THE CENTRAL VIRGINIA SEISMIC ZONE CAN BE A MOVER AND A SHAKER

Pentagon Gets Jolt In 2011 Earthquake.  Credit:  Wikimedia Commons.

FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

What Will You Do If an Earthquake Hits?

The Central Virginia Seismic Zone, it's called, and it sometimes shakes everything in sight.

As long ago as 1774, people in central Virginia felt small earthquakes and suffered damage from intermittent larger ones. A magnitude 4.8 quake happened in 1875.

Then last year, on August 23, 2011, a magnitude 5.8 quake hit the same region. Several aftershocks, ranging up to magnitude 4.5, occurred after the main tremor.

Will there be another such quake in the mid-Atlantic region?

Whether you live in that part of the U.S., or elsewhere around the country or the world, would you know what to do in an earthquake?

An event on October 18, 2012, provides some answers.

The Great ShakeOut is a series of earthquake drills that will be held in California and many other western states, along with southeast states and Washington D.C., several U.S. territories, and Canada and other countries.

Great ShakeOut drills encourage people to practice how to "Drop, Cover and Hold On" to protect themselves during earthquakes. Other preparedness actions are also recommended.

The first ShakeOut drill was held in southern California in 2008, based on the "ShakeOut Scenario," a study of a large earthquake on the San Andreas fault.

The Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) at the University of Southern California, funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), developed advanced simulations of the quake to estimate potential losses and casualties, and to show the public how shaking would be felt throughout the region.

SCEC staff members coordinate the research of hundreds of geologists and other scientists across the country, and communicate important information to reduce earthquake risks.

SCEC created a registration system where participants in the Great ShakeOut could be counted in the overall total.

The Great ShakeOut website provides a basis for motivating earthquake preparedness activities that may be adapted for use by states, regions and countries worldwide, each of which have developed new materials and concepts.

"ShakeOut is a great example of the public benefit from long-term NSF investments in basic scientific research and education," says Greg Anderson, program director in NSF's Division of Earth Sciences.

"Long-term support for SCEC has advanced our fundamental understanding of earthquakes and the threats they pose. ShakeOut will help people nationwide learn to respond to earthquakes safely, and to protect their families and themselves."

Part of the appeal of the ShakeOut is its simplicity.

At a minimum, participants practice "Drop, Cover, and Hold On," the recommended procedure for self-protection in an earthquake. Many schools and other organizations also practice additional aspects of their preparedness plans.

The 2012 Great ShakeOut will be held on October 18, 2012, at 10:18 a.m. local time in each participating state or region, with more than 12 million people in businesses, government offices, neighborhoods, schools and households expected to take part.

"ShakeOut participation continues to grow, with new regions involved each year," says Mark Benthien, SCEC education and outreach director. "For example, the California drill is already larger than last year's record 8.6 million participants and still growing."

Registering allows SCEC to know what people are planning for their drills, and how many are involved. Once registered, participants receive updates and preparedness information.

Because of the success of the ShakeOut in California, SCEC has worked with other regions to create ShakeOut drills, complete with websites and registration systems all managed by SCEC.

In addition to the areas already mentioned that are holding drills on October 18th, the central U.S. region, which held drills in February, 2012, will do so again in February, 2013.

Utah held its first ShakeOut in April, 2012; New Zealand held the first nationwide ShakeOut in September, 2012; and ShakeOut drills are being organized across Japan.

"ShakeOut is changing the way people and organizations are approaching community-wide earthquake preparedness," says Benthien. "Our goal is to make it easy for them to get better prepared so they survive, and recover quickly."

If you live in central Virginia, anywhere along the East Coast, or, in fact, anywhere around the world, participating in the Great ShakeOut could save your property--and your life.

U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PANETTA'S SPEECH ON DEFENDING NATION AGAINST CYBER ATTACKS

FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

"Defending the Nation from Cyber Attack" (Business Executives for National Security)

As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta, New York, New York, Thursday, October 11, 2012
Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much for this wonderful evening and the chance to enjoy such terrific company and be able to express my deepest gratitude to this organization for all of the great things that it does on behalf of those that serve in our military.

Bruce, my greatest thanks to you for your kind remarks and for your leadership here.

And I -- I accept this award, not so much for myself but I accept it on behalf of the men and women in uniform who are putting their lives on the line every night, every day in order to protect this country.

I want to congratulate the troops from the 82nd, they're -- they're the very best.

I also want to congratulate Frank for receiving this reward, the great service that he does in helping to -- to find jobs for those that are returning so that they can be part of -- of their community after serving this country, to protect their community is outstanding. And besides that, and perhaps most importantly, he's Italian. It's nice to have another Italian honored this evening.

I also want to thank Fran Townsend. She's a great friend and, obviously, a tremendous Master of Ceremonies this evening. And the reason I -- the reason I asked Fran to serve on the board is because she is bright. She is capable. She's dedicated. She -- she's a straight talker, she knows what she's talking about. She's dedicated to this country and in a room of a lot of ugly old guys, she's not bad to look at.

General Meigs, thank you for your leadership as well and for your distinguished service to this country.

I am truly honored to be with you this evening. We gather in the midst of a very important national contest. It's one that will continue to play out over the coming weeks in unpredictable ways before a final decision is reached. And in fact, some of the key players are dueling tonight.

So I want to be very clear about where my loyalties lie in this contest, I have always been and always will be for the New York Yankees.

And I think the score is 1-to-1. Right?

In all seriousness, I really do appreciate the opportunity to come back to this great city. This is -- New York is a special place for me and I'll tell you why. I am -- I'm the son of Italian immigrants and both of my parents came through New York, came through Ellis Island like so many millions of others. That made this a special place for me.

I also had the opportunity to be here and work as an Executive Assistant to the Mayor of New York City, a guy named John Lindsay at the time.

I also had the opportunity to work very closely with the delegation in Congress. As a matter of fact, in Washington.

I lived with Chuck Schumer and a group of other members of Congress in what was well known as Animal House in Washington. And you can't live with Schumer and not develop an appreciation for New York City.

I also served on the Board of the New York Stock Exchange for six years. And I was on the board when 9/11 took place and I want you to know how much at that time I appreciated the great courage of the people of New York in the face of that attack. And I remembered that courage when I had a chance to lead the operation that went after Bin Laden.

We sent a very clear message to the world. We sent a very clear message to terrorists that in fact, don't ever attack this country because you will not get away with it.



U.S. CYBER BRIGADE


I've long appreciated, from my own experience, New York's role as the center of gravity for our nation's economy. This is where it's at. And for that reason, it's an honor to be able to speak before this kind of distinguished audience of business leaders and innovators because you understand what a strong national defense is all about and you understand that a strong national defense and a strong economy go hand in hand.

With that in mind, tonight I'd like to discuss with you an issue that I think is at the very nexus of business and national security: the threats facing the United States in cyberspace and the role that the Defense Department must play in defending this country from those kinds of threats.

We're on an aircraft carrier, a famous and great aircraft carrier and it's a fitting and appropriate venue to have this discussion. This ship and the technology that's on display at this museum, attests to one of the central achievements of the United States in the 20th century, our ability to project power and strength across the land, across the high seas, across the skies and across outer space.

We secured those domains. Securing them helped ensure that they were used to advance peace and prosperity and were not used to promote war and aggression.

It is with that same goal in mind, today we have to address a new domain that we must secure to have peace and prosperity in the world of tomorrow.

Cyberspace has fundamentally transformed the global economy. It's transformed our way of life, providing two billion people across the world with instant access to information to communication, to economic opportunities.

Cyberspace is the new frontier, full of possibilities to advance security and prosperity in the 21st century. And yet, with these possibilities, also come new perils and new dangers.

The Internet is open. It's highly accessible, as it should be. But that also presents a new terrain for warfare. It is a battlefield of the future where adversaries can seek to do harm to our country, to our economy, and to our citizens.

