and the economic gains from unconventional gas and oil development in the United States, it is important to also note that there are many challenges as well. It is essential to develop these resources in an environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable manner. For this reason, we have taken an “all of government” approach to working with the range of stakeholders, including Civil Society – citizens groups, academia and non-governmental organizations on best practices. To that end, the Bureau of Energy Resources in the State Department manages the Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program (UGTEP), which brings together experts in policy and regulatory affairs from the United States to disseminate best practices based on the lessons learned in the United States over the past 40+ years in the environmental, social, health and safety, and commercial application of unconventional gas development.
Federal, state, and local officials in the United States are paying close attention to protecting water resources. The United States is adhering to or strengthening best practices to address fugitive methane emissions during the production and distribution processes. In tight oil development, gas flaring is a challenge, especially where the gas pipeline infrastructure is scarce. We are also looking at ways to help others reduce flaring just as we are looking to share our experiences and lessons-learned in developing unconventional oil and gas.
These issues are at the forefront of our bilateral and multilateral discussions on unconventional gas development. One way we share our experience under the UGTEP program is through visits to and from the United States, technical workshops addressing the environmental, social, and economic ramifications of unconventional gas development, and regulator training courses. And it is through these implementing mechanisms that we are helping governments implement best practices based on “lessons learned” in the U.S. experience – and allowing them to benefit from that experience by creating their own regulatory frameworks with the hindsight of our experiences in the United States.
Countries must determine how best to meet their energy resource development needs. The United States remains open to sharing what we have learned – the good and the bad experiences – to promote global security of supply and economic growth.
Conclusion
As I close, let me reiterate that there remains a global need for energy to meet the needs of people, industry, and society. Energy is a necessity for people's well-being in addition to a key factor in economic growth. Moreover, we increasingly recognize due to climate change and other factors that we need to focus on sustainability.
The United States is transitioning from being a natural gas importer to an exporter. We are open to sharing our experience with other countries as they seek to develop their unconventional resources, should they want to do so. We look forward to a productive and rewarding collaborative partnership.
Thank you and I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
World Shale Oil & Gas
Remarks
Robert F. Cekuta
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Energy Resources
Latin America Summit
Buenos Aires, Argentina
Session One: The Bigger Picture
“A Game-Changer for Latin America? Defining the Region’s Shale Potential by Global Comparison”
Good morning. Fellow panelists and distinguished guests, it is a pleasure to be here at the Latin America Summit of the World Shale Series. We are here today to examine the potential impact of gas resources in the region and globally. Unconventional gas, and shale gas in particular, have dramatically changed the energy landscape in the United States, and there is no reason to think that the United States is the only place where this resource can be developed safely and responsibly. This tremendous sea change in accessible energy resources has strong implications not only for our geopolitical relationships and economy, but also for our ability to address shared environmental goals.
I would like to talk a bit about what we have learned and in particular, highlight the political and policy challenges which exist as the United States transitions from being a net importer of energy resources.
Our dialogue this week in Buenos Aires represents one of a number of elements in the ongoing, close cooperation between the United States and Latin America on energy sector issues – whether it is the creation of complimentary energy efficiency standards for appliances throughout North and Central America or the promotion of electrical grid interconnections through the hemispheric Connecting the Americas 2022, we look forward to building strong and long-lasting partnerships in the Americas.
It is extremely appropriate that we are meeting here in Buenos Aires to discuss unconventional oil and gas development in Latin America. The U.S. Energy Information Administration’s 2013 World Shale Report notes Argentina has the world’s second-largest estimate of technologically recoverable shale gas resources. Other Latin American countries, such as Mexico, Colombia and Brazil, also hold potentially significant amounts of unconventional hydrocarbon resources. These resources will contribute profoundly to countries' economic growth as well as to world energy supplies and global energy security – if developed in a responsible and environmentally sustainable manner.
Changes At Home
I would like to discuss some of the changes which have propelled the United States into becoming a net exporter of natural gas. Over the past five years there has been a surprising transformation in the energy landscape of the United States. A few years ago, experts projected the United States would have to import approximately 64 percent of our natural gas needs by 2035. However, we have now initially begun to export some LNG, due in no small part to the “shale gas revolution” in the United States. Current projections estimate that unconventional gas – including shale gas, tight gas, and coal-bed methane – could make up more than 75 percent of U.S. natural gas production and that U.S. gas production could reach 33.14 trillion cubic feet in 2040.
Industry in the United States – and some foreign firms – have seen expanding supplies and lower prices as another positive factor for future economic growth in my country. The shale gas boom is attracting interest in industries such as steel, glass, and cement production, supporting the contention of a number of studies that low-priced natural gas can be a feedstock catalyzing a renaissance in American manufacturing, or what European Union Commissioner for Energy, Günther Oettinger called the “re-industrialization of the United States.” Unconventional oil and gas development is currently projected to create, directly or indirectly, almost 2.5 million jobs and add $350 billion to the U.S. GDP by 2015.[1]
The question many people are asking is can the experience of the United States be duplicated elsewhere? We think it can. Technological breakthroughs in horizontal drilling and multi-stage hydraulic fracturing have been essential in tapping and developing unconventional gas. But new technology is only one part of this success story.
