FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, May 11, 2015
Former CIA Officer Sentenced to 42 Months in Prison for Leaking Classified Information and Obstruction of Justice
Jeffrey A. Sterling, 47, of O’Fallon, Missouri, was sentenced today to 42 months in prison for disclosing national defense information and obstructing justice. Sterling disclosed classified information about a clandestine operational program concerning Iran’s nuclear weapons program to a New York Times reporter in 2003.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Dana J. Boente of the Eastern District of Virginia and Assistant Director in Charge Andrew McCabe of the FBI’s Washington, D.C. Field Office made the announcement.
“For his own vindictive purposes, Jeffrey Sterling carelessly disclosed extremely valuable, highly classified information that he had taken an oath to keep secret,” said U.S. Attorney Boente. “His attempt to leverage national security information for his own malicious reasons brought him to this sentence today. I would like to thank the trial team and our partners at the FBI’s Washington Field Office and the Central Intelligence Agency for their hard work and commitment to this case.”
“The sentence handed down by a federal judge is the culmination of a lengthy investigation, a protracted prosecution and a unanimous decision by a federal jury to convict Mr. Sterling for the unauthorized disclosure of national security information,” said Assistant Director in Charge McCabe. “The time and effort dedicated to this case by FBI special agents, intelligence analysts and prosecutors working on this matter exemplify the extent the FBI will undertake in pursuit of justice.”
Sterling was found guilty by a federal jury on Jan. 26, 2015. According to court records and evidence at trial, Sterling was employed by the CIA from May 1993 to January 2002. From November 1998 through May 2000, he was assigned to a classified clandestine operational program designed to undermine the Iranian nuclear weapons program. He was also the operations officer assigned to handle a human asset associated with that program, a person identified at trial as Merlin. Sterling was reassigned in May 2000, at which time he was no longer authorized to receive or possess classified documents concerning the program or the individual.
In connection with his employment, Sterling, who is a lawyer, signed various security, secrecy and non-disclosure agreements in which he agreed never to disclose classified information to unauthorized persons, acknowledged that classified information was the property of the CIA, and also acknowledged that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information could constitute a criminal offense. These agreements also set forth the proper procedures to follow if Sterling had concerns that the CIA had engaged in any “unlawful or improper” conduct that implicated classified information. These procedures permit such concerns to be addressed while still protecting the classified nature of the information. The media was not an authorized party to receive such classified information.
In August 2000, Sterling pursued administrative and civil actions against the CIA. Evidence at trial showed that Sterling, in retaliation for the CIA’s refusal to settle those actions on terms favorable to him, disclosed information concerning the classified operational program and the human asset to a New York Times reporter working on an unpublished article in early 2003 and a book the reporter published in January 2006. Sterling’s civil and administrative claims were ultimately dismissed by the court.
Evidence demonstrated that in February and March 2003, Sterling made various telephone calls to the reporter’s residence and e-mailed a newspaper article about the weapons capabilities of a certain country that was within Sterling’s previous clandestine operational assignment. While the possible newspaper article containing the classified information Sterling provided was ultimately not published in 2003, evidence showed that Sterling and the reporter remained in touch from December 2003 through November 2005 via telephone and e-mail. In January 2006, the reporter published a book that contained classified information about the program and the human asset.
Evidence at trial showed that Sterling was aware of a grand jury investigation into the matter by June 2006 when he was served a grand jury subpoena for documents relating to the reporter’s book. Nevertheless, between April and July 2006, Sterling deleted the e-mail containing the classified information he had sent from his account in an effort to obstruct the investigation.
This case was investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office, with assistance in the arrest from the FBI’s St. Louis Field Office. This case was prosecuted by Deputy Chief Eric G. Olshan of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Senior Litigation Counsel James L. Trump and Assistant U.S. Attorney Dennis Fitzpatrick of the Eastern District of Virginia.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
SEC WARNS INVESTORS TO LOOK OUT FOR GOVERNMENT IMPERSONATORS
FROM: U.S. SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Updated Investor Alert: SEC Warns of Government Impersonators
May 11, 2015
SEC staff is issuing this updated Investor Alert because we are aware of continuing fraudulent solicitations that purport to be affiliated with or sponsored by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The SEC does not endorse investment offers, assist in the purchase or sale of securities, or participate in money transfers. SEC staff will not, for example, contact individuals by telephone or email for purposes of:
seeking assistance with a fund transfer;
forwarding investment offers to them;
advising individuals that they own certain securities;
telling investors that they are eligible to receive disbursements from an investor claims fund or class action settlement; or
offering grants or other financial assistance (especially for an upfront fee).
SEC staff do not make these types of unsolicited communications, including emails or telephone calls asking for detailed personal and financial information, such as shareholdings and PIN numbers. If you receive a telephone call or email from someone claiming to be from the SEC (or another government agency), always verify the person’s identity. Use the SEC’s personnel locator, (202) 551-6000, to verify whether the caller is an SEC staff member and to speak with him or her directly. In addition, you can call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 for general information, including information about SEC enforcement actions and any investor claims funds. Our online Question Form is another way you can ask us about a solicitation.
If you have been contacted by someone misrepresenting himself as an SEC staff member, please let us know by either calling us or submitting a Complaint Form. You may also report the incident to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) at www.ic3.gov.
It’s not hard to figure out who the real regulators are and how you can contact them. You’ll find a list of international securities regulators on the website of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and a directory of state and provincial regulators in Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. on the website of the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA). If someone encourages you to verify information about a deal with an entity that doesn't appear on these lists, you should be wary.
For additional tips on investing wisely and avoiding fraud, please visit the following web pages on the SEC’s website and Investor.gov:
Updated Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (April 2013)
Updated Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (November 2012)
Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators> (February 2012)
Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (October 2010)
Investor Alert: SEC Warns of Government Impersonators (April 2010)
Advance Fee Fraud Schemes
PAUSE List of Fictitious Governmental Agencies and International Organizations Associated with Soliciting Entities
Worthless Stock: How to Avoid Doubling Your Losses
Fake Seals and Phony Numbers: How Fraudsters Try to Look Legit
FTC Identity Theft Site
The Office of Investor Education and Advocacy has provided this information as a service to investors. It is neither a legal interpretation nor a statement of SEC policy. If you have questions concerning the meaning or application of a particular law or rule, please consult with an attorney who specializes in securities law.
Updated Investor Alert: SEC Warns of Government Impersonators
May 11, 2015
SEC staff is issuing this updated Investor Alert because we are aware of continuing fraudulent solicitations that purport to be affiliated with or sponsored by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The SEC does not endorse investment offers, assist in the purchase or sale of securities, or participate in money transfers. SEC staff will not, for example, contact individuals by telephone or email for purposes of:
seeking assistance with a fund transfer;
forwarding investment offers to them;
advising individuals that they own certain securities;
telling investors that they are eligible to receive disbursements from an investor claims fund or class action settlement; or
offering grants or other financial assistance (especially for an upfront fee).
SEC staff do not make these types of unsolicited communications, including emails or telephone calls asking for detailed personal and financial information, such as shareholdings and PIN numbers. If you receive a telephone call or email from someone claiming to be from the SEC (or another government agency), always verify the person’s identity. Use the SEC’s personnel locator, (202) 551-6000, to verify whether the caller is an SEC staff member and to speak with him or her directly. In addition, you can call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 for general information, including information about SEC enforcement actions and any investor claims funds. Our online Question Form is another way you can ask us about a solicitation.
If you have been contacted by someone misrepresenting himself as an SEC staff member, please let us know by either calling us or submitting a Complaint Form. You may also report the incident to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) at www.ic3.gov.
It’s not hard to figure out who the real regulators are and how you can contact them. You’ll find a list of international securities regulators on the website of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and a directory of state and provincial regulators in Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. on the website of the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA). If someone encourages you to verify information about a deal with an entity that doesn't appear on these lists, you should be wary.
For additional tips on investing wisely and avoiding fraud, please visit the following web pages on the SEC’s website and Investor.gov:
Updated Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (April 2013)
Updated Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (November 2012)
Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators> (February 2012)
Investor Alert: Investors Beware of Government Impersonators (October 2010)
Investor Alert: SEC Warns of Government Impersonators (April 2010)
Advance Fee Fraud Schemes
PAUSE List of Fictitious Governmental Agencies and International Organizations Associated with Soliciting Entities
Worthless Stock: How to Avoid Doubling Your Losses
Fake Seals and Phony Numbers: How Fraudsters Try to Look Legit
FTC Identity Theft Site
The Office of Investor Education and Advocacy has provided this information as a service to investors. It is neither a legal interpretation nor a statement of SEC policy. If you have questions concerning the meaning or application of a particular law or rule, please consult with an attorney who specializes in securities law.
KEYNOTE REMARKS: BIOEONOMY AND CLIMATE CHANGE FORUM
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Economic, Energy, Agricultural and Trade Issues: Keynote Remarks at the Bioeconomy and Climate Change Forum
05/06/2015 01:10 PM EDT
Keynote Remarks at the Bioeconomy and Climate Change Forum
Remarks
Charles H. Rivkin
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
Washington, DC
May 6, 2015
As prepared
Thank you, Eric, for that introduction.
Good morning everyone, and a special welcome to our ambassadors and others from the foreign diplomatic corps here today.
Before I continue, I’d like to thank the many people responsible for today’s event, including our partner, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, or BIO. I look forward to hearing from Jim Greenwood, President and CEO, in just a few minutes.
I also want to thank all the people in the State Department who worked on this event for their outstanding support and participation in making this event happen. That includes, in particular, the Foreign Service Institute, as well as the Office of Global Food Security, the Office of the Science and Technology Advisor, the Bureau of Oceans, Environment, and Scientific Affairs, and of course our own Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs.
With that, I am delighted to kick off today’s event which will explore some of the innovative and exciting things this extended community is doing to address climate change. This is really one of the most challenging issues of our time but it is truly bringing out the best and brightest among us to respond.
As I thought about climate change and how far we have come, I thought about Homer’s Iliad, the ancient story of Helen of Troy – whose face launched a thousand ships to bring her back to Greece.
But before those ships could launch, they needed a favorable wind. So they consulted a prophet named Calchas, a man who examined animal entrails and observed the flight of birds to make his prognostications. He told the Greeks they would get their wind if their leader sacrificed his only daughter to the gods.
Back then, that’s what passed for climate science. Today, every Greek warrior would simply pull out a smartphone and check his weather app!
Of course, the Iliad’s a myth, set more than 3,000 years ago. But I use it to show just how far science has come and how technology is literally in our hands, letting us do things previous generations would have considered beyond the power of mere mortals. Most importantly, we are using the great discoveries of biotechnology to address climate change in more effective, sustainable and widely applicable ways.
Last fall, I went to Des Moines, Iowa, to attend the World Food Prize, and to speak about biotechnology as a tool for hunger alleviation and job creation. While there, I had the opportunity to join a farmer in central Iowa, sit in the buddy seat of his John Deere S670 combine harvester, and watch him work.
As we moved through the cornfields, his combine gathered, husked and shelled 12 rows of corn at a time, turning them into bushels of instant grain. He checked his progress with onboard computers and GPS technology. These helped him deposit seed and fertilizer precisely, and even showed if he had missed a single ear of corn!
While he was doing this, he spoke about the importance of international markets for American agriculture, and how he had once hosted President Xi Jinping of China at his farm.
In just one ride on a combine, I saw a farmer using technology to enhance his livelihood and engage fully within the global economy. I also saw how biotechnology was helping farmers to use sustainable techniques that reduce our carbon footprint and address climate change.
Of course, climate change cuts across all sectors of the bioeconomy, which not only include agriculture but health, industry and energy. It is one of the biggest threats of our time with a decisive role in everything from pandemic diseases to crop damage, and from famine to widespread destruction of homes and habitats.
One question for our time is this: Can we direct the kind of innovation that has already built the bioeconomy towards addressing these enormous challenges?
The answer is “yes,” if we continue to build on the incredible innovative progress we have made so far – and are making right now – in the biosciences.
It’s “yes,” as long as we share the same consensus mission: to provide for humanity’s ever growing needs while reducing our carbon footprint.
Finally, it’s “yes,” if we ensure that our breakthroughs not only create benefits for society but are sustainable in the global market.
Right now, in the United States, the bioeconomy is worth more than $300 billion dollars and already supports 1.6 million jobs. It can, and it should, grow more because, quite simply, we have no choice: We have to invent our way to solutions or face the consequences.
The good news is, innovation is central to our DNA. That’s clearly evident in the bioeconomy. We are finding ways to transform our waste into valuable resources. We are making our production processes more efficient and sustainable. Instead of addressing disease with chemically derived medicines that respond to symptoms, we are using biologically derived vaccines that work on the causes. And we are creating sustainable biofuels to drive our cars, warm our homes, and light up our workplaces.
But innovation needs support from many corners, from the funding of research to the protection of intellectual property rights; from a free and open internet to the imaginative partnerships that government and the private sector can create so that more people are free to make those powerful discoveries that benefit us all.
From the government corner, we need to address macro policies that respond to climate change. We need to agree on global commitments that count, metrics that matter, and standards that improve conditions.
The Obama administration has already shown its ongoing commitment in this space. It recently announced a target of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent in 2025 compared with 2005.
Last November, President Obama and President Xi Jinping of China made an historic Joint Announcement of our intended targets, with China agreeing for the first time to a peak year for its CO2 emissions of around 2030 and to an ambitious target of 20 percent clean energy in its energy mix by 2030.
This December in Paris, we are looking to establish, for the first time, an ambitious, durable climate regime that applies to all countries, is fair, and focuses on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building resilience.
Our commitment to address climate change is as widespread as it is focused.
We launched the Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture, which works to produce more food, adapt to a changing climate, and reduce greenhouse gases.
We support the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s Climate Technology Center and Network, and the Green Climate Fund, both of which support the efforts of developing countries in different ways to adapt to climate change.
That includes work to protect forests, support resilient agricultural sectors, and reduce greenhouse gases, while generating economic opportunities for their citizens.
We also invest billions in research and development of low carbon technologies and energy efficiency.
On other fronts, my Bureau has a leading role in making sure investors, entrepreneurs, researchers and the entire bio-economic extended community can be more connected, integrated, efficient and profitable.
For example, we advocate in world forums for a free internet to keep open channels of information, commerce and trade. We are integral to the negotiations in two ongoing multilateral trade deals that will not only break down barriers to trade and investment but set new environmental standards for member nations.
We also foster innovation by establishing legal frameworks that protect intellectual property rights, minimize corruption, and reward entrepreneurship.
The government has unique assets in at least two other ways. First of all, we have convening authority: We can assemble political leaders, scientists, economists, university leaders, business leaders and multilateral bodies to pursue mutually agreed upon goals.
Secondly, we have 270 embassies and posts around the world – our shoes on the ground, you might say – to extend our messages and outreach with citizens, political leaders and civil society organizations everywhere.
While the U.S. Government works to play its part, there are roles for a wide array of other actors in the bioeconomy, including other governments, multilateral bodies, businesses, universities, entrepreneurs, and scientists.
As I glance around this room, I can see a good representation of that global community. I look forward to hearing more about the stories you have to tell.
We have so much to build on; so many success stories in biotechnology, as we work to combat the effects of climate change. As I mentioned, one of the consequences of climate change is the increased risk of insect-borne disease exposure, such as dengue and malaria, in places such as Florida and Texas. The National Science Foundation has supported research that reengineers microorganisms to produce an anti-malarial drug. It’s called artemisinin and new companies are already putting it on the market.
