FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
03/05/2015 12:57 PM EST
Press Availability with Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Riyadh Air Base
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
March 5, 2015
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) In the name of Allah, the most gracious, the most merciful. At the beginning, it pleases me to extend thanks and appreciation to the custodian of the two holy mosques, King Salman Bin Abd al-Aziz for the care and attention the – accorded to me during my recent treatment period recently. I also express sincere love and cordiality to the current Saudi people for their noble feelings. Moreover, I would like to seize this opportunity to express the national happiness for the return of the Saudi diplomat, Abdullah al-Khalidi, to homeland with the protection and care of Allah. In this connection, I extend many thanks and appreciation and great (inaudible) to all the government, but as – and security agencies that participated in his safe return with direction from the generous leadership, particularly His Royal Highness, the deputy crown prince, second deputy premier, and minister of interior, Prince Muhammad Bin Nayef Bin Abd al-Aziz, who accorded this issue extreme care since the first day of the diplomat’s abduction.
I welcome now Secretary John Kerry and his accompanying delegation to Saudi Arabia. His extensive schedule was full of meetings that started this morning by meeting the GCC foreign ministers, then he was received by King – by the king, and then we held bilateral talks. Overall, the talks were fruitful, constructive, in-depth, and transparent, as always the case of our meetings. We examined a wide range of bilateral relations, issues, between our two countries, in addition to discussing the regional and international issues of mutual interest. The meeting explored the developments in Yemen, Syria, Libya, and the efforts of the international coalition for countering terrorism, in addition to the developments of talks on Iranian nuclear program, the Middle East peace process, and other issues.
With regard to Yemen, as you all see there is full international accord on rejecting the Houthi coup d’etat on the legitimacy and their endeavors to impose the status quo with force and refusal of the procedures resulting from this coup d’etat, including the so-called constitutional declaration by the Houthi militia. The international community expressed its full support to the legitimate government in Yemen led by President Abd Rabu Mansour Hadi. This is clearly reflected in the statements issued by GCC, the Arab League, and the UN Security Council.
Noting these positions and efforts and resulting resolutions and measures, Saudi Arabia renews its emphasis upon the importance of resuming the political process based on the GCC initiative and its executive mechanisms and the outcomes of the Yemeni national dialogue. Saudi Arabia stresses the importance of helping the (inaudible) Yemeni people out of their ordeal that led to these hazardous actions in a way that maintains Yemen’s stability, territorial integrity, stability in the region. We discussed the efforts of the international coalition to fight terrorism, and the ISIL in particular, including the ongoing military efforts to fight the organization, the ongoing military security, intellectual, financial and media actions. Saudi Arabia underscores the importance of this coalition in fighting ISIL both in Iraq and Syria.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia opines the importance of providing the military the necessary means – necessary military means to fight this challenge on the ground, and that campaign should have comprehensive strategic perspective fighting terrorism, wherever it may be, and whatever the organizations that stands behind it in order to uproot terrorism. Our talks included as well the negotiations of the Iranian nuclear program. Saudi Arabian Government supports the efforts of 5+1 in view of its keenness to solve this file peacefully, to reach successful agreement that dissipates the doubts and ensures not shifting to a military program that threatens the region and the world. Saudi Arabia also supports the 5+1 position in seeking a firm international and inspection system to ensure that Iran is not seeking manufactured opposition of nuclear weapons, together with maintaining Iran’s right and all regions – countries of the region rights to the peaceful use of nuclear energy according to IAEA standards, requirements, and inspection.
As for the Syrian crisis and its common efforts here, we all feel – I think that we all felt that the continuity of this crisis not only led to the destruction of Syria, displacement of its people, and deepening their humanitarian suffering, it also made Syria a safe haven for terrorist organizations with endorsement of the legitimate – of the illegitimate Bashar al-Assad’s regime. This entails a threat to Syria, the region, and the world – the whole world. This urges us to intensify efforts to promote and support the moderate opposition with all ordnance and training to counter al-Assad’s terrorism and the terrorist organizations as well. And to expel the foreign occupier from the Syrian territories, we – at the same time, we stress that reaching the business solution, based on Geneva I conference, requires a military balance on the ground.
We have also discussed the peace process in the Middle East within the framework of the efforts exerted by the United States recently to revive the peace negotiations to reach a just, permanent, and comprehensive solution. These efforts are supported by the Arabs, Palestinians, and with patronage of the Arab League. Our view of the desired solution will always be based on the principles of the international legitimacy, its resolutions, and the Arab Peace Initiative aiming at creation of a viable, independent Palestinian state.
Unfortunately, these efforts are still not yielding its fruits. This is due to the Israeli stubbornness and procrastination and its unilateral forcible measures against the rights of the Palestinian people. A case in point: The recent Israeli detention of a 14-year-old girl, Malak al-Khatib – not exceeding 14 years old – and indicted by an Israeli military court and imprisonment for two months and a fine with the pretext of hurling stones. This verdict calls for severe rejection and grief. Particularly, it’s being passed under the sight and hearing of all the world and its justice organizations in a flagrant defiance to all human rights and agreements and women and children rights agreements.
On our part, we stress the importance of international community shouldering of its responsibility towards the inhumane practices of Israel against the Palestinian people, also to obligate Israel to respect the peace process and its principles and not to infringe the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.
I reiterate this is long, I renew my welcome of Secretary Kerry, and I leave the floor to him.
SECRETARY KERRY: Let me begin by saying how very pleased I am to be back here in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia here in Riyadh, and I am particularly pleased to be able to be here with His Royal Highness, Prince Saud al-Faisal, as he comes back from a brief period of dealing with medical issues and now returning to his full responsibility. And all of us, all of the ministers here today, we’re really pleased to be able to welcome Prince Saud back. We value his wisdom. He’s the longest-serving foreign minister of any country, and he has become a very good friend as well as a good counselor with respect to issues in this region. So I’m particularly personally appreciative that we are here today.
I want to begin by underscoring an important point that is on a issue different from those we discussed here today. The safety and security of our diplomats abroad is a top priority for me and for President Obama. And even as we join in congratulating Saudi Arabia on the skillful return of their diplomat from detention – and I congratulate Deputy Crown Prince Minister Mohammed bin Nayef on his role together with the foreign ministry – but we in the United States were deeply concerned to learn about a very vicious attack on our ambassador in South Korea in the Republic of Korea – Mark Lippert. And this attack took place earlier this morning, and I want to be very, very clear to anybody who contemplates or thinks about this kind of tactic – the United States of America will never be intimidated or deterred by threat or by anybody who harms any American diplomat. We will remain as resolved as ever to pursue what we believe is in the interests of our country and with respect to universal rights and values. And whoever threatens or harms our diplomats, I can assure them, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I had the opportunity to talk to Mark earlier this morning. He was in the hospital. I’m enormously relieved to be able to report that thanks to the care and the support that he is receiving in South Korea, he’s doing okay. I’ve known Mark for years, as has President Obama. One thing both of us could tell anybody is this man is as tough as they come. And as I told him over the phone this morning, the State Department is a family, and so we are all sending the thoughts of a family his way, we’re sending our prayers his way to his wife, Robyn, and to their baby boy, and we are wishing him a fast and complete recovery.
This morning, as Prince Saud said, we have discussed a great many issues. We’ve had a very full day. And that’s partly because we have a very full agenda, not all of it by our choice, but all of it we are determined to deal with. We joined with our counterparts from the rest of the GCC, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait, in order to meet for the second time in the past month, which tells you something about the order of priority and the importance of the challenges we face. President Obama and I know that partnerships with the Gulf nations are absolutely essential in meeting any number of urgent challenges. It’s critical that we therefore keep in very close touch, particularly at such a complicated time when there are so many moving pieces in so many different places.
For that same reason, I also met today with His Majesty King Salman, with whom the United States looks forward to pursuing the very same kind of close and very personal relationship that we enjoyed with his predecessor, King Abdullah. And I also had a very productive lunch just now, a working lunch with Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef as well as with His Royal Highness, the Foreign Minister Prince Faisal.
As all of you know, I came here to Riyadh directly from Montreux, Switzerland where I spent the past few days engaged in with – negotiations with Iran on the nuclear issue that Prince Saud just discussed. Obviously, the outcome of these negotiations will be of major consequence to the United States, yes, but really to the entire world – and particularly to this region, and we understand that. With that fact comes a responsibility to all of us in the P5+1 to get it right. Preventing a nuclear-armed Iran will, as Prince Saud just said, address many of the concerns of the region. It will alleviate tension and remove barriers to regional security. It will reduce the pressure for a regional nuclear arms race, and it will increase the strength of the international nonproliferation regime. It will also vastly improve the prospects for peace both here and elsewhere.
So a large part of why I wanted to come to Riyadh today is to update our Gulf partners on exactly where the negotiations stand, on what our standards are, on what we are looking to achieve, and what we have done since the talks first started. And let me underscore: We are not seeking a grand bargain; nothing will be different the day after this agreement if we were to reach one with respect to all the other issues that challenge us in this region, except that we will have taken steps to guarantee that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. And that is a critical component of security for the region and for the world.
We are seeking to show that Iran’s program is exclusively peaceful and that we can block all of the pathways necessary to acquire the fissile material for a nuclear weapon and then to be able to move towards the production of that weapon. To date, we have made progress, but there do remain serious gaps, and those need to be resolved. We still don’t know whether we’ll get there. I said that in Switzerland; I say it again today. It may be that Iran cannot say yes to the type of deal that provides assurances that the international community requires. But we plan to return to the talks on the 15th of March, and we expect soon thereafter to know whether Iran will, in fact, be able to make the tough decisions that are required to get where we need to be.
Now, I also want to make clear, as I did in every one of my meetings today: Even as we engage with these discussions with Iran around its nuclear program, we will not take our eye off of Iran’s other destabilizing actions in places like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and the Arabian Peninsula – Yemen particularly. And whether or not we are able to reach a deal on the nuclear program, the United States will remain fully committed to addressing the full slate of issues that we have with Iran, including its support for terrorism.
Beyond Iran, we also discussed the situation in Yemen, where we recognize that it’s more important than ever for the United States and the GCC states to coordinate closely and where we need to continue to press all of the political parties, especially the Houthis, to commit to a consensus political solution that is based on the GCC initiative and the national dialogue outcomes.
We also, as Prince Saud said, discussed the situation in Syria. I think the whole world needs to see the war in Syria come to an end. Three quarters of the country are now displaced people, and the country is being torn apart by a leader who places his personal preservation ahead of the preservation of the state or the preservation of all of the people of his state. As President Obama and I have repeatedly made clear that we don’t see how a man who has gassed his people; dropped barrel bombs on children and on women, on schools; a man who has tortured more than 10,000 people, according to the evidence of photographs – how that person can become a leader in the future is beyond our consideration or capacity. He has lost any semblance of legitimacy.
But we have no higher priority than disrupting and defeating Daesh and other terror networks in order to give the people of Syria the chance that they deserve to recover and to build – rebuild their country. Ultimately, a combination of diplomacy and pressure will be needed to bring about a political transition. Military pressure particularly may be necessary, given President Assad’s unwillingness to negotiate seriously. And what we must do is strengthen the capacity for this political solution.
Now, obviously, everything we have just talked about emphasizes the fact that there is no shortage of urgent and complex challenges that face Saudi Arabia, the United States, the Gulf states, and our allies and friends. In the weeks and months and even years ahead, we will remain in close contact with our partners on the issues that I mentioned and more. And I am confident that based on the conversations with the king today, with all of our meetings, with the determination of the Gulf states, we will remain united and we will continue to examine how to best coordinate our efforts and bring the peace and the stability and the possibilities of the future that this region so deserves. Thank you.
MODERATOR: Let’s go to the American press first.
MS. PSAKI: Arshad Mohammed from Reuters.
QUESTION: Your Royal Highness, what concerns did you and your fellow GCC foreign ministers express today about the emerging Iran nuclear deal? And specifically, are you concerned that giving Iran sanctions relief will simply allow it to pursue its regional agenda in countries like Syria and Yemen more aggressively? Are you concerned that any deal would have an expiration date? And has the United States offered you and your fellow GCC countries any additional security assurances to guarantee your security once a deal has expired?
And Secretary Kerry, the State Department has said that it will review for public release the emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. My question is: Why shouldn’t the Department review all of the emails, including those that former Secretary Clinton has withheld from the Department, so that it is the U.S. Government that is determining what should ultimately go to the national archives or what should be released publicly rather than former Secretary Clinton’s office that is making that judgment?
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Inaudible) Iran (off-mike).
SECRETARY KERRY: He asked about Iran.
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: I don’t think I can be more specific in relating what guarantees the Secretary gave and he himself has done in this press conference. He has been very clear in the assurances he gave the country. And he has been very transparent in saying what the United States will adhere to in negotiating a deal with Iran. He has specifically specified that Iran – the intent is to keep it from developing an atomic bomb, which is to the good of all, international community as well as the Gulf countries. But he said that is not at the expense of forgetting everything else that Iran does. And that is really the main concern of the Gulf Cooperation Council.
We are, of course, worried about atomic energy and atomic bomb. But we’re equally concerned about the nature of action and hegemonistic tendencies that Iran has in the region. And these elements are the elements of instability in the region. We see Iran involved in Syria and Lebanon and Yemen and Iraq and God knows where. This (inaudible) must stop if Iran is to be part of the solution of the region and not part of the problem.
SECRETARY KERRY: If I can, Arshad, I’m just going to comment very quickly on that also, because I want to emphasize a couple of things. First of all, making the Gulf states safer and providing for greater security begins, notwithstanding Iran’s other activities, which we all object to – it begins by preventing them from having a nuclear weapon. So the first step is make sure they don’t have a nuclear weapon.
But nothing else changes the next day with respect to our joint commitment to stand up against any other kind of interference or violation of international law or support for terrorism. And Iran remains a labeled state supporter of terrorism. So those efforts will continue.
And in order to make sure that everybody is clear as we go forward and we work together cooperatively, we are inviting our GCC friends to come to Washington sometime in the next month or so – somewhere in the next months, certainly in next couple of months – in order to continue to review together those cooperative efforts and arrangements that can be made with respect to security and cooperation as we go forward in this endeavor.
We have a long task ahead of us, and it’s not going to be solved by one agreement, nor deterred by one agreement. And I think we’re all in agreement on that.
With respect to Secretary Clinton’s emails, the State Department has had access to a wide array of Secretary Clinton’s records, including emails, between her and Department officials with the state.gov accounts, as well as cables, as they do for every secretary of state. And last year, the Department sent a letter to representatives of the former secretaries of state requesting that they submit any records in their possession for proper preservation. In response, Secretary Clinton provided the Department with the emails that span her time at the State Department. And after reviewing those emails, the Department produced about 300 responsive to the requests from the select committee.
So we are now in the process of appropriately reviewing those for public release, as we do for any document for public release. And we will undertake this task as rapidly as possible in order to make sure that we’re dealing with the sheer volume of this in a responsible way and we’ll conclude it as soon as we can and get those released publicly.