Producers in the United States are able to capitalize on factors like a well-functioning market, attractive investment frameworks, extensive pipeline networks and other infrastructure, and an experienced and capable workforce from the conventional upstream side of the industry.
We would be remiss in discussing the shale gas revolution if we didn’t also mention the financial requirements and climate necessary for unconventional oil and gas development to flourish. Single unconventional wells can cost twice as much or more than conventional wells. Up-front exploration and initial production costs are high relative to conventional costs, and high depletion rates after initial production require continuing capital expenditures to maintain and increase target levels of shale gas or oil production. An attractive fiscal regime has been essential to the success of unconventional resource development in the United States.
Global Potential for Unconventional Gas and Oil Development
These developments are not confined to the United States, but have significant ripple effects on third party gas markets. We have seen this in terms of LNG from Qatar and Trinidad and Tobago once destined for the United States now going to other markets. As these imported LNG supplies were diverted from the United States and provided European markets with lower priced gas and meaningful competition to more expensive pipeline gas from Russia.
Looking forward, we anticipate that growing global supplies of gas could result in gas prices being de-linked from oil, as has already happened already in the United States. One possible outcome could be further reducing the power of gas transportation monopolies to use natural gas exports as a political lever.
Unconventional resource development is also changing the tenor of our engagement with major energy exporters. A few years ago, our dialogue with OPEC and other major producers was based almost exclusively on our oil import needs as the world’s largest importer. Discussions in international meetings now look at the declining import needs of the Americas, the rising import needs of Asian and non-OECD markets, and the growing number of new oil and gas producers. Patterns in the global energy trade are already changing, and the implications of these changes are important for energy producers and consumers alike.
Other countries have been watching these developments and wondering if they can replicate the U.S. experience. Numerous countries have reached out to the United States and have participated in international meetings on the subject sponsored by academic institutions or international organizations like the International Energy Agency. We welcome these discussions and see it as important to share what we have learned, what we are learning, and the things we wished we had known earlier on.
Challenges to Unconventional Gas and Oil Development
While recognizing the energy security benefits and the economic gains from unconventional gas and oil development in the United States, it is important to also note that there are many challenges as well. It is essential to develop these resources in an environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable manner. For this reason, we have taken an “all of government” approach to working with the range of stakeholders, including Civil Society – citizens groups, academia and non-governmental organizations on best practices. To that end, the Bureau of Energy Resources in the State Department manages the Unconventional Gas Technical Engagement Program (UGTEP), which brings together experts in policy and regulatory affairs from the United States to disseminate best practices based on the lessons learned in the United States over the past 40+ years in the environmental, social, health and safety, and commercial application of unconventional gas development.
Federal, state, and local officials in the United States are paying close attention to protecting water resources. The United States is adhering to or strengthening best practices to address fugitive methane emissions during the production and distribution processes. In tight oil development, gas flaring is a challenge, especially where the gas pipeline infrastructure is scarce. We are also looking at ways to help others reduce flaring just as we are looking to share our experiences and lessons-learned in developing unconventional oil and gas.
These issues are at the forefront of our bilateral and multilateral discussions on unconventional gas development. One way we share our experience under the UGTEP program is through visits to and from the United States, technical workshops addressing the environmental, social, and economic ramifications of unconventional gas development, and regulator training courses. And it is through these implementing mechanisms that we are helping governments implement best practices based on “lessons learned” in the U.S. experience – and allowing them to benefit from that experience by creating their own regulatory frameworks with the hindsight of our experiences in the United States.
Countries must determine how best to meet their energy resource development needs. The United States remains open to sharing what we have learned – the good and the bad experiences – to promote global security of supply and economic growth.
Conclusion
As I close, let me reiterate that there remains a global need for energy to meet the needs of people, industry, and society. Energy is a necessity for people's well-being in addition to a key factor in economic growth. Moreover, we increasingly recognize due to climate change and other factors that we need to focus on sustainability.
The United States is transitioning from being a natural gas importer to an exporter. We are open to sharing our experience with other countries as they seek to develop their unconventional resources, should they want to do so. We look forward to a productive and rewarding collaborative partnership.
Thank you and I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
COMMUNITY IT ENTERPRISE MILESTONE TO IMPROVE INFORMATION SHARING
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Intel Officials Announce Community IT Enterprise Milestone
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 11, 2013 - Eighteen months after the director of national intelligence announced plans for a new information technology environment that would vastly improve information sharing across the intelligence community, a milestone has set the community on the path to its IT future.
James R. Clapper was talking about the future at that 2011 U.S. Geospatial Intelligence Foundation symposium in Texas, Al Tarasiuk told reporters during a recent briefing, and the Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise, or IC ITE -- which nearly everyone at the office of the director of national intelligence pronounces "i cite" -- was part of the discussion.
Tarasiuk, intelligence community chief information officer and assistant director of national intelligence, said that at the time, consolidating IT across the community was driven by budget considerations. But today, he added, it's more than an efficiency play on IT.
"We laid out the vision for IC ITE very much focused on improving intelligence integration across the community," the CIO said. "Basically, the vision statement says [it] enables intelligence integration, information sharing and safeguarding, as well as driving to a more efficient IT model for the community."