That’s a perfect illustration of the bioeconomy at its best: Funded innovative research addresses a serious problem, using cross-disciplinary biosciences. The private sector brings it to market and makes it available globally. The problem is addressed.
As I learned on my trip to Iowa, the agricultural sector continues to benefit from innovation. We are making more sustainable use of land and water. We are developing drought tolerant varieties of corn, nutritionally enhanced rice, and disease resistant oranges. These are crucial breakthroughs as we also try to feed a global population that will reach an estimated 9 billion by the year 2050.
These and other stories prove to me that, despite the size and scale of our challenges, we are rising to meet them head on. I believe it’s because, throughout human history, we have made productive use of innovation since we first learned to rub two sticks together.
Back then it was sticks. Now we’re creating genetically modified mosquitos that don’t carry malaria. We are turning algae into jet fuel. We are making apples that don’t brown and potatoes that produce fewer carcinogens when fried.
Of course, with innovation comes change – and inevitably resistance. Charles Kettering, an American inventor and former head of research at General Motors, who owned 186 patents, once said: “The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress.”
The bioeconomy is all about progress, from the cellular level to the macro-economic level, as we work to grow an ecosystem of invention and reinvention that creates the products and processes for a more sustainable future. We may not seem as powerful and impressive as those ancient Greek warriors, waiting for their favorable wind. But if you compare the stakes we face, we can make the case that we’re more modern heroes. By creating a viable, sustainable bioeconomy, we are not only enhancing and sustaining society; we are contributing to a more ecologically balanced planet. For my money, that beats getting Helen back from Troy any time!
Thank you.
Economic, Energy, Agricultural and Trade Issues: Keynote Remarks at the Bioeconomy and Climate Change Forum
05/06/2015 01:10 PM EDT
Keynote Remarks at the Bioeconomy and Climate Change Forum
Remarks
Charles H. Rivkin
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
Washington, DC
May 6, 2015
As prepared
Thank you, Eric, for that introduction.
Good morning everyone, and a special welcome to our ambassadors and others from the foreign diplomatic corps here today.
Before I continue, I’d like to thank the many people responsible for today’s event, including our partner, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, or BIO. I look forward to hearing from Jim Greenwood, President and CEO, in just a few minutes.
I also want to thank all the people in the State Department who worked on this event for their outstanding support and participation in making this event happen. That includes, in particular, the Foreign Service Institute, as well as the Office of Global Food Security, the Office of the Science and Technology Advisor, the Bureau of Oceans, Environment, and Scientific Affairs, and of course our own Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs.
With that, I am delighted to kick off today’s event which will explore some of the innovative and exciting things this extended community is doing to address climate change. This is really one of the most challenging issues of our time but it is truly bringing out the best and brightest among us to respond.
As I thought about climate change and how far we have come, I thought about Homer’s Iliad, the ancient story of Helen of Troy – whose face launched a thousand ships to bring her back to Greece.
But before those ships could launch, they needed a favorable wind. So they consulted a prophet named Calchas, a man who examined animal entrails and observed the flight of birds to make his prognostications. He told the Greeks they would get their wind if their leader sacrificed his only daughter to the gods.
Back then, that’s what passed for climate science. Today, every Greek warrior would simply pull out a smartphone and check his weather app!
Of course, the Iliad’s a myth, set more than 3,000 years ago. But I use it to show just how far science has come and how technology is literally in our hands, letting us do things previous generations would have considered beyond the power of mere mortals. Most importantly, we are using the great discoveries of biotechnology to address climate change in more effective, sustainable and widely applicable ways.
Last fall, I went to Des Moines, Iowa, to attend the World Food Prize, and to speak about biotechnology as a tool for hunger alleviation and job creation. While there, I had the opportunity to join a farmer in central Iowa, sit in the buddy seat of his John Deere S670 combine harvester, and watch him work.
As we moved through the cornfields, his combine gathered, husked and shelled 12 rows of corn at a time, turning them into bushels of instant grain. He checked his progress with onboard computers and GPS technology. These helped him deposit seed and fertilizer precisely, and even showed if he had missed a single ear of corn!
While he was doing this, he spoke about the importance of international markets for American agriculture, and how he had once hosted President Xi Jinping of China at his farm.
In just one ride on a combine, I saw a farmer using technology to enhance his livelihood and engage fully within the global economy. I also saw how biotechnology was helping farmers to use sustainable techniques that reduce our carbon footprint and address climate change.
Of course, climate change cuts across all sectors of the bioeconomy, which not only include agriculture but health, industry and energy. It is one of the biggest threats of our time with a decisive role in everything from pandemic diseases to crop damage, and from famine to widespread destruction of homes and habitats.
One question for our time is this: Can we direct the kind of innovation that has already built the bioeconomy towards addressing these enormous challenges?
The answer is “yes,” if we continue to build on the incredible innovative progress we have made so far – and are making right now – in the biosciences.
It’s “yes,” as long as we share the same consensus mission: to provide for humanity’s ever growing needs while reducing our carbon footprint.
Finally, it’s “yes,” if we ensure that our breakthroughs not only create benefits for society but are sustainable in the global market.
Right now, in the United States, the bioeconomy is worth more than $300 billion dollars and already supports 1.6 million jobs. It can, and it should, grow more because, quite simply, we have no choice: We have to invent our way to solutions or face the consequences.
The good news is, innovation is central to our DNA. That’s clearly evident in the bioeconomy. We are finding ways to transform our waste into valuable resources. We are making our production processes more efficient and sustainable. Instead of addressing disease with chemically derived medicines that respond to symptoms, we are using biologically derived vaccines that work on the causes. And we are creating sustainable biofuels to drive our cars, warm our homes, and light up our workplaces.
But innovation needs support from many corners, from the funding of research to the protection of intellectual property rights; from a free and open internet to the imaginative partnerships that government and the private sector can create so that more people are free to make those powerful discoveries that benefit us all.
From the government corner, we need to address macro policies that respond to climate change. We need to agree on global commitments that count, metrics that matter, and standards that improve conditions.
The Obama administration has already shown its ongoing commitment in this space. It recently announced a target of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent in 2025 compared with 2005.
Last November, President Obama and President Xi Jinping of China made an historic Joint Announcement of our intended targets, with China agreeing for the first time to a peak year for its CO2 emissions of around 2030 and to an ambitious target of 20 percent clean energy in its energy mix by 2030.
This December in Paris, we are looking to establish, for the first time, an ambitious, durable climate regime that applies to all countries, is fair, and focuses on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building resilience.
Our commitment to address climate change is as widespread as it is focused.
We launched the Global Alliance for Climate Smart Agriculture, which works to produce more food, adapt to a changing climate, and reduce greenhouse gases.
We support the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s Climate Technology Center and Network, and the Green Climate Fund, both of which support the efforts of developing countries in different ways to adapt to climate change.
That includes work to protect forests, support resilient agricultural sectors, and reduce greenhouse gases, while generating economic opportunities for their citizens.
We also invest billions in research and development of low carbon technologies and energy efficiency.
On other fronts, my Bureau has a leading role in making sure investors, entrepreneurs, researchers and the entire bio-economic extended community can be more connected, integrated, efficient and profitable.
For example, we advocate in world forums for a free internet to keep open channels of information, commerce and trade. We are integral to the negotiations in two ongoing multilateral trade deals that will not only break down barriers to trade and investment but set new environmental standards for member nations.
We also foster innovation by establishing legal frameworks that protect intellectual property rights, minimize corruption, and reward entrepreneurship.
The government has unique assets in at least two other ways. First of all, we have convening authority: We can assemble political leaders, scientists, economists, university leaders, business leaders and multilateral bodies to pursue mutually agreed upon goals.
Secondly, we have 270 embassies and posts around the world – our shoes on the ground, you might say – to extend our messages and outreach with citizens, political leaders and civil society organizations everywhere.
While the U.S. Government works to play its part, there are roles for a wide array of other actors in the bioeconomy, including other governments, multilateral bodies, businesses, universities, entrepreneurs, and scientists.
As I glance around this room, I can see a good representation of that global community. I look forward to hearing more about the stories you have to tell.
We have so much to build on; so many success stories in biotechnology, as we work to combat the effects of climate change. As I mentioned, one of the consequences of climate change is the increased risk of insect-borne disease exposure, such as dengue and malaria, in places such as Florida and Texas. The National Science Foundation has supported research that reengineers microorganisms to produce an anti-malarial drug. It’s called artemisinin and new companies are already putting it on the market.
That’s a perfect illustration of the bioeconomy at its best: Funded innovative research addresses a serious problem, using cross-disciplinary biosciences. The private sector brings it to market and makes it available globally. The problem is addressed.
As I learned on my trip to Iowa, the agricultural sector continues to benefit from innovation. We are making more sustainable use of land and water. We are developing drought tolerant varieties of corn, nutritionally enhanced rice, and disease resistant oranges. These are crucial breakthroughs as we also try to feed a global population that will reach an estimated 9 billion by the year 2050.
These and other stories prove to me that, despite the size and scale of our challenges, we are rising to meet them head on. I believe it’s because, throughout human history, we have made productive use of innovation since we first learned to rub two sticks together.
Back then it was sticks. Now we’re creating genetically modified mosquitos that don’t carry malaria. We are turning algae into jet fuel. We are making apples that don’t brown and potatoes that produce fewer carcinogens when fried.
Of course, with innovation comes change – and inevitably resistance. Charles Kettering, an American inventor and former head of research at General Motors, who owned 186 patents, once said: “The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress.”
The bioeconomy is all about progress, from the cellular level to the macro-economic level, as we work to grow an ecosystem of invention and reinvention that creates the products and processes for a more sustainable future. We may not seem as powerful and impressive as those ancient Greek warriors, waiting for their favorable wind. But if you compare the stakes we face, we can make the case that we’re more modern heroes. By creating a viable, sustainable bioeconomy, we are not only enhancing and sustaining society; we are contributing to a more ecologically balanced planet. For my money, that beats getting Helen back from Troy any time!
Thank you.
Monday, May 11, 2015
AG LYNCH MAKES STATEMENT ON OFFICER SHOOTINGS IN HATTIESBURG
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, May 11, 2015
Statement by Attorney General Lynch on Officer Shootings in Hattiesburg, Mississippi
Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch released the following statement on the death of two officers in Hattiesburg, Mississippi:
“The shocking assault on law enforcement officers in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, struck at the heart of that great city. The Department of Justice stands ready to offer any possible aid to the Hattiesburg community as they investigate this appalling incident. And we will continue to do all that we can to protect our officers across the country and support all those who wear the badge.
“Officer Benjamin Deen and Officer Liquori Tate were committed and courageous public safety officials, dedicated to their community and devoted to their mission. They exemplified the very best that our country has to offer. And as we go forward, the Department of Justice intends to honor their service and their sacrifice by fighting for the values they protected every day, and defending the American people they were proud to serve.
“Their loss is made even more tragic by the fact that, on the day they were killed this past Saturday, the country began observing Police Week – a time when we pause to remember and honor the more than 20,000 law enforcement officers who have been killed in the line of duty. The murder of these young men is a devastating reminder that the work our brave police officers perform every day is extremely dangerous, profoundly heroic, and deeply deserving of our unequivocal support. All Americans owe these courageous citizens a debt of gratitude. The Department of Justice stands in solidarity with our brothers and sisters at every level of law enforcement as we mourn this most recent loss.”
Monday, May 11, 2015
Statement by Attorney General Lynch on Officer Shootings in Hattiesburg, Mississippi
Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch released the following statement on the death of two officers in Hattiesburg, Mississippi:
“The shocking assault on law enforcement officers in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, struck at the heart of that great city. The Department of Justice stands ready to offer any possible aid to the Hattiesburg community as they investigate this appalling incident. And we will continue to do all that we can to protect our officers across the country and support all those who wear the badge.
“Officer Benjamin Deen and Officer Liquori Tate were committed and courageous public safety officials, dedicated to their community and devoted to their mission. They exemplified the very best that our country has to offer. And as we go forward, the Department of Justice intends to honor their service and their sacrifice by fighting for the values they protected every day, and defending the American people they were proud to serve.
“Their loss is made even more tragic by the fact that, on the day they were killed this past Saturday, the country began observing Police Week – a time when we pause to remember and honor the more than 20,000 law enforcement officers who have been killed in the line of duty. The murder of these young men is a devastating reminder that the work our brave police officers perform every day is extremely dangerous, profoundly heroic, and deeply deserving of our unequivocal support. All Americans owe these courageous citizens a debt of gratitude. The Department of Justice stands in solidarity with our brothers and sisters at every level of law enforcement as we mourn this most recent loss.”
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO UN CONCERNED BURUNDI IS SLIDING INTO VIOLENT TURMOIL
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
May 8, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Good afternoon. We just heard a very concerning briefing from Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Great Lakes Region, Said Djinnit, about the situation in Burundi.
This is the third time the Council has come together just in the last month to address the need for all parties in Burundi to refrain from violence and intimidation before, during, and after elections, and to actively support the conditions for a peaceful, timely, credible, and inclusive elections process.
What we are seeing is a Burundi sliding into violent turmoil. The intensity of the violence has increased this week. Live rounds, water cannons, and arbitrary arrest have been used against protestors. We’ve now seen reports of grenade attacks.
While reports of those killed and arrested vary, we know that on May 4th at least three protestors were shot dead. On May 6th, another half dozen people were reportedly killed, and over the last three days, we have started to see more gruesome attacks against alleged members of the Imbonerakure, including a lynching and separate burning.
Amidst this increase in violence, refugee flows into Rwanda, Tanzania, and the DRC have skyrocketed to over 50,000 people. Any further violence carries with it the risk of irreversible consequences not just for Burundian citizens, but for the people of the Great Lakes region writ-large.
This violence is due to two very foreseeable and very preventable events. First, President Nkurunziza’s decision to seek a third term, which the United States has clearly stated is a violation of the Arusha Agreement. Despite warnings from multiple parts of Burundian society and the international community that such a move would lead to violence, Nkurunziza decided to move forward. He rejected, and indeed was extremely dismissive, of the possibility that his moving out in abrogation of the Arusha Agreement would generate protests and would result in violence. He ruled that out – out of hand – and now we are seeing, unfortunately, the consequence of his decisions and of his dismissiveness of these risks. Second, the government’s continued and relentless crackdown against the people’s rights to peacefully protest and freely express their views has itself increased violence. The severe restrictions placed on the media – traditional and social – have only exacerbated these problems.
While the government claims that President Nkurunziza’s third term is constitutional, and the Constitutional Court ruling this week supported that finding, we must underscore the apparent lack of judicial impartiality that led to this decision. The Vice President of Burundi’s Constitutional Court fled to safety in Rwanda this week and refused to succumb to the government’s pressure to validate President Nkurunziza’s third term.
This Vice President said judges, “were subjected to enormous pressure and even death threats,” stating that, “those opposed to a third term - violating the constitution and the Arusha Agreement - were afraid, because they were put under pressure.” “We risk our lives,” he said, “so judges had to get behind the third term and join the camp supporting it.”
We welcome the leadership being shown by the region. The foreign ministers of Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya and Angola were in Burundi this week to engage all parties to seek a way out the crisis. The heads of state of the East African Community will meet next week in Dar es Salaam, where we hope the crisis in Burundi is front and center – and we have every reason to believe it will be.
We also welcome African Union Chairwoman Dlamini-Zuma’s statement yesterday that Nkurunziza should not seek a third term and that what is most important at this critical time is to ensure a peaceful environment conducive to elections.
