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

From the Los Angeles Times

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

Obama presents Medal of Honor

Army Staff Sgt. Salvatore Giunta rushed into enemy fire in Afghanistan and pulled wounded soldiers to safety. He's the first living recipient of the award for valor in an ongoing conflict since Vietnam.

By Kim Geiger, Tribune Washington Bureau

November 17, 2010

Reporting from Washington

Army Staff Sgt. Salvatore Giunta, who rushed into enemy fire and pulled three wounded soldiers to safety in Afghanistan in 2007, on Tuesday became the first living soldier to be awarded the Medal of Honor for bravery in a conflict since the Vietnam War.

At a White House ceremony, President Obama noted that nearly 40 years had passed since a recipient of the nation's highest award for valor in an ongoing conflict had received the award in person. Nine have been awarded the medal posthumously for their service since the Vietnam War.

"I really like this guy," Obama said in an off-script remark that drew applause. "When you meet Sal and you meet his family, you are just absolutely convinced that this is what America is all about."

"This is an incredible time, but it's also kind of a bittersweet time," Giunta said after the ceremony. "Although this is so positive, I would give this back in a second to have my friends with me right now."

On Oct. 25, 2007, Giunta's platoon was ambushed by Taliban insurgents in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan's Kunar province. Two soldiers were immediately injured.

When a third was struck, "Sal charged headlong into the wall of bullets to pull him to safety behind what little cover there was," Obama said. During the rescue he was hit by two bullets.

Giunta and others on his team mounted a counterattack, eventually reaching one of the two injured soldiers. Giunta continued pressing ahead in search of the other, Sgt. Joshua C. Brennan, one of Giunta's best friends.

"He crested a hill alone, with no cover but the dust kicked up by the storm of bullets still biting into the ground," Obama said.

Giunta found two insurgents attempting to carry Brennan away. He opened fire on them, killing one and wounding the other.

"For nearly half an hour, Sal worked to stop the bleeding and help his friend breathe," Obama said.

Brennan was one of two soldiers who died that day. Obama told Giunta that his "courage prevented the capture of an American soldier and brought that soldier back to his family."

"You may believe that you don't deserve this honor," Obama told Giunta, "but it was your fellow soldiers who recommended you for it."

Giunta, 25, was raised in Iowa. He has received the Bronze Star Medal and the Purple Heart, among other awards. He is a member of Company B, 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 503rd Infantry Regiment, stationed in Vicenza, Italy.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-medal-of-honor-20101117,0,7207893,print.story

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

Longtime Hollywood publicist shot to death in Beverly Hills

Ronni Chasen, who had represented a host of producers, directors and composers for four decades, was found in her car, shot five times. Shocked friends remember a hard-working, caring person whose clients were family.

By Harriet Ryan, Andrew Blankstein and Martha Groves, Los Angeles Times

November 16, 2010

The premiere party for the movie "Burlesque" was just the sort of glitzy Hollywood affair that Ronni Chasen, a veteran movie publicist, loved, and as she had for four decades, she worked the room with relish. As celebrities, including Jane Fonda and the film's stars Cher and Christina Aguilera, mingled around a rooftop pool, Chasen moved among the revelers with a songwriter whose work she was promoting.

"She was happy-go-lucky and gossipy and fun, just like she always was," said Jim Dobson, a publicist who crossed paths with Chasen around midnight.

Less than an hour and a half later, Chasen was dead, gunned down in her Mercedes in an assault that baffled police and made a woman who spent her career touting others, the talk of Hollywood. When word of the slaying broke, some studios canceled meetings and conference calls that had been scheduled to strategize their Oscar campaigns — Chasen's specialty. One publicist set up a reward fund and others closed their offices for the day.

"I'm devastated by this," said Academy Award-winning producer Richard Zanuck, who had worked with Chasen since 1982 and had talked to her earlier in the day about the awards season campaign for his movie "Alice in Wonderland."

Detectives with the Beverly Hills Police Department spent Tuesday trying to piece together the final minutes of Chasen's life and discern a motive for the killing of a 64-year-old single woman who, according to friends, had no enemies.

"She was not a drinker. She never did drugs…. She had solid, really nice people as clients who became sort of her family," said New York publicist Kathie Berlin, a friend of 45 years.

Chasen attended the movie premiere and after party with client Diane Warren, who wrote the song "You Haven't Seen the Last of Me" for the "Burlesque" soundtrack. Sometime after midnight, she steered her new E350 sedan away from the W Hotel in Hollywood, apparently en route to her Westwood condominium. At 12:28 a.m., residents of Whittier Drive, a quiet, tree-lined street often used as a cut through between Sunset and Wilshire boulevards, heard gunshots.

Nahid Shekarchian, 33, said she was in her house on Whittier when she heard gunshots — "boom-boom-boom" — and opened the curtain of her upstairs bedroom to see a Mercedes crashed into a light pole. Shekarchian rushed to the car and peered through the shattered passenger's side window. She said she saw Chasen in the driver's seat bleeding profusely from her head and chest.

Another neighbor, she said, walked to the window and asked, "Can I help you?" Shekarchian said Chasen was breathing "very heavily" and did not respond.

Chasen was pronounced dead at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center at 1:30 a.m., according to the Los Angeles County coroner's office. Coroner's spokesman Ed Winter said she sustained multiple gunshot wounds to her chest.

Shekarchian told police she didn't see anyone else in the vicinity. She said officers told her that the perpetrator might have been on foot.