Translating those factors into goals produces effectiveness, security and efficiency, Tarasiuk added.
"In the past, these were mutually exclusive, but ... we believe that cloud technologies, the price points that we can obtain today [and] some of the developments that we have invested in ... will allow us to ... address all three at the same time," he said.
Around Aug. 16, Tarasiuk said, the ODNI declared a milestone they call the initial baseline for IC ITE. The first step in deploying IC ITE across the intel community began with giving a few thousand users at the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency a common software desktop.
"We are moving toward a single desktop for the community," Tarasiuk said, "so instead of every agency building their own software desktop, which they do today, we will build one for use by all. They will have common collaboration services, and people will be able to use common email and those kinds of things."
The desktop is being produced by NGA and DIA as partners, he said, part of a new business model for ODNI called a service-provider-based business architecture.
As part of the new IC ITE architecture, Tarasiuk explained, the big five agencies -- NGA, DIA, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and National Reconnaissance Office -- alone or as partners, "become the providers of certain ... services that we designated as part of this overall architecture."
The CIO said the IC ITE work leverages investments made by the agencies and much of the work already accomplished by the four combat-support agencies -- NSA, DIA, NGA and NRO.
"They were heading toward consolidation of various pieces of IT infrastructure already prior to us starting down the path of IC ITE," he said, so they had done legwork on a common desktop and had begun planning on network consolidation.
The CIA and NSA are partners on another part of the IC ITE, the IC cloud, which Tarasiuk says consists of the lower layers of IT -- bare-metal hosting, analytics as part of that hosting, and virtual and storage capabilities.
"The IC cloud is not something that's going to be out on the Internet," he said. "It's privately hosted inside the intelligence community according to our security standards and under our security watch."
Tarasiuk said the cloud capabilities are available to the initial DIA and NGA desktop users, but also to legacy users.
"Everyone in the community, everyone who's connected up to the TS/SCI networks within agencies across the community, can access the capabilities on IC ITE right now," he said.
Another service that came online in August, provided and managed by NSA, is an applications mall for the intelligence community, the CIO said.
"The idea here is to begin to rationalize the number of applications across the community that might be redundant or that may be needed," he said, adding that the initial architecture for the mall will be based on a customizable open-source Web application called the Ozone Widget Framework.
The NRO will provide the IC ITE network requirements and engineering service, Tarasiuk said.
"They're not going to provision networks," he added, "but they're going to look at how we connect both our local area networks and our wide area networks and try to find a more efficient model, one that actually improves our effectiveness as well."
In the coming year, Tarasiuk said, the CIO's office will work to ensure the resilience of the first several thousand uses of the common desktops and other infrastructure services "to make sure that we can move more production capabilities into it."
"Then," he added, "we will scale beyond what we have right now -- scale the number of desktops, scale the amount of data that's in the cloud."
New services also will be brought in, he said, including security monitoring, and a central service will be established to monitor end-to-end security of IC ITE.
"The beauty of what we're doing is enforcing an IC standard for all data objects that go in the cloud," Tarasiuk added. "Today, agencies comply with security standards, but they implement them in different ways. This is where we believe we can improve information sharing over time."
Based on the way data was originally implemented, an analyst in one agency may not be able to access certain data sets from another agency, the CIO explained. "What we're trying to do from an infrastructure perspective is remove roadblocks that prevent that kind of sharing," he said. "That's the big benefit of moving the data. It's not all going to be in one place, but from a virtual perspective it will be interconnected to the same standards and formats so the automated engines can determine whether a user can see the data or not."
Tarasiuk also stays in touch with the Defense Department's CIO, Theresa M. Takai, who for the defense secretary, the nation's warfighters and many others ensures the delivery of such IT-based capabilities through the Joint Information Environment to support the range of DOD missions.
The need for more effectiveness, security and efficiency isn't unique to the intelligence community, and DOD is transitioning in a first-phase implementation of the JIE -- a single, secure, reliable and agile command, control, communications, and computing enterprise information environment -- that spans fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
Tarasiuk says the relationship between IC ITE and JIE is still being defined in terms of what services the enterprises can leverage from each other.
"Teri Takai and I are pretty close partners in trying to ensure three important elements that are critical to the IC and the DOD communities -- interoperability of standards and identities, and then the cross-domain capabilities," he said.
"We chair joint committees," he added, "and we have people working on committees to ensure that we can move information back and forth and we can understand who's seeing information, so that's enabled."
The CIO said the piece that's still being defined is where services can be leveraged.
For instance, he said, "we don't plan on a wide scale to produce a secret domain infrastructure. We are very much focused on TS/SCI domain only, and that's where our ... priority is.
DOD has substantial capabilities already in that space, Tarasiuk added, and the ODNI CIO is exploring that and the unclassified level as potential places to leverage services.
"That's what we're currently working on," he said, "trying to figure out where we can point requirements to JIE or JIE point requirements to us when it comes to the TS/SCI space."
Intel Officials Announce Community IT Enterprise Milestone
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Sept. 11, 2013 - Eighteen months after the director of national intelligence announced plans for a new information technology environment that would vastly improve information sharing across the intelligence community, a milestone has set the community on the path to its IT future.
