FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Army Launches 50th Anniversary Commemoration of Vietnam War
By J.D. Leipold
Army News Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 30, 2013 - The afternoon in the Pentagon auditorium on Aug. 28 was a time for reflection on a war that spanned 10 years and cost the country the lives of more than 58,000 young men and women. It was also an occasion to honor and thank nine Vietnam War veterans who'd served a total of 14 tours in-country and 225 years in uniform.
Kicking off the Pentagon's first event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the conflict, Army Lt. Gen. Raymond V. Mason, deputy chief of staff for logistics, opened the ceremony recalling personal memories as well as his broader experiences as a young American citizen.
"I was a young Army brat and it was difficult for me to watch my dad come back after his third tour in Vietnam and not get treated appropriately, at least in my mind," Mason said. "I was just a pretty young guy at that time, but I could feel that it wasn't right. It struck me, and I knew if I ever had the opportunity to make that right I would do the best I could.
"Today, we are recognizing nine of our patriots and their families who stood up to the test of their generation and their decade," he continued. "I think it's well overdue. Nothing is more important than pausing and reflecting on the sacrifices of what these great men and women did and those who gave their last full measure."
On March 8, 1965, America's ground war in Vietnam began when 3,500 Marines were deployed with the American public's support. By Christmas, nearly 200,000 soldiers, Marines, airmen and sailors were in the country. At war's end on April 30, 1975, nearly 3 million Americans had been on the ground, in the air and on rivers of Vietnam. More than 58,000 Americans lost their lives.
While the official 50th anniversary of the Vietnam War will be in 2015, the president and Congress requested the secretary of Defense to begin planning the Vietnam War commemoration in 2007.
The goal is to get more than 10,000 corporations, civic groups as well as government and community organizations to join as partners and help sponsor hometown events to honor Vietnam veterans, their families and those who were prisoners of war and missing in action.
To date, 4,921 commemorative partners have signed on, including Army logistics, or G-4, which became the first.
Following Mason's remarks, Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John F. Campbell thanked him and his team for leading the way to celebrate the contributions of Vietnam veterans.
The son of an Air Force senior master sergeant, Campbell told of his years growing up on military bases around the world before attending West Point, and then recalled his first interaction with Vietnam veterans while a lieutenant in Germany.
"Both the battalion commanders were Vietnam veterans ... all the platoon sergeants, all the first sergeants, all the company commanders were Vietnam veterans," Campbell said. The vets, he said, instilled in him their hard-fought lessons-learned from Vietnam and wanted to make sure the young lieutenants and soldiers wouldn't make the same mistakes they had.
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Claude "Mick" Kicklighter serves as director of the U.S. Vietnam War Commemoration. During the Pentagon event he previewed the timeline of plans for honoring Vietnam veterans across the country over the next few years.
"Veterans of Valor," a 30-minute documentary with the nine honorees recalling humorous and somber anecdotes of their war experiences and interspersed with still photographs of themselves in Vietnam was also premiered.
Monday, September 2, 2013
U.S. LABOR SECRETARY PEREZ ISSUES LABOR DAY STATEMENT
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
Statement on Labor Day by Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez
WASHINGTON — Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez issued the following statement today to commemorate Labor Day on Monday, Sept. 2:
On Labor Day, we pay tribute and say thanks to the people who build our nation's strength, character and prosperity. American workers are the most industrious, the most capable and the most diligent in the world. There is no challenge they don't embrace, no hardship they can't overcome.
"Our grit and determination has been put to the test recently, as we've endured the most crippling recession in 80 years. But now we are turning the corner. In the past 41 months, we've created 7.3 million jobs. The auto industry, which was flat on its back a few years ago, is surging again. Unemployment is at its lowest level since 2008. And the economy continues to grow as we provide affordable health care for every American. But there's no question we can and must do more.
"Our common agenda must be jobs, jobs, jobs. Working together, we can unleash the economy's full potential, secure a better bargain for the middle class and expand opportunities for everyone.
"Over the past 100 years, one federal agency has been workers' strongest ally and fiercest advocate: the U.S. Department of Labor. Our job is to make the American Dream a reality for all. To do that, we are investing in higher education and working closely with employers to provide workers with the state-of-the-art skills they need to succeed in 21st century jobs. We're making sure workers come home safely to their families at the end of every day, partnering with responsible employers to ensure the most exacting standards on occupational safety and health. We're continuing our strong efforts and unparalleled commitment to protect workers' benefits, so they can retire with dignity and security. And we're fighting for an honest day's pay for an honest day's work. It's a moral and economic imperative that we raise the federal minimum wage. People who work full-time in America shouldn't live in poverty.
"On Labor Day, we reflect on the men and women whose heads, hearts and hands have made ours the strongest economy the world has ever known. To meet the challenges ahead, we must draw inspiration from their stories. We must emulate their strength and resilience. We must summon their dignity and their courage.
"As the first Labor Secretary of the department's second century, I have every confidence that, powered by the talent and determination of our workers, we will create more opportunity in the years ahead. Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous Labor Day."
Statement on Labor Day by Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez
WASHINGTON — Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez issued the following statement today to commemorate Labor Day on Monday, Sept. 2:
On Labor Day, we pay tribute and say thanks to the people who build our nation's strength, character and prosperity. American workers are the most industrious, the most capable and the most diligent in the world. There is no challenge they don't embrace, no hardship they can't overcome.
"Our grit and determination has been put to the test recently, as we've endured the most crippling recession in 80 years. But now we are turning the corner. In the past 41 months, we've created 7.3 million jobs. The auto industry, which was flat on its back a few years ago, is surging again. Unemployment is at its lowest level since 2008. And the economy continues to grow as we provide affordable health care for every American. But there's no question we can and must do more.
"Our common agenda must be jobs, jobs, jobs. Working together, we can unleash the economy's full potential, secure a better bargain for the middle class and expand opportunities for everyone.
"Over the past 100 years, one federal agency has been workers' strongest ally and fiercest advocate: the U.S. Department of Labor. Our job is to make the American Dream a reality for all. To do that, we are investing in higher education and working closely with employers to provide workers with the state-of-the-art skills they need to succeed in 21st century jobs. We're making sure workers come home safely to their families at the end of every day, partnering with responsible employers to ensure the most exacting standards on occupational safety and health. We're continuing our strong efforts and unparalleled commitment to protect workers' benefits, so they can retire with dignity and security. And we're fighting for an honest day's pay for an honest day's work. It's a moral and economic imperative that we raise the federal minimum wage. People who work full-time in America shouldn't live in poverty.
"On Labor Day, we reflect on the men and women whose heads, hearts and hands have made ours the strongest economy the world has ever known. To meet the challenges ahead, we must draw inspiration from their stories. We must emulate their strength and resilience. We must summon their dignity and their courage.
"As the first Labor Secretary of the department's second century, I have every confidence that, powered by the talent and determination of our workers, we will create more opportunity in the years ahead. Best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous Labor Day."
THE PRESENCE OF THE NYPD IN AFGHANISTAN
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Face of Defense: NYPD Officer Serves in Afghanistan
By Marine Corps Cpl. Paul Peterson
2nd Marine Logistics Group
CAMP LEATHERNECK, Afghanistan, Aug. 30, 2013 - Before the War on Terror, the toppling of the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan, or the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a young boy from the Bronx knew one thing: he wanted to help.
Marine Corps Sgt. Jonathan L. Vasquez was that boy in New York City. Today, Vasquez is a Marine Corps reservist currently serving with Combat Logistics Regiment 2, Regional Command-Southwest, in Helmand province, Afghanistan
"I've been that way since I was young," said Vasquez, who spent four years persistently applying to become a New York City police officer after joining the military at the age of 17.
"Both the career choices I made happen to help people. It's the best of both worlds, I say," he said.
While already committed to the idea of public service, the attacks on the World Trade Center changed things for the then-12-year-old Vasquez.
"I was in social studies class -- go figure, history," Vasquez recalled. "They actually brought the TV into the classroom and explained to us the World Trade Center was hit. At first they thought it was an accident, but then they told us it wasn't. I actually wish I was older, and I had joined right then."
As Americans paused to grieve and unite, he tightened his focus on the future. It was a five-year wait before he met the age requirements for military service and nearly a decade before he realized his dream of joining the New York City Police Department.
The wait and the right to wear the uniforms were worth it, Vasquez said.
"I don't want to sound corny. It's not like Superman or anything like that, but it feels good," he said. "New York is very patriotic. You get a lot of grace and a lot of thanks. It's an awesome feeling."
Not every day is easy. Both jobs come with separation from family, constant stress, and the burden of responsibility. Not all the right choices are clear, Vasquez said.
"You don't know," he said. "Sometimes you just have to make a decision and go with it. That's a trait of being a leader, especially in the Marine Corps where they grow you to become a leader."
Vasquez said he takes it all in stride. The strain is difficult, but it also forges bonds between him and his fellow service members and police officers. Still, the risks are palpable.
"When you put on that uniform for your shift, you don't know if you're coming home," Vasquez said. "You don't know if you'll [experience] a shooting or deliver a baby that day. It's very stressful, and it's every day of your life."
Vasquez balances the stress with an inherent optimism. Whether he's serving as a vehicle commander on a convoy in Afghanistan or working as a patrol officer out of the 47th Precinct, he's upbeat.
It's in his voice every day, a nasal-heavy New York accent even a Midwesterner could appreciate and a snicker-like smile to back it up. On patrol or drenched in sweat inside the sweltering gym at Camp Leatherneck, Vasquez keeps smiling, laughing and joking.
He's the kind of New Yorker who will interrupt the climax of a perfectly good movie to point out the setting is his city. He's got "attitude."
"Not in a bad way," Vasquez said. "I'm very respectful, and I'll respect anyone as long as they respect me."
Vasquez said his family back home worries about him, but their constant support is a source of strength. He said he finds contact with his daughter particularly uplifting.
"She puts a smile on my face," he said, completely dropping his shield of military toughness. "I can see it in her eyes [when we talk online] that she really misses me ... it feels good."
Vasquez also has deployed to South America, Asia, and Iraq. At every turn, he's brought his love for service with him.
"I'm grateful for all the things the military has done for me as well as the things I try to do for the military," Vasquez said. "It's the same thing for the police department. I'm glad I have a career back home I can go to and also help people."
Face of Defense: NYPD Officer Serves in Afghanistan
By Marine Corps Cpl. Paul Peterson
2nd Marine Logistics Group
CAMP LEATHERNECK, Afghanistan, Aug. 30, 2013 - Before the War on Terror, the toppling of the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan, or the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, a young boy from the Bronx knew one thing: he wanted to help.
Marine Corps Sgt. Jonathan L. Vasquez was that boy in New York City. Today, Vasquez is a Marine Corps reservist currently serving with Combat Logistics Regiment 2, Regional Command-Southwest, in Helmand province, Afghanistan
"I've been that way since I was young," said Vasquez, who spent four years persistently applying to become a New York City police officer after joining the military at the age of 17.
"Both the career choices I made happen to help people. It's the best of both worlds, I say," he said.
While already committed to the idea of public service, the attacks on the World Trade Center changed things for the then-12-year-old Vasquez.
"I was in social studies class -- go figure, history," Vasquez recalled. "They actually brought the TV into the classroom and explained to us the World Trade Center was hit. At first they thought it was an accident, but then they told us it wasn't. I actually wish I was older, and I had joined right then."
As Americans paused to grieve and unite, he tightened his focus on the future. It was a five-year wait before he met the age requirements for military service and nearly a decade before he realized his dream of joining the New York City Police Department.
The wait and the right to wear the uniforms were worth it, Vasquez said.
"I don't want to sound corny. It's not like Superman or anything like that, but it feels good," he said. "New York is very patriotic. You get a lot of grace and a lot of thanks. It's an awesome feeling."
Not every day is easy. Both jobs come with separation from family, constant stress, and the burden of responsibility. Not all the right choices are clear, Vasquez said.
"You don't know," he said. "Sometimes you just have to make a decision and go with it. That's a trait of being a leader, especially in the Marine Corps where they grow you to become a leader."
Vasquez said he takes it all in stride. The strain is difficult, but it also forges bonds between him and his fellow service members and police officers. Still, the risks are palpable.
"When you put on that uniform for your shift, you don't know if you're coming home," Vasquez said. "You don't know if you'll [experience] a shooting or deliver a baby that day. It's very stressful, and it's every day of your life."
Vasquez balances the stress with an inherent optimism. Whether he's serving as a vehicle commander on a convoy in Afghanistan or working as a patrol officer out of the 47th Precinct, he's upbeat.
It's in his voice every day, a nasal-heavy New York accent even a Midwesterner could appreciate and a snicker-like smile to back it up. On patrol or drenched in sweat inside the sweltering gym at Camp Leatherneck, Vasquez keeps smiling, laughing and joking.
He's the kind of New Yorker who will interrupt the climax of a perfectly good movie to point out the setting is his city. He's got "attitude."
"Not in a bad way," Vasquez said. "I'm very respectful, and I'll respect anyone as long as they respect me."
Vasquez said his family back home worries about him, but their constant support is a source of strength. He said he finds contact with his daughter particularly uplifting.