The government of Burundi has a window to stop and reverse the outbreak of violence by agreeing to allow for peaceful protests, easing restrictions to media, respecting human rights, and preventing violence by the Imbonerakure and the security forces. To date neither President Nkurunziza nor his government has condemned the violence by the youth militia or called for restraint by the police. We urge them to do so immediately; failure to take these steps will only heighten the scale of violence and increase the risk of this turning into a regional crisis.
With that, I’m happy to take a few questions.
Reporter: Madame Ambassador, thank you. What more can the Council do on this issue, given that Russia has sort of made clear that they think it’s a constitutional issue that the Council shouldn’t get involved in. Did you raise the possibility of threatening sanctions? And, what can you tell us about these reports that the President’s security are distributing weapons throughout the country and training militia? How concerned are you by this and what do you know about it?
Ambassador Power: Okay, let me get all of this. Let me just start with the reports that you mentioned. You might recall that, now, more than six months ago, the security advisor to the prior UN mission in Burundi was expelled from Burundi because of the leak of a report alleging the massive distribution of weapons to the Imbonerakure.
Now, we hear that some of those weapons are being used. We hear of threats by the youth militia toward people who peacefully protest against President Nkurunziza’s decision to pursue a third term. These are extremely alarming reports. There’s no question that there are weapons in the hands of people who are not affiliated with the traditional security establishment—with the armed forces and with the police. And the fact that these reports are increasing, not decreasing; the fact that prior reports appear to be credible; and the fact that the government’s only response to those reports was in effect to shoot the messenger—not literally, thankfully—but to expel the BNUB security advisor and indeed to end the prior mission, which had much more of a monitoring role than the current election-related mission. These are all extremely worrying facts.
In terms of sanctions, let me just say that the United States is very carefully monitoring the situation, and we are prepared to take targeted measures, including visa bans or sanctions, against those who plan or participate in wide-spread violence of the kind that we all fear. The United Nations Security Council has threatened action, and it remains to be seen what action the Council would come together in support of.
I think for all of the disagreement perhaps here or there about the constitution, there is no disagreement about the need for the Council to do everything in its power to prevent the situation from spiraling out of control. I mean, the Council is alarmed. I don’t think there’s been a period, maybe even in the last decade, where the Council has met this many times on Burundi consecutively. So right now, we’re emphasizing support for Said Djinnit, who’s actually trying to bring the parties together and see if there’s a peaceful way out of this crisis, and I think we will get at the “what are the next steps” again if these negotiations cannot bear fruit.
Reporter: Thank you. You have been to Bangui not once, but twice. So I must ask you, in light of these horrific allegations, are you satisfied that both France and the United Nations initiated this investigation quickly enough? Made sure that the soldiers were removed from that mission quickly enough? And that all the steps towards accountability have been taken? And related, does this draw new attention to all the reforms that have been called for in the past, on how to handle sex abuse in peacekeeping?
Ambassador Power: Thank you for the question. It’s an extremely important one. The allegations are completely horrific. You know, the fact that soldiers who are entrusted with the protection of civilians, the protection of young people—if these allegations prove true, again, it is such a profound violation, not only of the dignity and physical security of individuals in their most vulnerable state, but it is a complete abrogation of trust, between those who are alleged to come as protectors and those who violate that trust and take advantage of, again, the most acute vulnerability any of us could imagine experiencing. A vulnerability that comes from being desperate for food. From being desperate for protection.
So we don’t know, again, the full facts of the case at this stage—that is the case of the allegations of sexual abuse—whether those will be borne out. They are certainly very credible and very disturbing allegations. So it is essential that those countries whose soldiers are alleged to have been involved in crimes of this magnitude act aggressively to track down the facts and to punish anybody responsible.
In terms of the UN and the member state’s handling of the issue, I think it is extremely important that an impartial investigation be done also of that, on top of investigating the allegations themselves. When allegations like this are made, and sadly, this is not the first time that peacekeepers have been accused of sexual abuse of civilians who’ve put their faith in the international community. When allegations like these are made, speed is essential, absolutely imperative, because for as long, potentially, as crimes like these are being committed, then individuals are vulnerable to the same individuals who are alleged to be carrying out the crimes.
The safety of those who are brave enough to come forward, notwithstanding having potentially been abused, the safety of those individuals, those witnesses—the confidentiality of their testimony—that’s also essential.
So there are a number of elements to the appropriate handling of cases like this, and we need this impartial investigation of the handling to be carried out swiftly. We need all individuals, both in member states themselves and within the UN organization who were involved in the handling of this, again, grave and grotesque set of allegations, to involve themselves and come forward and make everything that they know available. And, I think the investigation needs to span, again, from start to finish. Because there were a lot of different stages to this.
But we need a system here, number one, where peacekeepers are vetted appropriately before they go into the field. Number two, at the slightest hint that peacekeepers could be carrying out abuses—that needs to be reported up the chain and investigated extremely swiftly. And we, again, like everyone, are concerned about the length of time between the alleged crimes and the time at which the appropriate authorities were made aware, and the lag between the time at which the appropriate authorities took the required action.
Reporter: Follow up on that? One question? Thanks. Appreciate it. One issue that has arisen that may not even need to wait for an investigation is that the Central African Republic says that they were never told of this, and given that these were their citizens, I wonder if you—does the U.S. think that when the UN system becomes aware of charges such as these, that the host country should be told? There’s also this issue, in the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling, that the Under Secretary General of Peacekeeping was reported, and the UN didn’t seem to dispute it, to have said that the whistleblower should resign or be suspended. And I wonder, this seems like a pretty serious charge. What do you think of that? Do you think that that is appropriate? What do you think of the treatment of the whistleblower who brought it to light?
Ambassador Power: I think, on a lot of these issues, we’re all going to be better off if we allow an impartial investigation to take hold. And, I think, you raise a really, really important issue about host country involvement, and we’d want to, again, get the facts on that. Certainly, it is the case that the host country itself, of course, has the sovereign responsibility for the protection of its citizens, and so, looking at what role Central African Republic authorities played or didn’t play has to be part of this.
And then, in terms of the individual who disclosed the allegations, who worked for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, again, it’s extremely important that any individual who comes into possession of allegations of this gravity acts swiftly. It is also extremely important that victim and witness safety be a very significant, a primary consideration as well. And so again, the impartial investigation will look at the handling and how both the issue of speed and the issue of victim and witness protection—how those issues were handled.
Ambassador Power: I think on a lot of these issues we’re all going to be better off if we allow an impartial investigation to take hold. And I think you raise a really important issue on host country involvement
Looking at what role Central African Republic authorities played or didn’t play has to be part of this.
It’s extremely important that any individual who comes into possession of allegations of this gravity acts swiftly, it is also extremely important that victim ad witness safety be a very significant, a primary consideration, as well.
Reporter: Ambassador, back to Burundi: I wonder if you could talk about the way the international architecture is set up. There’s been a lot of criticism from the Burundians themselves that the international community has been very slow on this issue – the fact that we do have 50,000 refugees and when the international community has been very well aware of what was going to happen. What can you say about how the international community responds to these issues, given what we’ve seen in South Sudan and Syria today?
Ambassador Power: Well, the international community, as represented by the UN Security Council, has actually been quite aggressive in the preventive diplomacy phase. I mean, the fact that just two months ago, or whenever it was, we all traveled all the way to Burundi as a way of sending a message to President Nkurunziza about what the risks were if he went ahead in violation of the letter and the spirit of the Arusha agreement. That’s actually quite unusual. And everybody on the Security Council, just as in the broader international community, is well aware of the history in Burundi, and of course the broader region, and how quickly political disputes can get – can descend into ethnic disputes. And Arusha enshrined a social compact that has allowed Burundi to make tremendous progress. And, you know, for the sake of Burundians who suffered so much and worked so hard to reconcile, and to get to the place they have gotten to, in terms of stability, including relative political stability – for that to be endangered. Sub-regional organizations sent the message that that was imperiled; regional organizations sent that message, including Dlamini-Zuma – not just yesterday, but over the course of recent months – and the Security Council traveled all the way there to send that message. I myself have been to Burundi twice in the last year to send that message. I believe the first Cabinet member to travel to Burundi in a long time, on behalf of President Obama, in order to send that message. So it is clear things are not going well in Burundi; and all of us want to learn if there was more we could have done. But at the end of the day, President Nkurunziza has to put his people first. The international community can’t make him privilege the welfare of his people, privilege the end of violence, over his own personal desire to seek a third term. He has to make that choice. And I think the message from the international community was loud and clear, and it’s a message that he has chosen not to hear. Thank you.
Reporter: (Inaudible, off mic) Syria?
Ambassador Power: I’ll just do that real quick. I’m not going to get ahead of the diplomatic discussions, but you all know that resolution 2118 – best remembered as the resolution that dismantled Syria’s declared chemical weapons program – bans the use of chemical weapons. And you know that resolution 2209 – the chlorine resolution – makes very clear that the use of chlorine as a weapon is chemical weapons use. And we heard in the Arria session devastating reports. I believe you all met as well with the doctors who treated the victims of chlorine attacks. So we believe, and it’s clear that many Council members agree, that we have got to have a means of establishing who was carrying out these chlorine attacks. To us, the Fact Finding Mission’s report was very clear – from the OPCW – it described hundreds of witnesses with the same symptoms. Victims who died without a cut on their bodies, just because they suffocated on this gas; and witnesses who described the smell of chlorine emanating at just the moment a helicopter came and dropped a barrel bomb on a particular building; the victims themselves smelled like chlorine. There are no allegations of how chlorine could be disbursed in the manner the OPCW has described it has been disbursed absent, again, these air attacks. Everybody who has been interviewed has described a correlation between the chlorine-related deaths and the dropping of what appear to be chlorine barrel bombs from helicopters. And, as you know, only the regime has helicopters. So we believe the factual record is quite straightforward and devastating in terms of Syrian regime use. But it is, as a factual matter, true that no one in the international system is mandated to establish attribution for these attacks; and we need to fix that. So we hope that we can make progress on a resolution to ensure that there is a mechanism that will not only establish chlorine use, but establish who carried out that use.
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
May 8, 2015
AS DELIVERED
Good afternoon. We just heard a very concerning briefing from Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for the Great Lakes Region, Said Djinnit, about the situation in Burundi.
This is the third time the Council has come together just in the last month to address the need for all parties in Burundi to refrain from violence and intimidation before, during, and after elections, and to actively support the conditions for a peaceful, timely, credible, and inclusive elections process.
What we are seeing is a Burundi sliding into violent turmoil. The intensity of the violence has increased this week. Live rounds, water cannons, and arbitrary arrest have been used against protestors. We’ve now seen reports of grenade attacks.
While reports of those killed and arrested vary, we know that on May 4th at least three protestors were shot dead. On May 6th, another half dozen people were reportedly killed, and over the last three days, we have started to see more gruesome attacks against alleged members of the Imbonerakure, including a lynching and separate burning.
Amidst this increase in violence, refugee flows into Rwanda, Tanzania, and the DRC have skyrocketed to over 50,000 people. Any further violence carries with it the risk of irreversible consequences not just for Burundian citizens, but for the people of the Great Lakes region writ-large.
This violence is due to two very foreseeable and very preventable events. First, President Nkurunziza’s decision to seek a third term, which the United States has clearly stated is a violation of the Arusha Agreement. Despite warnings from multiple parts of Burundian society and the international community that such a move would lead to violence, Nkurunziza decided to move forward. He rejected, and indeed was extremely dismissive, of the possibility that his moving out in abrogation of the Arusha Agreement would generate protests and would result in violence. He ruled that out – out of hand – and now we are seeing, unfortunately, the consequence of his decisions and of his dismissiveness of these risks. Second, the government’s continued and relentless crackdown against the people’s rights to peacefully protest and freely express their views has itself increased violence. The severe restrictions placed on the media – traditional and social – have only exacerbated these problems.
While the government claims that President Nkurunziza’s third term is constitutional, and the Constitutional Court ruling this week supported that finding, we must underscore the apparent lack of judicial impartiality that led to this decision. The Vice President of Burundi’s Constitutional Court fled to safety in Rwanda this week and refused to succumb to the government’s pressure to validate President Nkurunziza’s third term.
This Vice President said judges, “were subjected to enormous pressure and even death threats,” stating that, “those opposed to a third term - violating the constitution and the Arusha Agreement - were afraid, because they were put under pressure.” “We risk our lives,” he said, “so judges had to get behind the third term and join the camp supporting it.”
We welcome the leadership being shown by the region. The foreign ministers of Rwanda, Tanzania, Kenya and Angola were in Burundi this week to engage all parties to seek a way out the crisis. The heads of state of the East African Community will meet next week in Dar es Salaam, where we hope the crisis in Burundi is front and center – and we have every reason to believe it will be.
We also welcome African Union Chairwoman Dlamini-Zuma’s statement yesterday that Nkurunziza should not seek a third term and that what is most important at this critical time is to ensure a peaceful environment conducive to elections.
The government of Burundi has a window to stop and reverse the outbreak of violence by agreeing to allow for peaceful protests, easing restrictions to media, respecting human rights, and preventing violence by the Imbonerakure and the security forces. To date neither President Nkurunziza nor his government has condemned the violence by the youth militia or called for restraint by the police. We urge them to do so immediately; failure to take these steps will only heighten the scale of violence and increase the risk of this turning into a regional crisis.
With that, I’m happy to take a few questions.
Reporter: Madame Ambassador, thank you. What more can the Council do on this issue, given that Russia has sort of made clear that they think it’s a constitutional issue that the Council shouldn’t get involved in. Did you raise the possibility of threatening sanctions? And, what can you tell us about these reports that the President’s security are distributing weapons throughout the country and training militia? How concerned are you by this and what do you know about it?
Ambassador Power: Okay, let me get all of this. Let me just start with the reports that you mentioned. You might recall that, now, more than six months ago, the security advisor to the prior UN mission in Burundi was expelled from Burundi because of the leak of a report alleging the massive distribution of weapons to the Imbonerakure.
Now, we hear that some of those weapons are being used. We hear of threats by the youth militia toward people who peacefully protest against President Nkurunziza’s decision to pursue a third term. These are extremely alarming reports. There’s no question that there are weapons in the hands of people who are not affiliated with the traditional security establishment—with the armed forces and with the police. And the fact that these reports are increasing, not decreasing; the fact that prior reports appear to be credible; and the fact that the government’s only response to those reports was in effect to shoot the messenger—not literally, thankfully—but to expel the BNUB security advisor and indeed to end the prior mission, which had much more of a monitoring role than the current election-related mission. These are all extremely worrying facts.
In terms of sanctions, let me just say that the United States is very carefully monitoring the situation, and we are prepared to take targeted measures, including visa bans or sanctions, against those who plan or participate in wide-spread violence of the kind that we all fear. The United Nations Security Council has threatened action, and it remains to be seen what action the Council would come together in support of.
I think for all of the disagreement perhaps here or there about the constitution, there is no disagreement about the need for the Council to do everything in its power to prevent the situation from spiraling out of control. I mean, the Council is alarmed. I don’t think there’s been a period, maybe even in the last decade, where the Council has met this many times on Burundi consecutively. So right now, we’re emphasizing support for Said Djinnit, who’s actually trying to bring the parties together and see if there’s a peaceful way out of this crisis, and I think we will get at the “what are the next steps” again if these negotiations cannot bear fruit.
