U.S. DAILY STATE DEPARTMENT MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Victoria Nuland
Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
April 25, 2012
TRANSCRIPT:
1:06 p.m. EDT
MS. NULAND: Good afternoon, everybody. In keeping with our Free the Press campaign heading up to May 3rd, our journalist of the day is from Eritrea. And he is Dawit Isaak, who’s an independent Eritrean journalist. He co-owned the first Eritrean independent newspaper, which often reported on alleged abuses of regime power. He was arrested in 2001 without any formal charges or a trial, and he has since been held incommunicado by the Government of Eritrea. And we take this opportunity to call on the government to release him immediately. And you can learn more about him at our website humanrights.gov.
Let’s go to what’s on your minds.

QUESTION: I don’t have anything that’s significant enough to begin with, so --

MS. NULAND: Excellent.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) with the Free the Press campaign.

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: Are you aware that the Palestinian Authority blocked something like eight websites that are critical of Mahmoud Abbas? And if you are, do you have a comment on that?

MS. NULAND: I do have something on this. We have seen these reports, and we are concerned about any uses of technology that would restrict access to information. We are raising these concerns with the Palestinian Authority. You know that we’ve had these concerns in other parts of the world, and we wouldn’t want to see the PA going in the direction that some of those regimes have gone in. You know how strongly we advocate freedom of expression, freedom of information. So we will raise these things and endeavor to figure out what’s going on.

QUESTION: Are any of these news agencies and websites U.S.-financed?

MS. NULAND: Said, we started to do a little investigation of that. None of them is funded by the State Department programs under MEPI. I don’t have a full picture of the USAID programs yet. As soon as we do, we’ll get something back to you.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

Please, Andy.

QUESTION: I have a related – slightly related question. In an interview with CNN yesterday, President – Prime Minister Netanyahu said that he supported the idea of a contiguous Palestinian state – which commentators said seemed to be a new line from him – that it wouldn’t look like Swiss cheese under any future arrangement. Is that – do you see that as progress? Is that something that is – marks a step forward?

MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know that our goal remains a comprehensive peace that creates and allows for a secure Israel and a prosperous and contiguous Palestinian state. But as we’ve always said, we can’t do this through press announcements. We can only do this when the parties sit down together and do the negotiating they have to do.

QUESTION: But I guess my question is: Is Netanyahu’s statement a – does this mark a new – an advance in Israel’s position toward this goal that you’re referring to, contiguous state being now --
MS. NULAND: Well, we ourselves have always called for a contiguous state, so that’s a good thing. But what’s most important is that these parties really roll up their sleeves and work together.
Shaun.

QUESTION: On a somewhat related note, the head of the Israeli military, Lieutenant General Gantz, made some remarks about Iran, saying that he considers the Iranians to be – the Iranian leadership to be rational, and hinting that pressure can work in terms of making them refrain from a bomb. What is your – do you have a reaction to his remarks, an assessment?

MS. NULAND: I don’t, Shaun. I really don’t. I mean, you know where we are. We are working on this approach of pressure and talks in the hope that we can make progress on this. But I think it’s really only Iranian behavior that’s going to tell the true story of what their intentions are.

QUESTION: Also on Iran? There’s the report that apparently, according to the Iranian ambassador to Russia, that the country is now thinking about giving up its nuclear program in order to avoid the looming EU sanctions. Does the U.S know about this? What can you say about it? If this is indeed true, is this a positive development?

MS. NULAND: Well, frankly, these issues have to be negotiated at the table that we have now created and restarted with the P-5+1 process. So the ambassador of Iran to Russia is not a central player in those, and frankly, what’s most important is what Iran says and does at the negotiating table.

QUESTION: But the fact that he is indicating that they are seriously looking at the long-term impact – we believe – ostensibly – on the Iranian economy, is that perhaps a leverage point for the P-5+1 process?

MS. NULAND: I don’t think that we consider it new that the sanctions are biting on the Iranian economy, and that it is a direct result of the international pressure that we’ve been able to bring to bear – more sanctions than we’ve ever been able to muster against Iran – that has brought them back to the negotiating table. But now, what’s most important is that they actually roll up their sleeves and work with us and come clean on their program.

QUESTION: Have there been any conversations with the Embassy in Moscow to see if indeed this was directly communicated, perhaps, to the Russian Government to actually see whether this is just speculation in the press or there might be some sort of signal coming out of this?

MS. NULAND: Again, I think you’re taking this far more seriously than we are. What matters to us is what happens in the room.
Please.

QUESTION: If I can go back to Andy’s question for a second?

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: Do you see – does the prime minister’s statement present you with an opportunity to drive the point home about settlement and outposts and so on, the fact that he acknowledged the need for a contiguous contiguity for a possible Palestinian state?

MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t think there’s any lack of emphasis on our part with regard to how we feel about settlements. I mentioned yesterday that we had been in to talk to the Israelis about this latest move, just to confirm that our Ambassador Shapiro did speak to Israeli negotiator Molho on this issue. So I don’t think there’s any lack of attention to that matter.

QUESTION: Yeah. But up to this point, there has been either a dismissal on the part of the Israelis or they just flat out snub your call to stop the settlements and so on. Now the prime minister himself has spoke of the need for contiguity. Don’t you think that this is a good opportunity to sort of emphatically make the point once more?

MS. NULAND: Well, we’ve been emphatically making the point all week long, but thanks, Said.
Please.

QUESTION: What was the Israeli response when Shapiro went in to --

MS. NULAND: The Israelis have made their views known on this publicly as well as privately. I don’t think that what they said to us privately differed all that much from what they’ve said privately[1]. But I’ll let them speak for themselves.

QUESTION: Which is that?

MS. NULAND: I’m going to let them speak for themselves.

QUESTION: Well, what’s your – I want to get – find out what your – is your understanding that they have legalized these outposts?

MS. NULAND: I am not going to get into what happened in the room with them. I’m going to let them characterize their own views. But they’ve been pretty clear publicly --

QUESTION: Well, forget about that. What’s your understanding? I don’t know what they’ve said. I’m asking you: What have they said? What is your understanding of what their position is?

MS. NULAND: I’m going to send you to them on their position.

QUESTION: No, no. (Laughter.)

MS. NULAND: Yeah, yeah. I am.

Go ahead. Please.North Korea?

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: No. I need to stay with the Palestinian for a second.

MS. NULAND: Yeah. Right. You can ask the Israelis about their own views
.
QUESTION: Yeah. This has to do with a determination that was in today’s Federal Register signed by Bill Burns, who I believe is a U.S. official, right?

It says – and I’m not going to read the whole thing, but it says: “I hereby determine and certify that the Palestinians have not, since the date of the enactment of that act -- ” which refers to the appropriations bill – “obtained in the UN or any specialized agency thereof the same standing as member-states or full membership as a state outside of an agreement negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians and waive the provisions of Section 1003 of the Anti-Terrorism Act,” et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Basically what this means is that the Palestinians can still have a waiver to have an office here. Now, I’ve got a couple of questions about this. One, I’m not aware – and maybe I’m wrong, but I am not aware that the Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2012 has actually been enacted yet.
So one, is that correct? And two, how is possible that you’re waiving this if they got membership in UNESCO in November?

MS. NULAND: Well, I haven’t seen this citation that you’re reading from, so why don’t I take it from you and why don’t we endeavor to come back to you with answers on both of those.
Okay.

QUESTION: A question on North Korea.

MS. NULAND: Please.

QUESTION: The Chinese vice foreign minister today appeared to make a veiled warning to North Korea not to carry out this supposed or possible nuclear test. I was curious if you had seen or had a reaction to those comments from the Chinese vice foreign minister, and if there’s – what the thinking is, if China is doing enough with their leverage with North Korea to put off a possible nuclear test.

MS. NULAND: Well, as we’ve said all through this period, we have been working closely with the Chinese, encouraging them to use all of the political and other kinds of leverage that they have with the DPRK to encourage it to change course. So obviously, public statements of this kind are most welcome. And we look forward to consulting with the Chinese on what more they think can and should be done when we go to – when the Secretary and Secretary Geithner are in Beijing for the Strategic and Economic Dialogue next week.
Please, in the back.

QUESTION: A question to Iran again. They – Iran reported that there was a cyber attack on its oil industry last week. The implications were that the West was behind it, although the United States weren’t named specifically. Have you any idea what might be behind those attacks, who might be, or can you even confirm that these attacks occurred?

MS. NULAND: I don’t have any information on that one way or the other. I refer you to the Iranians.

QUESTION: Former negotiator Larijani said today that this is a really good time for the negotiations to go on between Iran and the West. Do you feel that this is really a propitious time for Iran to go forward with --

MS. NULAND: Well, I think it’s going to be a matter of what these talks produce. So we are obviously committed to working hard. As we said at the time, we believe the first meeting in Istanbul was worth having. We’re going to have another meeting in Baghdad. But I think we’re now getting down to concrete proposals. If there are real steps, we’ll be prepared to respond, but we need to now see some real steps.