"She puts a smile on my face," he said, completely dropping his shield of military toughness. "I can see it in her eyes [when we talk online] that she really misses me ... it feels good."
Vasquez also has deployed to South America, Asia, and Iraq. At every turn, he's brought his love for service with him.
"I'm grateful for all the things the military has done for me as well as the things I try to do for the military," Vasquez said. "It's the same thing for the police department. I'm glad I have a career back home I can go to and also help people."
BASEBALL TEAM PAYS BACK WAGES AND DAMAGES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
San Francisco Giants pay employees $545,000 in back wages, damages
US Labor Department finds clubhouse and administrative workers not paid properly
SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Giants baseball team paid $544,715 in back wages and liquidated damages to 74 employees after a U.S. Department of Labor investigation determined that the Major League Baseball club failed to properly pay the workers over a three-year period. As a result of the investigation, MLB and the department are now working to ensure that all teams are aware of and adhere to the requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Investigators with the department's Wage and Hour Division found violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage, overtime pay and record-keeping provisions. The violations affected a range of employees in the organization at the major and minor league levels, including clubhouse assistants and managers. San Francisco Baseball Associates LLC, the club's ownership group, has entered into an agreement with the department to ensure continued and future compliance with the FLSA.
"We are pleased that the Giants addressed this matter, and it is our hope that other Major League Baseball teams will take a close look at their pay practices to ensure they are in compliance with the law," said Laura Fortman, principal deputy administrator of the Wage and Hour Division. "MLB has agreed to work collaboratively with the department to ensure all MLB teams are in compliance with the FLSA."
Susana Blanco, director of the San Francisco District Office of the Wage and Hour Division, said the case underscores the importance of wage protections: "I am encouraged that the Giants acted to resolve this issue, but it was disappointing to learn that clubhouse workers providing services to high-paid sports stars weren't making enough to meet the basic requirements of minimum-wage law."
During the investigation, the department determined that clubhouse employees were working more hours than were recorded, under an employment agreement required by the club that established a flat rate of pay of $55 for working 5.5 hours per day. However, investigators found that the employees actually worked an average of 12 to 15 hours daily, and the workers received less than the hourly federal minimum wage of $7.25 and were also not paid overtime for hours exceeding 40 in a workweek.
Investigators found the club had improperly classified a number of employees as exempt from overtime pay, including clubhouse managers at the major and minor league levels and video operators at the team's major and minor league affiliates. The non-exempt employees were paid a straight salary and no overtime premium, as required based on their job duties. Additionally, the investigation determined that the club failed to pay overtime or incorrectly calculated overtime pay for administrative staff participating in the Giants' bonus program, in violation of the FLSA.
The FLSA requires that covered employees be paid at least the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, as well as time and one-half their regular rates for hours worked over 40 per week. The law also requires employers to maintain accurate records of employees' wages, hours and other conditions of employment, and it prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who exercise their rights under the law. The FLSA provides that employers who violate the law are, as a general rule, liable to employees for back wages and an equal amount in liquidated damages. Liquidated damages are paid directly to the affected employees.
San Francisco Giants pay employees $545,000 in back wages, damages
US Labor Department finds clubhouse and administrative workers not paid properly
SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Giants baseball team paid $544,715 in back wages and liquidated damages to 74 employees after a U.S. Department of Labor investigation determined that the Major League Baseball club failed to properly pay the workers over a three-year period. As a result of the investigation, MLB and the department are now working to ensure that all teams are aware of and adhere to the requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Investigators with the department's Wage and Hour Division found violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act's minimum wage, overtime pay and record-keeping provisions. The violations affected a range of employees in the organization at the major and minor league levels, including clubhouse assistants and managers. San Francisco Baseball Associates LLC, the club's ownership group, has entered into an agreement with the department to ensure continued and future compliance with the FLSA.
"We are pleased that the Giants addressed this matter, and it is our hope that other Major League Baseball teams will take a close look at their pay practices to ensure they are in compliance with the law," said Laura Fortman, principal deputy administrator of the Wage and Hour Division. "MLB has agreed to work collaboratively with the department to ensure all MLB teams are in compliance with the FLSA."
Susana Blanco, director of the San Francisco District Office of the Wage and Hour Division, said the case underscores the importance of wage protections: "I am encouraged that the Giants acted to resolve this issue, but it was disappointing to learn that clubhouse workers providing services to high-paid sports stars weren't making enough to meet the basic requirements of minimum-wage law."
During the investigation, the department determined that clubhouse employees were working more hours than were recorded, under an employment agreement required by the club that established a flat rate of pay of $55 for working 5.5 hours per day. However, investigators found that the employees actually worked an average of 12 to 15 hours daily, and the workers received less than the hourly federal minimum wage of $7.25 and were also not paid overtime for hours exceeding 40 in a workweek.
Investigators found the club had improperly classified a number of employees as exempt from overtime pay, including clubhouse managers at the major and minor league levels and video operators at the team's major and minor league affiliates. The non-exempt employees were paid a straight salary and no overtime premium, as required based on their job duties. Additionally, the investigation determined that the club failed to pay overtime or incorrectly calculated overtime pay for administrative staff participating in the Giants' bonus program, in violation of the FLSA.
The FLSA requires that covered employees be paid at least the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, as well as time and one-half their regular rates for hours worked over 40 per week. The law also requires employers to maintain accurate records of employees' wages, hours and other conditions of employment, and it prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who exercise their rights under the law. The FLSA provides that employers who violate the law are, as a general rule, liable to employees for back wages and an equal amount in liquidated damages. Liquidated damages are paid directly to the affected employees.
U.S. SIGNS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH NIGERIA IN ATTEMPT TO ELIMINATE CROSS-BORDER FRAUD
FROM: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC Signs Memorandum of Understanding with Nigerian Consumer Protection and Criminal Enforcement Authorities
Memorandum Provides for Strong Cooperation on Cross-Border Fraud
The Federal Trade Commission signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with two Nigerian agencies to increase cooperation and communication in their joint efforts to stamp out cross-border fraud. Nigeria’s Ambassador to the United States, Ambassador Adebowale Adefuye, provided opening remarks for the MOU signing ceremony.
The MOU was signed by FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez; Director General Dupe Atoki, of Nigeria’s Consumer Protection Council (CPC); and Executive Chairman Ibrahim Lamorde, of Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). It is the first FTC MOU of this kind to include a foreign criminal enforcement authority. The CPC addresses consumer complaints through investigations and enforcement; the EFCC is a criminal enforcement agency with authority to address consumer fraud and other financial crimes.
Cross-border scammers use fraudulent e-mails and other scams to bilk consumers all over the world, while undermining confidence in legitimate businesses,” said FTC Chairwoman Ramirez. “This MOU will help our agencies better protect consumers in both the U.S. and Nigeria.”
Director Atoki stated that “We fully support this collaboration on consumer and fraud matters, and have already detailed a senior CPC official to the FTC for a six-month staff exchange.” And Executive Chairman Lamorde noted that he “welcomes this partnership, which builds on our existing collaboration with the FTC and with U.S. criminal enforcement authorities.”
The MOU provides for a Joint Implementation Committee to identify concrete areas of collaboration, establish joint training programs and workshops, and provide assistance regarding specific cases and investigations. The MOU is a framework for voluntary cooperation and will not change existing laws in either country.
The FTC has already worked with the two Nigerian agencies on policy and enforcement matters in various fora, including the African Consumer Protection Dialogue, the International Mass Marketing Fraud Working Group, the London Action Plan (LAP, an anti-spam network), and the International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network.
The Commission vote authorizing Chairwoman Ramirez to sign the MOU on behalf of the agency was 4-0.
As more U.S. companies and consumers do business overseas, more FTC work involves international cooperation. The Office of International Affairs serves both as an internal resource to Commission staff on international aspects of their work and as an official representative to numerous international organizations. In addition, the FTC cooperates with foreign authorities through formal and informal agreements. The FTC works with more than 100 foreign competition and consumer protection authorities around the world to promote sound policy approaches. For questions about the Office of International Affairs, send an e-mail to oia@ftc.gov. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases and the FTC International Monthly for the latest FTC news and resources.
FTC Signs Memorandum of Understanding with Nigerian Consumer Protection and Criminal Enforcement Authorities
Memorandum Provides for Strong Cooperation on Cross-Border Fraud
The Federal Trade Commission signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with two Nigerian agencies to increase cooperation and communication in their joint efforts to stamp out cross-border fraud. Nigeria’s Ambassador to the United States, Ambassador Adebowale Adefuye, provided opening remarks for the MOU signing ceremony.
The MOU was signed by FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez; Director General Dupe Atoki, of Nigeria’s Consumer Protection Council (CPC); and Executive Chairman Ibrahim Lamorde, of Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). It is the first FTC MOU of this kind to include a foreign criminal enforcement authority. The CPC addresses consumer complaints through investigations and enforcement; the EFCC is a criminal enforcement agency with authority to address consumer fraud and other financial crimes.
Cross-border scammers use fraudulent e-mails and other scams to bilk consumers all over the world, while undermining confidence in legitimate businesses,” said FTC Chairwoman Ramirez. “This MOU will help our agencies better protect consumers in both the U.S. and Nigeria.”
Director Atoki stated that “We fully support this collaboration on consumer and fraud matters, and have already detailed a senior CPC official to the FTC for a six-month staff exchange.” And Executive Chairman Lamorde noted that he “welcomes this partnership, which builds on our existing collaboration with the FTC and with U.S. criminal enforcement authorities.”
The MOU provides for a Joint Implementation Committee to identify concrete areas of collaboration, establish joint training programs and workshops, and provide assistance regarding specific cases and investigations. The MOU is a framework for voluntary cooperation and will not change existing laws in either country.
The FTC has already worked with the two Nigerian agencies on policy and enforcement matters in various fora, including the African Consumer Protection Dialogue, the International Mass Marketing Fraud Working Group, the London Action Plan (LAP, an anti-spam network), and the International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network.
The Commission vote authorizing Chairwoman Ramirez to sign the MOU on behalf of the agency was 4-0.
As more U.S. companies and consumers do business overseas, more FTC work involves international cooperation. The Office of International Affairs serves both as an internal resource to Commission staff on international aspects of their work and as an official representative to numerous international organizations. In addition, the FTC cooperates with foreign authorities through formal and informal agreements. The FTC works with more than 100 foreign competition and consumer protection authorities around the world to promote sound policy approaches. For questions about the Office of International Affairs, send an e-mail to oia@ftc.gov. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases and the FTC International Monthly for the latest FTC news and resources.
NAVY STUDY LOOKS TO FIND NEW MALARIA VACCINE
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Navy Study May Lead to Malaria Vaccine
Dana Crudo | Health.mil
August 29, 2013
The Navy made medical history with its release of promising research results that may lead the way to a much-needed malaria vaccine.
The breakthrough research published in the journal Science on Aug. 8 includes results of a human clinical trial of a malaria vaccine developed by the Navy Medical Research Center and federal and industry collaborators. The trial showed 100 percent protection against the disease.
“This is a historical moment in malaria vaccine research development,” said Capt. Judith Epstein, lead investigator of the trial at the Navy Medical Research Center. “For the first time, we and our collaborators have a malaria vaccine approach which has demonstrated the high-level vaccine efficacy required to protect our troops.”
This is no easy feat. The malaria parasite is incredibly complex, making it particularly difficult to develop a vaccine, researchers say.
The Defense Department has been dedicated to solving the malaria riddle since World War II because of its significant impact on U.S. military operations throughout history. Malaria continues to present major challenges to troops in tropical and subtropical regions of the world where it is rampant.
However, malaria is not a problem unique to the military. It is a major global health concern, with the World Health Organization reporting 216 million cases of malaria and an estimated 655,000 deaths in 2010.
Despite the significant need, there currently is no approved vaccine against malaria.
The latest research by the Navy provides hope that a vaccine soon will be available to effectively combat malaria within the military and beyond.
“I see the Navy paving the way to a vaccine which can be used within the next three- to four years for military personnel and for the millions of individuals suffering and dying from malaria worldwide,” Epstein said.
The vaccine used in the clinical trial was given at varied doses by intravenous injection to 40 volunteers from October 2011 to October 2012. Navy researchers played a key role in the design of the study, particularly the assessment of vaccine efficacy and volunteer follow up.
Navy Study May Lead to Malaria Vaccine
Dana Crudo | Health.mil
August 29, 2013
The Navy made medical history with its release of promising research results that may lead the way to a much-needed malaria vaccine.
The breakthrough research published in the journal Science on Aug. 8 includes results of a human clinical trial of a malaria vaccine developed by the Navy Medical Research Center and federal and industry collaborators. The trial showed 100 percent protection against the disease.
“This is a historical moment in malaria vaccine research development,” said Capt. Judith Epstein, lead investigator of the trial at the Navy Medical Research Center. “For the first time, we and our collaborators have a malaria vaccine approach which has demonstrated the high-level vaccine efficacy required to protect our troops.”
This is no easy feat. The malaria parasite is incredibly complex, making it particularly difficult to develop a vaccine, researchers say.
The Defense Department has been dedicated to solving the malaria riddle since World War II because of its significant impact on U.S. military operations throughout history. Malaria continues to present major challenges to troops in tropical and subtropical regions of the world where it is rampant.
