Saturday, February 23, 2013
REMARKS BY U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AND JAPANESE FOREIGN MINISTER KISHIDA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
February 22, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. It’s my great pleasure to welcome the Foreign Minister of Japan, His Excellency Fumio Kishida. We’ve just come from an excellent meeting of the President and the Prime Minister of Japan, and I think it’s fair to say that almost every topic with respect to Japanese-American relations was discussed.
We meet now, two of the three strongest economies in the world, and we meet as very special friends in a very strong alliance, an alliance that I can say to you is really evolving into a global partnership and which is critical to the peace and security of the Asia Pacific.
I want to particularly thank the people of Japan and the leadership of Japan for their extraordinary cooperation on a number of global issues: on counterterrorism - the efforts with respect to Afghanistan; where Japan has been a major partner - efforts in Mali most recently; where we regret the loss of life and we particularly express our sympathies to Japan for the loss of 10 citizens at the In Amenas facility. And Japan has worked hard with respect to the issue of nuclear nonproliferation. They have been an important partner in reducing the level of fuel being used and bought, purchased from Iran. They’ve been important with respect to the enforcement of sanctions.
Japan is also a very important partner in efforts to try to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, and the Prime Minister raised this issue in the conversation with the President. And Japan, importantly, has been part of the Major Economies Forum and the Clean Climate Coalition and other initiatives, and I think the Minister and I look forward to following up on the discussion that was initiated by the President and the Prime Minister earlier.
Just to underscore the importance of the relationship with Japan, obviously everybody has been aware of tensions around the Senkakus Islands, and I want to compliment Japan on the restraint that it has shown, its efforts to try to make sure that this does not flare up into a significant confrontation. And we make it clear with respect to the Republic of – the Democratic Republic of North Korea, which has recently engaged in very reckless behavior with its nuclear test, that we believe the alliance with Japan is strong, our security commitments with Japan are real and we stand behind them, and they are strong.
So I welcome the Foreign Minister here. There are a number of things that are less critical, I think, that we will be talking about, but I look forward to a good discussion. And most importantly, I look forward to this very important continued global alliance and partnership that we have built. Thank you for visiting us, Minister.
FOREIGN MINISTER KISHIDA: (Via interpreter) Let me start by saying that I appreciate the kind and powerful messages and words from Secretary Kerry with regard to Japan. Right after taking office as Secretary of State, we have had two opportunities so far to talk to each other over the phone, and this is our first meeting – face-to-face meeting, and certainly it is my pleasure to see you in person this time.
With Mr. Secretary, I certainly have looked forward to having discussions on the Japan-U.S. alliance, as well as how we respond to the situations in the Asia Pacific, in the Middle East, as well as the Sahel, and also how we look forward to working on global issues such as counterterrorism and also the issue of environment. And I certainly look forward to having a discussion, and also, by doing so, we would like to deepen our cooperation.
Just a while ago both Mr. Secretary and myself attended the Japan-U.S. summit meeting and during the meeting both leaders had a candid discussion to cover issues such as the economy, security affairs, as well as foreign policy challenges. And I would like to underscore that the meeting was indeed very meaningful. And right now we are going to have the Japan-U.S. foreign ministers meeting with Mr. Secretary, and by having this meeting we would like to do a follow-up based on the outcome of the discussion of the summit meeting. And also, we would like to have the exchange of opinions on the regional affairs.
Obviously, the Japan-U.S. alliance is a lynchpin of the – Japan’s foreign policy, and by working together hand in hand with Mr. Secretary, we would like to achieve progress in reinforcing the Japan-U.S. alliance. And once again, thank you very much for taking the time out to have the foreign ministers meeting today.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. Thank you.
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PANETTA GIVES PRESS CONFERENCE AT NATO HEADQUARTERS
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSEPresenter: Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta February 22, 2013
Press Conference with Secretary Panetta at NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LEON E. PANETTA: Let me begin by welcoming everyone to what should be my final press conference on this -- the last of my international trips as secretary. I've been saying that a lot lately, but my hope is that this time it really works.
Truthfully, I have appreciated the opportunity to be here and to be able to consult with my fellow NATO and ISAF defense ministers one last time as secretary of defense. And I should say that I deeply appreciate all of their -- their kind comments to me and also to Giampaolo. Both -- both Italians are going to be moving on.
Foremost on the agenda has been the mission in Afghanistan, which was the focus, as many of you know, of this morning's session and a key topic of my bilateral meetings over the last two days. In my discussions with the other ministers of defense, there is a strong consensus that our mission is succeeding, it's succeeding on the ground because of the growing role and capabilities that all of us have seen of the Afghan National Security Forces.
The ANSF are now in the lead for nearly 90 percent of combat operations. And they are on track to step into the lead for all of these operations by this spring. That has truly exceeded the expectations that were set at the Chicago summit last year, but it is as a result of their success in the field that General Allen, in particular, felt that we could make that transition in the spring.
This success led President Obama to accept General Allen's recommendation that the U.S. maintain a strong presence, once we've made this transition of combat control to the Afghans, that it was important for the United States to maintain a strong presence throughout the fighting season of 2013. What we're looking at is probably a presence in excess of 60,000 during the fighting season through the final transition of tranche five, which would take place in August of 2013.
Following that, sometime in the fall, we would then begin a drawdown that would take us to roughly about 50,000 by November, and then it would take us down, as the president indicated, to 34,000 by February of 2014. We would maintain that number through the election in order to provide and assist the Afghans in providing sufficient security for the elections. Once those elections were completed, we would then begin the final drawdown of our forces towards the end of 2014. I have full confidence that we'll be able to achieve our goal of giving the ANSF full responsibility for security nationwide by the end of 2014 and successfully complete this mission.
As my Italian father used to say in an old expression that he repeated oftentimes, "piano piano te va lontano," which means, "Step by step, you'll go a long way." And I think that's probably good advice for all of us as we approach this final period, hopefully, in the completion of the mission that we've been engaged in, in Afghanistan.
As we draw closer to the end of our combat mission, the alliance has also begun to discuss how to implement our strong commitment to the long-term security of Afghanistan. In particular, we discussed how we could best continue to support the ANSF, building on the commitments that nations made last year in Chicago.
That continued support includes enablers and the possibility of providing funding to extent the ANSF at the surge level of 352,000 through 2018, before moving towards what would then be, hopefully, a more sustainable number. That is seriously being considered by the president, and it's something we discussed with President Karzai when he came to Washington.
We also discussed how to transition to our new train, advise, and assist mission after 2014. Today, we ask NATO to begin planning for a range of options on the post-2014 posture that would provide for an effective regional presence, not only in Kabul, but at fixed sites in the north, the south, the east, and the west.
As the United States weighs our own force posture options and consults with the Afghan government on a post-2014 presence, we will continue to work very closely with ISAF nations, particularly the other regional lead nations, to continue to discuss a range of options with regards to what the NATO force will look like in that post-2014 period. And our goal is obviously to ensure the success of this new mission and the long-term stability of Afghanistan. We've made a commitment to a strong enduring presence, and we intend to stand by that commitment.
As I prepare to leave NATO headquarters, I can say that, among the things that I am most proud of as secretary is the success of our troops that have been able to achieve the kind of successful direction that we've been able to achieve on the ground in Afghanistan and the extraordinary unity and strength and resolve of ISAF.