QUESTION: So your feeling is that the meeting on May 23rd in Baghdad will be far more substantive than the meeting in Istanbul, which basically set the date of the meeting?

MS. NULAND: I think we’ve sort of set the table at Istanbul. Now we need to start seeing what the meal’s going to look like.

QUESTION: And when you say concrete proposal, do you expect Iran to submit like a – to open up its facilities and to submit to whatever it needs from the West to aid it in a civilian program?

MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know all of the issues of concern to us with regard to Iran’s program. They’re clearly outlined in the repeated IAEA reports. So we had a chance to have that opening meeting of this round of talks and to talk about all the issues that we care about, and now we have to do some more technical exchanges between now and Baghdad, and then we have to see whether at the Baghdad round we can really get down to what the Iranians are prepared to do and what steps we might be willing to take to respond if the steps are real.

Okay.

QUESTION: And finally, is the feeling in this town that the sanctions are so biting that Iran is beginning to approach these talks seriously?

MS. NULAND: Well, again, we’ve said that we believe that the sanctions are biting, as I said at the top of the briefing. We think that that has led to their decision to come back to the table, and we hope that it’ll continue to contribute to working through this issue diplomatically, because that’s obviously the best way to get this done.
Yeah.

QUESTION: Did you have an update on David Hale?

MS. NULAND: I did, especially after I mangled it yesterday.

QUESTION: Oh. Was he not in Saudi?

MS. NULAND: Yeah. He actually went to Saudi last night. He had a meeting with Deputy Foreign Minister bin Abdullah today in Riyadh. He then went on to Cairo this evening. In Cairo, he’s going to meet with Egyptian officials. But he’s also going to meet with Qatari Prime Minister Al Thani, who is also going to be in Cairo at the same time.

QUESTION: So --

MS. NULAND: And then he is coming back to Washington on the weekend.

QUESTION: So he’s not going to Qatar, he’s --

MS. NULAND: Correct, correct.

QUESTION: And wasn’t there another one that he was going to – wasn’t he going to go to the UAE or something like that? Maybe --

MS. NULAND: Net on this trip: He will have been in Jerusalem, Jericho, Amman, Riyadh – I think he was in Kuwait at the front end, I can’t remember – Saudi, et cetera.

QUESTION: All right. And so he decided that it’s not worth his while, it’s not worth his time to go back to Israel and the PA after Cairo?

MS. NULAND: I think he – that he wants to come home and report and consult here before he makes another trip. That’s the current planning.

QUESTION: When he is in Cairo, isn’t he going to bring up the gas issue between Egypt and Israel?

MS. NULAND: The which issue?

QUESTION: The gas.

QUESTION: Gas.

QUESTION: Natural gas.

MS. NULAND: I’m sure that’ll be one of the subjects that he discusses, yes.

QUESTION: Any message he will bring to Cairo in this regard?

MS. NULAND: I think we’ll let him have his consultations in Cairo and we see what we want to read out on those.
Please.

QUESTION: Do you have a readout on Ambassador Grossman’s travel to Copenhagen, Ankara, and Abu Dhabi?

MS. NULAND: I do have some info on Ambassador Grossman’s travels.
First, on his European stops, as you know, he was primarily focused on support for the Afghan National Security Forces in line with the Chicago summit agenda that the Secretary laid out when she was in Brussels last week. He also was yesterday in Turkey for the same purposes, in Ankara. Today, he is in Abu Dhabi, and he – there was also a meeting of the International Contact Group on Afghanistan in the UAE.
And he is going on tonight to Islamabad, where he will be having bilateral conversations, and he will also be taking part in a core group meeting – this is Afghanistan, U.S., and Pakistan – that’ll be attended for the Pakistanis by Foreign Secretary Jilani, and by the Afghans by Deputy Foreign Minister Ludin.

QUESTION: So when he visits Islamabad and meets the foreign ministers, is he carrying any message from Secretary Clinton on --

MS. NULAND: When he goes to Pakistan?
QUESTION: Yeah.

MS. NULAND: Well, this is, as you know, in the context of the parliament concluding its review. We have begun our process of reengaging with the Pakistani Government to work through the issues that have come up during the review. So this will be an effort to really take up those issues one at a time and to see how we work through them.

QUESTION: So has Pakistan formally informed you about the parliamentary review or the conditions that they have announced publicly?

MS. NULAND: Well, I think we mentioned a week ago that the Secretary had spoken to Foreign Minister Khar, so she gave some views on this, and it was agreed at that time that Ambassador Grossman would make a trip to Pakistan to deepen and broaden the conversation that we’ve been having. I think you know that we had also had Deputy Secretary Nides in Pakistan, I think it was two weeks ago. And we had
USAID Administrator Shah there, we had Generals Allen and Dempsey there. So you can see us working hard now with the Pakistanis to work through the issues.

QUESTION: And this is a day-long trip?

MS. NULAND: He will be there – he’s arriving this evening. I think he will be there through Friday is my understanding, because the core group meeting is on Friday.

QUESTION: And he’s also going to Afghanistan?

MS. NULAND: He’s not going to Afghanistan on this trip.

QUESTION: He’s going back to D.C.?

MS. NULAND: Correct, yeah.

QUESTION: As part of the deepening of the relationship, did Pakistan inform the U.S. that it was going to conduct this missile test in the last 24 hours?

MS. NULAND: I don’t know what kind of advanced information we have – we had. I assume we had some, because I do know that they did have contact with the Indian Government before they proceeded with this.

QUESTION: Any reaction to that, to the missile test, to this – obviously it comes after the Indian test.

MS. NULAND: Well, we – obviously, the same message that we gave at the time of the Indian test, that we urge all nuclear-capable states to exercise restraint regarding nuclear and missile capabilities. We understand that this was a planned launch. The Pakistanis have said it wasn’t a direct response to the Indian test. But what’s most important is that they do seem to have taken steps to inform the Indians, and we, as you know, are quite intent on those two countries continuing to work together and improve their dialogue.

QUESTION: Sorry, just on Grossman’s meetings with the Pakistanis, not the core group --

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: So Ambassador Grossman is prepared to discuss everything that’s on the list of Pakistani concerns?

MS. NULAND: I think he’s open to working through the results of the parliamentary review with the Pakistani Government. I don’t want to prejudge or preempt how those conversations will go or what agenda the Pakistani side will bring, but as we said, we had been waiting for that review to be concluded before we could fully reengage. So this is our opportunity to do that.

QUESTION: But do you see the results of that review as something that can be negotiated, or is it something that you’re just going to accept flat out or --

MS. NULAND: I think we want to hear the Pakistani Government’s presentation of where it thinks the bilateral relationship needs to go, and then we will present our views and work through the issues, as partners do. That’s the expectation, so --

QUESTION: So it is something that you see as a negotiation process?

MS. NULAND: This is a conversation. This is a bilateral consultation about how we can improve our relationship along all of the lines that have been difficult. So I don’t want to prejudge what he’s going to hear or where we’re going to go in response. But as you know, we had said that we really needed them to complete their internal work and then come back to us, give us a sense of what they think this ought to lead to, and then we can talk. So that’s – this is the talk.

QUESTION: Does he have the authority to – or the authorization to discuss things like drone strikes, which are very high on the Pakistanis’ list? Well, I mean, at the top of the Pakistanis’ list.

MS. NULAND: Well, I think you can imagine that (a) I’m not going to get into intelligence issues and how we talk about them or don’t talk about them; and I’m certainly not going to get into the precise instructions of our fully empowered special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

QUESTION: So he is? He can negotiate with the Pakistanis on this and any other issue?

MS. NULAND: I am not using the “n” word and I’m not going to get into his instructions.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Just briefly on that?

MS. NULAND: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you when the last time he was in Pakistan, when his last visit was to Pakistan?

MS. NULAND: I do not have that. I will take it for you.

Yeah, please.

QUESTION: In the same region, Afghanistan. Congressman Rohrabacher has been giving interviews talking about his co-del he was on where he did not end up going to Afghanistan. He said he had a conversation with the Secretary, who, basically, what he is saying is told her it would be best if he did not go to Afghanistan. I was curious if you had any comment on that situation and whether the Secretary might have had any conversations with President Karzai about letting Congressman Rohrabacher come to Afghanistan as part of that co-del.

MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t think we can improve on what Congressman Rohrabacher himself has said, so why don’t we just leave it there.

QUESTION: Any reason why we would support President Karzai’s wishes over a U.S. congressman going on this trip?