QUESTION: But my question is why couldn’t the Department look at all these emails and make its own judgment about which ones should go to the archives.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, the Department has the emails. We’re --
QUESTION: Has every one of them, or just the ones that were provided?
SECRETARY KERRY: I’d have to check on that. I believe we have all the ones that – I think we have all the ones that are state.gov, which are appropriately the ones in the purview of the Department. But let me check on that when I actually have time to pay attention to such an important issue when I get home.
QUESTION: (Via interpreter) (inaudible) newspaper. Your Highness, what is – what are you going to do since the stubbornness of the Houthis in Yemen?
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) In fact, GCC countries took the initiative in taking procedures in this direction since the Houthi coup d’etat of the state, as the president was held a legitimate president. We are trying to stress the legitimacy and this is the only way for the safety of Yemen.
Consequently, we were happy for the arrival of Mr. – President Hadi to Aden, to southern Yemen, and the statements he made from that, that he stresses his legitimacy and he stresses not accepting any of the procedures taken by the Houthis, so that even GCC countries took the initiative to support this president. And the secretary general of GCC went to Aden, other ambassadors of GCC countries were supported this position of the president, and as you know, the president is holding meetings outside of Yemen and he wants – and particularly the meeting for the negotiations will be most likely in Saudi Arabia. If he asks this, we agree to this. We will take the help of what is in the GCC initiative to help him restore the order in Yemen.
MS. PSAKI: Jo Biddle from AFP.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. (Inaudible) thank you for your gracious hospitality to us all today. Shukran. Could I ask you how concerned Saudi Arabia is about the reports of deep Iranian involvement in Iraq at the moment, particularly for the battle of Tikrit, with reports that General Qasem Soleimani is actually on the ground, the head of the Qods Force, coordinating the battle?
And if I may, could I also ask you: After your talks today, have your received assurances from Secretary Kerry that the United States is committed to regime change in Syria? And what role do you believe Saudi Arabia could do to help the Syrian people?
And Secretary Kerry, if I could just quickly ask for your view on what is happening in Tikrit. What is the U.S. involvement? How much are you monitoring the situation? And how concerned are you about the civilians who are trapped in the town?
And finally, just one other quick question, my apologies. The King Faisal Foundation has just given a $200,000 award to a leading Islamic scholar from India who apparently called the 9/11 attacks in the United States an inside job, suggesting that the Bush Administration was behind it. Could I have your reaction to that? Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Whose reaction?
QUESTION: That was for you, sir.
SECRETARY KERRY: Can I have the – what foundation? The King Faisal --
QUESTION: The King Faisal Foundation. And the name of the scholar was Zakir Naik.
SECRETARY KERRY: And they gave it to whom?
QUESTION: To this gentlemen, who is an Islamic scholar who claims that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job. Thank you.
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Inaudible) if you keep asking more than one question we tend to forget. (Inaudible) I’ve already forgotten the second question.
And the situation in Tikrit is a prime example of what we’re worried about. Iran is taking over the country. The act of the war and peace is no longer in the hand of the countries involved with Iran (inaudible) but in the hands of Iran. And these (inaudible) in Iraq. This is what is fomenting sectarian struggles in Iraq. We shared no sectarian struggles before the involvement of Iran in Iraq (inaudible).
The second question was --
QUESTION: Syria. Syria. Whether you have assurances now that the United States will (inaudible) regime change.
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: Well, we all agree with the United States that Bashar al-Assad has lost legitimacy. We all agree that the solution – and it must be based on Geneva I. That means that the transition government is going to be established, and that means that Saddam Hussein and those involved --
PARTICIPANT: Bashar al-Assad.
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: -- that Bashar – it’s the same, anyways – (laughter) – that they have to follow the political solution, as is suggested by the Geneva conference. We don’t have any differences at all on the basis of a solution or settlement in Syria. We want a political settlement. We want a political settlement giving peace and stability to Syria and unity of (inaudible) and territorial integrity. We want the troops that are illegally there to be withdrawn. We want the Syrians to unite under one house where there is no difference between Shia and Sunni, a Christian or (inaudible) nationality or sects in Iraq, and that is what we hope for.
SECRETARY KERRY: So with respect to Tikrit, Prime Minister Abadi himself has confirmed that this is an operation of Iraqi forces, consisting of a regular Iraqi Security Force militia – regular Iraqi Security Force contingent of militias and tribes, and it is specifically underway in order to liberate the Salahuddin province from ISIL control, and it is an Iraqi-led operation – Iraqi-designed, Iraqi-led. Is General Soleimani – has he been on the ground, is he playing a role? The answer’s yes. We’ve got information to that effect. But we are encouraged that as part of this operation, Prime Minister Abadi ensured the support of the Sunni leaders, including the governor of Salahuddin province and other local tribal leaders, as well as the speaker of the parliament, Salim al-Jubouri.
Now, there’s close coordination between the national and the local leaders throughout this operation. That’s the only way it’s ultimately going to be successful. Everybody has known that there are some movement of Iranian forces, both in and out of the northern part of Iraq, who have been engaged in fighting since the very beginning. But it is not coordinated. We are not coordinating with them. And Prime Minister Abadi went to the front a day or two before this initiative began and made it clear that this is Iraqi-sanctioned and Iraqis’ design and Iraqis’ desire to achieve.
Additionally, the spokesman for the Sunni tribal council of Salahuddin province issued a statement calling for all of the tribes of Salahuddin who are Sunni to stand side by side with the Security Forces and support the restoration of the province and stressing that they want to avoid any kind of risk to unarmed civilians and to do as much as possible to preserve homes and property.
Prime Minister Abadi also committed to take the upmost care to protect civilian lives during this operation, and we have urged all Iraqi forces to avoid and prevent the abuse to civilians of any kind of activity that violates international norms, fuels the sectarian fears, and promotes sectarian divides, and that includes Iran in terms of their activities or perception or whatever.
So I think it’s clear as the Iraqi army stands up more and more, militias and external actors are going to be less and less imperative and needed. But that’s not where they are, and this is – and I emphasize this is not American-designed operation. This was put together by the Iraqis, formulated by the Iraqis, executed by the Iraqis, and that’s the best thing all of us could, frankly, ask for. So we take it the way it is and we’ll hope for the best results and move from there.
With respect to your other question, I really don’t know anything about the award, the process, the – I know, obviously, something of the individual, but let me find out more before I make any comment on it.
QUESTION: (Via interpreter) (inaudible) from Riyadh Radio. Your Highness, so far Iran was not nominated as a terrorism-supporting country, despite Iran is occupying two islands from Emirates and an Arab country as well, also Syria. You’re always blessing the Iranian fight. So far, you have not talked about the Iranian – the Israeli nuclear file. Israel is acting against the human rights. You say the – are trying – so as not to attack any civilians in Iraq. Israel is always infringing the rights of the population in Palestine. The nuclear – the Israeli nuclear file have not been – has not been studied here.
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (Via interpreter) Let me tell you, Iran doing what it is doing, interference in affairs of Arab countries, it is always a neighbor – it’s also a neighbor. We do not harvest any antagonism against it. If it’s – if it continues on its current positions, (inaudible) it will place itself directly against the Arab interest and against the moral values the international – against the international values. It promotes terrorism and occupies lands. These are not the features of countries which want peace and seeks to improve its relations with the neighboring countries.
We hope that Iran – before the situation develops and antagonism takes place between its neighbors, Iran should stop and listen to the advices of the wise Iranians and leave intervening in the internal affairs of Arab nations. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Is that it?
FOREIGN MINISTER AL-FAISAL: (In Arabic.) Thank you.
Saturday, March 7, 2015
Friday, March 6, 2015
DOD REPORTS ON AIRSTRIKES AGAINST ISIL
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Coalition Continues Airstrikes Against ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, March 6, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack and fighter aircraft conducted four airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Dayr az Zawr, an airstrike struck an ISIL crude oil collection point.
-- Near Kobani, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed four ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Tal Hamis, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 12 airstrikes in Iraq:
-- Near Qaim, two airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL bulldozer.
-- Near Fallujah, four airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, an ISIL headquarters and destroyed two ISIL buildings and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Haditha, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Mosul, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle and an ISIL anti-aircraft artillery system.
-- Near Samarra, an airstrike neutralized an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device.
-- Near Taji, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
-- Near Tal Afar, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations, officials said.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Coalition Continues Airstrikes Against ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, March 6, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack and fighter aircraft conducted four airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Dayr az Zawr, an airstrike struck an ISIL crude oil collection point.
-- Near Kobani, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed four ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Tal Hamis, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted 12 airstrikes in Iraq:
-- Near Qaim, two airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units and destroyed an ISIL bulldozer.
-- Near Fallujah, four airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, an ISIL headquarters and destroyed two ISIL buildings and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Haditha, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Mosul, two airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle and an ISIL anti-aircraft artillery system.
-- Near Samarra, an airstrike neutralized an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device.
-- Near Taji, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
-- Near Tal Afar, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations, officials said.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
MARINE COMMANDANT TELLS CONGRESS BUDGET CONSTRAINTS CAUSING PRIORITIZING OF READINESS
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Marine Commandant Outlines Budget-based Priority Shifts
By Amaani Lyle
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, March 5, 2015 – The Marine Corps has adjusted to budget constraints by prioritizing the readiness of forward deployed forces, the service’s top officer told Congress yesterday.
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. told the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee that amid budget uncertainty, the Marine Corps will strive to meet America’s expectations to successfully operate forward, engage with partners, deter potential adversaries and respond to crises, with 31,000 Marines currently forward deployed and engaged.
Recent Marine Corps missions, Dunford reported, include support to U.S. citizen evacuations in Sudan, Libya and Yemen, ongoing strikes in Syria and Iraq, Iraqi army training and U.S. Embassy protection in Baghdad.
Concurrently, 22,500 Marines remain west of the International Date Line in support of the U.S. rebalance to the Pacific region, the general said.
Budget Informs Decisions
The budget informs how the Marine Corps mans, trains and equips, Dunford said, and also informs how it prioritizes and allocates resources Congress allows.
“I can assure that your forward-deployed Marines are well-trained, well-led and well-equipped,” he told the senators, “but we’ve had to make tough choices to deal with the effects of two wars, sequestration in 2013, and reduced budgets in 2014 and 2015.”
But forward-deployed force readiness, Dunford acknowledged, has come at the expense of investments in home-station readiness, modernization, infrastructure sustainment and quality-of-life programs.
“Approximately half of our nondeployed units … who would respond to unforeseen contingencies suffer personnel, equipment or training shortfalls,” the general said. “In a major conflict, those shortfalls will result in a delayed response and/or the unnecessary loss of young American lives.”
Failure to Modernize Threatens Competitive Advantage
Over time, underinvesting in modernization will force the Marine Corps to maintain older, degraded or obsolete equipment at a higher cost, the commandant said. “It will eventually ruin our competitive advantage,” he added, “and we don’t ever want our Marines and sailors in a fair fight.”
Ultimately, the Marine Corps can meet defense strategic guidance requirements with the president’s fiscal year 2016 budget request, but there is no margin attached to that bottom line, Dunford emphasized.
“Funding below the president’s budget level will require we develop a new strategy,” the general told the Senate panel.
Budget Control Act funding levels, which currently require a return to sequestration spending cuts, would exacerbate the current readiness state, forcing of the Marine Corps to reduce the size of battalions and squadrons required to respond immediately to crises involving diplomatic posts, Americans citizens or U.S. interests.
Marine Commandant Outlines Budget-based Priority Shifts
By Amaani Lyle
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, March 5, 2015 – The Marine Corps has adjusted to budget constraints by prioritizing the readiness of forward deployed forces, the service’s top officer told Congress yesterday.
Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. told the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee that amid budget uncertainty, the Marine Corps will strive to meet America’s expectations to successfully operate forward, engage with partners, deter potential adversaries and respond to crises, with 31,000 Marines currently forward deployed and engaged.
Recent Marine Corps missions, Dunford reported, include support to U.S. citizen evacuations in Sudan, Libya and Yemen, ongoing strikes in Syria and Iraq, Iraqi army training and U.S. Embassy protection in Baghdad.
Concurrently, 22,500 Marines remain west of the International Date Line in support of the U.S. rebalance to the Pacific region, the general said.
Budget Informs Decisions
The budget informs how the Marine Corps mans, trains and equips, Dunford said, and also informs how it prioritizes and allocates resources Congress allows.
“I can assure that your forward-deployed Marines are well-trained, well-led and well-equipped,” he told the senators, “but we’ve had to make tough choices to deal with the effects of two wars, sequestration in 2013, and reduced budgets in 2014 and 2015.”
But forward-deployed force readiness, Dunford acknowledged, has come at the expense of investments in home-station readiness, modernization, infrastructure sustainment and quality-of-life programs.
“Approximately half of our nondeployed units … who would respond to unforeseen contingencies suffer personnel, equipment or training shortfalls,” the general said. “In a major conflict, those shortfalls will result in a delayed response and/or the unnecessary loss of young American lives.”
Failure to Modernize Threatens Competitive Advantage
Over time, underinvesting in modernization will force the Marine Corps to maintain older, degraded or obsolete equipment at a higher cost, the commandant said. “It will eventually ruin our competitive advantage,” he added, “and we don’t ever want our Marines and sailors in a fair fight.”
Ultimately, the Marine Corps can meet defense strategic guidance requirements with the president’s fiscal year 2016 budget request, but there is no margin attached to that bottom line, Dunford emphasized.
“Funding below the president’s budget level will require we develop a new strategy,” the general told the Senate panel.
Budget Control Act funding levels, which currently require a return to sequestration spending cuts, would exacerbate the current readiness state, forcing of the Marine Corps to reduce the size of battalions and squadrons required to respond immediately to crises involving diplomatic posts, Americans citizens or U.S. interests.
U.S. CONGRATULATE PEOPLE OF GHANA ON THEIR INDEPENDENCE DAY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Celebrating Ghanaian Independence
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 6, 2015
On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Ghana as you celebrate 58 years of independence on March 6.
The United States has stood by Ghana’s side ever since you peacefully earned independence and Kwame Nkrumah declared Ghana free forever. When the Organization of African Unity met in Ghana, the American embassy donated its typewriters. When Nkrumah arrived in Washington, President John F. Kennedy was on the tarmac waiting to shake his hand. And six years ago, President Obama traveled to Accra to declare that the 21st century will not just be shaped in Washington, but in African capitals like Accra, as well.
To this day, Ghanaian and American citizens are united in our commitment to democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and peace and security.
We have forged a strong partnership, reinforced by our joint effort to stop the spread of Ebola in West Africa. Ghana remains a critical partner and contributor to UN peacekeeping operations around the world. And we will continue to work closely with the Ghanaian people to strengthen your investment climate in order to expand trade and increase prosperity for all.
On this joyous occasion, I send warm wishes to the people of Ghana.
Celebrating Ghanaian Independence
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 6, 2015
On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Ghana as you celebrate 58 years of independence on March 6.