I had the opportunities a number of times to go to Afghanistan. This last time, I went to Afghanistan, had the opportunity to meet with all of our military leaders in the field. And to a person, each of them said that -- that this mission was headed in the right direction, and they all expressed confidence in the growing capability of the Afghan force to be able to handle security and to take on the enemy.
We've laid the groundwork for how our nations can come together to resolve the security challenges of the 21st century, including emerging challenges like the threat posed by violent extremism in North Africa and cyber attacks. I think the ability of having pulled together this great alliance and the effort in Afghanistan can really serve us as a model for how we decide to take on other challenges in the world that will confront us.
To resolve these challenges together, we must really commit to acting together. And there's no question that in the current budget environment, with deep cuts in European defense spending, the kind of political gridlock that we're seeing in the United States right now with regards to our own budget, is putting at risk our ability to effectively act together.
As I prepare to step down as secretary of defense, I do fear that the alliance will soon be -- if it is not already -- stretched too thin. In our sessions devoted to these topics, the questions I asked my fellow ministers were simple. Will we let our nations retreat from our responsibilities in the face of growing budget constraints? Or will we demonstrate the kind of creativity and innovation and political will to develop and share the capabilities we must have in order to meet future security threats together as an alliance?
The choice for our allies is clear. And I want to commend Secretary General Rasmussen for his leadership in warning against the effect of budget cuts and in proposing new ideas, like the Connected Forces Initiative, that will help our militaries continue to train and operate together, even as our deployments to Afghanistan are reduced.
These are critical to ensuring the readiness of the alliance, which has to be the top priority in an unpredictable and crisis-prone world. I'd also like to commend the secretary general for making cyber a major area of focus for the next defense ministerial. It's a call that I made upon NATO that they should do. We have seen -- we are seeing continuing attacks in the cyber arena on the private sector, on the public sector, in the defense arena. This is, without question, the battlefield for the future, and it's an area that NATO needs to pay attention to.
Let me conclude by noting, as I did last month in a speech that I gave in London, that there is a generational shift that is occurring. I'm probably the last American secretary of defense to have direct memories of World War II. And our youngest men and women in uniform today were born after the end of the Cold War.
The bonds that formed the basis of our alliance were built on the basis of those 20th century conflicts. But over more than a decade of war in Afghanistan, I believe we have renewed those bonds for the 21st century and carried out the most enduring and effective alliance campaign since World War II. If we have the strength to carry those bonds forward, then I believe that we can realize our shared dream of a better and more peaceful and more secure world for future generations. Thank you.
GEORGE LITTLE: The secretary is pleased to take a few questions. We'll start with the Associated Press. Or we'll start with Bloomberg.
Q: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Gopal Ratnam with Bloomberg News. Good luck to you as you leave and head back to your beloved California. I want to ask you two questions. This morning, the German defense minister has told reporters that you had expressed to him the U.S. would keep between 8,000 and 12,000 troops in Afghanistan post-2014. One, would you confirm that? And, second, in your discussions with your counterparts here in NATO, what kind of commitments do you ask of them post-2014? And what kind of promises have you got or what kind of concerns have they expressed to you about their commitments?
SEC. PANETTA: First of all, that report is not correct. We did discuss a range of options. And what we discussed was a range of options that would -- that would be directed to the NATO force overall, which includes both the U.S. force contribution that we would make, plus what other NATO countries would contribute, as well.
And that -- those options are there. NATO will continue to do a planning process around those options. And we will be working with them as we develop the final decisions that the president makes with regards to our commitment to that enduring presence.
With regards to the 2014 period, we did describe that we felt it was important to develop this regional approach to be able to have a presence in some of the key areas in the northwest, east, and south, to be able to have a presence, obviously, in Kabul, that we would provide -- continue to provide enabling capabilities, particularly on a strategic level, with regards to those forces, and that we would continue to work with them to develop what the train, advise, and assist mission should look like. So we're going to be continuing to work on that.
And that was -- I have to say -- there was good receptivity among all of the ministers with regards to the broad elements that I described during this last session.
Q: (off mic)
SEC. PANETTA: Pardon me?
Q: (off mic)
SEC. PANETTA: All of -- all of the ministers, a number of the ministers spoke. And I have to say that all of the ministers who spoke indicated that they appreciated the outlines that we presented and that they, too, were committed to an enduring presence. So I feel very confident that we are going to get a number of nations to make that contribution for the enduring presence.
MR. LITTLE: Yes, sir?
Q: It's (inaudible) from German television ZDF. I just heard the same thing, that the minister of defense of Germany said 8,000 to 12,000, so I just would like to make that understandable for me. So you say altogether there might be 8,000 to 12,000, is the contribution of the U.S. troops even less than 8,000 to 12,000? Or -- and in which region would you like to place troops?
SEC. PANETTA: What -- what we discussed was a range of options. I don't want to go into particular numbers, because, frankly, we want -- we want to be able to have the flexibility to look at a range of options that we ought to have for our enduring presence. But I want to make very clear that the range of options we were discussing was with regards to the NATO force.
And the NATO force consists of both a U.S. presence, plus NATO contributions. And we didn't define specifics on that. Frankly, that remains to be determined as we go forward with the planning process.
MR. LITTLE: Now the Associated Press.
Q: All right, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. The discussion about extending and maintaining 352,000 Afghan troops for the next five years, can you talk a little bit about how you're going to be able to go to the U.S. Congress and defend something like that, when just the other day you had to issue public notice of furloughs for 800,000 civilian workers? How can you defend increasing this amount of spending when, obviously, the Defense Department in the United States is in deep financial problems?
SEC. PANETTA: Well, I think -- I mean, look, first and foremost, with regards to the crisis that we confront in the United States, the fact is, as I've said, that this, frankly, should not be a crisis. This is a -- this is a political crisis. It's not a crisis that relates to our capabilities within the budget that we've defined for the Defense Department.
And my hope is that -- that Congress does not allow sequester to take place. I think it would be, frankly, a very shameful and irresponsible act of political dysfunction if, in fact, that were to occur. The American people would be justly outraged to have people who they elect to office to protect them harm them by allowing sequester to take place.
So I guess my -- what I want to make clear is that sequester is -- is by no means -- doesn't reflect the budget that we have put in place to implement our strategy. It would be -- it would be truly an act of -- of irresponsibility if it happened.
And then I -- in terms of the consequences of sequester, I have to say, if sequester does take place, it could impact not only our readiness, but, frankly, the role that we would play with regards to the readiness of NATO, as well. So all of that would be impacted if that occurred.
Assuming that doesn't happen, then our view is that we -- you know, if the president makes the decision to continue the ANSF presence at 352,000, that that would be an investment that would be worth making, because it would allow us greater flexibility as we take down our troops, and it would allow us greater flexibility, frankly, to save in the funds that we now dedicate to the warfighting effort. And I think I can make that case to the Congress, that that would be an effective tradeoff.
MR. LITTLE: We have time for one more question. Yes, sir? And we'll wrap it up.
Q: (Inaudible), Tolo TV Afghanistan. Sir, most of the Afghans believe that the U.S. will abandon Afghanistan again when the combat mission finishes in Afghanistan. What type of guarantee you can give them, sir? Because on one hand, Taliban still pose a serious threat to the Afghan government, and the peace process is also not going well.
