March 27, 2010

Reporting from Chicago

A Chicago taxi driver was arrested Friday on charges that he provided material support to Al Qaeda by trying to send money overseas, federal authorities said.

Raja Lahrasib Khan, 56, was arrested in downtown Chicago while working, authorities said.

Khan was charged with two counts of providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization and could face up to 15 years on each count.

Federal prosecutors said there did not appear to be any imminent threat, though Khan had spoken with an associate about wanting to bomb a stadium.

Authorities say Khan sought to send money for weapons and other supplies to a Pakistani militant, Ilyas Kashmiri, who purportedly is linked to Al Qaeda.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-chicago-terror27-2010mar27,0,3153917,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Second pick for transportation security chief is out

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Harding, whose past as a defense contractor was deemed troublesome, takes himself out of the running -- another delay in filling the top job at TSA.

From the Associated Press

March 27, 2010

WASHINGTON — President Obama is back to square one -- again -- in finding a transportation security chief to shore up the nation's defenses against terrorist threats from the air, road and rail.

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Harding took himself out of the running Friday night as head of the Transportation Security Administration, another setback for Obama after his first choice withdrew in January because he faced a tough confirmation struggle in Congress. The Obama administration has called the job the most important unfilled position on Obama's team.

Harding's past as a defense contractor raised complications for his nomination.

He had extensive intelligence experience that Obama hoped to tap in fortifying security against attacks such as the Christmas bombing attempt on an airliner bound for Detroit, which was foiled by passengers. The agency's primary mission is to keep commercial aviation safe from terrorism, but its responsibilities cover threats by land and ferry as well.

Harding retired from the Army in 2001, ending a three-decade career during which he served as the Defense Department's top human intelligence officer, managing a $1 billion intelligence collection program.

He became a government consultant on human intelligence and counterintelligence, selling his company in 2009.

Questions arose after his nomination about a contract his company had with the government to provide interrogators in Iraq. After the government ended the contract early, in 2004, Harding Security Associates claimed more money from termination of the contract than the Defense Department's inspector general said it was entitled to get. The firm refunded $1.8 million of that money in a 2008 settlement with the Defense Intelligence Agency.

"I feel that the distractions caused by my work as a defense contractor would not be good for this administration nor for the Department of Homeland Security," Harding said in a late-evening statement released by the White House. The Transportation Security Administration is part of Homeland Security.

A little over two months ago, Erroll Southers withdrew his nomination to lead the TSA after it became apparent he would have trouble winning confirmation. Questions were raised about a reprimand that Southers, a top official with the Los Angeles Airport Police Department, had received for running background checks on his then-estranged wife's boyfriend two decades ago. He acknowledged giving Congress inconsistent answers on the matter.

Obama had waited eight months before nominating Southers. Now Harding's withdrawal means more delays in filling the top job in transportation security.

The announcement about Harding came late Friday, a period favored by the government for releasing uncomfortable news because the public's attention is light. There was no immediate word on finding another nominee.

"By nominating Gen. Harding, the president tapped an individual with more than 35 years of military and intelligence experience who is dedicated to improving the security of our nation," said White House spokesman Nicholas Shapiro. "The president is disappointed in this outcome but remains confident in the solid team of professionals at TSA."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-naw-tsa-harding28-2010mar28,0,4181792,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Detectives eye serial killer Alcala in 1970s killing of two Seattle women

March 26, 2010

Seattle police said Friday that detectives are looking for links between convicted serial killer Rodney Alcala and two women who were killed in the late 1970s.

Seattle police are seeking DNA samples to determine whether Alcala is a suspect in the slayings of Antionette Witaker, 13, and Joyce Gaunt, 17. Both were killed in Seattle, and their cases were never solved.

Det. Mark Jamieson of the Seattle Police Department said officials don't have any definitive evidence yet linking Alcala to the homicides but are exploring whether there is a connection.

Last month, an Orange County jury found Alcala guilty of five counts of murder in the killings of four women and a teenage girl.

Days later, Huntington Beach detectives released a trove of photographs of women and children they seized more than 30 years ago from a storage locker the killer rented just as police were closing in on him.

Detectives said they wanted to know who these people were and whether they might have gone missing during Alcala's murder spree in the late 1970s. Since then, detectives have spent their days fielding a flood of phone calls from people whose loved ones have been missing for decades.

The photos were found in a Seattle storage locker Alcala rented soon after the 1979 kidnapping and murder of Robin Samsoe, 12, of Huntington Beach.

The locker also contained what prosecutors called Alcala's "trophies" -- earrings that linked Alcala to Robin and another pair later linked to Charlotte Lamb, a Santa Monica legal secretary who was strangled in the laundry room of an El Segundo apartment complex.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/03/detectives-eye-serial-killer-alcala-in-1970s-killing-of-seattle-women.html#more

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EDITORIAL

Fighting back on immigration

Bipartisan reform efforts in Congress may be dead for now, but activists should try grass-roots efforts.

March 27, 2010

Talk about whiplash. A week ago, tens of thousands of activists were traveling to the National Mall in Washington to insist that President Obama keep his campaign promise and champion comprehensive immigration reform, including a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Fifty thousand people had registered for the march. Organizers anticipated that as many as 100,000 would show up. In the end, they said, double that number arrived. It was part protest, part party. The marchers may have been drawn by their frustration with the president's inaction, but the mood often verged on euphoric. Many tweeted their optimism in 140-word updates and seemed confident of success. With reason.

Even before the marchers got to Washington, the pressure worked. Obama met with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and activists from across the country. Just three days before the demonstration, Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) released a framework for comprehensive reform that they had been working on for months. It provided for tough enforcement and required undocumented immigrants to atone for breaking the law by paying fines, doing community service and learning English. As activists demanded, Obama embraced the proposal and said it would be the basis for comprehensive legislation to be submitted this year.

It was one success after another, until 7:45 Sunday night. That's when the 216th Democratic vote for healthcare reform was recorded, Republican fury was unleashed, and bipartisanship was declared to be at an end. Passing immigration legislation this year was always going to be an uphill fight, but now it will take a miracle. Graham said "the well has been poisoned" by Democrats.

What to do next? Shift gears. Presidential disengagement may no longer be a serious obstacle to reform. But having Obama on board is not enough. President George W. Bush fought hard for reform; polls showed strong public support for comprehensive legislation, about 60 Republicans in Congress sided with him -- and still he was checkmated by conservative opponents.

A small but vocal, sign-wielding minority that insists on being heard can capture the nation's attention. It's time for immigration activists to take a leaf from the "birthers," "tea partyers" and "death panel" fear-mongers. Going to Washington was important, as is Saturday's march in Los Angeles. But it's at least as important that supporters of reform go back to their own states, cities and neighborhoods to begin a grass-roots campaign to explain to their fellow citizens the positive effects comprehensive immigration legislation will have on their lives, labor, economy and communities.

Immigration reform is politically unpopular, but it is right and it is necessary. Let's hope that the recent marches are followed by the critically important next steps that will help this movement grow.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-immigration27-2010mar27,0,4549769,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION

California must stem the flow of illegal immigrants

The state should go after employers who hire them, curb taxpayer-funded benefits, deploy the National Guard to help the feds at the border and penalize 'sanctuary' cities.