MS. NULAND: I think you know whenever any American travels, including members of Congress, members of the Executive Branch, traditionally there’s a visa process engaged there. In this case, sometimes when they fly in, it’s sort of handled more administratively. We were advised, as Congressman Rohrabacher made clear, that the sovereign government didn’t think this visit was timely. So it was in that context that he made his decision after our advice.
Okay, please.

QUESTION: I have a question on South America --

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- for what Americans might consider the ongoing soap opera involving the Secret Service, except this doesn’t involve the Secret Service. We’re talking about three U.S. Marines who apparently have been punished as well as an employee of the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia who apparently were implicated in tossing a prostitute out of a moving car sometime last year. And I wanted to find out, since we know that the Marines have been punished, who was the employee of the Embassy? Was this person an American? Was this person a local hire? What can you say about a pending lawsuit now, apparently, against the Embassy?

MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, your report of the incident in question is not accurate in terms of what actually happened. Second, this is something that happened back in December. There was a State Department employee involved. The – we did cooperate fully with the appropriate Brazilian authorities, including with the civil police. None of the Americans involved in the incident are still in Brazil. The civil police, as I understand it, are still working on their case, and no charges have been brought by the Brazilian authorities.

QUESTION: When you say that none of the people involved are still in Brazil, does that imply that the Embassy employee is an American?

MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: And does that person still work for the U.S. Government?

MS. NULAND: I do not have the answer to that. I believe so. But as you know, we don’t talk about our personnel for privacy reasons.

QUESTION: What is the policy? Much has been made about the Secret Service reviewing its standards of behavior for its employees when they’re detailed overseas. What is the standard for the State Department and its employees and how they’re expected to behave, conform to local laws overseas?

MS. NULAND: We have a zero-tolerance policy for any kind of conduct of the kind that was of – that involves prostitution or anything of that nature. I can give you the Foreign Affairs Manual regulations, if that’s helpful to you.

QUESTION: Mm-hmm.

MS. NULAND: Not only for the reasons of morality and local law, but also because any kind of conduct of that kind exposes our employees to blackmail and other things.

QUESTION: Even though that a country like Colombia may have legalized activity in this (inaudible)?
MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: Just a couple things on that. What about the description that you were read of the incident isn’t correct?

MS. NULAND: Well, Ros talked about somebody being thrown out of a car and this kind of thing. That is not what happened in this case.

QUESTION: What did happen?

QUESTION: Because that’s the description that the Secretary of Defense offered to reporters who were traveling with him. So --

MS. NULAND: Our information is that after four Embassy personnel left the club, the – a woman involved in this incident attempted to open a car door and get into a closed and moving vehicle. She was not able to do so. She fell and she injured herself. All of the Embassy personnel involved in this incident were interviewed by the Brazilian civil police. We have also conducted our own investigation into the incident, and we’ve taken all the appropriate steps regarding the individuals involved consistent with our laws and our regulations.

QUESTION: Did these – did any of these – in particular, the Embassy employee, did they violate any rule?

MS. NULAND: Well, as I said, they haven’t been charged by Brazilian authorities.

QUESTION: Right. But I mean any of the FAM rules.

MS. NULAND: I’m not going to get into the precise adjudication of the case for reasons of privacy with regard to our employee.

QUESTION: Well, yeah, but you said that none of the people are still in the country.
MS. NULAND: Correct.

QUESTION: But someone can be moved without being punished. I mean, you could be transferred just simply because this person – for another reason. So do you know if there was any – was there any reprimand or punishment handed out, and was there any reason to? Did they – did these people do anything wrong?

MS. NULAND: Again, my information is that we conducted our own investigation of this issue, and we took the appropriate steps. What I’m not at liberty to get into is what steps those might have been, given the privacy issues involving the employee. And that’s our policy that we don’t talk about disciplinary steps taken with employees.

QUESTION: Well, the Secret Service didn’t either until just recently.

MS. NULAND: I understand that.

QUESTION: Well, that’s why it’s important to know whether they actually did something wrong or they were just transferred or moved to – or demoted or whatever. I mean, maybe – I mean, the description that you just read, it sounds like it could be perfectly plausible that these people didn’t do anything wrong at all. So that’s --

MS. NULAND: And it may well be. I just don’t have information with regard to the case beyond what I’ve just given you.

QUESTION: Well, I would suggest that the Department might want to come clean on this, considering the interest in the – in that. The other thing is that in the FAM, it talks about – it said “notorious behavior” or something like that. But it only talks about that being a problem if it were to become publicly known.

MS. NULAND: Well, I don’t have the FAM in front of me. I think I should get it for you.

QUESTION: So I’m not sure I – okay. But I’m not – I’m curious as to – you say it’s a zero-tolerance policy, but it’s not clear to me that it is, in fact, zero tolerance if the only way it gets you into trouble is if other people find out about it.

MS. NULAND: But the problem – but this is the problem. This is why you have to have a zero-tolerance policy, because at any given time, if you open yourself up to such behavior, it could become known. And you can’t, as somebody engaged in behavior of that kind, predict when that might happen. And so you’re immediately vulnerable, and so is the U.S. Government. So that’s why we have the regulations that we have.
QUESTION: Okay. Can we --

QUESTION: Is there a lawsuit pending against the U.S. Government?

MS. NULAND: As I said, we have – I have information to indicate that there have been no charges filed by the – in Brazil.

QUESTION: FAM stands for foreign manual?

QUESTION: Wait, wait. I just want to make sure that you understand that – what I’m trying to get. I want – basically, I want to know if the people involved in this violated that FAM regulation.

MS. NULAND: I understand that, and I – my expectation is that we are not going to talk about an individual personnel case from the podium.

QUESTION: I’m just curious as to what FAM stands for.

MS. NULAND: Sorry. Foreign Affairs Manual, which are our published rules and regulations for ourselves. But anybody who’s interested in those, we’ll get them for you. I did have them a couple of days ago. I don’t have them here.
Please.

QUESTION: On Japan?

MS. NULAND: Yes.

QUESTION: There are reports that a U.S.-Japan joint announcement on the realignment of the U.S. forces in Japan scheduled on Wednesday, today, has been delayed because there are some senators have been criticizing it. I am curious if it’s really a reason – if you – do you think you can make an announcement before Japan’s prime minister visit to D.C. at this – at the end of this April?

MS. NULAND: Well, let me say that we have made progress in these negotiations. As you know, and as members of Congress have made clear, we have obligations to consult and to brief. And there are implications, including budgetary implications, that the Congress has to be happy with. So we are having those consultations. I’m not prepared to predict right now when we’ll go public with where we are, but everybody has their internal procedures, and we’re working through those now.

QUESTION: Toria?

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: I wonder if you’re aware, but the head of the Syrian National Council, Burhan Ghalioun, cancelled his trip to Washington. Are you aware of that, or do you have a comment on that?

MS. NULAND: I am. I frankly don’t have any back story. He’s a pretty busy guy, so maybe he had things to --

QUESTION: Okay. So it was not done at the suggestion, let’s say, of Washington?

MS. NULAND: No, not at all. Not at all. Not to my knowledge.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you find yourself in a position where the options towards Syria are actually – they range from bad to worse?

MS. NULAND: Well, the Secretary talked about this quite a bit yesterday. She made clear that we’re at a crossroads, and we’re at a very difficult crossroads as these monitors are starting to come in, are trying to do their job. In some cases, they are able to provide space and bear witness to what is going on, but in other cases, either they’ve had difficulty getting where they need to go, they’ve had difficulty in getting agreement with regard to the makeup of the personnel, and they have – as we talked about yesterday, we’ve had at least one incident where they went into a town, they were able to interview people, and then there were reprisals afterwards, which is just deplorable.

QUESTION: To follow up on my question that I raised a couple days ago on the number of monitors: Are you comfortable that 300 will be able to do their jobs, considering that there are so many flashpoints and there are so many places and villages and hamlets that they need to be at?

MS. NULAND: Well, frankly, we’re – right now we’re at 12, so let us get this scaled up and let us see what a mission of 300 that’s truly able to operate freely, truly able to do what it thinks is necessary in terms of interviewing people, in terms of gathering information, moving around, and then we’ll go from there. But at the moment, we’re at 12, and that’s not enough.

QUESTION: Okay. Going back to the Balkans experience, I mean, we – they had, like, thousands of monitors to be able to do the job. Do you see a point in time where this actually needs to be done?

MS. NULAND: Said, I think we have to take this one step at a time. We’ve seen what just a handful have been able to do in the towns where they’ve been – they’ve shown up. We’ve had outpourings of Syrian civilians thanking them, able to express themselves, so let’s see what we can do with 300. The most important thing now is to get them in and get them deployed and get them deployed freely.
Ros.

QUESTION: The French foreign minister, Mr. Juppe, suggested today that even if we let the full complement of monitors try to do its work in Syria, that it may well be time for the world to start looking at some sort of military intervention. Is he jumping the gun? Pardon the pun.

