U.S. Using Wide Range of Spy Tools to Monitor Coronavirus

Posted on February 29, 2020February 29, 2020 by Denise Simon

A major fall of nitrogen dioxide in China since the outbreak of Covid-19.

Nitrogen dioxide is a nasty-smelling gas. Some nitrogen dioxide is formed naturally in the atmosphere by lightning and some is produced by plants, soil and water. However, only about 1% of the total amount of nitrogen dioxide found in our cities’ air is formed this way.

Nitrogen dioxide is an important air pollutant because it contributes to the formation of photochemical smog, which can have significant impacts on human health. The main effect of breathing in raised levels of nitrogen dioxide is the increased likelihood of respiratory problems. Nitrogen dioxide inflames the lining of the lungs, and it can reduce immunity to lung infections. This can cause problems such as wheezing, coughing, colds, flu and bronchitis.

***

United States intelligence agencies are using “a wide range” of tools, ranging from open-source collection to communications interception and human intelligence, to collect desperately needed data about the spread of the coronavirus, according to sources. As of late last week, some of the most dependable data on the spread of the virus, known as COVID-19, came from military channels of information, according to Yahoo News’ National Security and Investigations Reporter Jenna McLaughlin.

Writing last Friday, McLaughlin cited “two sources familiar with the matter”, who said that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency’s Global Issues Mission Center were collecting and analyzing real-time data on the coronavirus. The spread of the disease was also being monitored by the National Center for Medical Intelligence, which assesses the impact of disease outbreaks on American and foreign military personnel, said McLaughlin. She added that the intelligence generated by these agencies was being channeled to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services, which lead the White House’s Task Force on COVID-19.

A major concern of the US Intelligence Community is that the Chinese, Iranian and other governments around the world may not be sharing comprehensive data on the spread of the virus and its impact. “No data means spying”, one unnamed source told McLaughlin. According to Reuters’ Mark Hosenball, US intelligence agencies have been using “a wide range of intelligence tools”, including human intelligence and electronic communications interception to track the spread of COVID-19. A major question that US intelligence agencies are trying to answer is whether governments like China’s or Iran’s have effective “continuity operations” plans in place, which relate to preserving the main functions of government during a major national disaster.

According to Hosenball, there is pessimism among US intelligence experts about the ability of developing countries around the world to respond to a massive COVID-19 outbreak. One example is India, whose dense population and rudimentary public-health infrastructure raises serious concerns about the government’s ability to protect the country’s population from a major pandemic. The report adds that there “deep concern” in US government circles about the possibility that Iran may be covering up the details about the spread of COVID-19.

***

The coronavirus is coinciding with “significant decreases” in nitrogen dioxide over China, according to NASA, as authorities there continue to place more people under quarantines and some businesses remain closed amid the outbreak.

Pollution monitoring satellites operated by NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) detected the decreases over a two-month span, according to a news release. The drops coincided with the outbreak and the Lunar New Year, which was unusually tame because many decided to stay indoors rather than risk becoming infected.

Nitrogen dioxide levels over China decreased dramatically as China continues to grapple with the coronavirus outbreak.

In January, Chinese authorities locked down several cities and shut down all transportation going into and out of the city of Wuhan, the epicenter of the outbreak.

The pollution reduction is shown in two maps released by the space agencies. The first shows large concentrations of nitrogen dioxide levels over Beijing and near Wuhan from Jan. 1 through 20, before mandated quarantines were issued. More here.

DOJ New Unit to Strip US Citizenship of Criminals and Terrorists

Posted on February 27, 2020February 27, 2020 by Denise Simon

Hoorah…it is a great start.

new unit staffed with an estimated 30 lawyers will review cases that point to those that fraudulently obtained citizenship by failing to disclose past convictions for serious crimes — including terrorism and war crimes.

The section, which will be within the DOJ’s Office of Immigration Litigation, will be dedicated to denaturalizing those who had failed to disclose they had been involved in criminal activity on their N-400 form for naturalization. It requires the government to show that citizenship was obtained illegally or “procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation.”

That form includes questions asking whether an applicant has been involved in genocide and torture among other serious crimes, if they have ever been part of a terrorist or totalitarian organization, if they had been associated with the Nazi government in Germany, and if they have been charged or convicted with a crime or served prison time. Targets for denaturalization are those who have made material breaches of those questions.

“When a terrorist or sex offender becomes a U.S. citizen under false pretenses, it is an affront to our system — and it is especially offensive to those who fall victim to these criminals,” Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt said. “The new Denaturalization Section will further the Department’s efforts to pursue those who unlawfully obtained citizenship status and ensure that they are held accountable for their fraudulent conduct.”

The department has seen an increase in such cases both because of an increased effort by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to root out fraud, as well as Operation Janus — an operation which began during the Obama administration and that identified hundreds of thousands of cases where paper fingerprint data was not entered into the centralized fingerprint database.

Officials have pointed to recent cases whereby the DOJ has secured the denaturalization of terrorists, war criminals and sex offenders. They include:

An individual convicted of terrorism in Egypt who admitted recruiting for Al Qaeda in the U.S. He was denaturalized while in Egypt and had his passport taken away from him.

An individual who received military training in an Afghan jihadist camp and coordinated with 9/11 mastermind Usama Bin Laden. He “self-deported” to Somaliland.

An individual who was convicted in Bosnia of executing eight unarmed civilians and prisoners of war during the Balkans conflict. He was denaturalized while serving a sentence in Bosnia.

One individual who engaged in sexual contact with a 7-year-old family member and another who sexually abused a minor for multiple years.