James R. Clapper was talking about the future at that 2011 U.S. Geospatial Intelligence Foundation symposium in Texas, Al Tarasiuk told reporters during a recent briefing, and the Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise, or IC ITE -- which nearly everyone at the office of the director of national intelligence pronounces "i cite" -- was part of the discussion.
Tarasiuk, intelligence community chief information officer and assistant director of national intelligence, said that at the time, consolidating IT across the community was driven by budget considerations. But today, he added, it's more than an efficiency play on IT.
"We laid out the vision for IC ITE very much focused on improving intelligence integration across the community," the CIO said. "Basically, the vision statement says [it] enables intelligence integration, information sharing and safeguarding, as well as driving to a more efficient IT model for the community."
Translating those factors into goals produces effectiveness, security and efficiency, Tarasiuk added.
"In the past, these were mutually exclusive, but ... we believe that cloud technologies, the price points that we can obtain today [and] some of the developments that we have invested in ... will allow us to ... address all three at the same time," he said.
Around Aug. 16, Tarasiuk said, the ODNI declared a milestone they call the initial baseline for IC ITE. The first step in deploying IC ITE across the intel community began with giving a few thousand users at the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency a common software desktop.
"We are moving toward a single desktop for the community," Tarasiuk said, "so instead of every agency building their own software desktop, which they do today, we will build one for use by all. They will have common collaboration services, and people will be able to use common email and those kinds of things."
The desktop is being produced by NGA and DIA as partners, he said, part of a new business model for ODNI called a service-provider-based business architecture.
As part of the new IC ITE architecture, Tarasiuk explained, the big five agencies -- NGA, DIA, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency and National Reconnaissance Office -- alone or as partners, "become the providers of certain ... services that we designated as part of this overall architecture."
The CIO said the IC ITE work leverages investments made by the agencies and much of the work already accomplished by the four combat-support agencies -- NSA, DIA, NGA and NRO.
"They were heading toward consolidation of various pieces of IT infrastructure already prior to us starting down the path of IC ITE," he said, so they had done legwork on a common desktop and had begun planning on network consolidation.
The CIA and NSA are partners on another part of the IC ITE, the IC cloud, which Tarasiuk says consists of the lower layers of IT -- bare-metal hosting, analytics as part of that hosting, and virtual and storage capabilities.
"The IC cloud is not something that's going to be out on the Internet," he said. "It's privately hosted inside the intelligence community according to our security standards and under our security watch."
Tarasiuk said the cloud capabilities are available to the initial DIA and NGA desktop users, but also to legacy users.
"Everyone in the community, everyone who's connected up to the TS/SCI networks within agencies across the community, can access the capabilities on IC ITE right now," he said.
Another service that came online in August, provided and managed by NSA, is an applications mall for the intelligence community, the CIO said.
"The idea here is to begin to rationalize the number of applications across the community that might be redundant or that may be needed," he said, adding that the initial architecture for the mall will be based on a customizable open-source Web application called the Ozone Widget Framework.
The NRO will provide the IC ITE network requirements and engineering service, Tarasiuk said.
"They're not going to provision networks," he added, "but they're going to look at how we connect both our local area networks and our wide area networks and try to find a more efficient model, one that actually improves our effectiveness as well."
In the coming year, Tarasiuk said, the CIO's office will work to ensure the resilience of the first several thousand uses of the common desktops and other infrastructure services "to make sure that we can move more production capabilities into it."
"Then," he added, "we will scale beyond what we have right now -- scale the number of desktops, scale the amount of data that's in the cloud."
New services also will be brought in, he said, including security monitoring, and a central service will be established to monitor end-to-end security of IC ITE.
"The beauty of what we're doing is enforcing an IC standard for all data objects that go in the cloud," Tarasiuk added. "Today, agencies comply with security standards, but they implement them in different ways. This is where we believe we can improve information sharing over time."
Based on the way data was originally implemented, an analyst in one agency may not be able to access certain data sets from another agency, the CIO explained. "What we're trying to do from an infrastructure perspective is remove roadblocks that prevent that kind of sharing," he said. "That's the big benefit of moving the data. It's not all going to be in one place, but from a virtual perspective it will be interconnected to the same standards and formats so the automated engines can determine whether a user can see the data or not."
Tarasiuk also stays in touch with the Defense Department's CIO, Theresa M. Takai, who for the defense secretary, the nation's warfighters and many others ensures the delivery of such IT-based capabilities through the Joint Information Environment to support the range of DOD missions.
The need for more effectiveness, security and efficiency isn't unique to the intelligence community, and DOD is transitioning in a first-phase implementation of the JIE -- a single, secure, reliable and agile command, control, communications, and computing enterprise information environment -- that spans fiscal years 2013 and 2014.
Tarasiuk says the relationship between IC ITE and JIE is still being defined in terms of what services the enterprises can leverage from each other.
"Teri Takai and I are pretty close partners in trying to ensure three important elements that are critical to the IC and the DOD communities -- interoperability of standards and identities, and then the cross-domain capabilities," he said.
"We chair joint committees," he added, "and we have people working on committees to ensure that we can move information back and forth and we can understand who's seeing information, so that's enabled."
The CIO said the piece that's still being defined is where services can be leveraged.