MS. NULAND: I think the Secretary made clear again yesterday, as she had in Paris, that even as we do our best to get these monitors in and doing their job, we also have to look at increased pressure in case this Annan plan doesn’t succeed. With regard to external military forces, our position on that has not changed, Ros.
Please.

QUESTION: Was the Secretary intending to meet with Burhan Ghalioun?

MS. NULAND: I don’t think we’d gotten that far in the planning of his schedule. She has met with him, I think, three times now. She – and most recently when we were in Istanbul some three weeks ago. So I think one of the issues was whether he was going to be here when she was here, but yeah.

QUESTION: A U.S. Congressman Joe Walsh from Illinois has written a letter to Secretary Clinton on reviewing a U.S. decision of 2005 not to issue a visa to the Gujarat chief minister in India, Narendra Modi. Is Secretary Clinton responding to the letter? And are you reviewing the U.S. position on that issue?

MS. NULAND: I haven’t seen the letter. I think you know that our position on the visa issue hasn’t changed at all, so I would guess that if we do respond, it’ll be along familiar lines.
I’m getting the high sign here because we have --

QUESTION: One more, on Burma.

MS. NULAND: Yeah.

QUESTION: Nine NGOs have – in a statement, have expressed concern on Secretary’s decision to ease sanctions on Burma. They are saying this is not going to be fruitful as far as Burma is concerned. How do you address their concerns?

MS. NULAND: If you’re referring – you’re referring to the letter from the American NGOs, right?
QUESTION: Yes.

MS. NULAND: Yeah. Well, as you know, we are not at the step with Burma yet that the NGOs are concerned about. We do have a very strong, vibrant dialogue with our own NGOs, with Burmese NGOs, as we develop this action for action policy, and we’ll continue to do that.
Thanks, everybody.

U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK REPORT

FROM:  U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
During the first half of fiscal year 2012, Ex-Im Bank approved $10.7 billion in authorizations. This financing is supporting approximately 96,000 American jobs. Although total authorizations decreased by 18% when compared to the first half of fiscal year 2011 ($13.1 billion in FY’11 and $10.7 billion in FY’12), small business transactions went up. Ex-Im authorizations during this period included $2.1 billion for small business, which was, as a percentage of total authorizations, an increase over last year’s performance, bringing this portfolio slightly below 20% of overall activity. Additionally, we added 273 new small companies to our ranks in the first half of fiscal year 2012.Working capital loan guarantees, which primarily support small business, were the highest volume of transactions in the second quarter.

Pending our reauthorization, long-term transactions in our pipeline put Ex-Im on track for another record-setting year. In addition, small business authorizations are expected to exceed the historic high of $6 billion achieved in fiscal year 2011.

Our pipeline contains a large number of Structured/Project Finance transactions, which have longer lead times. These are primarily located in Australia, the Middle East, and North Africa with concentrations in the manufacturing and power industries.

Ex-Im transactions contributed to the increase in overall U.S. goods and services exported in February, valued at $181.2 billion. The Commerce Department reported that over the last twelve months, the U.S. exports totaled $2.134 trillion, which is the largest amount the U.S. has ever exported in one year. In support of the National Export Initiative, we are still on track to doubling exports by 2015.

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER'S TASK FORCE ON CHILDREN EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Attorney General Eric Holder’s Task Force on Children Exposed to Violence Holds Final Public Hearing in Detroit New DOJ Study Reveals School Officials More Likely to Learn of Child Victimization than Police or Medical Authorities

At the final hearing of Attorney General Eric Holder’s National Task Force on Children Exposed to Violence in Detroit, officials from the Justice Department and the city of Detroit underscored efforts to keep kids safe and prevent youth violence. The task force is a key part of Attorney General Holder’s Defending Childhood Initiative to prevent and reduce children’s exposure to violence.

At the hearing, Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West announced the release of a new Justice Department research bulletin showing that 46 percent of victimized children were known to school, police or medical authorities. The bulletin, Child and Youth Victimization Known to Police, School, and Medical Authorities draws from the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs’ Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention with support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“While more children are reporting violence to authorities, many continue to endure the pain of victimization in silence,” said Acting Associate Attorney General West.  “Through the work of the Attorney General’s task force, we hope to find more ways to identify those children in need and make sure they have access to effective prevention and treatment options.”

The task force is co-chaired by Joe Torre, chairman of the board of the Joe Torre Safe At Home Foundation, and Robert Listenbee, Jr., chief of the Juvenile Unit of the Defender Association of Philadelphia.  Co-chair Listenbee, a Detroit-area native, highlighted the urgency and opportunity of the task force’s work.

“I grew up just 20 miles outside of Detroit in Mt. Clemens, Michigan. During my high school years, violence was commonplace,” said Listenbee. “Similar violence still occurs in cities and towns across the country, but today we know so much more about how to address it.   The resounding message this task force has heard is that we can – and must – change the norm of violence in children’s lives.”

During the opening session, Detroit Police Chief Ralph Godbee discussed the police department’s work with youth.   He was joined by Lawnya Sherrod, a former Detroit gang member turned community organizer, who highlighted her work to get youth out of gangs and to help them graduate from high school and become productive, successful members of the community.

In a panel discussion about successful programs, Wayne County Child and Family Services Director Tadarial Sturdivant described his agency’s efforts to reform the juvenile justice system through a program called First Contact.

“[The program] creates an opportunity to collaborate with the Detroit Police Department and offer services at the street level to support the patrol officer who has first contact with the juvenile,” said Sturdivant. “As an alternative to arrest and detention, [the department] will convey youth to the Juvenile Assessment Center for stabilization, parental contact, brief assessment, transportation home, and referral for voluntary services.”

In a panel about public-private partnerships, Dr. William Bell, President and CEO of Casey Family Programs, discussed the need to meet the “overwhelming circumstances” of violence against children “with deliberate and intentional action.” Bell outlined concrete steps that every city in America could take to build “communities of hope” to reverse these violent trends.

Mary Lee, Deputy Director of PolicyLink, described how place influences many child outcomes. “ Just by knowing his or her zip code, a young person’s health, life expectancy, success in school, adult income¯all of these can be predicted,” noted Lee in her testimony, which described ways to improve the places children live to improve long-term outcomes.

The task force is composed of 13 leading experts, including practitioners, child and family advocates, academic experts and licensed clinicians, who will identify promising practices, programming and community strategies to prevent and respond to children’s exposure to violence.   Their findings will inform their final report to the Attorney General in late 2012, which will present policy recommendations and serve as a blueprint for preventing and reducing the negative effects of such violence across the United States.

SEC. OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS AT TIME 100 GALA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the TIME 100 Gala
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Lincoln Center
New York, NY
April 24, 2012
Thank you very much. Thank you all. Thank you and welcome to my announcement to run for president of Malta. (Laughter.) I am so delighted to be here in New York in the United States of America at this event, and I want to thank Rick Stengel and everyone at TIME for bringing together this remarkable group of people and for including me as well. Truth be told, as Richard just mentioned, I did invite him to travel with me to all those countries, including Libya, just after the revolution, and it was, frankly, a transparent ploy to make the TIME 100 list. (Laughter.) So if you ever want to make the list again, or for the first time, just follow that example.

We’re here in the greatest city in the world, and I’m delighted that TIME has included two of the newest residents: Jeremy Lin and Tim Tebow. And for both of them, I’m sure they will have already discovered what a welcoming, exciting place New York is. And if you want any advice, if you need a little help getting your bearings, I’ve put together some ideas for a Listening Tour – and if you just travel around, you’ll hear all kinds of things from New Yorkers. And for me it was a great experience representing this exciting state.
Now, there’s a lot to be done tonight, but there’s not really a lot of room for more than one internet meme sensation, so I’m afraid that Tim Tebow and Jeremy Lin really take the cake here. Speaking of New York though, I was delighted to see that our wonderful Governor Andrew Cuomo is on the TIME 100 list, along with others like Marco Rubio. And the two of them and I have ended up on some other lists this past couple of months. (Laughter.) And I assume it’s their keen interest in foreign policy that brings us together. But for me, looking through this list and looking at that exciting video depiction of everyone, I just want to say how impressed and grateful I am.

TIME has honored so many national and global leaders; you couldn’t possibly acknowledge every one. There’s many I haven’t had a chance to meet yet – I was sort of hoping Kim Jong-un would show up. (Laughter.) I don’t think he’s here but if you catch sight of him, let me know. We’re still trying to figure out what he’s all about. (Laughter.)

But I do want to give a shout-out to Angela Merkel and Dilma Rousseff and Portia Miller, Christine Lagarde, who are also on this list and prove once again that you actually can run the world in heels and pantsuits. (Applause.) Because the day is over when women leaders could only aspire to a supporting role. And by the way, I think we may have just found Kristen Wiig’s next movie. She can call it: “Bridesmaids No Longer.” (Laughter.)

