Monday, September 22, 2014

U.S. CONGRATULATES PEOPLE OF MALTA ON THEIR INDEPENDENCE DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
On the Occasion of Malta's Independence Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 21, 2014

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Malta as you celebrate your Independence Day on September 21.

Today marks 50 years since independence came to your country by democratic vote. Decades later, Malta’s steadfast promotion of economic prosperity and human rights stands as a powerful example of democracy’s promise. Your country continues to stand up for these values this year by hosting the International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law.

We wish you a joyous celebration as you observe your Independence Day.

ARMY GEN. ODIERNO SAYS BY 2016 FORCE WILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY DEGRADED IF SEQUESTRATION CONTINUES

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Left:  Lance Cpl. Dominique Sparacino pauses while on patrol during Mountain Exercise 2014 on Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center in Bridgeport, Calif., Sept. 8, 2014. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Sgt. Emmanuel Ramos.

Army Chief: Fiscal 2016 Sequestration Marks ‘Breaking Point’
By David Vergun
Army News Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 19, 2014 – Should sequestration resume in fiscal year 2016 as current law requires, "it will be very difficult for us to lead around the world,” Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno said here today.

Fiscal 2016 is “a breaking point," Odierno told the Defense Writers Group. "I'm not seeing peace breaking out around the world in ’16," he added.

Everyone wants the United States to lead the way in resolving global conflicts and crises, the general said -- not necessarily supplying the preponderance of forces, but being involved to some extent. The nagging question, he said, is "Do we want to do that or not?"

In fiscal 2016, Odierno pointed out, the Army’s budget will go down $9 billion from what it is now. That would have a "significant degradation" on the force, he said, "because I cannot take people out fast enough."

The general explained that manpower, modernization and training need to be kept in balance, even as the budget shrinks. And it's currently out of balance with too many soldiers and not enough dollars to properly train and equip them, he said. A reduction of 20,000 soldiers a year is as far as he's willing to push manpower reductions without seriously degrading operational concerns and personnel considerations, Odierno told the writers.

Vast majority of budget is mandatory spending.  Although the total Army budget is around $120 billion a year, the general said, the vast majority of that is mandatory spending that can't be touched, such as funds for equipment and personnel costs. About 46 percent of the budget alone is for personnel, he noted.

Sequestration takes a large percentage of a small portion of the budget that otherwise would have gone to training and equipping the force, he said, noting that the slashed budget will delay aircraft purchases, platform upgrades, command and control system and a host of other needed requirements for years to come.

The active Army is now 510,000 soldiers, down from a high of 570,000. It will be 490,000 by the end of fiscal 2015, 470,000 by fiscal 2016, 415,000 by fiscal 2017 and 420,000 by fiscal 2019, he pointed out.

Before the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant offensive and the Russian incursion into Ukraine, Odierno said, he testified to lawmakers that a reduction to 450,000 would pose a significant security risk, and 420,000 would mean the Army would be unable to execute its current strategy. Since that time, he said, the risk has increased while the ability of the Army to deploy soldiers to a number of hot spots around the world simultaneously causes him grave concern. "I'm in a box," he added.

Over the last two days, the Army chief said, he approved letters for the Army secretary to sign, replying to about 40 lawmakers who had expressed concern that the Army will reduce the number of soldiers on installations in their home states.

"I wrote back that the reason I'm taking soldiers out of your installation and out of your state is because of sequestration, not that I want to do it,” Odierno said. That's the dilemma we're in."

The nation needs to have a security debate what it wants to do, the general told the writers. "Not a budget debate,” he added. “A security debate about what capabilities and responsibilities we want from our Army."

Summing up the current state of affairs -- sequestration and degradation of readiness, even as unforeseen problems emerge in Africa, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere -- the general remarked: "This is a lousy way to plan and do business."

NASA 360 VIDEO- RISE OF THE ROVERS TRAILER

U.S. UNITED NATIONS REPRESENTATIVE'S REMARKS TO SECURITY COUNCIL ON UKRAINE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a Security Council Briefing on Ukraine
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations 
New York, NY
September 19, 2014
AS DELIVERED

Thank you, Under-Secretary-General Feltman, for your informative briefing. Thank you, Ministers Timmermans, Bishop, and Asselborn for being here and signaling the importance of this issue with your presence.

First, on behalf of the United States, let me once again convey our condolences to the loved ones of the victims of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. We do not presume to grasp the depth of your grief. But we mourn the lives of those you lost.

We convene today for an update on the investigation into a crime that abruptly ended too many lives. The purpose of the investigation is to determine the truth about what brought down that plane.

Now, for any investigation to be credible, we all agree that it must be thorough, impartial, and professional. Ukraine and the whole international community turned to the Dutch Safety Board because we believed it was more than capable of meeting these standards.

The Board’s preliminary findings reflect its independence and its expertise. Those findings, submitted to the Security Council on September 9th, include the following:

- First, the aircraft was brought down by, “a large number of high-energy objects that penetrated the aircraft from the outside.”

- Second, there were no engine warnings, aircraft system warnings, or distress messages detected.

- Third, the damage to the aircraft is, “not consistent with any known failure mode of the aircraft, its engines, or systems.”

- And fourth, the only planes identified in the report that were in the vicinity of Flight MH 17 were commercial aircraft.

Based on those preliminary findings, one can rule out that Flight MH 17 was brought down by a bomb on board. It was not. Russian claims that the flight was brought down by a Ukrainian fighter jet are also not supported by evidence in the report. Moreover, ground photography is consistent with the expected damage from a surface-to-air missile, but does not correspond with the damage that short-range, air-to-air missile from a smaller warhead would produce. These facts are important because they contradict the fiction that has been propagated by Russia.

The Dutch Safety Board’s findings are consistent, however, with evidence gathered by a group of countries, including the United States, pointing to the fact that Flight MH 17 was shot down by a surface-to-air missile fired from territory controlled by Russian-backed separatists.

Russia called for today’s meetings under the pretense of being briefed on the status of the investigation. The representative of the Russian Federation today has appealed for what he calls a “objective and transparent investigation.”

But in its intervention today, Russia made clear its real intention is not to learn about the investigation, but to discredit it. Russia is seeking to play the role of forensic aviation investigator but cannot do so in an impartial and objective manner.

Russian-backed separatists denied access to the crash site for days after Flight 17 was downed. Russian-backed separatists then restricted access after initially letting outside officials in.

This is not consistent with an objective and transparent investigation.

The representative of the Russian Federation today complained about the timeliness of the voice recordings being processed. Yet telephone conversations intercepted by the Ukrainian government indicate that the commander of a pro-Russian separatist unit told local state emergency service employees that Moscow wanted to find the black boxes; and he enlisted the support of these local officials to help recover the boxes.

This is not consistent with the desire to ensure the sanctity of the recordings that, today, the Russian representative professes a desire to protect.

The Russian representative says that the report does not contain “convincing information.” In order to be convinced of facts, one must acknowledge them. In order to be convinced of truth, one must allow it to be surfaced. One can be convinced if one confronts the facts as they are established and proven, not as one may wish they were.

It’s time to allow facts, however inconvenient, to be uncovered. And it is time to stop all attempts to undermine the credibility of a thorough, impartial, and independent investigation that the international community has no reason to doubt.

Russia does not have the track record to play the credible investigator here. Russia has repeatedly misled this Council, its own people, and the world about its support for illegal armed groups and its own military incursions into Ukraine. Just read the transcripts of the previous 24 Security Council sessions on Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Read Russia’s denials that it was arming and training separatists in Crimea, and later its denials that it had deployed troops to Crimea. Read Russia’s denials that it was arming and training separatists in eastern Ukraine, and later its denials that it had deployed troops to eastern Ukraine.

The Dutch Safety Board that has been delegated the authority by Ukraine, in line with ICAO standards, to investigate this crash. If Russia has evidence that it believes can help identify who shot down Flight MH 17, it has a responsibility to share that information with the independent investigators.

Too many lives have been lost and this conflict has gone on for too long. It is time for Russia to bring its intervention to an end. That is why we fully support the ceasefire and agreement signed in Minsk, which aims to de-escalate the conflict that has taken approximately 3,000 lives. We fully support a negotiated political solution to this crisis, as we have asserted since Russia’s incitements created the conflict. We welcome reports that Russia is decreasing its troop levels in eastern Ukraine – even if Russia continues to deny that its troops were there in the first place. And we welcome Russia’s recent statements expressing support for the ceasefire.

However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the crisis in eastern Ukraine, just like the occupation and annexation of Crimea before it, was manufactured by Moscow. And no country should support carving off pieces of sovereign Ukraine and handing them to the aggressors. The territorial integrity of Ukraine is non-negotiable.