I know that when people think of cybersecurity today, they worry about hackers and criminals who prowl the Internet, steal people's identities, steal sensitive business information, steal even national security secrets. Those threats are real and they exist today.

But the even greater danger -- the greater danger facing us in cyberspace goes beyond crime and it goes beyond harassment. A cyber attack perpetrated by nation states are violent extremists groups could be as destructive as the terrorist attack on 9/11. Such a destructive cyber-terrorist attack could virtually paralyze the nation.

Let me give you some examples of the kinds of attacks that we have already experienced.

In recent weeks, as many of you know, some large U.S. financial institutions were hit by so-called Distributed Denial of Service attacks. These attacks delayed or disrupted services on customer websites. While this kind of tactic isn't new, the scale and speed with which it happened was unprecedented.

But even more alarming is an attack that happened two months ago when a very sophisticated virus called Shamoon infected computers in the Saudi Arabian State Oil Company Aramco. Shamoon included a routine called a 'wiper', coded to self-execute. This routine replaced crucial systems files with an image of a burning U.S. flag. But it also put additional garbage data that overwrote all the real data on the machine. More than 30,000 computers that it infected were rendered useless and had to be replaced. It virtually destroyed 30,000 computers.

Then just days after this incident, there was a similar attack on RasGas of Qatar, a major energy company in the region. All told, the Shamoon virus was probably the most destructive attack that the private sector has seen to date.

Imagine the impact an attack like that would have on your company or your business.

These attacks mark a significant escalation of the cyber threat and they have renewed concerns about still more destructive scenarios that could unfold.

For example, we know that foreign cyber actors are probing America's critical infrastructure networks. They are targeting the computer control systems that operate chemical, electricity and water plants and those that guide transportation throughout this country.

We know of specific instances where intruders have successfully gained access to these control systems.

We also know that they are seeking to create advanced tools to attack these systems and cause panic and destruction and even the loss of life.

Let me explain how this could unfold. An aggressor nation or extremist group could use these kinds of cyber tools to gain control of critical switches. They could, for example, derail passenger trains or even more dangerous, derail trains loaded with lethal chemicals.

They could contaminate the water supply in major cities or shutdown the power grid across large parts of the country.

The most destructive scenarios involve cyber actors launching several attacks on our critical infrastructure at one time, in combination with a physical attack on our country. Attackers could also seek to disable or degrade critical military systems and communication networks.

The collective result of these kinds of attacks could be a "cyber Pearl Harbor:" an attack that would cause physical destruction and the loss of life. In fact, it would paralyze and shock the nation and create a new, profound sense of vulnerability.

As director of the CIA and now Secretary of Defense, I have understood that cyber attacks are every bit as real as the more well-known threats like terrorism, nuclear weapons proliferation and the turmoil that we see in the Middle East.

And the cyber threats facing this country are growing. With dramatic advances, this is an area of dramatic developments in cyber technology. With that happening, potential aggressors are exploiting vulnerabilities in our security. But the good news is this, we are aware of this potential. Our eyes are wide open to these kinds of threats and we are a nation that, thank God, is on the cutting edge of this new technology. We are the best and we have to stay there.

The Department of Defense, in large part through the capabilities of the National Security Agency, NSA, has develop the world's most sophisticated system to detect cyber intruders and attackers.

We are acting aggressively to get ahead of this problem, putting in place measures to stop cyber attacks dead in their tracks. We are doing this as part of a broad whole of government effort to confront cyber threats.

The Department of Homeland Security has the lead for domestic cybersecurity, the FBI also has a key part to play and investigating and preventing cyber-attacks. And our intelligence agencies, of course, are focused on this potential threat as well.

The State Department is trying to forge international consensus on the roles and responsibilities of nations to help secure cyberspace.

The Department of Defense also has a role. It is a supporting role but it is an essential role. And tonight I want to explain what that means. But first let me make clear what it does not mean.

It does not mean that the Department of Defense will monitor citizens' personal computers. We're not interested in personal communication or in e-mails or in providing the day to day security of private and commercial networks. That is not our goal. That is not our job. That is not our mission.

Our mission is to defend the nation. We defend. We deter, and if called upon, we take decisive action to protect our citizens. In the past, we have done so thorough operations on land and at sea, in the skies and in space. In this century, the United States military must help defend the nation in cyberspace as well.

If a foreign adversary attacked U.S. soil, the American people have every right to expect their national defense forces to respond.

If a crippling cyber attack were launched against our nation, the American people must be protected. And if the Commander in Chief orders a response, the Defense Department must be ready to obey that order and to act.

To ensure that we fulfill our role to defend the nation in cyberspace, the department is focusing on three main tracks.

One, developing new capabilities.

Two, putting in place the policies and organizations we need to execute our mission.

And three, building much more effective cooperation with industry and with our international partners.

Let me briefly talk about each of these.

First, developing new capabilities. DoD is investing more than $3 billion annually in cybersecurity because we have to retain that cutting edge capability in the field.

Following our new defense strategy, the department is continuing to increase key investments in cybersecurity even in an era of fiscal restraint.

Our most important investment is in skilled cyber warriors needed to conduct operations in cyberspace.

Just as DoD developed the world's finest counterterrorism force over the past decade, we need to build and maintain the finest cyber force and operations. We're recruiting, we're training, we're retaining the best and the brightest in order to stay ahead of other nations.

It's no secret that Russia and China have advanced cyber capabilities. Iran has also undertaken a concerted effort to use cyberspace to its advantage.

Moreover, DoD is already in an intense daily struggle against thousands of cyber actors who probe the Defense Department's networks, millions of time a day. Throughout the innovative efforts of our cyber operators, we've been trying to enhance the department's cyber-defense programs.

These systems rely on sensors; they rely on software to hunt down the malicious code before it harms our systems. We actively share our own experience defending our systems with those running the nation's critical private sector networks.

In addition to defending the department's networks, we also help deter attacks. Our cyber adversaries will be far less likely to hit us if they know that we will be able to link to the attack or that their effort will fail against our strong defenses.

The department has made significant advances in solving a problem that makes deterring cyber adversaries more complex: the difficulty of identifying the origins of that attack.

Over the last two years, DoD has made significant investments in forensics to address this problem of attribution and we're seeing the returns on that investment.

Potential aggressors should be aware that the United States has the capacity to locate them and to hold them accountable for their actions that may try to harm America.

But we won't succeed in preventing a cyber attack through improved defenses alone. If we detect an imminent threat of attack that will cause significant, physical destruction in the United States or kill American citizens, we need to have the option to take action against those who would attack us to defend this nation when directed by the president.

For these kinds of scenarios, the department has developed that capability to conduct effective operations to counter threats to our national interests in cyberspace.

Let me clear that we will only do so to defend our nation, to defend our interests, to defend our allies and we will only do so in a manner that is consistent with the policy principles and legal frameworks that the department follows for other domains including the law of armed conflict.

Which brings me to the second area of focus, policies and organization. Responding to the cyber threat requires the right policies and organizations across the federal government.

For the past year, the Department of Defense has been working very closely with other agencies to understand where are the lines of responsibility when it comes to cyber defense. Where do we draw those lines? And how do those responsibilities get executed?

As part of that effort, the department is now finalizing the most comprehensive change to our rules of engagement in cyberspace in seven years. The new rules will make clear that the department has a responsibility, not only to defend DoD's networks, but also to be prepared to defend the nation and our national interests against an attack in or through cyberspace.

These new rules make the department more agile and provide us with the ability to confront major threats quickly.

To execute these responsibilities, we must have strong organization structures in place.

Three years ago, the department took a major step forward by establishing the United States Cyber Command. Under the leadership of General Keith Alexander, a four-star officer who also serves as the director of the National Security Agency.