I am – just excited to have the chance to say a few semi-serious words. Because aside from the dictators – and I am not talking about my friend Harvey – (laughter) – this is a truly remarkable list with so many distinguished leaders, artists, and activists, people who are on the front lines across the globe, whether it’s fighting AIDS in India, corruption in Russia, gender-based violence in Pakistan. And I am personally pleased at how many courageous women are on the list this year.

Now what does this actually mean, besides a fabulous evening in one of the great spots of New York? You’ve been deemed as influential. And I think it means that, at least according to TIME and the process they went through, people are inspired by your grace and your grit, moved by your refusal to give up even when the challenges appear insurmountable, motivated by your focus on solving problems that actually matter in people’s lives, showing us all what it means to work hard, to innovate, to advance our common humanity, to lead.

And the challenges that so many of you and others who couldn’t be with us tonight take on every day – conflict and persecution, corruption and poverty, hunger and disease – go directly to the security and prosperity of this country and all countries.

Today a flu in Canton can become an epidemic in Chicago. Or a protest in Cairo can reverberate to Calcutta causing economic and political shockwaves. And we know too well the destruction that an extremist cell in Karachi or Kandahar can cause. The world has changed – technology and globalization have made nearly every country and community interdependent and interconnected; citizens and non-state actors like NGOs, corporations, cartels are increasingly influencing international affairs for good or for ill. And the challenges we face have become so complex, so fast-moving, so cross-cutting that no one nation can hope to solve them alone. So how we practice foreign policy needs to change as well.

And when President Obama asked me to be Secretary of State, people were asking, “Is America still up to the job of leading in this rapidly changing world?” And we faced two wars, an economy in free-fall, diplomacy had been deemphasized, our traditional alliances were fraying, the international system the United States had helped to build and defend looked increasingly obsolete.

So the President set a clear objective to secure and advance America’s global leadership in the 21st Century. And to achieve that goal, we could no longer rely primarily on military solutions or on a go-it-alone approach. We needed to expand our thinking and our horizons, to use every tool in the proverbial tool box, every asset, every partner, in an integrated approach. And that meant breaking out of old bureaucratic silos, engaging with emerging powers, and most importantly, as Rick said, with people themselves, not just governments. It also meant harnessing market forces to help solve strategic problems, finding new partners in the private sector. In short, we needed to change the way we did business from top to bottom. And we called this new approach: “Smart Power.”

And it’s been more than three years now. By the time I finish next January, I guess I’ll have traveled a million miles, visited more than 100 countries. And I know a couple of things. One, the world remains a dangerous place, but I’m very proud of what we’ve accomplished. We have integrated the three pillars of American foreign policy: diplomacy, development, and defense. And we have worked hard to restore America’s standing, especially by repairing alliances and deepening relationships, and paying a lot of attention to the so-called rising powers. And also putting together coalitions to do things like protect civilians in Libya, or to try to, through pressure and sanctions, influence behavior in Iran. Putting people at the center of our foreign policy, especially those long pushed to the margins like women and young people, religious and ethnic minorities, the LGBT community, civil society. That was important because we want to make clear that America’s values of inclusivity and democracy, of fairness and equality of opportunity really were at the core of who we are and who we will be. So we determined to make innovation and partnerships the foundation of what we did.

And America’s global leadership is not a birthright. It has to be earned by each successive generation. So putting the common good ahead of narrow interests is what I think is not just a nice thing to do, but essential. And that’s as true at home as it is abroad. To be innovative, integrated, visionary, it’s all critical to the kind of future we want.

And there is no substitute for American leadership. I feel it everywhere I travel, every time that big blue and white plane with the words United States of America on the side touches down in another country. And yes, I appreciate greatly our military and material might. But at bottom it is our values and our commitment to fairness and justice, freedom and democracy that has set us apart and hopefully, God-willing, will always set us apart. It’s what makes American leadership so exceptional.

So let me leave you with just one final thought. Because as much as the world changes, this will always be true: Sometimes nations must be willing to do what is right no matter the odds or the costs. We must be prepared to act strongly and decisively, with every tool and, even occasionally, weapon at our disposal.

Some of you might have seen that photograph from the White House Situation Room on the day Usama bin Ladin was killed. And I’m often asked: What was going through my mind during that very long, tense day? And first, I remembered all the people here in New York who I had gotten to know, who I was privileged to represent in the Senate, and how much they, and we, deserved justice for our loved ones. And I thought about America and how important it was to protect our country from another attack. And I prayed for the safety of those brave men, those Navy SEALS risking their lives on that moonless Pakistani night.

So America will not only continue to lead, we will do so because we must. It’s who we are. It’s in our DNA. And I want to be sure that as I finish off my term as Secretary of State, and eventually get to a point where I can put my feet up and actually enjoy just being a citizen again, there’s a lot of work still to be done. There’s not a moment to lose.

And as I head off to another country and go on to all the meetings that I’ll be having, I will have the privilege to meet people like those we honor tonight. I will have the privilege to see firsthand what they are doing to advance freedom and opportunity to stand up to injustice, and I will know that America needs to be on their side. We need to continue doing what America does best: solving problems, standing for our values, and making it clear that the future will be just as exciting, filled with potential, as we have enjoyed a past that has given so many of us the opportunities that we sometimes take for granted, but which we are privileged to have as we gather here tonight.

So we need your help to continue this mission, this human mission. And next year when the editors of TIME begin putting together their list, I hope that they, and we, will find a world perhaps a little more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.
And thanks to all of you for your contributions in making that so. Thank you all. Goodnight. (Applause.)

SBA AND FDIC OFFER EDUCATION AND MENTORING SUPPORT FOR NEW ENTREPRENEURS

FROM:  SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

FDIC and SBA Team Up to Offer Financial Education and Mentoring Support to New and Aspiring Entrepreneurs

WASHINGTON – The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and U.S. Small Business Administration today announced new resources to support small businesses across the nation.  Acting Chairman Gruenberg and SBAs Associate Administrator for Entrepreneurial Development Michael Chodos released Money Smart for Small Business, a training curriculum for new and aspiring business owners.

Developed in partnership between both agencies, this curriculum is the latest offering in the FDIC’s award-winning Money Smart program.

 Money Smart for Small Business provides an introduction to day-to-day business organization and planning and is written for entrepreneurs with limited or no prior formal business training.  It offers practical information that can be applied immediately, while also preparing participants for more advanced training.  FDIC and SBA will form a Training Alliance for organizations that support small businesses through training, technical assistance or mentoring. 

 Money Smart for Small Business provides an introduction to day-to-day business organization and planning and is written for entrepreneurs with limited or no prior formal business training.  It offers practical information that can be applied immediately, while also preparing participants for more advanced training.  FDIC and SBA will form a Training Alliance for organizations that support small businesses through training, technical assistance or mentoring. 

 “We are excited to join the FDIC in its expansion of the Money Smart curriculum for small business,” said SBA Administrator Karen Mills.  “The FDIC is a vital ally in our efforts to help small business owners start, grow and create jobs.  Money Smart for Small Business will help to put more information on the business basics of financial management at entrepreneurs’ fingertips and make it easier for them to build their knowledge and skill set.”

 “We are excited to join the FDIC in its expansion of the Money Smart curriculum for small business,” said SBA Administrator Karen Mills.  “The FDIC is a vital ally in our efforts to help small business owners start, grow and create jobs.  Money Smart for Small Business will help to put more information on the business basics of financial management at entrepreneurs’ fingertips and make it easier for them to build their knowledge and skill set.”

 Gruenberg and Chodos were joined by Training Alliance partners at the launch of Money Smart for Small Business, hosted by the District of Columbia’s Affinity Lab, a small business incubator. “We are proud to launch Money Smart for Small Business,” said Gruenberg.  “We value our partnerships – with SBA and the Money Smart Alliance members – and recognize their importance to our work.  Small businesses play a vital role in supporting a vibrant economy.”

 Gruenberg and Chodos were joined by Training Alliance partners at the launch of Money Smart for Small Business, hosted by the District of Columbia’s Affinity Lab, a small business incubator. “We are proud to launch Money Smart for Small Business,” said Gruenberg.  “We value our partnerships – with SBA and the Money Smart Alliance members – and recognize their importance to our work.  Small businesses play a vital role in supporting a vibrant economy.”

Each of the 10 instructor-led modules in Money Smart for Small Business provides financial and business management for business owners and includes a scripted instructor guide, participant guide and overhead slides.  The FDIC will host an online “town hall” for potential Training Alliance partners in the months ahead.