Ukraine has demonstrated remarkably good faith in meeting its commitments. This week – notwithstanding the aggression against the state by the separatists and by Russian forces – Ukraine’s parliament passed legislation granting certain districts in eastern Ukraine special status that includes greater self-governance, economic control, and Russian language rights.

Now it is Russia’s turn. Russia must immediately withdraw all of its forces and equipment from Ukraine, including Crimea, and cease all forms of support and training for separatist groups. Russia and the separatists it backs must release all of their hostages and prisoners. Russia must finally close its borders to the flow of soldiers, separatists, tanks, artillery, and other machinery of war, and it must grant Ukraine control over its own border. Russia and the groups it backs must create an environment that allows the OSCE to fulfill its monitoring and verification mandate.

There is one very important imperative we must remember, which brings us back to why we convened today: truth. Two hundred and ninety-eight innocent people were killed on July 17th. The international community has identified an independent investigative body to uncover the truth about what happened to Flight MH 17. Today, we join the chorus of member states in reiterating our full support for the Dutch Safety Board’s investigation and we reject Russia’s efforts to disparage it or hinder its progress. The next step is the pursuit of justice. And when those responsible for this horrific crime are eventually identified, they will be punished.

Thank you.

U.S. STATEMENT ON IRAQ: MADE IN CAPACITY AS SECURITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT

FROM:   U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations 
New York, NY
September 19, 2014
Note: This is issued in the United States’ capacity as President of the Security Council

The Security Council welcomes the newly formed Government of Iraq and calls on the international community to support its efforts to strengthen further democratic institutions, to maintain security and combat terrorism and to create a safe, stable and prosperous future for the people of Iraq. The Security Council reaffirms its support for the independence, sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity of Iraq and reaffirms further the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

The Security Council underscores the need for all segments of the Iraqi population to participate in the political process and engage in political dialogue. The Security Council is encouraged by the Iraqi Government’s commitment to resolve longstanding issues through an inclusive political process and consistent with the Iraqi Constitution and look forward to implementation of this commitment through its new national agenda. The Security Council encourages Iraq’s leaders to accelerate implementation of this agenda and national reconciliation to address the needs of Iraq’s diverse communities.

The Security Council also urges Member States to work closely with the Government of Iraq to identify how best the international community can aid implementation of the new Iraqi agenda. The Security Council reaffirms its full support for the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq in advising and assisting the Iraqi people and the Government of Iraq in strengthening democratic institutions and advancing inclusive political dialogue.

The Security Council strongly condemns attacks by terrorist organizations, including the terrorist organization operating under the name “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) and associated armed groups, in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon and emphasizes that this large-scale offensive poses a major threat to the region. The Security Council expresses again its deep outrage about all Iraqis as well as nationals of other states who have been killed, kidnapped, raped, or tortured by ISIL, as well as its recruitment and use of children. The Security Council stresses the need that those who have committed or are otherwise responsible for violations of international humanitarian law or violations or abuses of human rights in Iraq must be held accountable, noting that some of these acts may constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Security Council stresses the need for those responsible for such violations of international humanitarian law or violations or abuses of human rights to be held to account, and calls upon the Government of Iraq and the international community to work towards ensuring that all perpetrators are brought to justice.

The Security Council welcomes the Government of Iraq’s efforts, in association with local and regional authorities, to combat the terrorist threat facing all Iraqis, including members of its ethnic and religious minorities, notably Yezidis and Christians, and women from all communities who have been particularly targeted by ISIL.

The Security Council reaffirms that all parties, including ISIL, associated armed groups, and other militias, must respect the human rights of the Iraqi people and abide by all applicable obligations under international humanitarian law, including those protecting the civilian population, by which both official Iraqi forces and member states that assist them must also abide.

The Security Council also recognizes the steps taken to address the urgent humanitarian needs of those displaced by the current conflict. The Security Council calls for an intensification of these efforts by all parties and urges all Member States to continue to fund the UN humanitarian appeals.

The Security Council urges the international community, in accordance with international law to further strengthen and expand support for the Government of Iraq as it fights ISIL and associated armed groups. The Security Council welcomes the “International Conference on Peace and Security in Iraq” that took place in Paris on September 15, 2014 and the summit-level meeting of the Security Council responding to the global threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters that is scheduled for September 24.

The Security Council stresses that terrorism can only be defeated by a sustained and comprehensive approach involving the active participation and collaboration of all States, as well as international and regional organizations, to impede, impair, isolate and incapacitate the terrorist threat.

The Security Council reiterates the urgent need to stop any direct or indirect trade in oil from Iraq involving ISIL with the aim to put an end to financing terrorism.

The Security Council supports Iraq’s further economic, social, political and diplomatic integration into the region and the international community and calls upon regional states to engage more actively to facilitate this process. The Security Council recognizes that the situation that now exists in Iraq is significantly different from that which existed at the time of the adoption of Resolution 661 (1990), and further recognizes the importance of Iraq achieving international standing equal to that which it held prior to the adoption of Resolution 661 (1990).

The Security Council reiterates that no terrorist act can reverse the path toward peace, democracy and reconstruction in Iraq, which is supported by the people and the Government of Iraq, and by the international community.

MAN GETS LIFE IN PRISON FOR ROLE IN KILLING 6 MEMBERS OF FEDERAL WITNESS'S FAMILY

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Friday, September 19, 2014
Philadelphia Man Sentenced to Life in Prison for Deadly Firebombing of Federal Witness's Family

A Philadelphia man was sentenced today to life in prison for his role in the Oct. 9, 2004, retaliatory firebombing that killed six members of a federal witness’s family, including four children.

Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Zane David Memeger of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and Special Agent in Charge Edward J. Hanko of the FBI’s Philadelphia Division made the announcement.  U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick imposed the sentence.

Robert Merritt, 34, was convicted following a jury trial on May 13, 2013, of conspiracy to participate in a racketeering enterprise and the murders of the family members of a federal witness, Eugene Coleman.

At the direction of convicted drug kingpin Kaboni Savage, Merritt and his cousin, Lamont Lewis, participated in the firebombing of the Coleman family home in retaliation for Coleman’s testimony against Savage.  Evidence introduced at trial showed that Merritt threw a gas can with a lit cloth fuse, and then a second gas can, into the occupied Philadelphia row house in the predawn hours of Oct. 9, 2004.  Six people, including four children ranging in age from 15 months to 15 years, were killed in the ensuing fire.

Co-defendants Kaboni Savage and Kadida Savage were also convicted at the May 2013 trial of the firebombing.  Kaboni Savage was sentenced to death for 12 counts of murder in aid of racketeering.  Kidada Savage was sentenced to life in prison.  Lamont Lewis, who pleaded guilty before trial, is awaiting sentencing.

The case was investigated by the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations, the Philadelphia Police Department, the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office, and the Maple Shade, New Jersey, Police Department.  The United States Bureau of Prisons, the United States Marshals Service, and the Philadelphia / Camden High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Task Force also assisted in the investigation.

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Steve Mellin of the Criminal Division’s Capital Case Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys David E. Troyer and John M. Gallagher of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.  

# # #

U.S. SENDS BEST WISHES TO PEOPLE OF MALI ON THEIR NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Mali National Day Message
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 19, 2014

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States of America, I send our best wishes to the people of Mali as you celebrate your Independence Day on September 22.

The United States commends the Malian people for your peaceful return to democracy and support for the ongoing peace and reconciliation processes.

Building on the progress of the past year, we look forward to working with President Keita as he promotes national reconciliation, strengthens Mali’s democratic institutions, and undertakes security sector reform.

On the 54th anniversary of your independence, the United States stands with all Malians as you work towards a durable peace agreement and national reconciliation.

Sunday, September 21, 2014

U.S. SENDS CONGRATULATIONS TO AFGHAN LEADERS ON AGREEMENT TO FORM NATIONAL UNITY GOVERNMENT

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
United States Congratulates Dr. Ashraf Ghani and Dr. Abdullah Abdullah on the Agreement on Formation of a Government of National Unity
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
September 21, 2014

This was a moment of extraordinary statesmanship. These two men have put the people of Afghanistan first, and they've ensured that the first peaceful democratic transition in the history of their country begins with national unity.

Americans know very well that the road to democracy is contentious and challenging, but it's a road that leads to the best place. It doesn't happen overnight. We've had our own contentious elections and witnessed their aftermath. I've lived some of them. But if my recent visits to Kabul and the hours upon hours on the phone with these two men have taught me anything, it's how invested Afghanistan is in this historic effort.

In the days to come, Afghanistan has an enormous opportunity to grow stronger from this recent moment of testing.