The United States has stood by Ghana’s side ever since you peacefully earned independence and Kwame Nkrumah declared Ghana free forever. When the Organization of African Unity met in Ghana, the American embassy donated its typewriters. When Nkrumah arrived in Washington, President John F. Kennedy was on the tarmac waiting to shake his hand. And six years ago, President Obama traveled to Accra to declare that the 21st century will not just be shaped in Washington, but in African capitals like Accra, as well.
To this day, Ghanaian and American citizens are united in our commitment to democracy, human rights, free enterprise, and peace and security.
We have forged a strong partnership, reinforced by our joint effort to stop the spread of Ebola in West Africa. Ghana remains a critical partner and contributor to UN peacekeeping operations around the world. And we will continue to work closely with the Ghanaian people to strengthen your investment climate in order to expand trade and increase prosperity for all.
On this joyous occasion, I send warm wishes to the people of Ghana.
FDA SAYS 99% OF MILK SAMPLES "FREE OF DRUG RESIDUES THAT ARE OF CONCERN"
FROM: U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
FDA’s Survey of Milk Finds Few Drug Residues
March 5, 2015
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced results from its milk sampling survey, involving the testing of nearly 2,000 dairy farms for drug residues in milk. More than 99 percent of the samples are free of drug residues of concern-- underscoring the safety of the US milk supply. These findings provide evidence that the nation’s milk safety system is effective in helping to prevent drug residues of concern in milk, even in those limited instances when medications are needed to maintain the health of dairy cattle.
The agency initiated the study to determine whether dairy farms with previous drug residue violations in tissue derived from dairy cows were more likely to have violative drug residues in milk than other dairy farms. The FDA tested samples from two groups: a “targeted” list of farms with known previous tissue residue violations and a control group of farms. Results show that the occurrence of drug residues in milk is very low, even in the targeted group. However, the limited number of residues detected involved drugs that are not included in routine testing under the current milk safety program.
Despite the finding of a small number of drug residues in samples collected, the FDA intends to take steps to maintain the strongest possible system to ensure milk safety. The FDA will work closely with state regulators to consider modifying testing to include collecting samples as necessary from milk tanks on farms when investigating illegal drug residues in tissues involving culled dairy cows. The agency is also working with its milk regulatory partners to update the existing milk safety program, as necessary, to include testing for a greater diversity of drugs and to educate dairy producers on best practices to avoid drug residues in both tissues and milk.
FDA’s Survey of Milk Finds Few Drug Residues
March 5, 2015
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced results from its milk sampling survey, involving the testing of nearly 2,000 dairy farms for drug residues in milk. More than 99 percent of the samples are free of drug residues of concern-- underscoring the safety of the US milk supply. These findings provide evidence that the nation’s milk safety system is effective in helping to prevent drug residues of concern in milk, even in those limited instances when medications are needed to maintain the health of dairy cattle.
The agency initiated the study to determine whether dairy farms with previous drug residue violations in tissue derived from dairy cows were more likely to have violative drug residues in milk than other dairy farms. The FDA tested samples from two groups: a “targeted” list of farms with known previous tissue residue violations and a control group of farms. Results show that the occurrence of drug residues in milk is very low, even in the targeted group. However, the limited number of residues detected involved drugs that are not included in routine testing under the current milk safety program.
Despite the finding of a small number of drug residues in samples collected, the FDA intends to take steps to maintain the strongest possible system to ensure milk safety. The FDA will work closely with state regulators to consider modifying testing to include collecting samples as necessary from milk tanks on farms when investigating illegal drug residues in tissues involving culled dairy cows. The agency is also working with its milk regulatory partners to update the existing milk safety program, as necessary, to include testing for a greater diversity of drugs and to educate dairy producers on best practices to avoid drug residues in both tissues and milk.
NAVY SECRETARY GIVES TESTIMONY TO SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE DEFENSE SUBCOMMITTEE
Right: Navy Secretary Ray Mabus testifies before the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee on the proposed budget for fiscal year 2016 in Washington, D.C., March 4, 2015. U.S. Navy photo by Chief Sam Shavers.
Navy Secretary Explains Significance of Sea Power
By Amaani Lyle
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, March 4, 2015 – National security interests face heightened threats and demands as budget woes grow more challenging and complex, but the Navy and Marines Corps remain the best value to advance global security and presence, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told a Senate panel today.
The secretary testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee to reinforce the significance of the naval forces’ rapid, self-contained response and latitude to execute missions.
Power of Presence
“Uniquely, the Navy and Marine Corps provide presence around the world, around the clock,” Mabus said. “We are the nation’s first line of defense, ready for anything that might come over the horizon.”
Mabus cited Article 1 of the Constitution, which he explained authorizes Congress to raise an Army when needed but directs them to provide and maintain a Navy.
“From the first six frigates to our growing fleet today, from Tripoli to Afghanistan, sailors and Marines have proven the founder’s wisdom,” the secretary said.
He also noted that senior U.S. leaders recognize the value of sea power.
“We are truly America’s ‘away team,’” Mabus said. “We deploy just as much in peace as we do in war, and our role in the last 70 years in securing sea lanes and freedom of commerce has boosted our own and the world’s economy.”
Nearly half the world’s population lives within 100 miles of the sea, 90 percent of global trade goes by sea and 90 percent of all voice and data go under the sea, Mabus said.
According to the secretary, some 38 million jobs in America are directly linked to seaborne international trade.
Mabus described the Navy and Marine Corps as the “primary protectors” of an international system that has created unprecedented economic growth.
“While we’ve led this effort,” he said, “we’ve worked with allies and partners, increasing interoperability, establishing relationships that also help keep the peace.”
As a result, the national defense strategy, Mabus said, is focused on the maritime domain and requires investment in maritime assets.
People, Platforms, Power, Partnership
Still, in recent years, the Navy has braced in the wake of budget turbulence marked by numerous continuing resolutions and the specter of sequestration’s return. The environment, he recounted, has spurred difficult but critical choices, which have helped mold the foundations of presence: people, platforms, power and partnership.
Mabus praised sailors and Marines, whom he described as adaptable and armed with independent judgment.
“We remain committed to providing our sailors, Marines, and our civilians with the training and support they need to maintain our naval presence -- and we include in this their dedicated families and our wounded,” he said. “We’ve launched a comprehensive approach to assure the world’s healthiest, fittest, most resilient and best-educated force, truly representing America’s diversity.”
But people, no matter how prepared, need platforms -- ships, submarines, aircraft, systems and equipment -- to perform their jobs, Mabus said.
Quantity has a quality of its own, he said, adding this philosophy calls for a properly sized and balanced fleet.
On Sept. 11, 2001, the Navy’s battle force stood at 316 ships, Mabus said, before a sharp drop in 2008 to 278 ships. He said the focus on two ground wars over the past decade only partly explains the decline.
Mabus said in the five years before hetook over as Navy secretary, the Navy contracted for only 27 ships, which he maintained was not enough to stanch the decline in the fleet size.
Mabus reported the Navy contracted for 70 ships during his first five years on the job, halting and reversing the decline. And by decade’s end, the service expects to be at 304 ships.
“We accomplished this with a direct and fundamental business approach,” he said, “increasing competition, relying more on fixed-price contracts … and multi-year block buys.”
But budget instability, Mabus said, hampers the Navy’s ability to manage and grow the fleet and maintain the industrial base.
Cutting ships, he added, is the most “damaging, dangerous and least reversible” course of action.
“Fueling those ships, aircraft and vehicles of our Navy and Marine Corps is a vital operation of concern and enables the global presence necessary to keep the nation secure,” Mabus said.
The Navy therefore has a history of innovation, particularly in energy, from sail, to steam, to oil and nuclear pioneering, the secretary said.
“Our national security interests in the Navy and Marine Corps to meet their missions,” he said, “must be enhanced by increasing our energy diversity.”
Additionally, presence and global security will be augmented through partnerships and cooperation, ensuring the Navy remains an immediate, capable and adaptable option when a crisis develops, the secretary said.
Though President Barack Obama’s proposed fiscal year 2016 budget balances current readiness while sustaining a highly capable fleet, Mabus said, the current budget climate demands a rigorous examination of every dollar spent and aggressive efforts to cut unnecessary costs from tail to tooth.
MAN INVOLVED IN PLOT TO BOMB U.K. MALL CONVICTED IN BROOKLYN FEDERAL COURT
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Al-Qaeda Operative Convicted for Role in International Terrorism Plot Targeting the United States and Europe
Defendant and Co-Plotters Came Within Days of Bombing a U.K. Shopping Mall
U.S. Attorney Loretta E. Lynch of the Eastern District of New York, Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, Assistant Director in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s New York Field Office and Commissioner William J. Bratton of the New York City Police Department (NYPD) announced that earlier today, following a two-week trial, Abid Naseer, 28, a Pakistani national who joined al-Qaeda and plotted to commit a terrorist attack in the United Kingdom, was found guilty by a jury in Brooklyn federal court of providing material support to al-Qaeda, conspiring to provide material support to al-Qaeda, and conspiring to use a destructive device in relation to a crime of violence. The evidence at trial established that the defendant and his accomplices came within days of executing a plot to conduct an attack on a busy shopping mall located in the city center of Manchester, United Kingdom, in April 2009. The planned attack, which also targeted the New York City subway system and a newspaper office in Copenhagen, Denmark, had been directed by and coordinated with senior al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan. Naseer is the eighth defendant to face charges, and the fourth to be convicted, in Brooklyn federal court related to the al-Qaeda plot, which also involved Adis Medunjanin, Najibullah Zazi, and Zarein Ahmedzay, the three members of the cell that targeted New York City.
“This al-Qaeda plot was intended by the group’s leaders to send a message to the United States and its allies,” said U.S. Attorney Lynch. “Today’s verdict sends an even more powerful message in response: the United States will stop at nothing in order to hold those who plot to kill and maim in the name of religion accountable for their grievous crimes.” U.S. Attorney Lynch extended her grateful appreciation to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, which led the investigation and comprises a large number of federal, state, and local agencies from the region. U.S. Attorney Lynch also extended her appreciation to the law enforcement authorities in the United Kingdom and Norway, including the Greater Manchester Police, the British Security Service, and the Norwegian Police Security Service, for their outstanding assistance with the case.
“Abid Naseer was part of an al Qaeda conspiracy that targeted Western countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, for terrorist attack,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “His conviction reflects our dedication to identifying and holding accountable those who seek to target the United States and its allies. I want to thank the many agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this successful result.”
“Naseer knowingly and willingly conspired with others to carry out a destructive plot on behalf of al-Qaeda,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge Rodriquez. “The wheels were set in motion, and he and his accomplices were prepared to execute their plan. Those who pledge allegiance to terrorists and terrorist organizations throughout the world will be brought to justice, and every effort will be made to protect Americans and our interests throughout the world. The FBI will continue to work with our local and international partners to mitigate the threat of global terrorism.”
“The Abid Naseer case demonstrates that terrorists who target the U.S. and its allies will be brought to justice, no matter where they are,” said NYPD Commissioner Bratton. “This investigation involved leads from the streets of Manchester, England, to New York City, to Usama Bin Laden’s hidden lair in Pakistan. I want to thank the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District and the members of the N.Y. FBI-NYPD Joint Terrorism Task Force for the work that led to this successful prosecution.”
In approximately September 2008, al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan recruited Medunjanin, Zazi, and Ahmedzay, three friends from New York City, to conduct a suicide bombing attack in New York City. Those al-Qaeda leaders, including Adnan El-Shukrijumah and Saleh al-Somali, communicated with Zazi about the plot through an al-Qaeda facilitator named “Ahmad,” who was located in Peshawar, Pakistan. In early September 2009, after Medunjanin, Zazi, and Ahmedzay had selected the New York City subway system as their target, Zazi emailed with “Ahmad” in Pakistan about the proper ingredients for the main charge explosive, which included flour and oil. Zazi pleaded guilty to his role in the plot on Feb. 22, 2010; Ahmedzay pleaded guilty on April 23, 2010; and Medunjanin was convicted after trial on May 1, 2012.
The investigation by authorities in the United States and United Kingdom revealed that “Ahmad” had also been communicating with the defendant earlier in 2009. The evidence at trial demonstrated that the defendant and his Pakistani accomplices had been dispatched by al-Qaeda to the U.K. in 2006 in order to begin preparations for an attack in that country. The defendant and his co-conspirators entered the U.K. on student visas but then immediately dropped out of the university in which they had enrolled. The defendant, like Zazi, returned briefly to Peshawar in November 2008, at the same time Zazi and his co-conspirators were receiving weapons and explosives training from al-Qaeda in that region. After returning to the U.K., the defendant sent messages back and forth to the same email account that “Ahmad” was also using to communicate with the American-based al-Qaeda cell on behalf of Saleh al-Somali, al-Qaeda’s then-head of external operations. In the messages, the defendant used coded language to refer to different types of explosives. At the culmination of the plot, in early April 2009, the defendant told “Ahmad” that he was planning a large “wedding” for numerous guests during the upcoming Easter weekend, and that “Ahmad” – whom he called “Sohaib” – should be ready. Notably, Zazi testified that Ahmad had instructed him to use the same code of “marriage” to refer to the planned attack on the New York City subway, and that Zazi emailed Ahmad that “the marriage is ready” just before he drove to New York in early September 2009 to conduct the attack.
On April 8, 2009, the defendant and several associates were arrested in the United Kingdom. In connection with these arrests, U.K. authorities conducted searches of the plotters’ homes as well as an internet café used by the defendant to send his messages to Ahmad, where they seized a large volume of electronic media. As demonstrated at trial, a forensic review of that electronic media revealed that the defendant had downloaded several jihadi nasheeds, or anthems, calling for “death in large numbers.” A document recovered from the raid on Usama bin Laden’s compound in May 2011 contained a letter from Saleh al-Somali to Bin Laden, written on April 16, 2009, that discussed the defendant and his accomplices’ arrests in the U.K.
On Jan. 30, 2012, three defendants were also convicted in a Norwegian court of plotting a similar terrorist attack in Denmark as part of the same overall multinational al-Qaeda conspiracy. During that trial, the United States made available to the Norwegian prosecutors three witnesses who also pleaded guilty to terrorism offenses in the Eastern District of New York: Zazi, Ahmedzay, and Bryant Neal Vinas. Zazi and Ahmedzay again testified in the trial against Naseer.
The defendant faces up to life imprisonment when he is sentenced at a later date by the Honorable Raymond J. Dearie.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zainab Ahmad, Celia A. Cohen, and Michael P. Canty, with assistance provided by the Justice Department’s National Security Division and Office of International Affairs.