For instance, he said, "we don't plan on a wide scale to produce a secret domain infrastructure. We are very much focused on TS/SCI domain only, and that's where our ... priority is.
DOD has substantial capabilities already in that space, Tarasiuk added, and the ODNI CIO is exploring that and the unclassified level as potential places to leverage services.
"That's what we're currently working on," he said, "trying to figure out where we can point requirements to JIE or JIE point requirements to us when it comes to the TS/SCI space."
NEW FDA ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TREATMENT OF PAIN WITH OPIOID ANALGESICS
FROM: FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
The Division of Drug Information (DDI) is CDER's focal point for public inquiries. We serve the public by providing information on human drug products and drug product regulation by FDA.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced class-wide safety labeling changes and new postmarket study requirements for all extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioid analgesics intended to treat pain.
Given the serious risks of using ER/LA opioids, the class-wide labeling changes, when final, will include important new language to help health care professionals tailor their prescribing decisions based on a patient’s individual needs.
The updated indication states that ER/LA opioids are indicated for the management of pain severe enough to require daily, around-the-clock, long-term opioid treatment and for which alternative treatment options are inadequate.
The updated indication further clarifies that, because of the risks of addiction, abuse, and misuse, even at recommended doses, and because of the greater risks of overdose and death, these drugs should be reserved for use in patients for whom alternative treatment options (e.g., non-opioid analgesics or immediate-release opioids) are ineffective, not tolerated, or would be otherwise inadequate to provide sufficient management of pain; ER/LA opioid analgesics are not indicated for as-needed pain relief.
The Division of Drug Information (DDI) is CDER's focal point for public inquiries. We serve the public by providing information on human drug products and drug product regulation by FDA.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced class-wide safety labeling changes and new postmarket study requirements for all extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioid analgesics intended to treat pain.
Given the serious risks of using ER/LA opioids, the class-wide labeling changes, when final, will include important new language to help health care professionals tailor their prescribing decisions based on a patient’s individual needs.
The updated indication states that ER/LA opioids are indicated for the management of pain severe enough to require daily, around-the-clock, long-term opioid treatment and for which alternative treatment options are inadequate.
The updated indication further clarifies that, because of the risks of addiction, abuse, and misuse, even at recommended doses, and because of the greater risks of overdose and death, these drugs should be reserved for use in patients for whom alternative treatment options (e.g., non-opioid analgesics or immediate-release opioids) are ineffective, not tolerated, or would be otherwise inadequate to provide sufficient management of pain; ER/LA opioid analgesics are not indicated for as-needed pain relief.
Thursday, September 12, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS WITH FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV REGARDING SYRIA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Intercontinental Hotel
Geneva, Switzerland
September 12, 2013
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: (Via interpreter) (In progress) – delegations that accompany us. Of course, we would like you to have unbiased ideas about what we are going to do. But I think that you understand well before we start to tell you what we are going to do, we should get down to a very serious work, the work which is dedicated to a principled agreement to solve once and for – till the end the Syrian problem and the adhesion of Syria to the convention, to the Chemical Weapons Convention, to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. These documents are officially tabled by Damascus to the corresponding agencies, and we will have to have a look at the corresponding documents with the participation of experts that have all the qualifications and professionalism how to work further, not to postpone this process, in strict compliance with the rules that are established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
We proceed from the fact that the solution on this problem will make unnecessary any strike on the Syrian Arab Republic, and I am convinced that our American colleagues, as President Obama stated, are firmly convinced that we should follow the peaceful way of resolution of the conflict in Syria. And I should say that we spoke with John by phone several times when we prepared for this meeting. We think that the development of the events gives us an additional opportunity for Geneva 2 in order to move this today’s situation from the stage of military confrontation and to prevent any terroristic threats which is expanding in Syria and in the region, and to convene the conference during which the Syrian parties, in accordance with the Geneva communiques, should agree on the creation of the transition body that will have all the executive functions. And this is our common objectives, and I hope that our today’s and tomorrow work and all other efforts that we are going to continue will help us to move on and to achieve this objective.
Thank you for your attention.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much, Foreign Minister Lavrov. My privilege to be here with our delegation, and I want to thank you and your delegation on behalf of all the people who hope that diplomacy can avoid military action, and we thank you for coming quickly to Geneva in order to have this important conversation that we will engage in.
Over one year ago, President Obama and President Putin directed high-level experts in our governments, both of our governments, to work together to prepare contingencies involving Syria’s chemical weapons. Foreign Minister Lavrov and I have been in regular contact about this issue since my visit to Moscow earlier this year. And as Foreign Minister Lavrov said to me in a phone conversation after St. Petersburg and the meetings there, President Putin and President Obama thought it would be worthwhile for us to work together to determine if there is life in this concept.
This challenge obviously took on grave urgency on August 21st when the Syrian regime used chemical weapons in a massive and indiscriminate way against its own citizens. President Obama and dozens of our partners believe that that action is unacceptable, and we have in no uncertain terms made it clear that we cannot allow that to happen again.
In light of what has happened, the world wonders and watches closely whether or not the Assad regime will live up to its public commitments that it has made to give up their chemical weapons and whether two of the world’s most powerful nations can together take a critical step forward in order to hold the regime to its stated promises.