However, malaria is not a problem unique to the military. It is a major global health concern, with the World Health Organization reporting 216 million cases of malaria and an estimated 655,000 deaths in 2010.
Despite the significant need, there currently is no approved vaccine against malaria.
The latest research by the Navy provides hope that a vaccine soon will be available to effectively combat malaria within the military and beyond.
“I see the Navy paving the way to a vaccine which can be used within the next three- to four years for military personnel and for the millions of individuals suffering and dying from malaria worldwide,” Epstein said.
The vaccine used in the clinical trial was given at varied doses by intravenous injection to 40 volunteers from October 2011 to October 2012. Navy researchers played a key role in the design of the study, particularly the assessment of vaccine efficacy and volunteer follow up.
Sunday, September 1, 2013
STATEMENT BY HHS SECRETARY SEBELIUS ON OVARIAN CANCER AWARENESS MONTH
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month 2013
A statement by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
This year, thousands of American women – our mothers, grandmothers, aunts, daughters, and friends – will die from ovarian cancer. During September, we observe National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month to recognize those who have died and recommit ourselves to helping the women who are fighting for their health.
Every year, more than 20,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with ovarian cancer, which is the fifth leading cause of cancer death for women and accounts for more than 14,000 deaths a year.
The administration advances scientific research to improve prevention, diagnosis and treatment. When ovarian cancer is found in its early stages, treatment is most effective, but, there is currently no proven method to screen for ovarian cancer in women.
That is why awareness is key to women’s survival. Ovarian cancer often does have signs and symptoms, so it is important to pay attention to your body –to be aware-- and know what is normal for you. If you have vaginal bleeding that is not normal for you, see a doctor right away. Also see your health care provider if you have any of the other signs that are not normal for you, such as pain in the pelvic or abdominal area or bloating, for two weeks or longer.
Know your risk factors. All women are at risk for ovarian cancer, but older women are more likely to get the disease than younger women. There are some factors that may increase your risk, including if you have genetic mutations called BRCA1 or BRCA2, have had certain cancers, breast,uterine,or have never given birth or have had trouble getting pregnant.
Having any of these symptoms or factors does not mean you have or will get ovarian cancer. But you should speak with your health care professional about your risk and whether you need genetic counseling and further examination.
The Affordable Care Act is making health care more accessible and providing important protections for women. Insurers must cover –at no out-of-pocket cost -- an annual well-woman visit, which is a good time for women to discuss their concerns about ovarian cancer with their health care provider. The law also guarantees coverage for genetic counseling and testing for certain women at high risk for ovarian cancer.
Women who are enrolled in Medicare part B can discuss any concerns at the annual wellness visit, which is available without part B coinsurance or satisfying the deductible. We also know that women-- and men -- without insurance are less likely to get the primary health care that they need to get healthy and to catch serious conditions like ovarian cancer in their early and more treatable stage. The good news is for millions of Americans who are uninsured or under-insured, new options for affordable, quality health insurance are around the corner.
In just a few weeks, every state will have an online Health Insurance Marketplace where people can find a plan that fits their budget and needs. Open enrollment starts October 1 for coverage that begins as soon as January 1, 2014. You can find information and updates at HealthCare.gov – and the Spanish-language version at CuidadoDeSalud.gov. Sign up now at either site for a personal account to begin the process.
Also, in 2014, the health law makes it illegal to deny coverage or charge more if a woman has ovarian cancer or other pre-existing condition.
Remember: Being aware of what’s normal for our bodies and having access to quality health care are vital weapons in the fight against ovarian cancer.
Learn more about the risks and symptoms of ovarian and other gynecologic cancers.
See the National Cancer Institute’s What You Need to Know About Ovarian Cancer booklet and check out the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Inside Knowledge: Get the Facts About Gynecologic Cancer campaign and read survivors’ personal stories.
National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month 2013
A statement by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
This year, thousands of American women – our mothers, grandmothers, aunts, daughters, and friends – will die from ovarian cancer. During September, we observe National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month to recognize those who have died and recommit ourselves to helping the women who are fighting for their health.
Every year, more than 20,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with ovarian cancer, which is the fifth leading cause of cancer death for women and accounts for more than 14,000 deaths a year.
The administration advances scientific research to improve prevention, diagnosis and treatment. When ovarian cancer is found in its early stages, treatment is most effective, but, there is currently no proven method to screen for ovarian cancer in women.
That is why awareness is key to women’s survival. Ovarian cancer often does have signs and symptoms, so it is important to pay attention to your body –to be aware-- and know what is normal for you. If you have vaginal bleeding that is not normal for you, see a doctor right away. Also see your health care provider if you have any of the other signs that are not normal for you, such as pain in the pelvic or abdominal area or bloating, for two weeks or longer.
Know your risk factors. All women are at risk for ovarian cancer, but older women are more likely to get the disease than younger women. There are some factors that may increase your risk, including if you have genetic mutations called BRCA1 or BRCA2, have had certain cancers, breast,uterine,or have never given birth or have had trouble getting pregnant.
Having any of these symptoms or factors does not mean you have or will get ovarian cancer. But you should speak with your health care professional about your risk and whether you need genetic counseling and further examination.
The Affordable Care Act is making health care more accessible and providing important protections for women. Insurers must cover –at no out-of-pocket cost -- an annual well-woman visit, which is a good time for women to discuss their concerns about ovarian cancer with their health care provider. The law also guarantees coverage for genetic counseling and testing for certain women at high risk for ovarian cancer.
Women who are enrolled in Medicare part B can discuss any concerns at the annual wellness visit, which is available without part B coinsurance or satisfying the deductible. We also know that women-- and men -- without insurance are less likely to get the primary health care that they need to get healthy and to catch serious conditions like ovarian cancer in their early and more treatable stage. The good news is for millions of Americans who are uninsured or under-insured, new options for affordable, quality health insurance are around the corner.
In just a few weeks, every state will have an online Health Insurance Marketplace where people can find a plan that fits their budget and needs. Open enrollment starts October 1 for coverage that begins as soon as January 1, 2014. You can find information and updates at HealthCare.gov – and the Spanish-language version at CuidadoDeSalud.gov. Sign up now at either site for a personal account to begin the process.
Also, in 2014, the health law makes it illegal to deny coverage or charge more if a woman has ovarian cancer or other pre-existing condition.
Remember: Being aware of what’s normal for our bodies and having access to quality health care are vital weapons in the fight against ovarian cancer.
Learn more about the risks and symptoms of ovarian and other gynecologic cancers.
See the National Cancer Institute’s What You Need to Know About Ovarian Cancer booklet and check out the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Inside Knowledge: Get the Facts About Gynecologic Cancer campaign and read survivors’ personal stories.
RECREATION CENTERS FOR SERVICE MEMBERS, THEIR FAMILIES AND DOD CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES
 |
| The Hale Koa, on Honolulu's Waikiki Beach, offers tropical gardens, pools and authentic Hawaiian luaus and is the largest of four Armed Forces Recreation Centers operated by the Army. U.S. Army photo |
Recreation Centers Offer Value to Troops, Families
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 30, 2013 - Fans of the Armed Forces Recreation Centers can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that because the crown jewels of the military's morale, welfare and recreation programs are completely self-supporting, they're unaffected by defense budget cuts and undergoing capital improvements.
The AFRCs have served as centerpieces of the MWR program since the post-World War II era. They were initially established after the war in confiscated German facilities to provide recreational getaways for U.S. forces, Debbie Martin, the Army's chief of hospitality programs, told American Forces Press Service.
Today, the Army operates four AFRCs around the world for all the military services: the Edelweiss Lodge and Resort, in Garmisch, Germany; the Hale Koa Hotel, in Honolulu; Shades of Green, on the grounds of Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida; and Dragon Hill Lodge, in Seoul, South Korea.
The facilities serve military members and their families, military retirees, and Defense Department civilian employees. Last year alone, 1.7 million guests visited an AFRC, Martin reported.
Make no mistake about it: the AFRCs aren't simply military-run hotels like those found on many installations, she emphasized. They're luxury resorts that cater exclusively to military and Defense Department leisure travelers and their families.
Edelweiss, opened in 2004, is a world-class resort smack in the middle of the Bavarian Alps and Germany's premier ski and summer sports scene. The Hale Koa, on Honolulu's Waikiki Beach, offers an open door to paradise, complete with tropical gardens and pools and regular luaus. Shades of Green, the only AFRC in the continental United States, gives service members and families immediate access to the wonders of Disney World. The Dragon Hill offers an upscale escape in the Land of the Morning Calm, all steps from the excitement and intrigue of downtown Seoul.
All feature exclusive accommodations and fitness facilities, restaurants, lounges and activity desks that can keep guests running from morning to night when they're not simply kicking back and enjoying their surroundings.
"We look for the 'Wow' factor, as do most resorts," Martin said. "We want the military community, not only today, but into the future, to arrive at any one of these resorts and say, 'Wow. This is what the nation does for me and gives me the opportunity to be involved in.'"
For many AFRC guests, the initial attraction is the price. Unlike civilian resorts that must turn a profit to stay in business, AFRCs charge only what they need to cover operating expenses and facility improvements, Martin said. Not a penny of the direct funding comes from appropriated funds, so the facilities are largely sheltered from the budget cuts impacting the Defense Department.
Room rates are based on a sliding scale according to rank, with the most-junior guests paying the least $64 a night for a single room at the Dragon Hill, $79 at the Hale Koa, $86 at the Edelweiss and $95 for a 450-square-foot room that sleeps six at Shades of Green.
For higher-ranking guests, the same rooms go for more, and larger rooms are available at higher prices at some of the facilities to accommodate larger parties.
"The value for your dollar goes much farther at the AFRCs than it would in any resort that would be comparable," Martin said.
That's kept occupancy rates steady, typically at 90 percent or higher at the Hale Koa, Shades of Green and Dragon Hill facilities, she reported. The Edelweiss resort has experienced a recent drop, she said, reflecting force-structure changes in Europe but making it easier than ever before for guests to get a reservation.
While price may draws guests to the AFRCs, Martin said the quality of the accommodations and services provided continue to bring them back. Each resort offers everything service members might expect to find in a luxury resort: swimming pools, gardens, dining choices ranging from fast food to haute cuisine and access to a plethora of entertainment options.
Each facility also has a post exchange on site, a godsend, many guests say, that saves them a bundle when they're vacationing.
"AFRCS offer a blend of the military culture and a resort environment that military members find very, very appealing, not just in terms of price, but also because of the atmosphere," Martin said.
An ambitious recapitalization program is helping to ensure that atmosphere remains for years to come, she said. Shades of Green, for example, opened its expanded post exchange this spring. A major renovation is underway on one of its pools, featuring a "zero entry" ramp to meet the needs of guests in wheelchairs or with other physical limitations. Another pool, known as the "Mickey Pool," will be upgraded within the next year to 15 months to add new child-friendly features, Martin said.
Meanwhile, officials are considering a major renovation of the resort's original wing, which includes about half of its 583 rooms, Martin said.
The Hale Koa, which recently completed a $60-plus million facelift on its Ilima Tower, is in the conceptual stages for a similar effort on its original Maile Tower, she said. Once that's completed, all 817 guest rooms at the largest of the AFRC resorts will have a new face.
"The idea is that you refresh things before they become worn out in the eye of the users," Martin said. "We want to make sure our guests are greeted with something they view as current and fresh -- and that gives them the overall feeling, 'I am in a resort and I am being pampered.'"
Pampering, after all, is what the AFRCs are all about, she said. They offer an opportunity for military members and their families to relax, unwind and reconnect. The benefit, she said, is that they return to their homes and duty stations refreshed and ready to take on whatever challenges the military presents them.
Martin said there's little that makes her feel more satisfied than seeing a military parent and child spend quality time together at an AFRC.
"It is those innocent moments, those special moments that make a lasting impression," she said, not just on the child, but on the parent who will carry those memories to the next deployment.
"That is what we do," Martin said. "We help strengthen that bond that allows folks to get through the things that we as a nation ask them to get through."
HHS ANNOUNCES GUIDANCE ON DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT COURT DECISION
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
August 29, 2013
HHS announces first guidance implementing Supreme Court’s decision on the Defense of Marriage Act
Today, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a memo clarifying that all beneficiaries in private Medicare plans have access to equal coverage when it comes to care in a nursing home where their spouse lives. This is the first guidance issued by HHS in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling, which held section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.
“HHS is working swiftly to implement the Supreme Court’s decision and maximize federal recognition of same-sex spouses in HHS programs,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “Today’s announcement is the first of many steps that we will be taking over the coming months to clarify the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision and to ensure that gay and lesbian married couples are treated equally under the law.”
“Today, Medicare is ensuring that all beneficiaries will have equal access to coverage in a nursing home where their spouse lives, regardless of their sexual orientation,” said Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Marilyn Tavenner. “Prior to this, a beneficiary in a same-sex marriage enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan did not have equal access to such coverage and, as a result, could have faced time away from his or her spouse or higher costs because of the way that marriage was defined for this purpose.”