SEC. PANETTA: I -- you know, I want to make clear that -- that the United States and ISAF, the NATO -- the NATO countries that are involved in the ISAF effort, all of us are committed to supporting Afghanistan, not just now, but in the future. And that commitment is unwavering.
And the best example of that commitment is that we are going to maintain in excess of 60,000 troops there even after we've made the transition to the Afghans for combat responsibility. So we will maintain a significant presence there through a key fighting season and through the final transition of areas. And even as we draw down, we'll still maintain a significant presence there throughout the Afghan election.
And beyond that, we will maintain an enduring presence to be able to fulfill two key missions, to be able to train, assist and continue to support the Afghan army and defense force, and in addition to that, to conduct counterterrorism activities to make sure that Al Qaida and its affiliates never again are able to establish a safe haven there.
So I -- in the discussions I've had, both with President Karzai, with the defense minister, and with others, we have made very clear that we have a continuing and dedicated commitment to make sure that Afghanistan is a country that ultimately can govern and secure itself.
MR. LITTLE: Thank you, everyone. Have a good afternoon.
U.S. JOINS LAWSUIT AGAINST LANCE ARMSTRONG AND OTHERS
United States Joins Lawsuit Alleging Lance Armstrong and Others Caused the Submission of False Claims to the U.S. Postal Service
The Department of Justice announced today that the government has joined a civil lawsuit alleging that Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel and Tailwind Sports LLC and Tailwind Sports Corporation (Tailwind) submitted or caused the submission of false claims to the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) in connection with its sponsorship of a professional bicycle racing team by regularly employing banned substances and methods to enhance their performance, in violation of the USPS sponsorship agreements.
From 1996 through 2004, the USPS sponsored a professional cycling team owned by Tailwind and its predecessors. Lance Armstrong was the lead rider on the team, and between 1999 and 2004, he won six consecutive Tour de France titles as a member of the USPS-sponsored team. Johan Bruyneel was the directeur sportif, or manager, of the cycling team.
The sponsorship agreements gave the USPS certain promotional rights, including the right to prominent placement of the USPS logo on the cycling team’s uniform. Each of the agreements required the team to follow the rules of cycling’s governing bodies, which prohibited the use of certain performance enhancing substances and methods. Between 2001 and 2004 alone, the Postal Service paid $31 million in sponsorship fees.
The lawsuit joined today by the government alleges that riders on the USPS-sponsored team, including Armstrong, knowingly caused the USPS agreements to be violated by regularly employing banned substances and methods to enhance their performance. The lawsuit further alleges that Bruyneel knew that team members were using performance enhancing substances and facilitated the practice.
The government today notified the court that it is joining this lawsuit against Armstrong, Bruyneel and Tailwind, and will file its formal complaint within 60 days.
"The Postal Service contract with Tailwind required the team to enter cycling races, wear the Postal Service logo, and follow the rules banning performance enhancing substances – rules that Lance Armstrong has now admitted he violated," said Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. "Today’s action demonstrates the Department of Justice’s steadfast commitment to safeguarding federal funds and making sure that contractors live up to their promises."
"Lance Armstrong and his cycling team took more than $30 million from the U.S. Postal Service based on their contractual promise to play fair and abide by the rules – including the rules against doping," said Ronald C. Machen Jr., U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. "The Postal Service has now seen its sponsorship unfairly associated with what has been described as ‘the most sophisticated, professionalized, and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.’ This lawsuit is designed to help the Postal Service recoup the tens of millions of dollars it paid out to the Tailwind cycling team based on years of broken promises. In today’s economic climate, the U.S. Postal Service is simply not in a position to allow Lance Armstrong or any of the other defendants to walk away with the tens of millions of dollars they illegitimately procured."
"The Postal Service conducts business with many different contractors and subcontractors, with a large majority of them providing a much needed service and fulfilling their contractual duties. It is critical that public confidence in contractor performance remains high. When that public trust is compromised, as occurred in this case, the Office of Inspector General will fully investigate," said David C. Williams, Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service, and Office of Inspector General.
"The Postal Service strongly supports intervention by the Department of Justice in this matter and a vigorous pursuit of this case," said Postal Service General Counsel and Executive Vice President Mary Anne Gibbons. "The defendants agreed to play by the rules and not use performance enhancing drugs. We now know that the defendants failed to live up to their agreement, and instead knowingly engaged in a pattern of activity that violated the rules of professional cycling and, therefore, violated the terms of their contracts with the Postal Service. For that reason, the Postal Service fully agrees with the decision by the Department of Justice to seek appropriate damages under the False Claims Act."
For many years, including during the USPS sponsorships, Armstrong and others repeatedly denied that the team used performance enhancing substances or methods. Yet on Oct. 10, 2012, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) issued a report concluding that Armstrong used banned performance enhancing substances starting in at least 1998 and continuing throughout his professional career, and that he pressured and helped his teammates to engage in similar conduct. Accordingly, USADA disqualified all of his competitive results since Aug. 1, 1998, including his seven Tour de France victories, and banned him from sport for life pursuant to the World Anti-Doping Code.
In a recently-televised interview with Oprah Winfrey, Armstrong contradicted his earlier denials and admitted that he used banned substances and methods throughout his career, starting in the mid-1990s. In particular, he admitted having engaged in banned practices during each of his seven Tour de France victories, including the six he won as a USPS rider. Armstrong explained that he avoided detection by anti-doping authorities by carefully timing his use of banned drugs so that they would leave his system prior to his undergoing cycling’s required periodic drug testing.
The lawsuit joined by the United States was filed by Floyd Landis, a former rider and teammate of Armstrong on the USPS sponsored team from 2002 through 2004. The lawsuit was filed under the False Claims Act, which imposes liability on those who submit false claims for government funds, and provides for the recovery of three times the government’s damages, plus civil penalties. The False Claims Act contains a qui tam or whistleblower provision, which permits private parties to sue on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in any recovery. The False Claims Act permits the government to investigate the allegations and intervene, or decline to intervene in the whistleblower’s lawsuit. While the government notified the court that it was joining the lawsuit’s allegations as to Armstrong, Bruyneel, and Tailwind, it advised the court that it was not intervening in the case as to several other defendants named in the complaint.
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Delery and U.S. Attorney Machen commended the coordinated effort of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, and the USPS Office of Inspector General and Office of General Counsel, in their investigation of this matter.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is captioned United States ex rel. Landis v. Tailwind Sports Corporation, et al. The claims made in the complaint are only allegations and do not constitute a determination of liability. Trial Attorney Robert Chandler of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Darrell Valdez and Mercedeh Momeni of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia are representing the government.
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Friday, February 22, 2013 United States Joins Lawsuit Alleging Lance Armstrong and Others Caused the Submission of False Claims to the U.S. Postal Service
The Department of Justice announced today that the government has joined a civil lawsuit alleging that Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel and Tailwind Sports LLC and Tailwind Sports Corporation (Tailwind) submitted or caused the submission of false claims to the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) in connection with its sponsorship of a professional bicycle racing team by regularly employing banned substances and methods to enhance their performance, in violation of the USPS sponsorship agreements.