Elections are not the end. They must be the beginning, where Afghanistan and its people move forward on a reform agenda and make improvements to the electoral process.

The inauguration of the new President, appointment of his Chief Executive, and the signing of the Bilateral Security Agreement and NATO SOFA will open a new chapter in our enduring partnership with Afghanistan.

The United States remains determined to honor the Afghan people’s historic achievement by helping their transition succeed.

NASA VIDEO: FOUR YEARS OF PROGRESS

HEAD LICE COMPANY SETTLES FTC CHARGES OF MAKING DECEPTIVE CLAIMS

FROM:  U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
FTC Approves Final Order Settling Charges that Company’s Head Lice Protection Claims Were Deceptive

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order settling charges that personal care company Lornamead, Inc. deceived consumers with exaggerated claims that its “Lice Shield” shampoo, stick, and spray products will prevent or reduce the risk of getting head lice.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Lornamead claimed in print ads, website and banner ads, and on product packaging, that the citronella and other essential oils in its Lice Shield products would “dramatically reduce” the risk of head lice infestations. The company also claimed that the best way to treat lice was to avoid getting them, with Lice Shield products that are “scientifically shown to repel head lice.”

Under the final order setting the FTC’s charges, Lornamead will pay $500,000, and is prohibited from making further deceptive lice-prevention claims.

The Commission vote approving the final order and responses to members of the public who provided comments was 4-0-1, with Commissioner Terrell McSweeny not participating. (FTC File No. 132-3204.

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON IRAQ AT UN SECURITY COUNCIL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Secretary's Remarks: Statement as Chair of Ministerial Debate of the UN Security Council on Iraq
09/19/2014 05:10 PM EDT
Statement as Chair of Ministerial Debate of the UN Security Council on Iraq
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
New York, NY
September 19, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much, Your Excellency, Mr. al-Jafari, for a very important statement, and we appreciate very much your leadership and the new government’s efforts. Now it’s my privilege to make a statement in my capacity as Secretary of State of the United States.

Let me start again by thanking every single one of you for participating in this session. I’ve seen in the last weeks traveling around how extraordinarily busy everybody is and how committed to this effort everyone is, through their actions as well as through their incredibly busy schedules. So I’m convinced that the fact that so many countries are represented here from so many parts of the world really underscores the clear need for all of us to come together to welcome and to support the new, inclusive government in Iraq, and, of course, to put an end to ISIL’s unfettered barbarity.

I want to thank Secretary-General Ban and welcome our new Iraqi counterpart, Foreign Minister al-Jafari. I don’t need to remind anyone here that the last two times the eyes of the world were focused on Iraq was when its government was in confrontation with the international community, with great consequences. Today, however, we come together in support of the new Iraqi Government that has already made great strides in a short amount of time, and we must not miss this moment.

Last week, I made my second trip to Baghdad in just over two months, in order to meet with the new Iraqi Government. And I was very encouraged to hear them reaffirm their commitment to govern in the interests of all Iraqis and to finally begin to address the deep divisions that we’re all aware of, including those over energy resources, regional autonomy, and the composition of the security forces. All of these have plagued Iraq throughout its modern history. They’re also committed to empowering local communities to mobilize, to maintain security control in their area, and work with the international community to defeat ISIL.

Indeed, Iraq has responded to the ISIL threat with a spirit of unity that the country has not experienced in decades, if ever. Last month, an Iraqi Arab pilot, Major General Majid Ahmed Saadi, flew an Iraqi Air Force helicopter with a Kurdish crew and a Yezidi member of parliament and with the single goal of rescuing Yezidis on Mount Sinjar. Tragically, the helicopter crashed. General Saadi was the only one killed. But before he died, he told a New York Times reporter that the mission to rescue the Yezidis was the most important thing he had ever done in his entire life and career as an Iraqi pilot. This historic level of cooperation between Iraqi and Kurdish forces has resonated deeply in both communities.

As the President explained earlier this month – my President – ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way. In a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are actually unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners, kneeling them down, tying their hands behind their back, a bullet through their heads. They kill children. They enslave, rape, and force women into marriage. They threatened a religious minority with genocide. And in acts of barbarism, they took the lives of two American journalists, Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff, and a British aid worker, David Haines. ISIL simply poses a threat to the people of Iraq and Syria and the broader Middle East, and if left unchecked, these terrorists certainly would pose a growing threat beyond the region because they have already promised to.

Ultimately, history will judge how the world responds to this moment, to this challenge. In the face of this sort of evil, we have only one option: To confront it with a holistic global campaign that is committed and capable of degrading and destroying this terrorist threat; to confront it with a holistic global campaign that is committed and capable enough to ensure whether in Iraq, Syria, or elsewhere, ISIL cannot find safe haven.

As President Obama has clearly explained, and as I think everyone in this room is well aware of at this point, the coalition required to eliminate ISIL is not only, or even primarily, military in nature. It must be comprehensive and include close collaboration across multiple lines of effort. It’s about taking out an entire network – decimating and discrediting a militant cult masquerading as a religious movement. The fact is there is a role for nearly every country in the world to play, including Iran, whose foreign minister is here with us here today. ISIL poses a threat to all of us, and we’re committed to working in close partnership with the new Iraqi Government and countries around the world to defeat it. That’s why I spent the past week consulting with my Iraqi counterparts and traveling in the Middle East and in Europe, building partnerships; and that’s why we were so focused on hosting this session here today.

And I thank Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal for Saudi Arabia’s leadership in hosting their conference in Jeddah, and I thank President Hollande and Laurent Fabius in France for their leadership in hosting the conference in Paris. From each of these has come a greater and greater commitment to do what we need to do. - I have to tell you that in many of the meetings that I’ve had so far, leaders aren’t talking about if they should support our campaign against ISIL; they’re asking how. And already across each of the lines of effort that we’re focused on, we have seen more than 50 countries come forward with critical commitments.

First, on military support, countries in the region and around the world are already providing assistance both in terms of kinetic action, but also in the form of training, advising, equipping, providing logistical support, and so on. In the region, countries like Egypt have committed to significantly enhance the coordination between its forces and Iraqi and Kurdish forces. But even further from away from Iraq, countries like Australia are committing to deploying fighter jets and support aircraft and personnel. Germany, in recognition of the grave threat posed by ISIL, reversed its longstanding policy against offering lethal aid. France, last night, conducted its first air strikes against ISIL targets in Iraq. These forms of assistance, provided at the request of Iraq, and with full respect for its sovereignty, are essential to combating ISIL – but they are only one part of a comprehensive approach that is required.

We’re also seeing overwhelming support when it comes to humanitarian assistance. Dozens of countries from throughout the international community have so far committed almost $1 billion to the UN-led humanitarian response in Iraq. That includes donations from countries within the region – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and elsewhere – as well as funds from countries on the other side of the world – Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, and more.

We’re seeing encouraging progress in the effort to dry up ISIL’s illicit funding, as well. And Bahrain has offered to host an international conference in the near future to further develop a global action plan to counter terrorist financing. - As we’ll discuss next week at the session that President Obama will chair, we must also stop the flow of foreign terrorist fighters to ISIL – men and women who carry passports from countries around the world, including nearly every country represented in this room. This is yet another area where countries have already begun to take important steps, including legislation criminalizing the recruitment, preparation, and participation of their citizens in combat activities of terrorism abroad.

And finally, there is an urgent need to counter the poisonous propaganda and gross distortion of Islam that ISIL is spreading far and wide. It is time to put an end to a group, so extreme in its rejection of modernity, that it bans math and social studies for children. It’s time to put an end to the sermons by extremists that brainwash young men to join these terrorist groups and commit mass atrocities in the name of God. This is something that leaders in the region are very focused on. Saudi Arabia’s top clerics this week came out publicly and declared terrorism a “heinous crime” under Sharia law and called ISIL in particular “the order of Satan.”

All of this is vital, because we know that in preventing an individual from joining ISIL, or from getting to the battlefield in the first place, that’s the most effective measure you can take.

But for this campaign to have any chance of success, Iraq itself – and its security forces on the front lines – must be leading the way. - That’s one of the reasons why it’s imperative that we all go the extra mile to help Iraq fully re-integrate into the region and into the global community of nations. And that’s starting to happen. Last week, the Iraqis, long estranged from their neighbors and isolated from the world, were not just invited, but were warmly welcomed at international meetings in Jeddah and Paris, and now here in New York, before the Security Council and before the entire world.

And what is different about today’s meeting – and this is one reason why we’re so grateful to so many minsters for traveling here – is that the last meetings the world did not share in the deliberation or the discussion formally as it went on; they heard afterwards. Today, the world can listen to each of the ministers, and they will understand the breadth and scope of the support for this effort.