I have seen reports that the Syrian regime has suggested that as part of the standard process they ought to have 30 days to submit data on their technical – on their chemical weapons stockpile. We believe there is nothing standard about this process at this moment because of the way the regime has behaved, because the – not only the existence of these weapons, but they have been used. And the words of the Syrian regime, in our judgment, are simply not enough, which is why we’ve come here in order to work with the Russians and work with Sergey Lavrov and his delegation here in order to make certain that this can, in fact, be achieved.
The United States and Russia have had and continue to have our share of disagreements about the situation in Syria, including a difference as to the judgment we just offered with respect to who may have done that. But what’s important as we come here is that there’s much that we agree on. We agree that on August 21st Syrian men, women, and children died grotesque deaths due to chemical weapons. We agree that no one anywhere at any time should employ chemical weapons. And we agree that our joining together with the international community to eliminate stockpiles of these weapons in Syria would be an historic moment for the multilateral nonproliferation efforts. We agree on those things. We agree that it would help to save lives if we could accomplish this, that it would reduce the threat to the region, that it would uphold the norm that was established here in Geneva almost a century ago, and it would achieve the best of our – all of our aspirations for curbing weapons of mass destruction.
Foreign Minister Lavrov and I have come to Geneva today to begin to test these propositions, not just on behalf of each of our countries but on behalf of everybody who is interested in a peaceful resolution. So I welcome the distinguished Russian delegation and I am proud that at President Obama’s direction we have a delegation here which I lead of some of our nation’s foremost chemical weapons experts; people who’ve dedicated their lives every day to countering the proliferation of these weapons and to bringing about their eventual elimination from this Earth.
The Russian delegation has put some ideas forward, and we’re grateful for that. We respect it. And we have prepared our own principles that any plan to accomplish this needs to encompass. Expectations are high. They are high for the United States, perhaps even more so for Russia to deliver on the promise of this moment. This is not a game, and I said that to my friend Sergey when we talked about it initially. It has to be real. It has to be comprehensive. It has to be verifiable. It has to be credible. It has to be timely and implemented in a timely fashion. And finally, there ought to be consequences if it doesn’t take place.
Diplomacy is and always has been President Obama’s and this Administration’s first resort, and achieving a peaceful resolution is clearly preferable to military action. President Obama has said that again and again. Now, it’s too early to tell whether or not these efforts will succeed, but the technical challenges of trying to do this in the context of a civil war are obviously immense. But despite how difficult this is, with the collaboration of our experts and only with the compliance from the Assad regime, we do believe there is a way to get this done.
We have come here to define a potential path forward that we can share with our international partners, and together we will test the Assad regime’s commitment to follow through on its promises. We are serious – Mr. Foreign Minister, we are serious, as you are – about engaging in substantive, meaningful negotiations even as our military maintains its current posture to keep up the pressure on the Assad regime. Only the credible threat of force and the intervention of President Putin and Russia based on that has brought the Assad regime to acknowledge for the first time that it even has chemical weapons and an arsenal, and it is now prepared to relinquish it. President Obama has made clear that should diplomacy fail, force might be necessary to deter and degrade Assad’s capacity to deliver these weapons. It won’t get rid of them, but it could change his willingness to use them.
The best thing to do, we agree, is remove them altogether. Our challenge here in Geneva is to test the viability of placing Assad’s chemical weapons under international control, removing them from Syria, and destroying them forever. But the United States has also made clear that the deaths of more than 100,000 Syrians and the displacement of millions either internally or as refugees remains a stain on the world’s conscience. We all need to keep that in mind and deal with it.
And that is why Foreign Minister Lavrov and I continue to work with Joint Special Envoy Brahimi and ourselves under the auspices of the Geneva communique. The Foreign Secretary just mentioned this and his hopes. We share those hopes that could foster a political solution to a civil war that undermines the stability of the region, threatens our own national security interests, and compels us to act. That is our hope and that is what we fervently hope can come out of this meeting and these negotiations.
Thank you very much.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: With your permission, just two words.
(Via interpreter) I’m not prepared with the (inaudible) political statement to (inaudible) the Syrian problem, because our approaches are clear and they are stated in the statements of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and in his article in The New York Times. And I’m convinced that all of you read this article and I decided not to lay out here our diplomatic position. The diplomacy likes silence. And we’re intent to find compromises, and I am sure that John, in his presentation of the American position, also showed that they would like to find mutual consensus and be – if we follow this way, I hope that we will achieve all the successes.
SECRETARY KERRY: I lost the last part of the – can you give me the last part of the translation, please? Hello?
INTERPRETER: Yes, hello.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: It was okay, John. Don’t worry. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY KERRY: You want me to take your word for it? (Laughter.) It’s a little early for that.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: Okay. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks.