By Steve Poizner

March 27, 2010

The United States, and California in particular, has been built by immigrants who legally crossed our borders in search of a brighter future. For generations, these legal immigrants have made immeasurable contributions to creating a unique and vibrant California. As Americans and Californians, we are right to welcome people from all over the globe when they obey our laws and are willing to play by the rules.

Illegal immigration is another matter entirely. With the state budget in tatters, millions of residents out of work and a state prison system strained by massive overcrowding, California simply cannot continue to ignore the strain that illegal immigration puts on our budget and economy. Illegal aliens cost taxpayers in our state billions of dollars each year. As economist Philip J. Romero concluded in a 2007 study, "illegal immigrants impose a 'tax' on legal California residents in the tens of billions of dollars."

Some have said that illegal immigration is an issue for the federal government, not the states, and that there's little a governor can do to fix the problem. Those people are wrong.

In government at any level, federal or state, a chief executive's duty is to preserve the rule of law. This also means confronting those who flout it, including illegal immigrants and those who shield them.

I believe there are many ways our state can stem the flow of illegal immigration, including social services reform and beefed-up border security. The state needs to confront the problem in a way that is fair and decent but also unapologetically aggressive.

Above all, California has too many policies that reward illegal aliens and act like magnets, drawing them to and keeping them in our cities and communities. We have to change those policies.

Ten other states, including neighboring Arizona, have passed laws to cut taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants. We need such legislation too. In this time of fiscal crisis, we can't afford to subsidize the presence of illegal aliens.

One taxpayer-funded benefit for illegal aliens that should be stopped is in-state tuition at our public colleges and universities. Today, California is one of just 10 states that allow illegal immigrants access to reduced college tuition at taxpayer expense.

California must also do its part to help secure the border by deploying the state's National Guard to assist federal authorities. We should also work with other border states to create a multi-state partnership for sharing information, resources and manpower.

Confronting illegal immigration also means confronting those who offer assistance to those who are flouting the law. We need to end "sanctuary city" policies, in which communities (San Francisco, for example) openly offer haven to illegal aliens. Counties, cities and towns that put in place sanctuary policies should lose state funds.

Why? We have seen the tragic consequences that can stem from offering sanctuary to protect criminals who are in our country illegally. Consider, for example, the case of Edwin Ramos. An illegal alien from El Salvador, Ramos was twice convicted of felonies as a juvenile but was shielded from deportation by San Francisco's sanctuary policy. Subsequently, he was charged with murdering three people and is now awaiting trial. Ramos should have been sent back to his country of origin when he was first arrested. And the same should be true of any illegal alien arrested for committing a crime.

Businesses that knowingly employ illegal aliens also undermine the rule of law. Jobs are a major reason people immigrate to California. We need to be tough on employers who hire -- and at times prey on -- an illegal workforce. We must require employers to verify the immigration status of their workers, and we should revoke the state-issued licenses of businesses that make a practice of knowingly employing people who aren't authorized to work in this country.

Legal immigration is a great thing for California, but we can no longer afford illegal immigration. If we eliminate the public benefit magnets, step up border enforcement and crack down on the cities and businesses that shield illegal aliens who are already here, we can go a long way toward stemming the tide of illegal immigration.

Immigration law is defined by the federal government. But the consequences and costs of illegal immigration fall on the states. That is why California must do everything possible to address this pressing problem. And in any debate on the future of immigration policy, state officials should voice the interests of their constituents.

To those currently debating a new immigration bill in Washington, I have just two words: no amnesty.

Steve Poizner is California's insurance commissioner and a Republican candidate for governor.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-poizner27-2010mar27,0,7071283,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION

Meg Whitman: immigration reform, with respect

It's an issue vital to California, but we must debate it without becoming divisive.

By Meg Whitman

March 27, 2010

California has the most to gain from sensible immigration reform, and the most to lose from the failed status quo. We need common-sense solutions to the problem of illegal immigration while preserving the many benefits our state derives from legal immigration.

Too often, the rhetoric surrounding this issue has been overly divisive and disrespectful to Latino American citizens. The country needs to have a thoughtful debate about how we stop the tide of illegal immigration that strains budgets and angers taxpayers. But the immigration debate must take place in a measured way that reflects our national aspirations toward tolerance, hope and opportunity.

As a Republican, I believe it's important to both continue our rich tradition of protecting the rule of law while diligently reaching out to the millions of Latinos who share our values.

While I am a strong proponent of legal immigration, I am 100% opposed to granting amnesty to immigrants who entered the country illegally. It is the wrong policy for California, it is the wrong policy for America, and it is grossly unfair to those immigrants who have followed the law to obtain legal status.

The truth is we are always going to have a problem with illegal immigration as long as there is a demand for undocumented labor. We need to build an "economic fence" with a strong e-verification system that holds employers accountable for only hiring documented workers. The lure of well-paying jobs is the ultimate magnet attracting illegal immigrants to our state. To remove it, we have to give employers the tools they need to do the right thing, and then we must strictly enforce the law.

We also need to crack down through legislation on sanctuary cities like San Francisco that shield illegal immigrants from federal immigration laws.

But the real key to this issue rests in the hands of Congress and the president. The bottom line is we need more federal Border Patrol resources at the Mexican border. The California congressional delegation needs to work together with other border-state representatives to get something done on border security once and for all.

California's governor must also work hard to ensure that the state is reimbursed for the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrants in our prisons. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and our powerful congressional delegation need to be pushed to use the purse strings they control to repay California for what it is owed.

Taken together, these steps would make a significant difference in reducing the burdens of illegal immigration without casting unneeded and discourteous aspersions on Latino American citizens and driving them away from the Republican Party.

I have been criticized for opposing Proposition 187, which was on the California ballot in 1994. It is true that I am opposed to cutting off public education and healthcare services to immigrant children. I do not believe that kids should be punished for the sins of their parents.

But I do understand the frustration in California that led to the passage of Proposition 187. Our schools have class sizes that are too big. We need comprehensive reform of our K-12 education system to drive money out of Sacramento and down to local school districts. Our education resources must be dedicated to the advancement of our children, not wasted on bureaucracy.

We must ensure that our children receive a world-class education so they can compete for jobs in the high-growth sectors of the economy, and that means standing up to the education establishment and elevating performance standards. And we must ensure that English is taught to all children in our schools.

The immigration issue touches many of California's core priorities, and it must be a priority of the state's governor.

Meg Whitman is the former president and chief executive of EBay and a Republican candidate for governor.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-whitman27-2010mar27,0,4262422,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OPINION

A pope with a problem

By lashing out at the coverage of the sexual abuse scandal, the Roman Catholic Church shows it has learned little from the squalid affair.

Tim Rutten

March 27, 2010

This has been a tough Lent for the Roman Catholic Church. Its seemingly endless sexual abuse scandal finally has seeped into the papal apartments, and the Vatican's response to this week's revelations suggests that far too little has been learned from this squalid affair.

Until now, Pope Benedict XVI had seemed to be taking a far more forthright approach to the problem than his predecessor, John Paul II, most recently in a blistering "pastoral letter" to the entire Irish church.

This week, however, the New York Times published a pair of stories suggesting that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- the future Pope Benedict -- participated in precisely the sort of secrecy and administrative negligence that has been at the root of this scandal.

Documents produced over the church's objections in an American lawsuit show that the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which Ratzinger headed from 1981-2005, declined to defrock Father Lawrence C. Murphy, even though he molested at least 200 boys at a Wisconsin school for the deaf. In 1996, then-Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland twice wrote directly to Ratzinger requesting a trial aimed at defrocking Murphy, whose crimes were known to three successive Milwaukee prelates.

Ultimately, Ratzinger's deputy, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, authorized a trial, then halted it after Murphy -- by then aging and in ill health -- wrote to Ratzinger appealing for leniency. As pope, Benedict has appointed Bertone to the Vatican's two highest offices, secretary of State and Camerlengo. The last Italian cardinal to hold both posts simultaneously was Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII.

On Friday, the New York Times reported that, as archbishop of Munich, Ratzinger presided over a meeting that approved the return to parish work of an admitted pedophile, who went on to molest more children. A memo from that period also seems to show that the cardinal was "kept informed about the priest's assignment."

The Holy See's reaction to both stories has been swift. An unsigned editorial this week in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano attacked the New York Times by name, accusing the paper of willfully ignoring the "truth" of Ratzinger/Benedict's record and of attempting "to instrumentalize, without any foundation in fact, horrible episodes and sorrowful events uncovered in some cases from decades ago." The media, it continued, showed a "despicable intent of attacking, at whatever cost, Benedict XVI and his closest collaborators."

Earlier in the week, New York's archbishop, Timothy Dolan, used his blog to dismiss the New York Times' reports and defend the pontiff's record by arguing that authorities outside the church also are culpable. Stories about sexual abuse by priests were "fair" if "unending," he wrote. But he condemned the media for portraying child sexual abuse "as a tragedy unique to the church alone. That, of course, is malarkey."

Sadly, this latest everybody-is-responsible-so-nobody-is-to-blame defense is of a piece with a little-noticed section of Benedict's letter to the Irish church in which he seemed to blame the crisis, in part, on "new and serious challenges to the faith arising from the rapid transformation and secularization of Irish society."

So what happens now?

In all likelihood, nothing. Even if further revelations show that Benedict was malfeasantly negligent as a cardinal, there is no canonical mechanism that could force him to step down. The last pope to resign was Gregory XII in 1415, and he acted to heal a schism that had produced three claimants to the Throne of Peter.

What now seems likely is that the pontiff, who turns 83 next month, will spend the rest of his papacy dealing with the fallout of an ever-widening scandal. His situation will be precisely the one over which he assailed the Irish bishops in his recent letter: "It cannot be denied that some of you and your predecessors failed, at times grievously, to apply the long-established norms of canon law to the crime of child abuse. . . . I recognize how difficult it was to grasp the extent and complexity of the problem, to obtain reliable information and to make the right decisions in the light of conflicting expert advice. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that grave errors of judgment were made and failures of leadership occurred. All this has seriously undermined your credibility and effectiveness."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten27-2010mar27,0,874103,print.column

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Daily News

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Man charged in death of Fla. girl in landfill

By Brent Kallestad and Tamara Lush

Associated Press Writer

03/26/2010

ORANGE PARK, Fla. — A 24-year-old unemployed restaurant worker was charged Friday with murder in the slaying of a 7-year-old Florida girl whose body was found in a Georgia landfill after she disappeared walking home from school, authorities said.
Jarred Mitchell Harrell was charged in the death of Somer Thompson, who went missing Oct. 19. Her lifeless legs were discovered two days later in a landfill about 50 miles from Orange Park.

During a press conference at the same church where Somer's memorial service was held in October, Clay County Sheriff Rick Beseler said detectives used DNA evidence, witnesses and statements from Harrell himself to solve the case.

"Our collective resolve to bring Somer's killer to justice is the only light in the darkness caused by this tragedy," Beseler said as about 50 members of "Team Somer" - the sheriff's office investigators and staff who worked the case - stood by.

Harrell, who is being held at the Clay County Jail, has been in custody since Feb. 11, when authorities arrested him in Mississippi on child pornography charges in Florida.

He was then extradited to Florida. His relatives have said they don't believe he is capable of violence.

Clay County detectives said at the time of Somer's disappearance, Harrell was living at his parents' suburban Jacksonville home, near her elementary school and house.

After Somer vanished, investigators on a hunch tailed nine garbage trucks from her neighborhood to the landfill, then picked through the trash as each rig spilled its load. They sorted through more than 225 tons of garbage before the gruesome find.

The discovery of Somer's body touched off an outpouring of support in northeast Florida and southern Georgia for the Thompson family; days of vigils and fundraisers were held so Somer's mom, Diena Thompson, could financially afford to stay home with her other children. A mountain of stuffed animals, balloons and notes to the family sprung up near a tree across from the little girl's home.

As officials searched for Somer, cable TV news outlets carried Diena Thompson's tear-filled statements and the candlelight vigils, where hundreds sang "You are My Sunshine" - Somer's favorite song.

With each day that passed and no suspect was arrested, residents were on edge.

Harrell had originally come to the attention of law enforcement in August, two months before Somer disappeared. His roommates said they kicked him out for stealing and he left behind his computer. They told police they looked at it and found child pornography. It was soon turned over to investigators.

The parents of one the roommates drove by the home of Harrell's parents a few days after Somer disappeared and noticed how close they lived to the girl's house. When they saw Harrell's car in his parents' driveway, they told detectives.

He was arrested Feb. 11 on child pornography charges at an aunt's home in Meridian, Miss., where he had moved a few weeks earlier. Clay County Sheriff Rick Beseler called him a person of interest in Somer's slaying at the time.

He has said Harrell wasn't arrested earlier because detectives had to prove Harrell downloaded the child porn.

Harrell was charged with 29 counts of possessing child pornography in Florida, then charged with a dozen additional counts of child porn and child molestation.

At the time of his February arrest, Harrell's aunt said she didn't think her nephew was capable of violence.

"They tried to make it sound like he's some monster, but he's not," said Kriss Mizelle, who let Harrell stay with her in Meridian. "I could say all these good things about him, but nobody wants to hear that. They think you're delusional and don't know about his secret life, but he's a good kid."

Harrell was originally from Lucedale, Miss., and was home-schooled before moving to Florida. He worked various jobs, from cooking to retail, Mizelle said. Friends described him as a "computer wiz."

http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_14763394

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Wall Street Journal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A City United by Tragedy, Divided by Its Kindness

By BOB DAVIS

BINGHAMTON, N.Y.—On the morning of April 3, 2009, Jiverly Wong walked into an immigrant aid center here and opened fire with two Beretta handguns. He killed 13 people and wounded four before ending the rampage with a bullet to his head. Dozens cowered in the basement and closets for hours before they were escorted out of the building by police.

The killing spree both united and tore apart residents of this blue-collar city ringed by pine forests. Churches, charities and local shops raised about $300,000 for the victims. A quieter but messy drama then unfolded: how to divide the money among survivors and family of the dead, all of whom had different needs and expectations?

Relatives of the dead felt they deserved the lion's share. The wounded pressed their claims. Those who escaped with no physical harm but deep emotional scars also ended up in the lottery for compensation.

In the end, many were unhappy. "People were murdered," says David Marsland, a software developer who lost his wife of eight months. "If you weren't shot, then you were a very lucky person and should be grateful to be alive, and shouldn't expect a cash payout."

Across the country, similar tensions have flared in the aftermath of tragedy—from the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks to a little-remembered 2007 mall shooting in Omaha, Neb. While the public is often eager to donate funds, the dollars raised can be the source of intense competition and renewed sorrow. What might appear to be a simple problem of arithmetic can turn into a complex moral calculus for the entire community—one rife with emotional and political consequences.

The process of distributing funds in Binghamton began when the local social-services director asked area charities, social service groups and lawyers to form a committee to oversee the task.

Among the questions they considered:

Who deserves more money: Survivors traumatized by the event, or the orphans of two slain parents?

How should they value the wounds suffered by a man who tried in vain to protect his wife by wrapping his arms around her?

Should a family with 11 children receive more than one where the breadwinner lost his job?

And what about the relatives of the dead? Should they be consulted, or would their woeful accounts inappropriately sway the committee?

Perhaps no one has wrestled more with these issues than Kenneth Feinberg. Currently the Treasury's point man for setting executive compensation at companies bailed out by the government, he previously headed efforts to manage funds in the wake of the 2001 terror attacks and the Virginia Tech shootings of 2007. Both experiences have led him to question whether any payments related to mass killings can be truly just.

Kenneth Feinberg is famous for his role on the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund. In this exclusive interview with WSJ's Bob Davis, he explains the difficulty of deciding how and who to compensate after an event.

Feinberg on Victim Compensation

"I have a great deal of difficulty distinguishing compensation systems on the basis of victims."

Read more from Mr. Feinberg's interview with the Journal

As a general rule, he is now "very wary of compensating victims of life's misfortune," says Mr. Feinberg, who wrote a book about the 9/11 fund called "What is Life Worth?" "The minute you go down that road of deciding that certain victims are entitled to public money but not others, you get into a very serious political and philosophic question."

Remunerating victims of mass acts of violence dates back to the early days of the republic. The federal government paid "sufferers" whose property was destroyed in the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 and the War of 1812, according to Stanford University Law Professor Michele Landis Dauber. In the mid-1860s, Congress appropriated $200,000 for white Minnesotans injured during a Sioux uprising.

After 9/11, it became common for victims of highly publicized tragedies to expect a financial balm. Congress appropriated $7 billion for payments averaging about $2.1 million to the families of those killed by al Qaeda, and $400,000 to those injured. Private charities chipped in an additional $2.7 billion.

Before doling out federal funds, Congress required that a calculation of the "value" of each life be performed. This formula was determined by considering the deceased's salary, age, number of children and other factors—a process Mr. Feinberg shepherded but now finds distasteful.

"Every victim of a death, whether it be a stockbroker, a policeman or a soldier, should get the same amount," Mr. Feinberg says.

So, at Virginia Tech, where private groups raised $8.5 million, he divided the money equally: Each of the families of the 32 murdered received $208,000.

A committee at Fort Hood, Texas, where 13 were killed and 32 wounded in a Nov. 2009 rampage, is beginning to wrestle with how to divide some $800,000 raised thus far. First, the members need to persuade Congress to exempt victims from military ethics rules that bar U.S. soldiers and their immediate family members from accepting certain gifts. Then the committee must figure out how to allocate the money, and whether to pay those who suffered emotional trauma as well as those killed and injured.

"Our heart is so darned heavy with what happened here," says Ron Taylor, president of the non-profit Association of the U.S. Army's Fort Hood chapter, which administers the fund. "I'd hate to pit one person against another" for payments.

Handling such assignments can be risky. The head of the American Red Cross resigned under pressure after the World Trade Center attack when the Red Cross was criticized for using contributions to build up its reserves. In the Columbine High School shooting of 1999, the repeated calls for payouts by some families produced a backlash. "When is enough enough?" asked columnist Chuck Green in the Denver Post.

In the Binghamton metropolitan area, a manufacturing hub of about 200,000 near New York's border with Pennsylvania, about $110,000 of the $300,000 raised after the shooting was spent on funerals, airline tickets, hotels and other emergency needs. Another $35,000 was earmarked for the American Civic Association, a stone-colored building where the shootings took place.

That left just $153,000—the cost of a four-bedroom home in Binghamton—to divide among the 62 people killed, wounded or traumatized at the ACA. If the funds were doled out equally, that would amount to just $2,500 each. The small size of the pot didn't make the decisions easier.

An area Catholic Charities chapter collected the bulk of the money that the committee eventually distributed. But executive director Lori Accardi says her organization was so overwhelmed by the payment issue that it turned down a potential gift of $15,000, which she urged be given to the ACA instead. You need "the wisdom of Solomon," says Ms Accardi. "Who has that?"

Once the dozen committee members sat down to work on April 22, 2009, one of the first questions they discussed was whether to compensate the killer's family, which had immigrated from Vietnam, as had many of the victims. Mr. Wong's father had long worried about his son's sanity, according to press reports, and asked a judge not to issue him a gun license, garnering him local sympathy. "We ask for forgiveness that we have such a son and for what he did," he said in a video message carried by local newscasts.

Other than forgiveness, the family requested nothing from the local charities. After Mr. Wong's father moved out of the area, support for a payment evaporated. The elder Mr. Wong couldn't be reached for comment.

The committee was dominated by two powerful personalities. One was Raini Baudendistel, the 39-year-old executive director of the Crime Victims Assistance Center. Her social services group had counseled those battling emotional trauma.

The other was Dan Smolnik, a mustachioed 49-year-old tax attorney from one of Binghamton's leading law firms. He was wary of labeling anything an "injury" unless he could see physical evidence.

During an early meeting in the boardroom of the United Way's headquarters, Ms. Baudendistel argued that all those who had been at the ACA, not just the killed and wounded, should receive payments. Those who escaped weren't simply survivors, she argued, they were hostages who feared they would be the next killed. A payment could help them cover bills coming due and reduce their anxiety.

"You can't put a price on people's lives, but you can't put a value on their sanity, either," she told committee members. There was wide agreement, says Mr. Smolnik, who confirmed her comments.

A second question was tougher. Should committee members meet with the families of the dead?

Mr. Feinberg, the Sept. 11 and Virginia Tech paymaster, had concluded years before that such meetings are crucial to persuade families that their concerns are being addressed and help them handle their losses by "validating the memory of the lost loved ones."

But Mr. Smolnik argued that to be impartial, they needed to avoid contact with the families. Some of those killed were well-known in Binghamton, including an American teacher at the ACA whose son is a surgeon. Many others were new arrivals from China, Vietnam and Pakistan, who barely spoke English. Committee members also worried about being sued if they were seen as playing favorites, he says.

Several committee members say their decision to reject meetings was reinforced in July, when Omri Yigal, the widower of one of those slain, circulated a letter of his needs that included a new house. Although Mr. Yigal says he only hoped the committee would help him make a "significant dent" in his expenses, some on the committee viewed it as an aggressive money grab.

At the time, the families of those killed had also organized, and were meeting weekly. Mr. Yigal and Mr. Marsland, the software engineer, were the group's most active, say community members.

Mr. Yigal, 54, is a quiet African-American from Tennessee who says he converted to Judaism in 2000, adopted an Israeli-sounding name and moved to Binghamton in 2005 to buy an inexpensive house near a synagogue.

Mr. Marsland, 52, is a talkative white man who had lived in a small town outside Binghamton since he was a child. They were united in grief over the loss of their wives. Mr. Marsland's spouse was from China; Mr. Yigal's was from the Philippines.

The meetings had originally been called to plan a memorial, but many quickly devolved into gripe sessions. Families of the dead felt they had claims that outweighed others. Mike Pandich, a local businessman who was guardian for two Haitian children orphaned in the killing, wanted money to help raise them. Samir al Salihi, an Iraqi immigrant whose wife was murdered, wanted to help his 18-year-old son pay for college.

Others, though, were against financial assistance. One Chinese family member dismissed any payment as "blood money."

The committee, meanwhile, had turned to Mr. Smolnik, the tax attorney, for guidance as to how to divide the pie. His interest in financial issues prompted him to get a mid-career MBA from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2006. Internal Revenue Service rules required the committee to make an assessment of each victim's needs in order for payments to be exempt from federal gift taxes. So he studied a dozen disaster-relief plans, including one from the World Health Organization. But he didn't find a suitable model for payouts after a mass killing, where needs are different than, say, replacing a house destroyed by a flood.

By June he devised a spreadsheet weighting different factors and using a point system. The group decided to add points for the number of children in a family, reasoning that such a figure should augment a family's needs. It also eliminated an open-ended category called "other circumstances." This template was designed partly to satisfy IRS rules that would allow recipients to claim any payment tax-free. In an attempt to preserve objectivity, victims were identified only by number or letter.

The spreadsheet adopted in September awarded a maximum of 16.62 points for each victim. Those killed started with three points; wounded got 1.5 points; unwounded survivors got 0.3 points. As many as 4.62 points were awarded for dependent children. (One survivor had 11.) Up to three points were awarded for severe physical wounds. Other needs, including inability to pay for food, rent or education, were assigned one point.

While the committee kept the results anonymous, The Wall Street Journal reviewed a copy of the spreadsheet. The survivor with 11 children received about $4,200. The two orphans received about $3,800 each. Long Huynh, a wounded survivor, received about $5,500 for himself and at least $3,300 for his wife who died in the shooting.

On Friday, Oct. 2, six months after the shootings, Ms. Accardi of Catholic Charities handed out checks at the county health department, a few blocks from where the massacre occurred. None of the victims knew the amount of the payment they would receive. The payments were a "token of support from the community," she says she told recipients, and couldn't replace what was lost.

Reactions varied. A family spokesman for Mr. Huynh says the check cheered him because it "made him think that a lot of people thought about him and thought about his wife."

Mr. Pandich brooded that the orphans in his care would have received far more if the pot were split only among the families of the dead. Mr. Yigal says tears rolled down his face when he saw his check was for about $3,300. "They were saying to me, 'This is all Doris was worth,"' he says.

As the April 3 anniversary of the killings draws close, some committee members and the families of the dead remain bitter. The ACA pulled out of a project to build a memorial after victims' relatives began squabbling over a design. Instead, it has marked their memory with two granite benches inscribed with all 13 names of the dead.

Ms. Accardi of Catholic Charities won't discuss the individual grants: "Money brings out things in people you wouldn't believe."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704588404575123522374730464.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hacker Sentenced to 20 Years in Massive Data Theft

By SIOBHAN GORMAN

The self-taught computer hacker prosecutors say stole data from millions of credit-card holders and cost businesses hundreds of millions of dollars was sentenced Friday to 20 years and one day in prison—the stiffest sentence ever handed down in a hacking case.

The sentencing in U.S. District Court in Boston wrapped up the cases against Albert Gonzalez, a 28-year-old college dropout and onetime Secret Service informant, in what prosecutors called largest and most costly computer crimes in U.S. history.

In the last of the three cases, Mr. Gonzalez had pleaded guilty in December to conspiracy charges in the theft of data from credit-card processor Heartland Payment Systems Inc. and other businesses. Prosecutors said the scheme stole the data of 130 million credit cards; Heartland says the hack cost the company nearly $130 million.

Prosecutors said Albert Gonzalez, a onetime Secret Service informant, was behind the largest and most costly computer crimes in U.S. history
On Thursday, Mr. Gonzalez had been sentenced Thursday to 20 years in prison in each of the first two cases against him, involving similar theft schemes against TJX Cos., the Dave & Buster Inc. restaurant chain and other businesses.

He will serve all three sentences concurrently.

The three schemes ensnared as many as tens of millions of victims, prosecutors said. The direct cost of Mr. Gonzalez's TJX scheme was close to $200 million, they said.

Mr. Gonzales's attorney, Martin Weinberg, disputed those numbers, saying the costs were due in part to corporate negligence. Mr. Weinberg said in a sentencing memo that Mr. Gonzalez played "only a peripheral role" in the Heartland thefts, which he committed with two Eastern European hackers known only by their online names "Grigg" and "Annex."

Mr. Gonzalez was unable to stop himself from committing the crimes because of drug abuse, an Internet addiction and symptoms of the psychological disorder known as Asperger's disorder, Mr. Weinberg said. He added that Mr. Gonzalez hacked for the computer-programming challenge rather than to make money. Mr. Weinberg couldn't be reached for comment.

Prosecutors called Mr. Gonzalez a "calculating businessman." He called his criminal enterprise "operation get rich or die tryin," according to court documents. He wanted to buy a yacht, threw himself a $75,000 birthday party, and once lamented having to count more than $340,000 by hand, according to court documents.

He took $2.8 million in proceeds from the hacking, $1.1 million of which he buried in his parents' backyard, according to court documents. He also purchased a Tiffany ring for his girlfriend, a Miami condo, a 2006 BMW, and a Glock 27 handgun.

Mr. Gonzalez targeted Fortune 500 companies with his data-theft operations and employed a hacking technique called "war driving," where Mr. Gonzalez and his conspirators hunted for security flaws in corporate wireless networks along U.S. Route 1 in Miami, according to investigators.

Mr. Gonzalez stole databases of payment-card information from companies and then sold them on the black market, often splitting the proceeds with his conspirators, according to prosecutors. In one instance, 465 payment card numbers yielded Mr. Gonzalez $68,400. He also worked with others to use stolen ATM numbers to drain bank accounts and to launder proceeds through Eastern European bank accounts in the names of shell corporations, according to court documents.

He was arrested in 2003 in association with another hacking operation, known as Shadowcrew, and he became a Secret Service informant. The government allowed him in 2004 to move back to Miami, where he proceeded to commit the series of crimes targeting TJX, Heartland and others. He used information from the Secret Service to help his conspirators evade detection, prosecutors said. He was arrested in May 2008 and has held in federal custody since. He can apply that time served to his sentence.

Five other men have been convicted as part of Mr. Gonzalez's schemes, including former employees of Morgan Stanley and Barclays Bank. Three have been sentenced, and two others await sentencing next month.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703416204575146152576681126.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Data Theft at Loan Firm Hits Borrowers

By MARY PILON

Personal information on 3.3 million federal student-loan borrowers was stolen from ECMC Group Inc., a guarantor of the loans.

The theft at the company's St. Paul, Minn., headquarters was discovered March 21, a spokesman said. The data taken included consumer names, addresses, dates of birth and Social Security numbers, the company said in a statement. Financial or bank-account information wasn't involved.

"It was simple, old-fashioned theft," Paul Kelash, a spokesman for ECMC said. "It was not a hacker incident."

ECMC will notify affected borrowers, and the company will provide free credit monitoring and notification, as well as identity-theft insurance. More information is available at ecmc.org or by calling 877-449-3568.

ECMC, a nonprofit company, has a contract with the federal government to insure federal student loans against default. In case of default, the lender is reimbursed by the guaranty agency.

"We deeply regret that this incident occurred," said Richard Boyle, chief executive of ECMC, in a statement, "and the stress it has caused our borrowers and our partners and are doing everything we can to help protect our borrowers' identity and personal information."

"Protecting student privacy is a top priority for the Department," said U.S. Department of Education spokesman Justin Hamilton. "We are working with ECMC to make sure that affected individuals are provided with resources to protect their information and to provide with them with identity-theft insurance."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704100604575146360834054370.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the New York Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Matter of Life and Death: Suicides in the Army

By TIMOTHY HSIA

The Army faces a battle over the life and death of its soldiers. The battle is not being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in the minds and tortured souls of soldiers contemplating suicide. Last year the Army again reported an increase in suicides, and in response the Army now requires every soldier to complete an online assessment of their physical, mental and spiritual well-being.

The Army’s suicide problem is worse than the official numbers presented because the suicide statistics that are tabulated do not include the family members of soldiers. When I attended suicide prevention training sponsored by the Army, several chaplains who were leading the class told the participants that beyond just counseling service members they also had assisted in helping soldiers cope with a family member’s suicide. The official numbers also do not include veterans who have left the military.

While suicides are most pronounced in the Army, the other branches of the military also face this problem, which extends beyond just soldiers returning from combat and even to the service academies. Moreover, the pain and emotional strain of deployment and suicides is not simply limited to soldiers in the junior ranks. Even generals, like Gen. Carter Ham, commanding general of U.S. Army Europe, has encouraged soldiers to seek help for their mental wounds.

The Army’s response to the uptick in suicides has been swift and pronounced. Beyond just having soldiers fill out individual risk assessments, soldiers are also required to role-play scenes in an interactive DVD video that mirrors the emotional issues that may be encountered. Perhaps more important, within the Army there has been a substantial shift in the army’s organizational ethos concerning how leaders view mental strain. Going to talk to a chaplain or mental health professional is no longer looked down upon. Leaders have also emphasized that official policy does not automatically prevent one from gaining security clearance if they see a psychiatrist.

When my unit returned from Iraq the first time, there was no emphasis on the soldier’s mental health. The one solace that soldiers seek out, then and now, are military chaplains. Were it not for the listening and compassionate ear of my unit’s chaplains, my unit’s morale would have plummeted while deployed. While many civilians probably presume that there are numerous military health professionals — particularly in light of the notoriety of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan and the Fort Hood Army Base shootings in Texas — in actuality there are very few psychiatrists at the unit level.

However, after my unit’s second deployment, there was emphasis placed not just on soldiers’ outward physical well-being, but also on their mental state. For example, readjustment classes called BattleMind training were offered to soldiers and their families. Additionally, many of the soldiers in our unit took part in outdoor activities that helped them gradually cope with returning from combat like rock climbing and skiing.

Typically before any weekend, unit commanders have given the same cut-and-dry safety briefing before releasing their soldiers: “stay away from drugs … unsafe sex … driving under the influence … physical violence … and make sure you have a battle buddy if you are going off base.”

Now, as the Army faces the increasing number of suicides, another element has been added to these safety briefs:

If you are feeling down and low, talk to someone. Do not bottle up your feelings if you are thinking about hurting yourself. Talk to the chaplain or go see a mental health professional.

Finding and eliminating the root problems of suicidal thoughts has been as intractable and hard as the most complicated counterinsurgency battlefield problem and has confounded the Army’s military leaders. Within my suicide prevention class there were several theories that soldiers and civilians had regarding the rise in the number of suicides. Some said it is obviously the result of post-traumatic stress disorder and combat stress. Others suggested that perhaps the military’s demographics now reflected problems associated with society as a whole, and that the lowered recruiting standards several years ago have exacerbated the problem. Some even suggested it was a social meme that was being spread inadvertently by the Army in its efforts to halt suicides.

Military suicides have also prompted the question of whether or not families of these service members deserve to have condolence letters written by the commander in chief.

At a restaurant recently, I overheard civilians joking about post-traumatic stress syndrome, and how one of them would claim it and combat stress as an umbrella excuse for any criminal or moral wrongdoings. When I heard this discussion I instantly felt both shame and disgust. I felt shame because of the actions of a minority of veterans who have landed in trouble and sought to use the disorder as an excuse. I felt disgust because of the lack of empathy by these civilians, and how they trivialized the mental anguish and wounds that some returning veterans face.

While much of our nation’s news of war has shifted to Afghanistan from Iraq, another shift has gradually unfolded to back home from combat zones overseas. Some soldiers now are dying not by enemy fire overseas, but as a result of their own actions on United States soil. Perhaps these are the worst casualties in war, the casualties that could have been averted if someone had listened and responded to their request for assistance. The survivors who no longer wanted to survive.

Contacts for crisis intervention:

Military OneSource Crisis Intervention Line: (800) 342-9647
Defense Centers of Excellence: (866) 966-1020
Veterans Health Administration’s Suicide Prevention Hot Line: (800) 273-TALK (8255)

http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/a-matter-of-life-and-death-suicides-in-the-army/?pagemode=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For Years, Deaf Boys Tried to Tell of Priest’s Abuse

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and DAVID CALLENDER

They were deaf, but they were not silent. For decades, a group of men who were sexually abused as children by the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy at a school for the deaf in Wisconsin reported to every type of official they could think of that he was a danger, according to the victims and church documents.

They told other priests. They told three archbishops of Milwaukee. They told two police departments and the district attorney. They used sign language, written affidavits and graphic gestures to show what exactly Father Murphy had done to them. But their reports fell on the deaf ears of hearing people.

This week, they learned that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, received letters about Father Murphy in 1996 from Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland of Milwaukee, who said that the deaf community needed “a healing response from the Church.” The Vatican sat on the case, then equivocated, and when Father Murphy died in 1998, he died a priest.

“That man should have been in prison for a very long time, but he was lucky,” Steven Geier, one of Father Murphy’s victims, said Thursday. “What about me? I wasn’t supposed to touch girls. What gave him the right to be able to do that? Father Murphy constantly thought about sex with children, and he got away with it.”

Young victims of sexual abuse are often so confused, ashamed or traumatized that they wait years to report the violations. Some never say a word. One of the remarkable aspects of the Father Murphy case is that young victims began alerting the authorities in the mid-1950s, when sexual abuse was hardly even a part of the public vocabulary.

In his ranch house in Madison, where he lives with his wife, Ann, and two dachshunds, Mr. Geier said through an interpreter that he entered St. John’s School for the Deaf in St. Francis, Wis., when he was 9. His father had helped build a Catholic church in rural Dane County, and his aunt was a nun. His family wanted him to get a good education in a Catholic school.

Mr. Geier, now 59, said that between the ages of 14 and 15, starting around 1965, Father Murphy molested him four times in a closet at the school. The priest, a hearing man fluent in sign language, said that God wanted him to teach the boy about sex but that he had to keep it quiet because it was under the sacrament of confession. Mr. Geier said he felt sick.

“First thing in the morning,” Mr. Geier said, “we took communion, and as he passed out the communion wafers, I thought about how many boys did he touch with those hands and all of the germs, all of the filth of his hands.”

Father Murphy may have molested as many as 200 boys while he worked at the school from 1950 to 1974, according to the accounts of victims and a social worker hired by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee to interview him.

Mr. Geier said he first tried to tell the priest at his home parish in Madison, where he served as an altar boy, in 1966 when he was just 16. But the priest, he said, told him he did not want to hear about it, and to just forget about it. He told another priest while he was still a teenager, and yet a third priest years later, after he married.

That priest, the Rev. Tom Schroeder, 72, who led Masses for the deaf in Madison from 1970 to 1992, said in an interview Friday that he remembered Mr. Geier’s telling him about Father Murphy. Father Schroeder said that he told a nun, who told another nun who was a dormitory supervisor at St. John’s, but that the supervisor did not believe it and nothing ever came of it.

“I assumed that if enough people told her, she would finally believe it,” Father Schroeder said.

Internal church correspondence unearthed in a lawsuit against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee and given to The New York Times, which made it public it this week, included a letter from the Rev. David Walsh, who served as a chaplain for the deaf in Chicago, saying that teenage students at St. John’s had told him in the late 1950s about Father Murphy’s abuse.

Father Walsh said he told Archbishop Albert Gregory Meyer of Milwaukee, who sent Father Murphy on a retreat and then put him back in the school to undo “the harm he had done.”

In the 1970s, a group of former students who were in a vocational rehabilitation program in Milwaukee began telling their hearing supervisors about Father Murphy, a sequence of events reported in two articles in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in 2006.

Among the supervisors was John Conway, now the deputy administrator of workers’ compensation for the State of Wisconsin. Mr. Conway, the students and others collected affidavits from 15 to 20 former students about Father Murphy’s violations. They were granted a meeting with Archbishop William E. Cousins.

“In my extreme naïveté,” said Mr. Conway in an interview on Friday, “I told them the archbishop would take care of this.”

He said they were surprised to find the room packed with people, including several nuns and teachers from the school, two priests who said they were representing the apostolic delegate in Chicago, and Father Murphy himself.

Arthur Budzinski and Gary Smith, two more victims of Father Murphy, said in an interview last week that they remember seeing Archbishop Cousins yell, and Father Murphy staring at the floor. The deaf men and their advocates were told that Father Murphy, the school’s director and top fund-raiser, was too valuable to be let go, so he would be given only administrative duties.

They were outraged. They distributed “Wanted” posters with Father Murphy’s face outside the cathedral in Milwaukee. They went to the police departments in Milwaukee, where they were told it was not the correct jurisdiction, and in St. Francis, where the school was located, Mr. Conway said. They also went to the office of E. Michael McCann, the district attorney of Milwaukee County, and spoke with his assistant, William Gardner.

“A criminal priest was an oxymoron to them,” Mr. Conway said. “They said they’ll refer it to the archdiocese.”

Calls to Mr. McCann and Mr. Gardner this week were not returned.

Mr. Conway said it was only when they filed a lawsuit that the archdiocese removed Father Murphy from St. John’s and sent him to northern Wisconsin to live at his family’s summer house. The lawsuit was withdrawn. Mr. Smith, one of two of the plaintiffs whose cases were still within the statute of limitations, received a settlement of $2,000, he and Mr. Conway said.

Father Murphy continued working in parishes and schools, with deaf people, and leading youth retreats in the Diocese of Superior for the next 24 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/27/us/27wisconsin.html?ref=world&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the White House

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remarks by the President on the Announcement of New START Treaty

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. I just concluded a productive phone call with President Medvedev. And I’m pleased to announce that after a year of intense negotiations, the United States and Russia have agreed to the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly two decades.

Since taking office, one of my highest priorities has been addressing the threat posed by nuclear weapons to the American people. And that’s why, last April in Prague, I stated America’s intention to pursue the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons, a goal that’s been embraced by Presidents like John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.

While this aspiration will not be reached in the near future, I put forward a comprehensive agenda to pursue it -- to stop the spread of these weapons; to secure vulnerable nuclear materials from terrorists; and to reduce nuclear arsenals. A fundamental part of that effort was the negotiation of a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia.

Furthermore, since I took office, I’ve been committed to a “reset” of our relationship with Russia. When the United States and Russia can cooperate effectively, it advances the mutual interests of our two nations, and the security and prosperity of the wider world. We’ve so far already worked together on Afghanistan. We’ve coordinated our economic efforts through the G20. We are working together to pressure Iran to meet its international obligations. And today, we have reached agreement on one of my administration’s top national security priorities -- a pivotal new arms control agreement.

In many ways, nuclear weapons represent both the darkest days of the Cold War, and the most troubling threats of our time. Today, we’ve taken another step forward by -- in leaving behind the legacy of the 20th century while building a more secure future for our children. We’ve turned words into action. We’ve made progress that is clear and concrete. And we’ve demonstrated the importance of American leadership -- and American partnership -- on behalf of our own security, and the world’s.

Broadly speaking, the new START treaty makes progress in several areas. It cuts -- by about a third -- the nuclear weapons that the United States and Russia will deploy. It significantly reduces missiles and launchers. It puts in place a strong and effective verification regime. And it maintains the flexibility that we need to protect and advance our national security, and to guarantee our unwavering commitment to the security of our allies.

With this agreement, the United States and Russia -- the two largest nuclear powers in the world -- also send a clear signal that we intend to lead. By upholding our own commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we strengthen our global efforts to stop the spread of these weapons, and to ensure that other nations meet their own responsibilities.

I’m pleased that almost one year to the day after my last trip to Prague, the Czech Republic -- a close friend and ally of the United States -- has agreed to host President Medvedev and me on April 8th, as we sign this historic treaty. The following week, I look forward to hosting leaders from over 40 nations here in Washington, as we convene a summit to address how we can secure vulnerable nuclear materials so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists. And later this spring, the world will come together in New York to discuss how we can build on this progress, and continue to strengthen the global non-proliferation regime.