From 1996 through 2004, the USPS sponsored a professional cycling team owned by Tailwind and its predecessors. Lance Armstrong was the lead rider on the team, and between 1999 and 2004, he won six consecutive Tour de France titles as a member of the USPS-sponsored team. Johan Bruyneel was the directeur sportif, or manager, of the cycling team.
The sponsorship agreements gave the USPS certain promotional rights, including the right to prominent placement of the USPS logo on the cycling team’s uniform. Each of the agreements required the team to follow the rules of cycling’s governing bodies, which prohibited the use of certain performance enhancing substances and methods. Between 2001 and 2004 alone, the Postal Service paid $31 million in sponsorship fees.
The lawsuit joined today by the government alleges that riders on the USPS-sponsored team, including Armstrong, knowingly caused the USPS agreements to be violated by regularly employing banned substances and methods to enhance their performance. The lawsuit further alleges that Bruyneel knew that team members were using performance enhancing substances and facilitated the practice.
The government today notified the court that it is joining this lawsuit against Armstrong, Bruyneel and Tailwind, and will file its formal complaint within 60 days.
"The Postal Service contract with Tailwind required the team to enter cycling races, wear the Postal Service logo, and follow the rules banning performance enhancing substances – rules that Lance Armstrong has now admitted he violated," said Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. "Today’s action demonstrates the Department of Justice’s steadfast commitment to safeguarding federal funds and making sure that contractors live up to their promises."
"Lance Armstrong and his cycling team took more than $30 million from the U.S. Postal Service based on their contractual promise to play fair and abide by the rules – including the rules against doping," said Ronald C. Machen Jr., U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. "The Postal Service has now seen its sponsorship unfairly associated with what has been described as ‘the most sophisticated, professionalized, and successful doping program that sport has ever seen.’ This lawsuit is designed to help the Postal Service recoup the tens of millions of dollars it paid out to the Tailwind cycling team based on years of broken promises. In today’s economic climate, the U.S. Postal Service is simply not in a position to allow Lance Armstrong or any of the other defendants to walk away with the tens of millions of dollars they illegitimately procured."
"The Postal Service conducts business with many different contractors and subcontractors, with a large majority of them providing a much needed service and fulfilling their contractual duties. It is critical that public confidence in contractor performance remains high. When that public trust is compromised, as occurred in this case, the Office of Inspector General will fully investigate," said David C. Williams, Inspector General, U.S. Postal Service, and Office of Inspector General.
"The Postal Service strongly supports intervention by the Department of Justice in this matter and a vigorous pursuit of this case," said Postal Service General Counsel and Executive Vice President Mary Anne Gibbons. "The defendants agreed to play by the rules and not use performance enhancing drugs. We now know that the defendants failed to live up to their agreement, and instead knowingly engaged in a pattern of activity that violated the rules of professional cycling and, therefore, violated the terms of their contracts with the Postal Service. For that reason, the Postal Service fully agrees with the decision by the Department of Justice to seek appropriate damages under the False Claims Act."
For many years, including during the USPS sponsorships, Armstrong and others repeatedly denied that the team used performance enhancing substances or methods. Yet on Oct. 10, 2012, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) issued a report concluding that Armstrong used banned performance enhancing substances starting in at least 1998 and continuing throughout his professional career, and that he pressured and helped his teammates to engage in similar conduct. Accordingly, USADA disqualified all of his competitive results since Aug. 1, 1998, including his seven Tour de France victories, and banned him from sport for life pursuant to the World Anti-Doping Code.
In a recently-televised interview with Oprah Winfrey, Armstrong contradicted his earlier denials and admitted that he used banned substances and methods throughout his career, starting in the mid-1990s. In particular, he admitted having engaged in banned practices during each of his seven Tour de France victories, including the six he won as a USPS rider. Armstrong explained that he avoided detection by anti-doping authorities by carefully timing his use of banned drugs so that they would leave his system prior to his undergoing cycling’s required periodic drug testing.
The lawsuit joined by the United States was filed by Floyd Landis, a former rider and teammate of Armstrong on the USPS sponsored team from 2002 through 2004. The lawsuit was filed under the False Claims Act, which imposes liability on those who submit false claims for government funds, and provides for the recovery of three times the government’s damages, plus civil penalties. The False Claims Act contains a qui tam or whistleblower provision, which permits private parties to sue on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in any recovery. The False Claims Act permits the government to investigate the allegations and intervene, or decline to intervene in the whistleblower’s lawsuit. While the government notified the court that it was joining the lawsuit’s allegations as to Armstrong, Bruyneel, and Tailwind, it advised the court that it was not intervening in the case as to several other defendants named in the complaint.
Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Delery and U.S. Attorney Machen commended the coordinated effort of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, and the USPS Office of Inspector General and Office of General Counsel, in their investigation of this matter.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is captioned United States ex rel. Landis v. Tailwind Sports Corporation, et al. The claims made in the complaint are only allegations and do not constitute a determination of liability. Trial Attorney Robert Chandler of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Darrell Valdez and Mercedeh Momeni of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia are representing the government.
NEW YORK MERCANTILE EXCHANGE, INC., CHARGED IN CONNECTION WITH DISCLOSURE OF CUSTOMER TRADES CASE
,+CREDIT,+CFTC+WEB+PAGE.jpg)
FROM: U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION CFTC Charges CME Group’s New York Mercantile Exchange and Two Former Employees with Disclosing Material Nonpublic Information about Customer Trades
Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today filed an enforcement action charging the New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (CME NYMEX), which is owned and operated by the CME Group, and two former CME NYMEX employees, William Byrnes and Christopher Curtin, with violating the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC Regulations through the repeated disclosures of material nonpublic customer information over of period of two and one-half years to an outside commodity broker who was not authorized to receive the information.
The CFTC’s Complaint, filed on February 21, 2013, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that Byrnes and Curtin worked on the CME ClearPort Facilitation Desk and were responsible for facilitating customer transactions reported for clearing through the CME ClearPort electronic system. The Complaint alleges that at least from in or about February 2008 to September 2010, Byrnes knowingly and willfully disclosed material nonpublic information about CME NYMEX trading and customers, including about trades cleared through CME ClearPort, to a commodity broker on at least 60 occasions. The Complaint further alleges that between May 2008 and March 2009, Curtin knowingly and willfully disclosed the same type of information to the same commodity broker on at least 16 additional occasions. The nonpublic customer information unlawfully disclosed by Byrnes and Curtin in conversations — often captured on tape — included details of recently executed trades, the identities of the parties to specific trades, the brokers involved in trades, the number of contracts traded, the prices paid, the structure of particular transactions, and the trading strategies of market participants, according to the Complaint.
The Complaint alleges that the CME NYMEX and the two former employees violated the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC Regulations, which specifically prohibit the disclosures of this type of customer information.
The CFTC’s Complaint also alleges that in July 2009, a market participant complained to CME NYMEX that the participant believed nonpublic information about trades cleared through CME ClearPort had been disclosed by a CME NYMEX employee named "Billy." Although a CME NYMEX Managing Director who investigated the market participant’s complaint identified "Billy" to be William Byrnes, CME NYMEX did not then question Byrnes, and Byrnes’s illegal disclosures continued for over a year, until at least September 2010. Ultimately, CME NYMEX terminated Byrnes’s employment in December 2010 after yet another market participant complained to CME NYMEX about disclosures of nonpublic customer information. Curtin had previously left CME NYMEX voluntarily.