So we’re well on our way, but that doesn’t mean that we’re where we need to be. I hope that today the progress that I’ve described will continue, and over the course of this week that more partners will come forward and more commitments to these efforts will be announced.

Make no mistake: Our work to build and enhance this coalition will continue well after this week is over. I commit that to you and President Obama firmly commits that. And one of our most respected military experts sitting right here behind me, General John Allen, who served in Afghanistan in command of our forces there for two years and also in Iraq, who knows many of the people in Iraq for his service in Anbar – has agreed to come to the State Department with a presidential appointment and oversee the U.S. effort to match up each country’s capabilities with the coalition’s total needs so the line of effort is coordinated.

I look forward to hearing from all of you in the course of this afternoon. Again, I’d just close by thanking everybody for joining this discussion, and I’m absolutely confident that through a global campaign that is comprehensive and committed, we can support the promise of the new government in Iraq and we can defeat the ISIL threat – wherever it exists.

FTC REPORTS COURT HALTING HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA MILL FROM SELLING DIPLOMAS

FROM:  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
FTC Action Halts Online High School Diploma Mill That Made $11 Million Selling Worthless Diplomas to Students

At the Federal Trade Commission’s request, a U.S. district court in Florida has temporarily halted a diploma mill that allegedly grossed more than $11 million from marketing and selling fake high school diplomas online to consumers nationwide.

The court imposed a temporary restraining order to halt the business operations of Diversified Educational Resources, LLC (DER), and Motivational Management & Development Services, Ltd. (MMDS), and freeze their assets. The FTC’s lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction to stop the deceptive practices and to return ill-gotten gains to consumers.

According to the FTC’s complaint, DER and MMDS have sold online high school diplomas since 2006 using multiple names, including “Jefferson High School Online” and “Enterprise High School Online.” Their websites claimed that by enrolling in the defendants’ programs, consumers could obtain “official” and accredited high school diplomas and use them to enroll in college, join the military, and apply for jobs. The defendants charged students between $200 and $300 for a diploma, and a preliminary review of bank records suggests that defendants have taken in more than $11,117,800 since January 2009.

“A high school diploma is necessary for entry into college, the military, and many jobs,” said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “These defendants took students’ money but only provided a worthless credential that won’t help their future plans.”

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the FTC Act by misrepresenting that the diplomas were valid high school equivalency credentials and that the online schools were accredited. The FTC says the defendants actually fabricated an accrediting body to give legitimacy to the diploma mill operation.

Defendants in the case are DER, MMDS, and IDM Services LLC. Also named as defendants are Maria T. Garcia, principal owner and manager of DER and MMDS; Alexander Wolfram, principal owner of DER, MMDS, and IDM Services. Steinbock Holdings LLC, Zwillinge, LLC, Sylvia Gads, co-owner of Zwillinge, and Tiffany Chambers are named as relief defendants.

Students can learn more about diploma mills in the FTC’s blog post: These online high schools didn’t make the grade.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 5-0. It was filed under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, on Sept. 16, 2014, and the seal was lifted on Sept. 18, 2014.


WHITE HOUSE VIDEO: WEST WING WEEK 9/12/14

PRESIDENT OBAMA TALKS WITH FIRST-GRADERS AT TINKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Weekly Address: The World is United in the Fight Against ISIL

9/19/14: White House Press Briefing

U.S. CONDEMNS ATTACKS ON UN MISSION IN MALI

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Attack on MINUSMA
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Department Spokesperson
Washington, DC
September 19, 2014

The United States strongly condemns yet another deadly attack against the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission (MINUSMA) yesterday in Mali which killed five Chadian peacekeepers and wounded three others. This is the third such attack this month alone. These continued attacks on UN peacekeepers must stop.

We express our condolences to the families of the peacekeepers killed and to the Government of Chad, and wish those wounded a full recovery. We call on all parties to cease hostilities and fully engage in the national peace and reconciliation process.

We reiterate our full support of MINUSMA and our commitment to Mali’s national reconciliation efforts including achieving a durable and comprehensive peace agreement through ongoing talks in Algiers.

NASA VIDEO: BOEING AND SPACEX COMPANIES TO TRANSPORT U.S. ASTRONAUTS TO ISS

HHS SPONSORS DEVELOPMENT OF NEXT-GEN PORTABLE VENTILATOR FOR PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCIES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
September 17, 2014

HHS spurs innovation to develop next-generation portable ventilator
Low-cost, user-friendly ventilators needed for pandemics, routine care
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will sponsor the advanced development of a next-generation portable ventilator to help fill the need for portable, low-cost, user-friendly and flexible ventilators in a pandemic or other public health emergency. The new ventilator will be developed under a three year, $13.8 million contract with Philips Respironics of Murrysville, Pennsylvania.

The project will be overseen by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) within the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response.

“In pandemics and other emergencies, doctors must have medicines, vaccines, diagnostics, and critical equipment such as mechanical ventilators at the ready in order to save lives,” said BARDA Director Robin Robinson, Ph.D.
In a severe influenza pandemic and potentially in other public health emergencies, a large number of severely ill patients would require mechanical ventilation. This number could overwhelm the capacity of the health care system to provide such care, both in the number of ventilators available and staff trained to operate them.

“An affordable portable ventilator will help us meet the needs of critically ill patients during a public health emergency, whether due to a naturally occurring pandemic or an act of bioterrorism.”

– BARDA Director Robin Robinson, Ph.D.

The innovative ventilator in development will leverage advanced technology to reduce the size and cost and will be designed in a way that doctors, nurses and other health professionals can operate without special training. The next-generation ventilator also will be designed to be manufactured quickly to meet a surge in the number of patients who need ventilators if more ventilators are needed than could be stockpiled.

Under today’s contract, the ventilator will be required to meet the needs of everyone from infants to the elderly. To make the new ventilator suitable for stockpiling, the portable equipment must be low-cost. Ventilators with all the required features currently cost from $6,000 to $30,000 per unit.

Under today’s agreement, Philips Healthcare will develop a next-generation ventilator that could be stockpiled by the federal government, including accessories for children and elderly patients. The contract includes an option to purchase 10,000 completely kitted, initial production ventilators for $32.8 million.

In addition to aiding in response to a public health emergency, the next-generation ventilator in development can have important implications for routine care. The modernized features, agility, and ease of use can improve patient care for triage in the field or advanced treatment in the hospital.

HHS is the principal federal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) leads HHS in preparing the nation to respond to and recover from adverse health effects of emergencies, supporting communities’ ability to withstand adversity, strengthening health and response systems, and enhancing national health security.

Within ASPR, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) develops and procures medical countermeasures – vaccines, medicines, diagnostics and medical equipment – that address the public health and medical consequences of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) accidents, incidents and attacks, pandemic influenza, and emerging infectious diseases.

$1.79 MILLION IN THE MAIL TO CONSUMERS ALLEGEDLY DEFRAUDED BY AMERIDEBT

FROM:  U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION   
FTC Sends More Than $1.79 Million in Refunds to Consumers Defrauded by AmeriDebt Scam

The Federal Trade Commission is mailing $1,792,759 in refund checks to 60,813 consumers allegedly defrauded by a credit counseling/debt management scam run by Andris Pukke and his companies, AmeriDebt Inc. and DebtWorks, Inc. The defendants allegedly deceived consumers about their fees, misrepresented that AmeriDebt was a non-profit, and falsely promised to teach consumers how to handle their credit and finances.

The FTC previously returned about $15 million to AmeriDebt consumers. Consumers affected in today’s announcement will receive checks for between $12.70 and $725.10; the amount will vary based upon the amount of each consumer’s loss, less the previous refund received. Those who receive checks from the FTC’s refund administrator should cash them within 60 days of the mailing date. The FTC never requires consumers to pay money or to provide information before refund checks can be cashed.

STATE DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ON P5+1 TALKS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Arms Control and International Security: Background Briefing on P5+1Talks
09/19/2014 06:39 AM EDT
Background Briefing on P5+1Talks
Special Briefing
Senior Administration Officials
Foreign Press Center
New York City
September 18, 2014

MODERATOR: Welcome. For those of you who I don't know, I’m [Moderator]. This will be all on background tonight with no embargo. So you know who’s up here – obviously not for reporting – this will be all be attributed to senior Administration officials, please no names and no titles. But to the left of me is [Senior Administration Official One and Senior Administration Official Two].

So in a moment, I’ll turn it over to [Senior Administration Official One] to make some opening remarks, and then we’ll go to your questions. Again, background, senior Administration officials. Please keep us all honest on this so we can keep doing this. And with that.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you. Good evening. Thank you all for coming tonight, and those of you who don’t live here – I don’t – welcome to New York.