Under current law, Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan are entitled to care in, among certain other skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), the SNF where their spouse resides (assuming that they have met the conditions for SNF coverage in the first place, and the SNF has agreed to the payment amounts and other terms that apply to a plan network SNF). Seniors with Medicare Advantage previously may have faced the choice of receiving coverage in a nursing home away from their same-sex spouse, or dis-enrolling from the Medicare Advantage plan which would have meant paying more out-of-pocket for care in the same nursing home as their same-sex spouse.
Today’s guidance clarifies that this guarantee of coverage applies equally to all married couples. The guidance specifically clarifies that this guarantee of coverage applies equally to couples who are in a legally recognized same-sex marriage, regardless of where they live.
August 29, 2013
HHS announces first guidance implementing Supreme Court’s decision on the Defense of Marriage Act
Today, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a memo clarifying that all beneficiaries in private Medicare plans have access to equal coverage when it comes to care in a nursing home where their spouse lives. This is the first guidance issued by HHS in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling, which held section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.
“HHS is working swiftly to implement the Supreme Court’s decision and maximize federal recognition of same-sex spouses in HHS programs,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “Today’s announcement is the first of many steps that we will be taking over the coming months to clarify the effects of the Supreme Court’s decision and to ensure that gay and lesbian married couples are treated equally under the law.”
“Today, Medicare is ensuring that all beneficiaries will have equal access to coverage in a nursing home where their spouse lives, regardless of their sexual orientation,” said Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Marilyn Tavenner. “Prior to this, a beneficiary in a same-sex marriage enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan did not have equal access to such coverage and, as a result, could have faced time away from his or her spouse or higher costs because of the way that marriage was defined for this purpose.”
Under current law, Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan are entitled to care in, among certain other skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), the SNF where their spouse resides (assuming that they have met the conditions for SNF coverage in the first place, and the SNF has agreed to the payment amounts and other terms that apply to a plan network SNF). Seniors with Medicare Advantage previously may have faced the choice of receiving coverage in a nursing home away from their same-sex spouse, or dis-enrolling from the Medicare Advantage plan which would have meant paying more out-of-pocket for care in the same nursing home as their same-sex spouse.
Today’s guidance clarifies that this guarantee of coverage applies equally to all married couples. The guidance specifically clarifies that this guarantee of coverage applies equally to couples who are in a legally recognized same-sex marriage, regardless of where they live.
3 PLEAD GUILTY TO BRIBERY OF FOREIGN OFFICIALS, MONEY LAUNDERING AND CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, August 30, 2013
Three Former Broker-dealer Employees Plead Guilty in Manhattan Federal Court to Bribery of Foreign Officials, Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice
Three employees of a New York-based U.S. broker-dealer have pleaded guilty for their roles in bribery schemes involving two state economic development banks in Venezuela.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Southern District of New York and Assistant Director in Charge George Venizelos of the New York Office of the FBI made the announcement.
Ernesto Lujan, Jose Alejandro Hurtado and Tomas Alberto Clarke Bethancourt pleaded guilty in New York federal court to conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), to violate the Travel Act and to commit money laundering, as well as substantive counts of these offenses. These charges relate to a scheme to bribe a foreign official named Maria de los Angeles Gonzalez de Hernandez at Banco de Desarrollo Económico y Social de Venezuela (BANDES), a state economic development bank in Venezuela, in exchange for receiving trading business from BANDES. Lujan, Hurtado and Clarke each also pleaded guilty to an additional charge of conspiring to violate the FCPA in connection with a similar scheme to bribe a foreign official employed by Banfoandes (the “Banfoandes Foreign Official”), another state economic development bank in Venezuela, and to conspiring to obstruct an examination by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the New York-based broker-dealer (the “Broker-Dealer”) where all three defendants had worked, to conceal the true facts of the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES.
Lujan, 50, and Clarke, 43, entered their guilty pleas yesterday before U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV, and Hurtado, 38, pleaded guilty today, also before Judge Francis. The men each pleaded guilty to the same six offenses and face a maximum penalty of five years in prison on each count except money laundering, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Sentencing for Lujan and Clarke is scheduled for Feb. 11, 2014, before U.S. District Judge Paul G. Gardephe. Hurtado is scheduled for sentencing before U.S. District Judge Harold Baer Jr. on March 6, 2014.
According to the informations filed against Lujan, Hurtado and Clarke this week, the criminal complaints previously filed, and statements made during the plea proceedings, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado worked or were associated with the Broker-Dealer, principally through its Miami offices. In 2008, the Broker-Dealer established a group called the Global Markets Group, which included Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado, and which offered fixed income trading services to institutional clients.
One of the Broker-Dealer’s clients was BANDES, which operated under the direction of the Venezuelan Ministry of Finance. The Venezuelan government had a majority ownership interest in BANDES and provided it with substantial funding. Gonzalez was an official at BANDES and oversaw the development bank’s overseas trading activity. At her direction, BANDES conducted substantial trading through the Broker-Dealer. Most of the trades executed by the Broker-Dealer on behalf of BANDES involved fixed-income investments for which the Broker-Dealer charged the bank a mark-up on purchases and a mark-down on sales.
The Broker-Dealer also conducted business with Banfoandes, another state development bank in Venezuela that, along with its 2009 successor Banco Bicentenario, operated under the direction of the Venezuelan Ministry of Finance. Banfoandes acted as a financial agent of the Venezuelan government in order to promote economic and social development by, among other things, offering credit to low-income Venezuelans. The Banfoandes Foreign Official was responsible for some of Banfoandes’s foreign investments.
Court records state that from early 2009 through 2012, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado participated in a bribery scheme in which Gonzalez allegedly directed trading business she controlled at BANDES to the Broker-Dealer, and in return, agents and employees of the Broker-Dealer split the revenue the Broker-Dealer generated from this trading business with Gonzalez. During this time period, the Broker-Dealer generated over $60 million in mark-ups and mark-downs from trades with BANDES. Agents and employees of the Broker-Dealer, including Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado, devised a split with Gonzalez of the commissions paid by BANDES to the Broker-Dealer. Emails, account records and other documents collected from the Broker-Dealer and other sources reveal that Gonzalez allegedly received a substantial share of the revenue generated by the Broker-Dealer for BANDES-related trades. Specifically, Gonzalez allegedly received kickbacks and payments from Broker-Dealer agents and employees that were frequently in six-figure amounts.
To further conceal the scheme, the kickbacks to Gonzalez were often paid using intermediary corporations and offshore accounts that she held in Switzerland, among other places. For instance, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado used accounts they controlled in Switzerland to transfer funds to an account Gonzalez allegedly controlled in Switzerland. Additionally, Hurtado and his spouse received substantial compensation from the Broker-Dealer, portions of which Hurtado transferred to an account allegedly held by Gonzalez in Miami and to an account held by an associate of Gonzalez in Switzerland. Hurtado also sought and allegedly received reimbursement from Gonzalez for the U.S. income taxes he had paid on money that he used to make kickback payments to Gonzalez. Lujan and Clarke also derived substantial profit from their roles in the bribery scheme.
According to court records, beginning in or about November 2010, the SEC commenced a periodic examination of the Broker-Dealer, and from November 2010 through March 2011 the SEC’s examination staff made several visits to the Broker-Dealer’s offices in Manhattan. In early 2011, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado discussed their concern that the SEC was examining the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES and asking questions regarding certain emails and other information that the SEC examination staff had discovered. Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado agreed that they would take steps to conceal the true facts of the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES, including deleting emails. Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado then, in fact, deleted emails. Additionally as part of this effort to obstruct the SEC examination, Clarke lied to SEC examination staff in response to an interview question about his relationship to an individual who had received purported foreign associate payments relating to BANDES.
In a related scheme, from 2008 through mid-2009, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado paid bribes to the Banfoandes Foreign Official, who, in exchange, directed Banfoandes trading business to the Broker-Dealer.
Gonzalez was charged in a criminal complaint and arrested on May 3, 2013, in connection with the BANDES bribery scheme. The charges against Gonzalez are merely accusations, and she is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
This ongoing investigation is being conducted by the FBI, with assistance from the SEC and the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs.
Assistant Chief James Koukios and Trial Attorneys Maria Gonzalez Calvet and Aisling O’Shea of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Harry A. Chernoff and Jason H. Cowley of the Southern District of New York’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force are in charge of the prosecution. Assistant U.S. Attorney Carolina Fornos is responsible for the forfeiture aspects of the case.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Three Former Broker-dealer Employees Plead Guilty in Manhattan Federal Court to Bribery of Foreign Officials, Money Laundering and Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice
Three employees of a New York-based U.S. broker-dealer have pleaded guilty for their roles in bribery schemes involving two state economic development banks in Venezuela.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of the Southern District of New York and Assistant Director in Charge George Venizelos of the New York Office of the FBI made the announcement.
Ernesto Lujan, Jose Alejandro Hurtado and Tomas Alberto Clarke Bethancourt pleaded guilty in New York federal court to conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), to violate the Travel Act and to commit money laundering, as well as substantive counts of these offenses. These charges relate to a scheme to bribe a foreign official named Maria de los Angeles Gonzalez de Hernandez at Banco de Desarrollo Económico y Social de Venezuela (BANDES), a state economic development bank in Venezuela, in exchange for receiving trading business from BANDES. Lujan, Hurtado and Clarke each also pleaded guilty to an additional charge of conspiring to violate the FCPA in connection with a similar scheme to bribe a foreign official employed by Banfoandes (the “Banfoandes Foreign Official”), another state economic development bank in Venezuela, and to conspiring to obstruct an examination by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the New York-based broker-dealer (the “Broker-Dealer”) where all three defendants had worked, to conceal the true facts of the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES.
Lujan, 50, and Clarke, 43, entered their guilty pleas yesterday before U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV, and Hurtado, 38, pleaded guilty today, also before Judge Francis. The men each pleaded guilty to the same six offenses and face a maximum penalty of five years in prison on each count except money laundering, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Sentencing for Lujan and Clarke is scheduled for Feb. 11, 2014, before U.S. District Judge Paul G. Gardephe. Hurtado is scheduled for sentencing before U.S. District Judge Harold Baer Jr. on March 6, 2014.
According to the informations filed against Lujan, Hurtado and Clarke this week, the criminal complaints previously filed, and statements made during the plea proceedings, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado worked or were associated with the Broker-Dealer, principally through its Miami offices. In 2008, the Broker-Dealer established a group called the Global Markets Group, which included Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado, and which offered fixed income trading services to institutional clients.
One of the Broker-Dealer’s clients was BANDES, which operated under the direction of the Venezuelan Ministry of Finance. The Venezuelan government had a majority ownership interest in BANDES and provided it with substantial funding. Gonzalez was an official at BANDES and oversaw the development bank’s overseas trading activity. At her direction, BANDES conducted substantial trading through the Broker-Dealer. Most of the trades executed by the Broker-Dealer on behalf of BANDES involved fixed-income investments for which the Broker-Dealer charged the bank a mark-up on purchases and a mark-down on sales.
The Broker-Dealer also conducted business with Banfoandes, another state development bank in Venezuela that, along with its 2009 successor Banco Bicentenario, operated under the direction of the Venezuelan Ministry of Finance. Banfoandes acted as a financial agent of the Venezuelan government in order to promote economic and social development by, among other things, offering credit to low-income Venezuelans. The Banfoandes Foreign Official was responsible for some of Banfoandes’s foreign investments.
Court records state that from early 2009 through 2012, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado participated in a bribery scheme in which Gonzalez allegedly directed trading business she controlled at BANDES to the Broker-Dealer, and in return, agents and employees of the Broker-Dealer split the revenue the Broker-Dealer generated from this trading business with Gonzalez. During this time period, the Broker-Dealer generated over $60 million in mark-ups and mark-downs from trades with BANDES. Agents and employees of the Broker-Dealer, including Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado, devised a split with Gonzalez of the commissions paid by BANDES to the Broker-Dealer. Emails, account records and other documents collected from the Broker-Dealer and other sources reveal that Gonzalez allegedly received a substantial share of the revenue generated by the Broker-Dealer for BANDES-related trades. Specifically, Gonzalez allegedly received kickbacks and payments from Broker-Dealer agents and employees that were frequently in six-figure amounts.
To further conceal the scheme, the kickbacks to Gonzalez were often paid using intermediary corporations and offshore accounts that she held in Switzerland, among other places. For instance, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado used accounts they controlled in Switzerland to transfer funds to an account Gonzalez allegedly controlled in Switzerland. Additionally, Hurtado and his spouse received substantial compensation from the Broker-Dealer, portions of which Hurtado transferred to an account allegedly held by Gonzalez in Miami and to an account held by an associate of Gonzalez in Switzerland. Hurtado also sought and allegedly received reimbursement from Gonzalez for the U.S. income taxes he had paid on money that he used to make kickback payments to Gonzalez. Lujan and Clarke also derived substantial profit from their roles in the bribery scheme.