In its continuing litigation, the CFTC seeks civil monetary penalties, trading and registration bans, and a permanent injunction prohibiting further violations of the federal commodities laws, as charged.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this case include Patrick Daly, James Wheaton, David W. MacGregor, Lenel Hickson, Stephen J. Obie, and Vincent A. McGonagle.
RECENT U.S. NAVY PHOTOS
FROM: U.S. NAVY
The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) pulls away from the pier at Naval Station Norfolk for a deployment to support maritime security operation and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility, Feb. 21. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ryan D. McLearnon-Released)
An MV-22 Osprey assigned to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 265 takes off from the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) as another Osprey prepares for take-off. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jerome D. Johnson-Released)
NATO MINISTERS DISCUSS TROOP STRENGTH IN AFGHANISTAN
 |
| Photo: U.S. Drawdown In Afghanistan. U.S. Army Photo. |
NATO Ponders Afghan Troop Strength, Official Says
By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service
BRUSSELS, Feb. 21, 2013 - NATO defense ministers gathered here are considering proposals to keep the number of Afghan national security forces at 325,000 for the next five years, according to a NATO official.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is here this week for the gathering of NATO defense ministers and representatives of non-NATO partner nations.
The official spoke to reporters on background, because the alliance and the Afghan government are still in discussions about the issue, and no final decision is expected soon.
Member nations fully realize that now, as the alliance enters a new phase of operations in Afghanistan and prepares to cut back on coalition troop strength, "we need to ensure that the Afghans are confident about the future," the official said.
Two narratives common among the Afghan people are working against success for coalition and Afghan forces, the official said: that coalition forces are there as occupiers, or that NATO will abandon Afghanistan after the transition to Afghan security lead is complete in 2014.
While the coalition has achieved "extraordinary progress" in defeating the Taliban and building Afghan forces, he said, it's now critical to address the Afghans' uncertainty.
Afghan soldiers and police are effective in their missions, but are increasingly distracted by fears about their personal futures, the official said. Coalition forces don't have to worry about whether they'll have a job, or get a paycheck, from year to year, he noted, but Afghan forces do.
If NATO can give Afghanistan's people solid assurances of the alliance's continued commitment beyond 2014, he said, "that's the one thing left, now, to advance the campaign forward."
Friday, February 22, 2013
HHS SAYS HEALTH CARE OPTION COMPARISONS BEGIN IN 2014
 |
| Ambulances. Credit: U.S. Air Force. |
Health care law allows consumers to easily find and compare options starting in 2014
New rule will expand mental health and substance use disorder benefits to 62 million Americans
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced a final rule that will make purchasing health coverage easier for consumers. The policies outlined today will give consumers a consistent way to compare and enroll in health coverage in the individual and small group markets, while giving states and insurers more flexibility and freedom to implement the Affordable Care Act.
"The Affordable Care Act helps people get the health insurance they need," said Secretary Sebelius. "People all across the country will soon find it easier to compare and enroll in health plans with better coverage, greater quality and new benefits."
Today’s rule outlines health insurance issuer standards for a core package of benefits, called essential health benefits, that health insurance issuers must cover both inside and outside the Health Insurance Marketplace. Through its standards for essential health benefits, the final rule released today also expands coverage of mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment, for millions of Americans.
A new report by HHS, also released today, details how these provisions will expand mental health and substance use disorder benefits and federal parity protections for 62 million more Americans.
In the past, nearly 20 percent of individuals purchasing insurance didn’t have access to mental health services, and nearly one third had no coverage for substance use disorder services. The rule seeks to fix that gap in coverage by expanding coverage of these benefits in three distinct ways:
By applying federal parity protections to mental health and substance use disorder benefits in the individual and small group markets
By providing more Americans with access to quality health care that includes coverage for mental health and substance use disorder services
To give states the flexibility to define essential health benefits in a way that would best meet the needs of their residents, this rule also finalizes a benchmark-based approach. This approach allows states to select a benchmark plan from options offered in the market, which are equal in scope to a typical employer plan. Twenty-six states selected a benchmark plan for their state, and the largest small business plan in each state will be the benchmark for the rest.
The rule additionally outlines actuarial value levels in the individual and small group markets, which helps to distinguish health plans offering different levels of coverage. Beginning in 2014, plans that cover essential health benefits must cover a certain percentage of costs, known as actuarial value or "metal levels." These levels are 60 percent for a bronze plan, 70 percent for a silver plan, 80 percent for a gold plan, and 90 percent for a platinum plan. Metal levels will allow consumers to compare insurance plans with similar levels of coverage and cost-sharing based on premiums, provider networks, and other factors. In addition, the health care law limits the annual amount of cost sharing that individuals will pay across all health plans – preventing insured Americans from facing catastrophic costs associated with an illness or injury.
Policies in today’s rule also provide more information on accreditation standards for qualified health plans (QHPs) that will be offered through the Health Insurance Marketplaces (also known as Exchanges), one-stop shops that will provide access to quality, affordable private health insurance choices.
Together, these provisions will help consumers compare and select health plans in the individual and small group markets based on what is important to them and their families. People can make these choices knowing these health plans will cover a core set of critical benefits and can more easily compare the level of coverage based on a uniform standard. Further, these provisions help expand choices and competition on the Marketplaces.
DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER WARNS OF CHAOS
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSEBy Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Feb. 21, 2013 - Deep, across-the board spending cuts scheduled to take effect March 1 would cause chaos for the Defense Department, Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said in a televised interview yesterday.
Carter told Judy Woodruff on "PBS Newshour" that the department will do what it can to minimize disruptions should the cuts kick in, but it can do only so much.
"We don't have a lot of flexibility, and we don't have a lot of time in that regard," Carter said.
A "sequestration" mechanism in budget law requires DOD to cut $46 billion in spending from March 1 until the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year unless Congress comes up with an alternative that would stop sequestration from triggering. This comes on top of $487 billion in defense spending reductions already programmed over 10 years, and Pentagon officials have noted that operating under continuing resolutions in the absence of a fiscal year budget complicates matters.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta notified Congress yesterday that the department is preparing to place almost all of its 800,000 civilian employees on unpaid furlough for one day a week through the rest of the fiscal year. These are not faceless bureaucrats who simply shuffle paper, Carter said.
"They repair our ships. They maintain our aircraft," Carter said. "That's who these people are, and 44 percent of them are veterans. It's a terrible thing to have to deprive them of some of their income."
If sequestration triggers, operations and maintenance -- the primary funding that ensures readiness -- will be particularly affected. The department will ensure units deploying to Afghanistan will receive the training needed to succeed. But this will rob other units readying for other missions, Carter said.
"That's just a mathematical fact of doing sequester," he added. "This is very damaging to national security."
In planning for sequestration, the Navy already has postponed sending an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf to join one already there, to ensure there will be enough ready carriers to dispatch to other critical areas if required.
"In everything we do, we're really trying to keep on protecting the country and delivering the defense under these circumstances," Carter said.
STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S COMMENTS ON POSTHARVEST LOSS AND FOOD SECURITY
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Food Security and Minimizing Postharvest Loss
Remarks
Robert D. Hormats
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
Marshall Center East Auditorium
Washington, DC
February 19, 2013
Thank you for participating in today’s conference on post-harvest losses. In particular, I would like to thank many of you here today. Your work to reduce post-harvest losses and support food security and sustainability throughout the globe is critical. Finding and supporting efforts to stop post-harvest food loss has been a high priority for me since I took this job over three years ago.