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Al-Qaeda Operative Convicted for Role in International Terrorism Plot Targeting the United States and Europe
Defendant and Co-Plotters Came Within Days of Bombing a U.K. Shopping Mall
U.S. Attorney Loretta E. Lynch of the Eastern District of New York, Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, Assistant Director in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s New York Field Office and Commissioner William J. Bratton of the New York City Police Department (NYPD) announced that earlier today, following a two-week trial, Abid Naseer, 28, a Pakistani national who joined al-Qaeda and plotted to commit a terrorist attack in the United Kingdom, was found guilty by a jury in Brooklyn federal court of providing material support to al-Qaeda, conspiring to provide material support to al-Qaeda, and conspiring to use a destructive device in relation to a crime of violence. The evidence at trial established that the defendant and his accomplices came within days of executing a plot to conduct an attack on a busy shopping mall located in the city center of Manchester, United Kingdom, in April 2009. The planned attack, which also targeted the New York City subway system and a newspaper office in Copenhagen, Denmark, had been directed by and coordinated with senior al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan. Naseer is the eighth defendant to face charges, and the fourth to be convicted, in Brooklyn federal court related to the al-Qaeda plot, which also involved Adis Medunjanin, Najibullah Zazi, and Zarein Ahmedzay, the three members of the cell that targeted New York City.
“This al-Qaeda plot was intended by the group’s leaders to send a message to the United States and its allies,” said U.S. Attorney Lynch. “Today’s verdict sends an even more powerful message in response: the United States will stop at nothing in order to hold those who plot to kill and maim in the name of religion accountable for their grievous crimes.” U.S. Attorney Lynch extended her grateful appreciation to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, which led the investigation and comprises a large number of federal, state, and local agencies from the region. U.S. Attorney Lynch also extended her appreciation to the law enforcement authorities in the United Kingdom and Norway, including the Greater Manchester Police, the British Security Service, and the Norwegian Police Security Service, for their outstanding assistance with the case.
“Abid Naseer was part of an al Qaeda conspiracy that targeted Western countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, for terrorist attack,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “His conviction reflects our dedication to identifying and holding accountable those who seek to target the United States and its allies. I want to thank the many agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this successful result.”
“Naseer knowingly and willingly conspired with others to carry out a destructive plot on behalf of al-Qaeda,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge Rodriquez. “The wheels were set in motion, and he and his accomplices were prepared to execute their plan. Those who pledge allegiance to terrorists and terrorist organizations throughout the world will be brought to justice, and every effort will be made to protect Americans and our interests throughout the world. The FBI will continue to work with our local and international partners to mitigate the threat of global terrorism.”
“The Abid Naseer case demonstrates that terrorists who target the U.S. and its allies will be brought to justice, no matter where they are,” said NYPD Commissioner Bratton. “This investigation involved leads from the streets of Manchester, England, to New York City, to Usama Bin Laden’s hidden lair in Pakistan. I want to thank the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District and the members of the N.Y. FBI-NYPD Joint Terrorism Task Force for the work that led to this successful prosecution.”
In approximately September 2008, al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan recruited Medunjanin, Zazi, and Ahmedzay, three friends from New York City, to conduct a suicide bombing attack in New York City. Those al-Qaeda leaders, including Adnan El-Shukrijumah and Saleh al-Somali, communicated with Zazi about the plot through an al-Qaeda facilitator named “Ahmad,” who was located in Peshawar, Pakistan. In early September 2009, after Medunjanin, Zazi, and Ahmedzay had selected the New York City subway system as their target, Zazi emailed with “Ahmad” in Pakistan about the proper ingredients for the main charge explosive, which included flour and oil. Zazi pleaded guilty to his role in the plot on Feb. 22, 2010; Ahmedzay pleaded guilty on April 23, 2010; and Medunjanin was convicted after trial on May 1, 2012.
The investigation by authorities in the United States and United Kingdom revealed that “Ahmad” had also been communicating with the defendant earlier in 2009. The evidence at trial demonstrated that the defendant and his Pakistani accomplices had been dispatched by al-Qaeda to the U.K. in 2006 in order to begin preparations for an attack in that country. The defendant and his co-conspirators entered the U.K. on student visas but then immediately dropped out of the university in which they had enrolled. The defendant, like Zazi, returned briefly to Peshawar in November 2008, at the same time Zazi and his co-conspirators were receiving weapons and explosives training from al-Qaeda in that region. After returning to the U.K., the defendant sent messages back and forth to the same email account that “Ahmad” was also using to communicate with the American-based al-Qaeda cell on behalf of Saleh al-Somali, al-Qaeda’s then-head of external operations. In the messages, the defendant used coded language to refer to different types of explosives. At the culmination of the plot, in early April 2009, the defendant told “Ahmad” that he was planning a large “wedding” for numerous guests during the upcoming Easter weekend, and that “Ahmad” – whom he called “Sohaib” – should be ready. Notably, Zazi testified that Ahmad had instructed him to use the same code of “marriage” to refer to the planned attack on the New York City subway, and that Zazi emailed Ahmad that “the marriage is ready” just before he drove to New York in early September 2009 to conduct the attack.
On April 8, 2009, the defendant and several associates were arrested in the United Kingdom. In connection with these arrests, U.K. authorities conducted searches of the plotters’ homes as well as an internet café used by the defendant to send his messages to Ahmad, where they seized a large volume of electronic media. As demonstrated at trial, a forensic review of that electronic media revealed that the defendant had downloaded several jihadi nasheeds, or anthems, calling for “death in large numbers.” A document recovered from the raid on Usama bin Laden’s compound in May 2011 contained a letter from Saleh al-Somali to Bin Laden, written on April 16, 2009, that discussed the defendant and his accomplices’ arrests in the U.K.
On Jan. 30, 2012, three defendants were also convicted in a Norwegian court of plotting a similar terrorist attack in Denmark as part of the same overall multinational al-Qaeda conspiracy. During that trial, the United States made available to the Norwegian prosecutors three witnesses who also pleaded guilty to terrorism offenses in the Eastern District of New York: Zazi, Ahmedzay, and Bryant Neal Vinas. Zazi and Ahmedzay again testified in the trial against Naseer.
The defendant faces up to life imprisonment when he is sentenced at a later date by the Honorable Raymond J. Dearie.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zainab Ahmad, Celia A. Cohen, and Michael P. Canty, with assistance provided by the Justice Department’s National Security Division and Office of International Affairs.
U.S. ASSISTS KOREA IN RECOVERING MILLIONS FROM FORMER PRESIDENT HWAN
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
United States Assists Korean Authorities in Recovering Over $28.7 Million In Corruption Proceeds of Former President of the Republic of Korea
The Department of Justice has reached a settlement of its civil forfeiture cases against $1.2 million in assets in the United States traceable to corruption proceeds accumulated by Chun Doo Hwan, the former president of the Republic of Korea. The department also assisted the government of the Republic of Korea in recovering an additional $27.5 million in satisfaction of an outstanding criminal restitution order against former President Chun.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Director Sarah R. Saldaña of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Assistant Director in Charge David Bowdich of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement after the settlement was signed and papers requesting that the court execute the agreement were filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
“Chun Doo Hwan’s campaign of corruption and bribery while serving as Korea’s president betrayed the trust of the Korean people, deprived Korea’s government of precious resources and undermined the rule of law,” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell. “Fighting corruption is a global imperative that demands a coordinated global response. The close cooperation between the United States and Korea in successfully recovering corruption proceeds stands as a testament to our resolve to battle the scourge of corruption through international collaboration.”
“Former Korean President Chun violated the trust of the people of Korea,” said Director Saldaña. “The results in this case reflect the outstanding international cooperation that exists between U.S. law enforcement and the government of Korea.”
"The U.S. will not idly standby and serve as a money laundering haven for foreign officials to hide corrupt activities,” said Assistant Director in Charge David Bowdich. “The FBI will continue to collaborate with our foreign partners by leveraging its resources in order to identify those engaged in foreign corruption and to recover their ill-gotten gains.”
According to court documents, President Chun was convicted in Korea in 1997 of receiving more than $200 million in bribes from Korean businesses and companies. President Chun and his relatives laundered some of these corruption proceeds through a web of nominees, trusts and shell companies in both Korea and the United States.
Under the terms of the U.S. settlement, $1,116,951.45 in assets will be forfeited to the United States. During the joint U.S.-Korean investigation, approximately $27.5 million in additional funds were paid by an associate of former President Chun to the Korean government to partially settle the judgment entered against former President Chun upon his criminal conviction. Including the settlement announced today, the U.S. and Korean authorities have recovered more than $28.7 million in connection with Korea’s investigation and prosecution of former President Chun.
The investigation was conducted jointly by the FBI’s West Covina Resident Agency of the Los Angeles Division, ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations’ (HSI) Philadelphia Office, HSI's Attaché in Seoul, South Korea and the FBI Kleptocracy Program of the International Corruption Unit within the Criminal Investigation Division. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Woo S. Lee and Della Sentilles of the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Katharine Schonbachler and Steven R. Welk of the Central District of California, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joseph Minni and Alvin Stout of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided substantial support.
The department is grateful for the significant assistance provided by the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor’s Office, Korea’s Supreme Prosecutor’s Office - Anti-Corruption Supervisory Division and the Ministry of Justice’s International Criminal Affairs Division in investigating and forfeiting these corruption proceeds.
This case was brought under the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative by a team of dedicated prosecutors in the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, working in partnership with federal law enforcement agencies to forfeit the proceeds of foreign official corruption and, where appropriate, return those proceeds to benefit the people harmed by these acts of corruption and abuse of office.
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
United States Assists Korean Authorities in Recovering Over $28.7 Million In Corruption Proceeds of Former President of the Republic of Korea
The Department of Justice has reached a settlement of its civil forfeiture cases against $1.2 million in assets in the United States traceable to corruption proceeds accumulated by Chun Doo Hwan, the former president of the Republic of Korea. The department also assisted the government of the Republic of Korea in recovering an additional $27.5 million in satisfaction of an outstanding criminal restitution order against former President Chun.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, Director Sarah R. Saldaña of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Assistant Director in Charge David Bowdich of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office made the announcement after the settlement was signed and papers requesting that the court execute the agreement were filed with the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
“Chun Doo Hwan’s campaign of corruption and bribery while serving as Korea’s president betrayed the trust of the Korean people, deprived Korea’s government of precious resources and undermined the rule of law,” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell. “Fighting corruption is a global imperative that demands a coordinated global response. The close cooperation between the United States and Korea in successfully recovering corruption proceeds stands as a testament to our resolve to battle the scourge of corruption through international collaboration.”
“Former Korean President Chun violated the trust of the people of Korea,” said Director Saldaña. “The results in this case reflect the outstanding international cooperation that exists between U.S. law enforcement and the government of Korea.”
"The U.S. will not idly standby and serve as a money laundering haven for foreign officials to hide corrupt activities,” said Assistant Director in Charge David Bowdich. “The FBI will continue to collaborate with our foreign partners by leveraging its resources in order to identify those engaged in foreign corruption and to recover their ill-gotten gains.”
According to court documents, President Chun was convicted in Korea in 1997 of receiving more than $200 million in bribes from Korean businesses and companies. President Chun and his relatives laundered some of these corruption proceeds through a web of nominees, trusts and shell companies in both Korea and the United States.
Under the terms of the U.S. settlement, $1,116,951.45 in assets will be forfeited to the United States. During the joint U.S.-Korean investigation, approximately $27.5 million in additional funds were paid by an associate of former President Chun to the Korean government to partially settle the judgment entered against former President Chun upon his criminal conviction. Including the settlement announced today, the U.S. and Korean authorities have recovered more than $28.7 million in connection with Korea’s investigation and prosecution of former President Chun.
The investigation was conducted jointly by the FBI’s West Covina Resident Agency of the Los Angeles Division, ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations’ (HSI) Philadelphia Office, HSI's Attaché in Seoul, South Korea and the FBI Kleptocracy Program of the International Corruption Unit within the Criminal Investigation Division. The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Woo S. Lee and Della Sentilles of the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Katharine Schonbachler and Steven R. Welk of the Central District of California, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Joseph Minni and Alvin Stout of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided substantial support.
The department is grateful for the significant assistance provided by the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor’s Office, Korea’s Supreme Prosecutor’s Office - Anti-Corruption Supervisory Division and the Ministry of Justice’s International Criminal Affairs Division in investigating and forfeiting these corruption proceeds.
This case was brought under the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative by a team of dedicated prosecutors in the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, working in partnership with federal law enforcement agencies to forfeit the proceeds of foreign official corruption and, where appropriate, return those proceeds to benefit the people harmed by these acts of corruption and abuse of office.
Thursday, March 5, 2015
DOD REPORTS ON RECENT AIRSTRIKES IN SYRIA AND IRAQ
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Military Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, March 5, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack, fighter and bomber aircraft conducted seven airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Hasakah, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Kobani, four airstrikes destroyed 11 ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device.
-- Near Tal Hamis, two airstrikes struck two ISIL fighting positions and destroyed an ISIL staging area and an ISIL fighting position.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted five airstrikes in Iraq:
-- Near Asad, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Fallujah, two airstrikes destroyed an ISIL armored vehicle, an ISIL artillery piece and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Haditha, an airstrike was conducted to help support friendly forces movement.
-- Near Mosul, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations, officials said.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Military Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, March 5, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack, fighter and bomber aircraft conducted seven airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Hasakah, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Kobani, four airstrikes destroyed 11 ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device.
-- Near Tal Hamis, two airstrikes struck two ISIL fighting positions and destroyed an ISIL staging area and an ISIL fighting position.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted five airstrikes in Iraq:
-- Near Asad, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL fighting position.
-- Near Fallujah, two airstrikes destroyed an ISIL armored vehicle, an ISIL artillery piece and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Haditha, an airstrike was conducted to help support friendly forces movement.
-- Near Mosul, an airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations, officials said.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON ANNIVERSARY OF NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Statement on the 45th Anniversary of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 5, 2015
All countries share responsibility to confront nuclear proliferation. All countries benefit if nuclear weapons do not spread to additional countries. All countries also profit when there is smart, continuous action in the direction of nuclear disarmament. And all countries gain from cooperation on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
That is why the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has served the international community well for the past 45 years.
Simply put, it is the bedrock foundation for nuclear nonproliferation, disarmament, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy. They include the areas of human health, food and agriculture, water resource management, and the environment.
There are many reasons for the success of the NPT, which entered into force on March 5, 1970.
The international consensus against the spread of nuclear weapons, embodied in the spirit and text of the Treaty, is strong and continues to be upheld. Overwhelming numbers of states have refrained from pursuing nuclear weapons and accept International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards as the standard for verification and peaceful nuclear trade. Several states that abandoned nuclear weapons efforts might have come to a different conclusion in the absence of a robust and widely supported NPT.
Today, as we mark this anniversary, we especially celebrate that more states are party to the NPT than to any other arms control or nonproliferation agreement. But there is more work to do, and we must recommit ourselves to this task.
NPT Parties share a responsibility to reinforce the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, in particular to overcome the challenges posed by a few countries that have violated their international nonproliferation obligations. This should be a concern of all states, as it is the future integrity of the nonproliferation regime that is at stake.
Our common security would be profoundly affected if additional countries crossed the nuclear threshold.
