Wednesday, January 21, 2015
SEC ANNOUNCES S&P RATINGS SERVICES WAS INVOLVED WITH FRAUD IN COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES BUSINESS
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2015-10
Washington D.C., Jan. 21, 2015 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced a series of federal securities law violations by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services involving fraudulent misconduct in its ratings of certain commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS).
S&P agreed to pay more than $58 million to settle the SEC’s charges, plus an additional $19 million to settle parallel cases announced today by the New York Attorney General’s office ($12 million) and the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office ($7 million).
“Investors rely on credit rating agencies like Standard & Poor’s to play it straight when rating complex securities like CMBS,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, Director of the SEC Enforcement Division. “But Standard & Poor’s elevated its own financial interests above investors by loosening its rating criteria to obtain business and then obscuring these changes from investors. These enforcement actions, our first-ever against a major ratings firm, reflect our commitment to aggressively policing the integrity and transparency of the credit ratings process.”
The SEC issued three orders instituting settled administrative proceedings against S&P. One order, in which S&P made certain admissions, addressed S&P’s practices in its conduit fusion CMBS ratings methodology. S&P’s public disclosures affirmatively misrepresented that it was using one approach when it actually used a different methodology in 2011 to rate six conduit fusion CMBS transactions and issue preliminary ratings on two more transactions. As part of this settlement, S&P agreed to take a one-year timeout from rating conduit fusion CMBS.
Another SEC order found that after being frozen out of the market for rating conduit fusion CMBS in late 2011, S&P sought to re-enter that market in mid-2012 by overhauling its ratings criteria. To illustrate the relative conservatism of its new criteria, S&P published a false and misleading article purporting to show that its new credit enhancement levels could withstand Great Depression-era levels of economic stress. S&P’s research relied on flawed and inappropriate assumptions and was based on data that was decades removed from the severe losses of the Great Depression. According to the SEC’s order, S&P’s original author of the study expressed concerns that the firm’s CMBS group had turned the article into a “sales pitch” for the new criteria, and that the removal of certain information from the article could lead to him “sit[ting] in front of [the] Department of Justice or the SEC.” The SEC’s order further finds that S&P failed to accurately describe certain aspects of its new criteria in the formal publication setting forth their operation. Without admitting or denying the findings in the order, S&P agreed to publicly retract the false and misleading Great Depression-related study and correct the inaccurate descriptions in the publication about its criteria.
“These CMBS-related enforcement actions against S&P demonstrate that ‘race to the bottom’ behavior by ratings firms will not be tolerated by the SEC and other regulators. When ratings standards are compromised in pursuit of market share, a firm’s disclosures cannot tell a different story,” said Michael J. Osnato, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Complex Financial Instruments Unit.
A third SEC order issued in this case involved internal controls failures in S&P’s surveillance of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) ratings. The order finds that S&P allowed breakdowns in the way it conducted ratings surveillance of previously-rated RMBS from October 2012 to June 2014. S&P changed an important assumption in a way that made S&P’s ratings less conservative, and was inconsistent with the specific assumptions set forth in S&P’s published criteria describing its ratings methodology. S&P did not follow its internal policies for making changes to its surveillance criteria and instead applied ad hoc workarounds that were not fully disclosed to investors. Without admitting or denying the findings in the order, S&P agreed to extensive undertakings to enhance and improve its internal controls environment. S&P self-reported this particular misconduct to the SEC and cooperated with the investigation, enabling the Enforcement Division to resolve the case more quickly and efficiently and resulting in a reduced penalty for the firm.
The SEC’s orders find that S&P violated Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act (fraud), Section 15E(c)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act (internal controls violations), Securities Exchange Rules 17g-2(a)(2)(iii) (books and records violations), Rule 17g-2(a)(6) (books and records violations), and 17g-2(a)(2)(iii) (failure to maintain records explaining differences between numerical model output and ratings).
In a separate order instituting a litigated administrative proceeding, the SEC Enforcement Division alleges that the former head of S&P’s CMBS Group fraudulently misrepresented the manner in which the firm calculated a critical aspect of certain CMBS ratings in 2011. Barbara Duka allegedly instituted the shift to more issuer-friendly ratings criteria, and the firm failed to properly disclose the less rigorous methodology. The matter against Duka will be scheduled for a public hearing before an administrative law judge for proceedings to adjudicate the Enforcement Division’s allegations and determine what, if any, remedial actions are appropriate.
The SEC’s investigation was conducted by the Enforcement Division’s Complex Financial Instruments Unit and led by John Smith in the Denver office, Robert Leidenheimer and Lawrence Renbaum in the Washington D.C. office, and Joshua Brodsky in the New York office with assistance from Daniel Nigro and Judy Bizu. The litigation against Duka will be led by Stephen McKenna of the Denver office. The cases were supervised by Laura Metcalfe, Reid Muoio, and Mr. Osnato. The Enforcement Division worked closely with the SEC’s Office of Credit Ratings in these matters, particularly Thomas Butler, Michele Wilham, Natasha Kaden, Julia Kiel, Kenneth Godwin, and David Nicolardi.
The SEC appreciates the assistance of the New York Attorney General’s office and the Massachusetts Attorney General’
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2015-10
Washington D.C., Jan. 21, 2015 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced a series of federal securities law violations by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services involving fraudulent misconduct in its ratings of certain commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS).
S&P agreed to pay more than $58 million to settle the SEC’s charges, plus an additional $19 million to settle parallel cases announced today by the New York Attorney General’s office ($12 million) and the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office ($7 million).
“Investors rely on credit rating agencies like Standard & Poor’s to play it straight when rating complex securities like CMBS,” said Andrew J. Ceresney, Director of the SEC Enforcement Division. “But Standard & Poor’s elevated its own financial interests above investors by loosening its rating criteria to obtain business and then obscuring these changes from investors. These enforcement actions, our first-ever against a major ratings firm, reflect our commitment to aggressively policing the integrity and transparency of the credit ratings process.”
The SEC issued three orders instituting settled administrative proceedings against S&P. One order, in which S&P made certain admissions, addressed S&P’s practices in its conduit fusion CMBS ratings methodology. S&P’s public disclosures affirmatively misrepresented that it was using one approach when it actually used a different methodology in 2011 to rate six conduit fusion CMBS transactions and issue preliminary ratings on two more transactions. As part of this settlement, S&P agreed to take a one-year timeout from rating conduit fusion CMBS.
Another SEC order found that after being frozen out of the market for rating conduit fusion CMBS in late 2011, S&P sought to re-enter that market in mid-2012 by overhauling its ratings criteria. To illustrate the relative conservatism of its new criteria, S&P published a false and misleading article purporting to show that its new credit enhancement levels could withstand Great Depression-era levels of economic stress. S&P’s research relied on flawed and inappropriate assumptions and was based on data that was decades removed from the severe losses of the Great Depression. According to the SEC’s order, S&P’s original author of the study expressed concerns that the firm’s CMBS group had turned the article into a “sales pitch” for the new criteria, and that the removal of certain information from the article could lead to him “sit[ting] in front of [the] Department of Justice or the SEC.” The SEC’s order further finds that S&P failed to accurately describe certain aspects of its new criteria in the formal publication setting forth their operation. Without admitting or denying the findings in the order, S&P agreed to publicly retract the false and misleading Great Depression-related study and correct the inaccurate descriptions in the publication about its criteria.
“These CMBS-related enforcement actions against S&P demonstrate that ‘race to the bottom’ behavior by ratings firms will not be tolerated by the SEC and other regulators. When ratings standards are compromised in pursuit of market share, a firm’s disclosures cannot tell a different story,” said Michael J. Osnato, Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Complex Financial Instruments Unit.
A third SEC order issued in this case involved internal controls failures in S&P’s surveillance of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) ratings. The order finds that S&P allowed breakdowns in the way it conducted ratings surveillance of previously-rated RMBS from October 2012 to June 2014. S&P changed an important assumption in a way that made S&P’s ratings less conservative, and was inconsistent with the specific assumptions set forth in S&P’s published criteria describing its ratings methodology. S&P did not follow its internal policies for making changes to its surveillance criteria and instead applied ad hoc workarounds that were not fully disclosed to investors. Without admitting or denying the findings in the order, S&P agreed to extensive undertakings to enhance and improve its internal controls environment. S&P self-reported this particular misconduct to the SEC and cooperated with the investigation, enabling the Enforcement Division to resolve the case more quickly and efficiently and resulting in a reduced penalty for the firm.
The SEC’s orders find that S&P violated Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act (fraud), Section 15E(c)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act (internal controls violations), Securities Exchange Rules 17g-2(a)(2)(iii) (books and records violations), Rule 17g-2(a)(6) (books and records violations), and 17g-2(a)(2)(iii) (failure to maintain records explaining differences between numerical model output and ratings).
In a separate order instituting a litigated administrative proceeding, the SEC Enforcement Division alleges that the former head of S&P’s CMBS Group fraudulently misrepresented the manner in which the firm calculated a critical aspect of certain CMBS ratings in 2011. Barbara Duka allegedly instituted the shift to more issuer-friendly ratings criteria, and the firm failed to properly disclose the less rigorous methodology. The matter against Duka will be scheduled for a public hearing before an administrative law judge for proceedings to adjudicate the Enforcement Division’s allegations and determine what, if any, remedial actions are appropriate.
The SEC’s investigation was conducted by the Enforcement Division’s Complex Financial Instruments Unit and led by John Smith in the Denver office, Robert Leidenheimer and Lawrence Renbaum in the Washington D.C. office, and Joshua Brodsky in the New York office with assistance from Daniel Nigro and Judy Bizu. The litigation against Duka will be led by Stephen McKenna of the Denver office. The cases were supervised by Laura Metcalfe, Reid Muoio, and Mr. Osnato. The Enforcement Division worked closely with the SEC’s Office of Credit Ratings in these matters, particularly Thomas Butler, Michele Wilham, Natasha Kaden, Julia Kiel, Kenneth Godwin, and David Nicolardi.
The SEC appreciates the assistance of the New York Attorney General’s office and the Massachusetts Attorney General’
U.S. CONDEMNS VIOLENCE IN NIGER
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
01/20/2015 05:59 PM EST
U.S. Condemns Violence in Niger
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Department Spokesperson
Washington, DC
January 20, 2015
The United States strongly condemns the violence that occurred in Niger on January 16 and 17 during protests against the depiction of the Prophet Mohamed in the French journal Charlie Hebdo, which resulted in the deaths of at least 10 people and the destruction of residences, businesses and other property, including places of worship. We express our deepest condolences to the loved ones of the victims of the violence.
The U.S. Government respects all faiths. In a democratic society, freedom of expression includes allowing expression that one disagrees with and protecting the right of all persons to hold different views. This freedom does not imply acceptance of content, nor is there any justification for the wanton killing of innocents and destruction of property.
We commend the efforts of government officials, religious and traditional leaders, and civil society to end the violence and encourage calm in the affected communities. The United States remains firmly committed to our partnership with Niger to expand prosperity and counter regional threats to peace and security.
01/20/2015 05:59 PM EST
U.S. Condemns Violence in Niger
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Department Spokesperson
Washington, DC
January 20, 2015
The United States strongly condemns the violence that occurred in Niger on January 16 and 17 during protests against the depiction of the Prophet Mohamed in the French journal Charlie Hebdo, which resulted in the deaths of at least 10 people and the destruction of residences, businesses and other property, including places of worship. We express our deepest condolences to the loved ones of the victims of the violence.
The U.S. Government respects all faiths. In a democratic society, freedom of expression includes allowing expression that one disagrees with and protecting the right of all persons to hold different views. This freedom does not imply acceptance of content, nor is there any justification for the wanton killing of innocents and destruction of property.
We commend the efforts of government officials, religious and traditional leaders, and civil society to end the violence and encourage calm in the affected communities. The United States remains firmly committed to our partnership with Niger to expand prosperity and counter regional threats to peace and security.