Especially because the measures to avoid post-harvest losses are within reach if we and other countries take bold action.
The scale of post-harvest food loss is tragic. Nearly one-third of global agricultural production never makes it to the consumer or arrives in poor condition. Beyond the threat to food security, post-harvest losses adversely affect farmers and consumers in the lowest income groups. And, post-harvest food losses are a waste of valuable farming inputs, such as water, energy, land, labor, and capital. Having lived in East Africa earlier in my life, I saw the magnitude of post-harvest food losses in that region, and the tragic repercussions for human hunger, loss of farmer income, and harm to economic growth.
I have discussed the importance of reducing post-harvest losses in my meetings with leaders in India, Africa, and other parts of the world—and, indeed, at the G-8 and at APEC. Post-harvest losses can be reduced through:
The development and dissemination of regionally-appropriate technologies and techniques, and
Adoption of policies and incentives for investment in post-harvest infrastructure.
Developing New Technologies and Techniques
First, it’s important to develop technologies and techniques to reduce post-harvest losses that are appropriate to the needs of local communities. Needs vary widely, depending on crop type, region, weather, and other variables. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. The U.S. government is taking a comprehensive approach to helping countries solve the problem of post-harvest food loss. This includes, the Obama Administration’s Feed the Future initiative, which promotes a series of programs to reduce post-harvest losses. In Ghana, for example, Feed the Future is improving grain storage through better technology and processing techniques.
And, at the 2012 G8 Summit at Camp David, President Obama, other G8 leaders, and leaders from African partner countries launched the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.
The Alliance emphasizes engaging more partners from the private sector in these efforts and taking bold steps to reduce post-harvest food losses.
Indeed, a number of world-class companies, such as ADM, Cargill, Ingersoll-Rand, and Walmart, have already successfully deployed food storage and preservation technologies in several regions of the world. These companies are making a difference—supporting local farmers by efficiently moving their food products to store shelves with little loss.
In addition, companies such as ADM, NGO and individual donors, and many others are investing in universities and research institutions—such as at the University of Illinois and at the University of California, Davis—to carry out cutting-edge research programs, some of which you will hear more about during today’s program.
Several entrepreneurs have also stepped up to develop new technologies and approaches to reduce food loss. I recently met with Promethean Power Systems—a start-up co-founded by an MIT graduate and a Boston entrepreneur. They have partnered with an Indian company called Icelings to develop a solar-powered refrigeration system for transporting fruits and vegetables from rural farms to city markets. Technologies like this will improve the livelihoods of farmers in India by reliably getting their produce to market and will help consumers by increasing the availability of food. In June 2012, Secretary Clinton awarded the Promethean-Icelings partnership the first ever grant of the U.S.-India Science and Technology Endowment Fund.
There are many examples of new technologies and techniques being developed to reduce post-harvest food loss. These innovative solutions are essential.
Policies and Incentives to Invest in Post-Harvest Loss Mitigation
But even with the right technology solutions, many countries lack meaningful incentives, affordable financing options, and necessary government policies to encourage farmers to adopt efficient practices. Many countries lack the incentives for retailers to invest in equipment, facilities, and stores needed to reduce food loss and broaden market opportunities. And, government policies and regulations in some countries make it difficult for investments to be profitable. That’s why—in addition to developing new technologies and techniques—it is critical that governments adopt policies that encourage greater investment in post-harvest storage and distribution network infrastructures.
Some important progress is being made.
I recently returned from a trip to India, where I met with government officials who have taken steps to open India’s multi-brand retail sector to encourage foreign direct investment. This policy shift was aimed, in part, at building modern food supply chains, developing cold storage infrastructure, and improving overall agricultural efficiency and sustainability in India. Foreign direct investment in the multi-brand retail sector—as well as the development of India’s own storage and distribution industry and post-harvest technologies—are critical for India’s overall economic growth prospects as well as for the success of its agricultural sector.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh explained that an organized and efficient retail sector "will help to ensure that a third of our fruits and vegetables, which at present are wasted because of storage and transit losses, actually reach the consumer." Prime Minister Singh makes a compelling point—one that was echoed in my meetings with the Global Cold Chain Alliance’s India Division and the Agra Cold Storage Owners Association.
I have heard similar sentiments in other parts of the world. The need for investment in post-harvest infrastructure is clear and present. It’s time to remove bottlenecks and unlock business investment. The Department of State, USAID, and others in the U.S. government are working with foreign governments across the globe to help facilitate and make viable investment in post-harvest infrastructure.
Meeting the food demands of an ever-increasing world population presents a major challenge for the 21st century. Among the most important and efficient ways to improve food security, nutrition, and incomes for millions of small farmers is to make certain that every bushel of wheat, liter of milk, or kilogram of rice that is produced is stored properly and delivered efficiently from farm to table. A great deal of work is being done to improve agricultural productivity in a sustainable way around the world. But, at the same time, we must also work to ensure that goods produced by farmers actually have good markets and reach consumers in good condition. It’s high time to make solving the problem of post-harvest food losses an urgent global priority—and to make such losses a thing of the past.
Success will improve the food security of hundreds of millions of people around the world, boost the incomes of millions of small holder farmers in villages and towns throughout the world’s developing and emerging countries, and represent a giant step forward to better conserve our planet’s natural resources.
Thank you.
Food Security and Minimizing Postharvest Loss
Remarks
Robert D. Hormats
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
Marshall Center East Auditorium
Washington, DC
February 19, 2013
Thank you for participating in today’s conference on post-harvest losses. In particular, I would like to thank many of you here today. Your work to reduce post-harvest losses and support food security and sustainability throughout the globe is critical. Finding and supporting efforts to stop post-harvest food loss has been a high priority for me since I took this job over three years ago.
Especially because the measures to avoid post-harvest losses are within reach if we and other countries take bold action.
The scale of post-harvest food loss is tragic. Nearly one-third of global agricultural production never makes it to the consumer or arrives in poor condition. Beyond the threat to food security, post-harvest losses adversely affect farmers and consumers in the lowest income groups. And, post-harvest food losses are a waste of valuable farming inputs, such as water, energy, land, labor, and capital. Having lived in East Africa earlier in my life, I saw the magnitude of post-harvest food losses in that region, and the tragic repercussions for human hunger, loss of farmer income, and harm to economic growth.
I have discussed the importance of reducing post-harvest losses in my meetings with leaders in India, Africa, and other parts of the world—and, indeed, at the G-8 and at APEC. Post-harvest losses can be reduced through:
Adoption of policies and incentives for investment in post-harvest infrastructure.
Developing New Technologies and Techniques
First, it’s important to develop technologies and techniques to reduce post-harvest losses that are appropriate to the needs of local communities. Needs vary widely, depending on crop type, region, weather, and other variables. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. The U.S. government is taking a comprehensive approach to helping countries solve the problem of post-harvest food loss. This includes, the Obama Administration’s Feed the Future initiative, which promotes a series of programs to reduce post-harvest losses. In Ghana, for example, Feed the Future is improving grain storage through better technology and processing techniques.
And, at the 2012 G8 Summit at Camp David, President Obama, other G8 leaders, and leaders from African partner countries launched the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.