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO UN SUSAN E. RICE TALKS ABOUT ATROCITIES PREVENTION BOARD

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Statement by Ambassador Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, on the Launch of the Atrocities Prevention Board
Susan E. Rice
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
U.S. Mission to the United Nations New York, NYApril 23, 2012
Nearly nine months ago, President Obama declared the prevention of mass atrocities and genocide “a core national security interest and core moral responsibility” of the United States in the 21st century and set in motion an unprecedented review of our national capacity to foresee, prevent, and respond to them. In doing so, the President expressed his determination to ensure an end to history’s bitter succession of mass killings and to make “never again” not just a reminder to future generations, but a hallmark of American policy.
Today, at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC, an institution dedicated to the imperatives of memory and action, President Obama announced sweeping initiatives generated by his directive. The President ordered steps—including the establishment of an Atrocity Prevention Board—that will lay the foundation for a stronger, better-organized U.S. and international response to early warnings of mass atrocities and genocide, presenting policymakers with better prevention options before the costs of action rise.

Atrocities are not inevitable. They are perpetrated by those who choose cruelty, preach hate, and seek power through division and death. They need not—and should not—happen anywhere. Not in Cote d’Ivoire, nor Libya, nor Syria. Yet, as the President has said, “History has taught us that our pursuit of a world where states do not systematically slaughter civilians will not come to fruition without concerted and coordinated effort.” Today and every day, let us work together to apply the lessons of the past and to strengthen the world’s will and capacity to make “never again” an enduring reality.

U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FEARS SPREAD OF EXTREMISM IN LATIN AMERICA

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Panetta: Violent Extremism Threatens Latin America

By Cheryl Pellerin

RIO DE JANEIRO, April 24, 2012 - Even in a region where some of the United States' closest military partners are steadily improving national stability and security, the threat of violent extremism is spreading, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said here yesterday.

During a weeklong trip that includes stops in Bogota, Colombia; Brasilia and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; and Santiago, Chile, the secretary is meeting with military and political leaders to reaffirm the U.S. commitment to help with common defense challenges.

Increasingly, one of those challenges involves violent extremist organizations and the growing engagement of Iran in the region.

"We always have a concern about, in particular, the [Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps] and efforts by the IRGC to expand their influence, not only throughout the Middle East but also into this region," Panetta said during a briefing en route to Colombia.

"In my book," he added, "that relates to expanding terrorism."

Last month, in written testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Air Force Gen. Douglas M. Fraser, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, detailed the regional activities of Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based Shi'a Muslim militant group and political party, and Iran.

Southcom's area of responsibility includes Central America, South America and the Caribbean.

"We do see evidence of international terrorist groups benefitting from the intertwined systems of illicit trafficking and money laundering in our AOR," Fraser said.

In South America, funding for Hezbollah is raised through charitable donations as well as through drug trafficking and dealing in counterfeit and pirated goods, he said.

In 2011, the U.S. Treasury Department identified the Lebanese Canadian Bank as a "primary money laundering concern" for its role in facilitating money laundering activities of Ayman Joumaa and his Lebanon-based drug trafficking network, which also channeled financial support to Hezbollah.

Joumaa also is accused of smuggling U.S.-bound cocaine through Central America and Mexico and laundering money for a group called Los Zetas, and many Colombian and Venezuelan suppliers.

"In addition to Hezbollah supporters throughout South America, the region is home to a small number of violent extremist organizations, Fraser said.

"We remain vigilant for the potential radicalization of homegrown extremists," the general added.

For example, a small number of Sunni extremists are involved in the radicalization of converts and other Muslims, Fraser told the panel.

"These efforts can be seen through the influence of public personalities like Jamaica's Shaykh Abdullah al-Faisal, who was convicted in the United Kingdom for inciting terrorism," the general said.

Al-Qaida senior operative Adnan el-Shukrijumah has held valid passports for the United States, as well as Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago, where he has family and associates, Fraser added.

Despite recent convictions in a 2007 plot to attack the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York, one alleged co-conspirator remains at large in Guyana, he said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has visited the region six times in six years, and Iran continues its overtures to countries there to try to circumvent international sanctions, Fraser said.

Iran has established modest economic, cultural and security ties, the general added, mostly with nations aligned with a group known as the Bolivarian Alliance for the People of our Americas, called ALBA. These include Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Cuba.

Iran also has established 36 Shi'a cultural centers in the region, Fraser said.

The Fundacion Cultural Oriente is an Iranian outreach center dedicated to strengthening Iran's ties to Latin America, Fraser said.

The center is run by radical cleric Moshen Rabbani, who is on the Interpol Red List for involvement in the 1994 bombings of a Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires, the general said, adding that Rabbani oversees several media outlets and has recruited students from the region to study in Iran.

"We take Iranian activity in the hemisphere seriously and we monitor its activities closely," Fraser said.

"The U.S. government's successful detection and thwarting of the plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States," he added, "reinforces the importance of that monitoring and the effectiveness of U.S. countermeasures."

The expansion of terrorism is an area of concern for the region and its partners, Panetta said.

"I hope we can work together," the secretary added, "to make sure that all the steps are taken to ensure that anything that encourages terrorism can be fought against."

FORMER BP ENGINEER ARRESTED IN CONNECTION WITH DEEPWATER HORIZON INVESTIGATION

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Former BP Engineer Arrested for Obstruction of Justice in Connection with the Deepwater Horizon Criminal Investigation First Criminal Charges to Result from the Deepwater Horizon Task Force Investigation
WASHINGTON – Kurt Mix, a former engineer for BP plc, was arrested today on charges of intentionally destroying evidence requested by federal criminal authorities investigating the April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon disaster, announced Attorney General Eric Holder, Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Jim Letten of the Eastern District of Louisiana and Kevin Perkins, Acting Executive Assistant Director for the FBI’s Criminal Cyber Response and Services Branch.

Mix, 50, of Katy, Texas, was charged with two counts of obstruction of justice in a criminal complaint filed in the Eastern District of Louisiana and unsealed today.
“The department has filed initial charges in its investigation into the Deepwater Horizon disaster against an individual for allegedly deleting records relating to the amount of oil flowing from the Macondo well after the explosion that led to the devastating tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico,” said Attorney General Holder.  “The Deepwater Horizon Task Force is continuing its investigation into the explosion and will hold accountable those who violated the law in connection with the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history.”
According to the affidavit in support of a criminal complaint and arrest warrant, on April 20, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon rig experienced an uncontrolled blowout and related explosions while finishing the Macondo well.  The catastrophe killed 11 men on board and resulted in the largest environmental disaster in U.S. history.

According to court documents, Mix was a drilling and completions project engineer for BP.  Following the blowout, Mix worked on internal BP efforts to estimate the amount of oil leaking from the well and was involved in various efforts to stop the leak.  Those efforts included, among others, Top Kill, the failed BP effort to pump heavy mud into the blown out wellhead to try to stop the oil flow.  BP sent numerous notices to Mix requiring him to retain all information concerning Macondo, including his text messages.

On or about Oct. 4, 2010, after Mix learned that his electronic files were to be collected by a vendor working for BP’s lawyers, Mix allegedly deleted on his iPhone a text string containing more than 200 text messages with a BP supervisor.  The deleted texts, some of which were recovered forensically, included sensitive internal BP information collected in real-time as the Top Kill operation was occurring, which indicated that Top Kill was failing.  Court documents allege that, among other things, Mix deleted a text he had sent on the evening of May 26, 2010, at the end of the first day of Top Kill.  In the text, Mix stated, among other things, “Too much flowrate – over 15,000.”  Before Top Kill commenced, Mix and other engineers had concluded internally that Top Kill was unlikely to succeed if the flow rate was greater than 15,000 barrels of oil per day (BOPD).  At the time, BP’s public estimate of the flow rate was 5,000 BOPD – three times lower than the minimum flow rate indicated in Mix’s text.

In addition, on or about Aug. 19, 2011, after learning that his iPhone was about to be imaged by a vendor working for BP’s outside counsel, Mix allegedly deleted a text string containing more than 100 text messages with a BP contractor with whom Mix had worked on various issues concerning how much oil was flowing from the Macondo well after the blowout.  By the time Mix deleted those texts, he had received numerous legal hold notices requiring him to preserve such data and had been communicating with a criminal defense lawyer in connection with the pending grand jury investigation of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

A complaint is merely a charge and a defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

If convicted, Mix faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 as to each count.?
The Deepwater Horizon Task Force, based in New Orleans, is supervised by Assistant Attorney General Breuer and led by Deputy Assistant Attorney General John D. Buretta, who serves as the Director of the task force.  The task force includes prosecutors from the Criminal Division and the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Louisiana and other U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and investigating agents from the FBI, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Interior, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal law enforcement agencies.