Reporter: Thank you. You have been to Bangui not once, but twice. So I must ask you, in light of these horrific allegations, are you satisfied that both France and the United Nations initiated this investigation quickly enough? Made sure that the soldiers were removed from that mission quickly enough? And that all the steps towards accountability have been taken? And related, does this draw new attention to all the reforms that have been called for in the past, on how to handle sex abuse in peacekeeping?
Ambassador Power: Thank you for the question. It’s an extremely important one. The allegations are completely horrific. You know, the fact that soldiers who are entrusted with the protection of civilians, the protection of young people—if these allegations prove true, again, it is such a profound violation, not only of the dignity and physical security of individuals in their most vulnerable state, but it is a complete abrogation of trust, between those who are alleged to come as protectors and those who violate that trust and take advantage of, again, the most acute vulnerability any of us could imagine experiencing. A vulnerability that comes from being desperate for food. From being desperate for protection.
So we don’t know, again, the full facts of the case at this stage—that is the case of the allegations of sexual abuse—whether those will be borne out. They are certainly very credible and very disturbing allegations. So it is essential that those countries whose soldiers are alleged to have been involved in crimes of this magnitude act aggressively to track down the facts and to punish anybody responsible.
In terms of the UN and the member state’s handling of the issue, I think it is extremely important that an impartial investigation be done also of that, on top of investigating the allegations themselves. When allegations like this are made, and sadly, this is not the first time that peacekeepers have been accused of sexual abuse of civilians who’ve put their faith in the international community. When allegations like these are made, speed is essential, absolutely imperative, because for as long, potentially, as crimes like these are being committed, then individuals are vulnerable to the same individuals who are alleged to be carrying out the crimes.
The safety of those who are brave enough to come forward, notwithstanding having potentially been abused, the safety of those individuals, those witnesses—the confidentiality of their testimony—that’s also essential.
So there are a number of elements to the appropriate handling of cases like this, and we need this impartial investigation of the handling to be carried out swiftly. We need all individuals, both in member states themselves and within the UN organization who were involved in the handling of this, again, grave and grotesque set of allegations, to involve themselves and come forward and make everything that they know available. And, I think the investigation needs to span, again, from start to finish. Because there were a lot of different stages to this.
But we need a system here, number one, where peacekeepers are vetted appropriately before they go into the field. Number two, at the slightest hint that peacekeepers could be carrying out abuses—that needs to be reported up the chain and investigated extremely swiftly. And we, again, like everyone, are concerned about the length of time between the alleged crimes and the time at which the appropriate authorities were made aware, and the lag between the time at which the appropriate authorities took the required action.
Reporter: Follow up on that? One question? Thanks. Appreciate it. One issue that has arisen that may not even need to wait for an investigation is that the Central African Republic says that they were never told of this, and given that these were their citizens, I wonder if you—does the U.S. think that when the UN system becomes aware of charges such as these, that the host country should be told? There’s also this issue, in the UN Dispute Tribunal ruling, that the Under Secretary General of Peacekeeping was reported, and the UN didn’t seem to dispute it, to have said that the whistleblower should resign or be suspended. And I wonder, this seems like a pretty serious charge. What do you think of that? Do you think that that is appropriate? What do you think of the treatment of the whistleblower who brought it to light?
Ambassador Power: I think, on a lot of these issues, we’re all going to be better off if we allow an impartial investigation to take hold. And, I think, you raise a really, really important issue about host country involvement, and we’d want to, again, get the facts on that. Certainly, it is the case that the host country itself, of course, has the sovereign responsibility for the protection of its citizens, and so, looking at what role Central African Republic authorities played or didn’t play has to be part of this.
And then, in terms of the individual who disclosed the allegations, who worked for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, again, it’s extremely important that any individual who comes into possession of allegations of this gravity acts swiftly. It is also extremely important that victim and witness safety be a very significant, a primary consideration as well. And so again, the impartial investigation will look at the handling and how both the issue of speed and the issue of victim and witness protection—how those issues were handled.
Ambassador Power: I think on a lot of these issues we’re all going to be better off if we allow an impartial investigation to take hold. And I think you raise a really important issue on host country involvement
Looking at what role Central African Republic authorities played or didn’t play has to be part of this.
It’s extremely important that any individual who comes into possession of allegations of this gravity acts swiftly, it is also extremely important that victim ad witness safety be a very significant, a primary consideration, as well.
Reporter: Ambassador, back to Burundi: I wonder if you could talk about the way the international architecture is set up. There’s been a lot of criticism from the Burundians themselves that the international community has been very slow on this issue – the fact that we do have 50,000 refugees and when the international community has been very well aware of what was going to happen. What can you say about how the international community responds to these issues, given what we’ve seen in South Sudan and Syria today?
Ambassador Power: Well, the international community, as represented by the UN Security Council, has actually been quite aggressive in the preventive diplomacy phase. I mean, the fact that just two months ago, or whenever it was, we all traveled all the way to Burundi as a way of sending a message to President Nkurunziza about what the risks were if he went ahead in violation of the letter and the spirit of the Arusha agreement. That’s actually quite unusual. And everybody on the Security Council, just as in the broader international community, is well aware of the history in Burundi, and of course the broader region, and how quickly political disputes can get – can descend into ethnic disputes. And Arusha enshrined a social compact that has allowed Burundi to make tremendous progress. And, you know, for the sake of Burundians who suffered so much and worked so hard to reconcile, and to get to the place they have gotten to, in terms of stability, including relative political stability – for that to be endangered. Sub-regional organizations sent the message that that was imperiled; regional organizations sent that message, including Dlamini-Zuma – not just yesterday, but over the course of recent months – and the Security Council traveled all the way there to send that message. I myself have been to Burundi twice in the last year to send that message. I believe the first Cabinet member to travel to Burundi in a long time, on behalf of President Obama, in order to send that message. So it is clear things are not going well in Burundi; and all of us want to learn if there was more we could have done. But at the end of the day, President Nkurunziza has to put his people first. The international community can’t make him privilege the welfare of his people, privilege the end of violence, over his own personal desire to seek a third term. He has to make that choice. And I think the message from the international community was loud and clear, and it’s a message that he has chosen not to hear. Thank you.
Reporter: (Inaudible, off mic) Syria?
Ambassador Power: I’ll just do that real quick. I’m not going to get ahead of the diplomatic discussions, but you all know that resolution 2118 – best remembered as the resolution that dismantled Syria’s declared chemical weapons program – bans the use of chemical weapons. And you know that resolution 2209 – the chlorine resolution – makes very clear that the use of chlorine as a weapon is chemical weapons use. And we heard in the Arria session devastating reports. I believe you all met as well with the doctors who treated the victims of chlorine attacks. So we believe, and it’s clear that many Council members agree, that we have got to have a means of establishing who was carrying out these chlorine attacks. To us, the Fact Finding Mission’s report was very clear – from the OPCW – it described hundreds of witnesses with the same symptoms. Victims who died without a cut on their bodies, just because they suffocated on this gas; and witnesses who described the smell of chlorine emanating at just the moment a helicopter came and dropped a barrel bomb on a particular building; the victims themselves smelled like chlorine. There are no allegations of how chlorine could be disbursed in the manner the OPCW has described it has been disbursed absent, again, these air attacks. Everybody who has been interviewed has described a correlation between the chlorine-related deaths and the dropping of what appear to be chlorine barrel bombs from helicopters. And, as you know, only the regime has helicopters. So we believe the factual record is quite straightforward and devastating in terms of Syrian regime use. But it is, as a factual matter, true that no one in the international system is mandated to establish attribution for these attacks; and we need to fix that. So we hope that we can make progress on a resolution to ensure that there is a mechanism that will not only establish chlorine use, but establish who carried out that use.
CARIBOU, MAINE SETTLES DOJ LAWSUIT CONCERNING SEX DISCRIMINATION
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
City of Caribou, Maine, Agrees to Settle Justice Department Lawsuit Alleging Sex Discrimination
The Justice Department announced today that it has agreed to enter into a consent decree with the city of Caribou, Maine, that, if approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, will resolve allegations that Caribou discriminated against a female employee based upon her sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The department’s complaint alleges that Caribou discriminated against a female city employee when she was regularly subjected to sexual harassment in the workplace by the city’s former Fire Chief, Roy Woods. According to the complaint, the sexual harassment of the victim included both unwanted touching and comments, culminating in Mr. Woods sexually assaulting the victim. At the time of the assault, the victim was 18 years old and worked for Caribou under Mr. Woods’ supervision. Mr. Woods was 66.
According to the department’s complaint, Caribou did not take reasonable steps to prevent Woods’ unlawful acts. For instance, supervisory employees with Caribou knew that Woods had a history of sexually harassing women in the workplace but Caribou never took any action to stop his harassment. Caribou did not take any corrective action at all until Dec. 27, 2011, after Woods had assaulted the victim. The victim was never provided with Caribou’s sexual harassment policy and was unaware of the process for reporting Woods’ illegal conduct before it escalated to an assault. The department’s complaint was based on a charge of discrimination filed by the victim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Maine Human Rights Commission that was forwarded to the department by the EEOC’s Boston Office.
Under the terms of the consent decree, once approved by the district court, Caribou is required to review and revise its sexual harassment policies in order to protect its employees from sexual harassment in the workplace. Caribou must provide training to its employees on its newly revised policies for the prevention of sexual harassment. The consent decree also requires Caribou to pay the victim a monetary award of $85,000.
“All Americans are entitled to a workplace that is free of unlawful harassment based upon sex,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division. “The early resolution of this case, without contested litigation, was in the best interests of all parties concerned.”
The United States is represented in this case by Civil Rights Division attorney Allan Townsend.
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
City of Caribou, Maine, Agrees to Settle Justice Department Lawsuit Alleging Sex Discrimination
The Justice Department announced today that it has agreed to enter into a consent decree with the city of Caribou, Maine, that, if approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, will resolve allegations that Caribou discriminated against a female employee based upon her sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The department’s complaint alleges that Caribou discriminated against a female city employee when she was regularly subjected to sexual harassment in the workplace by the city’s former Fire Chief, Roy Woods. According to the complaint, the sexual harassment of the victim included both unwanted touching and comments, culminating in Mr. Woods sexually assaulting the victim. At the time of the assault, the victim was 18 years old and worked for Caribou under Mr. Woods’ supervision. Mr. Woods was 66.
According to the department’s complaint, Caribou did not take reasonable steps to prevent Woods’ unlawful acts. For instance, supervisory employees with Caribou knew that Woods had a history of sexually harassing women in the workplace but Caribou never took any action to stop his harassment. Caribou did not take any corrective action at all until Dec. 27, 2011, after Woods had assaulted the victim. The victim was never provided with Caribou’s sexual harassment policy and was unaware of the process for reporting Woods’ illegal conduct before it escalated to an assault. The department’s complaint was based on a charge of discrimination filed by the victim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Maine Human Rights Commission that was forwarded to the department by the EEOC’s Boston Office.
Under the terms of the consent decree, once approved by the district court, Caribou is required to review and revise its sexual harassment policies in order to protect its employees from sexual harassment in the workplace. Caribou must provide training to its employees on its newly revised policies for the prevention of sexual harassment. The consent decree also requires Caribou to pay the victim a monetary award of $85,000.
“All Americans are entitled to a workplace that is free of unlawful harassment based upon sex,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta of the Civil Rights Division. “The early resolution of this case, without contested litigation, was in the best interests of all parties concerned.”
The United States is represented in this case by Civil Rights Division attorney Allan Townsend.
SBA EXPANDS HELP TO MATCH LENDERS WITH ENTREPRENEURS
FROM: U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
SBA Administrator Announces Major Expansion to LINC
Online Tool that Matches Entrepreneurs and Lenders is
Now Available to All 7(a) Lenders Nationwide
WASHINGTON– Today, the head of the U.S. Small Business Administration Maria Contreras-Sweet announced a major expansion to the recently launched online tool LINC –Leveraging Information and Networks to Access Capital - a platform that matches entrepreneurs with SBA lenders. Administrator Contreras-Sweet made the announcement during her keynote speech at the National Government Guaranteed Lenders annual conference in San Antonio, Texas, while on her nationwide tour for National Small Business Week, May 4-8.
“Effective today, all SBA lenders can participate in LINC, a platform that is bringing entrepreneurs and SBA lenders together to increase access to capital. There's a hunger among entrepreneurs to find financing to get their business off the ground or take the next big step in their expansion plan. The SBA stands there ready to help them, now with a few simple clicks,” said Contreras-Sweet.
LINC was originally launched last February as a pilot program and was available only to nonprofit lenders. The LINC matchmaking tool is now available to all 7(a) lenders nationwide, which constitutes a huge step toward giving small business entrepreneurs access to essential sources of capital in all 50 states and the U.S. territories.
“Since we launched this program in February, close to 14,000 matches have been made, and I have personally heard about the great success both our lenders and our entrepreneurs are having with LINC. If you have a bankable business idea backed by good credit and sound financial planning, the SBA is streamlining the process for you to get the capital you need,” said Contreras-Sweet.
SBA Administrator Announces Major Expansion to LINC
Online Tool that Matches Entrepreneurs and Lenders is
Now Available to All 7(a) Lenders Nationwide
WASHINGTON– Today, the head of the U.S. Small Business Administration Maria Contreras-Sweet announced a major expansion to the recently launched online tool LINC –Leveraging Information and Networks to Access Capital - a platform that matches entrepreneurs with SBA lenders. Administrator Contreras-Sweet made the announcement during her keynote speech at the National Government Guaranteed Lenders annual conference in San Antonio, Texas, while on her nationwide tour for National Small Business Week, May 4-8.
“Effective today, all SBA lenders can participate in LINC, a platform that is bringing entrepreneurs and SBA lenders together to increase access to capital. There's a hunger among entrepreneurs to find financing to get their business off the ground or take the next big step in their expansion plan. The SBA stands there ready to help them, now with a few simple clicks,” said Contreras-Sweet.
LINC was originally launched last February as a pilot program and was available only to nonprofit lenders. The LINC matchmaking tool is now available to all 7(a) lenders nationwide, which constitutes a huge step toward giving small business entrepreneurs access to essential sources of capital in all 50 states and the U.S. territories.
“Since we launched this program in February, close to 14,000 matches have been made, and I have personally heard about the great success both our lenders and our entrepreneurs are having with LINC. If you have a bankable business idea backed by good credit and sound financial planning, the SBA is streamlining the process for you to get the capital you need,” said Contreras-Sweet.
STATE DEPT.-SAN DIEGO PORT DISTRICT PARTNER TO ENHANCE MARITIME SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO ASIA, LATIN AMERICA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Law Enforcement, Narcotics, Anti-corruption: U.S. Department of State Announces Partnership with the San Diego Unified Port District
05/06/2015 04:35 PM EDT
U.S. Department of State Announces Partnership with the San Diego Unified Port District
Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 6, 2015
Ambassador William R. Brownfield, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), signed a formal Memorandum of Understanding with the Port of San Diego to launch a partnership that will enhance the Department’s maritime security assistance to Asia and Latin America.
Under this partnership, the vast expertise and experience of the Port’s Harbor Police Department will be put to work helping partner nations improve border security in the face of increased criminal threats. The Harbor Police Department is the law enforcement agency that patrols San Diego Bay, surrounding waterfront areas, and San Diego International Airport. Its 120 sworn officers are highly trained, with a range of expertise in a variety of subjects including maritime firefighting, counter smuggling, human trafficking, K-9 detection of explosives/narcotics, aviation security, vessel operations, maritime tactical training and dive operations. By providing training and mentorship, the Harbor Police will assist in efforts to combat transnational crime and build partner nations’ capacity to establish effective port and maritime security. The Harbor Police will be a unique partner for INL in addressing those challenges in addition to providing partner nations a regional perspective on port and maritime security.