I want to begin tonight on a personal note, not just for me but for many in this room. Michael Adler was one of our most beloved colleagues – one of yours, and in many ways, I considered him a colleague as well. He was someone who had watched and reported on these negotiations as they progressed through many, many years. He was one of the sharpest minds on these issues and one of the kindest people any of us has ever had the pleasure of knowing. He was with us in Geneva when we finished the Joint Plan of Action, and I know how much he wanted to see where these comprehensive talks would take us. He was eager to see the end of the story he had been writing for so long. He was taken from us too soon, and his absence is felt acutely here. These issues were the work of his life, and in many ways, they are ours as well.

Turning now to the talks, the last time we all met at the political director level as the P5+1 led by the European Union group was in July, when, after several weeks of intense negotiations, we decided to extend the Joint Plan of Action until November 24th. We made that decision because there had been enough progress to see a path forward; because it’s important that Iran’s nuclear program not advance further under the terms of the JPOA while we work to negotiate a comprehensive joint plan of action; and because we all know that diplomacy is the best, most enduring way to solve this most pressing security challenge.

Since that time, members of the P5+1 and the European Union have held bilateral meetings with Iran, including the United States. We’ve had expert meetings and coordination sessions, as well as ongoing contact with the Iranians, even when we’re not meeting in person. Coming into New York, I think many of us were not very optimistic. But clearly, over meetings over the last two days both with Iran and with my P5+1 and EU colleagues, it is clear that everyone has come here to go to work.

As you know, the United States and Iran held bilateral consultations over the past two days here in New York. These meetings were constructive and a lot of hard technical work that will need to be part of a comprehensive agreement is being undertaken by all parties.

In terms of this next week and a half, we will begin the P5+1 round tomorrow morning with a plenary session at the United Nations led by High Representative Cathy Ashton and Foreign Minister Zarif. During the weekend and UNGA high-level week, we will continue meeting on the Iran nuclear issue in whatever format makes the most sense. There will be plenaries, expert meetings, bilaterals. There may be a ministerial-level P5+1 meeting. And it’s very likely that Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Zarif will meet bilaterally, as they’ve done throughout these talks.

Over the next week and a half, you’re also going to hear a lot from President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif about these nuclear negotiations, maybe about some other issues as well. It’s worth pointing out, particularly to those of you in this room, that at this moment, while senior Iranian officials have the benefit of the freedom of our press, a U.S. citizen sits in an Iranian prison, a journalist for one of our top newspapers, The Washington Post. Jason Rezaian should be freed immediately. The other American citizens being detained by Iran should also be freed as well. And additionally, we appeal again for Iran’s assistance in locating and bringing Robert Levinson home.

The Iranians have said over these many days and weeks how reasonable and flexible they are in these talks, and about how their current capacity should be acceptable. But the status quo is not doable for any of us. It is not doable for either side. The world will agree to suspend and then lift sanctions only if Iran takes convincing and verifiable steps to show that its nuclear program is and will remain exclusively peaceful.

Given Iran’s public statements that it does not seek a nuclear weapon, including the Supreme Leader’s fatwa, these practical steps should be doable. And we have consistently sought to pave a reasonable path forward in close coordination with our P5+1 partners and the European Union.

In our conversations with the Iranian negotiators, we’ve listened closely to their views about what Iran sees as their legitimate practical needs, and we’ve offered creative solutions to address them. There is a unique opportunity over this next week and a half when heads of state, foreign ministers, and many other world leaders are gathered in New York. There is an opportunity to make progress in these talks and to see whether the outlines, and more importantly, the details of a potential agreement begin to emerge in a fuller way than we’ve seen before.

And with that, I would be glad to take your questions.

MODERATOR: So as always, I’ll call the questions, and I know we know most of you, but please identify yourself and your media outlet. Lou Charbonneau, kick us off.

QUESTION: Thanks for this, and I first wanted to ask – you said that Secretary Kerry and Foreign Minister Zarif might meet as they have before. Is it possible that the presidents will also meet during this time? They did speak on the phone during last year’s UNGA, and this was one of the issues that was discussed.

And when you had your bilateral meetings with the Iranians yesterday and today, did you get any sense that there’s a willingness on their part to push forward, given their public comments about keeping the status quo and what they’ve said are unreasonable conditions put forth by the U.S. and other members of the P5+1? Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Josh Earnest, the spokesperson for the White House, said that at this point there is no meeting scheduled between the President of the United States and President Rouhani. The President of the United States is well known for being open to such a meeting, but the choice is really Iran’s. We will continue to work and we think that there’s a lot of very important work that will go on this week, but that’s not dependent upon whether that meeting happens or not.

Secondly, in terms of the status quo and Iran saying that we are making unreasonable demands, I would make a couple points. First of all, let’s remember how we got here. We are in these talks because for years upon years, the international community – not just the United States, but through several UN Security Council resolutions – has said that Iran has not met its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, that they have taken many steps, some in secret, to undermine those obligations. And that is why we are at the table, and I do not think – and I don’t think the world thinks – that it is an unreasonable demand that says that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Indeed, the Supreme Leader has said Iran does not want a nuclear weapon, so showing that, in fact, in verifiable ways that they do not and will not is quite reasonable.

Secondly, I do not think it is an excessive demand to say that any agreement must, in a verifiable and transparent manner, show that Iran’s program today and into the future is exclusively peaceful.

So I don’t think either of those objectives – that Iran not acquire a nuclear weapon and that Iran’s program be exclusively peaceful, and that it be clear to everyone that it is – are unreasonable or excessive demands. I think they’re quite reasonable, and in fact is exactly what Iran has said is its intention. So showing that to the world in verifiable ways seems to me quite doable.

MODERATOR: Great. Let’s go in the middle here and wait for the microphone.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this. BBC Persian, Bahman Kalbasi. [Senior Administration Official One], yesterday Foreign Minister Zarif in the Council on Foreign Relations talked about sanctions, and he specifically said are these sanctions worth risking not getting a deal and not having a new horizon in cooperation in the region; almost seems to be suggesting that this will open the door for other issues to be discussed, including what’s happening in Iraq.

But is there a sense – and this has been discussed on the Iranian press a lot – that America is not or has not offered a meaningful or reliable way to lift these sanctions? Or at least is the Administration really able to do so, given the situation in Congress? Is that one of the sticking points, that on the other side there is not meaningful sanction relief being discussed?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I don’t think that’s the case at all. We’re well aware that sanctions relief is a critical part of any agreement. Iran has said so themselves, as you note. And indeed, we have done extensive work on what will be necessary to suspend and then ultimately lift those sanctions. The reason it is suspend first and lift later is because we all need to build confidence that this is a durable agreement, and so there will be many steps that Iran will take almost immediately if we get to an agreement. Some will take more time, and then one has to see whether it’s durable over a period of time, and the duration of that time is something that’s, of course, one of the things that we are discussing.

And we know how to do this. We believe we can offer very meaningful relief. We understand and have listened carefully to what Iran is looking for. We hope that Iran is listening very closely to what is necessary to obtain that relief, but I don’t have any questions that technically we can do what is necessary, and they know that.

MODERATOR: Michael Wilner. Wait, do you have the mike?

QUESTION: Thanks for doing this. Whenever I ask folks in the Administration to weigh or to measure Israeli Government concerns on this matter, they say Israel is rightly concerned with an Iranian nuclear weapon, first and foremost, and they say that the U.S. is working on an unprecedented level to bring the Israelis in, to brief them and the like. And they have expressed publicly that they appreciate that.

But here’s the thing: The Israelis that you are briefing on this unprecedented scale are now saying two months before your deadline that they are deeply, deeply concerned with what they are seeing. And given the relevance of Israel’s concerns, as you describe, it would appear that that is a significant problem. Is it a problem?

And secondly, if you’re in these negotiations to end the crisis, as you say, is it possible to do so without adopting Israel’s baseline for a good deal?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: It is not just Israel. It is the world that has said that Iran should not acquire a nuclear weapon, and the Supreme Leader’s fatwa also says that Iran does not have, does not intend to, and does not want to have a nuclear weapon. So that is the objective for everyone. We do indeed consult very closely with Israel, as we do with other partners around the world who are very, very concerned about whether we will be able to reach an agreement and whether that agreement will be a good one, which it must be.

So we appreciate that there are countries around the world that see things a little differently than we do. We have other partners around the world that have other concerns about an agreement and what it will mean in the geopolitics of the world, and what it will mean for nuclear – civilian nuclear energy. Lots of concerns are raised. We listen to all of those concerns, and of course, we listen to Israel’s concern. Israel’s security is very critical from an American point of view.

What I appreciate is that all of these countries – including Israel, with whom we closely consult – have shared their technical know-how, their understanding, their ideas, and that will create potentially a good solution to this very, very tough security challenge that we have in front of us.