Cyber Command has matured into what I believe is a world-class organization.

It has the capacity to conduct a full range of missions inside cyberspace. And it's also working to develop a common, real-time understanding of the threats in cyberspace. The threat picture could be quickly shared with DoD's geographic and functional combatant commanders, with DHS, with FBI and with other agencies in government. After all, we need to see an attack coming in order to defend against that attack.

And we're looking at ways to strengthen Cyber Command as well. We must ensure that hit has the resources, that it has the authorities, that it has the capabilities required to perform this growing mission. And it must also be able to react quickly to events unfolding in cyberspace and help fully integrate cyber into all of the department's plans and activities.

And finally, the third area is to build stronger partnerships.

As I've made clear, securing cyberspace is not the sole responsibility of the United States military or even the sole responsibility of the United States government. The private sector, government, military, our allies - all share the same global infrastructure and we all share the responsibility to protect it.

Therefore, we are deepening cooperation with our closest allies with the goal of sharing threat information, maximizing shared capabilities and determining malicious activities. The president, the vice president, Secretary of State and I have made cyber a major topic of discussion in nearly all of our bilateral meetings with foreign counterparts.

I recently met with our Chinese military counterparts just a few weeks ago. As I mentioned earlier, China is rapidly growing its cyber capabilities.

In my visit to Beijing, I underscored the need to increase communication and transparency with each other so that we could avoid a misunderstanding or a miscalculation in cyberspace. This is in the interest of the United States, but it's also in the interest of China.

Ultimately, no one has a greater interest in cybersecurity than the businesses that depend on a safe, secure and resilient global, digital infrastructure.

Particularly those who operate the critical networks that we must help defend. To defend those networks more effectively, we must share information between the government and the private sector about threats in cyberspace.

We've made real progress in sharing information with the private sector. But very frankly, we need Congress to act to ensure that this sharing is timely and comprehensive.

Companies should be able to share specific threat information with the government, without the prospect of lawsuits hanging over their head. And a key principle must be to protect the fundamental liberties and privacy in cyberspace that we are all duty bound to uphold.

Information sharing alone is not sufficient. We've got to work with the business community to develop baseline standards for our most critical private-sector infrastructure, our power plants, our water treatment facilities, our gas pipelines. This would help ensure that companies take proactive measures to secure themselves against sophisticated threats, but also take common sense steps against basic threats. Although awareness is growing, the reality is that too few companies have invested in even basic cybersecurity.

The fact is that to fully provide the necessary protection in our democracy, cybersecurity legislation must be passed by the Congress. Without it, we are and we will be vulnerable.

Congress must act and it must act now on a comprehensive bill such as the bipartisan Cybersecurity Act of 2012 co-sponsored by Senators Lieberman, Collins, Rockefeller and Feinstein.

This legislation has bipartisan support, but is victim to legislative and political gridlock like so much else in Washington. That frankly is unacceptable and it should be unacceptable not just to me, but to you and to anyone concerned with safeguarding our national security.

While we wait for Congress to act, the administration is looking to enhance cybersecurity measures under existing authorities, by working with the private sector to promote best practices, increase information sharing.

They are considering issuing an Executive Order as one option to try to deal with the situation, but very frankly there is no substitute for comprehensive legislation and we need to move as far as we can in the meantime. We have no choice because the threat that we face, as I've said, is already here.

Congress has a responsibility to act and the President of the United States has constitutional responsibility to defend our country.

I want to urge each of you to add your voice to those who support stronger cyber defenses for our country.

In closing, let me say something that I know the people of New York, along with all Americans, will appreciate.

Before September 11, 2001, the warning signs were there. We weren't organized. We weren't ready and we suffered terribly for that lack of attention.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DESCRIBES POLICY ON EAGLE FEATHER USE BY TRIBAL MEMBERS

Photo:  Bald Eagle.  Credit:  Wikimedia.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENTOFJUJSTICE
Friday, October 12, 2012

Justice Department Announces Policy on Tribal Member Use of Eagle Feathers

The Department of Justice announced today a policy addressing the ability of members of federally recognized Indian tribes to possess or use eagle feathers, an issue of great cultural significance to many tribes and their members. Attorney General Eric Holder signed the new policy after extensive department consultation with tribal leaders and tribal groups. The policy covers all federally protected birds, bird feathers and bird parts.

Federal wildlife laws such as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act generally criminalize the killing of eagles and other migratory birds and the possession or commercialization of the feathers and other parts of such birds. These important laws are enforced by the Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior and help ensure that eagle and other bird populations remain healthy and sustainable.

At the same time, the Department of Justice recognizes that eagles play a unique and important role in the religious and cultural life of many Indian tribes. Many Indian tribes and tribal members have historically used, and today continue to use federally protected birds, bird feathers or other bird parts for their tribal cultural and religious expression.

"This policy will help ensure a consistent and uniform approach across the nation to protecting and preserving eagles, and to honoring their cultural and spiritual significance to American Indians," said Attorney General Holder. "The Department of Justice is committed to striking the right balance in enforcing our nation’s wildlife laws by respecting the cultural and religious practices of federally recognized Indian tribes with whom the United States shares a unique government-to-government relationship."

The department is issuing this policy to address the concerns of tribal members who are unsure of how they may be affected by federal wildlife law enforcement efforts, and because of a concern that this uncertainty may hinder or inhibit tribal religious and cultural practices. The department first announced it was considering formalizing a policy on eagle feathers in October 2011 and sought tribal input at that time. The department held formal consultations with tribal leaders in June, July and August 2012.

"From time immemorial, many Native Americans have viewed eagle feathers and other bird parts as sacred elements of their religious and cultural traditions," said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. "The Department of Justice has taken a major step forward by establishing a consistent and transparent policy to guide federal enforcement of the nation’s wildlife laws in a manner that respects the cultural and religious practices of federally recognized Indian tribes and their members."

"The Justice Department’s policy balances the needs of the federally recognized tribes and their members to be able to obtain, possess and use eagle feathers for their religious and cultural practices with the need to protect and preserve these magnificent birds," said Donald E. "Del" Laverdure, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs. "Its reasoned approach reflects a greater understanding and respect for cultural beliefs and spiritual practices of Indian people while also providing much-needed clarity for those responsible for enforcing federal migratory bird protection laws."

"This policy helps to clarify how federal law enforcement goes about protecting these special birds and also should reassure federally recognized tribal members that they do not have to fear prosecution for possessing or using eagle feathers for their religious and cultural purposes," said Brendan V. Johnson, U.S. Attorney for the District of South Dakota and the Chairman of the Native American Issues Subcommittee of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee.


"Eagles and other native migratory bird species are a vital part of our nation’s natural heritage, and we remain dedicated to providing every American with the opportunity to experience them in the wild," said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe. "This new policy honors the past while looking to the future, contributing to the preservation of these species and ensuring that tribal members can continue their religious and cultural practices for generations to come."


The policy provides that, consistent with the Department of Justice’s traditional exercise of its discretion, a member of a federally recognized tribe engaged only in the following types of conduct will not be subject to prosecution:

· Possessing, using, wearing or carrying federally protected birds, bird feathers or other bird parts (federally protected bird parts);

· Traveling domestically with federally protected bird parts or, if tribal members obtain and comply with necessary permits, traveling internationally with such items;

· Picking up naturally molted or fallen feathers found in the wild, without molesting or disturbing federally protected birds or their nests;

· Giving or loaning federally protected bird parts to other members of federally recognized tribes, without compensation of any kind;

· Exchanging federally protected bird parts for federally protected bird parts with other members of federally recognized tribes, without compensation of any kind;

· Providing the feathers or other parts of federally protected birds to craftspersons who are members of federally recognized tribes to be fashioned into objects for eventual use in tribal religious or cultural activities.