AFTER NEARLY THREE YEARS, FUGITIVE MURDER SUSPECT ARRESTED IN DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
FROM: U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE
For Immediate Release
Contact:
January 17, 2015 Kevin Neal, Supervisory Deputy U.S. Marshal
District of Massachusetts
Jimell Griffin, Senior Inspector
Domestic Investigations
USMS Office of Public Affairs
U.S. Marshals 15 Most Wanted Fugitive Arrested in Dominican Republic
Fugitive allegedly killed military veteran; fled the country
Peter Castillo (Captured)
Washington – After only three months on the U.S. Marshals 15 Most Wanted fugitive list, suspected murderer Peter Castillo is now in custody after he was arrested Thursday, Jan. 15, in the Dominican Republic.
Castillo, 26, was wanted for allegedly shooting and killing 22-year-old military veteran Stephen Perez on May 10, 2012, following an altercation that occurred in the Boston Theater District. The Boston Police Department immediately identified Castillo as the shooter, and a warrant was issued charging him with homicide. Shortly after the incident, Castillo allegedly fled to New York then to the Dominican Republic where he had extensive ties.
“The arrest of Peter Castillo is a testament to how effective and valuable our relationships are with our international and domestic law enforcement partners,” said U.S. Marshals Service Director Stacia Hylton.
“Because of these strong partnerships and the global network they provide, Castillo’s attempt to flee and disappear in another country after murdering a member of our military proved unsuccessful. We will never rest in seeking those who murder or assault our public servants,” said Hylton.
The manhunt for Castillo gained momentum when U.S. Marshals developed significant information leading them to believe he was at a residence in the city of Santo Domingo. Marshals forwarded the information to the country’s Direccion Nacional Control de Drogas Fugitive Task Force whose members responded to the location. Upon arrival, authorities discovered Castillo, with the help of local neighbors, fled the residence and hid in the neighborhood. After a brief search, authorities located and arrested him at approximately 6:15 p.m.
On Saturday, U.S. Marshals escorted Castillo back to the U.S. He is currently being held in a U.S. jail awaiting transfer to Massachusetts.
“Today, I want to commend the deputies of the U.S. Marshals Service and the officers of the Boston Police Department for their steadfast commitment to Castillo’s apprehension in the Dominican Republic” said John Gibbons, U.S. Marshal for the District of Massachusetts.
“I would also like to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of the United States Attorney’s Office, which assisted in securing the arrest warrant, and charging Castillo with unlawful flight to avoid prosecution; the Dominican Direccion Nacional Control de Drogas (DNCD) Fugitive Task Force for their assistance in the apprehension; and Interpol Washington for issuing the red notice that helped facilitate the arrest."
“Countless hours of collaborative investigative work by the agencies involved and sheer determination have finally brought Castillo to justice,” said Gibbons. “I hope his arrest brings some comfort to the family of Stephen Perez.”
"I want to commend the U.S. Marshals, our law enforcement partners in the Dominican Republic, as well as, the members of the Boston Police Homicide and Fugitive Apprehension Units for the shared efforts and team first approach that lead to the arrest of Peter Castillo,” said Boston Police Commissioner William Evans.
“Castillo’s capture should send a strong, clear message to anyone who cruelly and callously takes the life of another in our city that although you can certainly run and attempt to hide, BPD investigators, working hand-in-hand with our federal partners, will ultimately run you down, find you and bring you to justice."
“Stephen Perez was a young man who certainly deserved better. What began as a night out with friends in Boston’s Theater District on April 28, 2012 ended in an unthinkable tragedy and the loss of a young man who had proudly served his country as U.S. Army sniper in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Undoubtedly, Stephen Perez deserved more including a long life well beyond his 22 years. Today, our thoughts and prayers go out to the Perez family and it is our sincere hope that the news of today’s arrest will provide for them some small measure of comfort and relief," Evans said.
“This defendant’s capture and return to U.S. soil is a major step toward justice for Stephen Perez,” said Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley.”
“It’s a moment his family, his friends, and his fellow veterans have awaited for too long. We expect to arraign him on a first-degree murder indictment at the earliest opportunity.”
For Immediate Release
Contact:
January 17, 2015 Kevin Neal, Supervisory Deputy U.S. Marshal
District of Massachusetts
Jimell Griffin, Senior Inspector
Domestic Investigations
USMS Office of Public Affairs
U.S. Marshals 15 Most Wanted Fugitive Arrested in Dominican Republic
Fugitive allegedly killed military veteran; fled the country
Peter Castillo (Captured)
Washington – After only three months on the U.S. Marshals 15 Most Wanted fugitive list, suspected murderer Peter Castillo is now in custody after he was arrested Thursday, Jan. 15, in the Dominican Republic.
Castillo, 26, was wanted for allegedly shooting and killing 22-year-old military veteran Stephen Perez on May 10, 2012, following an altercation that occurred in the Boston Theater District. The Boston Police Department immediately identified Castillo as the shooter, and a warrant was issued charging him with homicide. Shortly after the incident, Castillo allegedly fled to New York then to the Dominican Republic where he had extensive ties.
“The arrest of Peter Castillo is a testament to how effective and valuable our relationships are with our international and domestic law enforcement partners,” said U.S. Marshals Service Director Stacia Hylton.
“Because of these strong partnerships and the global network they provide, Castillo’s attempt to flee and disappear in another country after murdering a member of our military proved unsuccessful. We will never rest in seeking those who murder or assault our public servants,” said Hylton.
The manhunt for Castillo gained momentum when U.S. Marshals developed significant information leading them to believe he was at a residence in the city of Santo Domingo. Marshals forwarded the information to the country’s Direccion Nacional Control de Drogas Fugitive Task Force whose members responded to the location. Upon arrival, authorities discovered Castillo, with the help of local neighbors, fled the residence and hid in the neighborhood. After a brief search, authorities located and arrested him at approximately 6:15 p.m.
On Saturday, U.S. Marshals escorted Castillo back to the U.S. He is currently being held in a U.S. jail awaiting transfer to Massachusetts.
“Today, I want to commend the deputies of the U.S. Marshals Service and the officers of the Boston Police Department for their steadfast commitment to Castillo’s apprehension in the Dominican Republic” said John Gibbons, U.S. Marshal for the District of Massachusetts.
“I would also like to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of the United States Attorney’s Office, which assisted in securing the arrest warrant, and charging Castillo with unlawful flight to avoid prosecution; the Dominican Direccion Nacional Control de Drogas (DNCD) Fugitive Task Force for their assistance in the apprehension; and Interpol Washington for issuing the red notice that helped facilitate the arrest."
“Countless hours of collaborative investigative work by the agencies involved and sheer determination have finally brought Castillo to justice,” said Gibbons. “I hope his arrest brings some comfort to the family of Stephen Perez.”
"I want to commend the U.S. Marshals, our law enforcement partners in the Dominican Republic, as well as, the members of the Boston Police Homicide and Fugitive Apprehension Units for the shared efforts and team first approach that lead to the arrest of Peter Castillo,” said Boston Police Commissioner William Evans.
“Castillo’s capture should send a strong, clear message to anyone who cruelly and callously takes the life of another in our city that although you can certainly run and attempt to hide, BPD investigators, working hand-in-hand with our federal partners, will ultimately run you down, find you and bring you to justice."
“Stephen Perez was a young man who certainly deserved better. What began as a night out with friends in Boston’s Theater District on April 28, 2012 ended in an unthinkable tragedy and the loss of a young man who had proudly served his country as U.S. Army sniper in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Undoubtedly, Stephen Perez deserved more including a long life well beyond his 22 years. Today, our thoughts and prayers go out to the Perez family and it is our sincere hope that the news of today’s arrest will provide for them some small measure of comfort and relief," Evans said.
“This defendant’s capture and return to U.S. soil is a major step toward justice for Stephen Perez,” said Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley.”
“It’s a moment his family, his friends, and his fellow veterans have awaited for too long. We expect to arraign him on a first-degree murder indictment at the earliest opportunity.”
2 CHARGED WITH CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT MURDER OF U.S. NATIONALS ABROAD
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Two Yemeni Nationals Charged with Conspiring to Murder United States Nationals Abroad and Providing Material Support to Al-Qaeda
Defendants Allegedly Conspired to Carry Out Armed Attacks Against United States Military Personnel and Facilitated the Entry of an American Citizen into Al-Qaeda
A complaint and arrest warrant were unsealed today in federal court in the Eastern District of New York charging Saddiq Al-Abbadi, also known as “Sufiyan al-Yemeni” and “Sufwan,” and Ali Alvi, also known as “Issa al-Yemeni,” with conspiracy to murder United States nationals abroad and providing material support to al-Qaeda. Alvi’s initial appearance was held before United States Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on Jan. 18, 2015, and Al-Abbadi’s initial appearance is scheduled today before United States Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom. Al-Abbadi and Alvi were arrested in Saudi Arabia pursuant to the pending warrants in this case and lawfully expelled to the United States.
The charges were announced by Loretta E. Lynch, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; John P. Carlin, Assistant Attorney General for National Security; and Andrew G. McCabe, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington Field Office.
As alleged in the complaint, Al-Abbadi and Alvi are both members of al-Qaeda who engaged in attacks against United States military forces stationed in Afghanistan. Between 2003 and 2007, Al-Abbadi also fought against United States military forces in Iraq. In approximately March 2008, Al-Abbadi and Alvi traveled to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan for the purpose of training with and fighting for al-Qaeda. During that time period, both defendants helped an American citizen gain entry into al-Qaeda so that he could fight against U.S. troops in Afghanistan and U.S. citizens in the homeland.
In approximately late spring and summer 2008, Al-Abbadi and Alvi traveled from Pakistan to Afghanistan to conduct attacks against United States military personnel stationed there. Al-Abbadi led a battle against U.S. forces in Paktya Province in May 2008 during which one U.S. Army Ranger was killed and several others were seriously wounded.
“There is no escape from the reach of our law for violent terrorists, especially if they target our military,” stated United States Attorney Lynch. “Al-Abbadi and Alvi may have operated in the mountains of Afghanistan, but now they face justice in a courtroom in Brooklyn.” Ms. Lynch extended her grateful appreciation to the FBI.
“With the charges announced today, these defendants will face justice for conspiring to kill Americans overseas and providing material support to al-Qaeda,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “Seeking to identify, thwart, and hold accountable those who target U.S. citizens and interests around the world will remain a top priority of the National Security Division. I want to thank the many agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this matter.”
“The arrest and prosecution of these two individuals, who allegedly directly supported the mission of a designated terrorist organization, is a major step in the international cooperation to combat terrorism,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge McCabe. “On a daily basis, the FBI is faced with a complex threat environment that is always evolving and changing. Through international partnerships, the FBI will continue to pursue those who provide support to terrorist groups and ensure that they are brought to justice.”
If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The charges in the complaint are merely allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zainab Ahmad, Michael P. Canty and Douglas M. Pravda, with assistance provided by Trial attorney Josh Parecki of the Justice Department’s Counterterrorism Section and by the Office of International Affairs.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Two Yemeni Nationals Charged with Conspiring to Murder United States Nationals Abroad and Providing Material Support to Al-Qaeda
Defendants Allegedly Conspired to Carry Out Armed Attacks Against United States Military Personnel and Facilitated the Entry of an American Citizen into Al-Qaeda
A complaint and arrest warrant were unsealed today in federal court in the Eastern District of New York charging Saddiq Al-Abbadi, also known as “Sufiyan al-Yemeni” and “Sufwan,” and Ali Alvi, also known as “Issa al-Yemeni,” with conspiracy to murder United States nationals abroad and providing material support to al-Qaeda. Alvi’s initial appearance was held before United States Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on Jan. 18, 2015, and Al-Abbadi’s initial appearance is scheduled today before United States Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom. Al-Abbadi and Alvi were arrested in Saudi Arabia pursuant to the pending warrants in this case and lawfully expelled to the United States.
The charges were announced by Loretta E. Lynch, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; John P. Carlin, Assistant Attorney General for National Security; and Andrew G. McCabe, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington Field Office.