At the end of the day, Israel will have to make its own judgment about an agreement, as will every other country in the world. And I understand that, but I also believe that the President of the United States will only sign off on an agreement that he believes is good for the world’s security, including Israel.

MODERATOR: Pam from Voice of America. Right here. It’s behind you.

QUESTION: Good evening. A little bit earlier you said that it was clear that everyone had come here to work and you described some of the initial bilaterals as constructive. A two-part question. First, can you shed more light, provide a little bit more insight on what you mean? And then secondly, specifically, was there any indication of movement on what’s been one of the key sticking points, and that’s the uranium enrichment?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: So, we’ve only had a few hours of talks over two days, and not even all day of those two days. We started last evening for a bit of time and then again this morning, and then we had coordination meetings with our partners in the P5+1, or as the Europeans call it the E3+3.

So this is just a beginning, so I don’t have any substantive things to report. Probably wouldn’t anyway in the middle of a negotiation. What I think is that we have – everyone has come here intent on taking whatever time it takes. This can become a very busy time here at the UN General Assembly when the high-level week starts next week. People have committed to canceling meetings if they need to if they are needed for meetings, though I think these meetings will happen in lots of different formats and lots of different ways. Some of our partners in the E3+3 will have meetings with President Rouhani, with Foreign Minister Zarif, as I believe Secretary Kerry will meet with Foreign Minister Zarif. We will have lots of different combinations and expert conversations.

It’s really the tone and the quality of the discussion. And I don’t want to overstate this either. We’re at the beginning of a very intense period here, and one never knows where it will go or whether you’ll get to an issue and hit a wall or whether you’ll break through. But everyone has come here – everyone, all parties – clearly intent on seeing if we can’t work through some of these very difficult issues.

MODERATOR: Laura Rozen, and then I’m coming to this side of the room, I promise.

QUESTION: Laura Rozen from Al-Monitor. Thank you for doing this. Back in May when the going-in bids were made in Vienna, we’ve heard from you all to not be alarmed if the going-in bids on each side were wide apart because that’s the nature of the negotiation. We heard that from you, I think, in Baghdad a few years ago, if I remember as well.

Can you give us a sense of between May, when those positions were put on the table, and I guess now in mid-September, have things narrowed, especially on the enrichment capacity issue (inaudible) from the opening bid?

And secondly, let me just say as you will hear the Iranians say many times over the next week, they kind of raise the prospect that no deal will very quickly result in their breakout time going down very quickly because they already have 20,000 centrifuges in store; they’ll flip back on at 20 percent and very quickly, all the things we’re worried about. So that the best is the enemy of the good, I think is their argument. So how do you respond to that? Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: As I said, we’ve just begun the talks here so I am not going to go into substance, and I probably wouldn’t under any circumstances. What I think has occurred is we probably understand each other a great deal better than we did back in May about the elements that are required, the parameters for how one could get there. We’ve had some creative technological thinking that’s gone on. We understand that there are different paths to the same objective. You all know the infamous Rubik’s cube comparison. So I would say there has been a deepening of understanding, and when that happens sometimes it opens some doors to some possibilities. But I can’t say anyone has walked through them to an answer, or we wouldn’t be here so intensely at work.

On the “no deal, they can break out,” we can all go through lots of escalatory talk about what they would do and what we would do if we don’t have any agreement. I don’t find that particularly productive. We each know what each other would do if things don’t work out. I’d rather be focused right now on what might be possible.

MODERATOR: We’re going to do a few from this side, and then wrap up with a few others. Go ahead, Laurence Norman of The Wall Street Journal.

QUESTION: Hey.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Hey.

QUESTION: How are you? Thanks for doing this. Good to see you again.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: (Laughter.) We’ve having a blast. How about you?

QUESTION: Good, thank you. Two questions, if I may. First of all, I think you said you weren’t very optimistic arriving in New York. Now, I’m assuming that’s because not very much progress was made over the summer in the bilaterals, but could you just say why? And it might link into the second question, which is: What is your current reading of this Russian deal with Iran, and do you think it’s making the Iranians feel like they need a deal less?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: What Russian deal are you referring to?

QUESTION: I’m not quite sure what to call it. The memorandum that they signed to cooperate (inaudible) economics. I’m not sure they even know exactly what it is.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I don’t know all – I don’t know what it is either, so what I would say is that countries have relationships with other countries, and they are working on ways to relate to each other all of the time. What we care about is whether any country makes an agreement that would break the sanctions enforcement of all of the sanctions that are in place. I do not expect Russia to do that. Everyone here knows, and I’m sure someone would ask, “Have all of the tensions around Ukraine entered into this negotiation?” They have not to date. [Sergei Ryabkov] is a professional who understands the nonproliferation world extremely well, and we are all focused on solving this problem in this room.

In terms of over the summer, I wouldn’t say nothing happened over the summer. I think every conversation, even when they’re tough and they seem to not make progress, sometimes people have to hear messages many, many times before realizing that unless people start to open doors, you’re just going to keep having the same conversation. So I think that not only the United States, but all of my partners in the P5+1 in the bilaterals – and all of us have had bilaterals over the last few weeks with Iran – have delivered the same messages. And sometimes messages have to get delivered many times before people really come to believe them.

QUESTION: You said you weren’t very optimistic.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No, because messages were delivered, they were heard, but there wasn’t something forthcoming in that immediate instance. But this is a process, so I don’t find it surprising either.

MODERATOR: Okay, we’re going to do a few more. George.

QUESTION: George Jahn, Associated Press. Hi. You said in your opening remarks that the status quo is not doable for either side. That could be interpreted to mean that you’re bringing, if not new proposals, modified proposals to the table. I don’t expect you to go into specifics, but --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: What I was referring to is the status quo of – Iran has said, as one of the rest of you said, that when Foreign Minister Zarif did some of his comments – I think it was Foreign Minister Zarif – you all said that he said that we have to maintain what we currently have. Well, that’s – if that were the case, then we wouldn’t be in a negotiation if that were something that everybody could agree to. Iran would say we can’t maintain our sanctions in place in the way that we have. And I would say that the only – as I said, if Iran takes the steps necessary to ensure that they will not acquire a nuclear weapon and that their program is exclusively peaceful, then we have a way to, in fact, suspend and ultimately lift sanctions.

MODERATOR: Okay, we’re going to do two very quick ones. Indira quick and Paul quick, and then we’ll --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Not that I don’t want to spend the evening here, but I know you all want to get to dinner. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Indira Lakshmanan from --

MODERATOR: There will be more opportunities as well.

QUESTION: -- from Bloomberg News. Thank you for doing this. I want to start out by asking you, I mean: What is going to be your goal at the end of this week-and-a-half period where you will be able to check a box and say, “Yes, we’ve made progress; we came in pessimistic, but this shows we’ve taken one step closer.” And then if we come to November 24th and we don’t have a comprehensive deal, are you guys prepared to extend once more?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: So I’m going to do the second part of your question first. Way too early to talk about hypotheticals. We are --

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Huh? Yeah, we – no. (Laughter.) We are not – good try. We are not going to talk about any Plan B because we’re focused on getting Plan A, and we hope Iran is as well. So that’s where I am on that.

On your first part, was – I’m sorry.

QUESTION: It was about what is it going to --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Oh, what’s success at the --

QUESTION: What’s your measure? What’s your metric that you will – that you don’t have to be negative, that the --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Progress, progress.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: There could be many ways. It could be in many ways. It’s hard to say because this is so complex. And would I like at the end of this week to have a broad understanding on all of the major issues, even if we have to use the next October, November writing all the details? Sure, I’d love to be there. Will we be there at the end of this week? I don’t know. It’s tough, very tough. We are discussing all of the issues. We are discussing all the parameters of all of the issues. And I think this is an opportunity because we have – everybody’s here. Any consultation you have to have with anybody about anything, everybody’s here. So we ought to make use of that to try to deal with some of these very tough issues. We’ll see.

QUESTION: But we’re further than we were in July?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Are we further than we are in July? The reason I have such a hard time answering this question is what I’ve said to you all so many times before: You can get 98 percent of the way there in this agreement and that last 2 percent means you don’t. It’s not a situation where you can say, ah, we’re 50 percent of the way there, we’re 75 percent of the way there, because that last percentage may be the crucial one and you don’t have the deal at all. That’s why this is so hard. It all fits together.

MODERATOR: I think we’re going to end tonight with Paul Richter of the L.A. Times. Wait for the mike. And there will be more opportunities, I promise, for us all to chat. Right here, Paul. Right here. Yeah.