According to court records, beginning in or about November 2010, the SEC commenced a periodic examination of the Broker-Dealer, and from November 2010 through March 2011 the SEC’s examination staff made several visits to the Broker-Dealer’s offices in Manhattan. In early 2011, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado discussed their concern that the SEC was examining the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES and asking questions regarding certain emails and other information that the SEC examination staff had discovered. Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado agreed that they would take steps to conceal the true facts of the Broker-Dealer’s relationship with BANDES, including deleting emails. Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado then, in fact, deleted emails. Additionally as part of this effort to obstruct the SEC examination, Clarke lied to SEC examination staff in response to an interview question about his relationship to an individual who had received purported foreign associate payments relating to BANDES.
In a related scheme, from 2008 through mid-2009, Lujan, Clarke and Hurtado paid bribes to the Banfoandes Foreign Official, who, in exchange, directed Banfoandes trading business to the Broker-Dealer.
Gonzalez was charged in a criminal complaint and arrested on May 3, 2013, in connection with the BANDES bribery scheme. The charges against Gonzalez are merely accusations, and she is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
This ongoing investigation is being conducted by the FBI, with assistance from the SEC and the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs.
Assistant Chief James Koukios and Trial Attorneys Maria Gonzalez Calvet and Aisling O’Shea of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Harry A. Chernoff and Jason H. Cowley of the Southern District of New York’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Task Force are in charge of the prosecution. Assistant U.S. Attorney Carolina Fornos is responsible for the forfeiture aspects of the case.
USDA SAYS CHINA'S PROCESSED POULTRY FOOD SAFETY INSPECTION SYSTEM EQUIVALENT TO U.S.
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FSIS Reaffirms Equivalence of China’s Poultry Processing System
WASHINGTON, August 30, 2013– The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today re-affirms the equivalence of the food safety inspection system for processed poultry in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which was originally established in 2006. This will enable the PRC to certify plants to export processed poultry product to the United States.
Additional information on this topic may be found on the FSIS website:
Poultry Processing Inspection System Audit Report for the People’s Republic of China
Frequently Asked Questions
While the PRC received approval to export processed poultry products to the United States, the raw poultry used for these products must originate in the United States or Canada. As of this announcement, no companies in the PRC are certified to export processed poultry to the United States.
FSIS is currently auditing the PRC’s slaughter inspection system. At this time, no chickens raised or slaughtered in the PRC can be shipped to the United States.
FSIS utilizes a comprehensive, three-part system for both establishing initial equivalence and ensuring the ongoing equivalence of countries that export regulated products to the United States. A foreign country’s inspection system must ensure that establishments preparing poultry products for import into the Unites States comply with requirements equivalent to those in the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) and in FSIS regulations. Once a country’s inspection system is granted equivalence, FSIS conducts periodic verification reviews and audits of exporting establishments. In addition, products undergo re-inspection at U.S. ports-of-entry to check for proper certification, labeling, transportation damage and general condition. Selected shipments are subject to additional re-inspection procedures, including examinations for product defects and laboratory analyses to detect harmful chemical residues or pathogen testing appropriate for the products. FSIS performs increased import re-inspection activities for countries that are beginning to export product to the Unites States.
FSIS Reaffirms Equivalence of China’s Poultry Processing System
WASHINGTON, August 30, 2013– The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today re-affirms the equivalence of the food safety inspection system for processed poultry in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), which was originally established in 2006. This will enable the PRC to certify plants to export processed poultry product to the United States.
Additional information on this topic may be found on the FSIS website:
Poultry Processing Inspection System Audit Report for the People’s Republic of China
Frequently Asked Questions
While the PRC received approval to export processed poultry products to the United States, the raw poultry used for these products must originate in the United States or Canada. As of this announcement, no companies in the PRC are certified to export processed poultry to the United States.
FSIS is currently auditing the PRC’s slaughter inspection system. At this time, no chickens raised or slaughtered in the PRC can be shipped to the United States.
FSIS utilizes a comprehensive, three-part system for both establishing initial equivalence and ensuring the ongoing equivalence of countries that export regulated products to the United States. A foreign country’s inspection system must ensure that establishments preparing poultry products for import into the Unites States comply with requirements equivalent to those in the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) and in FSIS regulations. Once a country’s inspection system is granted equivalence, FSIS conducts periodic verification reviews and audits of exporting establishments. In addition, products undergo re-inspection at U.S. ports-of-entry to check for proper certification, labeling, transportation damage and general condition. Selected shipments are subject to additional re-inspection procedures, including examinations for product defects and laboratory analyses to detect harmful chemical residues or pathogen testing appropriate for the products. FSIS performs increased import re-inspection activities for countries that are beginning to export product to the Unites States.
SMART MATERIALS AND THE DESIGN OF EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT BRIDGES
FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Strong, elastic 'smart materials' aid design of earthquake-resistant bridges
Bridges are a main component of the transportation infrastructure as we know it today. There are no less than 575,000 highway bridges nationwide, and more than $5 billion are allocated yearly from the federal budget for bridge repairs.
Over the past couple of decades, increasing seismic activity around the world has been identified as an impending threat to the strength and well-being of our bridges. Earthquakes have caused bridge collapses in the U.S., Japan, Taiwan, China, Chile, Turkey, and elsewhere. Therefore, we need to find ways to minimize seismic effects on bridges, both by improving existing bridges and refining specifications and construction materials for future bridges.
A large majority of bridges are made of steel and concrete. While this combination is convenient and economical, steel-concrete bridges don't hold up as well in strong earthquakes (7.0 magnitude or higher). Conventional reinforced columns rely on the steel and concrete to dissipate energy during strong earthquakes, potentially creating permanent deformation and damage in the column and making the column unusable.
Under earthquake loading, engineers allow for damage in column hinges to dissipate energy and prevent total bridge collapse. While that practice is widely accepted, the effects of hinge damage can interfere with disaster recovery operations and have a major economic impact on the community.
With funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and using NSF's George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES), civil engineer M. Saiid Saiidi of the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), and his colleagues have discovered a solution. They've identified several smart materials as alternatives to steel and concrete in bridges.
Shape memory alloys (SMAs) are unique in their ability to endure heavy strain and still return to their original state, either through heating or superelasticity. SMAs demonstrate an ability to re-center bridge columns, which minimizes the permanent tilt columns can experience after an earthquake.
Nickel titanium, or nitinol, the shape memory alloy tested in the UNR project, has a unique ability even amongst SMAs. While the majority of SMAs are only temperature-sensitive, meaning that they require a heat source to return to their original shape, Nitinol is also superelastic. This means that it can absorb the stress imposed by an earthquake and return to its original shape, which makes nitinol a particularly advantageous alternative to steel. In fact, the superelasticity of nickel titanium is between 10 to 30 times the elasticity of normal metals like steel.
Many of us know nickel titanium from our flexible prescription eyeglass frames. The material allows frames to easily return to their original shape after being bent in any direction. Nickel titanium's uses are extremely varied, with applications that range from medicine to heat engines, lifting devices and even novelty toys--and now, earthquake engineering.
To assess the performance of nickel-titanium reinforced concrete bridges, the researchers analyzed three types of bridge columns: traditional steel and concrete, nickel titanium and concrete, and nickel titanium and engineered cementitious composites (ECC), which include cement, sand, water, fiber and chemicals. First, they modeled and tested the columns in OpenSEES, an earthquake simulation program developed at the University of California, Berkeley. Finally, they assembled and tested the columns on the UNR NEES shake table.
To strengthen the concrete and prevent immediate failure in an earthquake, the researchers used the shake tables to test glass and carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Both composites substantially enhanced the reinforcing properties of concrete and the columns resisted strong earthquake forces with minor damage.
The results of both the modeling and shake table tests were extremely promising. The nickel titanium/ECC bridge columns outperformed the traditional steel and concrete bridge columns on all levels, limiting the amount of damage that the bridge would sustain under strong earthquakes.
While the initial cost of a typical bridge made of nickel titanium and ECC would be about 3 percent higher than the cost of a conventional bridge, the bridge's lifetime cost would decrease. Not only would the bridge require less repair, it would also be serviceable in the event of moderate and strong earthquakes. As a result, following a strong earthquake, the bridge would remain open to emergency vehicles and other traffic.
-- Misha Raffiee, California Institute of Technology
About the author: Misha Raffiee is a sophomore undergraduate at the California Institute of Technology, but she began work with UNR on the NSF/NEES 4-Span Bridge Project following her graduation from high school at age 15. As an undergraduate research fellow, Raffiee was given the opportunity to conduct her own complementary research, a feasibility study of copper-based shape memory alloys and ECC. Copper-based SMAs, such as copper-aluminum-beryllium (CuAlBe) are predicted to be more cost-effective than other shape memory alloys, such as nickel titanium. Using computer modeling and testing in the Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation with the results from the nickel titanium-reinforced concrete runs, Raffiee was able to assess the performance of a unique CuAlBe and ECC column. She presented her findings at NSF's Young Researcher's Symposium at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and later assisted in presentations of the nickel titanium-reinforced concrete column project at an NSF showcase event held at the United States Senate. Raffiee credits the experience as an NSF/NEES Undergraduate Research Fellow with helping her grow both as a researcher and as a scholar, solidifying her post-graduate aspirations.
Strong, elastic 'smart materials' aid design of earthquake-resistant bridges
Bridges are a main component of the transportation infrastructure as we know it today. There are no less than 575,000 highway bridges nationwide, and more than $5 billion are allocated yearly from the federal budget for bridge repairs.
Over the past couple of decades, increasing seismic activity around the world has been identified as an impending threat to the strength and well-being of our bridges. Earthquakes have caused bridge collapses in the U.S., Japan, Taiwan, China, Chile, Turkey, and elsewhere. Therefore, we need to find ways to minimize seismic effects on bridges, both by improving existing bridges and refining specifications and construction materials for future bridges.
A large majority of bridges are made of steel and concrete. While this combination is convenient and economical, steel-concrete bridges don't hold up as well in strong earthquakes (7.0 magnitude or higher). Conventional reinforced columns rely on the steel and concrete to dissipate energy during strong earthquakes, potentially creating permanent deformation and damage in the column and making the column unusable.
Under earthquake loading, engineers allow for damage in column hinges to dissipate energy and prevent total bridge collapse. While that practice is widely accepted, the effects of hinge damage can interfere with disaster recovery operations and have a major economic impact on the community.
With funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and using NSF's George E. Brown, Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES), civil engineer M. Saiid Saiidi of the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), and his colleagues have discovered a solution. They've identified several smart materials as alternatives to steel and concrete in bridges.
Shape memory alloys (SMAs) are unique in their ability to endure heavy strain and still return to their original state, either through heating or superelasticity. SMAs demonstrate an ability to re-center bridge columns, which minimizes the permanent tilt columns can experience after an earthquake.
Nickel titanium, or nitinol, the shape memory alloy tested in the UNR project, has a unique ability even amongst SMAs. While the majority of SMAs are only temperature-sensitive, meaning that they require a heat source to return to their original shape, Nitinol is also superelastic. This means that it can absorb the stress imposed by an earthquake and return to its original shape, which makes nitinol a particularly advantageous alternative to steel. In fact, the superelasticity of nickel titanium is between 10 to 30 times the elasticity of normal metals like steel.
Many of us know nickel titanium from our flexible prescription eyeglass frames. The material allows frames to easily return to their original shape after being bent in any direction. Nickel titanium's uses are extremely varied, with applications that range from medicine to heat engines, lifting devices and even novelty toys--and now, earthquake engineering.
To assess the performance of nickel-titanium reinforced concrete bridges, the researchers analyzed three types of bridge columns: traditional steel and concrete, nickel titanium and concrete, and nickel titanium and engineered cementitious composites (ECC), which include cement, sand, water, fiber and chemicals. First, they modeled and tested the columns in OpenSEES, an earthquake simulation program developed at the University of California, Berkeley. Finally, they assembled and tested the columns on the UNR NEES shake table.
To strengthen the concrete and prevent immediate failure in an earthquake, the researchers used the shake tables to test glass and carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Both composites substantially enhanced the reinforcing properties of concrete and the columns resisted strong earthquake forces with minor damage.
The results of both the modeling and shake table tests were extremely promising. The nickel titanium/ECC bridge columns outperformed the traditional steel and concrete bridge columns on all levels, limiting the amount of damage that the bridge would sustain under strong earthquakes.
While the initial cost of a typical bridge made of nickel titanium and ECC would be about 3 percent higher than the cost of a conventional bridge, the bridge's lifetime cost would decrease. Not only would the bridge require less repair, it would also be serviceable in the event of moderate and strong earthquakes. As a result, following a strong earthquake, the bridge would remain open to emergency vehicles and other traffic.
-- Misha Raffiee, California Institute of Technology
About the author: Misha Raffiee is a sophomore undergraduate at the California Institute of Technology, but she began work with UNR on the NSF/NEES 4-Span Bridge Project following her graduation from high school at age 15. As an undergraduate research fellow, Raffiee was given the opportunity to conduct her own complementary research, a feasibility study of copper-based shape memory alloys and ECC. Copper-based SMAs, such as copper-aluminum-beryllium (CuAlBe) are predicted to be more cost-effective than other shape memory alloys, such as nickel titanium. Using computer modeling and testing in the Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation with the results from the nickel titanium-reinforced concrete runs, Raffiee was able to assess the performance of a unique CuAlBe and ECC column. She presented her findings at NSF's Young Researcher's Symposium at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, and later assisted in presentations of the nickel titanium-reinforced concrete column project at an NSF showcase event held at the United States Senate. Raffiee credits the experience as an NSF/NEES Undergraduate Research Fellow with helping her grow both as a researcher and as a scholar, solidifying her post-graduate aspirations.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S REMARKS REGARDING SYRIA'S USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Obama: Strike Syrian Regime, But Have Congressional Debate, Vote
By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 31, 2013 - President Barack Obama said today he supports a U.S. military strike against Syrian regime targets in response to the regime's use of chemical weapons against its own people, but he called on Congress to debate and vote on how America should react to "the worst chemical weapons attack of the 21st century."