That is why President Obama and I have committed so much time and attention to seeking an agreement that will ensure Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful, and that it will formally commit to it in perpetuity as a signatory to the NPT, and through a science-based, verifiable agreement with the P5+1 member nations and their partners.
We are also working with the international community to achieve the DPRK's complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization, and its return to the NPT and IAEA safeguards.
The United States is fully committed to continuing to fulfill its own Treaty obligations, as well as to strengthening the global nuclear nonproliferation regime.
Under the New START Treaty, we are reducing our deployed nuclear weapons to levels not seen since the 1950s, and we are prepared to negotiate further reductions. Through bilateral agreements and through the IAEA, we also continue to advance peaceful nuclear cooperation with other NPT Parties. We also are proud of our record as the leading contributor of funds to assist such global development.
The Ninth Review Conference of the NPT will open in New York on April 27. The United States has been working diligently to implement the items in the Action Plan adopted at the 2010 Review Conference, and we seek to strengthen that Plan.
We look forward to working with all NPT Parties to achieve a constructive outcome of the conference.
Statement on the 45th Anniversary of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 5, 2015
All countries share responsibility to confront nuclear proliferation. All countries benefit if nuclear weapons do not spread to additional countries. All countries also profit when there is smart, continuous action in the direction of nuclear disarmament. And all countries gain from cooperation on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
That is why the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has served the international community well for the past 45 years.
Simply put, it is the bedrock foundation for nuclear nonproliferation, disarmament, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy. They include the areas of human health, food and agriculture, water resource management, and the environment.
There are many reasons for the success of the NPT, which entered into force on March 5, 1970.
The international consensus against the spread of nuclear weapons, embodied in the spirit and text of the Treaty, is strong and continues to be upheld. Overwhelming numbers of states have refrained from pursuing nuclear weapons and accept International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards as the standard for verification and peaceful nuclear trade. Several states that abandoned nuclear weapons efforts might have come to a different conclusion in the absence of a robust and widely supported NPT.
Today, as we mark this anniversary, we especially celebrate that more states are party to the NPT than to any other arms control or nonproliferation agreement. But there is more work to do, and we must recommit ourselves to this task.
NPT Parties share a responsibility to reinforce the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, in particular to overcome the challenges posed by a few countries that have violated their international nonproliferation obligations. This should be a concern of all states, as it is the future integrity of the nonproliferation regime that is at stake.
Our common security would be profoundly affected if additional countries crossed the nuclear threshold.
That is why President Obama and I have committed so much time and attention to seeking an agreement that will ensure Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful, and that it will formally commit to it in perpetuity as a signatory to the NPT, and through a science-based, verifiable agreement with the P5+1 member nations and their partners.
We are also working with the international community to achieve the DPRK's complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization, and its return to the NPT and IAEA safeguards.
The United States is fully committed to continuing to fulfill its own Treaty obligations, as well as to strengthening the global nuclear nonproliferation regime.
Under the New START Treaty, we are reducing our deployed nuclear weapons to levels not seen since the 1950s, and we are prepared to negotiate further reductions. Through bilateral agreements and through the IAEA, we also continue to advance peaceful nuclear cooperation with other NPT Parties. We also are proud of our record as the leading contributor of funds to assist such global development.
The Ninth Review Conference of the NPT will open in New York on April 27. The United States has been working diligently to implement the items in the Action Plan adopted at the 2010 Review Conference, and we seek to strengthen that Plan.
We look forward to working with all NPT Parties to achieve a constructive outcome of the conference.
DOJ ANNOUNCES FINDINGS OF FERGUSON INVESTIGATIONS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri
Justice Department Finds a Pattern of Civil Rights Violations by the Ferguson Police Department
The Justice Department announced the findings of its two civil rights investigations related to Ferguson, Missouri, today. The Justice Department found that the Ferguson Police Department (FPD) engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First, Fourth, and 14th Amendments of the Constitution. The Justice Department also announced that the evidence examined in its independent, federal investigation into the fatal shooting of Michael Brown does not support federal civil rights charges against Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson.
“As detailed in our report, this investigation found a community that was deeply polarized, and where deep distrust and hostility often characterized interactions between police and area residents,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “Our investigation showed that Ferguson police officers routinely violate the Fourth Amendment in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force against them. Now that our investigation has reached its conclusion, it is time for Ferguson’s leaders to take immediate, wholesale and structural corrective action. The report we have issued and the steps we have taken are only the beginning of a necessarily resource-intensive and inclusive process to promote reconciliation, to reduce and eliminate bias, and to bridge gaps and build understanding.”
“While the findings in Ferguson are very serious and the list of needed changes is long, the record of the Civil Rights Division’s work with police departments across the country shows that if the Ferguson Police Department truly commits to community policing, it can restore the trust it has lost,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division. “We look forward to working with City Officials and the many communities that make up Ferguson to develop and institute reforms that will focus the Ferguson Police Department on public safety and constitutional policing instead of revenue. Real community policing is possible and ensures that all people are equal before the law, and that law enforcement is seen as a part of, rather than distant from, the communities they serve.”
Attorney General Holder first announced the comprehensive pattern or practice investigation into the Ferguson Police Department after visiting that community in August 2014, and hearing directly from residents about police practices and the lack of trust between FPD and those they are sworn to protect. The investigation focused on the FPD’s use of force, including deadly force; stops, searches and arrests; discriminatory policing; and treatment of detainees inside Ferguson’s city jail by Ferguson police officers.
In the course of its pattern or practice investigation, the Civil Rights Division reviewed more than 35,000 pages of police records; interviewed and met with city, police and court officials, including the FPD’s chief and numerous other officers; conducted hundreds of in-person and telephone interviews, as well as participated in meetings with community members and groups; observed Ferguson Municipal Court sessions, and; analyzed FPD’s data on stops, searches and arrests. It found that the combination of Ferguson’s focus on generating revenue over public safety, along with racial bias, has a profound effect on the FPD’s police and court practices, resulting in conduct that routinely violates the Constitution and federal law. The department also found that these patterns created a lack of trust between the FPD and significant portions of Ferguson’s residents, especially African Americans.
The department found that the FPD has a pattern or practice of:
Conducting stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment; and
Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The department found that Ferguson Municipal Court has a pattern or practice of:
Focusing on revenue over public safety, leading to court practices that violate the 14th Amendment’s due process and equal protection requirements.
Court practices exacerbating the harm of Ferguson’s unconstitutional police practices and imposing particular hardship upon Ferguson’s most vulnerable residents, especially upon those living in or near poverty.Minor offenses can generate crippling debts, result in jail time because of an inability to pay and result in the loss of a driver’s license, employment, or housing.
The department found a pattern or practice of racial bias in both the FPD and municipal court:
The harms of Ferguson’s police and court practices are borne disproportionately by African Americans and that this disproportionate impact is avoidable.
Ferguson’s harmful court and police practices are due, at least in part, to intentional discrimination, as demonstrated by direct evidence of racial bias and stereotyping about African Americans by certain Ferguson police and municipal court officials.
The findings are laid out in a 100-page report that discusses the evidence and what remedies should be implemented to end the pattern or practice. The findings include two sets of recommendations, 26 in total, that the Justice Department believes are necessary to correct the unconstitutional FPD and Ferguson Municipal Court practices. The recommendations include: changing policing and court practices so that they are based on public safety instead of revenue; improving training and oversight; changing practices to reduce bias, and; ending an overreliance on arrest warrants as a means of collecting fines.
The Justice Department will require that the recommendations and other measures be part of a court-enforceable remedial process that includes involvement from community stakeholders as well as independent oversight. The Justice Department has provided its investigative report to the FPD and in the coming weeks, the Civil Rights Division will seek to work with the City of Ferguson and the Ferguson community to develop and reach an agreement for reform, using the recommendations in the report as the starting point.
The federal criminal investigation into the fatal shooting of Michael Brown sought to determine whether the evidence from the events that led to Brown’s death was sufficient to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Wilson’s actions violated federal civil rights laws that make it a federal crime for someone acting with law enforcement authority to willfully violate a person’s civil rights. As part of the investigation, federal authorities reviewed physical, ballistic, forensic, and crime scene evidence; medical reports and autopsy reports, including an independent autopsy performed by the U.S. Department of Defense Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service; Wilson’s personnel records; audio and video recordings; internet postings, and; the transcripts from the proceedings before the St. Louis County grand jury. Federal investigators interviewed purported eyewitnesses and other individuals claiming to have relevant information. Federal prosecutors and agents re-interviewed dozens of witnesses to evaluate their accounts and obtain more detailed information. FBI agents independently canvassed more than 300 residences to locate and interview additional witnesses.
The standard of proof is the same for all criminal cases: that the defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. However, unlike state laws, federal criminal civil rights statutes do not have the equivalent of manslaughter or a statute that makes negligence a crime. Federal statutes require the government to prove that Officer Wilson used unreasonable force when he shot Michael Brown and that he did so willfully, that is, he shot Brown knowing it was wrong and against the law to do so. After a careful and deliberative review of all of the evidence, the department has determined that the evidence does not establish that Darren Wilson violated the applicable federal criminal civil rights statute. The family of Michael Brown was notified earlier today of the department’s findings.
Due to the high interest in this case, the department took the rare step of publicly releasing the closing memo in the case. The report details, in over 80 pages, the evidence, including evidence from witnesses, the autopsies and physical evidence from the analysis of the DNA, blood, shooting scene and ballistics. The report also explains the law as developed by the federal courts and applies that law to the evidence.
DOJ Report on Shooting of Michael Brown
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Justice Department Announces Findings of Two Civil Rights Investigations in Ferguson, Missouri
Justice Department Finds a Pattern of Civil Rights Violations by the Ferguson Police Department
The Justice Department announced the findings of its two civil rights investigations related to Ferguson, Missouri, today. The Justice Department found that the Ferguson Police Department (FPD) engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First, Fourth, and 14th Amendments of the Constitution. The Justice Department also announced that the evidence examined in its independent, federal investigation into the fatal shooting of Michael Brown does not support federal civil rights charges against Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson.
“As detailed in our report, this investigation found a community that was deeply polarized, and where deep distrust and hostility often characterized interactions between police and area residents,” said Attorney General Eric Holder. “Our investigation showed that Ferguson police officers routinely violate the Fourth Amendment in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause, and using unreasonable force against them. Now that our investigation has reached its conclusion, it is time for Ferguson’s leaders to take immediate, wholesale and structural corrective action. The report we have issued and the steps we have taken are only the beginning of a necessarily resource-intensive and inclusive process to promote reconciliation, to reduce and eliminate bias, and to bridge gaps and build understanding.”
“While the findings in Ferguson are very serious and the list of needed changes is long, the record of the Civil Rights Division’s work with police departments across the country shows that if the Ferguson Police Department truly commits to community policing, it can restore the trust it has lost,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division. “We look forward to working with City Officials and the many communities that make up Ferguson to develop and institute reforms that will focus the Ferguson Police Department on public safety and constitutional policing instead of revenue. Real community policing is possible and ensures that all people are equal before the law, and that law enforcement is seen as a part of, rather than distant from, the communities they serve.”
Attorney General Holder first announced the comprehensive pattern or practice investigation into the Ferguson Police Department after visiting that community in August 2014, and hearing directly from residents about police practices and the lack of trust between FPD and those they are sworn to protect. The investigation focused on the FPD’s use of force, including deadly force; stops, searches and arrests; discriminatory policing; and treatment of detainees inside Ferguson’s city jail by Ferguson police officers.
In the course of its pattern or practice investigation, the Civil Rights Division reviewed more than 35,000 pages of police records; interviewed and met with city, police and court officials, including the FPD’s chief and numerous other officers; conducted hundreds of in-person and telephone interviews, as well as participated in meetings with community members and groups; observed Ferguson Municipal Court sessions, and; analyzed FPD’s data on stops, searches and arrests. It found that the combination of Ferguson’s focus on generating revenue over public safety, along with racial bias, has a profound effect on the FPD’s police and court practices, resulting in conduct that routinely violates the Constitution and federal law. The department also found that these patterns created a lack of trust between the FPD and significant portions of Ferguson’s residents, especially African Americans.
The department found that the FPD has a pattern or practice of:
Conducting stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment; and
Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The department found that Ferguson Municipal Court has a pattern or practice of:
Focusing on revenue over public safety, leading to court practices that violate the 14th Amendment’s due process and equal protection requirements.
Court practices exacerbating the harm of Ferguson’s unconstitutional police practices and imposing particular hardship upon Ferguson’s most vulnerable residents, especially upon those living in or near poverty.Minor offenses can generate crippling debts, result in jail time because of an inability to pay and result in the loss of a driver’s license, employment, or housing.
The department found a pattern or practice of racial bias in both the FPD and municipal court:
The harms of Ferguson’s police and court practices are borne disproportionately by African Americans and that this disproportionate impact is avoidable.
Ferguson’s harmful court and police practices are due, at least in part, to intentional discrimination, as demonstrated by direct evidence of racial bias and stereotyping about African Americans by certain Ferguson police and municipal court officials.
The findings are laid out in a 100-page report that discusses the evidence and what remedies should be implemented to end the pattern or practice. The findings include two sets of recommendations, 26 in total, that the Justice Department believes are necessary to correct the unconstitutional FPD and Ferguson Municipal Court practices. The recommendations include: changing policing and court practices so that they are based on public safety instead of revenue; improving training and oversight; changing practices to reduce bias, and; ending an overreliance on arrest warrants as a means of collecting fines.
The Justice Department will require that the recommendations and other measures be part of a court-enforceable remedial process that includes involvement from community stakeholders as well as independent oversight. The Justice Department has provided its investigative report to the FPD and in the coming weeks, the Civil Rights Division will seek to work with the City of Ferguson and the Ferguson community to develop and reach an agreement for reform, using the recommendations in the report as the starting point.
The federal criminal investigation into the fatal shooting of Michael Brown sought to determine whether the evidence from the events that led to Brown’s death was sufficient to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Wilson’s actions violated federal civil rights laws that make it a federal crime for someone acting with law enforcement authority to willfully violate a person’s civil rights. As part of the investigation, federal authorities reviewed physical, ballistic, forensic, and crime scene evidence; medical reports and autopsy reports, including an independent autopsy performed by the U.S. Department of Defense Armed Forces Medical Examiner Service; Wilson’s personnel records; audio and video recordings; internet postings, and; the transcripts from the proceedings before the St. Louis County grand jury. Federal investigators interviewed purported eyewitnesses and other individuals claiming to have relevant information. Federal prosecutors and agents re-interviewed dozens of witnesses to evaluate their accounts and obtain more detailed information. FBI agents independently canvassed more than 300 residences to locate and interview additional witnesses.