The Department of Justice will continue to prosecute tribal members and non-members alike for violating federal laws that prohibit the killing of eagles and other migratory birds or the buying or selling of the feathers or other parts of such birds.


The policy expands upon longstanding Department of Justice practice and Department of the Interior policy. It was developed in close coordination with the Department of the Interior. The Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) and United States Attorneys’ Offices work closely with the Department of the Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Indian Affairs on enforcement of federal laws protecting birds.

The view the policy and a fact sheet on the policy, visit: www.justice.gov/tribal .

LOOK WHAT'S COMMING

DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS IN THE MAGHREB

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT,

Democratic Transitions in the Maghreb

Remarks

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Washington, DC
October 12, 2012

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you all. Thank you very much. And a special word of thanks to a friend and someone whom I admire greatly, General Scowcroft. His many years of distinguished service to our country is a great tribute in every respect.

Thanks also to Jon Alterman and CSIS for hosting this conference on "The Maghreb in Transition: Seeking Stability in an Era of Uncertainty." I also wish to acknowledge Dr. Terrab for his strong support of this important conference and members of the diplomatic corps as well.

Now, why are we here? And why is this conference so timely? Well, to start with, what happens in this dynamic region has far-reaching consequences for our own security and prosperity. And we know very well that it is most important to the people of this region, whose aspirations and ambitions deserve to be met. But recent events have raised questions about what lies ahead – what lies ahead for the region, what lies ahead for the rest of us who have watched with great hope, as General Scowcroft said, the events that have unfolded in the Maghreb. A terrorist attack in Benghazi, the burning of an American school in Tunis – these and other scenes of anger and violence have understandably led Americans to ask what is happening. What is happening to the promise of the Arab Spring? And what does this mean for the United States?

Well, I certainly think it’s important to ask these questions and to seek answers, as you are doing today. And let me, on a personal note, start with what happened in Benghazi. No one wants to find out exactly what happened more than I do. I’ve appointed an Accountability Review Board that has already started examining whether our security procedures were appropriate, whether they were properly implemented, and what lessons we can and must learn for the future. And we are working as thoroughly and expeditiously as possible, knowing that we cannot afford to sacrifice accuracy to speed. And of course, our government is sparing no effort in tracking down the terrorists who perpetrated this attack.

And we are focused, as we must, on what more needs to be done right now to protect our people and our facilities. We had another terrible attack yesterday. I strongly condemn the killing of a longtime Yemeni employee at our Embassy in Sana’a. And we are working with Yemeni authorities to investigate this attack and to bring those responsible to justice as well.

But throughout all of this, we must not only focus on the headlines. We have to keep in mind the trend lines. We have to remain focused on the broader strategic questions posed by these democratic transitions and their impact on American interests and values.

Let me start by stating the obvious: Nobody should have ever thought this would be an easy road. I certainly didn’t. However, it is important to look at the full picture – to weigh the violent acts of a small number of extremists against the aspirations and actions of the region’s people and governments. That broader view supports rather than discredits the promise of the Arab revolutions. It reaffirms that, instead of letting mobs and extremists speak for entire countries, we should listen to what the elected governments and free citizens are saying. They want more freedom, more justice, more opportunity – not more violence. And they want better relations not only with the United States, but with the world – not worse.

I have no illusions about how complicated this is. After all, American foreign policy has long been shaped by debates over how to balance our interests in security and stability with our values in supporting freedom and democracy. Recent revolutions have intensified these debates by creating a new birth of freedom, but also by unseating old partners and unleashing unpredictable new forces.

As I said last fall at the National Democratic Institute, we have to be honest that America’s policies in the region will always reflect the full range of our interests and values – promoting democracy and human rights, and defeating al-Qaida; defending our allies and partners, and also ensuring a secure supply of energy.

And there will be times when not all of our interests and values align. We work to align them, but we do so acknowledging reality. And it’s true that we tailor our tactics for promoting democratic change to the conditions on the ground in each country. After all, it would be foolish to take a one-size-fits-all approach regardless of circumstances or historical trends.

But in the long run, the enduring cooperation we seek – and that our interests and our values demand – is difficult to sustain without democratic legitimacy and public consent.

Weeks before the revolution in Egypt began, I told Arab leaders gathered in Doha that the region’s foundations were sinking into the sand. It was clear even then that the status quo was unsustainable, that refusal to change was itself becoming a threat to stability.

So for the United States, supporting democratic transitions is not a matter of idealism. It is a strategic necessity.

And we will not return to the false choice between freedom and stability. And we will not pull back our support for emerging democracies when the going gets rough. That would be a costly strategic mistake that would, I believe, undermine both our interests and our values.

Now, we recognize that these transitions are not America’s to manage, and certainly not ours to win or lose. But we have to stand with those who are working every day to strengthen democratic institutions, defend universal rights, and drive inclusive economic growth. That will produce more capable partners and more durable security over the long term.

Today, these transitions are entering a phase that must be marked more by compromise than by confrontation, by politics more than protests. Politics that deliver economic reforms and jobs so that people can pursue their livelihoods and provide for their families. Politics that will be competitive and even heated, but rooted in democratic rules and norms that apply to everyone – Islamists and secularists, Muslims and Christians, conservatives and liberals, parties and candidates of every stripe. Everyone must reject violence, terrorism, and extremism; abide by the rule of law; support independent judiciaries; and uphold fundamental freedoms. Upholding the rights and dignity of all citizens, regardless of faith, ethnicity, or gender, should be expected.

And then, of course, we look to governments to let go of power when their time comes – just as the revolutionary Libyan Transitional National Council did this past August, transferring authority to the newly elected legislature in a ceremony that Ambassador Chris Stevens cited as the highlight of his time in the country.

Achieving genuine democracy and broad-based growth will be a long and difficult process. We know that from our own history. More than 235 years after our own revolution, we are still working toward that more perfect union. So one should expect setbacks along the way, times when some will surely ask if it was all worth it. But going back to the way things were in December 2010 isn’t just undesirable; it is impossible.

So this is the context in which we have to view recent events and shape our approach going forward. And let me explain where that leads us.

Now, since this is a conference on the Maghreb, that’s where I’ll focus. Because after all, that’s where the Arab revolutions started, and where an international coalition helped stop a dictator from slaughtering his people, and where, just last month, we saw such disturbing violence.

But let’s look at what’s actually happening on the ground, especially in light of recent events. We have to, as always, be clear-eyed about the threat of violent extremism. A year of democratic transition was never going to drain away reservoirs of radicalism built up through decades of dictatorship, nor was that enough time to stand up fully effective and responsible security forces to replace the repressive ones of the past.

As we’ve warned from the beginning, there are extremists who seek to exploit periods of instability and hijack these democratic transitions. All the while, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb and other terrorist groups are trying to expand their reach from a new stronghold in northern Mali.

But that is not the full story. Far from it.

The terrorists who attacked our mission in Benghazi did not represent the millions of Libyan people who want peace and deplore violence. And in the days that followed, tens of thousands of Libyans poured into the streets to mourn Ambassador Stevens, who had been a steadfast champion of their revolution. You saw the signs. One read, "Thugs and killers don’t represent Benghazi or Islam." And on their own initiative, the people of Benghazi overran extremist bases and insisted that militias disarm and accept the rule of law. That was as inspiring a sight as any we saw in the revolutions. And it points to the undimmed promise of the Arab Spring – by starting down the path of democratic politics, Libyans and Arabs across the region have firmly rejected the extremists’ argument that violence and death are the only way to reclaim dignity and achieve justice.

In Tripoli, the country’s transitional leaders condemned the attack. They fired the top security officials responsible for Benghazi. Then, the government issued an ultimatum to militias across the country: Disarm and disband in 48 hours or face the consequences. As many as 10 major armed groups complied. Now, militias and extremists remain a significant problem in Libya, but there is an effort to address it that has now taken hold throughout the country. As Libya grapples with the challenges of forming a government, the international community needs to support its efforts to bring these militias to heel and provide security for all of its citizens.