As alleged in the complaint, Al-Abbadi and Alvi are both members of al-Qaeda who engaged in attacks against United States military forces stationed in Afghanistan. Between 2003 and 2007, Al-Abbadi also fought against United States military forces in Iraq. In approximately March 2008, Al-Abbadi and Alvi traveled to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan for the purpose of training with and fighting for al-Qaeda. During that time period, both defendants helped an American citizen gain entry into al-Qaeda so that he could fight against U.S. troops in Afghanistan and U.S. citizens in the homeland.
In approximately late spring and summer 2008, Al-Abbadi and Alvi traveled from Pakistan to Afghanistan to conduct attacks against United States military personnel stationed there. Al-Abbadi led a battle against U.S. forces in Paktya Province in May 2008 during which one U.S. Army Ranger was killed and several others were seriously wounded.
“There is no escape from the reach of our law for violent terrorists, especially if they target our military,” stated United States Attorney Lynch. “Al-Abbadi and Alvi may have operated in the mountains of Afghanistan, but now they face justice in a courtroom in Brooklyn.” Ms. Lynch extended her grateful appreciation to the FBI.
“With the charges announced today, these defendants will face justice for conspiring to kill Americans overseas and providing material support to al-Qaeda,” said Assistant Attorney General Carlin. “Seeking to identify, thwart, and hold accountable those who target U.S. citizens and interests around the world will remain a top priority of the National Security Division. I want to thank the many agents, analysts, and prosecutors who are responsible for this matter.”
“The arrest and prosecution of these two individuals, who allegedly directly supported the mission of a designated terrorist organization, is a major step in the international cooperation to combat terrorism,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge McCabe. “On a daily basis, the FBI is faced with a complex threat environment that is always evolving and changing. Through international partnerships, the FBI will continue to pursue those who provide support to terrorist groups and ensure that they are brought to justice.”
If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The charges in the complaint are merely allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Zainab Ahmad, Michael P. Canty and Douglas M. Pravda, with assistance provided by Trial attorney Josh Parecki of the Justice Department’s Counterterrorism Section and by the Office of International Affairs.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND COMPUTER GAME MAKER SETTLE "BRAIN TRAINING" GAME CASE
FROM: U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Makers of Jungle Rangers Computer Game for Kids Settle FTC Charges that They Deceived Consumers with Baseless “Brain Training” Claims
A Texas company and its officers must stop making unsubstantiated claims that their computer game, Jungle Rangers, permanently improves children’s focus, memory, attention, behavior, and school performance, including for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), under a Federal Trade Commission settlement.
“This case is the most recent example of the FTC’s efforts to ensure that advertisements for cognitive products, especially those marketed for children, are true and supported by evidence,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Many parents are interested in products that can improve their children’s focus, behavior, and grades, but companies must back up their brain training claims with reliable science.”
The FTC’s administrative complaint states that Focus Education,its chief executive officer, Michael Apstein, and its chief financial officer, John Able, have marketed and sold the ifocus System, including the Jungle Rangers computer game, via television infomercials and the company’s websites for $214.75 plus tax, generating sales of approximately $4.5 million between 2012 and the middle of 2013.
The advertisements claimed that Jungle Rangers had “scientifically proven memory and attention brain training exercises, designed to improve focus, concentration and memory” and touted the software as giving children “the ability to focus, complete school work, homework, and to stay on task.” Focus Education’s website implied that these benefits would be permanent.
The infomercial featured children stating that because of Jungle Rangers they could “pay attention to [their] teacher a lot more,” and got “better grades,” and “a lot more 100 percents,” according to the complaint. Parents, teachers, and a child psychiatrist also appeared, stating that Jungle Rangers had improved children’s school performance and behavior.
The FTC has charged that Focus Education and its officers violated the FTC Act by making false or unsubstantiated claims that the ifocus System permanently improves children’s focus, memory, attention, behavior, and/or school performance, including in children with ADHD. The company also allegedly falsely claimed that these benefits were scientifically proven.
The proposed consent order settling the FTC’s charges prohibits Focus Education and its principals from making the claims alleged in the complaint about the ifocus System (or any substantially similar product), unless the claims are non-misleading and are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence.
The proposed order further prohibits the company and its principals from making unsubstantiated claims about the benefits, performance, or efficacy of products or services that supposedly alter the brain’s structure or function, improve cognitive abilities, behavior, or academic performance, or treat or reduce the symptoms of cognitive disorders, including ADHD.
Finally, the proposed order bars the company and its principals from misrepresenting the results of any test, study, or research; or misrepresenting that the benefits of a cognitive improvement product are scientifically proven.
Further details of the settlement can be found in the analysis to aid public comment for this matter.
The Commission vote to accept the proposed consent order for public comment was 5-0. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through February 20, 2015, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit comments electronically by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section.
NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
Makers of Jungle Rangers Computer Game for Kids Settle FTC Charges that They Deceived Consumers with Baseless “Brain Training” Claims
A Texas company and its officers must stop making unsubstantiated claims that their computer game, Jungle Rangers, permanently improves children’s focus, memory, attention, behavior, and school performance, including for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), under a Federal Trade Commission settlement.
“This case is the most recent example of the FTC’s efforts to ensure that advertisements for cognitive products, especially those marketed for children, are true and supported by evidence,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Many parents are interested in products that can improve their children’s focus, behavior, and grades, but companies must back up their brain training claims with reliable science.”
The FTC’s administrative complaint states that Focus Education,its chief executive officer, Michael Apstein, and its chief financial officer, John Able, have marketed and sold the ifocus System, including the Jungle Rangers computer game, via television infomercials and the company’s websites for $214.75 plus tax, generating sales of approximately $4.5 million between 2012 and the middle of 2013.
The advertisements claimed that Jungle Rangers had “scientifically proven memory and attention brain training exercises, designed to improve focus, concentration and memory” and touted the software as giving children “the ability to focus, complete school work, homework, and to stay on task.” Focus Education’s website implied that these benefits would be permanent.
The infomercial featured children stating that because of Jungle Rangers they could “pay attention to [their] teacher a lot more,” and got “better grades,” and “a lot more 100 percents,” according to the complaint. Parents, teachers, and a child psychiatrist also appeared, stating that Jungle Rangers had improved children’s school performance and behavior.
The FTC has charged that Focus Education and its officers violated the FTC Act by making false or unsubstantiated claims that the ifocus System permanently improves children’s focus, memory, attention, behavior, and/or school performance, including in children with ADHD. The company also allegedly falsely claimed that these benefits were scientifically proven.
The proposed consent order settling the FTC’s charges prohibits Focus Education and its principals from making the claims alleged in the complaint about the ifocus System (or any substantially similar product), unless the claims are non-misleading and are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence.
The proposed order further prohibits the company and its principals from making unsubstantiated claims about the benefits, performance, or efficacy of products or services that supposedly alter the brain’s structure or function, improve cognitive abilities, behavior, or academic performance, or treat or reduce the symptoms of cognitive disorders, including ADHD.
Finally, the proposed order bars the company and its principals from misrepresenting the results of any test, study, or research; or misrepresenting that the benefits of a cognitive improvement product are scientifically proven.
Further details of the settlement can be found in the analysis to aid public comment for this matter.
The Commission vote to accept the proposed consent order for public comment was 5-0. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through February 20, 2015, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit comments electronically by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section.
NOTE: The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT JOURNALISTS SECURITY CONFERENCE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the Journalists Security Conference
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
January 20, 2015
Well, thank you very much, Tom. Thanks for your outstanding service, your leadership, and your passion about this and all issues about human rights. And as Secretary of State, I will tell everybody it’s an enormous advantage to have an adviser who is so knowledgeable and so widely respected, so much so that the very name Malinowski has become synonymous, virtual synonym for leadership on the issue of human rights. It is my fervent wish that the world didn't give my assistant secretary of state so much to do.
This morning I also want to say thank you to another assistant secretary and his team for conceiving and organizing this conference. Now, I’ve known Doug Frantz for a long time. He worked with me in the United States Senate. He’s been in and out of journalism, but journalism is his passion, as well as public policy. And he’s really equally passionate with Tom about this issue of safety for journalists. And the reason is he was a great reporter himself and later had the experience of sending people on his staff into dangerous places, into war zones, to cover and shed light on the nature of the conflict to the rest of the world. And everybody here knows how much we value that. The open free flow of information is at the core of our democracy, at the core of our sense of rectitude about the relationship between people and the world around them.
And Doug is also somebody who tragically has lost close friends and colleagues who were killed simply for doing their jobs. Journalism is in his blood and he cares deeply about those who practice it and about the principles that should protect everybody’s freedom and safety as they go out simply to tell the story. So I thank him for bringing us together, and I thank the expert panelists – including my friends David Rhode and Sebastian Junger – from whom you are going to hear directly shortly. And I thank all of you for taking time out of your schedules, particularly those of you who have traveled some distance to be able to be here.
We all know that journalism can be dangerous. There’s no way to eliminate the risk completely, except by keeping silent, and that’s what we call surrender. So that’s not in the cards. The world obviously needs to be informed about what is happening. Silence gives power to dictators, to the abusers, to tyrants. It allows tyranny to flourish, not freedom. And so what is happening in high-threat locations such as Syria, Iraq, Somalia, or Central African Republic, Libya, Pakistan – all of these are places where they don’t want people to tell the story or they distort it. We need people who are going to shed light also on subtler forms of coercion that rot a society from within – corruption, crime. Exposing them can be dangerous, difficult, but equally critical to the capacity to have accountability and to respect the rights of people.
Today’s conference gives us a chance to look in a cooperative way at: How do we better protect journalists and other media workers who provide these windows on reality? And our particular focus is on local reporters and freelancers who lack the broad access to training and also lack, frankly, support from the largest news organizations that have a little more clout and a little more power and ability to be able to protect their people.
Why does this issue matter? Well, there are a bunch of reasons, but let me begin pretty starkly with a few: al-Moataz Bellah Ibrahim, Deniz Firat, James Foley, Gregorio Jimenez de la Cruz, Camille Lepage, Ali Mustafa, Andrea Rocchelli, Luke Somers, Steven Sotloff, and Bernard Verlhac. I could go on. Unfortunately, a bunch more were added the other day in Paris. These are much more than just names of people, folks. Each one of those names reflects a life that was prematurely cut off, and it was ended by violence – that’s just 2014, some of those names I read you; in the case of Monsieur Verlhac, earlier this month. And each reflects the death of a storyteller who had more stories to tell. Each is a personal tragedy. Each is a call to action. Each is a reminder that freedom of the press is not free but it is, in fact, very costly.
By now, we’re all familiar with the statistics. Nine media workers were among the dead in Paris. In 2014, at least 60 journalists were killed; 73 the year before that. And many others wounded, harassed, detained, or threatened. These are record numbers, getting worse, not better. And a sad litany is that it really reflects the collective failure on the part of the world community to end some of these conflicts and to preserve peace. There’s nothing I’d like more as Secretary of State than to see war correspondents left with no stories to cover; but until that distant day arrives, it’s going to remain the trademark of top international journalists that they rush to enter places that other folks are desperate to escape. It’s also true that the vast majority of the victims we mourn each year are local reporters covering local issues. And when the security environment heats up, these journalists can’t buy a plane ticket and go home. They are home. If they write or take pictures for a living, that’s the job that many of them are going to continue to do, and for that we ought to be grateful. But these journalists are also in danger, and the question today is: What more can we realistically do to help?
Decades ago, when I was preparing to go to Vietnam, I received training from the most professional military in the world. Yet I still found that a lot of what I saw and engaged in was jarring and unexpected – a certain level of lack of preparation despite the preparation, each day filled with unpleasant surprises. And even though reporters aren't sent anywhere to fight, they’re expected to do a job. And the more preparation that they have, frankly, the better the chances are for them to avoid danger. Measure that against the training that most reporters get today. What kind – what are we talking about here?
Well, you’re the experts. But if I were about to drop into an uncertain environment in order to try to cover the story, I’d sure as heck want to know as much as I could about how to protect myself, about what to expect, about what kind of equipment and supplies I should carry, about how to do first aid on myself or my colleagues, about how to develop educational and situational awareness, to identify warning signs about how to make sure that my communications are secure. I’d also want to know what not to do, what not to say, what not to have in my possession in case I were stopped or searched or abducted. And perhaps most of all, I’d want to have some help in preparing psychologically in knowing what to expect and in thinking about how to deal with the intense stress, with harsh questioning, with deprivation, and other forms of adversity. And I would feel a lot better if there were people I could call when the trouble arose or some signal or mechanism that existed to know my last location or where I was going, or all of those kinds of things that not everybody thinks about.