The standard of proof is the same for all criminal cases: that the defendant committed the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. However, unlike state laws, federal criminal civil rights statutes do not have the equivalent of manslaughter or a statute that makes negligence a crime. Federal statutes require the government to prove that Officer Wilson used unreasonable force when he shot Michael Brown and that he did so willfully, that is, he shot Brown knowing it was wrong and against the law to do so. After a careful and deliberative review of all of the evidence, the department has determined that the evidence does not establish that Darren Wilson violated the applicable federal criminal civil rights statute. The family of Michael Brown was notified earlier today of the department’s findings.
Due to the high interest in this case, the department took the rare step of publicly releasing the closing memo in the case. The report details, in over 80 pages, the evidence, including evidence from witnesses, the autopsies and physical evidence from the analysis of the DNA, blood, shooting scene and ballistics. The report also explains the law as developed by the federal courts and applies that law to the evidence.
DOJ Report on Shooting of Michael Brown
COMMANDER U.S. FORCES AFGHANISTAN SAYS TALIBAN UNLIKELY TO TOPPLE GOVERNMENT
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Campbell: Taliban Overmatched by Afghan Forces
By Nick Simeone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, March 4, 2015 – While Afghanistan remains a dangerous place with many challenges ahead, it’s unlikely the Taliban have the ability to best Afghan forces on the battlefield or topple the government, the top U.S. general in the country said today.
Army Gen. John F. Campbell, commander of Operation Resolute Support and U.S. Forces Afghanistan, said in prepared remarks to the House Armed Services Committee that while the Taliban has shifted tactics to high-profile attacks against soft targets, it is not capable of overthrowing the Afghan government in Kabul.
While they will continue to test Afghan security forces, “it’s unlikely that the Taliban will be able to overmatch the Afghan national defense and security forces on the battlefield in 2015,” Campbell said.
He predicted that indirect fire, insider attacks and other Taliban offensives will increase during the upcoming fighting season, but “these are not the tactics of an insurgent movement capable of overthrowing the Afghan government.”
Afghans Control Key Territory
With 350,000 Afghan security forces now in charge of the country’s security, Campbell said, the Afghan government has been able to maintain control over all key territory and populated areas including the country’s 34 provincial capitals and its major cities.
Casualties among Afghan security forces were higher last year than in 2013, he said, primarily because of the stepped-up role Afghan forces have taken in security operations at a time when coalition forces were drawing down.
Though U.S. and coalition casualties were lower, “Afghanistan remains a dangerous place,” Campbell said. In the coming months, he added, “we can anticipate we will be targeted and we will suffer casualties.”
Some 10,600 U.S. forces remain in Afghanistan -- out of a total coalition force of 13,000 -- continuing with a mission to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and conduct counterterrorism operations.
“Our primary focus continues to be on preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven again for al-Qaida and other international extremist groups,”
Campbell said, including the Haqqani network. That network, he said, could pose a formidable challenge to the Afghan government and coalition forces.
There is evidence of recruiting efforts in Afghanistan by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists and that some Taliban members have rebranded themselves as ISIL, Campbell said. These are developments, he said, that bear watching.
Campbell: Taliban Overmatched by Afghan Forces
By Nick Simeone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, March 4, 2015 – While Afghanistan remains a dangerous place with many challenges ahead, it’s unlikely the Taliban have the ability to best Afghan forces on the battlefield or topple the government, the top U.S. general in the country said today.
Army Gen. John F. Campbell, commander of Operation Resolute Support and U.S. Forces Afghanistan, said in prepared remarks to the House Armed Services Committee that while the Taliban has shifted tactics to high-profile attacks against soft targets, it is not capable of overthrowing the Afghan government in Kabul.
While they will continue to test Afghan security forces, “it’s unlikely that the Taliban will be able to overmatch the Afghan national defense and security forces on the battlefield in 2015,” Campbell said.
He predicted that indirect fire, insider attacks and other Taliban offensives will increase during the upcoming fighting season, but “these are not the tactics of an insurgent movement capable of overthrowing the Afghan government.”
Afghans Control Key Territory
With 350,000 Afghan security forces now in charge of the country’s security, Campbell said, the Afghan government has been able to maintain control over all key territory and populated areas including the country’s 34 provincial capitals and its major cities.
Casualties among Afghan security forces were higher last year than in 2013, he said, primarily because of the stepped-up role Afghan forces have taken in security operations at a time when coalition forces were drawing down.
Though U.S. and coalition casualties were lower, “Afghanistan remains a dangerous place,” Campbell said. In the coming months, he added, “we can anticipate we will be targeted and we will suffer casualties.”
Some 10,600 U.S. forces remain in Afghanistan -- out of a total coalition force of 13,000 -- continuing with a mission to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and conduct counterterrorism operations.
“Our primary focus continues to be on preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven again for al-Qaida and other international extremist groups,”
Campbell said, including the Haqqani network. That network, he said, could pose a formidable challenge to the Afghan government and coalition forces.
There is evidence of recruiting efforts in Afghanistan by Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists and that some Taliban members have rebranded themselves as ISIL, Campbell said. These are developments, he said, that bear watching.
SEC CHAIR WHITE'S REMARKS AT MEETING OF SEC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON SMALL AND EMERGING COMPANIES
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
PUBLIC STATEMENT
Opening Remarks at Meeting of SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies
SEC Chair Mary Jo White
March 4, 2015
Good morning. Thank you all for being here. I will be very brief so that you can get to the business at hand.
I, too, would like to welcome Michael Pieciak who will be serving as the committee’s observer representative from NASAA. Mike is the Deputy Commissioner of the Vermont Securities Division, and I am very pleased he is here on behalf of the state securities regulators to bring that knowledgeable and important voice to your discussions.
Today’s agenda addresses several important topics, including Regulation A+, secondary market liquidity, and recommendations regarding the definition of accredited investor, all of which are quite timely topics for the Commission’s ongoing work in these areas. As you know, our Regulation A+ and crowdfunding rulemakings are designed to facilitate smaller companies’ ability to access capital and to provide investors with additional investment opportunities. In making investment decisions, investors may naturally consider whether they will have the ability to resell their shares in the future; there is no doubt that secondary market liquidity is an important factor impacting the availability of capital for small businesses as well as investor protection.
SEC staff in the Divisions of Corporation Finance and Trading and Markets have been looking at various means to facilitate the secondary market trading of securities issued by small businesses. Among a number of other possible avenues, the staff is considering whether the development of appropriately structured venture exchanges could provide more liquidity for the securities of smaller companies. Some earlier exchanges have not been successful; the reasons for that need to be carefully studied along with other issues. Smaller companies are important to our economy, and it is important to support appropriately a market structure that promotes the capital formation of smaller companies, while also providing robust investor protections.
More generally, as I have emphasized on several occasions, one market structure may not fit all and that the Commission must concretely focus on how to enhance the market structure for smaller companies. I look forward to perspectives and ideas from your committee on what obstacles and possible solutions you see to the development of secondary market liquidity venues for privately-issued securities.
As promised, I will stop to let you get down to business. As always, we very much appreciate your expertise and efforts. Facilitating small business capital formation is a priority we all share. It is our job, with your help, to convert the supportive words into workable and effective actions.
Thank you.
PUBLIC STATEMENT
Opening Remarks at Meeting of SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies
SEC Chair Mary Jo White
March 4, 2015
Good morning. Thank you all for being here. I will be very brief so that you can get to the business at hand.
I, too, would like to welcome Michael Pieciak who will be serving as the committee’s observer representative from NASAA. Mike is the Deputy Commissioner of the Vermont Securities Division, and I am very pleased he is here on behalf of the state securities regulators to bring that knowledgeable and important voice to your discussions.
Today’s agenda addresses several important topics, including Regulation A+, secondary market liquidity, and recommendations regarding the definition of accredited investor, all of which are quite timely topics for the Commission’s ongoing work in these areas. As you know, our Regulation A+ and crowdfunding rulemakings are designed to facilitate smaller companies’ ability to access capital and to provide investors with additional investment opportunities. In making investment decisions, investors may naturally consider whether they will have the ability to resell their shares in the future; there is no doubt that secondary market liquidity is an important factor impacting the availability of capital for small businesses as well as investor protection.
SEC staff in the Divisions of Corporation Finance and Trading and Markets have been looking at various means to facilitate the secondary market trading of securities issued by small businesses. Among a number of other possible avenues, the staff is considering whether the development of appropriately structured venture exchanges could provide more liquidity for the securities of smaller companies. Some earlier exchanges have not been successful; the reasons for that need to be carefully studied along with other issues. Smaller companies are important to our economy, and it is important to support appropriately a market structure that promotes the capital formation of smaller companies, while also providing robust investor protections.
More generally, as I have emphasized on several occasions, one market structure may not fit all and that the Commission must concretely focus on how to enhance the market structure for smaller companies. I look forward to perspectives and ideas from your committee on what obstacles and possible solutions you see to the development of secondary market liquidity venues for privately-issued securities.
As promised, I will stop to let you get down to business. As always, we very much appreciate your expertise and efforts. Facilitating small business capital formation is a priority we all share. It is our job, with your help, to convert the supportive words into workable and effective actions.
Thank you.
FTC, STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL MOVE AGAINST POLITICAL SURVEY ROBOCALLERS WHO OFFER BAHAMAS VACATION
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
FTC and Ten State Attorneys General Take Action Against Political Survey Robocallers Pitching Cruise Line Vacations to the Bahamas
Settling Defendants to Pay More Than $500,000 in Penalties for Billions of Illegal Robocalls
The Federal Trade Commission and 10 state attorneys general have taken action against a Florida-based cruise line company and seven other companies that assisted a massive telemarketing campaign resulting in billions of robocalls. The FTC and state partners allege that that the companies illegally sold cruise vacations using political survey robocalls.
Although the FTC’s do-not-call and robocall rules do not prohibit political survey robocalls, the defendants’ robocalls violated federal law because they incorporated a sales pitch for a cruise to the Bahamas. The robocalls generated millions of dollars for the cruise line.
“Marketers who know the ropes understand you can’t steer clear of the do not call rules by tacking a political or survey call onto a sales pitch,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. She added: “Anyone who assists in making illegal calls is also on the hook.”
According to the joint complaint filed by the FTC and the states, the defendants’ robocall campaign ran from October 2011 through July 2012 and averaged approximately 12 to 15 million illegal sales calls a day. Consumers who answered these calls typically heard a pre-recorded message supposedly from “John from Political Opinions of America,” who told them they had been “carefully selected” to participate in a 30-second research survey, after which they could “press one” to receive a two-day cruise to the Bahamas.
Consumers who completed the survey and pressed one for their cruise were connected to a live telemarketer working on behalf of Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc. (CCL), to market its cruise vacations. In addition to the cruise, these telemarketers also sold pre-boarding hotels, cruise excursions, enhanced accommodations, and other travel packages.
The complaint charges CCL with violating the agency’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) by using robocalls to sell cruise vacations. The complaint also alleges that two other companies, Linked Service Solutions, LLC and Economic Strategy LLC, violated the TSR by placing the robocalls that generated leads for CCL.
The complaint also charges a group of five interrelated companies, and their owner, Fred Accuardi, with assisting and facilitating the illegal cruise calls. The complaint alleges that these defendants provided robocallers with hundreds of telephone numbers to use when making calls, made it possible for robocallers to choose and change the names that would appear on consumers’ caller ID devices, and hid the robocallers’ identities from authorities.
In addition, the Accuardi defendants helped fund the robocallers by sharing fees generated by accessing caller ID names. The five companies charged with assisting and facilitating the robocall violations are: Telephone Management Corporation, T M Caller ID, LLC, Pacific Telecom Communications Group, International Telephone Corporation and International Telephone, LLC.
The FTC was joined in this action by the attorneys general of Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington and appreciates their assistance in bringing this case.
The following defendants have agreed to court orders settling the charges against them: CCL; Linked Service Solutions, LLC and its owners, Scott Broomfield and Jason Birkett (LSS); Economic Strategy LLC, and its owner, Jacob deJongh; and Steve Hamilton.
The proposed settlement orders bar CCL and the other settling defendants from engaging in abusive telemarketing practices, including calling consumers whose phone numbers are on the DNC Registry, calling anyone that has previously said they don’t want to be called again, failing to transmit accurate caller ID information, and placing illegal robocalls. The orders also require CCL to monitor its lead generators on an ongoing basis and Hamilton to terminate any clients placing telephone calls that would violate the TSR.
The proposed settlement orders also impose: 1) a civil penalty of $7.73 million against CCL, which will be partially suspended after CCL pays $500,000; 2) a partially suspended civil penalty of $5 million against LSS and its owners, upon payment of $25,000; 3) a partially suspended civil penalty of $295,000 against Economic Strategy and its owner, upon the payment of $2,000; and 4) a partially suspended civil penalty of $750,000 against Steve Hamilton, one of the owners of Pacific Telecom Communication Group, upon payment of $2,000. The penalties are partially suspended based on the defendants’ inability to pay.
Litigation continues against Fred Accuardi and the five companies charged with assisting and facilitating the illegal conduct alleged in the complaint.
Information for Consumers
The FTC has a range of information for consumers who would like to learn more about the Do Not Call Registry, robocalls, and travel fraud in general. Please see the travel scams feature page and Limiting Unwanted Calls & Emails.
The Commission vote approving the complaint and each of the four proposed stipulated final orders was 5-0. They were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. Stipulated orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.
FTC and Ten State Attorneys General Take Action Against Political Survey Robocallers Pitching Cruise Line Vacations to the Bahamas
Settling Defendants to Pay More Than $500,000 in Penalties for Billions of Illegal Robocalls
The Federal Trade Commission and 10 state attorneys general have taken action against a Florida-based cruise line company and seven other companies that assisted a massive telemarketing campaign resulting in billions of robocalls. The FTC and state partners allege that that the companies illegally sold cruise vacations using political survey robocalls.
Although the FTC’s do-not-call and robocall rules do not prohibit political survey robocalls, the defendants’ robocalls violated federal law because they incorporated a sales pitch for a cruise to the Bahamas. The robocalls generated millions of dollars for the cruise line.
“Marketers who know the ropes understand you can’t steer clear of the do not call rules by tacking a political or survey call onto a sales pitch,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. She added: “Anyone who assists in making illegal calls is also on the hook.”
According to the joint complaint filed by the FTC and the states, the defendants’ robocall campaign ran from October 2011 through July 2012 and averaged approximately 12 to 15 million illegal sales calls a day. Consumers who answered these calls typically heard a pre-recorded message supposedly from “John from Political Opinions of America,” who told them they had been “carefully selected” to participate in a 30-second research survey, after which they could “press one” to receive a two-day cruise to the Bahamas.
Consumers who completed the survey and pressed one for their cruise were connected to a live telemarketer working on behalf of Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc. (CCL), to market its cruise vacations. In addition to the cruise, these telemarketers also sold pre-boarding hotels, cruise excursions, enhanced accommodations, and other travel packages.
The complaint charges CCL with violating the agency’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR) by using robocalls to sell cruise vacations. The complaint also alleges that two other companies, Linked Service Solutions, LLC and Economic Strategy LLC, violated the TSR by placing the robocalls that generated leads for CCL.