Consider Tunisia, the birthplace of the Arab revolutions. Last year, an Islamist party won a plurality of the votes in an open, competitive election. I know some in Washington took this as an omen of doom. But these new leaders formed a coalition with secular parties and promised to uphold universal rights and freedoms, including for women. And the United States made it clear that we would be watching closely and would assess the new government by its actions, not its words.

This past February in Tunis, students and civil society activists shared with me their fears about extremists seeking to derail their transition to lasting democracy, but also their hopes that responsible leaders and accountable institutions would be strong enough and willing enough to turn back that challenge.

And, indeed, we have seen an intense debate play out in Tunisian society. For example, early drafts of the new constitution labeled women as "complementary to men," but Tunisia’s active civil society raised strong objections, and eventually the National Constituent Assembly amended the text to recognize women’s equality.

Civil society is wise to remain vigilant, and to exercise their hard-earned rights to safeguard their new democracy. Like the hundreds of Tunisian women who recently took to the streets to protest on behalf of a woman charged with indecency after she was raped by police officers. These competing visions of Tunisia’s future were put to the test when violent extremists attacked the U.S. Embassy in Tunis and burned the American school nearby. How did the Tunisian people and government respond?

First, the government increased security around our Embassy and promised to assist with repairs to the school, which they have done. Then they publicly committed to confront violent groups and prevent Tunisia from becoming a safe haven for international terrorism. Following through on these pledges is essential. Those responsible for the attacks must be brought to justice. The government must provide security for diplomatic missions and create a secure environment for foreign residents and visitors. And the rule of law must extend to everyone throughout the country.

The country’s leaders also took to the airwaves, to newspaper pages, even Facebook and Twitter, to denounce both the attacks and the extremist ideology behind them, putting their own political capital on the line. The Foreign Minister flew to Washington to stand with me and publicly condemn the violence. And so we continue to support those changes that are occurring in Libya and in Tunisia and those leaders and citizens who understand what is expected of them if they are to fulfill their own hopes.

Now, the situation in the rest of the Maghreb is different. Morocco and Algeria have not experienced revolutions, but recent events have also tested their values and resolve. Last year, when citizens of Morocco called for change, Moroccan society under King Mohammed VI answered with major constitutional reforms followed by early elections and expanded authorities for parliament. An Islamist party leads the new ruling coalition along with a variety of other parties after thirteen years in the opposition. And we’ve been encouraged that its leaders have sought to engage all Moroccans and have focused on creating jobs and fighting corruption. And we continue to urge them to follow through on all of their commitments for political and economic reform.

Last month, with anti-American protestors in the streets across the cities of Morocco, the Foreign Minister traveled to Washington for our first-ever Strategic Dialogue. He could have avoided the cameras, but instead, he strongly condemned the attack in Benghazi, embraced a broader partnership with the United States, and pledged that his country would continue working toward democracy and the rule of law.

Algeria also has much to gain by embracing the changes that are taking place around it, and we have seen some progress. The government held parliamentary elections in May and invited international observers to monitor them for the first time. And it moved quickly last month to protect diplomatic missions, including the U.S. Embassy, and to defuse tensions in the streets. But still, Algeria has a lot of work to do to uphold universal rights and create space for civil society, a message I delivered at the highest levels in person in February.

Now, what do these snapshots and stories from across the region tell us? On the one hand, last month’s violence revealed strains of extremism that threaten those nations, as well as the broader region and even the United States. On the other hand, we’ve seen actions that would have been hard to imagine a few years ago, democratically-elected leaders and free people in Arab countries standing up for a peaceful, pluralist future.

It is way too soon to say how these transitions will play out. But what’s not in doubt is that America has a big stake in the outcome.

Last month at the United Nations General Assembly in New York, I met with leaders from across the region, and I told each of them that the United States will continue to pursue a strategy to support emerging democracies as they work to provide effective security grounded in the rule of law to spur economic growth and bolster democratic institutions. We’ve made those three priorities the hallmark of America’s involvement in the region. We've convened donor conferences to coordinate assistance, leverage new partnerships through the G-8, the Community of Democracies, the OECD; and we have stepped up our engagement with the Arab League, signing the first ever memorandum of understanding for a strategic dialogue between us.

But we recognize that words, whether they come from us or others, are cheap. When we talk about investing in responsible leaders and accountable democratic institutions, it has to be followed by actual investments.

So we have mobilized more than $1 billion in targeted assistance since the start of the revolutions. And the Obama Administration has requested from Congress a new $770 million fund that would be tied to concrete benchmarks for political and economic reforms. And I again urge Congress to move forward on this priority.

But let me briefly just address the three parts of our strategy, starting with security. The recent riots and lawlessness underscore the challenges of safeguarding public safety in free societies and reforming security forces. For decades, those forces protected regimes. Now their job is to protect citizens, especially against the threat from violent extremists. For some time, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb and other terrorist groups have launched attacks and kidnappings from northern Mali into neighboring countries. Now, with the chaos and ethnic conflict there allowing these groups to carve out a larger safe haven, they are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions.

So we are using every tool we can to help our partners fight terrorism and meet their security challenges. We recently embedded additional Foreign Service Officers with regional expertise into the U.S. Africa Command to better integrate our approach. Across the region, diplomats, development experts, and military personnel are working hand in hand.

Across the region also, we’re partnering with security officials of these new governments who are moving away from the repressive approaches that helped fuel radicalization in the past and we're trying to help them develop strategies grounded in the rule of law and human rights.

We’re helping border guards upgrade their equipment and tighten their patrols so that weapons don’t flood the region even more than they already have. We're helping train prosecutors and build forensic labs that can produce evidence that stands up in courts. And last month, just days after the riots in Tunis, we launched a new partnership with Tunisia to train police and other justice officials. And we were very pleased that Tunisia also agreed to host a new international training center that will help officials from across the region develop means to protect their citizens’ security and their liberty.

Now the nations of the Maghreb are not the first to struggle with the challenge of protecting a new democracy. And one of the lessons we’ve learned around the world is that training, funding, and equipment will only go so far. It takes political will to make the hard choices and demand the accountability that is necessary for strong institutions and lasting security. And it takes changes in mindsets to make those reforms stick.

In all my conversations with high-ranking officials in these countries, I recognize that particularly in Tunisia and Libya, the people I'm talking to were often victims of security forces, imprisoned, seeking exile, beaten, in some cases, tortured. And for them all of the sudden to find themselves on the side of security forces, even ones that are of the new regime, takes a mental change, and they have admitted that it is a responsibility that they now understand they must assume.

The United States is also stepping up our counterterrorism efforts, helping the countries of North Africa target the support structure of the extremist groups, particularly al-Qaida and its affiliates – closing safe havens, cutting off financing, countering their ideology, denying them recruits.

Our Trans Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership is building the capacity of ten countries, providing training and support so that they can better work together to disrupt terrorist networks, and prevent attacks.

And we are expanding our work with civil society organizations in specific terrorist hotspots, particular villages, prisons, and schools. Now, the Maghreb’s economic and social challenges fueled the revolutions and the calls for reform. And in order to succeed, these emerging democratic governments need to show they can deliver concrete results.

So that is the second area we’re focused on: Working with small- and medium-sized enterprises, which create jobs and alternatives to radicalism, bringing women and young people into the formal economy, providing capital and training for entrepreneurs, helping emerging democracies update their economic regulations, their investment laws, their trade policies so their private sectors can actually flourish.