It’s good to know that you've prepared for the possibility that people have your back. As a rule, it’s not the responsibility, obviously, of government to step in and provide this kind of training. In fact, journalists ought to be as independent from the public sector as possible, and sometimes, that lack of independence confuses people, and those are some of the telling pre-indicators of a potential of trouble. But there are places where government can help. We do believe that.
Two years ago, the State Department launched what we call the SAFE Initiative, a pilot project to help local media workers in difficult regions. It now has five centers in various parts of the globe, and it’s focused on digital and physical security, psycho-social care, information sharing, and the establishment of regional security advisory networks. And thus far, it has reached some 300 working journalists. In addition, the U.S. Agency for International Development and State Department have programs that support independent media in more than 30 countries, including an internet freedom program that provides outlets with long-term mentoring, tools, training, and techniques to help reporters keep themselves and keep their data safe.
More generally, under President Obama, we have made support for press freedom one of the recurring themes of United States foreign policy. Each day, American diplomats make known our backing in one place or another directly to government, directly to the public, but firmly, in all cases, our backing for the right of people to speak, publish, broadcast, blog, tweet, and otherwise express themselves openly and without fear and without retribution. And when journalists are unfairly detained, we always raise this issue in our meetings with foreign officials at every level, and that is true whether the journalist is an American such as Jason Rezaian, who is being held in Iran, or from some other country where the rights of journalists are violated all too often.
And this is particularly important now because the world environment has obviously changed and changed significantly. It used to be that the primary threat to journalists was just being in the wrong place at the wrong time – you step on a landmine or you get in the way of a border or a fire or whatever happens. And we’ve lost people that way, obviously, in past wars. In the past, it was extremely rare for a member of the press to be intentionally targeted, stalked, followed. But in our era, roughly two-thirds of the reporters who die violently are killed because of, not despite, their profession. They are attacked for what they have written, silenced for what they have witnessed, or kidnapped for the leverage their capture may provide. And in most cases, the perpetrators are not caught.
The truth is that freedom of the press, whether symbolized by a pencil, a pen, a camera, or a microphone is under siege, purposefully. And that is because some people, some groups, and even some governments want to dictate the truth, want to define it, want to hide what we would know to be the truth. And obviously, we cannot and we will not let that happen, especially after the outrage in Paris on January 7th, we need to make certain that we are taking all the steps in our power to reiterate our commitment to the values that bring all of you here today.
So this morning there’s a band of brothers and sisters who are here today, and I have great confidence because of you in coming here today and in my knowledge of the people and mission you are on. I know you’re not going to give up and I have great confidence in the future of press freedom and the commitment of journalists of every description to go out and find the truth and report on it no matter where they are and what the resistance and no matter how stark the danger, no matter how many efforts are made to shut you down. And we will stand with you every step of the way in all the ways that we have at our disposal.
So I ask you to sort of have at it this morning. You’re going to hear from some experts, from some folks who've been through some pretty grueling experiences, and you’re going to have a chance to really dig into this and I urge you to do so. I’d like to just ask, just to get a sense of this, I’d ask all the journalists and other media workers who are here if you have ever been attacked or kidnapped or seriously threatened in the course of doing your jobs, I’d just like for you to stand, just so we get a sense of how many you here have been through that experience. Come on. You guys who were – how many people here who have been in that experience.
We’ll that’s pretty significant. That’s amazing, as a matter of fact. An enormous number. Thank you for standing, and please, I want you to stay, be part of this discussion. Please share with everybody what you've been through, what you learned from it, what you think could be done, and I really look forward to Doug and Tom reporting to all of us here in the Department what our road-map is going forward so that we can help to do our part to try to make you a little bit safer.
I thank you very, very much for being here and I think because of you perhaps we have a chance to make future generations of journalists a little safer, a little more secure. And I can guarantee you in doing so we all contribute to the possibilities of the truth winning out and of democracy getting stronger, and I thank you for that. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Remarks at the Journalists Security Conference
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
January 20, 2015
Well, thank you very much, Tom. Thanks for your outstanding service, your leadership, and your passion about this and all issues about human rights. And as Secretary of State, I will tell everybody it’s an enormous advantage to have an adviser who is so knowledgeable and so widely respected, so much so that the very name Malinowski has become synonymous, virtual synonym for leadership on the issue of human rights. It is my fervent wish that the world didn't give my assistant secretary of state so much to do.
This morning I also want to say thank you to another assistant secretary and his team for conceiving and organizing this conference. Now, I’ve known Doug Frantz for a long time. He worked with me in the United States Senate. He’s been in and out of journalism, but journalism is his passion, as well as public policy. And he’s really equally passionate with Tom about this issue of safety for journalists. And the reason is he was a great reporter himself and later had the experience of sending people on his staff into dangerous places, into war zones, to cover and shed light on the nature of the conflict to the rest of the world. And everybody here knows how much we value that. The open free flow of information is at the core of our democracy, at the core of our sense of rectitude about the relationship between people and the world around them.
And Doug is also somebody who tragically has lost close friends and colleagues who were killed simply for doing their jobs. Journalism is in his blood and he cares deeply about those who practice it and about the principles that should protect everybody’s freedom and safety as they go out simply to tell the story. So I thank him for bringing us together, and I thank the expert panelists – including my friends David Rhode and Sebastian Junger – from whom you are going to hear directly shortly. And I thank all of you for taking time out of your schedules, particularly those of you who have traveled some distance to be able to be here.
We all know that journalism can be dangerous. There’s no way to eliminate the risk completely, except by keeping silent, and that’s what we call surrender. So that’s not in the cards. The world obviously needs to be informed about what is happening. Silence gives power to dictators, to the abusers, to tyrants. It allows tyranny to flourish, not freedom. And so what is happening in high-threat locations such as Syria, Iraq, Somalia, or Central African Republic, Libya, Pakistan – all of these are places where they don’t want people to tell the story or they distort it. We need people who are going to shed light also on subtler forms of coercion that rot a society from within – corruption, crime. Exposing them can be dangerous, difficult, but equally critical to the capacity to have accountability and to respect the rights of people.
Today’s conference gives us a chance to look in a cooperative way at: How do we better protect journalists and other media workers who provide these windows on reality? And our particular focus is on local reporters and freelancers who lack the broad access to training and also lack, frankly, support from the largest news organizations that have a little more clout and a little more power and ability to be able to protect their people.
Why does this issue matter? Well, there are a bunch of reasons, but let me begin pretty starkly with a few: al-Moataz Bellah Ibrahim, Deniz Firat, James Foley, Gregorio Jimenez de la Cruz, Camille Lepage, Ali Mustafa, Andrea Rocchelli, Luke Somers, Steven Sotloff, and Bernard Verlhac. I could go on. Unfortunately, a bunch more were added the other day in Paris. These are much more than just names of people, folks. Each one of those names reflects a life that was prematurely cut off, and it was ended by violence – that’s just 2014, some of those names I read you; in the case of Monsieur Verlhac, earlier this month. And each reflects the death of a storyteller who had more stories to tell. Each is a personal tragedy. Each is a call to action. Each is a reminder that freedom of the press is not free but it is, in fact, very costly.
By now, we’re all familiar with the statistics. Nine media workers were among the dead in Paris. In 2014, at least 60 journalists were killed; 73 the year before that. And many others wounded, harassed, detained, or threatened. These are record numbers, getting worse, not better. And a sad litany is that it really reflects the collective failure on the part of the world community to end some of these conflicts and to preserve peace. There’s nothing I’d like more as Secretary of State than to see war correspondents left with no stories to cover; but until that distant day arrives, it’s going to remain the trademark of top international journalists that they rush to enter places that other folks are desperate to escape. It’s also true that the vast majority of the victims we mourn each year are local reporters covering local issues. And when the security environment heats up, these journalists can’t buy a plane ticket and go home. They are home. If they write or take pictures for a living, that’s the job that many of them are going to continue to do, and for that we ought to be grateful. But these journalists are also in danger, and the question today is: What more can we realistically do to help?
Decades ago, when I was preparing to go to Vietnam, I received training from the most professional military in the world. Yet I still found that a lot of what I saw and engaged in was jarring and unexpected – a certain level of lack of preparation despite the preparation, each day filled with unpleasant surprises. And even though reporters aren't sent anywhere to fight, they’re expected to do a job. And the more preparation that they have, frankly, the better the chances are for them to avoid danger. Measure that against the training that most reporters get today. What kind – what are we talking about here?
Well, you’re the experts. But if I were about to drop into an uncertain environment in order to try to cover the story, I’d sure as heck want to know as much as I could about how to protect myself, about what to expect, about what kind of equipment and supplies I should carry, about how to do first aid on myself or my colleagues, about how to develop educational and situational awareness, to identify warning signs about how to make sure that my communications are secure. I’d also want to know what not to do, what not to say, what not to have in my possession in case I were stopped or searched or abducted. And perhaps most of all, I’d want to have some help in preparing psychologically in knowing what to expect and in thinking about how to deal with the intense stress, with harsh questioning, with deprivation, and other forms of adversity. And I would feel a lot better if there were people I could call when the trouble arose or some signal or mechanism that existed to know my last location or where I was going, or all of those kinds of things that not everybody thinks about.
It’s good to know that you've prepared for the possibility that people have your back. As a rule, it’s not the responsibility, obviously, of government to step in and provide this kind of training. In fact, journalists ought to be as independent from the public sector as possible, and sometimes, that lack of independence confuses people, and those are some of the telling pre-indicators of a potential of trouble. But there are places where government can help. We do believe that.
Two years ago, the State Department launched what we call the SAFE Initiative, a pilot project to help local media workers in difficult regions. It now has five centers in various parts of the globe, and it’s focused on digital and physical security, psycho-social care, information sharing, and the establishment of regional security advisory networks. And thus far, it has reached some 300 working journalists. In addition, the U.S. Agency for International Development and State Department have programs that support independent media in more than 30 countries, including an internet freedom program that provides outlets with long-term mentoring, tools, training, and techniques to help reporters keep themselves and keep their data safe.
More generally, under President Obama, we have made support for press freedom one of the recurring themes of United States foreign policy. Each day, American diplomats make known our backing in one place or another directly to government, directly to the public, but firmly, in all cases, our backing for the right of people to speak, publish, broadcast, blog, tweet, and otherwise express themselves openly and without fear and without retribution. And when journalists are unfairly detained, we always raise this issue in our meetings with foreign officials at every level, and that is true whether the journalist is an American such as Jason Rezaian, who is being held in Iran, or from some other country where the rights of journalists are violated all too often.
And this is particularly important now because the world environment has obviously changed and changed significantly. It used to be that the primary threat to journalists was just being in the wrong place at the wrong time – you step on a landmine or you get in the way of a border or a fire or whatever happens. And we’ve lost people that way, obviously, in past wars. In the past, it was extremely rare for a member of the press to be intentionally targeted, stalked, followed. But in our era, roughly two-thirds of the reporters who die violently are killed because of, not despite, their profession. They are attacked for what they have written, silenced for what they have witnessed, or kidnapped for the leverage their capture may provide. And in most cases, the perpetrators are not caught.
The truth is that freedom of the press, whether symbolized by a pencil, a pen, a camera, or a microphone is under siege, purposefully. And that is because some people, some groups, and even some governments want to dictate the truth, want to define it, want to hide what we would know to be the truth. And obviously, we cannot and we will not let that happen, especially after the outrage in Paris on January 7th, we need to make certain that we are taking all the steps in our power to reiterate our commitment to the values that bring all of you here today.
So this morning there’s a band of brothers and sisters who are here today, and I have great confidence because of you in coming here today and in my knowledge of the people and mission you are on. I know you’re not going to give up and I have great confidence in the future of press freedom and the commitment of journalists of every description to go out and find the truth and report on it no matter where they are and what the resistance and no matter how stark the danger, no matter how many efforts are made to shut you down. And we will stand with you every step of the way in all the ways that we have at our disposal.