The Alliance emphasizes engaging more partners from the private sector in these efforts and taking bold steps to reduce post-harvest food losses.
Indeed, a number of world-class companies, such as ADM, Cargill, Ingersoll-Rand, and Walmart, have already successfully deployed food storage and preservation technologies in several regions of the world. These companies are making a difference—supporting local farmers by efficiently moving their food products to store shelves with little loss.
In addition, companies such as ADM, NGO and individual donors, and many others are investing in universities and research institutions—such as at the University of Illinois and at the University of California, Davis—to carry out cutting-edge research programs, some of which you will hear more about during today’s program.
Several entrepreneurs have also stepped up to develop new technologies and approaches to reduce food loss. I recently met with Promethean Power Systems—a start-up co-founded by an MIT graduate and a Boston entrepreneur. They have partnered with an Indian company called Icelings to develop a solar-powered refrigeration system for transporting fruits and vegetables from rural farms to city markets. Technologies like this will improve the livelihoods of farmers in India by reliably getting their produce to market and will help consumers by increasing the availability of food. In June 2012, Secretary Clinton awarded the Promethean-Icelings partnership the first ever grant of the U.S.-India Science and Technology Endowment Fund.
There are many examples of new technologies and techniques being developed to reduce post-harvest food loss. These innovative solutions are essential.
Policies and Incentives to Invest in Post-Harvest Loss Mitigation
But even with the right technology solutions, many countries lack meaningful incentives, affordable financing options, and necessary government policies to encourage farmers to adopt efficient practices. Many countries lack the incentives for retailers to invest in equipment, facilities, and stores needed to reduce food loss and broaden market opportunities. And, government policies and regulations in some countries make it difficult for investments to be profitable. That’s why—in addition to developing new technologies and techniques—it is critical that governments adopt policies that encourage greater investment in post-harvest storage and distribution network infrastructures.
Some important progress is being made.
I recently returned from a trip to India, where I met with government officials who have taken steps to open India’s multi-brand retail sector to encourage foreign direct investment. This policy shift was aimed, in part, at building modern food supply chains, developing cold storage infrastructure, and improving overall agricultural efficiency and sustainability in India. Foreign direct investment in the multi-brand retail sector—as well as the development of India’s own storage and distribution industry and post-harvest technologies—are critical for India’s overall economic growth prospects as well as for the success of its agricultural sector.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh explained that an organized and efficient retail sector "will help to ensure that a third of our fruits and vegetables, which at present are wasted because of storage and transit losses, actually reach the consumer." Prime Minister Singh makes a compelling point—one that was echoed in my meetings with the Global Cold Chain Alliance’s India Division and the Agra Cold Storage Owners Association.
I have heard similar sentiments in other parts of the world. The need for investment in post-harvest infrastructure is clear and present. It’s time to remove bottlenecks and unlock business investment. The Department of State, USAID, and others in the U.S. government are working with foreign governments across the globe to help facilitate and make viable investment in post-harvest infrastructure.
Meeting the food demands of an ever-increasing world population presents a major challenge for the 21st century. Among the most important and efficient ways to improve food security, nutrition, and incomes for millions of small farmers is to make certain that every bushel of wheat, liter of milk, or kilogram of rice that is produced is stored properly and delivered efficiently from farm to table. A great deal of work is being done to improve agricultural productivity in a sustainable way around the world. But, at the same time, we must also work to ensure that goods produced by farmers actually have good markets and reach consumers in good condition. It’s high time to make solving the problem of post-harvest food losses an urgent global priority—and to make such losses a thing of the past.
Success will improve the food security of hundreds of millions of people around the world, boost the incomes of millions of small holder farmers in villages and towns throughout the world’s developing and emerging countries, and represent a giant step forward to better conserve our planet’s natural resources.
Thank you.
NEWS FROM AFGHANISTAN FOR FEBRUARY 22, 2013
 |
| U.S. Army Lt. Col. Thomas M. Feltey, second left, meets with an Afghan uniform police commander and other district leaders after the first district leaders' shura in Spin Boldak in Kandahar province, Afghanistan, Feb. 11, 2013. Feltry commands the 2nd Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Shane Hamann |
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Precision Strike Kills Taliban IED Expert
From an International Security Assistance Force Joint Command News Release
KABUL, Afghanistan, Feb. 22, 2013 - A precision strike killed Zekaria, a Taliban improvised explosive device expert, in the Chahar Darah district of Afghanistan's Kunduz province yesterday, military officials reported. The strike will significantly degrade the ability of insurgents to conduct attacks in the Charhar Darah district, International Security Assistance Force Joint Command officials said.
In other news, ISAF Joint Command officials confirmed today that Habib, a Taliban leader, was killed by a precision strike yesterday in Logar province's Charkh district. He obtained weapons for insurgents and helped to plan attacks against Afghan and coalition forces, officials said.
FEMA ARCHAEOLOGISTS FIND ANCIENT NATIVE AMERICAN ARTIFACTS NEAR LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN
 |
| Lake Pontchartrain. Jocelyn Augustino-FEMA |
FEMA
Archaeologists Discover One of the Oldest Native American Artifacts South of Lake Pontchartrain
NEW ORLEANS – Pottery sherds, animal bones and pieces of clay tobacco pipes are among the items recently discovered by a team of archaeologists under contract to the Federal Emergency Management Agency surveying land near Bayou St. John in New Orleans.
"It was a bit of a surprise to find this," said FEMA Louisiana Recovery Office Deputy Director of Programs Andre Cadogan, referencing a small, broken pottery fragment. "We clearly discovered pottery from the late Marksville period, which dates to 300-400 A.D. The pottery was nice, easily dateable, and much earlier than we expected. This is exciting news for historians and Tribal communities as it represents some of the only intact prehistoric remains of its kind south of Lake Pontchartrain."
The Bayou St. John spot holds a prominence in New Orleans’ history, throughout the years serving as the location of a Native American occupation, a French fort, a Spanish fort, an American fort, a resort hotel and then an amusement park. Through a series of shovel tests and methodological excavation, the archaeologists discovered evidence of the early Native Americans, the colonial period and the hotel.
"The historical record tells us that the shell midden (or mound) created by the Native American occupation was destroyed by the French when they built their fort here," said Cadogan. "However, we’ve discovered, through archaeology, that rather than destroy the midden, the French cut off the top of it and used it as a foundation for their fort."
FEMA’s work near Bayou St. John is part of an agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office, Indian Tribes and the state to perform archaeological surveys of parks and public land in the city of New Orleans. It falls under FEMA’s Environmental and Historic Preservation program, which evaluates historical and environmental concerns that may arise from projects funded by federal dollars.
FEMA hazard mitigation funding was used for thousands of home elevations and reconstructions throughout Louisiana. Rather than evaluate every property for archaeological remains—a nearly impossible task—FEMA, the State Historic Preservation Office and various consulting parties signed an agreement, which allowed FEMA to conduct alternate studies such as the archaeological surveys.
"The surveys not only offset potential destruction of archaeological resources on private property from the home mitigations but also give us a leg up on any future storms. We are helping the state of Louisiana learn about its history as well as provide information that leads to preparedness for the next event," said Cadogan.