We’re establishing a Tunisian-American Enterprise Fund with an initial capitalization of $20 million to stimulate investment in the private sector and provide businesses with needed capital. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation, OPIC, is offering $50 million in loans and guarantees, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation is helping address long-term constraints to economic growth. We’ve provided export training for small business owners and job training to hundreds of young Tunisians. And I’m particularly proud of the new $10 million scholarship fund, which we launched in August to help Tunisian students study at American universities and colleges.

We also look forward to working on economic issues with the new Libyan Government once it’s formed. One of our top priorities is helping nations trade more with each other. That, after all, will create new jobs for their citizens and markets for their products. But today, North Africa is one of the least integrated regions in the world. It doesn’t have to be that way. And opening the border between Algeria and Morocco would be an important step in moving toward that integration.

The third key area in our strategy is strengthening democratic institutions and advancing political reforms – not an easy process, as we can see from the difficulty in forming a government in Libya. And political progress has to grow from the inside, not imposed from the outside or abroad. But there are ways we can and are helping. In Libya, for example, the United States has trained hundreds of lawyers and civil society activists on election laws and offered tutorials to campaign managers and candidates in the run-up to the recent elections. Now we’re encouraging civil society to be fully engaged in drafting a new constitution that will protect the equal rights of all Libyan citizens.

Similar efforts are underway across the Maghreb, tailored to local needs and conditions. And none of this is happening in a vacuum. The transitions occurring in the Maghreb are linked, as you well know, with developments across the wider Middle East.

Egypt, of course, the largest Arab nation, cornerstone of the region, we’ve seen its new elected leadership say that the success of Egypt’s democratic transition depends on building consensus and speaking to the needs and concerns of all Egyptians, men and women, of all faiths and communities. Now, we stand with the Egyptian people in their quest for universal freedoms and protections. And we’ve made the point that Egypt’s international standing depends both on peaceful relations with its neighbors and also on the choices it makes at home and whether or not it fulfills its own promises to its own people.

In Syria, the Assad regime continues to wage brutal war against its own people, even as territory slips from its grasp. I recently announced major new contributions of humanitarian aid and assistance for the civilian opposition, and we remain committed with our like-minded partners to increase pressure on the regime.

And in Yemen, where we supported negotiations that eventually achieved a peaceful transition, we are working to prevent al-Qaida and other extremists from threatening these emerging, fragile democratic institutions and prevent them also from finding a safe haven from which to stage new attacks.

And when I met with King Abdullah of Jordan last month, we discussed the importance of continuing reforms to move his country toward more democracy and prosperity.

So in all of these places and many others, the United States is helping the people of those nations chart their own destinies and realize the full measure of their own human dignity.

Dignity is a word that means many things to different people and cultures, but it does speak to something universal in all of us. As one Egyptian observed in the wake of that country’s revolution, freedom and dignity are "more important than food and water. When you eat in humiliation, you can’t taste the food."

But dignity does not come from avenging perceived insults, especially with violence that can never be justified. It comes from taking responsibility for one’s self and one’s community. And if you look around the world today, those countries focused on fostering growth rather than fomenting grievance are pulling ahead – building schools instead of burning them; investing in their people’s creativity, not encouraging their rage; empowering women, not excluding them; opening their economies and societies to more connections with the wider world, not shutting off the internet or attacking embassies.

I remain convinced that the people of the Arab world do not want to trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob. There is no dignity in that. The people of Benghazi told this world loudly and clearly when they rejected the extremists in their midst what they hoped for. And so did the leaders of Libya when they challenged the militias. And so did the Tunisians who spoke out against violence and hatred. That is the message we should take from the events of the last month.

Now, I want to add and close with one more thought about what happened in Benghazi. Because, as you might expect, that is for me and for all the men and women at the State Department very personal.

Diplomacy, by its nature has to be often practiced in dangerous places. We send people to diplomatic posts in 170 countries around the world. And yes, some of those are in war and conflict zones. Others are in unstable countries with complex threats and no U.S. military presence. That is the reality of the world we live in.

And we will never prevent every act of violence or terrorism or achieve perfect security. Our people cannot live in bunkers and do their jobs. But it is our solemn responsibility to constantly improve, to reduce the risks our people face, and make sure they have the resources they need to do those jobs we expect from them. And of course, nobody takes that more seriously than I and the security professionals at the State Department do.

Chris Stevens understood that diplomats must operate in many places where soldiers do not or cannot, where there are no other boots on the ground, and security is far from guaranteed. And like so many of our brave colleagues and those who served in our armed forces as well, he volunteered for his assignments.

Last year, our Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, was assaulted in Damascus by pro-regime thugs. But he insisted on continuing to meet with peaceful protesters and serving as a living manifestation of America’s support. And when he drove to the battered city of Hama, the people there covered his car with flowers.

People like Chris and Robert represent diplomacy and America at its and our best. They know that when America is absent, especially from the dangerous places, there are consequences. Extremism takes root, our interests suffer, and our security at home is threatened. So we will continue sending our diplomats and development experts to dangerous places. The United States will not retreat. We will keep leading and we will stay engaged in the Maghreb and everywhere in the world, including in those hard places where America’s interests and values are at stake. That’s who we are. And that’s the best way to honor those whom we have lost. And that’s also how we ensure our country’s global leadership for decades to come.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)




　

U.S. Department of Defense Armed with Science Update: The Turning Of Trash

U.S. Department of Defense Armed with Science Update

U.S. DEFENSE AND CHANGES AT THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Intel Agency Director Outlines Changes Under Way
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2012 - The director of the Defense Intelligence Agency shared his vision of accelerating change and building capacity within the agency during a symposium yesterday in Orlando, Fla.

Army Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn spoke to the U.S. Geospatial Intelligence Foundation about reshaping defense analysis and professional development of the workforce, but began with his plan to use the Defense Clandestine Service to integrate the intelligence community.

"I'm going to use this to integrate the entire agency," Flynn said. "This is not a marginal adjustment for DIA. This is a major adjustment for national security."

The idea is increasing partnerships, he said, as well as increasing capacity and capabilities while putting the agency's presence where it's needed.

It's also about offsetting risk, preventing strategic surprise and retaining U.S. competitive advantage, Flynn said, "and I think that's really important."

Flynn discussed reshaping defense analysis for the agency and lauded the operational community for its understanding of intelligence.

"The operational community understands intelligence, [in] many, many cases, particularly in the surveillance and reconnaissance realm, much more than they did five years ago," Flynn said, "[and] definitely [more] than they did 10 years ago."

The general also touched on professional development, in particular, focusing on the civilian side of the workforce, which until recently, hasn't had the same opportunities as their military counterparts.

"I went and studied post-World World II, post-Korea, post-Vietnam and post the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War," Flynn said. "In all four examples, the Department of Defense killed training and professional development."

Flynn noted DIA has a "fairly healthy budget," and he said he has made professional development one of his priorities.

"It's an area that I'm very comfortable with, and it's something that we will invest in -- particularly, leader training," he said.

Flynn also emphasized the importance of building capacity within DIA, and the intelligence community at large.

"When we're getting ready and adjusting for whatever the next conflict is going to be, we have to use our training and education system to drive change, build trust and instill this culture," he said.

"Everything is under attack, [and] everything is challenged," Flynn added. "One of the things that we have a responsibility to do is understand some of [the] issues and then prioritize accordingly, based on the direction that we are given from our leadership."

The general underscored the value of DIA in the U.S. national defense strategy.

"It is [an] indispensable element of the military dimension of our national defense posture," Flynn said. "[This is] what the Defense Intelligence Agency gives this nation."

　

THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE CORPS

Photo Credit:  U.S. Navy.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health care law increases access to primary care through the National Health Service Corps
Investments help ease cost of professional schooling for clinicians, students

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced that $229.4 million was invested in the National Health Service Corps in 2012 to support more doctors and nurses and increase access to primary care. These investments included nearly 4,600 loan repayment and scholarship awards to clinicians and students, and grants to 32 states to support state loan repayment programs.

"Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, the National Health Service Corps is providing loans and scholarships to more doctors, nurses, and other health care providers, so more people get the care they need," said Secretary Sebelius. "National Health Service Corps clinicians are providing care to approximately 10.4 million patients across the country."

The National Health Service Corps provides financial, professional and educational resources to medical, dental, and mental and behavioral health care providers who bring their skills to areas of the United States with limited access to health care.

With nearly 10,000 providers, the National Health Service Corps has nearly tripled since 2008. In addition to Corps clinicians currently providing care, nearly 1,000 students, residents, and health providers receive scholarships or participate in the Student to Service Loan Repayment program to prepare to practice.

Today’s announcement was made in conjunction with the celebration of the National Health Service Corps’ annual Corps Community Day.

Established in 1970, the National Health Service Corps, administered by HHS’ Health Resources and Services Administration, has provided health care to communities across the country by supporting more than 42,000 primary health care practitioners over its 40-year history.

Which fat

Which fat

AIR FORCE WISHES NAVY A HAPPY 237TH BIRTHDAY

FROM: U.S. AIR FORCE

(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Mark R. Alvarez)

Air Force leaders salute Navy on 237th birthday

10/12/2012 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark A. Welsh III and Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force James Roy salute the Navy on its 237th birthday Oct. 13.

Donley wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Navy stating:

"Congratulations as you celebrate the 237th birthday of the United States Navy. Our Nation depends upon the men and women of the United States Navy, whose selfless service builds on your Service's proud heritage as a global force for good.

"The men and women of the United States Air Force are honored to serve alongside you and your Sailors as part of the Joint team. We wish you the very best on the Navy's 237th birthday."

Welsh wrote a letter to the Chief of Naval Operations stating:

"Congratulations to the men and women of the United States Navy as you celebrate 237 years of service to our great Nation. Since 1775, the men and women of the Navy have placed service above self in faithfully executing their mission to maintain freedom of the seas.

"On behalf of the men and women of the United States Air Force, I salute you and your Sailors, and wish you the very best on the Navy's birthday."

Roy wrote a letter to the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy stating:

"I'm writing this to extend sincere wishes for a Happy 237th Birthday to the United States Navy. Since the birth of our Navy in 1775, Sailors have served as the shield of the Republic. From the historic sailing vessels of the late eighteenth century to today's most advanced sea-based weapons systems, Americans have come to rely on their United States Navy to keep the Nation safe.

"On behalf of Airmen everywhere, I wish you all the best as you celebrate. We look forward to serving alongside you for many years to follow."


　

TEXAS HOME HEALTH CARE COMPANY OWNER PLEADS GUILTY IN $374 MILLION MEDICARE FRAUD

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, October 11, 2012

Owner of Texas Home Health Services Company Pleads Guilty, Admits Role in $374 Million Fraud Scheme

WASHINGTON - A Dallas-area home health services company owner today admitted his role in a $374 million home health fraud scheme in which he and others conspired to bill Medicare for unnecessary services that were never performed. Cyprian Akamnonu, 64, of Arlington, Texas, entered his guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud before U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay in Dallas federal court.

The guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Sarah R. Saldaña; Special Agent in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s Dallas Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General's (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office; and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU).

According to court documents, beginning in at least January 2006, Akamnonu, along with his wife Pat Akamnonu, owned and operated Ultimate Care Home Health Services, Inc. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that he directed his wife and others to recruit Medicare beneficiaries from Dallas neighborhoods for home health services they did not need and for which they did not qualify. Once the beneficiaries were recruited, Cyprian Akamnonu would take prescriptions for home health services to the offices of Medistat Group Associates, P.A., owned and operated by co-defendant Jacques Roy, M.D.


Cyprian Akamnonu admitted he brought the prescriptions to Roy because he and Roy had a fraudulent arrangement whereby Ultimate provided Roy with beneficiaries to bolster Medistat’s patient roster in exchange for Roy’s certification for skilled nursing services of any beneficiary brought to him. Roy’s office manager, co-defendant Teri Sivils, and others would allegedly then sign these prescriptions on Roy’s behalf. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted to paying Sivils cash to sign the prescriptions.

Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that once he obtained signed prescriptions, nurses acting at his direction would perform cursory visits for the beneficiaries they had recruited that bore little relationship to the skilled nursing services which Roy had purportedly prescribed. Ultimate would then bill Medicare, at Cyprian Akamnonu’s direction, for skilled nursing services that were not necessary and were not performed.


Court documents show that from January 2006 through November 2011, Roy or another Medistat physician allegedly certified over 78% of the beneficiaries serviced by Ultimate. Ultimate billed over $43 million to the Medicare program for these beneficiaries. Roy, in turn, allegedly incorporated these beneficiaries into his own practice and billed over $2.4 million for services related to them.

At sentencing, Cyprian Akamnonu faces a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the conspiracy count. Sentencing is currently scheduled for Feb. 4, 2013. As part of his plea agreement, he has also agreed not to contest the forfeiture of 21 real properties, four automobiles, and funds in a number of personal and business accounts connected to proceeds of the fraud.

His six co-defendants, including his wife, await trial on related charges, currently set for June 2013. The charges and allegations contained in the indictment against them are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Elliott and Mindy Sauter of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, and Deputy Chief Sam Sheldon and Trial Attorney Ben O’Neil of the Criminal Division's Fraud Section. The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division's Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas.

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK LISTS NATIONS WITH LARGEST INCREASES IN U.S. GOODS PURCHASES

Photo:  Container ships In Panama.  Credit:  CIA World Factbook.

 FROM:  U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The United States exported $181.3 billion in goods and services in August 2012, according to data released today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Commerce Department.

"I am pleased that U.S. exports remain high, because they are a major contributor to our economic recovery, and help create and sustain jobs across the country," said Export-Import Bank Chairman and President Fred P. Hochberg. "Going forward, we encourage more American companies to compete in international markets, where 95 percent of the world’s customers are located."

Exports of goods and services over the past twelve months totaled $2.173 trillion, which is nearly 37.6 percent above the level of exports in 2009. Over the past twelve months, exports have been growing at an annualized rate of 12.7 percent when compared to 2009.

In June of this year, the U.S. recorded exports of $185.2 billion, an all-time record high.

Among major export markets, the top ten buying countries with the largest annualized increase in purchases of U.S. goods were, when compared to 2009, Panama (34.9 percent), Chile (27.8 percent), Argentina (26.3 percent), Turkey (26.3 percent), Russia (25.7 percent), Hong Kong (25.6 percent), Peru (25.3 percent), United Arab Emirates (21.8 percent), Ecuador (21.6 percent), and Venezuela (20.9 percent).

U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PANETTA GIVES DETAILS REGARDING CYBERDEFENSE

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Panetta Spells Out DOD Roles in Cyberdefense
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2012 - Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta spelled out in detail the Defense Department's responsibility in cybersecurity during a speech to the Business Executives for National Security meeting in New York, today.

Panetta has stressed the importance of cybersecurity since taking office last year. In addition, the secretary has warned about a "cyber Pearl Harbor" many times, including during testimony before Congress.

The speech before BENS aboard the USS Intrepid Museum is the secretary's clearest discussion to date of DOD's responsibility in the cyber domain.

"A cyber attack perpetrated by nation states or violent extremist groups could be as destructive as the terrorist attack of 9/11," he said in prepared remarks. "Such a destructive cyber terrorist attack could paralyze the nation."

The secretary pointed to denial of service attacks that many large U.S. corporations have suffered in recent weeks, but also cited a more serious attack in Saudi Arabia. In that attack a sophisticated virus called "Shamoon" infected computers at the Saudi Arabian state oil company, ARAMCO.