So I ask you to sort of have at it this morning. You’re going to hear from some experts, from some folks who've been through some pretty grueling experiences, and you’re going to have a chance to really dig into this and I urge you to do so. I’d like to just ask, just to get a sense of this, I’d ask all the journalists and other media workers who are here if you have ever been attacked or kidnapped or seriously threatened in the course of doing your jobs, I’d just like for you to stand, just so we get a sense of how many you here have been through that experience. Come on. You guys who were – how many people here who have been in that experience.
We’ll that’s pretty significant. That’s amazing, as a matter of fact. An enormous number. Thank you for standing, and please, I want you to stay, be part of this discussion. Please share with everybody what you've been through, what you learned from it, what you think could be done, and I really look forward to Doug and Tom reporting to all of us here in the Department what our road-map is going forward so that we can help to do our part to try to make you a little bit safer.
I thank you very, very much for being here and I think because of you perhaps we have a chance to make future generations of journalists a little safer, a little more secure. And I can guarantee you in doing so we all contribute to the possibilities of the truth winning out and of democracy getting stronger, and I thank you for that. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
MAN ARRESTED FOR TRYING TO ACQUIRE RICIN THROUGH THE "DARK WEB"
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
New York Man Indicted For Attempting to Acquire Deadly Toxin, Ricin
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara for the Southern District of New York and Assistant Director-in-Charge George Venizelos of the FBI’s New York Office, announced today that a federal grand jury returned a two-count indictment against Cheng Le for attempting to acquire and distribute ricin and committing postal fraud. Le was arrested on Dec. 23, 2014, by the FBI in Manhattan. He was presented on a Complaint before the U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV on Dec. 24, 2014, and has been detained since his arrest. He is expected to be arraigned on Friday, January 23, 2015, before the United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan.
“As alleged, Cheng Le attempted to acquire ricin, a potentially lethal toxin, through the Dark Web so that it could be used for deadly purposes,” said U.S. Attorney Bharara. “Thankfully, with the help of our law enforcement partners he was intercepted and must now answer for his alleged crimes.”
“In the shadows of the Dark Web, criminals hide behind a veil of anonymity, sniffing out hidden opportunities to buy and sell illegal and potentially dangerous merchandise,” said Assistant Director-in-Charge Venizelos. “As alleged, in this case, activity carried out in the marketplace served as a conduit for Le to obtain ricin. In his desire to acquire this potentially deadly toxin, he picked his own poison and now faces the consequences of the justice system.”
According to the Complaint, which was unsealed today in Manhattan federal court, and the indictment:
Ricin is a highly potent and potentially fatal toxin with no known antidote. In December 2014, an individual (the Ricin Buyer) contacted an FBI online covert employee (the OCE) on an online forum. During Dec. 2014, the Ricin Buyer exchanged a series of messages with the OCE, during which the Ricin Buyer explored the possibility of the OCE supplying the Ricin Buyer with ricin, for the Ricin Buyer to resell to at least one secondary buyer.
On or about Dec. 18, 2014, the Ricin Buyer directed the OCE to send a quantity of ricin to a particular postal box in Manhattan (the Postal Box). The FBI later determined that the Postal Box belonged to Cheng Le. Later that same day, FBI agents observed Le wear latex gloves while retrieving a package from the Postal Box (the Package) and mailing it at a nearby post office (the Post Office). Law enforcement officers examined the Package, confirmed that it did not contain any hazardous materials, and determined that Le had listed a fake name as the Package’s return address. A postal employee (the Postal Employee) informed the FBI that the Postal Employee had seen Le at the Post Office on multiple prior occasions and that Le has worn blue latex gloves on at least some of those occasions.
The FBI prepared a package (the Sham Shipment) that was consistent with the Ricin Buyer’s request to the OCE, which was then delivered to the Postal Box. On Dec. 23, 2014, Le, wearing latex gloves, retrieved the Sham Shipment, opened it, and took the contents to his apartment, whereupon he was arrested by FBI agents.
* * *
The indictment charges Le, 21, in two counts. Count One charges Le with attempting to possess a biological toxin for use as a weapon, and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. Count Two charges Le with using a fictitious name in furtherance of unlawful business involving the mail, and carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment. The maximum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by a judge.
Assistant Attorney General Carlin is grateful for the outstanding investigative efforts of the FBI, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS). Le’s arrest is the result of the close cooperative efforts of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force—which consists of law enforcement officers of the FBI, NYPD, USPIS and other agencies.
The case is being prosecuted by the office’s Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ilan Graff and Andrew D. Beaty are in charge of the prosecution, with assistance provided by Trial Attorney Joseph Kaster of the Justice Department’s Counterterrorism Section.
The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
New York Man Indicted For Attempting to Acquire Deadly Toxin, Ricin
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara for the Southern District of New York and Assistant Director-in-Charge George Venizelos of the FBI’s New York Office, announced today that a federal grand jury returned a two-count indictment against Cheng Le for attempting to acquire and distribute ricin and committing postal fraud. Le was arrested on Dec. 23, 2014, by the FBI in Manhattan. He was presented on a Complaint before the U.S. Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV on Dec. 24, 2014, and has been detained since his arrest. He is expected to be arraigned on Friday, January 23, 2015, before the United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan.
“As alleged, Cheng Le attempted to acquire ricin, a potentially lethal toxin, through the Dark Web so that it could be used for deadly purposes,” said U.S. Attorney Bharara. “Thankfully, with the help of our law enforcement partners he was intercepted and must now answer for his alleged crimes.”
“In the shadows of the Dark Web, criminals hide behind a veil of anonymity, sniffing out hidden opportunities to buy and sell illegal and potentially dangerous merchandise,” said Assistant Director-in-Charge Venizelos. “As alleged, in this case, activity carried out in the marketplace served as a conduit for Le to obtain ricin. In his desire to acquire this potentially deadly toxin, he picked his own poison and now faces the consequences of the justice system.”
According to the Complaint, which was unsealed today in Manhattan federal court, and the indictment:
Ricin is a highly potent and potentially fatal toxin with no known antidote. In December 2014, an individual (the Ricin Buyer) contacted an FBI online covert employee (the OCE) on an online forum. During Dec. 2014, the Ricin Buyer exchanged a series of messages with the OCE, during which the Ricin Buyer explored the possibility of the OCE supplying the Ricin Buyer with ricin, for the Ricin Buyer to resell to at least one secondary buyer.
On or about Dec. 18, 2014, the Ricin Buyer directed the OCE to send a quantity of ricin to a particular postal box in Manhattan (the Postal Box). The FBI later determined that the Postal Box belonged to Cheng Le. Later that same day, FBI agents observed Le wear latex gloves while retrieving a package from the Postal Box (the Package) and mailing it at a nearby post office (the Post Office). Law enforcement officers examined the Package, confirmed that it did not contain any hazardous materials, and determined that Le had listed a fake name as the Package’s return address. A postal employee (the Postal Employee) informed the FBI that the Postal Employee had seen Le at the Post Office on multiple prior occasions and that Le has worn blue latex gloves on at least some of those occasions.
The FBI prepared a package (the Sham Shipment) that was consistent with the Ricin Buyer’s request to the OCE, which was then delivered to the Postal Box. On Dec. 23, 2014, Le, wearing latex gloves, retrieved the Sham Shipment, opened it, and took the contents to his apartment, whereupon he was arrested by FBI agents.
* * *
The indictment charges Le, 21, in two counts. Count One charges Le with attempting to possess a biological toxin for use as a weapon, and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. Count Two charges Le with using a fictitious name in furtherance of unlawful business involving the mail, and carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment. The maximum potential sentences in this case are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by a judge.
Assistant Attorney General Carlin is grateful for the outstanding investigative efforts of the FBI, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and the United States Postal Inspection Service (USPIS). Le’s arrest is the result of the close cooperative efforts of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force—which consists of law enforcement officers of the FBI, NYPD, USPIS and other agencies.
The case is being prosecuted by the office’s Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ilan Graff and Andrew D. Beaty are in charge of the prosecution, with assistance provided by Trial Attorney Joseph Kaster of the Justice Department’s Counterterrorism Section.
The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
RECENT DOD PHOTOS: DROP ZONE PORDENONE
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
 |
| U.S. paratroopers descend onto Juliet drop zone in Pordenone, Italy, Jan. 13, 2015. The paratroopers are assigned to the 173rd Brigade Support Battalion, 173rd Airborne Brigade. The aircraft crew is assigned to U.S. Air Force 86th Air Wing. U.S. Army photo by Paolo Bovo. |
 |
| U.S. paratroopers come in for a landing on Juliet drop zone in Pordenone, Italy, Jan. 13, 2015. U.S. Army photo by Paolo Bovo. |
GEN. DEMPSEY MEETS WITH ITALIAN OFFICIALS OVER SECURITY
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Dempsey, Italian Officials to Discuss Security Concerns
By Lisa Ferdinando
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
ROME, Jan. 18, 2015 – The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in Italy to discuss threats to Italy's southern flank and get the Italian perspective on the country's security issues, ahead of a two-day NATO meeting in Brussels.
The Italians are great military partners who have "stepped up in any number of missions," Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said in an interview here today.
Dempsey, who arrived in Rome earlier in the day, is to meet Monday with his Italian counterpart, Chief of Defense Adm. Luigi Binelli Mantelli, as well as Minister of Defense Roberta Pinotti.
The talks with this "key ally" come at an important time, Dempsey said.
"There have been approximately 160,000 immigrants from North Africa into Italy, (that) puts a huge burden on them, so they have some real concerns about their southern flank," he said.
Dempsey and European defense officials have expressed concern about the possible flow of foreign fighters, via the southern flank.
Dempsey lauded the Italians for their contributions to global military efforts, including in the United Nations mission in Lebanon, and against terrorists with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL.
Italy's leadership in NATO is critical to global security, particularly in the Mediterranean, according to the chairman, who also underscored the U.S. commitment to strong relations with Italy.
Italy and the U.S. are the top two contributors of on-the-ground trainers and advisors who are enabling the Kurds and Iraqis in the fight against extremists, defense officials noted.
There are more than 4,000 Italian service members serving overseas in Kosovo, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa on a number of missions, including peacekeeping, training, and counter-piracy missions, they said.
Allies gather in Brussels Wednesday, Thursday "In my three and a half years (as chairman) this is probably going to be the most important meeting of NATO's military leaders during that period," Dempsey said.
It is of such high importance, he said, because the representatives are "going to talk about the hard work that's been done at the staff level to meet those commitments" that were made in September at the Wales summit.
The NATO Military Committee conference in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday is expected to include discussion on NATO's southern flank, Afghanistan, and efforts against ISIL.
Dempsey said he is looking forward to also hearing from the Italians about Italy's view on Eastern Europe and "aggressiveness" from Russia.
"The way they see it will determine how they balance their priorities and their resources," he said.
"Our relationship vis-a-vis Russia has changed. I don't think it's irreversibly changed," he said. "I think that in the next year, you'll find NATO in particular working toward determining how to react to that changed relationship."
Dempsey highlighted the importance of U.S.-NATO collaboration and maintaining strong ties with European allies.
"It's all about building relationships so that when things don't turn out the way you hope they will, you have a foundation to build on," he said.
Dempsey, Italian Officials to Discuss Security Concerns
By Lisa Ferdinando
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
ROME, Jan. 18, 2015 – The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is in Italy to discuss threats to Italy's southern flank and get the Italian perspective on the country's security issues, ahead of a two-day NATO meeting in Brussels.
The Italians are great military partners who have "stepped up in any number of missions," Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said in an interview here today.
Dempsey, who arrived in Rome earlier in the day, is to meet Monday with his Italian counterpart, Chief of Defense Adm. Luigi Binelli Mantelli, as well as Minister of Defense Roberta Pinotti.
The talks with this "key ally" come at an important time, Dempsey said.
"There have been approximately 160,000 immigrants from North Africa into Italy, (that) puts a huge burden on them, so they have some real concerns about their southern flank," he said.