At the White House Rose Garden, Obama spoke of the Aug. 21 attack on Damascus suburbs that, he noted, killed more than 1,000 people, including several hundred children -- "young girls and boys gassed to death by their own government."
"Ten days ago, the world watched in horror as men, women and children were massacred in Syria," the commander in chief said. " ... Yesterday, the United States presented a powerful case that the Syrian government was responsible for this attack on its own people."
The president said U.S. intelligence reports "show the Assad regime and its forces preparing to use chemical weapons, launching rockets into highly populated suburbs of Damascus, and acknowledging that a chemical weapons attack took place. And all of this corroborates what the world can plainly see: hospitals overflowing with victims; terrible images of the dead."
Obama called the attack "an assault on human dignity" that also presents a serious danger to U.S. national security and "risks making a mockery of the global prohibition on the use of chemical weapons."
Syria is currently embroiled in a bitter civil war pitting President Bashar Assad and his regime against the rebel opposition. The situation presents a danger to U.S. friends and partners on Syria's borders, Obama said, such as Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq.
The Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons could lead to their escalated use in the region, he said, or their proliferation to terrorist groups intent on harming the United States.
"In a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted," the president said.
Obama said after careful deliberation, he has decided "that the U.S. should take military action against Syrian regime targets." Such an intervention would be limited in scope and duration and would not place U.S. boots on the ground inside Syria, he said.
"I'm confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out," he said.
Obama said the United States has military assets in the Middle East, and he noted that Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "has informed me that we are prepared to strike whenever we choose."
Dempsey has also advised "that our capacity to execute this mission is not time-sensitive," the president said.
"It will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now," Obama said. "And I'm prepared to give that order."
Obama added, however, that as president of "the world's oldest constitutional democracy," he has also decided that as leader of a representational government, "I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress."
He said he has spoken with U.S. Senate and House leaders, "and they've agreed to schedule a debate and then a vote as soon as Congress comes back into session."
The president said his administration stands ready to inform Congress "what happened in Syria and why it has such profound implications for America's national security."
He added that he is confident that action need not wait on United Nations inspectors.
"I'm comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable," Obama said.
As a consequence, he added, many people "have advised against taking this decision to Congress, and undoubtedly, they were impacted by what we saw happen in the United Kingdom this week when the Parliament of our closest ally failed to pass a resolution with a similar goal, even as the Prime Minister supported taking action.
"And undoubtedly," he continued, "they were impacted by what we saw happen in the United Kingdom this week when the parliament of our closest ally failed to pass a resolution with a similar goal, even as the prime minister supported taking action."
Yet, any U.S. military actions against the Syrian regime will be more effective if they follow a debate in Congress and a vote, Obama said.
"We should have this debate, because the issues are too big for business as usual," he said.
A government that considers even limited military force faces a grave decision, Obama acknowledged.
"I respect the views of those who call for caution, particularly as our country emerges from a time of war that I was elected in part to end," he said. "But if we really do want to turn away from taking appropriate action in the face of such an unspeakable outrage, then we must acknowledge the costs of doing nothing."
The president said his question to Congress and the global community is this: "What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price? What's the purpose of the international system that we've built if a prohibition on the use of chemical weapons that has been agreed to by the governments of 98 percent of the world's people and approved overwhelmingly by the Congress of the United States is not enforced?"
He continued, "... We cannot raise our children in a world where we will not follow through on the things we say, the accords we sign, the values that define us."
The president said his message to the world is that "an atrocity committed with chemical weapons is not simply investigated, it must be confronted."
Obama said he knows Americans are weary of war.
"We've ended one war in Iraq," he said. "We're ending another in Afghanistan. And the American people have the good sense to know we cannot resolve the underlying conflict in Syria with our military. In that part of the world, there are ancient sectarian differences, and the hopes of the Arab Spring have unleashed forces of change that are going to take many years to resolve. And that's why we're not contemplating putting our troops in the middle of someone else's war."
The United States will continue to support the Syrian people through pressure on the Assad regime, commitment to the opposition, care for the displaced, and pursuit of a political resolution "that achieves a government that respects the dignity of its people," Obama said.
American values dictate that the nation "cannot and must not turn a blind eye to what happened in Damascus," he said.
"So to all members of Congress of both parties, I ask you to take this vote for our national security," Obama said. "... I've told you what I believe, that our security and our values demand that we cannot turn away from the massacre of countless civilians with chemical weapons.
"I'm ready to act in the face of this outrage," he added. "Today I'm asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation."
Obama: Strike Syrian Regime, But Have Congressional Debate, Vote
By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 31, 2013 - President Barack Obama said today he supports a U.S. military strike against Syrian regime targets in response to the regime's use of chemical weapons against its own people, but he called on Congress to debate and vote on how America should react to "the worst chemical weapons attack of the 21st century."
At the White House Rose Garden, Obama spoke of the Aug. 21 attack on Damascus suburbs that, he noted, killed more than 1,000 people, including several hundred children -- "young girls and boys gassed to death by their own government."
"Ten days ago, the world watched in horror as men, women and children were massacred in Syria," the commander in chief said. " ... Yesterday, the United States presented a powerful case that the Syrian government was responsible for this attack on its own people."
The president said U.S. intelligence reports "show the Assad regime and its forces preparing to use chemical weapons, launching rockets into highly populated suburbs of Damascus, and acknowledging that a chemical weapons attack took place. And all of this corroborates what the world can plainly see: hospitals overflowing with victims; terrible images of the dead."
Obama called the attack "an assault on human dignity" that also presents a serious danger to U.S. national security and "risks making a mockery of the global prohibition on the use of chemical weapons."
Syria is currently embroiled in a bitter civil war pitting President Bashar Assad and his regime against the rebel opposition. The situation presents a danger to U.S. friends and partners on Syria's borders, Obama said, such as Israel, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq.
The Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons could lead to their escalated use in the region, he said, or their proliferation to terrorist groups intent on harming the United States.
"In a world with many dangers, this menace must be confronted," the president said.
Obama said after careful deliberation, he has decided "that the U.S. should take military action against Syrian regime targets." Such an intervention would be limited in scope and duration and would not place U.S. boots on the ground inside Syria, he said.
"I'm confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out," he said.
Obama said the United States has military assets in the Middle East, and he noted that Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "has informed me that we are prepared to strike whenever we choose."
Dempsey has also advised "that our capacity to execute this mission is not time-sensitive," the president said.
"It will be effective tomorrow, or next week, or one month from now," Obama said. "And I'm prepared to give that order."
Obama added, however, that as president of "the world's oldest constitutional democracy," he has also decided that as leader of a representational government, "I will seek authorization for the use of force from the American people's representatives in Congress."
He said he has spoken with U.S. Senate and House leaders, "and they've agreed to schedule a debate and then a vote as soon as Congress comes back into session."
The president said his administration stands ready to inform Congress "what happened in Syria and why it has such profound implications for America's national security."
He added that he is confident that action need not wait on United Nations inspectors.
"I'm comfortable going forward without the approval of a United Nations Security Council that, so far, has been completely paralyzed and unwilling to hold Assad accountable," Obama said.
As a consequence, he added, many people "have advised against taking this decision to Congress, and undoubtedly, they were impacted by what we saw happen in the United Kingdom this week when the Parliament of our closest ally failed to pass a resolution with a similar goal, even as the Prime Minister supported taking action.
"And undoubtedly," he continued, "they were impacted by what we saw happen in the United Kingdom this week when the parliament of our closest ally failed to pass a resolution with a similar goal, even as the prime minister supported taking action."
Yet, any U.S. military actions against the Syrian regime will be more effective if they follow a debate in Congress and a vote, Obama said.
"We should have this debate, because the issues are too big for business as usual," he said.
A government that considers even limited military force faces a grave decision, Obama acknowledged.
"I respect the views of those who call for caution, particularly as our country emerges from a time of war that I was elected in part to end," he said. "But if we really do want to turn away from taking appropriate action in the face of such an unspeakable outrage, then we must acknowledge the costs of doing nothing."
The president said his question to Congress and the global community is this: "What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price? What's the purpose of the international system that we've built if a prohibition on the use of chemical weapons that has been agreed to by the governments of 98 percent of the world's people and approved overwhelmingly by the Congress of the United States is not enforced?"
He continued, "... We cannot raise our children in a world where we will not follow through on the things we say, the accords we sign, the values that define us."
The president said his message to the world is that "an atrocity committed with chemical weapons is not simply investigated, it must be confronted."
Obama said he knows Americans are weary of war.
"We've ended one war in Iraq," he said. "We're ending another in Afghanistan. And the American people have the good sense to know we cannot resolve the underlying conflict in Syria with our military. In that part of the world, there are ancient sectarian differences, and the hopes of the Arab Spring have unleashed forces of change that are going to take many years to resolve. And that's why we're not contemplating putting our troops in the middle of someone else's war."
The United States will continue to support the Syrian people through pressure on the Assad regime, commitment to the opposition, care for the displaced, and pursuit of a political resolution "that achieves a government that respects the dignity of its people," Obama said.
American values dictate that the nation "cannot and must not turn a blind eye to what happened in Damascus," he said.
"So to all members of Congress of both parties, I ask you to take this vote for our national security," Obama said. "... I've told you what I believe, that our security and our values demand that we cannot turn away from the massacre of countless civilians with chemical weapons.
"I'm ready to act in the face of this outrage," he added. "Today I'm asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation."
DOD SAYS NEW ARCHITECTURE-SHARING CAN INCREASE BANDWIDTH, SECURITY AND SAVE MONEY
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Shared IT Architecture Leads to Cost Savings
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 28, 2013 - A new architecture-sharing and modernization agreement among the Air Force, the Army and the Defense Information Systems Agency will increase bandwidth and network security and avoid more than $1 billion in future costs.
"As [the Defense Department] continues to move aggressively towards [the Joint Information Environment], this partnership is an important step forward," said Teresa M. Takai, DOD's chief information officer.
Due to force structure changes, the Army was left with excess information technology capacity, said Richard Breakiron, network capacity domain manager for the Army's chief information office. At the same time, the Air Force was seeking to modernize its IT architecture to meet the requirements of the future joint information environment.
By partnering and taking advantage of the Army's upgrade to faster multiprotocol label switching routers and regional security stacks, the Air Force was able to identify about $1.2 billion in cost avoidance. The Army expects to reduce its IT budget by $785 million between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 by consolidating hundreds of network security stacks into 15 joint regional security stacks, which the Air Force will also use.
"It's great to have strong partners as we move toward JIE," said Gen. William L. Shelton, Air Force Space Command commander. "I especially appreciate the tremendous spirit of cooperation that has emerged between the Army, Air Force, and DISA teams."
MPLS routers are an industry-standard technology for speeding and managing network traffic flow. The upgraded routers will increase the backbone bandwidth to 100 gigabytes per second, said Mike Krieger, the Army's deputy chief information officer. At Army installations, network speeds will rise to 10 gigabytes per second, he said. To put that in perspective, Fort Hood, Texas, currently operates at 650 megabytes per second, Krieger said.
Regional security stacks are designed to improve command and control and situational awareness and are essential to enabling a single security architecture in the joint information environment, said Krieger. The move will tremendously increase the network security posture and reduce costs, he added.
"More and more, we're saying that some of the service-delivery capability can be managed at the enterprise level, greatly improving efficiency, effectiveness and security," Breakiron said. But, he noted, to perform these enterprise functions off of the local installation, the IT backbone must be much more robust, because users are relying on it for much more service capability.
The new, larger-capacity routers will help the Air Force and Army converge their enterprise network backbones and gain cost savings in other areas, he said.
"As we do our investment in MPLS, it now allows us to do not only [Voice over Internet Protocol], it allows us to do unified capabilities and it allows us to put much more of this capability up at the enterprise level," Brig Gen Kevin Wooton, Air Force Space Command director of communication, said.
Together, MPLS routers and the regional security stack construct improve performance and security, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronnie D. Hawkins Jr., DISA director.
"It creates a network that is fundamentally more defensible and more efficient," Hawkins said. He added that the move is a major step in building the Joint Information Environment architecture.
The Army and DISA plan to implement the joint MPLS transport cloud and JRSS consolidation in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 to support operations in Southwest Asia and the continental United States.
The Air Force and the Army will have access to data from JRSSs that are owned and operated by DISA as a joint capability. Army and Air Force cyber components will continue to execute cyber defense on their networks.
"As we modernize the DOD network, the Army is committed to a joint solution that helps achieve the joint information environment," said Lt. Gen. Susan S. Lawrence, the Army's chief information officer.