This new relationship with the Port of San Diego is INL’s second port partnership and builds on the Bureau’s existing work with PortMiami to provide security assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean.
Law Enforcement, Narcotics, Anti-corruption: U.S. Department of State Announces Partnership with the San Diego Unified Port District
05/06/2015 04:35 PM EDT
U.S. Department of State Announces Partnership with the San Diego Unified Port District
Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 6, 2015
Ambassador William R. Brownfield, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), signed a formal Memorandum of Understanding with the Port of San Diego to launch a partnership that will enhance the Department’s maritime security assistance to Asia and Latin America.
Under this partnership, the vast expertise and experience of the Port’s Harbor Police Department will be put to work helping partner nations improve border security in the face of increased criminal threats. The Harbor Police Department is the law enforcement agency that patrols San Diego Bay, surrounding waterfront areas, and San Diego International Airport. Its 120 sworn officers are highly trained, with a range of expertise in a variety of subjects including maritime firefighting, counter smuggling, human trafficking, K-9 detection of explosives/narcotics, aviation security, vessel operations, maritime tactical training and dive operations. By providing training and mentorship, the Harbor Police will assist in efforts to combat transnational crime and build partner nations’ capacity to establish effective port and maritime security. The Harbor Police will be a unique partner for INL in addressing those challenges in addition to providing partner nations a regional perspective on port and maritime security.
This new relationship with the Port of San Diego is INL’s second port partnership and builds on the Bureau’s existing work with PortMiami to provide security assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean.
Sunday, May 10, 2015
A VIEW OF THE CLOUDY EARTH
FROM: NASA
 |
Decades of satellite observations and astronaut photographs show that clouds dominate space-based views of Earth. One study based on nearly a decade of satellite data estimated that about 67 percent of Earth’s surface is typically covered by clouds. This is especially the case over the oceans, where other research shows less than 10 percent of the sky is completely clear of clouds at any one time. Over land, 30 percent of skies are completely cloud free.
Earth’s cloudy nature is unmistakable in this global cloud fraction map, based on data collected by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA's Aqua satellite. While MODIS collects enough data to make a new global map of cloudiness every day, this version of the map shows an average of all of the satellite’s cloud observations between July 2002 and April 2015. Colors range from dark blue (no clouds) to light blue (some clouds) to white (frequent clouds).
There are three broad bands where Earth’s skies are most likely to be cloudy: a narrow strip near the equator and two wider strips in the mid-latitudes. The band near the equator is a function of the large scale circulation patterns—or Hadley cells—present in the tropics. Hadley cells are defined by cool air sinking near the 30 degree latitude line north and south of the equator and warm air rising near the equator where winds from separate Hadley cells converge. (The diagram here illustrates where Hadley cells are located and how they behave.) As warm, moist air converges at lower altitudes near the equator, it rises and cools and therefore can hold less moisture. This causes water vapor to condense into cloud particles and produces a dependable band of thunderstorms in an area known as the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).
Clouds also tend to form in abundance in the middle latitudes 60 degrees north and south of the equator. This is where the edges of polar and mid-latitude (or Ferrel) circulation cells collide and push air upward, fueling the formation of the large-scale frontal systems that dominate weather patterns in the mid-latitudes. While clouds tend to form where air rises as part of atmospheric circulation patterns, descending air inhibits cloud formation. Since air descends between about 15 and 30 degrees north and south of the equator, clouds are rare and deserts are common at this latitude.
Image Credit: NASA Earth Observatory image by Jesse Allen and Kevin Ward, using data provided by the MODIS Atmosphere Science Team, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
Caption: Adam Voiland, with information from Steve Platnick and Tom Arnold
Last Updated: May 9, 2015
Editor: Sarah Loff
|
U.S. LABOR DEPT. OFFERS FIVE THINGS TO KNOW REGARDING APRIL EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
OPA News Release
Five things you should know about the April employment numbers
WASHINGTON — With the release of the April 2015 Employment Situation Report today, U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez says there are five things you should know about the numbers:
With 223,000 jobs added in April, private-sector employment has grown for 62 consecutive months — the longest streak on record — to the tune of 12.3 million jobs over that time.
The national unemployment rate fell to 5.4 percent in April, the lowest it's been since May 2008.
The unemployment rate a year ago, in April 2014, was 6.2 percent. Since that time, the labor force participation rate has held steady, which means the decline in the unemployment rate has been due to people getting jobs.
Job growth last month was particularly strong in three sectors: construction, professional and business services, and education and health services. These are sectors that have historically provided good-paying middle-class jobs.
Despite all of the progress made, wages continue to be the unfinished business of the recovery. Wage growth has been picking up, with the average hourly wage increasing by 2.2 percent over the last year. But too many working people are still earning poverty wages. It's long past time for Congress to act to raise the minimum wage so that every person can share in the prosperity being created
OPA News Release
Five things you should know about the April employment numbers
WASHINGTON — With the release of the April 2015 Employment Situation Report today, U.S. Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez says there are five things you should know about the numbers:
With 223,000 jobs added in April, private-sector employment has grown for 62 consecutive months — the longest streak on record — to the tune of 12.3 million jobs over that time.
The national unemployment rate fell to 5.4 percent in April, the lowest it's been since May 2008.
The unemployment rate a year ago, in April 2014, was 6.2 percent. Since that time, the labor force participation rate has held steady, which means the decline in the unemployment rate has been due to people getting jobs.
Job growth last month was particularly strong in three sectors: construction, professional and business services, and education and health services. These are sectors that have historically provided good-paying middle-class jobs.
Despite all of the progress made, wages continue to be the unfinished business of the recovery. Wage growth has been picking up, with the average hourly wage increasing by 2.2 percent over the last year. But too many working people are still earning poverty wages. It's long past time for Congress to act to raise the minimum wage so that every person can share in the prosperity being created
SHOPPING MALL DEVELOPER ARRESTED FOR ALLEGEDLY TRYING TO CONCEAL $17 MILLION IN ASSETS DURING BANKRUPTCY
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Arizona Shopping Center Developer Arrested for Fraud and Bankruptcy Crimes in Alleged Scheme to Conceal $17 Million in Assets
An Arizona shopping center developer was arrested today on fraud and bankruptcy charges in connection with a scheme to allegedly conceal his control of approximately $17 million in assets.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney John S. Leonardo of the District of Arizona and Inspector in Charge Gary Barksdale of the Criminal Investigations Group of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service made the announcement.
Alex Papakyriakou, aka, Alex Papas, 57, of Phoenix, Arizona, was charged in an indictment in the District of Arizona with eight counts of bank fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit bankruptcy-related offenses, four counts of concealing assets in bankruptcy, one count of making a false oath in bankruptcy and three counts of falsification of records in bankruptcy.
According to allegations in the indictment, Papas and a now deceased business partner organized over 200 limited liability companies from 1997 to 2008 to develop shopping centers and other real estate projects in Arizona and elsewhere, funded by approximately $150 million from investors and $250 million in bank loans. When the companies encountered financial difficulties in 2007 and 2008, Papas allegedly created Cobea Associates, LLC (Cobea), a company nominally owned by his sister in South Africa, but actually operated and controlled by him to shield his valuable family assets from investors and other creditors. Papas then allegedly transferred title of his assets to Cobea, including a luxurious home in Paradise Valley, Arizona, a vacation beach house and a condominium in Laguna Beach, California, and a business entity in Scottsdale, Arizona, which bought and sold expensive vintage collector automobiles.
From June 2008 through approximately June 2013, Papas allegedly deceived various banks regarding the transfer of the assets and his financial condition to both obtain new loans and extend existing loans secured by his assets. Additionally, in 2011, Papas filed for bankruptcy, claiming that he had less than $1 million in assets and over $144 million in liabilities, while allegedly concealing and denying his control of the millions of dollars in assets he transferred to Cobea.
The charges contained in an indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The case is being investigated by the Criminal Investigations Group of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. The case is being prosecuted by Senior Litigation Counsel Jack Patrick and Trial Attorney Sarah Hall of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, with the assistance of Assistant U.S. Attorney Raymond Woo of the District of Arizona.
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Arizona Shopping Center Developer Arrested for Fraud and Bankruptcy Crimes in Alleged Scheme to Conceal $17 Million in Assets
An Arizona shopping center developer was arrested today on fraud and bankruptcy charges in connection with a scheme to allegedly conceal his control of approximately $17 million in assets.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney John S. Leonardo of the District of Arizona and Inspector in Charge Gary Barksdale of the Criminal Investigations Group of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service made the announcement.
Alex Papakyriakou, aka, Alex Papas, 57, of Phoenix, Arizona, was charged in an indictment in the District of Arizona with eight counts of bank fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit bankruptcy-related offenses, four counts of concealing assets in bankruptcy, one count of making a false oath in bankruptcy and three counts of falsification of records in bankruptcy.
According to allegations in the indictment, Papas and a now deceased business partner organized over 200 limited liability companies from 1997 to 2008 to develop shopping centers and other real estate projects in Arizona and elsewhere, funded by approximately $150 million from investors and $250 million in bank loans. When the companies encountered financial difficulties in 2007 and 2008, Papas allegedly created Cobea Associates, LLC (Cobea), a company nominally owned by his sister in South Africa, but actually operated and controlled by him to shield his valuable family assets from investors and other creditors. Papas then allegedly transferred title of his assets to Cobea, including a luxurious home in Paradise Valley, Arizona, a vacation beach house and a condominium in Laguna Beach, California, and a business entity in Scottsdale, Arizona, which bought and sold expensive vintage collector automobiles.
From June 2008 through approximately June 2013, Papas allegedly deceived various banks regarding the transfer of the assets and his financial condition to both obtain new loans and extend existing loans secured by his assets. Additionally, in 2011, Papas filed for bankruptcy, claiming that he had less than $1 million in assets and over $144 million in liabilities, while allegedly concealing and denying his control of the millions of dollars in assets he transferred to Cobea.
The charges contained in an indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The case is being investigated by the Criminal Investigations Group of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. The case is being prosecuted by Senior Litigation Counsel Jack Patrick and Trial Attorney Sarah Hall of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section, with the assistance of Assistant U.S. Attorney Raymond Woo of the District of Arizona.
DOL SAYS CONFINED SPACES RULE PROTECTS CONSTRUCTION WORKERS
FROM: U.S. LABOR DEPARTMENT
Confined spaces rule could protect nearly 800 construction workers a year
from serious injuries and reduce life-threatening hazards
Construction protections now match those in manufacturing and general industry
WASHINGTON — The Occupational Safety and Health Administration today issued a final rule to increase protections for construction workers in confined spaces.
Manholes, crawl spaces, tanks and other confined spaces are not intended for continuous occupancy. They are also difficult to exit in an emergency. People working in confined spaces face life-threatening hazards including toxic substances, electrocutions, explosions and asphyxiation.
Last year, two workers were asphyxiated while repairing leaks in a manhole, the second when he went down to save the first — which is not uncommon in cases of asphyxiation in confined spaces.
"In the construction industry, entering confined spaces is often necessary, but fatalities like these don't have to happen," said Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. "This new rule will significantly improve the safety of construction workers who enter confined spaces. In fact, we estimate that it will prevent about 780 serious injuries every year."
The rule will provide construction workers with protections similar to those manufacturing and general industry workers have had for more than two decades, with some differences tailored to the construction industry. These include requirements to ensure that multiple employers share vital safety information and to continuously monitor hazards — a safety option made possible by technological advances after the manufacturing and general industry standards were created.
"This rule will save lives of construction workers," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Unlike most general industry worksites, construction sites are continually evolving, with the number and characteristics of confined spaces changing as work progresses. This rule emphasizes training, continuous worksite evaluation and communication requirements to further protect workers' safety and health."
Compliance assistance material and additional information is available on OSHA's Confined Spaces in Construction Web page.
Confined spaces rule could protect nearly 800 construction workers a year
from serious injuries and reduce life-threatening hazards
Construction protections now match those in manufacturing and general industry
WASHINGTON — The Occupational Safety and Health Administration today issued a final rule to increase protections for construction workers in confined spaces.
Manholes, crawl spaces, tanks and other confined spaces are not intended for continuous occupancy. They are also difficult to exit in an emergency. People working in confined spaces face life-threatening hazards including toxic substances, electrocutions, explosions and asphyxiation.
Last year, two workers were asphyxiated while repairing leaks in a manhole, the second when he went down to save the first — which is not uncommon in cases of asphyxiation in confined spaces.
"In the construction industry, entering confined spaces is often necessary, but fatalities like these don't have to happen," said Secretary of Labor Thomas E. Perez. "This new rule will significantly improve the safety of construction workers who enter confined spaces. In fact, we estimate that it will prevent about 780 serious injuries every year."
The rule will provide construction workers with protections similar to those manufacturing and general industry workers have had for more than two decades, with some differences tailored to the construction industry. These include requirements to ensure that multiple employers share vital safety information and to continuously monitor hazards — a safety option made possible by technological advances after the manufacturing and general industry standards were created.
"This rule will save lives of construction workers," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Dr. David Michaels. "Unlike most general industry worksites, construction sites are continually evolving, with the number and characteristics of confined spaces changing as work progresses. This rule emphasizes training, continuous worksite evaluation and communication requirements to further protect workers' safety and health."
Compliance assistance material and additional information is available on OSHA's Confined Spaces in Construction Web page.
U.S. SUPPORTED NEW SYRIAN FORCES BEGIN COMBAT TRAINING
Right: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey answers a reporter's questions as Defense Secretary Ash Carter listens during a press conference in the Pentagon Briefing Room May 7, 2015. DoD Photo by Glenn Fawcett.
Carter: Combat Training Begins for New Syrian Forces
By Cheryl Pellerin
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, May 7, 2015 – Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced today that combat training has begun for nearly 90 fighters from the new Syrian forces and that a second group will begin training in the next few weeks.
Carter spoke alongside Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey during a briefing to the Pentagon press corps here.
“The program is a critical and complex part of our counter-ISIL efforts,” Carter said, referring to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.
The training for what the secretary called “highly vetted individuals” is led by very experienced trainers and taking place in a secure location, he said.
New Syrian Forces
Carter said the trainees have been in the program for quite a while, having gone through a process of being recruited and vetted.
“The training takes some time,” he added, “and then they would be inserted into operations, and the trainees [coming in] behind them. … We hope this to be an ever-expanding program once it proves itself, which I think it will.”
The trainees are being trained and equipped specifically to fight ISIL, the secretary said.
“That is the purpose, and that is the basis upon which they're being vetted and trained,” Carter said, adding that it’s not a goal of the U.S. program to have the new Syrian forces engage the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Engaging ISIL
The trainees are being fielded to engage ISIL, he said. “That will be their principal mission and that's one of the bases on which they would join our program in the first place.”
If Assad’s forces undertook to engage the new Syrian forces being trained, the Defense Department “would have some responsibility toward them,” the secretary said, but the extent of such responsibility and the rules of engagement have not yet been decided.
Carter said that along with the training, those who participate will receive compensation and small arms.
“We're figuring out what the best training is [and] what the best initial deployment is,” the secretary added. “We expect that to be successful and therefore to grow, but you have to start somewhere, and this is where we're starting.”
Growing the Program
Dempsey noted the program will be grown in a measured way.