"Shamoon included a routine called a 'wiper,' coded to self-execute," he said. "This routine replaced crucial system files with an image of a burning U.S. flag. It also put additional 'garbage' data that overwrote all the real data on the machine. The more than 30,000 computers it infected were rendered useless, and had to be replaced."

There was a similar attack later in Qatar. "All told, the Shamoon virus was probably the most destructive attack that the private sector has seen to date," Panetta said.

Enemies target computer control systems that operate chemical, electricity and water plants, and guide transportation networks.

"We also know they are seeking to create advanced tools to attack these systems and cause panic, destruction and even the loss of life," he said.

"An aggressor nation or extremist group could gain control of critical switches and derail passenger trains, or trains loaded with lethal chemicals," he said. "They could contaminate the water supply in major cities, or shut down the power grid across large parts of the country."

Cyber attacks could be part of a major attack against the United States, and this could mean the cyber Pearl Harbor the secretary fears. This is "an attack that would cause physical destruction and loss of life, paralyze and shock the nation and create a profound new sense of vulnerability," he said.

DOD has a supporting role in cyber defense, he said. The Department of Homeland Security is the lead federal agency, with the FBI having lead on law enforcement. Still the overall DOD mission is to defend the United States.

"We defend. We deter. And if called upon, we take decisive action," the secretary said. "In the past, we have done so through operations on land and at sea, in the skies and in space. In this new century, the United States military must help defend the nation in cyberspace as well."

DOD has responsibility for defending its own networks, and can also help deter attacks. "Our cyber adversaries will be far less likely to hit us if they know we will be able to link them to the attack, or that their effort will fail against our strong defenses," he said. "The Department has made significant advances in solving a problem that makes deterring cyber adversaries more complex: the difficulty of identifying the origins of an attack."

DOD has improved its capability of tracking attacks to point of origin. "Potential aggressors should be aware that the United States has the capacity to locate them and hold them accountable for actions that harm America or its interests," he said.

But improved defenses will not stop all cyber attacks. "If we detect an imminent threat of attack that will cause significant physical destruction or kill American citizens, we need to have the option to take action to defend the nation when directed by the President," Panetta said. "For these kinds of scenarios, the Department has developed the capability to conduct effective operations to counter threats to our national interests in cyberspace.

"Let me be clear that we will only do so to defend our nation, our interests, or our allies," he continued. "And we will only do so in a manner consistent with the policy principles and legal frameworks that the Department follows for other domains, including the law of armed conflict."

DOD is finalizing a comprehensive change to rules of engagement in cyberspace. "The new rules will make clear that the Department has a responsibility not only to defend DOD's networks, but also to be prepared to defend the nation and our national interests against an attack in or through cyberspace," he said. "These new rules will make the Department more agile and provide us with the ability to confront major threats quickly."

The private sector, government, military and international partners operate in cyberspace. "We all share the responsibility to protect it," he said. "Therefore, we are deepening cooperation with our closest allies with a goal of sharing threat information, maximizing shared capabilities, and deterring malicious activities."

All U.S. leaders have discussed cyber security with foreign leaders. Panetta raised the issue with Chinese leaders during his recent trip to Beijing. "I underscored the need to increase communication and transparency so that we can avoid misunderstanding or miscalculation in cyberspace," he said. "That is in the interest of the United States, and it is in the interest of China."

But businesses have the greatest interest in cybersecurity. Businesses depend on a safe, secure, and resilient global digital infrastructure, and businesses own and run many of the critical networks the nation depends on. "To defend those networks more effectively, we must share information between the government and the private sector about threats in cyberspace," the secretary said.

While there has been progress in sharing public-private cyber information, "we need Congress to act to ensure this sharing is timely and comprehensive," he said. "Companies should be able to share specific threat information with the government without the prospect of lawsuits hanging over their head. And a key principle must be to protect the fundamental liberties and privacy in cyberspace that we are all duty-bound to uphold."

Baseline standards must be set for cyber security and that means Congress must act, Panetta said. He said the bipartisan Cybersecurity Act of 2012 "has fallen victim to legislative and political gridlock. That is unacceptable to me, and it should be unacceptable to anyone concerned with safeguarding our national security."

One option under consideration, Panetta said, is an executive order to enhance cybersecurity measures. "There is no substitute for comprehensive legislation, but we need to move as far as we can in the meantime," he said. "We have no choice because the threat we face is already here. Congress has a responsibility to act. The President has a Constitutional responsibility to defend the country."

RECENT U.S. NAVY PHOTOS

FROM: U.S. NAVY

An E-2C Hawkeye assigned to Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 1 sits on the flight deck of USS Enterprise (CVN 65) at night. Enterprise is deployed to the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility conducting maritime security operations, theater security cooperation efforts and support missions as a part of Operation Enduring Freedom. The U.S. Navy has a 237-year heritage of defending freedom and projecting and protecting U.S. interests around the globe. Join the conversation on social media using #warfighting. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Brooks B. Patton Jr. (Released) 121008-N-JL826-020

An SH-60B Sea Hawk helicopter assigned to the Warlords of Helicopter Antisubmarine Squadron Light (HSL) 51 brings cargo from the Military Sealift Command fleet replenishment oiler USNS Tippecanoe (T-AO 199), not pictured, to the forecastle of the guided-missile destroyer USS Mustin (DDG 89) during a vertical replenishment. Mustin is on patrol in the western Pacific Ocean. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Devon Dow (Released) 121010-N-MU720-263

US Navy Videos: SEC. OF NAVY HAS BIRTHDAY MESSAGE

US Navy Videos

PIONEER I LAUNCH

Pioneer I Launch
Thor-Able I with the Pioneer I spacecraft atop, prior to launch at Eastern Test Range at what is now Kennedy Space Center. Pioneer I launched 54 years ago on Oct. 11, 1958, the first spacecraft launched by the 11-day-old National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Although the spacecraft failed to reach the Moon, it did transmit 43 hours of data.

Image Credit-NASA

RESOLUTION ON MALI



Map Credit:  CIA World Factbook.

FROM: U.S. STATE DELPARTMENT
UNSC Adoption of Resolution on Mali

Press Statement
Victoria Nuland
Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
October 12, 2012

The United States supports the resolution on Mali adopted by the UN Security Council today as a comprehensive approach to the overlapping governance, security, and humanitarian crises affecting Mali.

This resolution today accomplishes a number of important objectives: it imposes targeted sanctions against AQIM individuals and entities in Mali, supports a negotiation process to seek a sustainable political solution with the North, provides support and assistance from the UN and member states to bolster planning efforts by ECOWAS and the African Union, and expresses the readiness of the Security Council to respond to the request from the Transitional authorities of Mali regarding a potential force to assist the Malian armed forces.

The United States believes that ECOWAS and the AU should play a prominent role in planning and implementing any such response, with strong and active support from the international community. Both military and civilian elements will be essential in responding to the emerging threats in Mali and the Sahel. The U.S. government’s objectives to address the situation in Mali include restoring the authority of the State of Mali over its entire national territory, upholding the unity and territorial integrity of Mali, and confronting the threat posed by AQIM and affiliated groups.

Strengthening democratic institutions must be at the heart of combating extremism and political upheaval. Accordingly, we believe that restoration of democratically-elected government in Mali by April 2013, as called for by ECOWAS, is a crucial component of the overall long-term solution to Mali’s current crises.

Finally, we welcome the appointment of Special Envoy Romano Prodi. The Secretary General should empower the envoy to marshal U.N. resources to help Bamako hold elections by April 2013, and to engage with Malian, Tuareg and regional stakeholders to promote a negotiated settlement to the Tuareg rebellion. In addition, the envoy should support U.N. OCHA’s ongoing efforts to improve the international response to the humanitarian crisis in the Sahel region.

We look forward to the report called for by today’s resolution and for continued international attention regarding the situation in Mali.