QUESTION: As you know, a lot of people on the outside, other foreign governments, people in Congress and elsewhere, are really focused on the very concrete questions of number of Iranian centrifuges, enrichment capacity. Are those the right terms to be judging progress here?

And I’ve got a second question, too. Did the Iraq/ISIS issue come up at all in the talks with the Iranians?

MODERATOR: I’m surprised it took till the end.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Gosh, I’m surprised that it took till the end. (Laughter.) I was having the same thought.

MODERATOR: Yeah.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Okay. The measure of this agreement – I know you’re sick of hearing me say this. The measure of this agreement is Iran can’t acquire a nuclear weapon and we’re assured its program is exclusively peaceful. There are many components of that. So counting one thing is not going to answer that question. It’s a package of things. If you’re talking about enrichment capacity, you’re talking about infrastructure, you’re talking about centrifuges, you’re talking about SWU, you’re talking about stockpile, you’re talking about the types of equipment in centrifuges, you’re talking about duration, you’re talking about a whole bunch of elements if you’re worried about how long it’s going to take to get a weapon’s worth of fissile material, which is often the terminology used for breakthrough – breakout, sorry.

So it’s a lot of elements. So all of the things that outsiders have said to you or members of Congress are certainly elements, but they’re only elements. They have to come together in a way that gives us and the international community confidence that the program is exclusively peaceful and Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon. That’s what we’re trying to do.

Now, as to your last question, I think you all know that tomorrow – I have to read it because I’m going to say it wrong – the Secretary of State is chairing a ministerial debate of the United Nations Security Council on the situation in Iraq at 2:00. Somebody’s phone is buzzing. Do you care?

QUESTION: I’m just going to --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Shall we answer? We can all say hello. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Put them on speaker phone.

MODERATOR: I don’t know what I just – I just think I --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Okay. Well, whosever phone that is --

MODERATOR: I hope it’s still recording, whoever’s phone that is.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah. If it’s your mom, tell her I’m sorry. (Laughter.)

Any member can attend, and so the meeting was mentioned in our discussions today on the margins because it’s very present, but we are very clear and continue to be clear, as the Secretary said in his testimony, that we, of course, expect there will be time to time that we discuss this, as we discuss ISIS with everyone – ISIL. The world is focused – and I think this is what this ministerial tomorrow will show – that the world is focused on the mission that the President of the United States has set out, and that is to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL. And I think we will all see that in a very powerful way tomorrow at the ministerial, and I believe that Iran thinks that ISIL should not be doing what it is doing either.

MODERATOR: Thank you, everyone.

QUESTION: What (inaudible) Iran (inaudible) come back tomorrow?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Ask Iran.

MODERATOR: Thank you, everyone, for coming tonight. Again, this is on background as a senior Administration official. We will have more opportunities to do these things over the next week and a half, so email [us] with any questions. We will have a transcript done later tonight of this as well.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you all.

WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCES ACTION TO COMBAT ANTIBIOTIC-RESISTANT BACTERIA

FROM:   THE WHITE HOUSE 
September 18, 2014
FACT SHEET: Obama Administration Takes Actions to Combat Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

Today, President Obama signed an Executive Order directing key Federal departments and agencies to take action to combat the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.  The Administration also released its National Strategy on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria. In addition, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is releasing a related report on Combating Antibiotic Resistance. The Administration also announced a $20 million prize, co-sponsored by the National Institutes of Health and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, to facilitate the development of rapid, point-of-care diagnostic tests for healthcare providers to identify highly resistant bacterial infections.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), antibiotic-resistant infections are associated with 23,000 deaths and 2 million illnesses in the United States each year.  Estimates of annual impact of antibiotic-resistant infections on the U.S. economy vary but have ranged as high as $20 billion in excess direct health care costs, and as much as $35 billion in lost productivity from hospitalizations and sick days.  And the problem is worsening.  Some bacterial infections are almost, or entirely, untreatable because the causal agents have acquired resistance to all of the antibiotics that can be deployed against them.  Without effective antibiotics, we will no longer be able to treat bacterial infections reliably and rapidly. Antibiotics are critically important for many modern medical interventions, including chemotherapy, complex surgery, and organ transplantation.

The Executive Order signed today by President Obama directs Federal departments and agencies to implement the National Strategy and address the PCAST report.  The National Strategy provides a five-year plan for enhancing domestic and international capacity to: prevent and contain outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant infections; maintain the efficacy of current and new antibiotics; and develop and deploy next-generation diagnostics, antibiotics, vaccines, and other therapeutics.  The PCAST report provides actionable recommendations from the President’s Council, in consultation with experts from the public and private sectors, for combating antibiotic resistance.

Controlling the development and spread of antibiotic resistance is a top national security and public health priority for the Obama Administration.  Taken together, the Executive Order, National Strategy, and PCAST report will significantly help the Federal government curb the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, potentially saving thousands of lives.

President Obama’s Executive Order

The Executive Order signed by President Obama:

Establishes a New Task Force for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

The Executive Order directs establishment of the Task Force for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, co-chaired by the Secretaries of Defense, Agriculture, and Health and Human Services (HHS).  It also instructs the Task Force to submit a National Action Plan to the President outlining specific Federal actions to implement the Strategy and address the recommendations made by the PCAST.
Establishes the Presidential Advisory Council on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

The Executive Order directs the Secretary of HHS, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to establish a Presidential Advisory Council on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, to be composed of leading non-governmental experts.
The Presidential Advisory Council will provide advice, information, and recommendations regarding programs and policies intended to: preserve antibiotic effectiveness; strengthen surveillance of antibiotic-resistant infections; advance the development of rapid, point-of-care diagnostics for use in human healthcare and agriculture; advance research on new treatments for bacterial infections; develop alternatives to the use of antibiotics for some agricultural purposes; and improve international coordination of efforts to combat antibiotic resistance.
Improves Antibiotic Stewardship

The Executive Order directs the Departments of HHS, Defense, and Veterans Affairs to review existing regulations governing antibiotic stewardship in hospitals and other inpatient healthcare delivery facilities and to propose new regulations and other actions to improve antibiotic stewardship programs in accordance with the best practices, including those defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The Executive Order requires Federal departments and agencies to lead by example through defining, communicating, and implementing stewardship programs in office-based practices, outpatient settings, emergency departments, and institutional and long-term care facilities such as nursing homes, pharmacies, and correctional facilities.
The Food and Drug Administration is directed to continue taking steps to eliminate agricultural use of medically important antibiotics for growth-promotion purposes. These and other improvements in antibiotic use will be tracked through the National Healthcare Safety Network.
Strengthens National-Surveillance Efforts for Resistant Bacteria

The Executive Order requires the Task Force to develop procedures for creating and integrating surveillance systems and laboratory networks to provide timely, high-quality data in healthcare and agricultural settings, including detailed genomic data to adequately track resistant bacteria across diverse settings.
It further directs Task Force agencies to, as appropriate, link data from Federal repositories for bacterial strains to an integrated surveillance system. Where feasible, the repositories shall integrate their sample collections and further interoperable data systems with national surveillance efforts.
Promotes the Development of New and Next-Generation Antibiotics and Diagnostics

The Executive Order requires the Task Force to describe steps that departments and agencies should take to encourage the development of new and next-generation antibiotics, diagnostics, and alternatives to traditional antibiotics. This includes steps to strengthen infrastructure for clinical trials, such as the Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group (ARLG), to reduce obstacles faced by drug companies who are developing new antibiotics as well as develop options for attracting greater private investment in the development of new antibiotics and rapid, point-of-care diagnostics.
The Executive Order also directs the Biomedical Advanced Research Development Authority in HHS to develop new and next generation countermeasures to antibiotic resistant bacteria that present a serious or urgent threat to public health.
Strengthens International Cooperation

The Executive Order directs the Secretaries of HHS and State to designate representatives to engage with the World Health Organization (WHO) and member states on the development of the WHO Global Action Plan for Antimicrobial Resistance.
The Executive Order complements the Global Health Security Agenda, which was launched to accelerate action to prevent, detect, and respond to threats posed by antibiotic-resistant bacteria and other disease threats.
National Strategy on Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

The National Strategy provides detailed actions for five interrelated national goals to be achieved by 2020 in collaboration with partners in healthcare, public health, veterinary medicine, agriculture, and food safety, as well as in academic, Federal, and industrial research and development.  The goals are:

Slow the emergence and prevent the spread of resistant bacteria.
Strengthen National efforts to identify and report cases of antibiotic resistance.
Advance the development and use of rapid diagnostic tests for the identification and characterization of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
Accelerate basic and applied research and development for new antibiotics as well as other therapeutics and vaccines.
Improve international collaboration, capacities for antibiotic-resistance prevention, surveillance, control, and antibiotic research and development.
Collectively, the actions outlined in the National Strategy will enhance antibiotic stewardship; strengthen national-surveillance capabilities; and expand the arsenal of diagnostics, antibiotics, and other countermeasures available to combat resistant bacteria.