Shared IT Architecture Leads to Cost Savings
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 28, 2013 - A new architecture-sharing and modernization agreement among the Air Force, the Army and the Defense Information Systems Agency will increase bandwidth and network security and avoid more than $1 billion in future costs.
"As [the Defense Department] continues to move aggressively towards [the Joint Information Environment], this partnership is an important step forward," said Teresa M. Takai, DOD's chief information officer.
Due to force structure changes, the Army was left with excess information technology capacity, said Richard Breakiron, network capacity domain manager for the Army's chief information office. At the same time, the Air Force was seeking to modernize its IT architecture to meet the requirements of the future joint information environment.
By partnering and taking advantage of the Army's upgrade to faster multiprotocol label switching routers and regional security stacks, the Air Force was able to identify about $1.2 billion in cost avoidance. The Army expects to reduce its IT budget by $785 million between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 by consolidating hundreds of network security stacks into 15 joint regional security stacks, which the Air Force will also use.
"It's great to have strong partners as we move toward JIE," said Gen. William L. Shelton, Air Force Space Command commander. "I especially appreciate the tremendous spirit of cooperation that has emerged between the Army, Air Force, and DISA teams."
MPLS routers are an industry-standard technology for speeding and managing network traffic flow. The upgraded routers will increase the backbone bandwidth to 100 gigabytes per second, said Mike Krieger, the Army's deputy chief information officer. At Army installations, network speeds will rise to 10 gigabytes per second, he said. To put that in perspective, Fort Hood, Texas, currently operates at 650 megabytes per second, Krieger said.
Regional security stacks are designed to improve command and control and situational awareness and are essential to enabling a single security architecture in the joint information environment, said Krieger. The move will tremendously increase the network security posture and reduce costs, he added.
"More and more, we're saying that some of the service-delivery capability can be managed at the enterprise level, greatly improving efficiency, effectiveness and security," Breakiron said. But, he noted, to perform these enterprise functions off of the local installation, the IT backbone must be much more robust, because users are relying on it for much more service capability.
The new, larger-capacity routers will help the Air Force and Army converge their enterprise network backbones and gain cost savings in other areas, he said.
"As we do our investment in MPLS, it now allows us to do not only [Voice over Internet Protocol], it allows us to do unified capabilities and it allows us to put much more of this capability up at the enterprise level," Brig Gen Kevin Wooton, Air Force Space Command director of communication, said.
Together, MPLS routers and the regional security stack construct improve performance and security, said Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronnie D. Hawkins Jr., DISA director.
"It creates a network that is fundamentally more defensible and more efficient," Hawkins said. He added that the move is a major step in building the Joint Information Environment architecture.
The Army and DISA plan to implement the joint MPLS transport cloud and JRSS consolidation in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 to support operations in Southwest Asia and the continental United States.
The Air Force and the Army will have access to data from JRSSs that are owned and operated by DISA as a joint capability. Army and Air Force cyber components will continue to execute cyber defense on their networks.
"As we modernize the DOD network, the Army is committed to a joint solution that helps achieve the joint information environment," said Lt. Gen. Susan S. Lawrence, the Army's chief information officer.
SOLDIER PLEADS GUILTY TO BRIBERY
FROM: DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Army Soldier Pleads Guilty in Kentucky to Bribery Charges for Facilitating Thefts of Fuel in Afghanistan
U.S. Army Sergeant Kevin Bilal Abdullah pleaded guilty today to bribery charges for his role in the theft of fuel at Forward Operating Base (FOB) Fenty, near Jalalabad, Afghanistan.
The guilty plea was announced by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky David J. Hale.
Abdullah, 30, of Fort Campbell, Ky., pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell in the Western District of Kentucky to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery and one substantive count of bribery.
According to court documents, in approximately May and June 2010, Abdullah was involved in overseeing the delivery of fuel from FOB Fenty to other military bases. As part of this process, documents generally described as “transportation movement requests” (TMRs or mission sheets) were created to authorize the movement of fuel.
According to court documents, Abdullah created fraudulent TMRs that purported to authorize the transport of fuel from FOB Fenty to other military bases, even though no legitimate fuel transportation was required. After the trucks were filled with fuel, the fraudulent TMRs were used by the drivers of the fuel trucks at FOB Fenty’s departure checkpoint in order to justify the trucks’ departures from FOB Fenty. In truth, the fuel was simply stolen.
Abdullah pleaded guilty to receiving payments from a representative of the trucking company in exchange for facilitating the theft of approximately 25 truckloads of fuel. According to court documents, the loss to the United States as a result of the theft was in excess of $400,000.
Abdullah’s plea is the third guilty plea arising from this investigation of fuel thefts at FOB Fenty. On Aug. 3, 2012, Jonathan Hightower, a civilian employee of a military contractor who had conspired with Abdullah, pleaded guilty to similar charges. On Oct. 10, 2012, Christopher Weaver also pleaded guilty to fuel theft charges. A fourth individual, Stephanie Charboneau, was indicted April 9, 2013, and is pending trial on fuel theft-related charges.
This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Mark H. Dubester of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael A. Bennett of the Western District of Kentucky. This case was investigated by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction; Department of the Army, Criminal Investigations Division; Defense Criminal Investigative Service; and FBI.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Army Soldier Pleads Guilty in Kentucky to Bribery Charges for Facilitating Thefts of Fuel in Afghanistan
U.S. Army Sergeant Kevin Bilal Abdullah pleaded guilty today to bribery charges for his role in the theft of fuel at Forward Operating Base (FOB) Fenty, near Jalalabad, Afghanistan.
The guilty plea was announced by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mythili Raman of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky David J. Hale.
Abdullah, 30, of Fort Campbell, Ky., pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell in the Western District of Kentucky to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery and one substantive count of bribery.
According to court documents, in approximately May and June 2010, Abdullah was involved in overseeing the delivery of fuel from FOB Fenty to other military bases. As part of this process, documents generally described as “transportation movement requests” (TMRs or mission sheets) were created to authorize the movement of fuel.
According to court documents, Abdullah created fraudulent TMRs that purported to authorize the transport of fuel from FOB Fenty to other military bases, even though no legitimate fuel transportation was required. After the trucks were filled with fuel, the fraudulent TMRs were used by the drivers of the fuel trucks at FOB Fenty’s departure checkpoint in order to justify the trucks’ departures from FOB Fenty. In truth, the fuel was simply stolen.
Abdullah pleaded guilty to receiving payments from a representative of the trucking company in exchange for facilitating the theft of approximately 25 truckloads of fuel. According to court documents, the loss to the United States as a result of the theft was in excess of $400,000.
Abdullah’s plea is the third guilty plea arising from this investigation of fuel thefts at FOB Fenty. On Aug. 3, 2012, Jonathan Hightower, a civilian employee of a military contractor who had conspired with Abdullah, pleaded guilty to similar charges. On Oct. 10, 2012, Christopher Weaver also pleaded guilty to fuel theft charges. A fourth individual, Stephanie Charboneau, was indicted April 9, 2013, and is pending trial on fuel theft-related charges.
This case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Mark H. Dubester of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael A. Bennett of the Western District of Kentucky. This case was investigated by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction; Department of the Army, Criminal Investigations Division; Defense Criminal Investigative Service; and FBI.
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS ON U.S. RESPONSE TO SYRIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS USE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Statement on Syria
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
August 30, 2013
President Obama has spent many days now consulting with Congress and talking with leaders around the world about the situation in Syria. And last night, the President asked all of us on his national security team to consult with the leaders of Congress as well, including the leadership of the Congressional national security committees. And he asked us to consult about what we know regarding the horrific chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs last week. I will tell you that as someone who has spent nearly three decades in the United States Congress, I know that that consultation is the right way for a president to approach a decision of when and how and if to use military force. And it’s important to ask the tough questions and get the tough answers before taking action, not just afterwards.
And I believe, as President Obama does, that it is also important to discuss this directly with the American people. That’s our responsibility, to talk with the citizens who have entrusted all of us in the Administration and the Congress with the responsibility for their security. That’s why this morning’s release of our government’s unclassified estimate of what took place in Syria is so important. Its findings are as clear as they are compelling. I’m not asking you to take my word for it. Read for yourself, everyone, those listening. All of you, read for yourselves the evidence from thousands of sources, evidence that is already publicly available, and read for yourselves the verdict reached by our intelligence community about the chemical weapons attack the Assad regime inflicted on the opposition and on opposition-controlled or contested neighborhoods in the Damascus suburbs on the early morning of August 21st.
Our intelligence community has carefully reviewed and re-reviewed information regarding this attack, and I will tell you it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience. We will not repeat that moment. Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves. But still, in order to protect sources and methods, some of what we know will only be released to members of Congress, the representatives of the American people. That means that some things we do know we can’t talk about publicly.
So what do we really know that we can talk about? Well, we know that the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons program in the entire Middle East. We know that the regime has used those weapons multiple times this year and has used them on a smaller scale, but still it has used them against its own people, including not very far from where last Wednesday’s attack happened. We know that the regime was specifically determined to rid the Damascus suburbs of the opposition, and it was frustrated that it hadn’t succeeded in doing so.
We know that for three days before the attack the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area making preparations. And we know that the Syrian regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated with chemical weapons. We know that these were specific instructions. We know where the rockets were launched from and at what time. We know where they landed and when. We know rockets came only from regime-controlled areas and went only to opposition-controlled or contested neighborhoods.
And we know, as does the world, that just 90 minutes later all hell broke loose in the social media. With our own eyes we have seen the thousands of reports from 11 separate sites in the Damascus suburbs. All of them show and report victims with breathing difficulties, people twitching with spasms, coughing, rapid heartbeats, foaming at the mouth, unconsciousness and death.
And we know it was ordinary Syrian citizens who reported all of these horrors. And just as important, we know what the doctors and the nurses who treated them didn’t report – not a scratch, not a shrapnel wound, not a cut, not a gunshot wound. We saw rows of dead lined up in burial shrouds, the white linen unstained by a single drop of blood. Instead of being tucked safely in their beds at home, we saw rows of children lying side by side sprawled on a hospital floor, all of them dead from Assad’s gas and surrounded by parents and grandparents who had suffered the same fate.
The United States Government now knows that at least 1,429 Syrians were killed in this attack, including at least 426 children. Even the first responders, the doctors, nurses, and medics who tried to save them, they became victims themselves. We saw them gasping for air, terrified that their own lives were in danger.
This is the indiscriminate, inconceivable horror of chemical weapons. This is what Assad did to his own people.
We also know many disturbing details about the aftermath. We know that a senior regime official who knew about the attack confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime, reviewed the impact, and actually was afraid that they would be discovered. We know this.
And we know what they did next. I personally called the Foreign Minister of Syria and I said to him, “If, as you say, your nation has nothing to hide, then let the United Nations in immediately and give the inspectors the unfettered access so they have the opportunity to tell your story.” Instead, for four days they shelled the neighborhood in order to destroy evidence, bombarding block after block at a rate four times higher than they had over the previous 10 days. And when the UN inspectors finally gained access, that access, as we now know, was restricted and controlled.
In all of these things that I have listed, in all of these things that we know, all of them, the American intelligence community has high confidence, high confidence. This is common sense. This is evidence. These are facts.
So the primary question is really no longer: What do we know? The question is: What are we – we collectively – what are we in the world going to do about it?
As previous storms in history have gathered, when unspeakable crimes were within our power to stop them, we have been warned against the temptations of looking the other way. History is full of leaders who have warned against inaction, indifference, and especially against silence when it mattered most. Our choices then in history had great consequences and our choice today has great consequences. It matters that nearly a hundred years ago, in direct response to the utter horror and inhumanity of World War I, that the civilized world agreed that chemical weapons should never be used again.
That was the world’s resolve then, and that began nearly a century of effort to create a clear redline for the international community. It matters today that we are working as an international community to rid the world of the worst weapons. That’s why we signed agreements like the START Treaty, the New START Treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention, which more than 180 countries, including Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, have signed on to.
It matters to our security and the security of our allies. It matters to Israel. It matters to our close friends Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon – all of whom live just a stiff breeze away from Damascus. It matters to all of them where the Syrian chemical weapons are. And if unchecked, they can cause even greater death and destruction to those friends. And it matters deeply to the credibility and the future interests of the United States of America and our allies.
It matters because a lot of other countries, whose polices challenges these international norms, are watching. They are watching. They want to see whether the United States and our friends mean what we say. It is directly related to our credibility and whether countries still believe the United States when it says something. They are watching to see if Syria can get away with it, because then maybe they too can put the world at greater risk.
And make no mistake, in an increasingly complicated world of sectarian and religious extremist violence, what we choose to do or not do matters in real ways to our own security. Some cite the risk of doing things, but we need to ask, what is the risk of doing nothing?
It matters because if we choose to live in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers that will flow from those others who believe that they can do as they will.
This matters also beyond the limits of Syria’s borders. It is about whether Iran, which itself has been a victim of chemical weapons attacks, will now feel emboldened, in the absence of action, to obtain nuclear weapons. It is about Hezbollah, and North Korea, and every other terrorist group or dictator that might ever again contemplate the use of weapons of mass destruction. Will they remember that the Assad regime was stopped from those weapons’ current or future use, or will they remember that the world stood aside and created impunity?