“This … program is very complex,” the chairman added. “It won't be easy, but I'd emphasize that it's one part, one component, of a much broader approach.”
The stability of the Assad regime could be a consideration as the training program proceeds, and Dempsey agreed that a destabilized regime would pose new challenges.
“Two years ago, Assad was at a point where we thought he was at a disadvantage and that the opposition was on the rise, and then that situation reversed itself for a period of time,” Dempsey explained, “so we've been through the intellectual rigor of what this might mean.”
Counter-ISIL Strategy
For Syria it might mean further instability if power were to transfer precipitously, the chairman said, and it could worsen the humanitarian crisis.
“For us and our counter-ISIL strategy, it wouldn't change the dynamic --
meaning that we still have the fundamental challenge of finding moderate Syrian opposition men to train to be a stabilizing influence over time,” Dempsey said.
“On the side of our diplomacy and our diplomats, there’s the issue of finding moderate Syrian opposition to establish a political structure to which the military force we're building can be responsive,” he added.
The challenges wouldn’t change for the Defense Department, he said, but it would make the situation for Syria more complicated.
Dempsey added, “I do think that the [Assad] regime's momentum has been slowed, and … I do believe the situation is trending less favorably for the regime. And if I were him, I would find the opportunity to look to the negotiating table.”
JAMAICA RESIDENT FOUND GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY RELATED TO LOTTERY FRAUD
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Jamaican Lottery Fraud Defendant Found Guilty of Conspiracy to Commit Fraud and Other Charges
Sanjay Ashani Williams, of Montego Bay, Jamaica, was found guilty on charges of one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud or mail fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit international money laundering and 45 counts of wire fraud (counts two through 44), after a six-and-a-half-day-jury trial in federal court, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Christopher C. Myers for the District of North Dakota.
Williams sold “lead lists” to Jamaican lottery fraud scammers, providing the scammers with the names, telephone numbers and personal information of potential victims. Williams’ co-conspirators then contacted victims by telephone or mail and falsely told the victims they had won a large sweepstakes prize, such as $3.5 million and a new Mercedes Benz automobile. Callers repeatedly instructed victims that in order to claim the prize, the victims had to send money, sometimes thousands of dollars, to the scammers to pay non-existent taxes, fees, insurance and the like. Williams and other scammers deliberately targeted victims over the age of 55. After the “fees” were paid, the victims were required to send more and more money, however, the prize was fake and the victims did not receive the promised prize.
The scammers frequently impersonated trusted institutions such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Bank of America, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and state government agencies. They sometimes mailed official-looking, but fake, documents on letterhead to victims. Scammers also used official-looking email addresses, telephone numbers and sent bogus checks to victims in order to make the scam more convincing.
Williams is the first person prosecuted and convicted, in either the United States or Jamaica, for selling lead lists to be used in the Jamaican lottery fraud. In this case alone, over 70 victims were identified, with reported losses totaling over $5 million. Individual victims lost as much as $800,000 to the scam. Williams was one of the first Jamaican national defendants implicated in the Jamaican lottery fraud to have been tried and convicted in the United States. Prior to Williams’ trial, 11 indicted defendants from Jamaica and the United States were arrested and pleaded guilty in this case and 14 indicted defendants are awaiting arrest and extradition from Jamaica. Three additional co-conspirators were charged in a separate indictment.
“This case should send the message to fraudsters around the world, if you victimize North Dakota citizens, we can and will find you and bring you to justice,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Myers said. “It is our hope that this groundbreaking prosecution will open doors for other jurisdictions to prosecute these cases and that the lessons we’ve learned can be used across the country.”
Williams faces up to 40 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines, restitution and criminal forfeiture. The honorable Daniel L. Hovland has set a sentencing hearing and forfeiture hearings for Williams on Aug. 6, 2015, in U.S. District Court in Bismarck, North Dakota.
The case was investigated by the North Dakota office of the FBI and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) in Florida, with assistance from many other federal and state law enforcement agencies. Corporal Kevin Watson of the Major Organised Crime and Anti-Corruption Agency (MOCA), Lottery Scam Task Force in Jamaica, testified as an expert witness.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Clare Hochhalter, Nick Chase and Patrick Thomas and Trial Attorney Lorinda Laryea for the Department of Justice prosecuted the case.
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Jamaican Lottery Fraud Defendant Found Guilty of Conspiracy to Commit Fraud and Other Charges
Sanjay Ashani Williams, of Montego Bay, Jamaica, was found guilty on charges of one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud or mail fraud, one count of conspiracy to commit international money laundering and 45 counts of wire fraud (counts two through 44), after a six-and-a-half-day-jury trial in federal court, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Christopher C. Myers for the District of North Dakota.
Williams sold “lead lists” to Jamaican lottery fraud scammers, providing the scammers with the names, telephone numbers and personal information of potential victims. Williams’ co-conspirators then contacted victims by telephone or mail and falsely told the victims they had won a large sweepstakes prize, such as $3.5 million and a new Mercedes Benz automobile. Callers repeatedly instructed victims that in order to claim the prize, the victims had to send money, sometimes thousands of dollars, to the scammers to pay non-existent taxes, fees, insurance and the like. Williams and other scammers deliberately targeted victims over the age of 55. After the “fees” were paid, the victims were required to send more and more money, however, the prize was fake and the victims did not receive the promised prize.
The scammers frequently impersonated trusted institutions such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Bank of America, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and state government agencies. They sometimes mailed official-looking, but fake, documents on letterhead to victims. Scammers also used official-looking email addresses, telephone numbers and sent bogus checks to victims in order to make the scam more convincing.
Williams is the first person prosecuted and convicted, in either the United States or Jamaica, for selling lead lists to be used in the Jamaican lottery fraud. In this case alone, over 70 victims were identified, with reported losses totaling over $5 million. Individual victims lost as much as $800,000 to the scam. Williams was one of the first Jamaican national defendants implicated in the Jamaican lottery fraud to have been tried and convicted in the United States. Prior to Williams’ trial, 11 indicted defendants from Jamaica and the United States were arrested and pleaded guilty in this case and 14 indicted defendants are awaiting arrest and extradition from Jamaica. Three additional co-conspirators were charged in a separate indictment.
“This case should send the message to fraudsters around the world, if you victimize North Dakota citizens, we can and will find you and bring you to justice,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Myers said. “It is our hope that this groundbreaking prosecution will open doors for other jurisdictions to prosecute these cases and that the lessons we’ve learned can be used across the country.”
Williams faces up to 40 years in prison and millions of dollars in fines, restitution and criminal forfeiture. The honorable Daniel L. Hovland has set a sentencing hearing and forfeiture hearings for Williams on Aug. 6, 2015, in U.S. District Court in Bismarck, North Dakota.
The case was investigated by the North Dakota office of the FBI and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) in Florida, with assistance from many other federal and state law enforcement agencies. Corporal Kevin Watson of the Major Organised Crime and Anti-Corruption Agency (MOCA), Lottery Scam Task Force in Jamaica, testified as an expert witness.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Clare Hochhalter, Nick Chase and Patrick Thomas and Trial Attorney Lorinda Laryea for the Department of Justice prosecuted the case.
CDC SAYS MANY DON'T RECEIVE RECOMMENDED CANCER SCREENINGS
FROM: CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Cancer Screening Test Use — United States, 2013
Many people are not receiving breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening as recommended. These screenings can reduce deaths from these cancers. People should talk with their healthcare providers about what screenings are appropriate for them, when they should start to receive them, and how often tests should be repeated. Screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer can reduce deaths from these cancers. While many people are up-to-date with these screenings, there is room for improvement. In 2013, screening use was below national targets, with no progress in increasing screening use compared with 2010.
Among adults of screening age, 72.6 percent of women reported having a mammogram within two years (Healthy People 2020 target 81.1 percent), 80.7 percent reported having a Pap test within three years (target 93.0 percent), and 58.2 percent of adults reported having recent colorectal cancer screening (target 70.5 percent).
Cancer Screening Test Use — United States, 2013
Many people are not receiving breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening as recommended. These screenings can reduce deaths from these cancers. People should talk with their healthcare providers about what screenings are appropriate for them, when they should start to receive them, and how often tests should be repeated. Screening for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer can reduce deaths from these cancers. While many people are up-to-date with these screenings, there is room for improvement. In 2013, screening use was below national targets, with no progress in increasing screening use compared with 2010.
Among adults of screening age, 72.6 percent of women reported having a mammogram within two years (Healthy People 2020 target 81.1 percent), 80.7 percent reported having a Pap test within three years (target 93.0 percent), and 58.2 percent of adults reported having recent colorectal cancer screening (target 70.5 percent).
Saturday, May 9, 2015
AIRSTRIKES CONTINUE HITTING ISIL
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Airstrikes Hit ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, May 8, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack, bomber fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted five airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Hasakah, four airstrikes struck three ISIL tactical units, destroying four ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Raqqah, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL vehicle.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted nine airstrikes in Iraq, approved by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:
-- Near Asad, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL building.
-- Near Qaim, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Beiji, three airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying six ISIL fighting positions, three ISIL vehicles, an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device and an ISIL armored personnel carrier.
-- Near Mosul, three airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units, destroying an ISIL fighting position, an ISIL heavy machine gun and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Sinjar, one airstrike struck an ISIL large tactical unit, destroying seven ISIL buildings and destroying nine ISIL heavy machine guns.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Jordan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Canada, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Airstrikes Hit ISIL in Syria, Iraq
From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, May 8, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces have continued to attack Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Inherent Resolve officials reported today.
Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.
Airstrikes in Syria
Attack, bomber fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted five airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Hasakah, four airstrikes struck three ISIL tactical units, destroying four ISIL fighting positions and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Raqqah, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL vehicle.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack, fighter and remotely piloted aircraft conducted nine airstrikes in Iraq, approved by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense:
-- Near Asad, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL building.
-- Near Qaim, one airstrike struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Beiji, three airstrikes struck an ISIL tactical unit, destroying six ISIL fighting positions, three ISIL vehicles, an ISIL vehicle-borne improvised explosive device and an ISIL armored personnel carrier.
-- Near Mosul, three airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units, destroying an ISIL fighting position, an ISIL heavy machine gun and an ISIL vehicle.
-- Near Sinjar, one airstrike struck an ISIL large tactical unit, destroying seven ISIL buildings and destroying nine ISIL heavy machine guns.
Part of Operation Inherent Resolve
The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations.
Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Iraq include the United States, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Jordan, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations conducting airstrikes in Syria include the United States, Bahrain, Canada, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT ON LIBERIA AND NEW EBOLA CASES
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
May 09, 2015
Statement by the Press Secretary on Liberia
Today, the Republic of Liberia reached the important milestone of 42 days without reporting a new Ebola case, and we are pleased the World Health Organization was able to declare the end of the country’s current outbreak. We congratulate the people of Liberia on reaching this important marker, and once again pledge our commitment to ending the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and helping to rebuild Liberia and other affected nations. As President Obama said when Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf visited the White House last month, “We’re proud to partner with you and we intend to see this through until the job is done.” While this milestone is important, the world must not forget that the Ebola outbreak still persists in neighboring Sierra Leone and Guinea. We must not let down our guard until the entire region reaches and stays at zero Ebola cases. And we must all work together to strengthen capacity around the world to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to outbreaks before they become epidemics.
May 09, 2015
Statement by the Press Secretary on Liberia
Today, the Republic of Liberia reached the important milestone of 42 days without reporting a new Ebola case, and we are pleased the World Health Organization was able to declare the end of the country’s current outbreak. We congratulate the people of Liberia on reaching this important marker, and once again pledge our commitment to ending the Ebola outbreak in West Africa and helping to rebuild Liberia and other affected nations. As President Obama said when Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf visited the White House last month, “We’re proud to partner with you and we intend to see this through until the job is done.” While this milestone is important, the world must not forget that the Ebola outbreak still persists in neighboring Sierra Leone and Guinea. We must not let down our guard until the entire region reaches and stays at zero Ebola cases. And we must all work together to strengthen capacity around the world to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to outbreaks before they become epidemics.
CHARLES RIVKIN SPEAKS ON TRADE
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the Second Worldwide Symposium of the Foreign Trade Advisors of France
Remarks
Charles H. Rivkin
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
Miami, FL
May 7, 2015
Thank you, Paul, for that kind introduction.
Mesdames et messieurs les parlementaires, mesdames et messieurs les ambassadeurs… Messieurs les chefs d’entreprise, et les entrepreneurs, tous ceux parmi vous qui aspirent à créer des entreprises et à investir aux Etats-Unis…
C’est pour moi un honneur de participer à ce forum et d’avoir l’opportunité de m’adresser à une assemblée aussi prestigieuse de femmes et d’hommes politiques, de chefs d’entreprise qui viennent de cinquante pays différents, et aussi d’entrepreneurs, un mot d’origine francaise qui fait aujourd’hui partie intégrante du vocabulaire américain et de notre ADN.
Le mot “terroir” est un mot francais qui n’a pas d’équivalent en anglais. Mais après avoir parcouru les 22 régions francaises – en tant qu’ambassadeur des Etats-Unis en France – j’ai pu pleinement appréhendé le sens de ce terme: l’histoire, la culture, et la fierté qui émanent de ces territoires et qui donnent à vos regions leur identité. J’ai pu réaliser à quel point ce pays se caractérise par sa richesse et sa diversité.
C’est un honneur pour moi de me trouver aujourd’hui avec des représentants de ce pays que j’affectionne tant.
Today, in English, I will briefly explore the question that the organizers of this conference have asked me to address: “The United States in 2025: first economic and political power?” Of course, the title is intentionally a little provocative. But while we cannot claim to predict the future, we can follow the wisdom of a previous American president – Abraham Lincoln.
He once said: “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”
“Le meilleur moyen de prédire l’avenir est de le créer.”
Under President Obama and Secretary Kerry’s leadership, I am fortunate to be in a position where we are working to do just that.
We do this by following two key principles.
The first is that “economic policy is foreign policy, and foreign policy is economic policy.” Secretary John Kerry has not only recognized the inextricable link between foreign policy and economic policy, he has made it central to everything we do.
The majority of challenges we face are economic in nature and, very often, those challenges have security implications for the United States of America. In a world where countries like the BRICS nations are already using their economic clout to punch above their weight, it is clear that economic power is no longer an option. It’s an imperative.
The second principle recognizes the strategic value of a shared economic future. The world has become flatter, more connected, and therefore more interdependent. There is no realistic scenario for an aspiring world power to try and create its economic, or any kind of, success in individually directed ways.
In the 21st century, the ones who earn the most economic power will be those who are smart enough to share it with key partners. This is central to what the Secretary calls the shared prosperity agenda.
As Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs, we are working to make that agenda real in many ways, including through two ongoing multilateral trade deals, which will not only benefit 12 countries in the Asia Pacific region, including the United States, but all 28 of our friends and allies in the European Union.
The deal that is closest to conclusion is the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, or TPP, which would bring the United States into free and open trade with Canada and Mexico; Chile and Peru; Australia and New Zealand; Japan, Malaysia and Singapore; Brunei and Vietnam.
Our hope is that this partnership will be followed by a second transformative trade deal – the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – or T-TIP – which we are currently negotiating with the European Union.
These deals – together – would account for the greater majority of the world’s trade, GDP, and future economic growth. Not only that, these ambitious, comprehensive, and high-standard trade and investment agreements would allow us to create enforceable labor, consumer and environmental standards that will establish a high bar for the rest of the world.