The task force’s investigation of this and other matters concerning the Deepwater Horizon disaster is ongoing.
The case is being pros
ecuted by task force Deputy Directors Derek Cohen and Avi Gesser of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, and task force prosecutors Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Pickens II of the Eastern District of Louisiana and Assistant U.S. Attorney Scott Cullen of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

EXPPORT-IMPORT BANK WORKS TO EXTEND REAUTHORIZATION WITH $140 BILLION CAP

FROM:  EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
As you know, the Ex-Im Bank charter expires on May 31st, and we are close to our exposure limit of $100 billion. Our efforts to achieve the President’s request for a four-year reauthorization with a $140 billion lending cap have been steady over these past few months.  But an effort in March to pass such a measure in the Senate fell short on procedural grounds.

Ex-Im Bank increases U.S. jobs, pays for itself and earns money for the U.S. Treasury -- $1.9 billion over the past five years. That is why we continue to enjoy strong, broad support. Members on both sides of the aisle, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Small Business Exporters Association, National Association of Manufacturers, Machinists and Aerospace Workers Unions, and others have been advocating for our reauthorization.

The world wants to buy what America makes, and this is no time to back away from export financing of United States equipment and services. In particular, our Nation’s small business owners are operating in a brutally competitive marketplace, and we need to be there so our companies and workers can conduct business on a level playing field. Ex-Im FY’11 financing supported 290,000 jobs, more than 1,000 jobs per working day.
Government-backed credit from other nations to help their companies export is growing, especially in emerging markets. Therefore, Ex-Im Bank plays a key role when foreign buyers are in need of high-quality products or services. We increase the opportunities for U.S. businesses to win the deals.

The next few weeks are critical. We are continuing to work with the House and Senate for support for our reauthorization, and we urge them to act promptly before serious damage is done to American competitiveness.

At our recent 37th annual conference, Ex-Im’s reauthorization received tremendous support.  This newsletter includes highlights from the very successful two-day event.

SEC OBTAINS AN ASSET FREEZE AND OTHER RELIEF AGAINST ALLEN WEINTRAUB

FROM:  SEC
April 24, 2012
On April 4, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Miami issued an Order to Show Cause and Other Emergency Relief (Order) to halt Allen Weintraub’s ongoing fraudulent scheme of selling securities of an investment vehicle that he falsely represented owned pre-IPO shares of Facebook, Inc. The Court’s Order temporarily freezes the assets of Weintraub and certain shell companies through which he apparently operates. The order also directed Weintraub to demonstrate, among other things, why he should not be held in contempt for violating the Court’s Final Judgment in SEC v. Allen E. Weintraub and AWMS Acquisition, Inc., d/b/a Sterling Global Holdings, Case No. 11-21549-CIV-HUCK/BANDSTRA (S.D.Fla.), which was entered on January 10, 2012 (Final Judgment). The Final Judgment enjoined Weintraub from violating, among other things, Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.

The Commission’s motion for an order to show cause alleges that in February 2012, Weintraub, acting through an alias, William Lewis, and through entities named Private Stock Transfer, Inc., PST Investments III, Inc. (PST Investments), and World Financial Solutions, defrauded investors by selling them worthless shares in PST Investments. Weintraub had falsely represented that he would sell the investors pre-IPO shares of Facebook, Inc., and that PST Investments had an ownership interest in Facebook stock. The Commission’s motion also alleges that Weintraub was utilizing the website privatestocktransfer.com to perpetrate his scheme. The Court’s Order directed that this website be deactivated.

On December 30, 2011, the Court entered an order granting the Commission’s motion for summary judgment against Weintraub and his shell company, Sterling Global. In its Order, the Court found that Weintraub deceived the public by making false and misleading statements regarding Sterling Global’s ability to purchase and operate Eastman Kodak Company and AMR Corporation. The Court’s January 2012 Final Judgment permanently enjoined Weintraub and Sterling Global from future violations of Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5 and 14e-8 thereunder, and ordered them to each pay a civil money penalty in the amount of $200,000.

SEC CHARGES FORMER CALPERS CEO IN $20 MILLION PLACEMENT AGENT FEE SCHEME

FROM: U.S.  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
April 23, 2011
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged the former CEO of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and his close personal friend with scheming to defraud an investment firm into paying $20 million in fees to the friend’s placement agent firms.

The SEC alleges that former CalPERS CEO Federico R. Buenrostro and his friend Alfred J.R. Villalobos fabricated documents given to New York-based private equity firm Apollo Global Management. Those documents gave Apollo the false impression that CalPERS had reviewed and signed placement agent fee disclosure letters in accordance with its established procedures. In fact, Buenrostro and Villalobos intentionally bypassed those procedures to induce Apollo to pay placement agent fees to Villalobos’s firms. The false letters bearing a fake CalPERS logo and Buenrostro’s signature were provided to Apollo, which then went ahead with the payments.

“Buenrostro and Villalobos not only tricked Apollo into paying more than $20 million in placement agent fees it would not otherwise have paid, but also undermined procedures designed to ensure that investors like CalPERS have full disclosure of such fees,” said John M. McCoy III, Associate Regional Director of the SEC’s Los Angeles Regional Office.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Apollo began requiring signed investor disclosure letters in 2007 from investors such as CalPERS before it would pay fees to a placement agent that assisted in raising funds. Villalobos’s firm ARVCO Capital Research LLC (which later became ARVCO Financial Ventures LLC) agreed to this contractual provision in a placement agent agreement with Apollo related to CalPERS’s investment in Apollo Fund VII. However, when ARVCO requested an investor disclosure letter from CalPERS’s Investment Office to provide Apollo, it was informed that CalPERS’s Legal Office had advised it not to sign a disclosure letter. ARVCO never again contacted CalPERS’s Investment Office for an investor disclosure letter.

The SEC alleges that in January 2008, Villalobos instead fabricated a letter using a phony CalPERS logo. At Villalobos’s request, Buenrostro then signed what appeared to be a CalPERS disclosure letter. Upon receipt of the fake disclosure letter for Apollo Fund VII, Apollo paid ARVCO about $3.5 million in placement agent fees.

The SEC’s complaint further alleges that less than two weeks later, Villalobos and Buenrostro created false CalPERS disclosure letters for at least four more Apollo funds under similarly suspicious circumstances. As part of the scheme, Buenrostro signed blank sheets of fake CalPERS letterhead that Villalobos and ARVCO then used to generate additional investor disclosure letters as they needed them. Based on these false documents, Apollo was induced to pay ARVCO more than $20 million in placement agent fees it would not have paid without the disclosure letters.

The SEC seeks an order requiring Buenrostro, Villalobos, and ARVCO to disgorge any ill-gotten gains, pay financial penalties, and be permanently enjoined from violating the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws.

As alleged in the SEC’s complaint, the defendants violated Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a) and 10b-5(c) thereunder.

SEC CHARGES OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION WITH MISLEADING INVESTORS ON RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES

FROM:  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., April 24, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged H&R Block subsidiary Option One Mortgage Corporation with misleading investors in several offerings of subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) by failing to disclose that its financial condition was significantly deteriorating.
Option One, which is now known as Sand Canyon Corporation, agreed to pay $28.2 million to settle the SEC’s charges.

The SEC alleges that Option One promised investors in more than $4 billion worth of RMBS offerings that it sponsored in early 2007 that it would repurchase or replace mortgages that breached representations and warranties. But Option One did not tell investors about its deteriorating financial condition and that it could not meet its repurchase obligations on its own.

“Option One’s financial condition deteriorated significantly as its large subprime mortgage lending business suffered from the collapse of the U.S. housing market,” said Robert Khuzami, Director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement. “The company nonetheless concealed from investors that its perilous finances created risk that it would not be able to fulfill its duties to repurchase or replace faulty mortgages in its RMBS portfolios.”
Kenneth Lench, Chief of the SEC Division of Enforcement’s Structured and New Products Unit, added, “We will take action against those who fail to disclose or downplay important facts that make an investment riskier, even if those risks do not materialize. We remain committed to uncovering misconduct involving complex financial instruments including RMBS.”

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Option One was one of the nation’s largest subprime mortgage lenders with originations of $40 billion in its 2006 fiscal year. Option One originated subprime loans and sold them in the secondary market through RMBS securitizations or whole loan pool sales.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Option One was generally profitable prior to its 2007 fiscal year. However, when the subprime mortgage market started to decline in the summer of 2006, Option One experienced a decline in revenues and significant losses, and faced hundreds of millions of dollars in margin calls from its creditors. At the time Option One offered and sold the RMBS, it needed H&R Block, through a subsidiary, to provide it with financing under a line of credit in order to meet its margin calls and repurchase obligations. But Block was under no obligation to provide that funding. Option One did not disclose this information to investors. The SEC further alleges that Block never guaranteed Option One’s loan repurchase obligations and that Option One’s mounting losses threatened Block’s credit rating at a time when Block was negotiating a sale of Option One.