So our concern is not just about some far off land oceans away. That’s not what this is about. Our concern with the cause of the defenseless people of Syria is about choices that will directly affect our role in the world and our interests in the world. It is also profoundly about who we are. We are the United States of America. We are the country that has tried, not always successfully, but always tried to honor a set of universal values around which we have organized our lives and our aspirations. This crime against conscience, this crime against humanity, this crime against the most fundamental principles of international community, against the norm of the international community, this matters to us. And it matters to who we are. And it matters to leadership and to our credibility in the world. My friends, it matters here if nothing is done. It matters if the world speaks out in condemnation and then nothing happens.
America should feel confident and gratified that we are not alone in our condemnation, and we are not alone in our will to do something about it and to act. The world is speaking out, and many friends stand ready to respond. The Arab League pledged, quote, “to hold the Syrian regime fully responsible for this crime.” The Organization for Islamic Cooperation condemned the regime and said we needed, quote, “to hold the Syrian Government legally and morally accountable for this heinous crime.” Turkey said there is no doubt that the regime is responsible. Our oldest ally, the French, said the regime, quote, “committed this vile action, and it is an outrage to use weapons that the community has banned for the last 90 years in all international conventions.” The Australian Prime Minister said he didn’t want history to record that we were, quote, “a party to turning such a blind eye.”
So now that we know what we know, the question we must all be asking is: What will we do? Let me emphasize – President Obama, we in the United States, we believe in the United Nations. And we have great respect for the brave inspectors who endured regime gunfire and obstructions to their investigation. But as Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary General, has said again and again, the UN investigation will not affirm who used these chemical weapons. That is not the mandate of the UN investigation. They will only affirm whether such weapons were used. By the definition of their own mandate, the UN can’t tell us anything that we haven’t shared with you this afternoon or that we don’t already know. And because of the guaranteed Russian obstructionism of any action through the UN Security Council, the UN cannot galvanize the world to act as it should.
So let me be clear. We will continue talking to the Congress, talking to our allies, and most importantly, talking to the American people. President Obama will ensure that the United States of America makes our own decisions on our own timelines based on our values and our interests.
Now, we know that after a decade of conflict, the American people are tired of war. Believe me, I am, too. But fatigue does not absolve us of our responsibility. Just longing for peace does not necessarily bring it about. And history would judge us all extraordinarily harshly if we turned a blind eye to a dictator’s wanton use of weapons of mass destruction against all warnings, against all common understanding of decency. These things we do know.
We also know that we have a President who does what he says that he will do. And he has said very clearly that whatever decision he makes in Syria, it will bear no resemblance to Afghanistan, Iraq, or even Libya. It will not involve any boots on the ground. It will not be open-ended. And it will not assume responsibility for a civil war that is already well underway. The President has been clear: Any action that he might decide to take will be a limited and tailored response to ensure that a despot’s brutal and flagrant use of chemical weapons is held accountable. And ultimately, ultimately, we are committed – we remain committed, we believe it’s the primary objective – is to have a diplomatic process that can resolve this through negotiation, because we know there is no ultimate military solution. It has to be political. It has to happen at the negotiating table, and we are deeply committed to getting there.
So that is what we know. That’s what the leaders of Congress now know. And that’s what the American people need to know. And that is at the core of the decisions that must now be made for the security of our country and for the promise of a planet where the world’s most heinous weapons must never again be used against the world’s most vulnerable people.
Thank you very much.
Statement on Syria
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
August 30, 2013
President Obama has spent many days now consulting with Congress and talking with leaders around the world about the situation in Syria. And last night, the President asked all of us on his national security team to consult with the leaders of Congress as well, including the leadership of the Congressional national security committees. And he asked us to consult about what we know regarding the horrific chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs last week. I will tell you that as someone who has spent nearly three decades in the United States Congress, I know that that consultation is the right way for a president to approach a decision of when and how and if to use military force. And it’s important to ask the tough questions and get the tough answers before taking action, not just afterwards.
And I believe, as President Obama does, that it is also important to discuss this directly with the American people. That’s our responsibility, to talk with the citizens who have entrusted all of us in the Administration and the Congress with the responsibility for their security. That’s why this morning’s release of our government’s unclassified estimate of what took place in Syria is so important. Its findings are as clear as they are compelling. I’m not asking you to take my word for it. Read for yourself, everyone, those listening. All of you, read for yourselves the evidence from thousands of sources, evidence that is already publicly available, and read for yourselves the verdict reached by our intelligence community about the chemical weapons attack the Assad regime inflicted on the opposition and on opposition-controlled or contested neighborhoods in the Damascus suburbs on the early morning of August 21st.
Our intelligence community has carefully reviewed and re-reviewed information regarding this attack, and I will tell you it has done so more than mindful of the Iraq experience. We will not repeat that moment. Accordingly, we have taken unprecedented steps to declassify and make facts available to people who can judge for themselves. But still, in order to protect sources and methods, some of what we know will only be released to members of Congress, the representatives of the American people. That means that some things we do know we can’t talk about publicly.
So what do we really know that we can talk about? Well, we know that the Assad regime has the largest chemical weapons program in the entire Middle East. We know that the regime has used those weapons multiple times this year and has used them on a smaller scale, but still it has used them against its own people, including not very far from where last Wednesday’s attack happened. We know that the regime was specifically determined to rid the Damascus suburbs of the opposition, and it was frustrated that it hadn’t succeeded in doing so.
We know that for three days before the attack the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area making preparations. And we know that the Syrian regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated with chemical weapons. We know that these were specific instructions. We know where the rockets were launched from and at what time. We know where they landed and when. We know rockets came only from regime-controlled areas and went only to opposition-controlled or contested neighborhoods.
And we know, as does the world, that just 90 minutes later all hell broke loose in the social media. With our own eyes we have seen the thousands of reports from 11 separate sites in the Damascus suburbs. All of them show and report victims with breathing difficulties, people twitching with spasms, coughing, rapid heartbeats, foaming at the mouth, unconsciousness and death.
And we know it was ordinary Syrian citizens who reported all of these horrors. And just as important, we know what the doctors and the nurses who treated them didn’t report – not a scratch, not a shrapnel wound, not a cut, not a gunshot wound. We saw rows of dead lined up in burial shrouds, the white linen unstained by a single drop of blood. Instead of being tucked safely in their beds at home, we saw rows of children lying side by side sprawled on a hospital floor, all of them dead from Assad’s gas and surrounded by parents and grandparents who had suffered the same fate.
The United States Government now knows that at least 1,429 Syrians were killed in this attack, including at least 426 children. Even the first responders, the doctors, nurses, and medics who tried to save them, they became victims themselves. We saw them gasping for air, terrified that their own lives were in danger.
This is the indiscriminate, inconceivable horror of chemical weapons. This is what Assad did to his own people.
We also know many disturbing details about the aftermath. We know that a senior regime official who knew about the attack confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime, reviewed the impact, and actually was afraid that they would be discovered. We know this.
And we know what they did next. I personally called the Foreign Minister of Syria and I said to him, “If, as you say, your nation has nothing to hide, then let the United Nations in immediately and give the inspectors the unfettered access so they have the opportunity to tell your story.” Instead, for four days they shelled the neighborhood in order to destroy evidence, bombarding block after block at a rate four times higher than they had over the previous 10 days. And when the UN inspectors finally gained access, that access, as we now know, was restricted and controlled.
In all of these things that I have listed, in all of these things that we know, all of them, the American intelligence community has high confidence, high confidence. This is common sense. This is evidence. These are facts.
So the primary question is really no longer: What do we know? The question is: What are we – we collectively – what are we in the world going to do about it?
As previous storms in history have gathered, when unspeakable crimes were within our power to stop them, we have been warned against the temptations of looking the other way. History is full of leaders who have warned against inaction, indifference, and especially against silence when it mattered most. Our choices then in history had great consequences and our choice today has great consequences. It matters that nearly a hundred years ago, in direct response to the utter horror and inhumanity of World War I, that the civilized world agreed that chemical weapons should never be used again.
That was the world’s resolve then, and that began nearly a century of effort to create a clear redline for the international community. It matters today that we are working as an international community to rid the world of the worst weapons. That’s why we signed agreements like the START Treaty, the New START Treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention, which more than 180 countries, including Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon, have signed on to.
It matters to our security and the security of our allies. It matters to Israel. It matters to our close friends Jordan, Turkey, and Lebanon – all of whom live just a stiff breeze away from Damascus. It matters to all of them where the Syrian chemical weapons are. And if unchecked, they can cause even greater death and destruction to those friends. And it matters deeply to the credibility and the future interests of the United States of America and our allies.
It matters because a lot of other countries, whose polices challenges these international norms, are watching. They are watching. They want to see whether the United States and our friends mean what we say. It is directly related to our credibility and whether countries still believe the United States when it says something. They are watching to see if Syria can get away with it, because then maybe they too can put the world at greater risk.
And make no mistake, in an increasingly complicated world of sectarian and religious extremist violence, what we choose to do or not do matters in real ways to our own security. Some cite the risk of doing things, but we need to ask, what is the risk of doing nothing?
It matters because if we choose to live in a world where a thug and a murderer like Bashar al-Assad can gas thousands of his own people with impunity, even after the United States and our allies said no, and then the world does nothing about it, there will be no end to the test of our resolve and the dangers that will flow from those others who believe that they can do as they will.
This matters also beyond the limits of Syria’s borders. It is about whether Iran, which itself has been a victim of chemical weapons attacks, will now feel emboldened, in the absence of action, to obtain nuclear weapons. It is about Hezbollah, and North Korea, and every other terrorist group or dictator that might ever again contemplate the use of weapons of mass destruction. Will they remember that the Assad regime was stopped from those weapons’ current or future use, or will they remember that the world stood aside and created impunity?
So our concern is not just about some far off land oceans away. That’s not what this is about. Our concern with the cause of the defenseless people of Syria is about choices that will directly affect our role in the world and our interests in the world. It is also profoundly about who we are. We are the United States of America. We are the country that has tried, not always successfully, but always tried to honor a set of universal values around which we have organized our lives and our aspirations. This crime against conscience, this crime against humanity, this crime against the most fundamental principles of international community, against the norm of the international community, this matters to us. And it matters to who we are. And it matters to leadership and to our credibility in the world. My friends, it matters here if nothing is done. It matters if the world speaks out in condemnation and then nothing happens.
America should feel confident and gratified that we are not alone in our condemnation, and we are not alone in our will to do something about it and to act. The world is speaking out, and many friends stand ready to respond. The Arab League pledged, quote, “to hold the Syrian regime fully responsible for this crime.” The Organization for Islamic Cooperation condemned the regime and said we needed, quote, “to hold the Syrian Government legally and morally accountable for this heinous crime.” Turkey said there is no doubt that the regime is responsible. Our oldest ally, the French, said the regime, quote, “committed this vile action, and it is an outrage to use weapons that the community has banned for the last 90 years in all international conventions.” The Australian Prime Minister said he didn’t want history to record that we were, quote, “a party to turning such a blind eye.”
So now that we know what we know, the question we must all be asking is: What will we do? Let me emphasize – President Obama, we in the United States, we believe in the United Nations. And we have great respect for the brave inspectors who endured regime gunfire and obstructions to their investigation. But as Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary General, has said again and again, the UN investigation will not affirm who used these chemical weapons. That is not the mandate of the UN investigation. They will only affirm whether such weapons were used. By the definition of their own mandate, the UN can’t tell us anything that we haven’t shared with you this afternoon or that we don’t already know. And because of the guaranteed Russian obstructionism of any action through the UN Security Council, the UN cannot galvanize the world to act as it should.
So let me be clear. We will continue talking to the Congress, talking to our allies, and most importantly, talking to the American people. President Obama will ensure that the United States of America makes our own decisions on our own timelines based on our values and our interests.
Now, we know that after a decade of conflict, the American people are tired of war. Believe me, I am, too. But fatigue does not absolve us of our responsibility. Just longing for peace does not necessarily bring it about. And history would judge us all extraordinarily harshly if we turned a blind eye to a dictator’s wanton use of weapons of mass destruction against all warnings, against all common understanding of decency. These things we do know.
We also know that we have a President who does what he says that he will do. And he has said very clearly that whatever decision he makes in Syria, it will bear no resemblance to Afghanistan, Iraq, or even Libya. It will not involve any boots on the ground. It will not be open-ended. And it will not assume responsibility for a civil war that is already well underway. The President has been clear: Any action that he might decide to take will be a limited and tailored response to ensure that a despot’s brutal and flagrant use of chemical weapons is held accountable. And ultimately, ultimately, we are committed – we remain committed, we believe it’s the primary objective – is to have a diplomatic process that can resolve this through negotiation, because we know there is no ultimate military solution. It has to be political. It has to happen at the negotiating table, and we are deeply committed to getting there.
So that is what we know. That’s what the leaders of Congress now know. And that’s what the American people need to know. And that is at the core of the decisions that must now be made for the security of our country and for the promise of a planet where the world’s most heinous weapons must never again be used against the world’s most vulnerable people.
Thank you very much.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)