Dempsey and European defense officials have expressed concern about the possible flow of foreign fighters, via the southern flank.
Dempsey lauded the Italians for their contributions to global military efforts, including in the United Nations mission in Lebanon, and against terrorists with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL.
Italy's leadership in NATO is critical to global security, particularly in the Mediterranean, according to the chairman, who also underscored the U.S. commitment to strong relations with Italy.
Italy and the U.S. are the top two contributors of on-the-ground trainers and advisors who are enabling the Kurds and Iraqis in the fight against extremists, defense officials noted.
There are more than 4,000 Italian service members serving overseas in Kosovo, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa on a number of missions, including peacekeeping, training, and counter-piracy missions, they said.
Allies gather in Brussels Wednesday, Thursday "In my three and a half years (as chairman) this is probably going to be the most important meeting of NATO's military leaders during that period," Dempsey said.
It is of such high importance, he said, because the representatives are "going to talk about the hard work that's been done at the staff level to meet those commitments" that were made in September at the Wales summit.
The NATO Military Committee conference in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday is expected to include discussion on NATO's southern flank, Afghanistan, and efforts against ISIL.
Dempsey said he is looking forward to also hearing from the Italians about Italy's view on Eastern Europe and "aggressiveness" from Russia.
"The way they see it will determine how they balance their priorities and their resources," he said.
"Our relationship vis-a-vis Russia has changed. I don't think it's irreversibly changed," he said. "I think that in the next year, you'll find NATO in particular working toward determining how to react to that changed relationship."
Dempsey highlighted the importance of U.S.-NATO collaboration and maintaining strong ties with European allies.
"It's all about building relationships so that when things don't turn out the way you hope they will, you have a foundation to build on," he said.
FIRM AGREES TO STOP PRODUCING ADULTERATED & MISBRANDED SUPPLEMENTS & UNAPPROVED NEW DRUGS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, January 16, 2015
California Firm Agrees to Stop Production of Adulterated and Misbranded Dietary Supplements and Unapproved New Drugs
As a result of a lawsuit filed by the United States, a federal court in California has issued an injunction shutting down Health One Pharmaceuticals Inc., a City of Industry, California, based manufacturer of dietary supplements and unapproved new drugs. The firm and its president, Richard S. Yeh, agreed to shut down and resolve the lawsuit as part of a consent decree. The Justice Department filed the injunction action in the Central District of California at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The consent decree forbids the company from operating unless and until it takes a number of steps to improve its compliance with federal law. The defendants have represented to the court that they have already ceased operations.
“Protecting the health of American consumers is some of the most important work we do,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We have an unwavering commitment to ensuring that the dietary supplements in this country are safe and have been manufactured in accordance with federal law.”
Based on the results of FDA inspections, the complaint alleged that the defendants violated the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by delivering, or causing to be delivered for introduction into interstate commerce, dietary supplements that have been prepared, packed or held under conditions that do not meet current good manufacturing practice regulations. Among other things, the complaint alleged that the defendants failed to meet current good manufacturing practices for dietary supplements by failing to conduct at least one appropriate test or examination to verify the identity of every dietary ingredient prior to using the ingredient. Furthermore, the complaint alleged that the defendants’ dietary supplements were misbranded because their labels do not include all the information required by federal law.
The complaint further alleged that some of the defendants’ products were unapproved new drugs—and therefore cannot be lawfully distributed under federal law—because they were articles intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease and, among other things, are not generally recognized as safe and effective for their intended uses and were not the subjects of new drug applications approved by FDA. Furthermore, the complaint alleged that these drugs were misbranded because it is impossible to provide “adequate directions for use” for an unapproved new drug.
The FDA referred this matter to the Department of Justice. The Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, together with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, filed this case on behalf of the United States.
The claims alleged in the complaint are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.
Friday, January 16, 2015
California Firm Agrees to Stop Production of Adulterated and Misbranded Dietary Supplements and Unapproved New Drugs
As a result of a lawsuit filed by the United States, a federal court in California has issued an injunction shutting down Health One Pharmaceuticals Inc., a City of Industry, California, based manufacturer of dietary supplements and unapproved new drugs. The firm and its president, Richard S. Yeh, agreed to shut down and resolve the lawsuit as part of a consent decree. The Justice Department filed the injunction action in the Central District of California at the request of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The consent decree forbids the company from operating unless and until it takes a number of steps to improve its compliance with federal law. The defendants have represented to the court that they have already ceased operations.
“Protecting the health of American consumers is some of the most important work we do,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We have an unwavering commitment to ensuring that the dietary supplements in this country are safe and have been manufactured in accordance with federal law.”
Based on the results of FDA inspections, the complaint alleged that the defendants violated the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by delivering, or causing to be delivered for introduction into interstate commerce, dietary supplements that have been prepared, packed or held under conditions that do not meet current good manufacturing practice regulations. Among other things, the complaint alleged that the defendants failed to meet current good manufacturing practices for dietary supplements by failing to conduct at least one appropriate test or examination to verify the identity of every dietary ingredient prior to using the ingredient. Furthermore, the complaint alleged that the defendants’ dietary supplements were misbranded because their labels do not include all the information required by federal law.
The complaint further alleged that some of the defendants’ products were unapproved new drugs—and therefore cannot be lawfully distributed under federal law—because they were articles intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease and, among other things, are not generally recognized as safe and effective for their intended uses and were not the subjects of new drug applications approved by FDA. Furthermore, the complaint alleged that these drugs were misbranded because it is impossible to provide “adequate directions for use” for an unapproved new drug.
The FDA referred this matter to the Department of Justice. The Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, together with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, filed this case on behalf of the United States.
The claims alleged in the complaint are allegations only and there has been no determination of liability.
CITIZEN SCIENTISTS ACCURATELY REPORT PRECIPITATION
FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Crowdsourcing yields a more accurate picture of rainfall and snowfall
Citizen scientists involved with the CoCoRaHS project advance their knowledge of atmospheric science while reporting precipitation data that is used by the National Weather Service and other agencies
It's the season of dramatic weather, when everyone from the National Weather Service to farmers and insurers monitor predictions of weather conditions--and assessments of where severe weather and its impacts are greatest. In this environment, a citizen science project called CoCoRaHS--the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network--makes possible a detailed view of rainfall, snowfall and hail in regions around the country. The organizers have found that precipitation is often highly variable--in extreme cases varying by inches at locations just a few blocks from each other.
CoCoRaHS was first envisioned in 1997, after an intense rainstorm in Fort Collins, Colo., caused massive flooding and more than $200 million in damage.
"Nothing in the radar indicated that the storm would cause this much damage," said Nolan Doesken, state climatologist at the Colorado Climate Center at Colorado State University, and founder of CoCoRaHS. "There was incredible variation in the amount of rainfall within the affected area--from less than 2 inches to more than 14 inches (which was close to the average rainfall for the whole year) over a distance of just 5 miles."
The unexpected severity of the storm and its uneven impacts suggested to Doesken that enlisting individuals and families to report on precipitation from their locations could provide a more accurate and useful picture of rainfall and snowfall around the state and the country.
So in 1998, CoCoRaHS was born, with the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration later becoming major sponsors. Since the program started, 46,000 people, including participants from every state in the nation, have signed up through the CoCoRaHS website. To participate in the network, each citizen scientist must invest in a high-capacity 4-inch-diameter rain gauge (at a cost of about $30). All new participants in the CoCoRaHS network receive training in how to place their gauges and take accurate readings. Then, each time a rain, hail or snow storm crosses their area, volunteers take measurements of precipitation.
Their reports are then recorded on the CoCoRaHS website. The data are displayed and organized for a range of end users--from the National Weather Service to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to emergency managers, hydrologists, farmers, ranchers, research scientists, educators, and the general public.
During 2014 there were more than 19,000 active users who set out rain gauges and sent in reports. Doesken notes that more than 11,000 reports come in every day.
Just as an image is sharper the more pixels it contains, having citizen scientists report precipitation data from thousands of locations provides a detailed picture valuable for predictions, emergency planning, insurance estimates, and a number of other uses.
But beyond its value to consumers of the data, CoCoRaHS is engaging non-scientists in the kind of observation, reporting and analysis done by scientists. The educational aspects of their work are particularly important to members of the CoCoRaHS community.
In addition to coordinating the volunteer reporting, CoCoRaHS sponsors webinars every month featuring experts discussing some aspect of weather or climate. Topics such as cloud formation, lightning, and atmospheric rivers of Pacific water vapor aiming at the west coast have been popular with the volunteers.
Charles Kuster, one of the network's youngest volunteer leaders, got involved with CoCoRaHS in 2001, when he was in seventh grade. He served as the county volunteer coordinator in Leadville, Colo. Since then, Kuster finished high school, attended Colorado State University, then pursued graduate school at the University of Oklahoma, a premier institution for meteorology. He continues to help the program in his spare time. Many other students across the country have also been able to participate.
"We hear from many of our volunteers that they had no idea that precipitation varied so much," said Doesken. "Some volunteers regret not having gone into science in college. Some say that they wish they'd pursued a scientific career--but that this this experience is giving them an outlet."
"Being able to contribute scientific data to a network and see the impact of your observations is a powerful experience," said Ellen McCallie, program director for the Advancing Informal STEM Learning program, through which CoCoRaHS is funded. "We're excited to see people from different age groups, different backgrounds, and different parts of the country who are taking part in research through CoCoRaHS. What volunteers are finding is fascinating--and it helps all of us better understand what we've experienced in our lives with rain, hail, and snow.
Those interested in joining the CoCoRaHS network can find out more by watching the videos posted above or visiting the CoCoRaHS website.
Investigators
Nolan Doesken
Steven Rutledge
Roger Pielke
Robert Cifelli
Victoria Jordan
Related Institutions/Organizations
Colorado State University
Locations
Fort Collins , Colorado
Crowdsourcing yields a more accurate picture of rainfall and snowfall
Citizen scientists involved with the CoCoRaHS project advance their knowledge of atmospheric science while reporting precipitation data that is used by the National Weather Service and other agencies
It's the season of dramatic weather, when everyone from the National Weather Service to farmers and insurers monitor predictions of weather conditions--and assessments of where severe weather and its impacts are greatest. In this environment, a citizen science project called CoCoRaHS--the Community Collaborative Rain, Hail and Snow Network--makes possible a detailed view of rainfall, snowfall and hail in regions around the country. The organizers have found that precipitation is often highly variable--in extreme cases varying by inches at locations just a few blocks from each other.
CoCoRaHS was first envisioned in 1997, after an intense rainstorm in Fort Collins, Colo., caused massive flooding and more than $200 million in damage.
"Nothing in the radar indicated that the storm would cause this much damage," said Nolan Doesken, state climatologist at the Colorado Climate Center at Colorado State University, and founder of CoCoRaHS. "There was incredible variation in the amount of rainfall within the affected area--from less than 2 inches to more than 14 inches (which was close to the average rainfall for the whole year) over a distance of just 5 miles."
The unexpected severity of the storm and its uneven impacts suggested to Doesken that enlisting individuals and families to report on precipitation from their locations could provide a more accurate and useful picture of rainfall and snowfall around the state and the country.
So in 1998, CoCoRaHS was born, with the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration later becoming major sponsors. Since the program started, 46,000 people, including participants from every state in the nation, have signed up through the CoCoRaHS website. To participate in the network, each citizen scientist must invest in a high-capacity 4-inch-diameter rain gauge (at a cost of about $30). All new participants in the CoCoRaHS network receive training in how to place their gauges and take accurate readings. Then, each time a rain, hail or snow storm crosses their area, volunteers take measurements of precipitation.
Their reports are then recorded on the CoCoRaHS website. The data are displayed and organized for a range of end users--from the National Weather Service to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to emergency managers, hydrologists, farmers, ranchers, research scientists, educators, and the general public.
During 2014 there were more than 19,000 active users who set out rain gauges and sent in reports. Doesken notes that more than 11,000 reports come in every day.
Just as an image is sharper the more pixels it contains, having citizen scientists report precipitation data from thousands of locations provides a detailed picture valuable for predictions, emergency planning, insurance estimates, and a number of other uses.