Remarks With Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Intercontinental Hotel
Geneva, Switzerland
September 12, 2013
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: (Via interpreter) (In progress) – delegations that accompany us. Of course, we would like you to have unbiased ideas about what we are going to do. But I think that you understand well before we start to tell you what we are going to do, we should get down to a very serious work, the work which is dedicated to a principled agreement to solve once and for – till the end the Syrian problem and the adhesion of Syria to the convention, to the Chemical Weapons Convention, to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. These documents are officially tabled by Damascus to the corresponding agencies, and we will have to have a look at the corresponding documents with the participation of experts that have all the qualifications and professionalism how to work further, not to postpone this process, in strict compliance with the rules that are established by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
We proceed from the fact that the solution on this problem will make unnecessary any strike on the Syrian Arab Republic, and I am convinced that our American colleagues, as President Obama stated, are firmly convinced that we should follow the peaceful way of resolution of the conflict in Syria. And I should say that we spoke with John by phone several times when we prepared for this meeting. We think that the development of the events gives us an additional opportunity for Geneva 2 in order to move this today’s situation from the stage of military confrontation and to prevent any terroristic threats which is expanding in Syria and in the region, and to convene the conference during which the Syrian parties, in accordance with the Geneva communiques, should agree on the creation of the transition body that will have all the executive functions. And this is our common objectives, and I hope that our today’s and tomorrow work and all other efforts that we are going to continue will help us to move on and to achieve this objective.
Thank you for your attention.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much, Foreign Minister Lavrov. My privilege to be here with our delegation, and I want to thank you and your delegation on behalf of all the people who hope that diplomacy can avoid military action, and we thank you for coming quickly to Geneva in order to have this important conversation that we will engage in.
Over one year ago, President Obama and President Putin directed high-level experts in our governments, both of our governments, to work together to prepare contingencies involving Syria’s chemical weapons. Foreign Minister Lavrov and I have been in regular contact about this issue since my visit to Moscow earlier this year. And as Foreign Minister Lavrov said to me in a phone conversation after St. Petersburg and the meetings there, President Putin and President Obama thought it would be worthwhile for us to work together to determine if there is life in this concept.
This challenge obviously took on grave urgency on August 21st when the Syrian regime used chemical weapons in a massive and indiscriminate way against its own citizens. President Obama and dozens of our partners believe that that action is unacceptable, and we have in no uncertain terms made it clear that we cannot allow that to happen again.
In light of what has happened, the world wonders and watches closely whether or not the Assad regime will live up to its public commitments that it has made to give up their chemical weapons and whether two of the world’s most powerful nations can together take a critical step forward in order to hold the regime to its stated promises.
I have seen reports that the Syrian regime has suggested that as part of the standard process they ought to have 30 days to submit data on their technical – on their chemical weapons stockpile. We believe there is nothing standard about this process at this moment because of the way the regime has behaved, because the – not only the existence of these weapons, but they have been used. And the words of the Syrian regime, in our judgment, are simply not enough, which is why we’ve come here in order to work with the Russians and work with Sergey Lavrov and his delegation here in order to make certain that this can, in fact, be achieved.
The United States and Russia have had and continue to have our share of disagreements about the situation in Syria, including a difference as to the judgment we just offered with respect to who may have done that. But what’s important as we come here is that there’s much that we agree on. We agree that on August 21st Syrian men, women, and children died grotesque deaths due to chemical weapons. We agree that no one anywhere at any time should employ chemical weapons. And we agree that our joining together with the international community to eliminate stockpiles of these weapons in Syria would be an historic moment for the multilateral nonproliferation efforts. We agree on those things. We agree that it would help to save lives if we could accomplish this, that it would reduce the threat to the region, that it would uphold the norm that was established here in Geneva almost a century ago, and it would achieve the best of our – all of our aspirations for curbing weapons of mass destruction.
Foreign Minister Lavrov and I have come to Geneva today to begin to test these propositions, not just on behalf of each of our countries but on behalf of everybody who is interested in a peaceful resolution. So I welcome the distinguished Russian delegation and I am proud that at President Obama’s direction we have a delegation here which I lead of some of our nation’s foremost chemical weapons experts; people who’ve dedicated their lives every day to countering the proliferation of these weapons and to bringing about their eventual elimination from this Earth.
The Russian delegation has put some ideas forward, and we’re grateful for that. We respect it. And we have prepared our own principles that any plan to accomplish this needs to encompass. Expectations are high. They are high for the United States, perhaps even more so for Russia to deliver on the promise of this moment. This is not a game, and I said that to my friend Sergey when we talked about it initially. It has to be real. It has to be comprehensive. It has to be verifiable. It has to be credible. It has to be timely and implemented in a timely fashion. And finally, there ought to be consequences if it doesn’t take place.
Diplomacy is and always has been President Obama’s and this Administration’s first resort, and achieving a peaceful resolution is clearly preferable to military action. President Obama has said that again and again. Now, it’s too early to tell whether or not these efforts will succeed, but the technical challenges of trying to do this in the context of a civil war are obviously immense. But despite how difficult this is, with the collaboration of our experts and only with the compliance from the Assad regime, we do believe there is a way to get this done.
We have come here to define a potential path forward that we can share with our international partners, and together we will test the Assad regime’s commitment to follow through on its promises. We are serious – Mr. Foreign Minister, we are serious, as you are – about engaging in substantive, meaningful negotiations even as our military maintains its current posture to keep up the pressure on the Assad regime. Only the credible threat of force and the intervention of President Putin and Russia based on that has brought the Assad regime to acknowledge for the first time that it even has chemical weapons and an arsenal, and it is now prepared to relinquish it. President Obama has made clear that should diplomacy fail, force might be necessary to deter and degrade Assad’s capacity to deliver these weapons. It won’t get rid of them, but it could change his willingness to use them.