The complaint also charges a group of five interrelated companies, and their owner, Fred Accuardi, with assisting and facilitating the illegal cruise calls. The complaint alleges that these defendants provided robocallers with hundreds of telephone numbers to use when making calls, made it possible for robocallers to choose and change the names that would appear on consumers’ caller ID devices, and hid the robocallers’ identities from authorities.
In addition, the Accuardi defendants helped fund the robocallers by sharing fees generated by accessing caller ID names. The five companies charged with assisting and facilitating the robocall violations are: Telephone Management Corporation, T M Caller ID, LLC, Pacific Telecom Communications Group, International Telephone Corporation and International Telephone, LLC.
The FTC was joined in this action by the attorneys general of Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Washington and appreciates their assistance in bringing this case.
The following defendants have agreed to court orders settling the charges against them: CCL; Linked Service Solutions, LLC and its owners, Scott Broomfield and Jason Birkett (LSS); Economic Strategy LLC, and its owner, Jacob deJongh; and Steve Hamilton.
The proposed settlement orders bar CCL and the other settling defendants from engaging in abusive telemarketing practices, including calling consumers whose phone numbers are on the DNC Registry, calling anyone that has previously said they don’t want to be called again, failing to transmit accurate caller ID information, and placing illegal robocalls. The orders also require CCL to monitor its lead generators on an ongoing basis and Hamilton to terminate any clients placing telephone calls that would violate the TSR.
The proposed settlement orders also impose: 1) a civil penalty of $7.73 million against CCL, which will be partially suspended after CCL pays $500,000; 2) a partially suspended civil penalty of $5 million against LSS and its owners, upon payment of $25,000; 3) a partially suspended civil penalty of $295,000 against Economic Strategy and its owner, upon the payment of $2,000; and 4) a partially suspended civil penalty of $750,000 against Steve Hamilton, one of the owners of Pacific Telecom Communication Group, upon payment of $2,000. The penalties are partially suspended based on the defendants’ inability to pay.
Litigation continues against Fred Accuardi and the five companies charged with assisting and facilitating the illegal conduct alleged in the complaint.
Information for Consumers
The FTC has a range of information for consumers who would like to learn more about the Do Not Call Registry, robocalls, and travel fraud in general. Please see the travel scams feature page and Limiting Unwanted Calls & Emails.
The Commission vote approving the complaint and each of the four proposed stipulated final orders was 5-0. They were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. Stipulated orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS IN MONTREUX, SWITZERLAND
FROM: THE STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks in Montreux, Switzerland
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Montreux, Switzerland
March 4, 2015
SECRETARY KERRY: So good afternoon to all, and thank you very, very much for your patience. We’ve been involved in some long discussions over the past few days, and even well before that. And before I leave Montreux, I wanted to quickly share with you where we are.
From the beginning, these negotiations have been tough and intense, and they remain so. And we’ve made some progress from where we were, but there are still significant gaps and important choices that need to be made. The purpose of these negotiations is not to get any deal; it’s to get the right deal, one that can withstand scrutiny – the scrutiny of experts on nuclear affairs all around the world, the scrutiny of other governments, the scrutiny of people, the scrutiny of the Congress of the United States, people in America, and the scrutiny of countries in the region that are affected by it. And so we know that. We approach these negotiations with a full understanding of the test that will be applied to this and of the expectations that exist.
We also want an agreement that is sustainable over time, and particularly that achieves the singular goal of proving that Iran’s nuclear program is and will remain peaceful. We aren’t going to be distracted by external factors or politics. We will continue to be guided by our experts, our scientists, our national interests and those of our partners and allies.
Now, for all the objections that any country has to Iranian activities in the region – and believe me, we have objections and others in the world have objections – the first step is to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. And we know that absent a deal, Iran will have the ability to move ahead with its nuclear program; that we know for sure, because that’s exactly what’s happened to date. We also know that any deal that we would agree to would significantly increase the breakout time, leaving Iran further – far further than it is today – from producing enough fissile material for a weapon, while it undertakes the effort of proving to the world that the program is, in fact, peaceful.
Clearly, increased breakout time makes any nation in the vicinity or any nation of concern safer. We also know that any deal that we reach would give us the intrusive access and verification measures necessary to confirm that Iran’s nuclear facilities are indeed on a peaceful path. And that would allow us to promptly detect any attempt to cheat or to break out, and then to respond appropriately. And contrary to some public reports, we are only contemplating a deal in which important access and verification measures will endure.
We also know that the international sanctions, which many want to simply hang their hats on – they may have gotten Iran to the table, but to date they haven’t stopped Iran from advancing its nuclear program. In fact, the first and only thing that had stopped their program from progressing in almost a decade was the Joint Plan of Action that we negotiated and we reached in November of 2013, and that has been adhered to in every single respect since then.
And most importantly, as President Obama said yesterday, we know that no one has presented a more viable, lasting alternative for how you actually prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. So folks, simply demanding that Iran capitulate is not a plan, and nor would any of our P5+1 partners support us in that position. And it’s very important to remember we have partners in this effort – France, Germany, Britain, China, Russia – all of whom have similar feelings about the importance of what must be done here.
So we continue to be focused on reaching a good deal, the right deal, that closes off any paths that Iran could have towards fissile material for a weapon and that protects the world from the enormous threat that we all know a nuclear-armed Iran would pose.
Now, we still don’t know whether we will get there, and it is certainly possible that we won’t. It may be that Iran simply can’t say yes to the type of deal that the international community requires. But we do know that we owe it to the American people in my case, people in the world, to try to find out. And we will return to these talks on the 15th of March, recognizing that time is of the essence, the days are ticking by, and important decisions need to be made. Thank you.
Remarks in Montreux, Switzerland
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Montreux, Switzerland
March 4, 2015
SECRETARY KERRY: So good afternoon to all, and thank you very, very much for your patience. We’ve been involved in some long discussions over the past few days, and even well before that. And before I leave Montreux, I wanted to quickly share with you where we are.
From the beginning, these negotiations have been tough and intense, and they remain so. And we’ve made some progress from where we were, but there are still significant gaps and important choices that need to be made. The purpose of these negotiations is not to get any deal; it’s to get the right deal, one that can withstand scrutiny – the scrutiny of experts on nuclear affairs all around the world, the scrutiny of other governments, the scrutiny of people, the scrutiny of the Congress of the United States, people in America, and the scrutiny of countries in the region that are affected by it. And so we know that. We approach these negotiations with a full understanding of the test that will be applied to this and of the expectations that exist.
We also want an agreement that is sustainable over time, and particularly that achieves the singular goal of proving that Iran’s nuclear program is and will remain peaceful. We aren’t going to be distracted by external factors or politics. We will continue to be guided by our experts, our scientists, our national interests and those of our partners and allies.
Now, for all the objections that any country has to Iranian activities in the region – and believe me, we have objections and others in the world have objections – the first step is to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. And we know that absent a deal, Iran will have the ability to move ahead with its nuclear program; that we know for sure, because that’s exactly what’s happened to date. We also know that any deal that we would agree to would significantly increase the breakout time, leaving Iran further – far further than it is today – from producing enough fissile material for a weapon, while it undertakes the effort of proving to the world that the program is, in fact, peaceful.
Clearly, increased breakout time makes any nation in the vicinity or any nation of concern safer. We also know that any deal that we reach would give us the intrusive access and verification measures necessary to confirm that Iran’s nuclear facilities are indeed on a peaceful path. And that would allow us to promptly detect any attempt to cheat or to break out, and then to respond appropriately. And contrary to some public reports, we are only contemplating a deal in which important access and verification measures will endure.
We also know that the international sanctions, which many want to simply hang their hats on – they may have gotten Iran to the table, but to date they haven’t stopped Iran from advancing its nuclear program. In fact, the first and only thing that had stopped their program from progressing in almost a decade was the Joint Plan of Action that we negotiated and we reached in November of 2013, and that has been adhered to in every single respect since then.
And most importantly, as President Obama said yesterday, we know that no one has presented a more viable, lasting alternative for how you actually prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. So folks, simply demanding that Iran capitulate is not a plan, and nor would any of our P5+1 partners support us in that position. And it’s very important to remember we have partners in this effort – France, Germany, Britain, China, Russia – all of whom have similar feelings about the importance of what must be done here.
So we continue to be focused on reaching a good deal, the right deal, that closes off any paths that Iran could have towards fissile material for a weapon and that protects the world from the enormous threat that we all know a nuclear-armed Iran would pose.
Now, we still don’t know whether we will get there, and it is certainly possible that we won’t. It may be that Iran simply can’t say yes to the type of deal that the international community requires. But we do know that we owe it to the American people in my case, people in the world, to try to find out. And we will return to these talks on the 15th of March, recognizing that time is of the essence, the days are ticking by, and important decisions need to be made. Thank you.
WHITE HOUSE FACT SHEET ON SUPPORTING THE ALLIANCE FOR PROSPERITY IN THE NORTHERN TRIANGLE
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
March 03, 2015
FACT SHEET: Support for the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle
Vice President Biden traveled to Guatemala March 2-3 for two days of meetings with the Presidents of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Inter-American Development Bank President Luis Alberto Moreno, to advance implementation of the “Plan of the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle” announced last November in Washington, DC. The Vice President was accompanied by State Department Counselor Thomas A. Shannon, Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, Under Secretary of Commerce Stefan Selig, USAID Associate Administrator Mark Feierstein, Southcom Commander General John Kelly, and Inter-American Development Bank U.S. Executive Director Mark Lopes.
This week's meetings provided an opportunity for the leaders to discuss steps to stimulate economic growth, reduce inequality, promote educational opportunities, target criminal networks responsible for human trafficking, and help create governance and institutions that are transparent and accountable.
During working group meetings on March 3, Northern Triangle leaders committed in a Joint Statement to specific actions to advance implementation of the Alliance for Prosperity, in cooperation with the United States and the Inter-American Development Bank.
Specific commitments made by the leaders included the following:
- The United States and Northern Triangle governments agreed to hold a regional security dialogue in May 2015;
- The Northern Triangle governments agreed to expand centers in high-crime neighborhoods for at-risk youth to acquire job and life skills and participate in recreational activities in a safe environment;
- They agreed to create independent governmental auditing mechanisms by the end of 2015 to help combat corruption;
- Honduras will introduce a plan for police service reform by June 2015;
- Honduras will recruit, train, and deploy an additional 6,000 police over the next three years;
- El Salvador will present a bill criminalizing bulk cash smuggling by June 2015;
- Guatemala will introduce legislation to transition from an inquisitorial to an accusatorial judicial system by December 2015;
- The Northern Triangle countries agreed to diversify their energy matrix in 2015, to include promoting the completion of a gas pipeline from Mexico to Central America;
- They agreed to promote an integrated, efficient energy market by modifying the regulations governing the regional electricity market by 2016;
- The leaders agreed to hold advisory meetings by Summer 2015 to promote private investment;
- Guatemala and Honduras agreed to implement their recently announced Customs Union by December 2015;
- The Northern Triangle governments agreed to establish a government “single window” for foreign investors by December 2015;
- They agreed to develop public investment plans for the areas of greatest economic need by April 2015;
- They agreed to develop education investment plans focusing on pre-school, secondary, and vocational schools by the end of 2016;
- The Northern Triangle leaders agreed to develop specific strategies for women’s economic empowerment by 2016;
- Guatemala will create specialized anti-money laundering, asset forfeiture, and cybercrime units by June 2015;
- The three Northern Triangle countries agreed to develop a plan to professionalize civil services beginning in 2015;
- They committed to strengthen their tax base through better tax administration, more robust tax authorities, and tax code simplification.
Foreign Ministers from the three countries also agreed to present a detailed implementation roadmap for the Alliance for Prosperity at the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington on March 16, 2015. The leaders also agreed to meet during the first half of 2015 with private sector and civil society stakeholders to receive feedback on the roadmap.
In addition to the President’s Fiscal Year 2016 budget request which included $1 billion for Central America, the Vice President announced that the Administration would work with Congress to increase assistance to the region in Fiscal Year 2015.
March 03, 2015
FACT SHEET: Support for the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle
Vice President Biden traveled to Guatemala March 2-3 for two days of meetings with the Presidents of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Inter-American Development Bank President Luis Alberto Moreno, to advance implementation of the “Plan of the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle” announced last November in Washington, DC. The Vice President was accompanied by State Department Counselor Thomas A. Shannon, Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, Under Secretary of Commerce Stefan Selig, USAID Associate Administrator Mark Feierstein, Southcom Commander General John Kelly, and Inter-American Development Bank U.S. Executive Director Mark Lopes.
This week's meetings provided an opportunity for the leaders to discuss steps to stimulate economic growth, reduce inequality, promote educational opportunities, target criminal networks responsible for human trafficking, and help create governance and institutions that are transparent and accountable.
During working group meetings on March 3, Northern Triangle leaders committed in a Joint Statement to specific actions to advance implementation of the Alliance for Prosperity, in cooperation with the United States and the Inter-American Development Bank.
Specific commitments made by the leaders included the following:
- The United States and Northern Triangle governments agreed to hold a regional security dialogue in May 2015;
- The Northern Triangle governments agreed to expand centers in high-crime neighborhoods for at-risk youth to acquire job and life skills and participate in recreational activities in a safe environment;
- They agreed to create independent governmental auditing mechanisms by the end of 2015 to help combat corruption;
- Honduras will introduce a plan for police service reform by June 2015;
- Honduras will recruit, train, and deploy an additional 6,000 police over the next three years;
- El Salvador will present a bill criminalizing bulk cash smuggling by June 2015;
- Guatemala will introduce legislation to transition from an inquisitorial to an accusatorial judicial system by December 2015;
- The Northern Triangle countries agreed to diversify their energy matrix in 2015, to include promoting the completion of a gas pipeline from Mexico to Central America;
- They agreed to promote an integrated, efficient energy market by modifying the regulations governing the regional electricity market by 2016;
- The leaders agreed to hold advisory meetings by Summer 2015 to promote private investment;
- Guatemala and Honduras agreed to implement their recently announced Customs Union by December 2015;
- The Northern Triangle governments agreed to establish a government “single window” for foreign investors by December 2015;
- They agreed to develop public investment plans for the areas of greatest economic need by April 2015;
- They agreed to develop education investment plans focusing on pre-school, secondary, and vocational schools by the end of 2016;
- The Northern Triangle leaders agreed to develop specific strategies for women’s economic empowerment by 2016;
- Guatemala will create specialized anti-money laundering, asset forfeiture, and cybercrime units by June 2015;
- The three Northern Triangle countries agreed to develop a plan to professionalize civil services beginning in 2015;
- They committed to strengthen their tax base through better tax administration, more robust tax authorities, and tax code simplification.
Foreign Ministers from the three countries also agreed to present a detailed implementation roadmap for the Alliance for Prosperity at the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington on March 16, 2015. The leaders also agreed to meet during the first half of 2015 with private sector and civil society stakeholders to receive feedback on the roadmap.