FEMA, in coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office and Indian Tribes, identified the areas to be surveyed. Once the field studies are completed and all of the artifacts are analyzed and recorded, the State Historic Preservation Office will become stewards of the information.
INVESTMENT ADVISER LOCATED IN VIRGIN ISLANDS CHARGED WITH DEFRAUDING CLIENTS
 |
| Off The Island Of St. Thomas. Credit: CIA World Factbook. |
Washington, D.C., Feb. 21, 2013 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged an investment adviser located in the U.S. Virgin Islands with defrauding clients from whom he withheld the fact that he was receiving kickbacks for investing their money in thinly-traded companies. When he faced pressure to pay clients their returns on those investments, he allegedly used money from other clients in a Ponzi-like fashion to make payments.
The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that James S. Tagliaferri, through his St. Thomas-based firm TAG Virgin Islands, routinely used his discretionary authority over the accounts of his clients to purchase promissory notes issued by particular private companies. In exchange for financing those companies, TAG received millions of dollars in cash and other compensation — a conflict of interest that was never disclosed to investors. The Enforcement Division further alleges that when the promissory notes neared or passed maturity and his clients demanded payment, Tagliaferri misused assets of other clients to meet those demands.
"Tagliaferri was anything but forthcoming with his clients and he repeatedly failed to act in their best interests," said Andrew M. Calamari, Director of the SEC’s New York Regional Office. "He didn’t tell them about the compensation he received from the companies they were financing, and then compounded his fraud by using client assets to pay other clients when the conflicted investments came due."
In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York today announced criminal charges against Tagliaferri.
According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings, Tagliaferri invested TAG clients primarily in conservative and liquid investments such as municipal bonds and blue-chip stocks until around 2007, when he began investing clients in highly illiquid securities. These investments included promissory notes issued by various closely-held private companies that were nothing more than holding companies through which an individual and his family effected personal and business transactions. He also invested at least $40 million of clients’ money in notes of a private horse-racing company, International Equine Acquisitions Holdings, Inc.
According to the SEC’s order, TAG received more than $3.35 million and approximately 500,000 shares of stock of a microcap company in return for placing various investments with these companies. The compensation that TAG received from the companies for the investments that Tagliaferri made on behalf of his clients created a conflict of interest that he was required to disclose to investors.
The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that Tagliaferri then further defrauded clients by investing their funds in microcap and other thinly-traded public companies in order to raise at least $80 million to pay the interest or principal due to other clients on certain of the promissory notes. Tagliaferri explained in e-mails he sent in April 2010 to the individual behind the companies that the real motivation for investing TAG clients in one of his microcap companies was to use the proceeds to pay off other clients invested in the initial series of promissory notes. "Where is the $125MM. As you are aware, this money was earmarked to clear all of the notes and other issues facing us both," Tagliaferri wrote. He later added, the "shares you transferred are being sold to clients. With those proceeds, you’re buying back your own notes." TAG clients were unaware, however, that Tagliaferri’s true motivation for having them buy these stocks was to repay other TAG clients on other conflicted investments he had made for them.
According to the SEC’s order, Tagliaferri willfully violated Sections 17(a)(1) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 thereunder, and Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 206(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.
The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing.
PENTAGON'S NEW APPROACH TO THE INDUSTRIAL BASE
 |
| Atlas V Rocket. Credit: U.S. Air Froce. |
Pentagon Revamps Approach to Industrial Base, Official Says
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20, 2013 - The Defense Department has revamped its approach to communicating and interacting with the defense industrial base after applying lessons learned from previous economic downturns, a senior defense official said here today.
Brett B. Lambert, deputy assistant secretary of defense for manufacturing and industrial base, spoke during an Atlantic Council panel session.
Lambert said he was asked in 2009 to figure out a perception that DOD's communication with the defense industry was lacking.
A lot of people thought it was political, he said, but that proved not to be the case.
"It became obvious to me very, very quickly it had nothing to do with politics or parties," he said. "It had everything to do with 10 years of double-digit, year-over-year growth. There was no need to talk to each other. Everyone was happy. When we had a program that was bleeding, we cauterized the wound with money, because we had it. Expediency was the most important thing."
Lambert said the defense industry delivered what was asked of it, but that over time, the interaction between DOD and the industrial base broke down.
"So we came in with strategic guidance to try to re-establish, if you will, communications -- specifically with industry," he said. "But I came in with another specific task."
The deputy assistant secretary said then-Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was aware of the coming downturn. "He knew well the times of double digit growth were over," Lambert said. "And so we knew we were entering a time of downturn."
With that in mind, Lambert said, officials reviewed the four previous downturns' effects on the industrial base.
"Basically we were 0-4," he said. "We got it wrong in every case. We got it wrong for a variety of different reasons, so we went back to look at what we could do better."
That effort made clear the need to engage industry up front, Lambert said. "And we needed to understand how dramatically the industry has changed since the last downturn -- the post-Cold War downturn," he added.
Lambert said the department reviewed lessons learned and crafted a plan, agreed to by Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter, and Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, to act on those lessons.
"One: better communications," he said. "We're doing that through outreach -- through working with organizations like the Atlantic Council to communicate, to get our ideas out, and to get feedback."
The Defense Department received more than 500 inputs from industry from the "Better Buying Power 1.0" initiative, Lambert said.
"Many were implemented," he added. "We have even more industry inputs for Better Buying Power 2.0. And they are being reviewed, and many of our changes you'll see coming out in the final document will reflect the industry's comments."
The second element, he said, places more emphasis on internal mechanisms and what the Defense Department could do better in working with industry partners, such as educating the DOD workforce on what those partners are all about.
"The third thing I was asked to take on was policies that were both enduring and flexible," Lambert said, noting that a new Defense Department acquisition instruction will be issued in the coming weeks. Lambert said the new instruction represents a new way to look at industrial base analysis and policy, and that every major program will be affected.
"Instead of thinking about industrial base as an afterthought once program decisions are made," he added, "industrial base will now be ... part of major decisions."
Lambert said he believes the department now is well prepared, despite changes in the defense industrial base over the past decade.
"Moving forward, I feel comfortable that we have the tools to deal with some of the more complicated industrial base issues, including the transaction issues we're going to see," Lambert said.
"At the same time," he added, "cuts are coming across the board, or likely to come across the board to the whole department," referring to a mechanism in budget law that will take effect March 1 unless Congress comes up with an alternative plan.
"Those cuts will also come to the very institutions we're trying to set up to mitigate the effects of those cuts," Lambert said, "so on that regard, I'm not terribly optimistic right now."
GROWING FOOD IN SPACE
FROM: NASA
Learning About 'Veggie' at the NASA Social
Marshall Porterfield, Life and Physical Sciences Division Director at NASA Headquarters, talks about the human body in microgravity and other life sciences at a NASA Social exploring science on the International Space Station at NASA Headquarters, Wednesday, Feb. 20, 2013 in Washington.
The Vegetable Production System ("Veggie"), a container used for growing plants on the ISS, is pictured in the foreground. Veggie is a deployable plant growth unit capable of producing salad-type crops to provide the crew with a palatable, nutritious, and safe source of fresh food and a tool to support relaxation and recreation. Veggie provides lighting and nutrient delivery, but utilizes the cabin environment for temperature control and as a source of carbon dioxide to promote growth. Image Credit-NASA-Carla Cioffi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)