The best thing to do, we agree, is remove them altogether. Our challenge here in Geneva is to test the viability of placing Assad’s chemical weapons under international control, removing them from Syria, and destroying them forever. But the United States has also made clear that the deaths of more than 100,000 Syrians and the displacement of millions either internally or as refugees remains a stain on the world’s conscience. We all need to keep that in mind and deal with it.
And that is why Foreign Minister Lavrov and I continue to work with Joint Special Envoy Brahimi and ourselves under the auspices of the Geneva communique. The Foreign Secretary just mentioned this and his hopes. We share those hopes that could foster a political solution to a civil war that undermines the stability of the region, threatens our own national security interests, and compels us to act. That is our hope and that is what we fervently hope can come out of this meeting and these negotiations.
Thank you very much.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: With your permission, just two words.
(Via interpreter) I’m not prepared with the (inaudible) political statement to (inaudible) the Syrian problem, because our approaches are clear and they are stated in the statements of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and in his article in The New York Times. And I’m convinced that all of you read this article and I decided not to lay out here our diplomatic position. The diplomacy likes silence. And we’re intent to find compromises, and I am sure that John, in his presentation of the American position, also showed that they would like to find mutual consensus and be – if we follow this way, I hope that we will achieve all the successes.
SECRETARY KERRY: I lost the last part of the – can you give me the last part of the translation, please? Hello?
INTERPRETER: Yes, hello.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: It was okay, John. Don’t worry. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY KERRY: You want me to take your word for it? (Laughter.) It’s a little early for that.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: Okay. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks.
FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA, ACTOR GARY SINISE TOUR NEW USO WARRIOR AND FAMILY CENTER
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
First Lady Visits USO Center at Fort Belvoir
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service
FORT BELVOIR, Va., Sept. 11, 2013 - First Lady Michelle Obama and actor Gary Sinise paused for arts and crafts with young people during their tour of the new USO Warrior and Family Center here in honor of Patriot Day and National Service Day of Remembrance.
Located adjacent to Warrior Transition Unit and the Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, the Warrior and Family Center provides a hub for programs and activities that promote physical health and recreation, family strengthening, positive behavioral health, education, employment and community reintegration.
With cookies from White House pastry chefs in tow, Obama thanked children and their families, lauding them for their sacrifices and heroism.
"We're so proud of what you do because your parents, your moms and dads and grandparents and cousins and uncles and aunts, whoever is in your family [and] serving -- you guys help them help our country," Obama said to the cavorting tykes. "And we just wanted to shine a light on all of the great work that the USO is doing for military families all over this country."
Obama also thanked Sinise, whose popular "Lt. Dan Band" -- named from his character in the film "Forrest Gump" -- has become a dedicated partner to the USO and other nonprofit organizations that support the military and their families. The band later presented a concert for the post community.
Andrew Starr, 6, the son of a Marine colonel, said he and his 5-year-old sister have already secured their personal invitations to the White House Halloween party after spending quality time with the first lady.
"I cut out our hands and I got to cut out the first lady's hand – but not the real one, a paper one," Andrew assured.
Kerry Stevens, USO family and troops programs and events coordinator, said she was pleased that the distinguished visitors initiated the visit to the volunteer-run center.
"[The first lady] worked with kids and their projects and really had a fun time with them – they were just so excited," Stevens said. "And it's exciting for us to get to offer this opportunity to the families."
First Lady Visits USO Center at Fort Belvoir
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service
FORT BELVOIR, Va., Sept. 11, 2013 - First Lady Michelle Obama and actor Gary Sinise paused for arts and crafts with young people during their tour of the new USO Warrior and Family Center here in honor of Patriot Day and National Service Day of Remembrance.
Located adjacent to Warrior Transition Unit and the Fort Belvoir Community Hospital, the Warrior and Family Center provides a hub for programs and activities that promote physical health and recreation, family strengthening, positive behavioral health, education, employment and community reintegration.
With cookies from White House pastry chefs in tow, Obama thanked children and their families, lauding them for their sacrifices and heroism.
"We're so proud of what you do because your parents, your moms and dads and grandparents and cousins and uncles and aunts, whoever is in your family [and] serving -- you guys help them help our country," Obama said to the cavorting tykes. "And we just wanted to shine a light on all of the great work that the USO is doing for military families all over this country."
Obama also thanked Sinise, whose popular "Lt. Dan Band" -- named from his character in the film "Forrest Gump" -- has become a dedicated partner to the USO and other nonprofit organizations that support the military and their families. The band later presented a concert for the post community.
Andrew Starr, 6, the son of a Marine colonel, said he and his 5-year-old sister have already secured their personal invitations to the White House Halloween party after spending quality time with the first lady.
"I cut out our hands and I got to cut out the first lady's hand – but not the real one, a paper one," Andrew assured.
Kerry Stevens, USO family and troops programs and events coordinator, said she was pleased that the distinguished visitors initiated the visit to the volunteer-run center.
"[The first lady] worked with kids and their projects and really had a fun time with them – they were just so excited," Stevens said. "And it's exciting for us to get to offer this opportunity to the families."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)