But beyond its value to consumers of the data, CoCoRaHS is engaging non-scientists in the kind of observation, reporting and analysis done by scientists. The educational aspects of their work are particularly important to members of the CoCoRaHS community.
In addition to coordinating the volunteer reporting, CoCoRaHS sponsors webinars every month featuring experts discussing some aspect of weather or climate. Topics such as cloud formation, lightning, and atmospheric rivers of Pacific water vapor aiming at the west coast have been popular with the volunteers.
Charles Kuster, one of the network's youngest volunteer leaders, got involved with CoCoRaHS in 2001, when he was in seventh grade. He served as the county volunteer coordinator in Leadville, Colo. Since then, Kuster finished high school, attended Colorado State University, then pursued graduate school at the University of Oklahoma, a premier institution for meteorology. He continues to help the program in his spare time. Many other students across the country have also been able to participate.
"We hear from many of our volunteers that they had no idea that precipitation varied so much," said Doesken. "Some volunteers regret not having gone into science in college. Some say that they wish they'd pursued a scientific career--but that this this experience is giving them an outlet."
"Being able to contribute scientific data to a network and see the impact of your observations is a powerful experience," said Ellen McCallie, program director for the Advancing Informal STEM Learning program, through which CoCoRaHS is funded. "We're excited to see people from different age groups, different backgrounds, and different parts of the country who are taking part in research through CoCoRaHS. What volunteers are finding is fascinating--and it helps all of us better understand what we've experienced in our lives with rain, hail, and snow.
Those interested in joining the CoCoRaHS network can find out more by watching the videos posted above or visiting the CoCoRaHS website.
Investigators
Nolan Doesken
Steven Rutledge
Roger Pielke
Robert Cifelli
Victoria Jordan
Related Institutions/Organizations
Colorado State University
Locations
Fort Collins , Colorado
DOJ ANNOUNCES COURT INJUNCTION AGAINST MEDICAL LASER MANUFACTURER
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, January 16, 2015
Federal Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Against South Dakota Medical laser Manufacturer
A federal court has barred a Rapid City, South Dakota, company and its president from further manufacturing and distributing its laser devices, which they marketed to treat a variety of medical conditions and diseases, the Justice Department announced today.
U.S. District Court Chief Judge Jeffrey L. Viken for the District of South Dakota entered the preliminary injunction on Wednesday against Robert “Larry” Lytle and his businesses, QLasers PMA, 2035 PMA, and 2035 INC., in an action filed by the Justice Department to enforce provisions of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). The court’s order prohibiting the manufacture and distribution of the QLaser devices also applies to Lytle’s business affiliates and franchisees.
Last October, the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Dakota filed a civil complaint for injunctive relief against Lytle and his businesses, alleging that they have been violating the FDCA by nationally marketing Lytle’s laser devices for the treatment of more than 200 different diseases and medical disorders without clearance or approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The preliminary injunction entered on Wednesday takes effect immediately and will remain in force while the government’s case seeking a permanent injunction proceeds to final judgment.
Judge Viken found, based on what he called an “extensive and well developed record,” that Lytle and his various businesses “have shown no intent to discontinue their activities and voluntarily comply with the FDCA. “The injunction bars the defendants from continuing to market and distribute any medical devices until they receive written permission from the FDA to do so.
Lytle, whom the court noted was a dentist in Rapid City until his license to practice dentistry was permanently revoked by the South Dakota Board of Dentistry in 1998, markets the devices by soliciting purchasers to join his “private membership associations” or “PMAs” before purchasing his lasers. As the court explained, however, “Hiding behind a curtain of private membership associations, 2035 PMA and QLaser PMA, does not shield Mr. Lytle from the authority of the FDCA or the jurisdiction of the court.”
“With the entry of this preliminary injunction, we have taken another step toward ensuring that only medical devices that have been shown to be safe and effective are placed in the hands of the American consumer,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Everyone who deals in products that affect people’s health must comply with the FDCA.”
According to court documents filed in the case, the defendants have been distributing the QLaser devices with labeling that contains false and misleading claims, touting their use in treating such serious conditions as cancer, HIV/AIDS, venereal disease and diabetes. Although two of his laser devices were FDA-cleared for providing temporary relief of pain associated with osteoarthritis of the hand, none of the devices has been cleared or approved to treat any other medical conditions. The government alleges that not only are there no published clinical studies to support the use of Lytle’s lasers to treat other serious medical conditions, but that in fact, using the devices according to the device’s labeling could be dangerous to health. The court’s order finds that the United States is substantially likely to succeed on the merits on this claim and the others within the government’s complaint.
“The preliminary injunction granted should provide consumers a renewed sense of confidence,” said U.S. Attorney Brendan V. Johnson for the District of South Dakota. “This action is crucial to prevent the company from continuing to operate on the periphery of the law, and potentially jeopardize the health and safety of its consumers.”
The FDA referred this enforcement action to the Department of Justice. The government’s case is being litigated by Trial Attorney Ross S. Goldstein of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Dakota and the FDA’s Office of Chief Counsel.
Friday, January 16, 2015
Federal Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Against South Dakota Medical laser Manufacturer
A federal court has barred a Rapid City, South Dakota, company and its president from further manufacturing and distributing its laser devices, which they marketed to treat a variety of medical conditions and diseases, the Justice Department announced today.
U.S. District Court Chief Judge Jeffrey L. Viken for the District of South Dakota entered the preliminary injunction on Wednesday against Robert “Larry” Lytle and his businesses, QLasers PMA, 2035 PMA, and 2035 INC., in an action filed by the Justice Department to enforce provisions of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). The court’s order prohibiting the manufacture and distribution of the QLaser devices also applies to Lytle’s business affiliates and franchisees.
Last October, the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Dakota filed a civil complaint for injunctive relief against Lytle and his businesses, alleging that they have been violating the FDCA by nationally marketing Lytle’s laser devices for the treatment of more than 200 different diseases and medical disorders without clearance or approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The preliminary injunction entered on Wednesday takes effect immediately and will remain in force while the government’s case seeking a permanent injunction proceeds to final judgment.
Judge Viken found, based on what he called an “extensive and well developed record,” that Lytle and his various businesses “have shown no intent to discontinue their activities and voluntarily comply with the FDCA. “The injunction bars the defendants from continuing to market and distribute any medical devices until they receive written permission from the FDA to do so.
Lytle, whom the court noted was a dentist in Rapid City until his license to practice dentistry was permanently revoked by the South Dakota Board of Dentistry in 1998, markets the devices by soliciting purchasers to join his “private membership associations” or “PMAs” before purchasing his lasers. As the court explained, however, “Hiding behind a curtain of private membership associations, 2035 PMA and QLaser PMA, does not shield Mr. Lytle from the authority of the FDCA or the jurisdiction of the court.”
“With the entry of this preliminary injunction, we have taken another step toward ensuring that only medical devices that have been shown to be safe and effective are placed in the hands of the American consumer,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Everyone who deals in products that affect people’s health must comply with the FDCA.”
According to court documents filed in the case, the defendants have been distributing the QLaser devices with labeling that contains false and misleading claims, touting their use in treating such serious conditions as cancer, HIV/AIDS, venereal disease and diabetes. Although two of his laser devices were FDA-cleared for providing temporary relief of pain associated with osteoarthritis of the hand, none of the devices has been cleared or approved to treat any other medical conditions. The government alleges that not only are there no published clinical studies to support the use of Lytle’s lasers to treat other serious medical conditions, but that in fact, using the devices according to the device’s labeling could be dangerous to health. The court’s order finds that the United States is substantially likely to succeed on the merits on this claim and the others within the government’s complaint.
“The preliminary injunction granted should provide consumers a renewed sense of confidence,” said U.S. Attorney Brendan V. Johnson for the District of South Dakota. “This action is crucial to prevent the company from continuing to operate on the periphery of the law, and potentially jeopardize the health and safety of its consumers.”
The FDA referred this enforcement action to the Department of Justice. The government’s case is being litigated by Trial Attorney Ross S. Goldstein of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Dakota and the FDA’s Office of Chief Counsel.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA TO PAY NEARLY $49 MILLION TO RESOLVE ILLEGAL PAYMENT OF BENEFITS ALLEGATIONS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, January 16, 2015
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to Pay $48.8 Million to Resolve Federal Government's Claims that it Provided Benefits to Ineligible Aliens
The commonwealth of Pennsylvania will pay $48.8 million to resolve the federal government’s claims that it provided benefits to ineligible aliens in violation of federal law, the Justice Department announced today. The benefits at issue were provided under three programs: Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps.
“The Department of Justice will continue to ensure that everyone, including the states, follows the law, but also recognizes the importance of these programs administered by the state that are essential for lower income individuals,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “This settlement demonstrates our commitment to protect taxpayer funds and ensure they are used for their intended purposes.”
Under the Personal Responsibility Work Opportunity Act, enacted in 1996, only documented aliens who meet certain low-income requirements and who have been in the country for more than five years may receive non-emergency Medicaid, TANF or SNAP benefits. The law also requires states to verify recipients’ eligibility before providing these means-tested benefits. The United States alleged that, between 2004 and 2010, the commonwealth of Pennsylvania provided Medicaid, TANF and SNAP benefits to ineligible aliens in violation of these restrictions.
“The staff of the civil division in our office has worked closely and diligently with our sister federal agencies, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services and the Governor’s office to make needed corrections to the operation of programs that are vital to low income families,” said U.S. Attorney Peter J. Smith for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. “At the same time, after lengthy negotiations, a fair and reasonable settlement has been achieved in the best interest of Pennsylvania tax payers.”
“Our agency will continue to work hard to ensure taxpayer-funded benefits are provided only to those eligible to receive them,” said Special Agent in Charge Nick DiGiulio for the Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Philadelphia Regional Office.
“We are pleased that this issue has been resolved,” said Administrator Audrey Rowe of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Food and Nutrition Service. “We will continue to work with Pennsylvania to ensure that the SNAP program is administered appropriately to benefit only those who are eligible.”
Acting Assistant Attorney General Branda thanked HHS-OIG, USDA’s Office of Inspector General and Food and Nutrition Service, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, for the collaboration that resulted in the settlement.
Friday, January 16, 2015
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to Pay $48.8 Million to Resolve Federal Government's Claims that it Provided Benefits to Ineligible Aliens
The commonwealth of Pennsylvania will pay $48.8 million to resolve the federal government’s claims that it provided benefits to ineligible aliens in violation of federal law, the Justice Department announced today. The benefits at issue were provided under three programs: Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps.
“The Department of Justice will continue to ensure that everyone, including the states, follows the law, but also recognizes the importance of these programs administered by the state that are essential for lower income individuals,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda for the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “This settlement demonstrates our commitment to protect taxpayer funds and ensure they are used for their intended purposes.”
Under the Personal Responsibility Work Opportunity Act, enacted in 1996, only documented aliens who meet certain low-income requirements and who have been in the country for more than five years may receive non-emergency Medicaid, TANF or SNAP benefits. The law also requires states to verify recipients’ eligibility before providing these means-tested benefits. The United States alleged that, between 2004 and 2010, the commonwealth of Pennsylvania provided Medicaid, TANF and SNAP benefits to ineligible aliens in violation of these restrictions.
“The staff of the civil division in our office has worked closely and diligently with our sister federal agencies, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services and the Governor’s office to make needed corrections to the operation of programs that are vital to low income families,” said U.S. Attorney Peter J. Smith for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. “At the same time, after lengthy negotiations, a fair and reasonable settlement has been achieved in the best interest of Pennsylvania tax payers.”
“Our agency will continue to work hard to ensure taxpayer-funded benefits are provided only to those eligible to receive them,” said Special Agent in Charge Nick DiGiulio for the Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Inspector General’s (HHS-OIG) Philadelphia Regional Office.
“We are pleased that this issue has been resolved,” said Administrator Audrey Rowe of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Food and Nutrition Service. “We will continue to work with Pennsylvania to ensure that the SNAP program is administered appropriately to benefit only those who are eligible.”