Without admitting or denying the SEC’s allegations, Option One consented to the entry of an order permanently enjoining it from violating Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and requiring it to pay disgorgement of $14,250,558, prejudgment interest of $3,982,027, and a penalty of $10 million. The proposed settlement is subject to court approval.

The SEC has now charged 102 individuals and entities in financial crisis-related enforcement actions, including 55 CEOs, CFOs, and other senior corporate officers. These enforcement actions have resulted in more than $1.98 billion in penalties, disgorgement, and other monetary relief for investors.

The SEC also is a co-chair of the Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group formed under the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force in January 2012. The Working Group is marshaling parallel efforts on the state and federal levels to collaborate on current and future investigations, pooling resources and streamlining processes to investigate in a comprehensive way those responsible for misconduct in the RMBS market. In addition to the SEC, other co-chairs of the Working Group include representatives from the Civil and Criminal Divisions of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Attorney General of the State of New York, and the United States Attorney’s Office.

The SEC’s investigation of Option One was conducted by the Enforcement Division’s Structured and New Products Unit led by Kenneth Lench and Reid Muoio and the Chicago Regional Office. The investigative attorneys were Daniel Ryan, Michael Wells, Anne McKinley, and Robert Burson along with litigation counsel Jonathan Polish and John Birkenheier in the Chicago Regional Office.

HUBBLE CELEBRATES 22 YEARS IN ORBIT

FROM:  NASA
To celebrate its 22nd anniversary in orbit, the Hubble Space Telescope released a dramatic new image of the star-forming region 30 Doradus, also known as the Tarantula Nebula because its glowing filaments resemble spider legs. A new image from all three of NASA's Great Observatories--Chandra, Hubble, and Spitzer--has also been created to mark the event. The nebula is located in the neighboring galaxy called the Large Magellanic Cloud, and is one of the largest star-forming regions located close to the Milky Way. At the center of 30 Doradus, thousands of massive stars are blowing off material and producing intense radiation along with powerful winds. The Chandra X-ray Observatory detects gas that has been heated to millions of degrees by these stellar winds and also by supernova explosions. These X-rays, colored blue in this composite image, come from shock fronts--similar to sonic booms--formed by this high-energy stellar activity. The Hubble data in the composite image, colored green, reveals the light from these massive stars along with different stages of star birth, including embryonic stars a few thousand years old still wrapped in cocoons of dark gas. Infrared emission data from Spitzer, seen in red, shows cooler gas and dust that have giant bubbles carved into them. These bubbles are sculpted by the same searing radiation and strong winds that comes from the massive stars at the center of 30 Doradus. Image Credits: X-ray: NASA/CXC/PSU/L.Townsley et al.; Optical: NASA/STScI; Infrared: NASA/JPL/PSU/L.Townsley et al.

KEEPING ILLEGAL RESIDUES OUT OF MEAT

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
WASHINGTON, April 23, 2012 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced two steps designed to prevent meat products that contain illegal residues from reaching consumers: the issuance of a compliance guide that will help livestock slaughter establishments avoid purchasing animals with illegal drug or other chemical residues; and increased testing of animals from producers with a history of residue violations.

"This new residue guidance will help industry to prevent certain animals from entering the marketplace and will contribute significantly toward our goal of protecting consumers," USDA Under Secretary for Food Safety Dr. Elisabeth Hagen said. "Coupled with increased testing of those with a history of violations, we are providing a pathway for those producers to correct deficient practices."

The residue compliance guide is intended for all livestock slaughter establishments, particularly those for dairy cows and bob veal calves, which account for the majority of residue violations. The guide outlines basic measures that slaughter establishments can employ to prevent or reduce residues in livestock.

FSIS administers the U.S. National Residue Program (NRP) to keep products with illegal residues from reaching consumers. As part of today's announcement, FSIS stated that a key part of the NRP, the Residue Repeat Violator List, has been revised and streamlined to be more user-friendly. The list now includes only producers who have supplied more than one animal with an illegal residue level in the past year. FSIS is interested in receiving comments on the list, including how to improve its usefulness, and whether the Agency should provide additional information on producers who supply animals with violative residues.

The Agency's increased testing applies to animals from producers who have been identified by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as producing livestock with residue violations. Since 2008, FSIS has increased testing of animals from producers whose practices have resulted in residue violations. FSIS also recently increased residue testing of carcasses in establishments that fail to apply adequate residue control measures.

FSIS will post the compliance guide, which can be utilized immediately, on April 25 on its Web page athttp://www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_Policies/
Compliance_Guides_Index/. The Agency is inviting interested persons to submit comments on both the notice, which will be published in the Federal Register on April 25, 2012, and the compliance guide, by June 25, 2012 athttp://www.regulations.gov.


In the past two years, FSIS has announced several new measures to safeguard the food supply, prevent foodborne illness, and improve consumers' knowledge about the food they eat. These initiatives support the three core principles developed by the President's Food Safety Working Group: prioritizing prevention; strengthening surveillance and enforcement; and improving response and recovery. Some of these actions include:

Poultry inspection modernization that will reduce the risk of foodborne illness by focusing FSIS inspection activities on tasks that advance its core mission of food safety and removing outdated regulatory requirements that do not help combat foodborne illness.

Performance standards for poultry establishments for continued reductions in the occurrence of pathogens. After two years of enforcing the new standards, FSIS estimates that approximately 5,000 illnesses will be prevented each year under the new Campylobacterstandards, and approximately 20,000 illnesses will be prevented under the revised Salmonella standards each year.

Zero tolerance policy for six Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) serogroups. Raw ground beef, its components, and tenderized steaks found to contain E. coli O26, O103, O45, O111, O121 or O145 will be prohibited from sale to consumers. USDA will launch a testing program to detect these dangerous pathogens and prevent them from reaching consumers.

Test and hold policy that will significantly reduce consumer exposure to unsafe meat products, should the policy become final, because products cannot be released into commerce until Agency test results for dangerous contaminants are known.

Labeling requirements that provide better information to consumers about their food by requiring nutrition information for single-ingredient raw meat and poultry products and ground or chopped products.

Public Health Information System, a modernized, comprehensive database about public health trends and food safety violations at the nearly 6,100 plants FSIS regulates.

MILITARY FLARE MAKER PAYS NEARLY $37 MILLION TO SETTLE FALSE CLAIMS ACT

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, April 23, 2012
Atk Launch Systems Inc. Settles False Claims Product Substitution Case for Nearly $37 Million Allegedly Delivered Unsafe Illuminating Para-flares Under Department of Defense Contracts

ATK Launch Systems Inc. has agreed to a $36,967,160 settlement with the United States to resolve allegations that ATK sold dangerous and defective illumination flares to the Army and the Air Force.   According to the government’s allegations, from 2000 to 2006, ATK delivered LUU-2 and LUU-19 illuminating para-flares to the Defense Department.   These flares, which burn in excess of 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit for over five minutes, are used for nighttime combat, covert and search and rescue operations and have been used extensively by American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan in the global war on terror.  The government alleged that the flares delivered by ATK were incapable of withstanding a 10-foot drop test without exploding or igniting, as required by specifications, and that ATK was aware of this when it submitted claims for payment.

ATK has agreed to pay the United States $21 million in cash and provide necessary in-kind services worth $15,967,160 to fix the 76,000 unsafe para-flares remaining in the government’s inventory.   The settlement resolves a False Claims Act suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah.

The lawsuit was initially filed by an ATK employee under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which permit private individuals, called “relators” to bring lawsuits on behalf of the United States and receiv e a portion of the proceeds of a settlement or judgment awarded against a defendant.

“Our men and women in combat deserve equipment that meets critical safety and performance requirements,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. “This case demonstrates that the Department of Justice will pursue cases where contractors knowingly provide defective equipment that puts the safety of American military service members at risk.”

“This settlement demonstrates our commitment to aggressively go after contractors who recklessly disregard and deliberately ignore critical safety defects in munitions used by America’s uniformed fighting men and women on the front lines of the war on terror,” said David B. Barlow, U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah.  “This office fully supported the federal investigators in their efforts to uncover these fraudulent claims and recover the ill-gotten gains for the American taxpayers.”

The investigation team, which was led by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, included the Air Force Office of Special Investigation, the Navy Naval Criminal Investigative Service, the Army Criminal Investigative Command and auditors from the Defense Contract Audit Agency and the Defense Contract Management Agency.  Additional technical support was provided by the Army Research Laboratory in Aberdeen, Md., the Army Aviation and Missile Command in Huntsville, Ala., the Naval Sea Systems Command at Crane, Ind. and Portsmouth, R.I., the Defense Standardization Program Office at Fort Belvoir, Va., the Air Force Materiel Command at Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio and Hill Air Force Base, Utah, and the Army Materiel Command at Rock Island Arsenal, Ill.