Through all these efforts, cooperation between the United States and Russia will be essential. I want to thank President Medvedev for his personal and sustained leadership as we worked through this agreement. We’ve had the opportunity to meet many times over the last year, and we both agree that we can serve the interests of our people through close cooperation.

I also want to thank my national security team, who did so much work to make this day possible. That includes the leaders with me here today -- Secretary Clinton, Secretary Gates, and Admiral Mullen. And it includes a tireless negotiating team. It took patience. It took perseverance. But we never gave up. And as a result, the United States will be more secure, and the American people will be safer.

Finally, I look forward to continuing to work closely with Congress in the months ahead. There is a long tradition of bipartisan leadership on arms control. Presidents of both parties have recognized the necessity of securing and reducing these weapons. Statesmen like George Shultz, Sam Nunn, Henry Kissinger, and Bill Perry have been outspoken in their support of more assertive action. Earlier this week, I met with my friends John Kerry and Dick Lugar to discuss this treaty, and throughout the morning, my administration will be consulting senators -- my administration will be consulting senators from both parties as we prepare for what I hope will be a strong, bipartisan support to ratify the new START treaty.

With that, I’m going to leave you in the able hands of my Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, as well as Secretary of Defense Gates and Joint Chief of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen. So I want to thank all of you for your attention.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-announcement-new-start-treaty

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From ICE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

37 arrested in San Diego area enforcement surge

SAN DIEGO - More than 30 criminal aliens, immigration fugitives and immigration violators are facing deportation on Friday following a three-day enforcement operation carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Fugitive Operations Teams (FOTs) in San Diego and the Imperial Valley.

During the operation, which concluded March 25, ICE officers made a total of 37 arrests in central San Diego, North County, the South Bay, East County and the Imperial Valley.

Of those taken into custody, 21 were immigration fugitives with outstanding orders of deportation, or previously deported aliens who returned to the United States illegally after being removed.

More than 80 percent of the aliens arrested during the enforcement action also had criminal records in addition to being in the country illegally. Their criminal histories included prior arrests and convictions on a variety of violations, including domestic violence, sexual battery, robbery, assault and drug charges.

"This enforcement action underscores ICE's commitment to strategic, effective immigration enforcement that enhances public safety," said Robin Baker, field office director for the ICE Office of Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) in San Diego. "ICE will continue to target, arrest, and remove those who come to this country to pursue a life of crime rather than the American dream."

Among those arrested by the San Diego-area teams was a 59-year-old Mexican female with a 1989 conviction in San Diego for possession of heroin for sale. She is being detained pending a removal hearing before an immigration judge. Of the four individuals arrested in the Imperial Valley, three had prior drug convictions involving the use or possession of amphetamines.

Since many of the individuals arrested during the operation have outstanding orders of deportation or have been previously deported, they are subject to immediate removal from the country. The remaining aliens will be held by ICE pending a hearing before an immigration judge or the completion of travel arrangements.

The Fugitive Operations Program was established in 2003 to eliminate the nation's backlog of immigration fugitives. Today, ICE has 104 FOTs deployed across the country, including three assigned to work cases in San Diego and Imperial counties.

Last year, ICE's FOTs nationwide made 35,094 arrests. More than 31,000 of those arrests, nearly 90 percent, involved immigration fugitives and aliens with prior criminal convictions. Criminal aliens specifically accounted for approximately 45 percent of the overall total, including more than 3,600 individuals with prior convictions for violent crimes, such as murder and assault.

As a result of the FOT's efforts, the nation's fugitive alien population continues to decline. Estimates now place the number of immigration fugitives in the United States at slightly under 525,000, a decrease of more than 71,000 since October 2007.

The officers who conducted this week's special operation received substantial assistance from ICE's Fugitive Operations Support Center (FOSC) located in South Burlington, Vt. The FOSC conducted exhaustive database checks on the targeted cases to help ensure the viability of the leads and accuracy of the criminal histories. The FOSC was established in 2006 to improve the integrity of the data available on at large criminal aliens and immigration fugitives nationwide. Since its inception, the FOSC has forwarded more than 150,000 case leads to ICE enforcement personnel in the field.

ICE's Fugitive Operations Program is just one facet of the Department of Homeland Security's broader strategy to heighten the federal government's effectiveness at identifying and removing dangerous criminal aliens from the United States. Other initiatives that figure prominently in this effort are the Criminal Alien Program, Secure Communities and the agency's partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies under 287(g).

http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1003/100326sandiego.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PUBLIC CORRUPTION

Why It’s Our #1 Criminal Priority

03/26/10

Public corruption is a breach of trust by federal, state, or local officials—often with the help of private sector accomplices. It’s also the FBI’s top criminal investigative priority. To explain why the Bureau takes public corruption so seriously and how we investigate, we talked with Special Agent Patrick Bohrer, assistant section chief of our Public Corruption/Civil Rights program at FBI Headquarters.

Question: Why is public corruption so high on the FBI’s list of investigative priorities?

Answer: Because of its impact. Corrupt public officials undermine our country’s national security, our overall safety, the public trust, and confidence in the U.S. government, wasting billions of dollars along the way. This corruption can tarnish virtually every aspect of society. For example, a border official might take a bribe, knowingly or unknowingly letting in a truck containing weapons of mass destruction. Or corrupt state legislators could cast deciding votes on a bill providing funding or other benefits to a company for the wrong reasons. Or at the local level, a building inspector might be paid to overlook some bad wiring, which could cause a deadly fire down the road.

Q: Can you describe the kinds of public corruption that the FBI investigates?

A: It really runs the gamut. Bribery is the most common. But there’s also extortion, embezzlement, racketeering, kickbacks, and money laundering, as well as wire, mail, bank, and tax fraud. Right now, based on our intelligence on emerging trends, we are focused specifically on several major issues: corruption along our national borders; corrupt officials who take advantage of natural disasters or economic crises to divert some of the government’s aid into their own pockets; and a myriad of officials who may personally benefit from the economic stimulus funding.

Q: Where do you find this corruption?

A: Just about everywhere—at the federal, state, and local levels throughout the country. And I should point out, the vast majority of our country’s public officials are honest and work hard to improve the lives of the American people. But a small number make decisions for the wrong reasons—usually, to line their own pockets or those of friends and family. These people can be found—and have been found—in legislatures, courts, city halls, law enforcement departments, school and zoning boards, government agencies of all kinds (including those that regulate elections and transportation), and even companies that do business with government.

Q: How does the FBI investigate public corruption?

A: We’re in a unique position to investigate allegations of public corruption. Our lawful use of sophisticated investigative tools and methods—like undercover operations, court-authorized electronic surveillance, and informants—often gives us a front-row seat to witness the actual exchange of bribe money or a backroom handshake that seals an illegal deal…and enough evidence to send the culprits to prison. But we have plenty of help. We often work in conjunction with the inspector general offices from various federal agencies, as well as with our state and local partners. And we depend greatly on assistance from the public. So let me end by saying, if anyone out there has any information about potential wrongdoing by a public official, please submit a tip online or contact your local FBI field office. Your help really makes a difference.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/mar10/corruption_032610.html

.