TPP alone, if concluded, would connect Americans with 40 percent of the world’s GDP – and 50 percent of its projected economic growth. In Asia, there are currently 525 million middle class consumers. That number is expected to grow to 2.7 billion by 2030. For the United States, that’s a market that’s projected to be six times the size of our domestic one.
T-TIP is equally important to us. The transatlantic economic relationship is already the world’s largest, accounting for one third of total goods and services trade and nearly half of global economic output.
It will not only boost economic growth in the United States and the EU. It will add to the more than 13 million American and EU jobs already supported by transatlantic trade and investment. We will also build on the transatlantic ties that undergird our national security.
I know that, in the audience today, there are many companies, most of them French, that either have a presence in the United States, or are strongly considering investing here.
This brings me to a third component of the shared prosperity agenda that I would like to briefly talk about. As Assistant Secretary, everywhere I travel, from Mumbai to Mexico City, from Bangkok to Beijing, I meet with investors and other business people who tell me just how much they love investing in the United States – and how they plan to invest even more. They recognize – as we do – that the U.S. is the world’s most attractive and stable market for high-quality goods and services.
Maintaining a strong and vibrant business climate that is built on innovation, strong intellectual property rights protections, a transparent legal system and a stable regulatory environment is central to the American economy and to our way of life. And we have a consumer market, workforce, advanced technology and resources that are, frankly, second to none.
The sheer diversity of the U.S. economy means that there are opportunities for nearly every company – from start-ups to medium-sized enterprises to multinationals.
Through SelectUSA, a joint initiative with the Department of Commerce, we work to promote, increase and support inward investment in the United States. We know that foreign companies will create jobs and innovation in the U.S., and also generate profits and exports for their home countries. Not only that, these companies bring back home technology, management expertise, cultural understanding, innovative products, and access to new markets. They increase prosperity, as well as economic and political stability, for nations and workers alike.
That’s the underlying wisdom of global prosperity. It’s not a “zero sum game,” but one of mutual gain.
As Victor Hugo also said: “There is nothing in the world – not even mighty armies – as powerful as an idea whose time has come.”
“Rien n’est plus puissant – pas même les plus grandes armées - qu’une idée dont le temps est venu.”
Economic power, based on two-way trade and investment, is one of those ideas whose time has truly come. The kind of 21st century, high standard and ambitious free trade agreements that we seek will bring shared prosperity, and so much more.
As Secretary of Defense Ash Carter recently said – and I quote: “Passing TPP is as important to me as another aircraft carrier. It would deepen our alliances and partnerships abroad and underscore our lasting commitment to the Asia-Pacific. And it would help us promote a global order that reflects both our interests and our values.”
These two trade deals, ladies and gentlemen, are as much strategic as they are economic. They will solidify relations with our friends and allies around the world.
And by embracing this idea of shared prosperity, we are not only embracing the future, we are helping to write it as well.
Merci, thank you – I enjoyed having the chance to speak with you and would be pleased to answer any of your questions.
Remarks at the Second Worldwide Symposium of the Foreign Trade Advisors of France
Remarks
Charles H. Rivkin
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs
Miami, FL
May 7, 2015
Thank you, Paul, for that kind introduction.
Mesdames et messieurs les parlementaires, mesdames et messieurs les ambassadeurs… Messieurs les chefs d’entreprise, et les entrepreneurs, tous ceux parmi vous qui aspirent à créer des entreprises et à investir aux Etats-Unis…
C’est pour moi un honneur de participer à ce forum et d’avoir l’opportunité de m’adresser à une assemblée aussi prestigieuse de femmes et d’hommes politiques, de chefs d’entreprise qui viennent de cinquante pays différents, et aussi d’entrepreneurs, un mot d’origine francaise qui fait aujourd’hui partie intégrante du vocabulaire américain et de notre ADN.
Le mot “terroir” est un mot francais qui n’a pas d’équivalent en anglais. Mais après avoir parcouru les 22 régions francaises – en tant qu’ambassadeur des Etats-Unis en France – j’ai pu pleinement appréhendé le sens de ce terme: l’histoire, la culture, et la fierté qui émanent de ces territoires et qui donnent à vos regions leur identité. J’ai pu réaliser à quel point ce pays se caractérise par sa richesse et sa diversité.
C’est un honneur pour moi de me trouver aujourd’hui avec des représentants de ce pays que j’affectionne tant.
Today, in English, I will briefly explore the question that the organizers of this conference have asked me to address: “The United States in 2025: first economic and political power?” Of course, the title is intentionally a little provocative. But while we cannot claim to predict the future, we can follow the wisdom of a previous American president – Abraham Lincoln.
He once said: “The best way to predict the future is to create it.”
“Le meilleur moyen de prédire l’avenir est de le créer.”
Under President Obama and Secretary Kerry’s leadership, I am fortunate to be in a position where we are working to do just that.
We do this by following two key principles.
The first is that “economic policy is foreign policy, and foreign policy is economic policy.” Secretary John Kerry has not only recognized the inextricable link between foreign policy and economic policy, he has made it central to everything we do.
The majority of challenges we face are economic in nature and, very often, those challenges have security implications for the United States of America. In a world where countries like the BRICS nations are already using their economic clout to punch above their weight, it is clear that economic power is no longer an option. It’s an imperative.
The second principle recognizes the strategic value of a shared economic future. The world has become flatter, more connected, and therefore more interdependent. There is no realistic scenario for an aspiring world power to try and create its economic, or any kind of, success in individually directed ways.
In the 21st century, the ones who earn the most economic power will be those who are smart enough to share it with key partners. This is central to what the Secretary calls the shared prosperity agenda.
As Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs, we are working to make that agenda real in many ways, including through two ongoing multilateral trade deals, which will not only benefit 12 countries in the Asia Pacific region, including the United States, but all 28 of our friends and allies in the European Union.
The deal that is closest to conclusion is the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, or TPP, which would bring the United States into free and open trade with Canada and Mexico; Chile and Peru; Australia and New Zealand; Japan, Malaysia and Singapore; Brunei and Vietnam.
Our hope is that this partnership will be followed by a second transformative trade deal – the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – or T-TIP – which we are currently negotiating with the European Union.
These deals – together – would account for the greater majority of the world’s trade, GDP, and future economic growth. Not only that, these ambitious, comprehensive, and high-standard trade and investment agreements would allow us to create enforceable labor, consumer and environmental standards that will establish a high bar for the rest of the world.
TPP alone, if concluded, would connect Americans with 40 percent of the world’s GDP – and 50 percent of its projected economic growth. In Asia, there are currently 525 million middle class consumers. That number is expected to grow to 2.7 billion by 2030. For the United States, that’s a market that’s projected to be six times the size of our domestic one.
T-TIP is equally important to us. The transatlantic economic relationship is already the world’s largest, accounting for one third of total goods and services trade and nearly half of global economic output.
It will not only boost economic growth in the United States and the EU. It will add to the more than 13 million American and EU jobs already supported by transatlantic trade and investment. We will also build on the transatlantic ties that undergird our national security.
I know that, in the audience today, there are many companies, most of them French, that either have a presence in the United States, or are strongly considering investing here.
This brings me to a third component of the shared prosperity agenda that I would like to briefly talk about. As Assistant Secretary, everywhere I travel, from Mumbai to Mexico City, from Bangkok to Beijing, I meet with investors and other business people who tell me just how much they love investing in the United States – and how they plan to invest even more. They recognize – as we do – that the U.S. is the world’s most attractive and stable market for high-quality goods and services.
Maintaining a strong and vibrant business climate that is built on innovation, strong intellectual property rights protections, a transparent legal system and a stable regulatory environment is central to the American economy and to our way of life. And we have a consumer market, workforce, advanced technology and resources that are, frankly, second to none.
The sheer diversity of the U.S. economy means that there are opportunities for nearly every company – from start-ups to medium-sized enterprises to multinationals.
Through SelectUSA, a joint initiative with the Department of Commerce, we work to promote, increase and support inward investment in the United States. We know that foreign companies will create jobs and innovation in the U.S., and also generate profits and exports for their home countries. Not only that, these companies bring back home technology, management expertise, cultural understanding, innovative products, and access to new markets. They increase prosperity, as well as economic and political stability, for nations and workers alike.
That’s the underlying wisdom of global prosperity. It’s not a “zero sum game,” but one of mutual gain.
As Victor Hugo also said: “There is nothing in the world – not even mighty armies – as powerful as an idea whose time has come.”
“Rien n’est plus puissant – pas même les plus grandes armées - qu’une idée dont le temps est venu.”
Economic power, based on two-way trade and investment, is one of those ideas whose time has truly come. The kind of 21st century, high standard and ambitious free trade agreements that we seek will bring shared prosperity, and so much more.
As Secretary of Defense Ash Carter recently said – and I quote: “Passing TPP is as important to me as another aircraft carrier. It would deepen our alliances and partnerships abroad and underscore our lasting commitment to the Asia-Pacific. And it would help us promote a global order that reflects both our interests and our values.”
These two trade deals, ladies and gentlemen, are as much strategic as they are economic. They will solidify relations with our friends and allies around the world.
And by embracing this idea of shared prosperity, we are not only embracing the future, we are helping to write it as well.
Merci, thank you – I enjoyed having the chance to speak with you and would be pleased to answer any of your questions.
PRESIDENT OBAMA ON CONTINUATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
May 08, 2015
Letter -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Central African Republic
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 of May 12, 2014, with respect to the Central African Republic is to continue in effect beyond May 12, 2015.
The situation in and in relation to the Central African Republic, which has been marked by a breakdown of law and order, intersectarian tension, widespread violence and atrocities, and the pervasive, often forced recruitment and use of child soldiers, threatens the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic and neighboring states, and continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 with respect to the Central African Republic.
Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA
May 08, 2015
Letter -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Central African Republic
Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 of May 12, 2014, with respect to the Central African Republic is to continue in effect beyond May 12, 2015.
The situation in and in relation to the Central African Republic, which has been marked by a breakdown of law and order, intersectarian tension, widespread violence and atrocities, and the pervasive, often forced recruitment and use of child soldiers, threatens the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic and neighboring states, and continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13667 with respect to the Central African Republic.
Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA
U.S. STATEMENT ON FISSILE MATERIAL CUT-OFF TREATY AND COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR TEST-BAN TREATY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
05/05/2015 12:33 PM EDT
U.S. Support for Multilateral Measures
Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
The United States is committed to negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, also known as Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.
We are hopeful that the two-year UN Group of Governmental Experts, which first convened in Geneva in March 2014, will serve to motivate and revitalize work on FMCT and progress within the Conference on Disarmament.
The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is in the security interest of every nation, and the United States remains committed to ratifying the CTBT and bringing it into force.
The United States makes the largest annual financial contribution to the CTBTO Preparatory Commission, paying more than 22 percent of the Commission’s annual budget.
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones
Protocols to the Africa and South Pacific Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone treaties were submitted to the U.S. Senate for advice and consent to ratification in May 2011.
The United States and other P5 states signed the Protocol to the Central Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty in May 2014. It was submitted to the Senate in April 2015.
The United States is committed to signing the revised Protocol to the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty.
The United States supports Middle East regional states as they work towards consensus for a conference on the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.
05/05/2015 12:33 PM EDT
U.S. Support for Multilateral Measures
Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
The United States is committed to negotiate a treaty banning the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, also known as Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty.
We are hopeful that the two-year UN Group of Governmental Experts, which first convened in Geneva in March 2014, will serve to motivate and revitalize work on FMCT and progress within the Conference on Disarmament.
The Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is in the security interest of every nation, and the United States remains committed to ratifying the CTBT and bringing it into force.
The United States makes the largest annual financial contribution to the CTBTO Preparatory Commission, paying more than 22 percent of the Commission’s annual budget.
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones
Protocols to the Africa and South Pacific Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone treaties were submitted to the U.S. Senate for advice and consent to ratification in May 2011.
The United States and other P5 states signed the Protocol to the Central Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty in May 2014. It was submitted to the Senate in April 2015.
The United States is committed to signing the revised Protocol to the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty.
The United States supports Middle East regional states as they work towards consensus for a conference on the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.
Friday, May 8, 2015
DOD MEDIA ON V-E DAY
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
V-E Day Marked End of Long Road for World War II Troops
By Jim Garamone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, May 5, 2015 – When President Harry S. Truman, British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill and Soviet Premier Josef Stalin simultaneously announced that Nazi Germany had surrendered on May 8, 1945, the joy Americans felt was tempered by where they were.
The war that began with Germany invading Poland Sept. 1, 1939, ended with the total defeat of the Nazi menace and the unconditional surrender of the German military.
In New York, London and Moscow the eruption of joy was instantaneous. Men and women rushed to the streets to hug and kiss and dance. The war against Nazi Germany was over. The killing had stopped. A great evil ended.
The End of a Long Road
On the front lines deep in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia, the celebration was more muted, with soldiers gradually realizing they were not going to be shot at anymore and were going to go home.
Their joy was further tempered because, while Germany was defeated, Japan fought on. The soldiers realized their divisions, brigades and units would be part of the invasion of Japan.
In the Pacific, there was a brief acknowledgement that the European battle was over, but it didn’t really matter to the soldiers and Marines who were still attacking Japanese positions on Okinawa or to the sailors who were fending off kamikaze attacks on ships off the island.
V-E Day signified the end of a long road. Just between June 1944 and May 8, 1945, there were 552,117 U.S. casualties in the European theater of operations. Of those, 104,812 were killed in action.
In January 1945, many believed the war in Europe would last much longer.
In January, U.S. Army soldiers were still battling against German forces that had launched the Battle of the Bulge. That battle was the largest the U.S. Army ever fought and out of the 90,000 casualties around 19,000 soldiers were killed.
Events accelerated from there.
The War Moves into Germany
Bombing missions continued over Germany and every B-17 or B-24 lost over the Reich meant a loss of 10 Americans. On the ground, Allied troops mopped up German resistance on the west bank of the Rhine River.
On March 7, 1945, soldiers from the 9th Armored Division secured the Ludendorff Bridge over the Rhine River in Remagen, Germany. The U.S. 1st Army vaulted the water barrier and struck deep into Germany. The 3rd Army also crossed the river and moved on. On March 22, U.S. and British forces launch a massive operation over the Rhine in Oppenheim.
On April 2, U.S. forces surrounded 600,000 Germans in the Ruhr Pocket. Throughout the month, American forces begin discovering the consequences of the Nazi ideology as they liberated death camps like Buchenwald, Ohrdruf and Dachau.
On April 12, Americans were shocked by the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Harry S Truman was sworn in and vowed to continue Roosevelt’s policies.
On April 21, Soviet forces began their assault on the German capital of Berlin.
With the Soviets closing in, Hitler committed suicide on April 30 and turned power over to Admiral Karl Donitz.
Surrender
On May 2, German forces in Berlin surrendered to the Soviets.
On May 7, formal negotiations for Germany’s surrender began at the Supreme headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force headquarters in Rheims, France, and the Germans surrender unconditionally the next day.
At the conclusion of the surrender, the allied staff attempted to write a message for General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower to send to allied leaders. He opted for “The mission of this Allied Force was fulfilled at 0241, May 7th, 1945.”
V-E Day Marked End of Long Road for World War II Troops
By Jim Garamone
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, May 5, 2015 – When President Harry S. Truman, British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill and Soviet Premier Josef Stalin simultaneously announced that Nazi Germany had surrendered on May 8, 1945, the joy Americans felt was tempered by where they were.