PCAST Report on Combating Antibiotic Resistance

At the request of the President, the PCAST, working with U.S. government and non-government experts, developed a set of practical and actionable steps that the Federal government could take to address the rise of antibiotic resistance through focused efforts in three areas:

Improved surveillance of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to enable effective response, stop outbreaks, and limit the spread of antibiotic-resistant organisms.
Increased longevity of current and new antibiotics, by promoting appropriate use, preventing the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and scaling up proven interventions to decrease the rate at which microbes develop resistance.
Increased rates of discovery and development of new antibiotics.
Launch of a $20 Million Prize for New Rapid, Point-of-Care Diagnostic Tests

The National Institutes of Health and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority will co-sponsor a prize for the development of a rapid, point-of-care diagnostic test for healthcare providers to use to identify highly resistant bacterial infections. In the near future, HHS agencies will host a public meeting that will engage stakeholders to ensure that this competition focuses on the type of diagnostic most needed by the medical and public health communities for recognizing and treating antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections.

A MEASURE OF OCEAN PROTEINS MAY REVEAL HOW OCEAN SYSTEMS OPERATE

FROM:  THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Scientists apply biomedical technique to reveal changes in body of the ocean
Researchers look at biochemical reactions happening inside ocean organisms
For decades, doctors have developed methods to diagnose how different types of cells and systems in the body are functioning. Now scientists have adapted an emerging biomedical technique to study the vast body of the ocean.

In a paper published in the journal Science, scientists demonstrate that they can identify and measure proteins in the ocean, revealing how single-celled marine organisms and ocean ecosystems operate.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation funded the research.

"Proteins are the molecules that catalyze the biochemical reactions happening in organisms," says Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) biogeochemist Mak Saito, the paper's lead author.

"Instead of just measuring what species are in the ocean, now we can look inside those organisms and see what biochemical reactions they're performing in the face of various ocean conditions.

"It's a potentially powerful tool we can use to reveal the inner biochemical workings of organisms in ocean ecosystems--and to start diagnosing how the oceans are responding to pollution, climate change and other shifts."

The emerging biomedical technique of measuring proteins--a field called proteomics--builds on the more familiar field of genomics that has allowed scientists to detect and identify genes in cells.

"Proteomics is an advanced diagnostic tool that allows us to take the pulse of, for example, phytoplankton cells while they respond to environmental cues," says paper co-author Anton Post, currently on leave from the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass., and a program officer in NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences.

The new study is an initial demonstration that proteomic techniques can be applied to marine species not only to identify the presence of proteins, but for the first time, to precisely count their numbers.

"We're leveraging that biomedical technology and translating it for use in the oceans," Saito says.

"Just as you'd analyze proteins in a blood test to get information on what's happening inside your body, proteomics gives us a new way to learn what's happening in ocean ecosystems, especially under multiple stresses and over large regions.

"With that information, we can identify changes, assess their effects on society and devise strategies to adapt."

For their study, the scientists collected water samples during a research cruise along a 2,500-mile stretch of the Pacific Ocean from Hawaii to Samoa.

The transect cut across regions with widely different concentrations of nutrients, from areas rich in iron to the north to areas near the equator that are rich in phosphorus and nitrogen but devoid of iron.

Back in the lab, the scientists analyzed the samples, focusing on proteins produced by one of the ocean's most abundant microbes, Prochlorococcus.

They used mass spectrometers to separate individual proteins in the samples, identifying them by their peptide sequences.

In subsequent steps, the scientists demonstrated for the first time that they could precisely measure the amounts of specific proteins in individual species at various locations in the ocean.

The results painted a picture of what factors were controlling microbial photosynthesis and growth and how the microbes were responding to different conditions over a large geographic region of the sea.

For example, in areas where nitrogen was limited, the scientists found high levels of a protein that transports urea, a form of nitrogen, which the microbes used to maximize their ability to obtain the essential nutrient.

In areas where iron was deficient, they found an abundance of proteins that help grab and transport iron.

"The microbes have biochemical systems that are ready to turn on to deal with low-nutrient situations," Saito says.

In areas in-between, where the microbes were starved for both nutrients, proteins indicated which biochemical machinery the microbes used to negotiate multiple environmental stresses.

The protein measurements enabled the scientists to map when, where, and how ecosystem changes occurred over broad areas of the ocean.

"We measured about 20 biomarkers that indicate metabolism, but we can scale up that capacity to measure many more simultaneously," Saito says.

"We're building an oceanic proteomic capability, which includes sampling with ocean-going robots, to allow us to diagnose the inner workings of ocean ecosystems and understand how they respond to global change."

Along with Saito and Post, the research team included Matthew McIlvin, Dawn Moran, Tyler Goepfert and Carl Lamborg of WHOI and Giacomo DiTullio of the College of Charleston in South Carolina.

-NSF-

Friday, September 19, 2014

PRESIDENT OBAMA MAKES STATEMENT ON SCOTTISH ELECTION RESULTS

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Statement by the President on the Results of the Scottish Referendum
We welcome the result of yesterday’s referendum on Scottish independence and congratulate the people of Scotland for their full and energetic exercise of democracy. Through debate, discussion, and passionate yet peaceful deliberations, they reminded the world of Scotland's enormous contributions to the UK and the world, and have spoken in favor of keeping Scotland within the United Kingdom.  We have no closer ally than the United Kingdom, and we look forward to continuing our strong and special relationship with all the people of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as we address the challenges facing the world today.

PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT ON AUTHORIZATION TO TRAIN SYRIAN OPPOSITION

FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE 
September 18, 2014
Statement By the President on Congressional Authorization to Train Syrian Opposition
State Dining Room

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Today, the United States continues to build a broad international coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL. As part of the air campaign, France will join in strikes against ISIL targets in Iraq. And as one of our oldest and closest allies, France is a strong partner in our efforts against terrorism, and we’re pleased that French and American servicemembers will once again work together on behalf of our shared security and our shared values.

More broadly, more than 40 countries -- including Arab nations -- have now offered assistance as part of this coalition. This includes support for Iraqi forces, strengthening the Iraqi government, providing humanitarian aid to Iraqi civilians, and doing their part in the fight against ISIL.

Here at home, I’m pleased that Congress -- a majority of Democrats and a majority of Republicans, in both the House and the Senate -- have now voted to support a key element of our strategy: our plan to train and equip the opposition in Syria so they can help push back these terrorists. As I said last week, I believe that we’re strongest as a nation when the President and Congress work together. And I want to thank leaders in Congress for the speed and seriousness with which they approached this urgent issue -- in keeping with the bipartisanship that is the hallmark of American foreign policy at its best.

These Syrian opposition forces are fighting both the brutality of ISIL terrorists and the tyranny of the Assad regime. We had already ramped up our assistance, including military assistance, to the Syrian opposition. With this new effort, we’ll provide training and equipment to help them grow stronger and take on ISIL terrorists inside Syria. This program will be hosted outside of Syria, in partnership with Arab countries, and it will be matched by our increasing support for Iraqi government and Kurdish forces in Iraq.

This is in keeping with a key principle of our strategy: The American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission; their mission is to advise and assist our partners on the ground. As I told our troops yesterday, we can join with allies and partners to destroy ISIL without American troops fighting another ground war in the Middle East.

The strong bipartisan support in Congress for this new training effort shows the world that Americans are united in confronting the threat from ISIL, which has slaughtered so many innocent civilians. With their barbaric murder of two Americans, these terrorists thought they could frighten us, or intimidate us, or cause us to shrink from the world, but today they’re learning the same hard lesson of petty tyrants and terrorists who have gone before.

As Americans, we do not give in to fear. And when you harm our citizens, when you threaten the United States, when you threaten our allies -- it doesn’t divide us, it unites us. We pull together, we stand together -- to defend this country that we love and to make sure justice is done, as well as to join with those who seek a better future of dignity and opportunity for all people.

Today, our strikes against these terrorists continue. We’re taking out their terrorists. We’re destroying their vehicles and equipment and stockpiles. And we salute our dedicated pilots and crews who are carrying out these missions with great courage and skill.

As Commander-in-Chief, I could not be more proud of their service. As I told some of our troops yesterday, the American people are united in our support for them and for their families. And as we go forward, as one nation, I’d ask all Americans to keep our forces and their families in their thoughts and prayers. Thanks very much.

NASA VIDEOS: SCIENCECASTS: COLLIDING ATMOSPHERES - MARS VS COMET SIDING SPRING

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed