NINE FACE CHARGES IN "ZEUS" MALWARE MULTIMILLION DOLLAR IDENTITY THEFT CONSPIRACY

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 

Friday, April 11, 2014

Nine Charged in Conspiracy to Steal Millions of Dollars Using “Zeus” Malware

Two Defendants Extradited to U.S. Will Make Initial Court Appearance Today

Nine  alleged members of a wide-ranging racketeering enterprise and conspiracy who infected thousands of business computers with malicious software known as “Zeus” have been charged in an indictment unsealed today in Lincoln, Neb.

Acting Assistant Attorney General David A. O’Neil of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Deborah R. Gilg for the District of Nebraska and Special Agent in Charge Thomas R. Metz of the FBI’s Omaha Division made the announcement.

The indictment alleges that the “Zeus” malware captured passwords, account numbers, and other information necessary to log into online banking accounts.  The conspirators allegedly used the information captured by “Zeus” to steal millions of dollars from account-holding victims’ bank accounts.

The indictment was unsealed in connection with the arraignment this afternoon at the federal courthouse in Lincoln of two Ukrainian nationals, Yuriy Konovalenko, 31, and Yevhen Kulibaba, 36.  Konovalenko and Kulibaba were recently extradited from the United Kingdom.  All of the defendants were charged by a federal grand jury in August 2012 with conspiracy to participate in racketeering activity, conspiracy to commit computer fraud and identity theft, aggravated identity theft, and multiple counts of bank fraud.

“The ‘Zeus’ malware is one of the most damaging pieces of financial malware that has ever been used,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General O’Neil.  “As the charges unsealed today demonstrate, we are committed to making the Internet more secure and protecting the personal information and bank accounts of American consumers.  With the invaluable cooperation of our foreign law enforcement partners, we will continue to bring to justice cyber criminals who steal the money of U.S. citizens.”

“In this case, the victims included a Nebraska bank and a Nebraska company,” said U.S. Attorney Gilg.  “This demonstrates the global reach of cybercrime and the significant threat to our financial infrastructure.  We are grateful for the collaboration of our international and federal law enforcement partners in this complex financial fraud crime."

This case illustrates the vigorous cooperation between national and global law enforcement agencies and sends a strong message to cyber thieves,” said FBI SAC Metz.  “The FBI and our international partners will continue to devote resources to finding better ways to safeguard our systems, fortify our cyber defenses and stop those who do us harm."

According to the indictment, the defendants participated in an enterprise and scheme that installed, without authorization, malicious software known as “Zeus” or “Zbot” on victims’ computers.  The defendants are charged with using that malicious software to capture bank account numbers, passwords, personal identification numbers, RSA SecureID token codes and similar information necessary to log into online banking accounts.  The indictment alleges that the defendants falsely represented to banks that they were employees of the victims and authorized to make transfers of funds from the victims’ bank accounts, causing the banks to make unauthorized transfers of funds from the victims’ accounts.

As part of the enterprise and scheme, the defendants allegedly used as “money mules” residents of the United States who received funds transferred over the Automated Clearing House network or through other interstate wire systems from victims’ bank accounts into the money mules’ own bank accounts.  These “money mules” then allegedly withdrew some of those funds and wired the money overseas to conspirators.

According to court documents unsealed today, Kulibaba allegedly operated the conspirators’ money laundering network in the United Kingdom by providing money mules and their associated banking credentials to launder the money withdrawn from U.S.-based victim accounts.  Konovalenko allegedly provided money mules’ and victims’ banking credentials to Kulibaba and facilitated the collection of victims’ data from other conspirators.

The following four identified defendants remain at large:

• Vyacheslav Igorevich Penchukov, 32, of Ukraine, who allegedly coordinated the exchange of stolen banking credentials and money mules and received alerts once a bank account had been compromised.
• Ivan Viktorvich Klepikov, 30, of Ukraine, the alleged systems administrator who handled the technical aspects of the criminal scheme and also received alerts once a bank account had been compromised.
• Alexey Dmitrievich Bron, 26, of Ukraine, the alleged financial manager of the criminal operations who managed the transfer of money through an online money system known as Webmoney.
• Alexey Tikonov, of Russia, an alleged coder or developer who assisted the criminal enterprise by developing new codes to compromise banking systems.

The indictment also charges three other individuals as John Doe #1, John Doe #2 and John Doe #3.

The case was investigated by the FBI’s Omaha Cyber Task Force.  The Metropolitan Police Service of the United Kingdom, the National Police of the Netherlands’s National High Tech Crime Unit and the Security Service of Ukraine provided significant assistance in the investigation.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney William A. Hall, Jr. of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven A. Russell of the District of Nebraska. The Office of International Affairs in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division provided valuable assistance with the extradition.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

U.S. OFFERS BEST WISHES TO PEOPLE OF NEPAL ON THEIR NEW YEAR

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 

Nepali New Year (Bikram Sambat) Message

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

April 11, 2014

Nepali New Year (Bikram Sambat) Message

On behalf of President Obama and the American people, I offer the people of Nepal best wishes for a prosperous and joyful New Year.

Nepal has achieved important milestones this past year, including the democratic election of a new Constituent Assembly.

I hope that the coming year will bring further progress towards enduring political stability and the full completion of a new constitution, keeping your country on the path of prosperity and peace.

Naya Barshako Shubha-Kamana!

HAZLETON, PA., AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT AGREES TO EQUALIZE EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ENGLISH LEARNER STUDENTS

FROM:  U.S. EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

U.S. Department of Education Announces Resolution of Hazleton, Pa., Area School District Civil Rights Investigation

APRIL 11, 2014

The U.S. Department of Education announced today that its Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has entered into an agreement with the Hazleton, Pa., Area School District to bring the district into compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for English Language Learner (ELL) students in the district.

OCR initiated an investigation to assess whether ELL students in the district have access to equal educational opportunities and whether the district adequately notifies national origin minority parents and guardians who are limited-English proficient (LEP) of school activities that are called to the attention of other parents.

“The Hazleton Area School District’s decision to equalize educational opportunity for its nearly 11,000 students, including its nearly 1,300 English language learner students and their families is a major step forward for the district’s children and families,” said assistant secretary for Civil Rights Catherine E. Lhamon. “This agreement protects English language learner students’ longstanding right to equal opportunity to participate in school programs, services and activities. The agreement also ensures that the district provides language assistance services to limited English proficient parents – to support their active participation in their children’s education.”


OCR found the district noncompliant in the following ways:

Some students whose primary language is not English were inappropriately excused from the English language development program;
The district did not provide required instructional time for over 240 elementary school ELL students;
The district did not evaluate the effectiveness of its program and address any deficiencies;
The district did not have an effective system to identify LEP parents and to ensure that interpreters were always available when needed.
Under the agreement, the district will take a number of corrective actions, including:

Ensuring that students whose primary home language is not English will be promptly assessed for English language proficiency to determine eligibility for placement in an English language development program and that students will not be improperly exempted from assessment;
Assessing students who were improperly exempted from language proficiency assessment to determine whether they may be eligible to receive English language development services;
Conducting a comprehensive evaluation of the English language development program at each school level to determine its effectiveness and making modifications to address areas where the program is not meeting the district’s goals;
Developing and implementing policies and procedures to ensure that LEP parents are notified, in a language they understand, of school activities that are called to the attention of other parents; and Providing training to appropriate staff on procedures for identifying language-minority parents and on policies and procedures for serving language minority parents.

OCR will closely monitor implementation of the agreement to ensure that the commitments are implemented in a timely and effective manner and that they result in equal opportunities for students to participate in the district’s education programs.

U.S. EXTENDS GREETINGS TO PEOPLE OF LAOS ON THEIR NEW YEAR

FROM:  STATE DEPARTMENT 

Lao New Year

Press Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Washington, DC

April 11, 2014

On behalf of President Obama I am delighted to extend my greetings to the people of Laos on the occasion of the Lao New Year.

The American people join you in the spirit of hope, celebration, joy, and renewal. May the New Year bring prosperity to Lao people all around the world.

The New Year is a time of great opportunity and expectation and I hope this year will provide even greater opportunities to work together and enrich the important friendship between Laos and the United States.

U.S. OFFICIAL'S BACKGROUND BRIEFING ON P5+1 TALKS

FROM:  THE STATE DEPARTMENT 

Background Briefing on P5+1 Talks

Special Briefing

Office of the Spokesperson

Senior U.S. Administration Official

Vienna, Austria

April 9, 2014

---

MODERATOR: Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for your patience. Welcome to our backgrounder. I think most of you know the ground rules here, but just to remind people, you all know [Senior U.S. Administration Official] who will be doing this all on background as a Senior U.S. Administration Official. Please, let’s all keep it to that. [Senior U.S. Administration Official] will give a few brief opening remarks, and then as always, we’ll open it up for questions. And please, when I call on you, even though we know most of you, please give your name and your media outlet.

With that, I’ll turn it over.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. Hello, everyone, and thank you for coming today for this backgrounder. It’s amazing to think that only a few months ago, many of us were in Geneva in the freezing cold finalizing the Joint Plan of Action at 4 in the morning. And today, we find ourselves at the halfway point in these comprehensive negotiations in a somewhat warmer and beautiful Vienna. Geneva was beautiful, just cold. (Laughter.)
In the past two days, we have continued our substantive discussions about all of the issues that will have to be part of a comprehensive agreement – every single issue you can imagine. These sessions have been in-depth and the conversations have given us important additional insights into where the biggest and most challenging gaps will be as we move forward.
At this point, we don’t know if we’ll be successful in bridging those gaps, but we are certainly committed, as everyone in the room is, to trying. One thing to keep in mind as we reach this midway mark is that all sides have kept all of the commitments they made in the Joint Plan of Action. That’s given all of us more confidence as we negotiate this even tougher comprehensive agreement.

In that vein today, we’ve just concluded a meeting of the Joint Commission that was announced when we implemented the Joint Plan of Action. Given it’s the halfway point, we thought it would be an appropriate time to check in on implementation progress, and as I said, the report out of that meeting which I just received is everyone acknowledged that everything was going well. This meeting took place at the experts level, not at the political directors level.
The next step in this process is to begin actually drafting text, which we have all said would happen after this round. This round and the last round was used to review all of the issues and understand each other’s positions at the beginning of this negotiation. I would caution everyone from thinking that a final agreement is imminent or that it will be easy. As we draft, I have no doubt this will be quite difficult at times. And as we’ve always been clear and as we said explicitly when we were negotiating the Joint Plan of Action – and it is even more so for the comprehensive agreement – we will not rush into a bad deal. We just won’t do it. No deal – as Secretary Kerry has said many times, as the President of the United States has said, no deal is better than a bad deal.

So now, we’ll move forward to begin drafting actual language. We’ll meet back here in Vienna at the political director level in May. As always, our experts and political directors will be working in the meantime on all of the technical issues that are a part of these talks. And we are all very focused on that special date, July 20th, because we believe that it should give us sufficient time to reach a comprehensive agreement if an agreement is indeed possible.
With that, I’m happy to take your questions.

MODERATOR: Great. Go ahead, Lou from Reuters. Kick us off.

QUESTION: Thanks. So just a couple questions here. When you said that every single issue you can imagine was discussed, did this include Iran’s ballistic missile program? And also, when the – the Iranians have just now said that you’ve got – Foreign Minister Zarif said that the deal is 50 to 60 percent agreed. And I know what you said in the conference call and what you said just now. How would you respond to that? And do you think that that’s an irrelevant comment?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: In terms of your first question about ballistic missiles, the Joint Plan of Action covers, in one way or another, everything that needs to be in the comprehensive agreement, including resolution of concerns. It also discusses the UN Security Council resolutions must be addressed as part of any comprehensive agreement, and I think that you are well aware that one of the UN Security Council resolutions speaks of concerns regarding ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. So when I say that all concerns have been discussed, all concerns have been discussed.

On your second point, I take seriously everything that Minister Zarif says. My own view is that the only percentage that matters is the one when we either get a comprehensive agreement or we don’t. In all of this negotiation, it is indeed like a Rubik’s cube. All of the pieces have to fit together just so to reach a final agreement that will ensure that Iran will not obtain a nuclear weapon and that the international community has the assurance it needs that Iran’s program will be exclusively peaceful.

Similarly, the Joint Plan of Action says that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. So one could agree to even 95 percent, and that last 5 percent might mean you’d never get to the agreement. So the only thing that matters at the end of the day is to get to the agreement, and that’s what we’re trying to do. And I think there are two principles that are important: Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and nothing is agreed until everyone agrees to it.

MODERATOR: Great. Yes, to the left of Lou.

QUESTION: Jay (inaudible) from Reuters. Would you say, though, that since the talks began in February that you have managed to narrow your decisions or narrow the gaps in (inaudible)?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What I would say is we understand each other a great deal, better than we did when we began, in terms of each other’s positions on the various issues of concern. It’s not that we didn’t know what each other’s positions were at the top lines, but a lot of this is quite technical, and the details matter enormously. And so we all have a much, much deeper understanding of each other’s positions. When one has that kind of understanding, you begin to see where there might be areas where one could reach agreement, you begin to see where the gaps are the largest, and where, in fact, you may indeed be close to an agreement. But again, until everything is agreed, nothing is agreed.

MODERATOR: Yes, here in the front.

QUESTION: Jonathan Tyrone with Bloomberg News. And just briefly, if you could characterize the Chinese envoy Wang’s comment about Russian participation as being, quote “utterly constructive,” and maybe give your side of that.

And then the broader question I’d like to pose is: There’s a lot of signaling, so the Iranian deputy foreign minister confirmed that Iran and Russia are, in fact, in trade talks about broadening trade, something that Mr. Kerry referred to specifically in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday. It looks like – he also said that they’re not close to signing a deal. But it’s obvious that there are contingency plans being formulated in the event of a failure of this process.

My question to you is: Is there a danger that the signals from the contingency planning overcome the positive signals that you’re trying to project through the actual process of dialogue that’s going through July?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What I would say is that my [Russian colleagues] played the constructive, focused role that they usually do. And we have – [Sergei Ryabkov] has worked as part of the P5+1 all through the Joint Plan of Action and now through the comprehensive agreement. And he and his team are very useful and important participants in this process.

In terms of the trade talks that Iran and Russia may be having, we have been very direct to both parties that should they bring this day to closure and engage in activity that is sanctionable under our sanctions, we will take appropriate action. And we’ve urged both parties not to move forward, to preserve the negotiating process.

Now, events happen in the world. You may have noticed that. And we cannot control them all. You may have noticed that as well. And so we have to deal with what happens in the world in general. You all have asked time and again has Ukraine made a difference, which was the reason you asked – or someone asked Mr. Wang about Russia’s participation. So we take these issues on board and we all stay focused on what we’re trying to do here, but we will all have to take whatever appropriate action we need to take under the laws of our lands.

MODERATOR: Great. Laurence Norman with The Wall Street Journal.

QUESTION: Hi. Thank you for doing this. Can you – I have several short questions for you. First of all, the timing for the next round was announced on May the 13^th, but there was no end date given. I mean, could they go on for five days, a week? Is there any sense of that?
And secondly, can you give any indication of what was discussed in the Joint Commission, issues that came up? And did you discuss the UN ambassador pick with (inaudible) yesterday?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Anything else?

QUESTION: Sure. (Laughter.) Can you rule out foreign ministers heading up to the next round – (laughter).

MODERATOR: I was wondering when that question would start getting asked.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Every time we come to any of these rounds, even when we have announced it’s going to be two days or three days, we call come with the presumption we will stay for as long as we need to stay. Obviously, as one begins to get into drafting, it is even more possible that you’ll stay longer than you planned to stay, so I assume that is why neither the – Lady Ashton – the High Representative of the European Union – nor Minister Zarif and their teams gave an end date. We were all planning for the week to be here and we’ll do whatever is necessary.

I think for all of us involved in this between now and July 20^th, we understand that there is no higher priority. The stakes here are quite high for all the reasons you all well know, because we are trying to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon and that their program is exclusively peaceful. And so everyone in the room has explicitly said they are ready to do whatever they need to do and change their schedules and their life to do what is necessary.
On the Joint Commission, it just concluded, but the agenda for that Joint Commission was really just to check in with each other – that’s why it’s at the expert level – have we kept all of our commitments on sanctions relief and other things that we needed to do, and is Iran keeping its commitments? I would note that secretary – Director General Amano made comments I saw in the press today affirming yet again that Iran has kept all of its commitments on their set of obligations. So it was just a check-in. It wasn’t a very long meeting, to tell you the truth, but a useful one, a very useful one.

In terms of the UN ambassador pick, what I would say is that you all have heard the comments from Jay Carney from the White House podium that we believe that this candidate, this possible nominee, is not viable from a U.S. perspective, and we have conveyed that directly to the Iranians through the channels that we have available to us. And I’m going to leave it there on that.

And as far as the foreign ministers flying in, that’s not planned, but --

QUESTION: Can I just check – so you’ve conveyed it through your channels, and maybe I’m not aware of what the U.S. diplomatic speak – I mean, does that mean – (laughter) – does that mean that you’ve conveyed it through the channel of being here and (inaudible)?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I’m not going to get into how that message got delivered to the Iranians.

MODERATOR: Great. In the back. Sorry, I can’t see you.

QUESTION: It’s George Jahn of the --

MODERATOR: Oh, hey, George. Sorry, continue.

QUESTION: George Jahn of the Associated Press. Assuming that any oil deal with Russia goes through, I think what you’re saying is that Russia could face potential sanctions. That would probably impact very, very hard on the talks, possibly resulting in less of the Russian cooperation that you’re talking about. But you are saying that the United States is going to take this step even if that happens, (inaudible).

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think the Secretary has been very clear about it, I’ve been very clear about it, others in our government have been very clear about it, that anyone who takes sanctionable action faces the potential for sanctions.
MODERATOR: Yes.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: But let me add one thing: As you all have said yourselves, they are in talks. Nothing is consummated, nothing is executed, nothing is done. I think that both Iran and Russia understand the stakes here. I expect and suspect that they understand that the priority in the first instance is to try to reach a comprehensive agreement if we can reach one.

MODERATOR: Yes.

QUESTION: Kasra Naji from BBC Persian Television. On the issue of the money that was released to the Iranians, the Iranians are having trouble getting their hands on it. Did this issue come up either in the talks or in your bilateral? How far are we into this? Is this close to a resolution? You said the two sides are sticking to their commitments under the Geneva agreement. Is this causing trouble within that context? Any information on that, I will be grateful. And secondly, on your bilateral, anything of interest?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Anything of interest I’m going to discuss, or anything of interest at any rate? (Laughter.)

On whether Iran has access to the repatriated funds that were part of our obligation under the Joint Plan of Action, we and the European Union on all of the sanctions-related obligations have done everything that we committed to doing. And I think if you ask the Iranians, they would say that we have complied with our obligations under the Joint Plan of Action.

And I know there have been stories written, there have been all kinds of issues. All of these things are always complicated to make happen, but we have made them happen. And so I think you will find – and part of the Joint Commission today was to check in on all of those issues. All the appropriate colleagues were there on both sides, and the report I just got out right before I walked in here is that everybody was grateful for the work that had been done on both sides and that everyone had complied with their obligations.
QUESTION: So the money is being released?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The – everything that we were supposed to do and the tranches we were supposed to do it has been done.

QUESTION: So the Iranians are saying that we have got our hands on the money?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: You’ll have to ask the Iranians.
As term – in terms of the bilateral, our bilateral was – as I’ve said to you now, it’s now normal. We met for about an hour and a half. We only talk about two things in the bilateral. One is nuclear negotiation. We make sure that Iran understands our perspective on all of the issues under discussion, and they’re able to tell us directly their views about our views. And the other thing we discuss and do so quite decidedly and in a focused way is our American citizens about which we are concerned – Mr. Hekmati, Pastor Abedini, and Robert Levinson – all of whom deserve to be home with their families.
MODERATOR: Yes, right here.

QUESTION: Thank you. (Inaudible) Television Network. Iranians have tweeted yesterday evening that Arak does not need to be converted to a light-water reactor. Can you please confirm about the decision because of the (inaudible)?

And my second question is: When you start drafting, you have to (inaudible) from all of the things that you have discussed till now. And is this going to work like a block by block, or can we expect everything being done is the next meeting, or are you going to say that, okay, let’s draft this part in what way and then come back? How will that (inaudible) work?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So I’m not going to get into the discussion of the mechanics of how we’re going to negotiate, because that’s also a subject of strategy in negotiations and that’s also a subject of the confidentiality of the negotiations in terms of how we’re going got proceed. Because then your next question will be, “Well, if you’re going to block by block, what will be the first issues you will discuss?” And I’m not going to get into that, because as I said to all of you, this is a negotiation with very high stakes, very crucial. We want to keep the details of the negotiation inside the room. And that answers your first question as well in the sense that all kinds of public comments are made. That usually happens in negotiations. They are meant to try to frame the negotiation. But the only thing that matters is what happens in the room, what gets agreed to among the parties in the room, and whether an agreement at the end of the day can be reached.

MODERATOR: Great. Yes, right here on the left.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) five weeks. Are you going to talk to them about the pace of this? Would you prefer that the next meeting to be sooner?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So you assume with that question that between now and when we come back here nothing is going on, and I can assure you that every single day work is being done on this negotiation. That happens in a variety of ways within capitals, among and between capitals, through our experts having meetings among themselves and with Iranian experts. There is not a day in my life now where I’m not spending at least some of my time, and I’m responsible for the whole world, but spending some of my time virtually every single day on this. And as we get further into this, it will be – it will take up most of my time and ultimately probably all of it.

MODERATOR: Yes, behind Laurence. Right there. Yes.

QUESTION: Thank you. (Inaudible) do you expect this to be finished here in Vienna, if it is finished at all, of course? Or are you going to go back to Geneva for a kind of signing ceremony? (Laughter.)

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The reason that we’re in Vienna is because we wanted, when we started the comprehensive agreement, to sort of end a chapter and begin a new one, so we switched cities. But from the beginning, the Iranians wanted to have a meeting in a city where there were UN facilities. So in fact, this whole process is out of a mandate from the UN Security Council, so it is a UN-based mandate. And so that’s why we’re in Vienna, because the UN is here present in Vienna as well.

So we expect we will continue to do our negotiations here in Vienna. I suppose someone could suggest that would change, but right now that’s my expectation. And I want to thank you and your city for hosting us so well. We are very well taken care of here. People help us get through traffic. The food is delicious when I get to leave the hotel and have some. Most of our meals we all eat together in the hotel where we’re having the negotiation, but tonight I’m going to get to go out sometime very late tonight and try some of your cuisine, so I thank you very much.
MODERATOR: Who else? Yes, right here.

QUESTION: Yeah, we’ve been talking a lot about bridging gaps --

MODERATOR: Where are you from? Sorry.

QUESTION: I’m sorry. (Inaudible) from Radio France International.

MODERATOR: Thanks.

QUESTION: Could you just specify one sort of example of gaps that you managed to bridge so far (inaudible)? Can you tell us what percentage of the gaps you (inaudible) so far at the beginning to bridge? (Inaudible.)

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So you’re right; I’m not going to identify where we bridge things, where there are gaps, where we see possibilities of agreement, where we see challenges, because it won’t help the negotiation. And as much as I care about the press and feel a responsibility to let people know what’s going on, I feel a greater responsibility to make sure that the negotiation stays inside the room.

And as for percentages, as I said earlier, it – at the end of the day what matters is whether we get to an agreement or not get to an agreement. And we could agree on 95 percent of the things, and that last 5 percent, which will probably be the hardest set of issues or issue, means we do or don’t get an agreement.

QUESTION: Well, how far are you from the 95 percent?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: (Laughter.) I don’t think we can say. We used the first round of the comprehensive agreement to lay out a framework for negotiating. Then the second and third rounds were to go into great detail on each of the issues of concern, to set up an understanding to get to drafting. So we’re now finished those two rounds. We have covered every issue of concern both here in Vienna and through experts’ groups meetings that have taken place in between, and political director’s consultations which have taken place in between, and now we are set to start drafting. And quite frankly, until you get down to it, and you get down to the details, we don’t know whether we’ll be able to get to the end of this or not. I hope we do, but I don’t know.

QUESTION: Yes. Stephanie Bell with BBC News. The – Minister Wang came out and said that this round of negotiations has gained considerable momentum. Would you agree with that assessment?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What I would say is that all of these rounds have been productive, have been constructive, have been thoughtful, have been professional. But what I would say is that now we have to get down to it. And then we will know whether we’re headed in a direction where we can get to a comprehensive agreement or not. We all want to. We all believe we can. But none of us know until we really get to the drafting and the text and the detail whether it’s possible or not.

MODERATOR: Yes, right there.

QUESTION: Stefan Graham, Danish Broadcasting. I have question to your bilateral meetings. Did the Iranians acknowledge the presence of all three American citizens in Iran? And are they any closer to being released?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I’m not going to get into the details of our conversation, and I do that both for the protection of those three Americans and for the privacy consideration of their families. But what I can say is that we have important conversations about all three and try to do whatever I can to get them closer and ultimately bring them home.
MODERATOR: Yes, who else? In the back.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me say just one thing. I meet with the families or people in the Department meet with the families, and it’s always terribly difficult. The Levinson family hasn’t seen Robert Levinson for seven years. Any of you – you all have family members, and just imagine what it’d be like if you hadn’t seen them for seven years and didn’t know where they were.

MODERATOR: Yes, in the back.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) for (inaudible), the Russian news agency. The last time there were four topics that were specified and we’re extracting this from. This time, this thing, you have said all issues have been discussed, which presumably means that you have to return to those four issues that were discussed the last time. Is that the case, and if so, why was there any need to return to them?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: As I said, we were using these two rounds to make sure we covered all the issues. The issues that we did last time, we sent our experts away to do some work products. And so we wanted to get the results of those to try to move forward a little bit more if we could. Again, these are very technical discussions, and I’ve learned an awful lot about nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, but I’m not a technical expert. So we need to rely on them to do a lot of work and bring it back to the political level. And we also knew that since we were going to move to drafting after this that we wanted to have one last review of every issue before we left here.

MODERATOR: Great. I think we have time for maybe a few more if we’ve answered all your questions. Yes, George, go ahead again.

QUESTION: Thanks. How many issues are there? I mean, how many categories? As Andrei said, the last time four issues were mentioned, (inaudible). (Inaudible) issues separated by topics?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: George, there’s a totality of issues, but each one of the issues has a myriad of subsets to it. So I couldn’t give you a count. And all of the issues interact with each other. And as I’ve said before, some – on some issues, if you can move forward, you may open up trade space on another issue. When we’ve talked about enrichment before, that has many, many pieces to it – from stockpiles to facilities to enrichment levels to centrifuge production. I mean, it’s just a myriad of subsets. And that’s true of every issue. So it’s quite impossible to sort of give you a count because it also requires you to categorize at what conceptual level you’re having the discussion.

What I can say is that we laid out in the first negotiating round all of the issues of concern to both parties, to both sides, and we have discussed them all. And they will all have to be addressed in some way.

MODERATOR: Let’s do a few more. Yes, right here in the front.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.) I just wonder: What do you think the positions? Is it more understanding or more accepting or more incentives or threatening, or what? Because it looks like still the Iranians are talking about redlines.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: As I said, what I care about most, what we all care about most, is what’s happening in the room, that all kinds of things will be said in public, and we understand that. We listen to it. It’s very important information. But what matters is what happens in the room. And it’s about all of the things you say – not threatening so much. It’s a very professional discussion. But it is, of course, understanding each other better. It is seeing if there are some technical solutions to problems of concern, whether in fact there are incentives, disincentives perhaps as well, but not in the manner in which you were suggesting.

I think the largest disincentive for everyone is if we can’t reach an agreement, then diplomacy has not succeeded. And we all appreciate that the best way to solve this problem is through diplomacy.

MODERATOR: Great. Maybe just a couple more. Yes, Laurence, we’ll go to you and then --

QUESTION: Very quick (inaudible) it was that you conveyed the message, was it conveyed directly that the U.S. could deny them a visa (inaudible)?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I’m not going to get into either what message was conveyed or to whom or how. I think we should leave it where it is right now, which you heard from Jay Carney, the spokesperson from the White House, say that we do not believe this is a viable candidate.

MODERATOR: Last one.

QUESTION: This is Indira’s question.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Indira’s question. (Laughter.)

MODERATOR: Even when she’s not here, she’s here.

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Tell her hi.

QUESTION: She’s always here. Possible military dimensions – is it enough for the IAEA to weigh in and determine those questions have been answered within that body, or does evidence that it has been cleared also need to convince the P5+1, the UN Security Council? I mean, where does the criteria, I guess, fit in?

SENIOR U.S. ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I’m not going to speak to specific criteria because that goes to where we are in the negotiation. What I can say to you is a couple of things that we’ve been very clear about. One, possible military dimensions is a central responsibility of what the IAEA is doing under its responsibilities. We want to support the IAEA and we want to encourage Iran to do everything they can to make substantive progress in the work they’re doing with the IAEA. And secondly, we have said that we will not be able to get to a comprehensive agreement without those issues being addressed.

MODERATOR: Great, thank you all for coming. Again, just as a reminder, this was on background. That means no names and no titles, just as a Senior U.S. Administration Official. And we will see all of you back here on May 13th. Thanks, guys.

BULL SHOALS, ARK., POLICE CHIEF ARRESTED FOR USING EXCESSIVE FORCE

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Chief of Bull Shoals, Ark., Police Department Arrested for Use of Excessive Force

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arkansas and the FBI announced that Daniel Sutterfield, 35, Chief of the Bull Shoals Police Department, was arrested yesterday on charges related to his use of excessive force in the arrest of a Bull Shoals resident and a related false report.  The complaint and complaint affidavit were unsealed today after Sutterfield’s initial appearance in court this morning before Magistrate Judge James R. Marshewski at the U.S. District Court in Harrison, Ark.
In the two-count complaint, Sutterfield was charged with one count of deprivation of rights and one count of falsifying a report.  The complaint charges that on July 9, 2013, Sutterfield used excessive force in the arrest of a Bull Shoals resident and then directed an officer to write a false and misleading report regarding the incident in order to cover up and justify the use of excessive force.

If convicted, Sutterfield faces a statutory maximum punishment of 10 years in prison for the civil rights charge involving excessive force and a statutory maximum punishment of 20 years in prison for the falsification charge.  If convicted, the defendant’s sentence will be determined by the court after review of factors unique to this case, including the defendant’s prior criminal record (if any), the defedant’s role in the offense and the characteristics of the violations.  The sentence will not exceed the statutory maximum and in most cases will be less than the maximum.

This case is being investigated by the FBI.  It is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Cindy Chung from the Civil Rights Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Kyra Jenner from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Arkansas.  
A federal complaint is a written statement of the essential facts of the offenses charged and must be made under oath before a magistrate judge.  The charges set forth in a complaint are merely accusations and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

AG HOLDER'S REMARKS ON SENTENCING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL TO REDUCED SENTENCING GUIDELINES IN SOME DRUG CASES

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Thursday, April 10, 2014

Statement by Attorney General Holder on Sentencing Commission’s Vote to Approve Reductions in Sentencing Guidelines for Nonviolent Drug Offenders
WASHINGTON—U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder—who testified before the U.S. Sentencing Commission last month in support of a proposal to reduce the federal sentencing guidelines for low-level, nonviolent drug offenders—released the following statement Thursday in response to the Commission voting to formally adopt those changes:

“This action by the U.S. Sentencing Commission represents a milestone in our effort to reshape the criminal justice system’s approach to dealing with drug offenders. This reduction in the federal sentencing guidelines, while modest, sends a strong message about the need to reserve the harshest penalties for the most serious criminals. At a time when prison and detention costs consume nearly a third of the Justice Department’s budget, it simply makes sense to explore alternatives to incarceration and renew our emphasis on treatment and prevention.

“It is now time for Congress to pick up the baton and advance legislation that would take further steps to reduce our overburdened prison system. Proposals like the bipartisan Smarter Sentencing Act would enhance the fairness of our criminal justice system while empowering law enforcement to focus limited resources on the most serious threats to public safety. I look forward to continuing to work with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle on these types of common-sense reforms.”

NSF TO EXPLORE LIFE INT THE OCEAN ABYSS

FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 
Into the abyss: Scientists explore one of Earth's deepest ocean trenches
What lives in the deepest part of the ocean--the abyss?

A team of researchers funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) will use the world's only full-ocean-depth, hybrid, remotely-operated vehicle, Nereus, and other advanced technology to find out. They will explore the Kermadec Trench at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

The trench, located off New Zealand, is the fifth deepest trench in the world. Its maximum depth is 32,963 feet or 6.24 miles (10,047 meters). It's also one of the coldest trenches due to the inflow of deep waters from Antarctica.

The 40-day expedition to the Kermadec Trench, which begins on April 12, 2014, kicks off a three-year collaborative effort.

The project, known as the Hadal Ecosystem Studies Project (HADES), will conduct the first systematic study of life in ocean trenches, comparing it to the neighboring abyssal plains--flat areas of the seafloor usually found at depths between 9,843 and 19,685 feet (3,000 and 6,000 meters).

"The proposal to study the deep-sea environment as part of HADES was high-risk, but, we hope, also high-reward," says David Garrison, program director in NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences, which funds HADES. "Through this exciting project, we will shine a light into the darkness of Earth's deep-ocean trenches, discovering surprising results all along the way."

Among least-explored environments on Earth

A result of extreme pressures in these deep-sea environments and the technical challenges involved in reaching them, ocean trenches remain among the least-explored environments on the planet.

"We know relatively little about life in ocean trenches--the deepest marine habitats on Earth," says Tim Shank, a biologist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, one of the participating organizations.

"We didn't have the technology to do these kinds of detailed studies before. This will be a first-order look at community structure, adaptation and evolution: how life exists in the trenches."

NSF HADES principal investigators are Shank, Jeff Drazen of the University of Hawaii and Paul Yancey of Whitman College.

Other participating researchers are Malcolm Clark and Ashley Rowden of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research in New Zealand, Henry Ruhl of the National Oceanography Centre at the University of Southampton, Alan Jamieson and Daniel Mayor of the University of Aberdeen and collaborators from the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the University of Oregon.

Telepresence technology aboard the research vessel Thomas G. Thompson will allow the public to share in the discoveries. Live-streaming Web events from the seafloor will include narration from the science team.

The researchers' work will also be chronicled in video, still images and blog updates on the expedition website.

How does life exist in a deep-sea trench?

What marine animals live in the Kermadec Trench, and how do they survive the crushing pressures found at that depth--some 15,000 pounds per square inch? These are among the questions the scientists will try to answer.

The biologists plan to conduct research at 15 stations, including sites in shallow water for testing purposes, sites along the trench axis and sites in the abyssal plain.

At each one, they will deploy free-falling, full-ocean-depth, baited imaging landers called Hadal-Landers and "elevators" outfitted with experimental equipment--including respirometers to see how animal metabolism functions, plus water-sampling bottles to investigate microbial activity.

The team will use Nereus, which can remain deployed for up to 12 hours, to collect biological and sediment samples.

Nereus will stream imagery from its video camera to the ship via a fiber-optic filament about the width of human hair.

The expedition will build on earlier studies of the Kermadec Trench by Jamieson and colleagues at the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research and the University of Tokyo. Using the Hadal-Lander, they documented new species of animals in the Kermadec and other trenches in the Pacific.

Ocean trenches: home to unique species

Once thought devoid of life, trenches may be home to many unique species. There is growing evidence that food is plentiful there. While it is still unclear why, organic material in the ocean may be transported by currents and deposited into the trenches.

In addition to looking at how food supply varies at different depths, the researchers will investigate the role energy demand and metabolic rates of trench organisms play in animal community structure.

"The energy requirements of hadal animals have never been measured," says Drazen, who will lead efforts to study distribution of food supply and the energetic demands of the trench organisms.

How animals in the trenches evolved to withstand high pressures is unknown, but Shank's objective is to compare the genomes of trench animals to piece together how they can survive there.

"The challenge is to determine whether life in the trenches holds novel evolutionary pathways that are distinct from others in the oceans," he says.

Water pressure, which at depths found in ocean trenches can be up to 1,100 times that at the surface, is known to inhibit the activity of certain proteins.

Yancey will investigate the role that piezolytes--small molecules that protect proteins from pressure--play in the adaptation of trench animals. Piezolytes, which Yancey discovered, may explain previous findings that not all deep-sea proteins are able to withstand high pressures.

"We're trying to understand how life can function under massive pressures in the hadal zone," says Yancey. "Pressure might be the primary factor determining which species are able to live in these extreme environments."

Trenches and climate change

Evidence also suggests that trenches act as carbon sinks, making the research relevant to climate change studies. The V-shaped topography along trench axes funnels resources--including surface-derived organic carbon--downward.

"The bulk of our knowledge of trenches is only from snapshot visits using mostly trawls and camera landers," Shank says.

"Only detailed systematic studies will reveal the role trenches may play as the final location of where most of the carbon and other chemicals are sequestered in the oceans."

-NSF-

THREE PEOPLE ACCUSED OF DEFRAUDING U.S. GOVERNMENT OF $32 MILLION

FROM:  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
Thursday, April 10, 2014
Three Men Charged with Allegedly Defrauding the FCC of Approximately $32 Million

Three individuals have been indicted for their alleged roles in an approximately $32 million fraud against a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) program designed to provide discounted telephone services to low-income customers.

The charges were announced today by Acting Assistant Attorney General David A. O’Neil of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Assistant Director in Charge Valerie Parlave of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, Inspector General David L. Hunt of the FCC Office of Inspector General (FCC-OIG) and Chief Richard Weber of the Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI).

Thomas E. Biddix, 44, of Melbourne, Fla., Kevin Brian Cox, 38, of Arlington, Tenn., and Leonard I. Solt, 49, of Land O’Lakes, Fla., were charged by a criminal indictment returned on April 9, 2014, and unsealed today in federal court in Tampa, Fla.   The indictment charges the three defendants with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and 15 substantive counts of wire fraud, false claims and money laundering.   The court also authorized a seizure warrant seeking the defendants’ ill-gotten gains, including the contents of multiple bank accounts, a yacht and several luxury automobiles.

As alleged in the indictment, the defendants engaged in a scheme to submit false claims with the federal Lifeline Program administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, a not-for-profit corporation designated and authorized by the FCC.   The program aims to provide affordable, nationwide telephone service to all Americans through discounted phone service for qualifying low-income customers.

The indictment alleges that the defendants owned and operated Associated Telecommunications Management Services LLC (ATMS), a holding company that owned and operated multiple subsidiary telephone companies that participated in the Lifeline Program.   Biddix, chairman of the board at ATMS, and Cox and Solt allegedly caused the submission of falsely inflated claims to the Lifeline Program between September 2009 and March 2011 that resulted in ATMS fraudulently receiving more than $32 million.

The investigation has been conducted by the FBI, FCC-OIG, and IRS-CI.   The United States Marshals Service provided assistance coordinating the seizures of assets.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Andrew H. Warren and Kyle Maurer of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, with assistance from Darrin McCullough of the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, and the United States Attorney’s Offices for the District of Columbia, the Western District of Tennessee and the Middle District of Florida.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

PRESIDENT OBAMA'S REMARKS AT LBJ LIBRARY CIVIL RIGHTS SUMMIT

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE

Remarks by the President at LBJ Presidential Library Civil Rights Summit

Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library
Austin, Texas

12:16 P.M. CDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  (Applause.)  Thank you so much.  Please, please, have a seat.  Thank you. 

What a singular honor it is for me to be here today.  I want to thank, first and foremost, the Johnson family for giving us this opportunity and the graciousness with which Michelle and I have been received. 

We came down a little bit late because we were upstairs looking at some of the exhibits and some of the private offices that were used by President Johnson and Mrs. Johnson.  And Michelle was in particular interested to -- of a recording in which Lady Bird is critiquing President Johnson’s performance.  (Laughter.)  And she said, come, come, you need to listen to this.  (Laughter.)  And she pressed the button and nodded her head.  Some things do not change -- (laughter) -- even 50 years later.

To all the members of Congress, the warriors for justice, the elected officials and community leaders who are here today  -- I want to thank you.

Four days into his sudden presidency -- and the night before he would address a joint session of the Congress in which he once served -- Lyndon Johnson sat around a table with his closest advisors, preparing his remarks to a shattered and grieving nation.

He wanted to call on senators and representatives to pass a civil rights bill -- the most sweeping since Reconstruction.  And most of his staff counseled him against it.  They said it was hopeless; that it would anger powerful Southern Democrats and committee chairmen; that it risked derailing the rest of his domestic agenda.  And one particularly bold aide said he did not believe a President should spend his time and power on lost causes, however worthy they might be.  To which, it is said, President Johnson replied, “Well, what the hell’s the presidency for?”  (Laughter and applause.)  What the hell’s the presidency for if not to fight for causes you believe in?

Today, as we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act, we honor the men and women who made it possible.  Some of them are here today.  We celebrate giants like John Lewis and Andrew Young and Julian Bond.  We recall the countless unheralded Americans, black and white, students and scholars, preachers and housekeepers -- whose names are etched not on monuments, but in the hearts of their loved ones, and in the fabric of the country they helped to change. 