In addition to the President’s Fiscal Year 2016 budget request which included $1 billion for Central America, the Vice President announced that the Administration would work with Congress to increase assistance to the region in Fiscal Year 2015.
THE QUEST FOR ECO-FRIENDLY PLASTICS
FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
From tea bags to Miatas, bioplastics are on the rise
Chemists and other researchers are working up new formulas for greener plastic
March 3, 2015
It's no longer common to hear, "Paper or plastic?" at the supermarket. In many jurisdictions, the plastic option is curbed. Hundreds of local governments around the world--even entire countries, such as China and India--ban or tax lightweight, single-use plastic bags.
Every year in the United States, more governments enact such restrictions, which are part of a larger shift away from petroleum-based plastic. As people grow more concerned about throwaways destined for landfills (or worse, for the open ocean) and the problems associated with fossil fuels, businesses of all sizes are looking beyond "traditional," petroleum-based plastics to alternatives derived from plants, or even synthesized by microorganisms.
The bioplastic revolution
Bioplastics are made wholly or in part from renewable biomass sources such as sugarcane and corn, or from the digest of microbes such as yeast. Some bioplastics are biodegradable or even compostable, under the right conditions.
These new, more eco-friendly plastics are cropping up in all sorts of places, from tea bags to 3D printing media to medical implants.
In Finland, for example, consumers can now buy milk in cartons, made by Tetra Pak, that are 100 percent plant-based. In the United States, a small company called Iris Industries used Kickstarter to get off the ground with "Denimite," a marbleized blue composite made of recycled denim and a thermoset resin binding agent that is partially bio-based. And NSF-funded Ecovative makes a packing material called "Myco Foam" that's designed to replace polystyrene packaging, that bane of environmentally aware consumers who nevertheless buy take-out meals.
The bioplastic revolution
Bio-based plastics are on the rise. The thriving European market for bioplastics is growing by more than 20 percent per year. Global demand is expected to rise by 19 percent annually through 2017, according to market research group Freedonia. Global production capacities are set to increase by 400 percent by 2018, with most bioplastics being produced in Asia, according to European Bioplastics (EUBP), an association that represents the interests of the industry in Europe.
Packaging has been, and still is, one of the most common uses for bioplastics, but there is growth in other areas, such as textiles and automotive applications.
"From functional sports garments with enhanced breathability to fuel lines, bioplastics are constantly spreading into new markets," said EUBP chairman François de Bie.
Even the sports-car market appreciates bioplastics. Mazda announced late last year that it would use a new bioplastic in the interior (and, eventually, exterior) of its MX5 Miata. In a December 2014 press release, the company says the plant-based plastic it developed with Mitsubishi Chemical Corp. can be dyed and has a higher-quality, less-toxic finish than traditional painted surfaces.
Likewise, the Ford Motor Co. said last July that it will work with Heinz to make plastic out of leftover tomato skins, for use in car wiring brackets and storage bins.
How plastics are born
All of this activity is exciting, but most of today's plastic still comes from a nonrenewable resource: crude oil deposits in the earth. The oil is extracted and sent to a refinery to be distilled and yield an intermediate product called naphtha. Intense heat helps "crack" the naphtha into smaller hydrocarbon molecules such as ethylene and propylene. These chemicals are combined with a catalyst and polymerized to form chains of many linked molecules--the materials we know as plastics.
Different kinds of plastic will have varying polymer structures and distinct properties (toughness, stiffness, strength, transparency, etc.). Manufacturers then buy those bulk polymer pellets, granules or liquids for creating plastic in different shapes using processes such as extrusion or injection molding.
The push to use alternative, more renewable feed stocks rests on increasing concerns about the impact of petrochemicals on health and the environment, as well as the wariness people feel about relying on finite fossil-fuel resources. Many petroleum-based plastics don't break down for hundreds, or even thousands, of years--the carbon-carbon bonds that form the polymers are that durable. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in 2012, the U.S. generated almost 32 million tons of plastic waste, but only 9 percent of that was recovered for recycling, leaving about 29 million tons. Much of the rest ends up in landfills, as ground litter or in the ocean.
In addition, petro-based plastics have been linked to health concerns such as endocrine disruption, and studies show some potentially harmful plastic chemicals accumulate in the human body.
Planting the next plastic crop
To spur solutions, some governments are promoting global and national bio-based economies or so-called bioeconomies. In 2012, the Obama administration released a National Bioeconomy Blueprint that calls for increased research and development, technology transfer, training and other steps to drive the nation's bioeconomy. Businesses are interested in following that lead--in fact, they may actually be ahead of consumers, some of whom aren't willing to pay a premium for greener plastics.
"The consumers want these materials, and they want to be more sustainable," said Marc Hillmyer, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Sustainable Polymers (CSP). "But they're generally not going to do it at a cost. What we hear from industry is, 'Yes, we obviously have businesses that rely on petrochemical feed stocks, and we obviously want to be profitable in those businesses. But we want to be part of the future as well," Hillmyer added.
Nearly three dozen company affiliates support the CSP's work, including 3M, Ashland, BASF, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Henkel, Kimberly-Clark, Natureworks and Schlumberger, which make up the center's Industrial Advisory Board.
Coca-Cola has been one of the big-business leaders in bioplastics development, with a recyclable "PlantBottle" that is made partially from PET (polyethylene terephthalate) derived from sugarcane. PlantBottle packaging accounts for 30 percent of the company's packaging in North America and 7 percent globally, "making Coke the world's largest bioplastics end user," the company has said. The company has also said it wants its bottles to be 100 percent made of plant-based plastic by 2020.
Alternative plastics also show up in niche products. For example, last year, wine cork maker Nomacorc released a recyclable cork made of renewable plant-based polyethylene, and a Finnish company called Ahlstrom sells tea bags made of polylactic acid (PLA), which is derived from resources such as corn starch and sugarcane, and is one of the most commonly used bioplastics.
The cost of green
Researchers working with businesses are challenged to make a material that will not only be biodegradable and nontoxic, but also cost-effective.
"Many people, including us, are very good at making expensive polymers that help us advance basic science but that are not economically all that viable," Hillmyer said. "And so, what we're really trying to emphasize in the center, again with industrial input, is how do we do it economically?"
To date, Hillmyer and his colleagues have had several success stories:
The center developed a biodegradable adhesive, made from PLA and a menthol-based polymer, which could one day make sticky-note recycling more efficient and environmentally friendly. (Most sticky notes are petroleum-based and tend to gum up recycling equipment.)
The center has identified a way to use additives to improve the toughness of PLA by a factor of more than 10.
They've discovered a new high-performance bio-based elastomer (an elastic polymer resembling rubber) that could be an economic, drop-in replacement for current petroleum-based materials.
There are many other challenges in developing new materials and getting them from the lab to the market.
"Our undergraduates, graduate students and postdocs all regularly hear from industry about the challenges that [companies] face when trying to introduce a new material into the marketplace," said CSP Managing Director Laura Seifert. "Can it be scaled up to an industrial process in an economically viable way? Can the material be used in existing infrastructure, or do we have to build an entirely new plant in order to adopt this new technology? And at the end of life … is it going to cause more harm than good to introduce this into our recycling stream?"
"These are hard problems," said Hillmyer. "If it was easy, somebody would have done it."
While the polymer industry is not going to shift overnight, in the long run change is inevitable, he added. "The graduate students and postdoctoral researchers and undergraduates...in the center, they're driven by these principles. So we are not having a hard time convincing them that this is something they should do. They're growing up in this world [asking] 'How do we make our world more sustainable?'"
-- Jacqueline Conciatore, National Science Foundation jconciat@associates.nsf.gov
Investigators
Marc Hillmyer
Related Institutions/Organizations
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
From tea bags to Miatas, bioplastics are on the rise
Chemists and other researchers are working up new formulas for greener plastic
March 3, 2015
It's no longer common to hear, "Paper or plastic?" at the supermarket. In many jurisdictions, the plastic option is curbed. Hundreds of local governments around the world--even entire countries, such as China and India--ban or tax lightweight, single-use plastic bags.
Every year in the United States, more governments enact such restrictions, which are part of a larger shift away from petroleum-based plastic. As people grow more concerned about throwaways destined for landfills (or worse, for the open ocean) and the problems associated with fossil fuels, businesses of all sizes are looking beyond "traditional," petroleum-based plastics to alternatives derived from plants, or even synthesized by microorganisms.
The bioplastic revolution
Bioplastics are made wholly or in part from renewable biomass sources such as sugarcane and corn, or from the digest of microbes such as yeast. Some bioplastics are biodegradable or even compostable, under the right conditions.
These new, more eco-friendly plastics are cropping up in all sorts of places, from tea bags to 3D printing media to medical implants.
In Finland, for example, consumers can now buy milk in cartons, made by Tetra Pak, that are 100 percent plant-based. In the United States, a small company called Iris Industries used Kickstarter to get off the ground with "Denimite," a marbleized blue composite made of recycled denim and a thermoset resin binding agent that is partially bio-based. And NSF-funded Ecovative makes a packing material called "Myco Foam" that's designed to replace polystyrene packaging, that bane of environmentally aware consumers who nevertheless buy take-out meals.
The bioplastic revolution
Bio-based plastics are on the rise. The thriving European market for bioplastics is growing by more than 20 percent per year. Global demand is expected to rise by 19 percent annually through 2017, according to market research group Freedonia. Global production capacities are set to increase by 400 percent by 2018, with most bioplastics being produced in Asia, according to European Bioplastics (EUBP), an association that represents the interests of the industry in Europe.
Packaging has been, and still is, one of the most common uses for bioplastics, but there is growth in other areas, such as textiles and automotive applications.
"From functional sports garments with enhanced breathability to fuel lines, bioplastics are constantly spreading into new markets," said EUBP chairman François de Bie.
Even the sports-car market appreciates bioplastics. Mazda announced late last year that it would use a new bioplastic in the interior (and, eventually, exterior) of its MX5 Miata. In a December 2014 press release, the company says the plant-based plastic it developed with Mitsubishi Chemical Corp. can be dyed and has a higher-quality, less-toxic finish than traditional painted surfaces.
Likewise, the Ford Motor Co. said last July that it will work with Heinz to make plastic out of leftover tomato skins, for use in car wiring brackets and storage bins.
How plastics are born
All of this activity is exciting, but most of today's plastic still comes from a nonrenewable resource: crude oil deposits in the earth. The oil is extracted and sent to a refinery to be distilled and yield an intermediate product called naphtha. Intense heat helps "crack" the naphtha into smaller hydrocarbon molecules such as ethylene and propylene. These chemicals are combined with a catalyst and polymerized to form chains of many linked molecules--the materials we know as plastics.
Different kinds of plastic will have varying polymer structures and distinct properties (toughness, stiffness, strength, transparency, etc.). Manufacturers then buy those bulk polymer pellets, granules or liquids for creating plastic in different shapes using processes such as extrusion or injection molding.
The push to use alternative, more renewable feed stocks rests on increasing concerns about the impact of petrochemicals on health and the environment, as well as the wariness people feel about relying on finite fossil-fuel resources. Many petroleum-based plastics don't break down for hundreds, or even thousands, of years--the carbon-carbon bonds that form the polymers are that durable. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in 2012, the U.S. generated almost 32 million tons of plastic waste, but only 9 percent of that was recovered for recycling, leaving about 29 million tons. Much of the rest ends up in landfills, as ground litter or in the ocean.
In addition, petro-based plastics have been linked to health concerns such as endocrine disruption, and studies show some potentially harmful plastic chemicals accumulate in the human body.
Planting the next plastic crop
To spur solutions, some governments are promoting global and national bio-based economies or so-called bioeconomies. In 2012, the Obama administration released a National Bioeconomy Blueprint that calls for increased research and development, technology transfer, training and other steps to drive the nation's bioeconomy. Businesses are interested in following that lead--in fact, they may actually be ahead of consumers, some of whom aren't willing to pay a premium for greener plastics.
"The consumers want these materials, and they want to be more sustainable," said Marc Hillmyer, director of the University of Minnesota's Center for Sustainable Polymers (CSP). "But they're generally not going to do it at a cost. What we hear from industry is, 'Yes, we obviously have businesses that rely on petrochemical feed stocks, and we obviously want to be profitable in those businesses. But we want to be part of the future as well," Hillmyer added.
Nearly three dozen company affiliates support the CSP's work, including 3M, Ashland, BASF, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Henkel, Kimberly-Clark, Natureworks and Schlumberger, which make up the center's Industrial Advisory Board.
Coca-Cola has been one of the big-business leaders in bioplastics development, with a recyclable "PlantBottle" that is made partially from PET (polyethylene terephthalate) derived from sugarcane. PlantBottle packaging accounts for 30 percent of the company's packaging in North America and 7 percent globally, "making Coke the world's largest bioplastics end user," the company has said. The company has also said it wants its bottles to be 100 percent made of plant-based plastic by 2020.
Alternative plastics also show up in niche products. For example, last year, wine cork maker Nomacorc released a recyclable cork made of renewable plant-based polyethylene, and a Finnish company called Ahlstrom sells tea bags made of polylactic acid (PLA), which is derived from resources such as corn starch and sugarcane, and is one of the most commonly used bioplastics.
The cost of green
Researchers working with businesses are challenged to make a material that will not only be biodegradable and nontoxic, but also cost-effective.
"Many people, including us, are very good at making expensive polymers that help us advance basic science but that are not economically all that viable," Hillmyer said. "And so, what we're really trying to emphasize in the center, again with industrial input, is how do we do it economically?"
To date, Hillmyer and his colleagues have had several success stories:
The center developed a biodegradable adhesive, made from PLA and a menthol-based polymer, which could one day make sticky-note recycling more efficient and environmentally friendly. (Most sticky notes are petroleum-based and tend to gum up recycling equipment.)
The center has identified a way to use additives to improve the toughness of PLA by a factor of more than 10.
They've discovered a new high-performance bio-based elastomer (an elastic polymer resembling rubber) that could be an economic, drop-in replacement for current petroleum-based materials.
There are many other challenges in developing new materials and getting them from the lab to the market.
"Our undergraduates, graduate students and postdocs all regularly hear from industry about the challenges that [companies] face when trying to introduce a new material into the marketplace," said CSP Managing Director Laura Seifert. "Can it be scaled up to an industrial process in an economically viable way? Can the material be used in existing infrastructure, or do we have to build an entirely new plant in order to adopt this new technology? And at the end of life … is it going to cause more harm than good to introduce this into our recycling stream?"
"These are hard problems," said Hillmyer. "If it was easy, somebody would have done it."
While the polymer industry is not going to shift overnight, in the long run change is inevitable, he added. "The graduate students and postdoctoral researchers and undergraduates...in the center, they're driven by these principles. So we are not having a hard time convincing them that this is something they should do. They're growing up in this world [asking] 'How do we make our world more sustainable?'"
-- Jacqueline Conciatore, National Science Foundation jconciat@associates.nsf.gov
Investigators
Marc Hillmyer
Related Institutions/Organizations
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)