The war that began with Germany invading Poland Sept. 1, 1939, ended with the total defeat of the Nazi menace and the unconditional surrender of the German military.
In New York, London and Moscow the eruption of joy was instantaneous. Men and women rushed to the streets to hug and kiss and dance. The war against Nazi Germany was over. The killing had stopped. A great evil ended.
The End of a Long Road
On the front lines deep in Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia, the celebration was more muted, with soldiers gradually realizing they were not going to be shot at anymore and were going to go home.
Their joy was further tempered because, while Germany was defeated, Japan fought on. The soldiers realized their divisions, brigades and units would be part of the invasion of Japan.
In the Pacific, there was a brief acknowledgement that the European battle was over, but it didn’t really matter to the soldiers and Marines who were still attacking Japanese positions on Okinawa or to the sailors who were fending off kamikaze attacks on ships off the island.
V-E Day signified the end of a long road. Just between June 1944 and May 8, 1945, there were 552,117 U.S. casualties in the European theater of operations. Of those, 104,812 were killed in action.
In January 1945, many believed the war in Europe would last much longer.
In January, U.S. Army soldiers were still battling against German forces that had launched the Battle of the Bulge. That battle was the largest the U.S. Army ever fought and out of the 90,000 casualties around 19,000 soldiers were killed.
Events accelerated from there.
The War Moves into Germany
Bombing missions continued over Germany and every B-17 or B-24 lost over the Reich meant a loss of 10 Americans. On the ground, Allied troops mopped up German resistance on the west bank of the Rhine River.
On March 7, 1945, soldiers from the 9th Armored Division secured the Ludendorff Bridge over the Rhine River in Remagen, Germany. The U.S. 1st Army vaulted the water barrier and struck deep into Germany. The 3rd Army also crossed the river and moved on. On March 22, U.S. and British forces launch a massive operation over the Rhine in Oppenheim.
On April 2, U.S. forces surrounded 600,000 Germans in the Ruhr Pocket. Throughout the month, American forces begin discovering the consequences of the Nazi ideology as they liberated death camps like Buchenwald, Ohrdruf and Dachau.
On April 12, Americans were shocked by the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Harry S Truman was sworn in and vowed to continue Roosevelt’s policies.
On April 21, Soviet forces began their assault on the German capital of Berlin.
With the Soviets closing in, Hitler committed suicide on April 30 and turned power over to Admiral Karl Donitz.
Surrender
On May 2, German forces in Berlin surrendered to the Soviets.
On May 7, formal negotiations for Germany’s surrender began at the Supreme headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force headquarters in Rheims, France, and the Germans surrender unconditionally the next day.
At the conclusion of the surrender, the allied staff attempted to write a message for General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower to send to allied leaders. He opted for “The mission of this Allied Force was fulfilled at 0241, May 7th, 1945.”
PRESIDENT OBAMA CONGRATULATES PRIME MINISTER CAMERON ON ELECTION VICTORY
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
May 08, 2015
Statement by the President on the Election in the United Kingdom
I congratulate Prime Minister Cameron on his impressive electoral victory. The special and essential relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is rooted in deep and abiding shared interests and values. I have enjoyed working closely with Prime Minister Cameron on a range of shared interests these last several years, and I look forward to continuing to strengthen the bonds between our countries, as we work together on behalf of global peace, security and prosperity.
May 08, 2015
Statement by the President on the Election in the United Kingdom
I congratulate Prime Minister Cameron on his impressive electoral victory. The special and essential relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is rooted in deep and abiding shared interests and values. I have enjoyed working closely with Prime Minister Cameron on a range of shared interests these last several years, and I look forward to continuing to strengthen the bonds between our countries, as we work together on behalf of global peace, security and prosperity.
AG LYNCH'S REMARKS ON BALTIMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at a Press Conference Announcing Investigation into Baltimore Police Department
Washington, DCUnited States ~ Friday, May 8, 2015
Good morning, and thank you all for being here. I am joined today by Vanita Gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division, and Director Ron Davis of the Community Oriented Policing Services Office, or COPS.
Over the past few days and weeks, we have watched as Baltimore struggled with issues that face cities across the country today. We have seen the tragic loss of a young man’s life. We have seen a peaceful protest movement coalesce to express the concern of a beleaguered community. We have seen brave officers upholding the right to peaceful protest, while also sustaining serious injury during the city’s unfortunate foray into violence. And we have watched it all through the prism of one of the most challenging issues of our time: police-community relations.
When I traveled to Baltimore earlier this week, I had an opportunity to see the significant work that the city and the police department had done with the COPS Office over the last six months through a collaborative reform process. But despite the progress being made, it was clear that recent events – including the tragic in-custody death of Freddie Gray – had given rise to a serious erosion of public trust. And in order to address this issue, I was asked – by city officials and community leaders – to augment our approach to the situation with a court enforcement model. I have spent the last few days with my team considering which of the Justice Department’s tools for police reform best meets the current needs of the Baltimore Police Department and the broader Baltimore community.
Today, the Department of Justice is opening an investigation into whether the Baltimore Police Department has engaged in a pattern or practice of violations of the Constitution or federal law. This investigation will begin immediately, and will focus on allegations that Baltimore Police Department officers use excessive force, including deadly force; conduct unlawful searches, seizures and arrests; and engage in discriminatory policing. The COPS Office will continue to work with the Baltimore Police Department and the collaborative reform process will now convert to the provision of technical assistance to the Baltimore Police Department. Some may ask how this differs from our current work with the Baltimore Police Department. The answer is: rather than examining whether the police department violated good policies, we will now examine whether they violated the Constitution and the community’s civil rights. This approach has been welcomed by the Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police, and I want to thank them for their support and their partnership as we move forward.
In the coming days, Civil Rights Division attorneys and investigators conducting the investigation, and the police experts who will assist them, will be engaging with community members and law enforcement. We will examine policies, practices and available data. And at the conclusion of our investigation, we will issue a report of our findings. If unconstitutional policies or practices are found, we will seek a court-enforceable agreement to address those issues. We will also continue to move forward to improve policing in Baltimore even as the pattern or practice investigation is underway.
Our goal is to work with the community, public officials and law enforcement alike to create a stronger, better Baltimore. The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has conducted dozens of these pattern or practice investigations, and we have seen from our work in jurisdictions across the country that communities that have gone through this process are experiencing improved policing practices and increased trust between the police and the community. In fact, I encourage other cities to study our past recommendations and see whether they can be applied in their own communities. Ultimately, this process is meant to ensure that officers are being provided with the tools they need – including training, policy guidance and equipment – to be more effective, to partner with civilians and to strengthen public safety.
For many people across the country, the tragic death of Freddie Gray and the violence that followed has come to personify the city, as if that alone is Baltimore. But earlier this week, I visited with members of the community who took to the streets in the days following the violence to pick up trash and to clear away debris – and they are Baltimore. I visited with elected officials who are determined to help the neighborhoods they love come back stronger and more united – and they are Baltimore. I visited youth leaders who believe that there’s a brighter day ahead – and they are Baltimore too. I visited with law enforcement officers who had worked 16 days without a break, and were focused not on themselves or even their own safety, but on protecting the people who live in their community. They, too, are Baltimore.
I have no illusions that reform will be easy; the challenges we face did not arise in a day, and change will not come overnight. It will take time and sustained effort. But the people I met in Baltimore – from protestors to public officials to an officer who had been injured amidst the violence – all said the same thing: “I love my city, and I want to make it better.” That’s why I’m so optimistic about this process. That’s why I’m so hopeful about the days to come. And that’s why I am confident that, as a result of this investigation and the hard work still ahead, all members of the Baltimore community – residents and law enforcement alike – will be able to create a stronger, safer, more united city together.
At this time, I’d like to open it up to a few questions.
Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Delivers Remarks at a Press Conference Announcing Investigation into Baltimore Police Department
Washington, DCUnited States ~ Friday, May 8, 2015
Good morning, and thank you all for being here. I am joined today by Vanita Gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division, and Director Ron Davis of the Community Oriented Policing Services Office, or COPS.
Over the past few days and weeks, we have watched as Baltimore struggled with issues that face cities across the country today. We have seen the tragic loss of a young man’s life. We have seen a peaceful protest movement coalesce to express the concern of a beleaguered community. We have seen brave officers upholding the right to peaceful protest, while also sustaining serious injury during the city’s unfortunate foray into violence. And we have watched it all through the prism of one of the most challenging issues of our time: police-community relations.
When I traveled to Baltimore earlier this week, I had an opportunity to see the significant work that the city and the police department had done with the COPS Office over the last six months through a collaborative reform process. But despite the progress being made, it was clear that recent events – including the tragic in-custody death of Freddie Gray – had given rise to a serious erosion of public trust. And in order to address this issue, I was asked – by city officials and community leaders – to augment our approach to the situation with a court enforcement model. I have spent the last few days with my team considering which of the Justice Department’s tools for police reform best meets the current needs of the Baltimore Police Department and the broader Baltimore community.
Today, the Department of Justice is opening an investigation into whether the Baltimore Police Department has engaged in a pattern or practice of violations of the Constitution or federal law. This investigation will begin immediately, and will focus on allegations that Baltimore Police Department officers use excessive force, including deadly force; conduct unlawful searches, seizures and arrests; and engage in discriminatory policing. The COPS Office will continue to work with the Baltimore Police Department and the collaborative reform process will now convert to the provision of technical assistance to the Baltimore Police Department. Some may ask how this differs from our current work with the Baltimore Police Department. The answer is: rather than examining whether the police department violated good policies, we will now examine whether they violated the Constitution and the community’s civil rights. This approach has been welcomed by the Baltimore City Fraternal Order of Police, and I want to thank them for their support and their partnership as we move forward.
In the coming days, Civil Rights Division attorneys and investigators conducting the investigation, and the police experts who will assist them, will be engaging with community members and law enforcement. We will examine policies, practices and available data. And at the conclusion of our investigation, we will issue a report of our findings. If unconstitutional policies or practices are found, we will seek a court-enforceable agreement to address those issues. We will also continue to move forward to improve policing in Baltimore even as the pattern or practice investigation is underway.
Our goal is to work with the community, public officials and law enforcement alike to create a stronger, better Baltimore. The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has conducted dozens of these pattern or practice investigations, and we have seen from our work in jurisdictions across the country that communities that have gone through this process are experiencing improved policing practices and increased trust between the police and the community. In fact, I encourage other cities to study our past recommendations and see whether they can be applied in their own communities. Ultimately, this process is meant to ensure that officers are being provided with the tools they need – including training, policy guidance and equipment – to be more effective, to partner with civilians and to strengthen public safety.
For many people across the country, the tragic death of Freddie Gray and the violence that followed has come to personify the city, as if that alone is Baltimore. But earlier this week, I visited with members of the community who took to the streets in the days following the violence to pick up trash and to clear away debris – and they are Baltimore. I visited with elected officials who are determined to help the neighborhoods they love come back stronger and more united – and they are Baltimore. I visited youth leaders who believe that there’s a brighter day ahead – and they are Baltimore too. I visited with law enforcement officers who had worked 16 days without a break, and were focused not on themselves or even their own safety, but on protecting the people who live in their community. They, too, are Baltimore.
I have no illusions that reform will be easy; the challenges we face did not arise in a day, and change will not come overnight. It will take time and sustained effort. But the people I met in Baltimore – from protestors to public officials to an officer who had been injured amidst the violence – all said the same thing: “I love my city, and I want to make it better.” That’s why I’m so optimistic about this process. That’s why I’m so hopeful about the days to come. And that’s why I am confident that, as a result of this investigation and the hard work still ahead, all members of the Baltimore community – residents and law enforcement alike – will be able to create a stronger, safer, more united city together.
At this time, I’d like to open it up to a few questions.
SECRETARY CARTER TESTIFIES BEFORE SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
Secretary of Defense Ash Carter testifies before the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee in Washington, D.C., May 6, 2015. DoD Photo by Glenn Fawcett
Carter Urges Senators to Support Stable Defense Budget
By Cheryl Pellerin
DoD News, Defense Media Activity
WASHINGTON, May 6, 2015 – Slashed budgets and high worldwide demand for U.S. military forces have created an unbalanced defense program that is taking on increasingly greater risks, Defense Secretary Ash Carter told a Senate panel this morning.
The secretary testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee on the Defense Department’s fiscal year 2016 budget request. Joining him was Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“Over the past three fiscal years the Defense Department has taken more than three-quarters of a trillion dollars in cuts to its future-years defense spending,” Carter said.
The frequently sudden and unpredictable timing and nature of the cuts and continued uncertainty over sequestration have made the stresses greater, he added, forcing DoD to make a series of incremental, inefficient decisions.
A Tumultuous World
“Even as budgets have dropped precipitously, our forces have been responding to unexpectedly high demand from a tumultuous world,” the secretary said.
Carter said he believes the result is an unbalanced defense program.
“We’ve been forced to prioritize force structure and readiness over modernization, taking on risks in capabilities and infrastructure that are far too great,” he added.
“High demands on smaller force structure mean the equipment and capabilities of too many components of the military are growing too old, too fast -- from our nuclear deterrent to our tactical forces,” Carter told the panel.
A Road to Nowhere
The secretary said that in recent weeks some in Congress have tried to give DoD its full fiscal year 2016 budget request by transferring funds from the base budget into DoD accounts for overseas contingency operations, or OCO –- funds that are meant to fund the incremental, temporary costs of overseas conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.
“While this approach clearly recognizes that the budget total we’ve requested is needed, the avenue it takes is just as clearly a road to nowhere,” Carter said, explaining that President Barack Obama has said he won’t accept a budget that locks in sequestration going forward, as this approach does.
“And he won’t accept a budget that severs the link between our national security and economic security,” the secretary added, “[so] legislation that implements this budget framework will … be subject to veto.”
If the Defense Department and Congress don’t find a different path by fall when a budget is needed, Carter said, the department will again have to make hasty and drastic decisions.
‘Holding the Bag’
“The Joint Chiefs and I are concerned that if our congressional committees continue to advance this idea and don’t explore alternatives we’ll all be left holding the bag,” Carter said, adding that the OCO approach does nothing to reduce the deficit.
“Most importantly,” he added, “because it doesn’t provide a stable multi-year budget horizon, this one-year approach is managerially unsound and unfairly dispiriting to our force. Our military personnel and their families deserve to know their future more than just one year at a time -- and not just them.”
Defense industry partners also need stability and longer-term plans to be efficient and cutting-edge, Carter said, “[and] … as a nation we need to base our defense budgeting on a long-term military strategy, and that’s not a one-year project.”
Such a funding approach reflects a narrow way of looking at national security, the secretary said.
Ignoring Vital Contributions
Year-to-year funding “ignores the vital contributions made by the State Department, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department and the Homeland Security Department,” he said.
And it disregards the enduring long-term connection between the nation’s security and factors like supporting the U.S. technological edge with scientific research and development, educating a future all-volunteer military force, and bolstering the general economic strength of the nation, Carter said.
“Finally, the secretary added, “I’m also concerned that how we deal with the budget is being watched by the rest of the world -– by our friends and potential foes alike. It could give a misleadingly diminished picture of America’s great strength and resolve.”
A Better Solution
To create a better solution than the one now being considered, he said, “I hope we can come together for a longer-term, multi-year agreement that provides the budget stability we need by locking in defense and nondefense budget levels consistent with the president’s request.”
Carter pledged his personal support and that of the department to this effort, and, he told the panel, “I would like to work with each of you, as well as other leaders and members of Congress, to this end.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)