But we also gather here, deep in the heart of the state that shaped him, to recall one giant man’s remarkable efforts to make real the promise of our founding:  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

Those of us who have had the singular privilege to hold the office of the Presidency know well that progress in this country can be hard and it can be slow, frustrating and sometimes you’re stymied.  The office humbles you.  You’re reminded daily that in this great democracy, you are but a relay swimmer in the currents of history, bound by decisions made by those who came before, reliant on the efforts of those who will follow to fully vindicate your vision.

But the presidency also affords a unique opportunity to bend those currents -- by shaping our laws and by shaping our debates; by working within the confines of the world as it is, but also by reimagining the world as it should be.

This was President Johnson’s genius.  As a master of politics and the legislative process, he grasped like few others the power of government to bring about change. 

LBJ was nothing if not a realist.  He was well aware that the law alone isn’t enough to change hearts and minds.  A full century after Lincoln’s time, he said, “Until justice is blind to color, until education is unaware of race, until opportunity is unconcerned with the color of men’s skins, emancipation will be a proclamation but not a fact.”

He understood laws couldn’t accomplish everything.  But he also knew that only the law could anchor change, and set hearts and minds on a different course.  And a lot of Americans needed the law’s most basic protections at that time.  As Dr. King said at the time, “It may be true that the law can’t make a man love me but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.”  (Applause.)

And passing laws was what LBJ knew how to do.  No one knew politics and no one loved legislating more than President Johnson.  He was charming when he needed to be, ruthless when required.  (Laughter.)  He could wear you down with logic and argument.  He could horse trade, and he could flatter.  “You come with me on this bill,” he would reportedly tell a key Republican leader from my home state during the fight for the Civil Rights Bill, “and 200 years from now, schoolchildren will know only two names:  Abraham Lincoln and Everett Dirksen!”  (Laughter.)  And he knew that senators would believe things like that.  (Laughter and applause.)

President Johnson liked power.  He liked the feel of it, the wielding of it.  But that hunger was harnessed and redeemed by a deeper understanding of the human condition; by a sympathy for the underdog, for the downtrodden, for the outcast.  And it was a sympathy rooted in his own experience.

As a young boy growing up in the Texas Hill Country, Johnson knew what being poor felt like.  “Poverty was so common,” he would later say, “we didn’t even know it had a name.”  (Laughter.)  The family home didn’t have electricity or indoor plumbing.  Everybody worked hard, including the children.  President Johnson had known the metallic taste of hunger; the feel of a mother’s calloused hands, rubbed raw from washing and cleaning and holding a household together.  His cousin Ava remembered sweltering days spent on her hands and knees in the cotton fields, with Lyndon whispering beside her, “Boy, there’s got to be a better way to make a living than this.  There’s got to be a better way.”

It wasn’t until years later when he was teaching at a so-called Mexican school in a tiny town in Texas that he came to understand how much worse the persistent pain of poverty could be for other races in a Jim Crow South.  Oftentimes his students would show up to class hungry.  And when he’d visit their homes, he’d meet fathers who were paid slave wages by the farmers they worked for.  Those children were taught, he would later say, “that the end of life is in a beet row, a spinach field, or a cotton patch.” 

Deprivation and discrimination -- these were not abstractions to Lyndon Baines Johnson.  He knew that poverty and injustice are as inseparable as opportunity and justice are joined.  So that was in him from an early age.

Now, like any of us, he was not a perfect man.  His experiences in rural Texas may have stretched his moral imagination, but he was ambitious, very ambitious, a young man in a hurry to plot his own escape from poverty and to chart his own political career.  And in the Jim Crow South, that meant not challenging convention.  During his first 20 years in Congress, he opposed every civil rights bill that came up for a vote, once calling the push for federal legislation “a farce and a sham.”  He was chosen as a vice presidential nominee in part because of his affinity with, and ability to deliver, that Southern white vote.  And at the beginning of the Kennedy administration, he shared with President Kennedy a caution towards racial controversy. 

But marchers kept marching.  Four little girls were killed in a church.  Bloody Sunday happened.  The winds of change blew.  And when the time came, when LBJ stood in the Oval Office -- I picture him standing there, taking up the entire doorframe, looking out over the South Lawn in a quiet moment -- and asked himself what the true purpose of his office was for, what was the endpoint of his ambitions, he would reach back in his own memory and he’d remember his own experience with want. 

And he knew that he had a unique capacity, as the most powerful white politician from the South, to not merely challenge the convention that had crushed the dreams of so many, but to ultimately dismantle for good the structures of legal segregation.  He’s the only guy who could do it -- and he knew there would be a cost, famously saying the Democratic Party may “have lost the South for a generation.” 

That’s what his presidency was for.  That’s where he meets his moment.  And possessed with an iron will, possessed with those skills that he had honed so many years in Congress, pushed and supported by a movement of those willing to sacrifice everything for their own liberation, President Johnson fought for and argued and horse traded and bullied and persuaded until ultimately he signed the Civil Rights Act into law. 

And he didn’t stop there -- even though his advisors again told him to wait, again told him let the dust settle, let the country absorb this momentous decision.  He shook them off.  “The meat in the coconut,” as President Johnson would put it, was the Voting Rights Act, so he fought for and passed that as well.  Immigration reform came shortly after.  And then, a Fair Housing Act.  And then, a health care law that opponents described as “socialized medicine” that would curtail America’s freedom, but ultimately freed millions of seniors from the fear that illness could rob them of dignity and security in their golden years, which we now know today as Medicare.  (Applause.)

What President Johnson understood was that equality required more than the absence of oppression.  It required the presence of economic opportunity.  He wouldn’t be as eloquent as Dr. King would be in describing that linkage, as Dr. King moved into mobilizing sanitation workers and a poor people’s movement, but he understood that connection because he had lived it.  A decent job, decent wages, health care -- those, too, were civil rights worth fighting for.  An economy where hard work is rewarded and success is shared, that was his goal.  And he knew, as someone who had seen the New Deal transform the landscape of his Texas childhood, who had seen the difference electricity had made because of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the transformation concretely day in and day out in the life of his own family, he understood that government had a role to play in broadening prosperity to all those who would strive for it.

“We want to open the gates to opportunity,” President Johnson said, “But we are also going to give all our people, black and white, the help they need to walk through those gates.” 

Now, if some of this sounds familiar, it’s because today we remain locked in this same great debate about equality and opportunity, and the role of government in ensuring each.  As was true 50 years ago, there are those who dismiss the Great Society as a failed experiment and an encroachment on liberty; who argue that government has become the true source of all that ails us, and that poverty is due to the moral failings of those who suffer from it.  There are also those who argue, John, that nothing has changed; that racism is so embedded in our DNA that there is no use trying politics -- the game is rigged. 

But such theories ignore history.  Yes, it’s true that, despite laws like the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act and Medicare, our society is still racked with division and poverty.  Yes, race still colors our political debates, and there have been government programs that have fallen short.  In a time when cynicism is too often passed off as wisdom, it’s perhaps easy to conclude that there are limits to change; that we are trapped by our own history; and politics is a fool’s errand, and we’d be better off if we roll back big chunks of LBJ’s legacy, or at least if we don’t put too much of our hope, invest too much of our hope in our government.

I reject such thinking.  (Applause.)  Not just because Medicare and Medicaid have lifted millions from suffering; not just because the poverty rate in this nation would be far worse without food stamps and Head Start and all the Great Society programs that survive to this day.  I reject such cynicism because I have lived out the promise of LBJ’s efforts.  Because Michelle has lived out the legacy of those efforts.  Because my daughters have lived out the legacy of those efforts.  Because I and millions of my generation were in a position to take the baton that he handed to us.  (Applause.)

Because of the Civil Rights movement, because of the laws President Johnson signed, new doors of opportunity and education swung open for everybody -- not all at once, but they swung open.  Not just blacks and whites, but also women and Latinos; and Asians and Native Americans; and gay Americans and Americans with a disability.  They swung open for you, and they swung open for me.  And that’s why I’m standing here today -- because of those efforts, because of that legacy.  (Applause.)

And that means we’ve got a debt to pay.  That means we can’t afford to be cynical.  Half a century later, the laws LBJ passed are now as fundamental to our conception of ourselves and our democracy as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  They are foundational; an essential piece of the American character. 

But we are here today because we know we cannot be complacent.  For history travels not only forwards; history can travel backwards, history can travel sideways.  And securing the gains this country has made requires the vigilance of its citizens.  Our rights, our freedoms -- they are not given.  They must be won.  They must be nurtured through struggle and discipline, and persistence and faith. 