Beverly Hills police fanned out across the Westside on Tuesday in search of clues. Officers were seen removing computer hard drives, compact discs and file boxes from her luxury high-rise apartment. Investigators also searched her company, Chasen & Co., in West Hollywood. Police declined to say whether any of Chasen's belongings were missing from the vehicle.

Beverly Hills Police Sgt. Lincoln Hoshino said the investigation remained open. Detectives were pursuing a range of possible scenarios, including one in which the perpetrator followed Chasen home from the hotel and another in which she was the victim of road rage.

"We don't know what the motive is," Hoshino said. "This is a fresh, active investigation."

Asked whether officers were reviewing video surveillance from businesses or the many mansions Chasen would have passed on her drive along Sunset, Hoshino said, "The department will conduct a thorough investigation and that will be part of it."

Investigators were questioning Chasen's friends and associates, many of whom had seen and talked to her in the hours before her death. Vivian Mayer-Siskind, a close friend for many years, said Chasen's employees told her that Chasen had called the office from her cellphone at 12:22 a.m. — six minutes before she was shot — leaving a to-do list for the following day on an answering machine.

"That was typical of Ronni," said Mayer-Siskind, referring to what she described as her tireless work ethic.

After hearing about Chasen's death from industry friends, Mayer-Siskind drove to the Beverly Hills police station to learn more. She later went to Chasen's office, where four staffers worked, to help write an obituary. By then, she said, the office was swarming with police, who were poring through Chasen's phone records, listening to her messages, going through her computer and taking photographs.

Chasen, born in 1946 in New York, started in the entertainment industry as a soap opera actress, Mayer-Siskind said. She began working for the publicity firm Rogers & Cowan in 1980 and later was a top publicist for MGM. She was best known for her awards season campaigns. She worked on campaigns for more than 100 movies, including last year's Best Picture Oscar winner, "The Hurt Locker," as well as "Cocoon," "Baby Boom," "On Golden Pond" and the 1989 Best Picture winner "Driving Miss Daisy."

In an age where publicists have Twitter feeds and reality shows, Chasen was somewhat old-fashioned and clients were producers, directors and composers rather than starlets.

"There were people who were newer in the business and have reputations as being hipper, but what I loved about Ronni is not just that she knew everyone but everyone knew and liked her," said Randall Wallace, the director of "Secretariat." He had planned to meet with her Tuesday afternoon to explore a possible Oscar campaign for that movie.

"She was the last of the real old-school publicists," said Valerie Van Galder, the former president of marketing for Sony Pictures.

Van Galder said that when she worked for Chasen in the mid-1980s, she relied on a teletype machine to dictate correspondence. But Chasen found an affinity for new technology because it allowed her to reach journalists at any time or place, Van Galder said. She was never far from her Blackberry and sent e-mail blasts extolling her clients' latest projects at all hours.

Friend Heidi Schaefer said that during a vacation last month to Paris, she caught Chasen using her Blackberry during a church chamber music concert. She never stopped working.

"Her hours were hideous and she organized and went to all of those functions we dread," Zanuck said.

Clients described her as fiercely protective and devoted. Producer Irwin Winkler said that when his 2004 film "De-Lovely" was not nominated for a Golden Globe, Chasen "was furious."

"She screamed and yelled at [members of] the Hollywood Foreign Press [Assn.]," the group that puts on the annual awards show, Winkler recalled.

Academy Award-winning composer Hans Zimmer said Chasen refused to let him be jaded about the annual contests, which he greeted with "an in-built disdain."

"For 20 years, she came up with new reasons I should care," he said.

According to friends, Chasen was married once and had divorced years ago. She had no children, but, friends said, counted her clients and fellow publicists as family.

Stan Rosenfeld, a publicist and longtime friend of Chasen, said he feared that her work would be lost in the shock of her death.

"I don't remember anything hitting the nerve of this town quite like this," he said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-ronni-chasen-20101117,0,2829710,print.story

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

Shut up and be scanned

The airport security devices may be intrusive, but they're also a necessary evil.

November 17, 2010

Would you rather pose for a nude photograph or be groped by a federal employee? To hear many fliers these days, those are the only two choices for air passengers as the Transportation Security Administration installs full-body scanners at airports and introduces a more invasive pat-down technique that some have likened to sexual molestation. We're not wild about the new methods either, but they're a necessary evil in the era of suicide bombers who board planes with chemical explosives in their underwear.

Objections to the enhanced procedures are many and varied. Some center on the scanners, which are increasingly replacing metal detectors at airport terminals, and for good reason — old-style detectors can't find the plastic or chemical bombs favored by today's terrorists. Yet the new scanners effectively peer through passengers' clothing, earning them the nickname "porno scanners" from such groups as We Won't Fly, a grass-roots consumer organization. Passengers fear that the nearly nude images will be saved and disseminated, or they are just uncomfortable with the idea of a security screener peering at their bodies. Others fret that the scanners pose a health risk. And then there are those, such as software engineer John Tyner, who refuse the scans, only to be confronted with an even worse alternative: the new TSA pat-down, which leaves no area of the body unexplored.

Tyner became a YouTube star last weekend after he recorded his encounter with security officers at San Diego International Airport on his cellphone and posted it online. In the audio-only recording, a TSA employee explains the search technique, which involves running a hand up the leg to the crotch in front and back, to which Tyner responds, "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested." Things go downhill from there, with Tyner eventually being threatened with a civil lawsuit for leaving the terminal without submitting to the search. And although Tyner might now be the most famous search objector, he is far from the only one; the Electronic Privacy Information Center has filed suit claiming that the scans violate the 4th Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches, and airline pilots unions are complaining volubly.

There's no bright line to indicate where our quest for security becomes intolerably invasive of our privacy, but we're still pretty sure the TSA hasn't yet crossed it. Although the pat-downs are seriously embarrassing, they're also usually voluntary — to avoid them, you just have to go through the scanner. And fears about the scanners have been overblown.

Images from the scanners are viewed in a separate room by an officer who never sees the passenger, whose face is automatically blurred. The TSA says the images cannot be saved, stored or printed, but privacy advocates are skeptical; the U.S. Marshals Service admitted saving 35,000 images from a full-body scanner at a Florida courtroom this summer. Having seen the less-than-titillating images produced by the scanners, we doubt that they'll show up on Internet porn sites anytime soon — or that even if they did, the subjects in them would be remotely recognizable.

Equally shrug-worthy are the complaints about safety. About half the machines being deployed use X-ray technology that exposes passengers to radiation, yet the amount is so tiny — it would take 5,000 trips through the scanner to equal the exposure of a single chest X-ray — that it's hard to take seriously as a health risk. Fliers are exposed to cosmic radiation during their flights that's many times the level of exposure from the scanners.

The quest to keep up with terrorists' shifting methods never ends; as soon as you block one potential attack route, terrorists often find another. In reaction to the new high-tech scans, suicide bombers may well switch to buses and trains rather than airplanes, or airborne killers might resort to inserting explosives into their body cavities, where the machines can't detect them. So, it's reasonable to ask, what's next? Anal probes at the airport? It's safe to say that if the TSA gets to that point, it will have crossed the line, and it might be time to explore less invasive methods. Meanwhile, though, a full-body scan isn't a terribly high price to pay for a measure of peace of mind.

Of course, that's not good enough for groups like We Won't Fly. It is promoting a mass protest on Nov. 24, the day before Thanksgiving, urging fliers to opt out of the full-body scanners. This will subject them to the far more intrusive and time-consuming pat-down instead, and if many people participate, it will render the traditionally long pre-Thanksgiving delays at airports positively unbearable — and all because a few excessively body-conscious individuals are uncomfortable with a scan that's little more taxing or dangerous than going through a metal detector. The new scans might not be foolproof, but they'll spot more dangerous materials than the old detectors and keep passengers safer. If you can't handle such a minor inconvenience, perhaps you should stay on the ground.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-security-20101117,0,6932116,print.story

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

From the New York Times

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

NATO Is Razing Booby-Trapped Afghan Homes

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — In the newly won districts around this southern city, American forces are encountering empty homes and farm buildings left so heavily booby-trapped by Taliban insurgents that the Americans have been systematically destroying hundreds of them, according to local Afghan authorities.

The campaign , a major departure from NATO practice in past military operations, is intended to reduce civilian and military casualties by removing the threat of booby traps and denying Taliban insurgents hiding places and fighting positions, American military officials said.

While it has widespread support among Afghan officials and even some residents, and has been accompanied by an equally determined effort to hand out cash compensation to homeowners, other local people have complained that the demolitions have gone far beyond what is necessary.

It would also seem to run counter to Gen. David H. Petraeus 's counterinsurgency strategy , which calls for respecting property as well as lives, and to run up against recent calls by President Hamid Karzai for foreign forces to lower their profile and avoid tactics that alienate Afghan civilians. There have been no reports of civilians casualties from the demolitions.

General Petraeus, the NATO commander in Afghanistan , has recently pointed to progress in routing the Taliban in Kandahar, thanks to 30,000 additional troops, although the insurgents have countered that they have simply gone into hiding to wait out the American push.

What they have left behind are vacant houses and farm buildings so heavily rigged that soldiers have started referring to them as house-borne improvised explosive devices .

In recent weeks, using armored bulldozers, high explosives, missiles and even airstrikes, American troops have taken to destroying hundreds of them, by a conservative estimate, with some estimates running into the thousands.

“We don't know the accurate number of homes destroyed, but it's huge,” said Zalmai Ayubi, the spokesman for the Kandahar provincial governor, Tooryalai Wesa, and who with the governor visited on Oct. 21. “It's the insurgents and the enemy of the country that are to blame for this destruction, because they have planted mines in civilian houses and main roads everywhere.”

Lt. Col. Webster Wright, the spokesman for NATO forces in Kandahar, said he did not know how many homes had been destroyed in the campaign, but put the number of deliberate demolitions since September at 174, including homes and other structures.

The number seemed well below the destruction indicated by the accounts of local officials.

In the most fiercely contested areas, especially in Zhare District, but also in parts of neighboring Panjwai and Arghandab Districts, American troops have been routinely destroying almost every unoccupied home or unused farm building in areas where they are operating.

In Arghandab District, for instance, every one of the 40 homes in the village of Khosrow was flattened by a salvo of 25 missiles, according to the district governor, Shah Muhammed Ahmadi, who estimated that 120 to 130 houses had been demolished in his district. “There was no other way; we knew people wanted us to get rid of all these deadly I.E.D.'s,” he said, referring to improvised explosive devices, the military's term for homemade bombs.

“In some villages where only a few houses were contaminated by bombs, we called the owners and got their agreement to destroy them,” Mr. Ahmadi said. “In some villages like Khosrow that were completely empty and full of I.E.D.'s, we destroyed them without agreement because it was hard to find the people.

“And not just Khosrow, but many villages,” he said, listing a half-dozen others. “We had to destroy them to make them safe.”

Military units in the field have been seen keeping meticulous records, recording not only every house they blow up, but also every grape-drying shed, retaining wall, tree and vine, and entering that data into computerized systems.

“I don't know exactly how many people have received compensation yet, but there are hundreds of people waiting to claim for their losses and many who already have put in claims,” said Karim Jan, the governor of Zhare District, where the destruction of homes has been most extensive. In neighboring Panjwai District, Gov. Baran Khaksar said 60 families had been compensated for destruction of their homes or other property.

Responding to questions about whether house demolitions contradicted counterinsurgency strategy, Col. Hans E. Bush, a press aide speaking on behalf of General Petraeus, said the steps had been taken to safeguard the local residents.

“The buildings in question posed a threat to everyone in the area since they were rigged with explosives and booby-trapped in a way to prevent E.O.D. personnel from rendering them safe,” he said referring to the American Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams.

American troops are using an impressive array of tools not only to demolish homes, but also to eliminate tree lines where insurgents could hide, blow up outbuildings, flatten agricultural walls, and carve new “military roads,” because existing ones are so heavily mined, according to journalists embedded in the area recently.

One of the most fearsome tools is the Miclic, the M58 Mine-Clearing Line Charge, a chain of explosives tied to a rocket, which upon impact destroys everything in a swath 30 feet wide and 325 feet long. The Himars missile system, a pod of 13-foot rockets carrying 200-pound warheads, has also been used frequently for demolition work.

Often, new military roads go right through farms and compounds, cutting a route that will keep soldiers safe from roadside bombs. In Zhare District alone, the 101st Airborne's Second Brigade has lost 30 soldiers since last June, mostly to such bombs.

Activists at the organization Afghanistan Rights Monitor have been critical of the campaign. “These are all mud houses, quite humble houses,” said Akmal Dawi, of the group, “so they are just taking the easiest way and saying, ‘We will destroy them and then help them rebuild, give them a couple hundred dollars and show we are on their side.' ”

However, with winter approaching and the fight continuing, owners are not likely to begin rebuilding anytime soon. “It's not enough,” Mr. Dawi said. “People will not be satisfied with that.”

The number of refugees from the districts around Kandahar is difficult to determine, because most of them stay with relatives or friends in the city, but local officials estimate that nearly 1,000 families have fled Zhare and Arghandab in the past month alone. Many others left before military operations stepped up, fleeing Taliban domination in the area.

Abdul Rahim Khan, 50, a tribal elder from Spirwan in Panjwai District, claimed that in many cases the American troops had been destroying empty homes, even when there were not any explosives inside. However, military officers pointed out, searching empty homes was often too dangerous.

“People are not happy with the compensation,” said a tribal elder in Zhare, who said he was afraid to give his name for publication. “Compensation is just kicking dirt in our eyes.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/world/asia/17afghan.html?_r=1&ref=world&pagewanted=print

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

F.B.I. Seeks Wider Wiretap Law for Web

WASHINGTON — Robert S. Mueller III , the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation , traveled to Silicon Valley on Tuesday to meet with top executives of several technology firms about a proposal to make it easier to wiretap Internet users.

Mr. Mueller and the F.B.I.'s general counsel, Valerie Caproni, were scheduled to meet with senior managers of several major companies, including Google and Facebook , according to several people familiar with the discussions. How Mr. Mueller's proposal was received was not clear.

“I can confirm that F.B.I. Director Robert Mueller is visiting Facebook during his trip to Silicon Valley,” said Andrew Noyes, Facebook's public policy manager. Michael Kortan, an F.B.I. spokesman, acknowledged the meetings but did not elaborate.

Mr. Mueller wants to expand a 1994 law, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, to impose regulations on Internet companies.

The law requires phone and broadband network access providers like Verizon and Comcast to make sure they can immediately comply when presented with a court wiretapping order.

Law enforcement officials want the 1994 law to also cover Internet companies because people increasingly communicate online. An interagency task force of Obama administration officials is trying to develop legislation for the plan, and submit it to Congress early next year.

The Commerce Department and State Department have questioned whether it would inhibit innovation, as well as whether repressive regimes might harness the same capabilities to identify political dissidents, according to officials familiar with the discussions.

Under the proposal, firms would have to design systems to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages. Services based overseas would have to route communications through a server on United States soil where they could be wiretapped.

A Google official declined to comment. Mr. Noyes said it would be premature for Facebook to take a position.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/technology/17wiretap.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

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

Facing Scrutiny, Officials Defend Airport Pat Downs

WASHINGTON — The official subject of the hearing Tuesday was screening air cargo. But senators seemed equally interested in hearing about a new procedure for airline passengers that involves a full-body pat down.

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman , independent of Connecticut and chairman of the homeland security committee, asked John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration , to explain why he believed the new pat-down procedures were “justified.”

Mr. Pistole said that while “reasonable people can disagree as to what that proper balance or blend is between privacy and security safety,” he believed that “everybody who gets on a flight wants to be reassured that everybody else around them has been properly screened.”

Aviation and travel news has been dominated recently by discussion of the method, which allows screeners to use the front of their hands to touch passengers' inner thighs, buttocks and breasts. The pat down is required for passengers who opt out of passing through a full-body scanner, officially known as Advanced Imaging Technology machines. More than 300 of the scanners are in use at airports nationwide.

Mr. Leiberman called the pat downs “awkward” and “unusual,” but ultimately defended them, saying that had Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab , who is accused of boarding a Detroit-bound flight with an explosive device sewn into his underwear, been successful, “Congress and I daresay the public would have been demanding not just the body imaging equipment but pat downs.”

If Mr. Abdulmutallab “had opted out,” Mr. Pistole said, “thinking, ‘Well, I'm not going to receive a thorough pat down so I can get on that flight,' if that had been successful on Christmas Day, I think we might be having a different dialogue here this afternoon and in the public.”

While Mr. Pistole did not provide specific numbers, he said only a “very small” percentage of travelers were patted down. The pat downs would occur, he said, if they had opted out of the scanner or if they had set off an alert another way.

Later, in response to questions from Senator John Ensign , Republican of Nevada, Mr. Pistole said, “There will be no exceptions because of religion” if security officials decide a passenger must either go through the scanner or be frisked.

On Tuesday, the T.S.A. also announced a new policy to offer a “modified pat down” for children 12 years old and under who require additional screening.

The committee also heard testimony about enhancing measures for air cargo security after a thwarted terrorist attack last month involving parcel bombs smuggled onto cargo planes bound for the United States.

Committee members pressed Mr. Pistole and Alan D. Bersin, commissioner of the Customs and Border Protection division of the Department of Homeland Security , on the differences between procedures for air cargo and cargo that goes by sea.

For maritime cargo procedures, manifest information must be submitted to the Department of Homeland Security at least 24 hours before a container is loaded onto a ship headed to the United States. For air cargo, the manifest information has to be submitted only four hours before the cargo lands in the United States.

“Frankly, a system that says we want to know four hours before it arrives at our shores provides very little protection,” said Senator Susan M. Collins , Republican of Maine. “The flight may be already en route.”

Ms. Collins and Senator Carl Levin , Democrat of Michigan, asked why the system for air cargo could not be changed immediately. Mr. Pistole said it was “a pragmatic issue” and asked, “The question is, Are the carriers capable of implementing that today?”

Mr. Levin said he did not understand the “practical problems” in making the change.

“This is easier than pat downs,” he said. “This is just slowing it down.”

On Tuesday, Representative Edward J. Markey , Democrat of Massachusetts, introduced legislation that would require the complete screening of cargo-only aircraft. In 2007, Mr. Markey wrote a similar law, which requires the total screening of all air cargo transported on domestic passenger planes and all international passenger planes entering the United States.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/us/17security.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

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

Tough Law Reduced Immigrants, Study Shows

WASHINGTON — A study of an Arizona-style immigration policy in Prince William County, Va., has found that it reduced the number of illegal immigrants in the county, but that its effect on violent crime was inconclusive.

The study was conducted by the University of Virginia and the Police Executive Research Forum , a nonprofit group focused on improving police tactics, at the request of the county. It looked at data from 2007, when the policy was proposed, through 2009.

Prince William County began enforcing the tough immigration law, similar to one that was passed later in Arizona and is now facing legal challenges, in 2008. The county's law required police officers to check the immigration status of anyone they had probable cause to believe was in the country illegally.

The county executive, Corey Stewart, pushed the policy in a campaign that polarized residents. Hispanic groups criticized the policy as inflammatory.

The county's police department, which paid for the study, expressed concern that the law would be expensive to carry out and that it would lead to accusations of racial profiling, and eight weeks later, it was suspended. It was later revised to apply only to those who had been arrested.

While the county's foreign-born population more than doubled in the past decade, according to the Migration Policy Institute , a rise largely attributable to the housing boom in northern Virginia, the report found that there were 3,000 to 6,000 fewer illegal immigrants in the county in 2009, compared with 2006.

“We are convinced that it's a clear result of the policy,” said Thomas M. Guterbock, a professor of sociology and one of the authors of the study.

It is not entirely clear whether reducing the illegal population was one of the policy's objectives. Mr. Stewart said in an interview last week that it was a desirable goal, but that the earlier, stricter policy had not been workable.

“I believe that if someone is here illegally, they should be deported,” he said. “But from a more practical perspective, we should be focusing on those illegal immigrants who are committing crimes.”

Illegal immigrants represent just 6 percent of the perpetrators of all serious crimes in the county, a small enough slice that measuring the effects of the policy on crime has been tricky.

Christopher Koper, director of research at the research forum and one of the authors of the study, said a significant finding was the sharp drop in aggravated assaults immediately after the announcement of the policy in 2007. But the drop might have been a fall-off in frightened immigrants reporting crimes, he said.

“We have no indication that the enforcement of the policy led to a reduction in crime,” Mr. Koper said. “Crime trends have been steady.”

Eric Byler, a documentary film maker whose film, “9500 Liberty,” captured the county's struggle with the law, noted that the stricter policy was in place only in March and April of 2008 and argued that it was too short-lived to have had much impact. The controversy it caused had perhaps the most serious effect, he said.

“If anything this is the measure of the controversy's impact, not a measure of the policy's impact,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/us/17immig.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

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

For Katrina Victims, Relief at Last

It took five long years. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has finally persuaded Mississippi to do right by Hurricane Katrina survivors who were unfairly shut out of a federally financed disaster aid program designed by the state. Congress needs to rewrite disaster aid regulations so that a travesty like this one never happens again.

The long delay in serving these needy families dates back to the Bush administration, which seemed inclined to let the state do anything it wanted to do with the $5.5 billion allotment of federal aid that Congress gave it after the storm. The law required that states and localities spend half the money on low- and moderate-income families, which should not have been difficult in the poorest state in the union.

But the Bush administration allowed the state to waive the income requirement on some projects. And despite evidence that many Katrina survivors still needed housing, the administration, in 2007, let the state shift $600 million of recovery to aid the refurbishment of the Port of Gulfport, a pet project conceived long before the storm. The Mississippi N.A.A.C.P. and the Gulf Coast Fair Housing Center then sued HUD, arguing the transfer violated federal disaster aid regulations.

Prompted by the lawsuit, the Obama administration began pressing Mississippi to revisit its housing aid policies, which led to the creation of a new program that was announced by the HUD secretary, Shaun Donovan, earlier this week.

Under the agreement, Mississippi will set aside $132 million, all of it from existing Katrina assistance programs, to help low-income victims with unmet housing needs. The new program has already identified more than 4,400 such people and expects to turn up many more after a new outreach effort starts.

The new program also will cure a fatal flaw in the original plan, which shut out victims whose homes were destroyed by wind, rather than water.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/opinion/17wed3.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print

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

From the White House

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

President Obama Presents the Medal of Honor to Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta: "We're All in Your Debt"

This afternoon in the East Room of the White House, the President presented the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry to Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta, U.S. Army -- the first living servicemember from the Iraq or Afghanistan wars to receive it.  "Now, I'm going to go off-script here for a second and just say I really like this guy," said the President to laughter and applause.  "I think anybody -- we all just get a sense of people and who they are, and when you meet Sal and you meet his family, you are just absolutely convinced that this is what America is all about." 

As the President always does, he recounted the story of the events that earned  this honor, and as always it needs no editorial embellishment:

During the first of his two tours of duty in Afghanistan, Staff Sergeant Giunta was forced early on to come to terms with the loss of comrades and friends.  His team leader at the time gave him a piece of advice:  “You just try -- you just got to try to do everything you can when it's your time to do it.”  You've just got to try to do everything you can when it's your time to do it.

Salvatore Giunta's time came on October 25, 2007.  He was a Specialist then, just 22 years old.

Sal and his platoon were several days into a mission in the Korengal Valley -- the most dangerous valley in northeast Afghanistan.  The moon was full.  The light it cast was enough to travel by without using their night-vision goggles.  With heavy gear on their backs, and air support overhead, they made their way single file down a rocky ridge crest, along terrain so steep that sliding was sometimes easier than walking. 

They hadn't traveled a quarter mile before the silence was shattered.  It was an ambush, so close that the cracks of the guns and the whizz of the bullets were simultaneous.  Tracer fire hammered the ridge at hundreds of rounds per minute -- “more,” Sal said later, “than the stars in the sky.”

The Apache gunships above saw it all, but couldn't engage with the enemy so close to our soldiers.  The next platoon heard the shooting, but were too far away to join the fight in time.

And the two lead men were hit by enemy fire and knocked down instantly.  When the third was struck in the helmet and fell to the ground, Sal charged headlong into the wall of bullets to pull him to safety behind what little cover there was.  As he did, Sal was hit twice -- one round slamming into his body armor, the other shattering a weapon slung across his back.

They were pinned down, and two wounded Americans still lay up ahead.  So Sal and his comrades regrouped and counterattacked.  They threw grenades, using the explosions as cover to run forward, shooting at the muzzle flashes still erupting from the trees.  Then they did it again.  And again.  Throwing grenades, charging ahead.  Finally, they reached one of their men.  He'd been shot twice in the leg, but he had kept returning fire until his gun jammed.

As another soldier tended to his wounds, Sal sprinted ahead, at every step meeting relentless enemy fire with his own.  He crested a hill alone, with no cover but the dust kicked up by the storm of bullets still biting into the ground.  There, he saw a chilling sight:  the silhouettes of two insurgents carrying the other wounded American away -- who happened to be one of Sal's best friends.  Sal never broke stride.  He leapt forward.  He took aim.  He killed one of the insurgents and wounded the other, who ran off.

Sal found his friend alive, but badly wounded.  Sal had saved him from the enemy -- now he had to try to save his life.  Even as bullets impacted all around him, Sal grabbed his friend by the vest and dragged him to cover.  For nearly half an hour, Sal worked to stop the bleeding and help his friend breathe until the MEDEVAC arrived to lift the wounded from the ridge.  American gunships worked to clear the enemy from the hills.  And with the battle over, First Platoon picked up their gear and resumed their march through the valley.  They continued their mission.

It had been as intense and violent a firefight as any soldier will experience.  By the time it was finished, every member of First Platoon had shrapnel or a bullet hole in their gear.  Five were wounded.  And two gave their lives:  Sal's friend, Sergeant Joshua C. Brennan, and the platoon medic, Specialist Hugo V. Mendoza.

Now, the parents of Joshua and Hugo are here today.  And I know that there are no words that, even three years later, can ease the ache in your hearts or repay the debt that America owes to you.  But on behalf of a grateful nation, let me express profound thanks to your sons' service and their sacrifice.  And could the parents of Joshua and Hugo please stand briefly?  (Applause.)

Now, I already mentioned I like this guy, Sal.  And as I found out myself when I first spoke with him on the phone and when we met in the Oval Office today, he is a low-key guy, a humble guy, and he doesn't seek the limelight.  And he'll tell you that he didn't do anything special; that he was just doing his job; that any of his brothers in the unit would do the same thing.  In fact, he just lived up to what his team leader instructed him to do years before:  “You do everything you can.”

Staff Sergeant Giunta, repeatedly and without hesitation, you charged forward through extreme enemy fire, embodying the warrior ethos that says, “I will never leave a fallen comrade.”  Your actions disrupted a devastating ambush before it could claim more lives.  Your courage prevented the capture of an American soldier and brought that soldier back to his family.  You may believe that you don't deserve this honor, but it was your fellow soldiers who recommended you for it.  In fact, your commander specifically said in his recommendation that you lived up to the standards of the most decorated American soldier of World War II, Audie Murphy, who famously repelled an overwhelming enemy attack by himself for one simple reason:  “They were killing my friends.”

That's why Salvatore Giunta risked his life for his fellow soldiers -- because they would risk their lives for him.  That's what fueled his bravery -- not just the urgent impulse to have their backs, but the absolute confidence that they had his.  One of them, Sal has said -- of these young men that he was with, he said, “They are just as much of me as I am.”  They are just as much of me as I am. 

So I would ask Sal's team, all of Battle Company who were with him that day, to please stand and be recognized as well.  (Applause.)  Gentlemen, thank you for your service.  We're all in your debt.  And I'm proud to be your Commander-in-Chief.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/11/16/president-obama-presents-medal-honor-staff-sergeant-salvatore-giunta-we-re-all-your -

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

From ICE

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

3 seizures yield more than 9,000 pounds of pot for ICE in Nogales

NOGALES, Ariz. - Special agents with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) seized more than 9,200 pounds of marijuana within one week in Nogales, Ariz.

In two separate incidents Wednesday, HSI agents seized 4,520 pounds of marijuana at a Nogales business under investigation for suspicion of narcotics smuggling and another 2,485 pounds from a load vehicle parked in town.

The business, located in downtown Nogales, was under surveillance by ICE when, at approximately 5 a.m., agents observed a 2001 purple Peterbilt tractor enter the property and park in the rear near a disabled cargo van. After parking next to the van, four individuals were observed unloading large marijuana bundles from the Peterbilt tractor and placing them into the cargo van.

HSI agents surrounded the property and seized a total of 206 bundles of marijuana with a cumulative weight of 4,520 pounds. Agents also arrested a 58-year-old Mexican citizen who is currently facing federal charges related to drug smuggling.

Later that day, agents identified an abandoned van laden with narcotics parked at a bank located on Mariposa Road in Nogales. A search the van revealed 2,485 pounds of marijuana stashed inside.

Finally, on Nov. 4, HSI agents identified a white panel van in a Nogales parking lot that resembled vehicles used to illicitly transport large quantities of marijuana. Agents observed a man enter the vehicle and depart the area. They followed the van to a warehouse area and watched as the van, after departing the warehouses, was followed closely by a Ford Expedition.

The van conducted a counter-surveillance maneuver, followed by the Expedition, which agents recognized as a common technique used by drug smuggling organizations to avoid law enforcement. Agents conducted a traffic stop on the van and the Expedition and discovered 2,213 pounds of marijuana in the van.

"As Homeland Security Investigations continues to identify the organizations, individuals and techniques used to smuggle narcotics, we will expect to see significant seizures and arrests being made by ICE agents," said Kevin Kelly, assistant special agent in charge of ICE HSI in Nogales.

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1011/101112nogales.htm

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

From the FBI

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

Domestic Terrorism
Anarchist Extremism: A Primer

11/16/2010

To help educate the public about domestic terrorism—Americans attacking Americans because of U.S.-based extremist ideologies—we've previously outlined three separate threats: eco-terrorists/animal rights extremists, lone offenders, and the sovereign citizen movement.

Today, we look at a fourth threat—anarchist extremism.

What is anarchist extremism? Anarchism is a belief that society should have no government, laws, police, or any other authority. Having that belief is perfectly legal, and the majority of anarchists in the U.S. advocate change through non-violent, non-criminal means. A small minority, however, believes change can only be accomplished through violence and criminal acts…and that, of course, is against the law.  

Anarchist extremism is nothing new to the FBI. One of our first big cases occurred in 1919, when the Bureau of Investigation (as we were called then) investigated a series of anarchist bombings in several U.S. cities. And during the 1970s, the FBI investigated anarchist extremists such as the Weather Underground Organization , which conducted bombing campaigns.  

The current threat. Anarchist extremism in the U.S. encompasses a variety of ideologies, including anti-capitalism, anti-globalism, and anti-urbanization. There's also "green anarchy," an element of anarchist extremism mixed with environmental extremism. The extremists are loosely organized, with no central leadership—although they occasionally demonstrate limited ability to mobilize themselves.

Typically, anarchist extremists in the U.S. are event-driven—they show up at political conventions, economic and financial summits, environmental meetings, and the like. They usually target symbols of Western civilization that they perceive to be the root causes of all societal ills—i.e., financial corporations, government institutions, multinational companies, and law enforcement agencies. They damage and vandalize property, riot, set fires, and perpetrate small-scale bombings. Law enforcement is also concerned about anarchist extremists who may be willing to use improvised explosives devices or improvised incendiary devices.

Currently, much of the criminal activities of anarchist extremists fall under local jurisdiction, so they're investigated by local police. If asked by police, the Bureau can assist. But we have a heavy presence at a major national or international events generating significant media coverage—that's when the threat from anarchist extremists, as well as others who are up to no good, dramatically increases.

For today's generation of American anarchist extremists, the rioting that disrupted the 1999 World Trade Organization meetings in Seattle is the standard by which they measure “success” —it resulted in millions of dollars in property damage and economic loss and injuries to hundreds of law enforcement officers and bystanders. But fortunately, they haven't been able to duplicate what happened in Seattle…which may be a combination of the improved preparations of law enforcement as well as the disorganization of the movement.

This disorganization, though, can also be a challenge for law enforcement: it gives the extremists anonymity and low visibility, and it makes it tough to recruit sources and gather intelligence. It's challenging, but not impossible—there have been a number of anarchist convictions since 1999 at both the state and federal levels. And the FBI, along with our law enforcement partners, will continue to detect and disrupt enterprises and individuals involved in criminal activity or who advocate the use of force or violence to further an anarchist extremist ideology. 

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2010/november/anarchist_111610/anarchist_111610

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

From the DEA

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

Viktor Bout Extradited To The United States To Stand
Trial On Terrorism Charges

NOV 16 -- (Washington) – After more than two years of legal proceedings, alleged international arms dealer Viktor Bout has been extradited to the Southern District of New York from Thailand to stand trial on terrorism charges, the Justice Department announced today.

Bout arrived this evening on a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) charter plane and was brought to a high-security prison in Manhattan, where he will be held pending trial.  Bout, who also goes by many other names, including “Boris,” “Victor Anatoliyevich Bout,” “Victor But,” “Viktor Budd,” “Viktor Butt,” “Viktor Bulakin,” and “Vadim Markovich Aminov,” is scheduled to be presented in Manhattan federal court tomorrow afternoon before U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, to whom the case has been assigned.

“Viktor Bout has been indicted in the United States, but his alleged arms trafficking activity and support of armed conflicts in Africa has been a cause of concern around the world.  His extradition is a victory for the rule of law worldwide,” Attorney General Eric Holder said.  “Long considered one of the world's most prolific arms traffickers, Mr. Bout will now appear in federal court in Manhattan to answer to charges of conspiring to sell millions of dollars worth of weapons to a terrorist organization for use in trying to kill Americans.”

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said, “Viktor Bout allegedly jumped at the chance to arm narco-terrorists bent on killing Americans with an arsenal of military grade weapons.  Today's successful extradition underscores our commitment to protect Americans on our own soil and throughout the world.  The historic operation culminating in today's extradition would not have been possible without the courageous and groundbreaking work of our partners at the DEA.” 

“With Viktor Bout now behind bars in the United States, this defendant will finally face his most feared consequence: accountability for his alleged crimes in a court of law,” said Michele M. Leonhart, Acting Administrator of the DEA. “For more than a decade, Mr. Bout is alleged to have plied a deadly trade in surface-to-air missiles, land mines, bullets, death and destruction.  Fortunately, with his arrest, extradition, and pending prosecution in the Southern District of New York, his last alleged attempt to deal in death means that he will finally face justice.”

According to the indictment and other court documents:

Until his arrest in March 2008, Bout was an alleged international weapons trafficker.  To carry out his weapons trafficking business, Bout assembled a fleet of cargo airplanes capable of transporting weapons and military equipment to various parts of the world, including Africa, South America and the Middle East.  In 2004, as a result of his weapons trafficking activities in Liberia, the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) placed Bout on the Specially Designated Nationals list, which prohibits any transactions between Bout and any U.S. nationals, and freezes any of Bout's assets that are within the jurisdiction of the United States.   

Between November 2007 and March 2008, Bout agreed to sell to the Colombian narco-terrorist organization, the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC),  millions of dollars worth of weapons -- including surface-to-air missile systems; armor piercing rocket launchers; AK-47 firearms; millions of rounds of ammunition; Russian spare parts for rifles; anti-personnel land mines; C-4 plastic explosives; night-vision equipment; “ultralight” aircraft that could be outfitted with grenade launchers and missiles; and unmanned aerial vehicles. 

The FARC is dedicated to the violent overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Colombia and is also the world's largest supplier of cocaine.  Bout agreed to sell the weapons to two confidential sources working with the DEA (the “CSs”), who represented that they were acquiring these weapons for the FARC, with the specific understanding that the weapons were to be used to attack U.S. helicopters in Colombia. 

During a covertly-recorded meeting in Thailand on March 6, 2008, Bout stated to the CSs that he could arrange to airdrop the arms to the FARC in Colombia, and offered to sell two cargo planes to the FARC that could be used for arms deliveries.  Bout also provided a map of South America, and asked the CSs to show him American radar locations in Colombia. 

Bout indicated that he understood that the CSs wanted the arms for use against American personnel in Colombia, and advised that the United States was also his enemy, stating that the FARC's fight against the United States was also his fight.  During the meeting, Bout also offered to provide people to train the FARC in the use of the arms.  Following this meeting, Bout was arrested by Thai law enforcement authorities.

The indictment charges Bout with four separate terrorism offenses:

• Count one: conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals,
• Count two: conspiracy to kill U.S. officers or employees,
• Count three: conspiracy to acquire and use an anti-aircraft missile, and
• Count four: conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization

If convicted of all counts, Bout faces a mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison and a maximum sentence of life in prison.

This investigation was conducted by the DEA and its success is the result of international law enforcement cooperation efforts spanning the globe.  The case is being handled by the Southern District of New York's Terrorism and International Narcotics Unit.  Assistant U.S. Attorneys Anjan Sahni and Brendan R. McGuire are in charge of the prosecution.  The Justice Department's Office of International Affairs and National Security Division, as well as the U.S. State Department, also provided substantial assistance.

The charges contained in the indictment are merely accusations and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/pressrel/pr111610.html

.