Acting Assistant Attorney General Branda thanked HHS-OIG, USDA’s Office of Inspector General and Food and Nutrition Service, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, for the collaboration that resulted in the settlement.
Monday, January 19, 2015
AMBASSADOR POWER'S REMARKS ON UNDERDEVELOPMENT AS IT RELATES TO PEACE AND SECURITY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks by Ambassador Samantha Power, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, at a Security Council Debate on Inclusive Development for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
January 19, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, President Bachelet, for chairing this critically important session, and for Chile’s leadership on these issues and many others in the Council and around the world. Thank you, as well, for your lifelong efforts – including during your tenure here as director of UN Women, and as Chilean President – to advance the causes of development and peace. Thanks also to Nobel Peace Prize laureate Leymah Gbowee, we can all see why you have made the difference that you have in Liberia and well beyond. You are truly formidable. And thank you Mr. Secretary-General and Ambassador Patriota for your very important contributions.
As threats to international peace and security have evolved, so has the Council’s conception of them. Consider two of the great crises we face today: the Ebola epidemic and violent extremism. While neither represents the kind of risk that may have been imagined by the architects of the United Nations, each threatens the stability and prosperity of multiple countries. And both highlight the way that underdevelopment can pose a risk to peace and security. One of the main reasons that Ebola spread as quickly as it did in West Africa – and has killed such a high proportion of the people that it has infected – is the acute underdevelopment of the public health systems in the affected countries. And as President Obama observed in his remarks before the General Assembly in September, violent extremist groups have found their most fertile recruiting grounds “in the Middle East and North Africa, where a quarter of young people have no job, where food and water could grow scarce, where corruption is rampant and sectarian conflicts have become increasingly hard to contain.”
The connection between development and peace and security extends beyond Ebola and violent extremism. The average civil war sets back a medium-sized developing country more than 30 years in terms of economic growth, trade levels after major violence take an average of 20 years to recover, and the global economic impact of stemming such violence is estimated at 9.5 trillion dollars, or approximately 11 percent of the Gross World Product. These figures show what should be clear to all: the economic and social health of countries is intrinsically linked to their ability to secure and maintain peace. More than 80 percent of extremely poor people – those who survive on less than a dollar a day – are expected to live in countries affected by conflict and chronic violence by 2025. We know that this is not a challenge we can ignore. We have to do something more.
One place to start is with women and girls. Leymah’s story is testament to the critical goal that women can play in advancing peace and security. In the middle of Liberia’s second brutal civil war, she rallied thousands of women to pray for peace, and founded a group that staged weeks-long non-violent protests calling for an end to the conflict. Women’s activism helped build grassroots pressure on Liberia’s president at the time, Charles Taylor, to engage in peace talks with rebels. When those talks faltered, she and 200 women formed a human chain to prevent the government and the rebels from leaving the negotiating table. Of course, the government and the rebels could have pushed their way through that chain. But the women’s symbolic demand for peace, together with international pressure, helped keep both sides at the negotiating table, and within weeks they reached a deal.
If we agree that international peace and security is bound up with inclusive development, it follows that one of the best ways for the international community to consolidate peace, and to help end conflict, is to bridge enduring development gaps.
That is why, in addition to investing unprecedented resources in stopping the Ebola outbreak at its source, and in leaving the affected countries with stronger public health systems than they had before the outbreak – including the efforts of more than 3,000 American engineers, epidemiologists, doctors, and others on the ground, mainly in Liberia, President Obama has launched the Global Health Security Agenda. The GHSA is aimed at preparing countries to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to outbreaks before they become epidemics. During a meeting with President Obama last September, 43 countries joined us in announcing more than 100 specific commitments to strengthen global health security, together with the WHO and other international institutions.
That is why we have invested so much time in the Post-2015 development agenda, which aims for inclusive and equitable development that leaves no one behind in any country – developing or developed – and not only in terms of gender equality and global health, but across other areas such as education, water and sanitation, sustainable energy, and inclusive and responsive governance. That is why the United States has strongly advocated for Goal 16, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. If we can achieve this goal – through reducing corruption, promoting universal free and legal identity, and ensuring public access to information – we can ensure that the UN’s next development agenda will help empower those who need it most.
And this is why, in Afghanistan, we have invested robustly in ensuring that women and girls are more fully integrated into Afghan society. Since 2001, school enrollment there has increased tenfold, with nearly 10 million children now signed up, 40 percent of whom are girls. Maternal mortality has fallen from 16 percent to 3 percent. And today women hold 28 percent of the Afghan Parliament’s seats – a higher proportion than in my own country. All of these investments, all of this progress, not only make women more equal partners in Afghanistan’s future, but they give Afghanistan far brighter prospects for a more secure and prosperous future.
Today, as has been said, we commemorate the life of another Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and one of the world’s greatest human rights champions – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In one of his last speeches, Dr. King spoke of what he called, “the Other America” – a country he contrasted with the America of opportunity and equality. The Other America, he said, had a “daily ugliness about it that transforms the buoyancy of hope into the fatigue of despair.” Dr. King spoke of men without work; of families living in miserable conditions; of children denied access to a quality education. And he spoke of how such inequality posed an enduring obstacle to American prosperity, calling on all Americans to bridge these gaps.
It has been nearly fifty years since Dr. King spoke to the need to address these gaps in the United States, and yet so many of the gaps persist, here in the United States and around the world. His call to action is as resonant and urgent today as when he first made it. We must do everything in our power to do our part to fulfill it.
Thank you.
Remarks by Ambassador Samantha Power, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, at a Security Council Debate on Inclusive Development for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
January 19, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Thank you, President Bachelet, for chairing this critically important session, and for Chile’s leadership on these issues and many others in the Council and around the world. Thank you, as well, for your lifelong efforts – including during your tenure here as director of UN Women, and as Chilean President – to advance the causes of development and peace. Thanks also to Nobel Peace Prize laureate Leymah Gbowee, we can all see why you have made the difference that you have in Liberia and well beyond. You are truly formidable. And thank you Mr. Secretary-General and Ambassador Patriota for your very important contributions.
As threats to international peace and security have evolved, so has the Council’s conception of them. Consider two of the great crises we face today: the Ebola epidemic and violent extremism. While neither represents the kind of risk that may have been imagined by the architects of the United Nations, each threatens the stability and prosperity of multiple countries. And both highlight the way that underdevelopment can pose a risk to peace and security. One of the main reasons that Ebola spread as quickly as it did in West Africa – and has killed such a high proportion of the people that it has infected – is the acute underdevelopment of the public health systems in the affected countries. And as President Obama observed in his remarks before the General Assembly in September, violent extremist groups have found their most fertile recruiting grounds “in the Middle East and North Africa, where a quarter of young people have no job, where food and water could grow scarce, where corruption is rampant and sectarian conflicts have become increasingly hard to contain.”
The connection between development and peace and security extends beyond Ebola and violent extremism. The average civil war sets back a medium-sized developing country more than 30 years in terms of economic growth, trade levels after major violence take an average of 20 years to recover, and the global economic impact of stemming such violence is estimated at 9.5 trillion dollars, or approximately 11 percent of the Gross World Product. These figures show what should be clear to all: the economic and social health of countries is intrinsically linked to their ability to secure and maintain peace. More than 80 percent of extremely poor people – those who survive on less than a dollar a day – are expected to live in countries affected by conflict and chronic violence by 2025. We know that this is not a challenge we can ignore. We have to do something more.
One place to start is with women and girls. Leymah’s story is testament to the critical goal that women can play in advancing peace and security. In the middle of Liberia’s second brutal civil war, she rallied thousands of women to pray for peace, and founded a group that staged weeks-long non-violent protests calling for an end to the conflict. Women’s activism helped build grassroots pressure on Liberia’s president at the time, Charles Taylor, to engage in peace talks with rebels. When those talks faltered, she and 200 women formed a human chain to prevent the government and the rebels from leaving the negotiating table. Of course, the government and the rebels could have pushed their way through that chain. But the women’s symbolic demand for peace, together with international pressure, helped keep both sides at the negotiating table, and within weeks they reached a deal.
If we agree that international peace and security is bound up with inclusive development, it follows that one of the best ways for the international community to consolidate peace, and to help end conflict, is to bridge enduring development gaps.
That is why, in addition to investing unprecedented resources in stopping the Ebola outbreak at its source, and in leaving the affected countries with stronger public health systems than they had before the outbreak – including the efforts of more than 3,000 American engineers, epidemiologists, doctors, and others on the ground, mainly in Liberia, President Obama has launched the Global Health Security Agenda. The GHSA is aimed at preparing countries to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to outbreaks before they become epidemics. During a meeting with President Obama last September, 43 countries joined us in announcing more than 100 specific commitments to strengthen global health security, together with the WHO and other international institutions.
That is why we have invested so much time in the Post-2015 development agenda, which aims for inclusive and equitable development that leaves no one behind in any country – developing or developed – and not only in terms of gender equality and global health, but across other areas such as education, water and sanitation, sustainable energy, and inclusive and responsive governance. That is why the United States has strongly advocated for Goal 16, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. If we can achieve this goal – through reducing corruption, promoting universal free and legal identity, and ensuring public access to information – we can ensure that the UN’s next development agenda will help empower those who need it most.
And this is why, in Afghanistan, we have invested robustly in ensuring that women and girls are more fully integrated into Afghan society. Since 2001, school enrollment there has increased tenfold, with nearly 10 million children now signed up, 40 percent of whom are girls. Maternal mortality has fallen from 16 percent to 3 percent. And today women hold 28 percent of the Afghan Parliament’s seats – a higher proportion than in my own country. All of these investments, all of this progress, not only make women more equal partners in Afghanistan’s future, but they give Afghanistan far brighter prospects for a more secure and prosperous future.
Today, as has been said, we commemorate the life of another Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and one of the world’s greatest human rights champions – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In one of his last speeches, Dr. King spoke of what he called, “the Other America” – a country he contrasted with the America of opportunity and equality. The Other America, he said, had a “daily ugliness about it that transforms the buoyancy of hope into the fatigue of despair.” Dr. King spoke of men without work; of families living in miserable conditions; of children denied access to a quality education. And he spoke of how such inequality posed an enduring obstacle to American prosperity, calling on all Americans to bridge these gaps.
It has been nearly fifty years since Dr. King spoke to the need to address these gaps in the United States, and yet so many of the gaps persist, here in the United States and around the world. His call to action is as resonant and urgent today as when he first made it. We must do everything in our power to do our part to fulfill it.
Thank you.
ENHANCING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AT NSF
FROM: NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
New Steps to Enhance Transparency and Accountability at the National Science Foundation
Important Notice No. 137
January 13, 2015
IMPORTANT NOTICE TO PRESIDENTS OF UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND HEADS OF OTHER NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION GRANTEE ORGANIZATIONS
Subject: New Steps to Enhance Transparency and Accountability at the National Science Foundation
Over the last year, the National Science Foundation has taken new steps to enhance transparency and accountability. This notice focuses on efforts to clarify NSF's award abstracts, which serve a different purpose than the project summary that is submitted as part of a proposal.
Effective December 26, 2014, NSF's updated Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 15-1) includes the following statement about award abstracts: "Should a proposal be recommended for award, the PI (Principal Investigator) may be contacted by the NSF Program Officer for assistance in preparation of the public award abstract and its title. An NSF award abstract, with its title, is an NSF document that describes the project and justifies the expenditure of Federal funds."
While our update to the PAPPG clarifies the possible role of the PI in helping NSF prepare award abstracts, NSF would like to share the Foundation's guidelines about NSF award abstracts with the science, engineering and education communities to help improve communication about the nature of the award to the public.
The NSF public award abstract consists of both a nontechnical and technical component. The nontechnical component of the NSF award abstract must:
explain the project's significance and importance; and
serve as a public justification for NSF funding by articulating how the project serves the national interest, as stated by NSF's mission: to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity and welfare; or to secure the national defense.
By sharing these guidelines, NSF is clarifying the nature of requested assistance from PIs in this valuable effort in helping the agency adhere to its newly established guidelines. This collaborative effort also helps foster stronger public communication about the value of federal investments in fundamental research.
France A. Córdova
/s/
Director
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)