And one concern I have sometimes during these moments, the celebration of the signing of the Civil Rights Act, the March on Washington -- from a distance, sometimes these commemorations seem inevitable, they seem easy.  All the pain and difficulty and struggle and doubt -- all that is rubbed away.  And we look at ourselves and we say, oh, things are just too different now;  we couldn’t possibly do what was done then -- these giants, what they accomplished.  And yet, they were men and women, too.  It wasn’t easy then.  It wasn’t certain then. 

Still, the story of America is a story of progress.  However slow, however incomplete, however harshly challenged at each point on our journey, however flawed our leaders, however many times we have to take a quarter of a loaf or half a loaf -- the story of America is a story of progress.  And that’s true because of men like President Lyndon Baines Johnson.  (Applause.)

In so many ways, he embodied America, with all our gifts and all our flaws, in all our restlessness and all our big dreams.  This man -- born into poverty, weaned in a world full of racial hatred -- somehow found within himself the ability to connect his experience with the brown child in a small Texas town; the white child in Appalachia; the black child in Watts.  As powerful as he became in that Oval Office, he understood them.  He understood what it meant to be on the outside.  And he believed that their plight was his plight too; that his freedom ultimately was wrapped up in theirs; and that making their lives better was what the hell the presidency was for.  (Applause.)

And those children were on his mind when he strode to the podium that night in the House Chamber, when he called for the vote on the Civil Rights law.  “It never occurred to me,” he said, “in my fondest dreams that I might have the chance to help the sons and daughters of those students” that he had taught so many years ago, “and to help people like them all over this country.  But now I do have that chance.  And I’ll let you in on a secret -- I mean to use it.  And I hope that you will use it with me.”  (Applause.)

That was LBJ’s greatness.  That’s why we remember him.  And if there is one thing that he and this year’s anniversary should teach us, if there’s one lesson I hope that Malia and Sasha and young people everywhere learn from this day, it’s that with enough effort, and enough empathy, and enough perseverance, and enough courage, people who love their country can change it.

In his final year, President Johnson stood on this stage, racked with pain, battered by the controversies of Vietnam, looking far older than his 64 years, and he delivered what would be his final public speech. 

“We have proved that great progress is possible,” he said.  “We know how much still remains to be done.  And if our efforts continue, and if our will is strong, and if our hearts are right, and if courage remains our constant companion, then, my fellow Americans, I am confident, we shall overcome.”  (Applause.)

We shall overcome.  We, the citizens of the United States.  Like Dr. King, like Abraham Lincoln, like countless citizens who have driven this country inexorably forward, President Johnson knew that ours in the end is a story of optimism, a story of achievement and constant striving that is unique upon this Earth.  He knew because he had lived that story.  He believed that together we can build an America that is more fair, more equal, and more free than the one we inherited.  He believed we make our own destiny.  And in part because of him, we must believe it as well.

Thank you.  God bless you.  God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.) 

END
12:46 P.M. CDT

RECENT U.S. AIR FORCE PHOTOS

FROM:  U.S. AIR FORCE 

Heritage Flight Training Conference 
An F-16 Fighting Falcon joins in formation with a P-40 Warhawk (front), P-51 Mustang (bottom), and an F-86 Sabre (top) during the Heritage Flight Training Course March 2, 2014, over Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz. During the course, aircrews practiced ground and flight training to allow civilian pilots of historic military aircraft and current Air Force fighter pilots to safely fly in formations together. (U.S Air Force photo-Airman 1st Class Cheyenne Morigeau).

Eglin hosts Army Stinger missile testing 
Col. Terrence Howard fires a FIM-92 Stinger during testing March 14, 2014, at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. Stinger Based Systems, a division of the Army’s cruise missile defense system unit, test-fired more than 30 Stingers at aerial and fixed targets on the base’s range throughout the week. Howard is the Cruise Missile Defense Systems project manager. (U.S. Air Force photo-Samuel King Jr.)

FTC TELLS FACEBOOK IT MUST HONOR WHATSAPP PRIVACY OBLIGATIONS

FROM:  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
FTC Notifies Facebook, WhatsApp of Privacy Obligations in Light of Proposed Acquisition

The director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection notified Facebook and WhatsApp about their obligations to protect the privacy of their users in light of Facebook’s proposed acquisition of WhatsApp.

In a letter to the two companies, Bureau Director Jessica Rich noted that WhatsApp has made clear privacy promises to consumers, and that both companies have told consumers that after any acquisition, WhatsApp will continue its current privacy practices.

“We want to make clear that, regardless of the acquisition, WhatsApp must continue to honor these promises to consumers. Further, if the acquisition is completed and WhatsApp fails to honor these promises, both companies could be in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act and, potentially, the FTC’s order against Facebook,” the letter states.

In 2011, Facebook settled FTC charges that it deceived consumers by failing to keep its privacy promises. Under the terms of the FTC’s order against the company, it must get consumers’ affirmative consent before making changes that override their privacy settings, among other requirements.

The letter notes that before making any material changes to how they use data already collected from WhatsApp subscribers, the companies must get affirmative consent. In addition, the letter notes that the companies must not misrepresent the extent to which they maintain the privacy or security of user data. The letter also recommends that consumers be given the opportunity to opt out of any future changes to how newly-collected data is used.        

SECRETARY HAGEL SPEAKS WITH UKRANIAN DEFENSE MINISTER KOVAL

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Secretary Speaks With Acting Ukrainian Defense Minister
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 10, 2014 – En route home from his Asia-Pacific trip, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel placed an in-flight call to Ukraine's Acting Minister of Defense Mykhaylo Koval, Assistant Press Secretary Carl Woog said in a statement issued today.

Woog’s statement reads as follows:
Secretary Hagel spoke by phone with Ukraine's Acting Minister of Defense Mykhaylo Koval on his return flight to Washington from Beijing. It was their first conversation since the minister took office last month.

Secretary Hagel commended Minister Koval for his leadership of the Armed Forces during this critical time for Ukraine and thanked him for hosting recent bilateral defense consultations in Kyiv. They discussed the situation in Crimea, as well as Russia's military activities along Ukraine's borders and attempts to destabilize communities in Eastern Ukraine.

Secretary Hagel told Minister Koval that the United States will continue to stand with Ukraine. They both pledged to remain in close contact going forward.

U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS FOR APRIL 10, 2014

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
CONTRACTS

AIR FORCE

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc., Poway, Calif., has been awarded a $141,444,171 delivery order (0089) to contract (FA8620-10-G-3038) to accomplish non-recurring engineering development of the Block 50 ground control stations (GCS) and production of two system test and qualification system integration laboratories (SIL), one technical order development SIL, two fixed GCS, two mobile GCS, two software developer kits, and the associated spares for the Block 50 configuration. Block 50 includes the updated design goals from the legacy GCS of creating an ergonomic crew workstation, enhancing situational awareness, and reducing or eliminating known deficiencies in legacy GCS. Block 50 includes the installation and integration of six 24 inches touchscreen displays, an enhanced heads-up display, primary control display, F-16 modeled stick and throttle, and new control panels that provide one touch access to critical and common functions. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Work will be performed at Poway, Calif., and is expected to be completed by Feb. 18, 2018. Fiscal 2014 through fiscal 2018 research and development funds in the amount of $19,363,327 will be obligated at time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity.

Jacobs Technology Inc., Tullahoma, Tenn., has been awarded an estimated $67,000,000 modification (14) for an existing indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (FA9200-12-D-0085) with multiple funding appropriations at the task order level for technical and engineering acquisition support services. This modification provides for the exercise of an option for additional diverse engineering, technical and acquisition support services being provided under the basic contract. Work will be performed at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., and is expected to be completed by Oct. 18, 2014. The current action includes unclassified foreign military sales to Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordon, Kuwait, Malaysia, Morocco, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, United Arab Emerites and United Kingdom. The portion of the current effort that supports FMS is 2.56 percent. Fiscal 2013 and 2014 research development test and evaluation, operations and maintenance, and procurement funds will be obligated incrementally when available. Air Force Test Center/PZZ, Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., is the contracting activity.

ARMY

Sierra Nevada Corp., Sparks, Nev. was awarded a sole-source $46,500,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee multi-year, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for dismounted counter radio-controlled, improvised explosive device, electronic warfare spares and services to sustain the Thor III and Baldr CREW systems. Funding and work performance location will be determined with each order. Estimated completion date is April 9, 2017. Army Contracting Command, Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., is the contracting activity (W15QKN-14-D-0041).
UNIT Co., Anchorage, Alaska, was awarded a $25,546,700 firm-fixed-price contract with options to design and construct a warm storage hangar at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. Fiscal 2014 military construction funds in the amount of $25,546,700 were obligated at the time of the award. Estimated completion date is Dec. 31, 2015. Bids were solicited via the Internet with six received. Work will be performed in Fairbanks, Alaska. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, is the contracting activity (W911KB-14-C-0007).

Northrop Grumman Information Systems, McLean, Va., was awarded a $25,220,493 modification (P00016) to contract W15QKN-13-F-0017 to exercise option year one for Army Knowledge Online Enterprise Services web-based enterprise information services. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance, Army funds in the amount of $10,473,522 were obligated at the time of the award. Estimated completion date is April 12, 2015. Work will be performed at Fort Belvoir, Va. Army Contracting Command, Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., is the contracting activity.

Louisiana Workforce Commission, Baton Rouge, La., was awarded a $9,580,960 modification (P00006) to contract W9124E-12-D-0002 to provide full food service to training units at the 162nd Infantry Brigade and rotational training units at the Joint Readiness Training Center, Fort Polk, La. Funding and work performance location will be determined with each order. Estimated completion date is May 9, 2015. Army Contracting Command, Fort Polk, La., is the contracting activity.

Tunista Construction LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska, was awarded a $9,525,000 firm-fixed-price contract to construct a company operations facility at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. Fiscal 2014 military construction funds in the amount of $9,525,000 were obligated at the time of the award. Estimated completion date is Oct. 16, 2015. Bids were solicited via the Internet with three received. Work will be performed at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, is the contracting activity (W911KB-14-C-0005).

NAVY

Kiewit Infrastructure West Co., Vancouver, Wash. (N44255-14-D-9003); Manson Construction Co., Seattle, Wash. (N44255-14-D-9004); Marathon Construction Co.,* Lakeside, Calif. (N44255-14-D-9005); Nova Group, Inc., Napa, Calif. (N44255-14-D-9006); Triton Marine Construction, Bremerton, Wash. (N44255-14-D-9007); Watts Construction LLC, Honolulu, Hawaii (N44255-14-D-9008), are each being awarded a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity multiple award construction contract for design-build or design-bid-build construction of marine waterfront facilities located primarily within the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Northwest area of responsibility (AOR). The maximum dollar value for all six contracts combined is $99,000,000. The work to be performed provides for new construction, repair, alteration, and renovation. Types of projects include, but are not limited to, piers, wharves, quay walls, bulkheads, sea walls, dry docks, boat ramps, docks and marinas, shore protection, rip rap, breakwaters, wave attenuation, mooring dolphins, buoys, primary and secondary fendering, pile driving, sheet piles, and dredging and disposal. Work also includes the design and construction of all utilities and other facilities in the marine waterfront area and/or related to marine waterfront operations to support Navy vessels and port operations. Work will be performed primarily within the NAVFAC Northwest AOR which includes Washington (92 percent), Oregon (2 percent), Alaska (2 percent), Idaho (1 percent), Montana (1 percent), and Wyoming (1 percent). Work may also be performed in the remainder of the United States (1 percent). The term of the contract is not to exceed 60 months, with an expected completion date of April 2019. Navy working capital funds in the amount of $150,000 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website, with 10 proposals received. These six contractors may compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contract. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Northwest, Silverdale, Wash., is the contracting activity.

Guam MACC Builders A Joint Venture, Honolulu, Hawaii, is being awarded $25,692,000 for firm-fixed-price task order 0004 under a previously awarded multiple award construction contract (N62742-10-D-1309) for the design and construction of an emergent repair facility at Naval Base, Guam. The work to be performed provides for the design and construction of a low rise (two-story) addition to the existing emergent repair facility. The project will expand the existing two story reinforced concrete structure with pile foundation, reinforced concrete walls and roof structure, and beam column frame. Built in equipment includes a passenger/freight elevator, an overhead crane and an emergency diesel generator and a radon mitigation system. The task order also contains one unexercised option, which if exercised would increase cumulative task order value to $28,007,544. Work will be performed in Santa Rita, Guam, and is expected to be completed by May 2016. Fiscal 2010 and 2014 military construction, Navy contract funds in the amount of $25,692,000 are being obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Four proposals were received for this task order. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pacific, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, is the contracting activity.

Phoenix Air Group Inc., Cartersville, Ga., is being awarded a $16,320,996 firm-fixed-price, cost-reimbursable indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for contractor owned and operated aircraft for range clearing services for missile testing and fleet training in support of the commander, naval air forces, and various Department of Defense agencies. Work will be performed in Barking Sands, Hawaii, and is expected to be completed in April 2019. No funds are being obligated at time of award. Funds will be obligated against individual delivery orders as they are issued. This contract was competitively procured via a request for proposals; one offer was received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00421-14-D-0023).
Huntington Ingalls Inc., Newport News, Va., is being awarded a $7,674,064 modification under a previously awarded contract (N00024-11-C-2103) to exercise an option for engineering and technical design services to support research and development of advanced submarine technologies for current and future submarine platforms. The contract provides for R&D studies to support the manufacturability, maintainability, producibility, reliability, manning, survivability, hull integrity, performance, structural, weight/margin, stability, arrangements, machinery systems, acoustics, hydrodynamics, ship control, logistics, human factors, materials, weapons handling and stowage, submarine safety, and affordability of submarines. The program also supports near term insertion of Virginia class technology; identification of Ohio class replacement technology options; future submarine concepts; and core technologies. Work will be performed in Newport News, Va., and is expected to be completed by January 2015. Fiscal 2014 research, development, test and evaluation contract funds in the amount of $279,451 will be obligated at the time of modification award. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity.

The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Mo., is being awarded a $6,632,674 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N68335-10-C-0491) for eight Reconfigurable Transportable Consolidated Automated Support System - Depot (RTCASS-D) conversion kits. These kits include the hardware and software required to convert eight base configuration RTCASS stations into RTCASS-D configurations, RTCASS-D specific test program sets development training, and the development and integration of eight high speed sub-system ancillary sets. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Mo., and is expected to be completed in August 2015. Fiscal 2012, 2013, and 2014 aircraft procurement, Navy funds in the amount of $6,632,674 will be obligated on this award, $1,704,605 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, N.J., is the contracting activity.

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

River Trading Company Ltd.,* Cincinnati, Ohio, has been awarded a maximum $16,871,250 firm-fixed-price contract for bituminous coal. This is a competitive acquisition, and four offers were received. This is a one-year base contract with no option periods. Locations of performance are Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky with a May 31, 2015 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 through fiscal 2015 military service funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Va., (SPE600-14-D-0651).
Carter Industries Inc.,** Olive Hill, Ky., has been awarded a maximum $12,761,280 modification (P00102) exercising the third option period on a one-year base contract (SPM1C1-11-D-1067) with three one-year option periods for flyer’s coveralls. This is a firm-fixed-price contract. Location of performance is Kentucky with an April 15, 2015 performance completion date. Using military services are Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 through fiscal 2015 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
Elbit Systems America Fort Worth Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, has been awarded a maximum $12,255,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for helicopter improved signal data converter. This is a sole source acquisition. This is a two-year base contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Texas with an April 9, 2016 performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., (SPRBL1-14-D-0004).
*Small Business
**Small In HubZone Business

NASA'S VIEW OF FROZEN FJORD IN EAST GREENLAND

FROM:  NASA

This view of the frozen fjord downstream of Violingletscher (Violin Glacier) in Østgrønland (East Greenland) was seen during an Operation IceBridge survey flight on April 5, 2014. NASA’s Operation IceBridge images Earth's polar ice in unprecedented detail to better understand processes that connect the polar regions with the global climate system. IceBridge utilizes a highly specialized fleet of research aircraft and the most sophisticated suite of innovative science instruments ever assembled to characterize annual changes in thickness of sea ice, glaciers, and ice sheets. In addition, IceBridge collects critical data used to predict the response of earth’s polar ice to climate change and resulting sea-level rise. IceBridge also helps bridge the gap in polar observations between NASA's ICESat satellite missions. > Read more about IceBridge's 2014 Arctic campaign. Image Credit-NASA-Michael Studinger.