The department has filed 228 civil denaturalization cases since 2008, and 94 since 2017. Officials say it has increased its filing rate by 200 percent in the past three years and has seen an increase in referrals by over 600 percent.

Such denaturalization proceedings are not targeted at people who commit crimes after they become citizens, only those who have made fraudulent citizenship applications and left out crimes they committed on that form. A number of cases involve those who were initially denied entry to the U.S. or removed from the country, only to re-enter under a false identity.

Citizens cannot be deported, but those who have been stripped of citizenship revert back to permanent residency status, which allows deportation or barring of entry from the U.S. in the case of serious criminal offenses. Source

When the World Bank is Corrupt, Anyone Care?

Posted on February 27, 2020February 27, 2020 by Denise Simon

Per the World Bank website:

The World Bank Group considers corruption a major challenge to its twin goals of ending extreme poverty by 2030 and boosting shared prosperity for the poorest 40 percent of people in developing countries. In addition, reducing corruption is at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals and achieving the ambitious targets set for Financing for Development.

Corruption has a disproportionate impact on the poor and most vulnerable, increasing costs and reducing access to services, including health, education and justice.

Great right? There is even a video of ten steps to stop corruption.

Also on the website:

The United States was a leading force in the establishment of the World Bank in 1944 and remains the largest shareholder of the World Bank today. As the only World Bank shareholder that retains veto power over changes in the Bank’s structure, the United States plays a unique role in influencing and shaping development priorities.

Through the World Bank Group, the United States participates in addressing international development challenges of vital importance. The United States has a long history of generously supporting the World Bank Group’s mission and has been a champion of the International Development Association (IDA), the Bank’s fund for the poorest, which provides low-interest loans and grants to developing countries for education, health, infrastructure, agriculture, communications, economic and institutional development.

Why all the concern?

World Bank Has Expressed This Big Estimate About Indias ...

OCCRP: A paper the World Bank released on Tuesday shows that countries dependent on aid from the organization see increased flows into tax secrecy havens, suggesting that some of its funds is ending up in the wrong hands. The Economist reported last week that the development bank allegedly tried to conceal the findings by neglecting to publish the study, and that Pinelopi “Penny” Goldberg, its chief economist, would be stepping down just 15 months into her tenure.

Because of media reports connecting Goldberg’s resignation and the study, the World Bank issued a public statement, explaining that the paper had undergone “several reviews, and it was improved as a result,” before it was published on the organization’s website. The timing of when it decided to publish the paper has drawn scrutiny, however.

Stefano Feltri, an Italian journalist who reported on the censorship in Pro Market, a University of Chicago-based publication, confirmed to OCCRP that the article was first published on the personal website of Niels Johannesen, a professor of the University of Copenhagen and CEBI, who co-authored it.

The article was then published hours later, by the World Bank, he explained, also confirming this through screenshots he shared with OCCRP.

Goldberg’s reason for resigning is unclear. The Economist said: “After aid to a country spikes, money departs for offshore havens. And after a sensitive paper is spiked, Penny departs for New Haven.”

OCCRP has obtained emails sources say were sent out Feb. 5, before the study controversy went public, showing that she had voiced her intention of returning to her post as an economics professor at Yale University.

Her departure marks the Bank’s second consecutive chief economist who has stepped down — Paul Romer, who served previously, resigned after publicly denouncing the organization for its “politically motivated” methodology that criticized business practice Chile under its socialist president Michelle Bachelet.

“I don’t know what exactly happened,” said Johannesen, who was more focused on the findings of his paper, when asked by OCCRP whether he could provide clarity to the situation.

He said his paper uncovered what he called “leakages” of foreign aid, where the number of offshore transactions going to tax havens designed to hide the origin of the source goes up in aid-dependent countries. He said about 5 percent of aid appears to be flowing illicitly offshore.

“While we can only speculate, the study shows that aid might itself be eroding institutions,” he said.

The professor concluded that the “big task,” in response to the findings, would be “the further disciplining of tax havens, and strengthening anti-money laundering standards.”

*** For context: The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loans and grants to the governments of poorer countries for the purpose of pursuing capital projects.^[6] It comprises two institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), and the International Development Association (IDA). The World Bank is a component of the World Bank Group.

The World Bank’s most recent stated goal is the reduction of poverty.^[7] As of November 2018, the largest recipients of World Bank loans were India ($859 million in 2018) and China ($370 million in 2018).

Remember India just signed a deal during President Trump’s visit to buy $3 billion in military equipment. And China has been buying/loaning money to countries to take over their cargo ports known as debt trapping while building the silk road initiative spending $900 billion.

Anyone asking any real questions on all this?

FCC Charges Mobile Carriers with Selling Your Location Data

Posted on February 27, 2020February 27, 2020 by Denise Simon

Source: The FCC has finished investigating carriers’ unauthorized disclosure and sale of subscribers’ real-time location data, Chairman Ajit Pai has shared with (PDF) lawmakers in the House of Representatives. In his letters, he told Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. and others that the agency has come to a conclusion after an extensive probe: one or more carriers “apparently violated federal law.” Pai has also promised the lawmakers that the agency is going to take action against the offending carriers to ensure that they comply with laws that protect consumers’ sensitive information.

Back in 2018, it came to light that carriers sell their customers’ real-time location data to aggregators, which then resold it to other companies or even gave it away. Last year, a Motherboard report also revealed that bail bond companies and bounty hunters have been buying people’s location data for years, allowing them to use that information to track their targets.

All four major US carriers promised to stop selling customer location data to aggregators after the information first came out. The companies made good on their word, though it took them a year to do so: They informed FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel that they had already halted sales to aggregators after she requested for an update in 2019.

Pallone said in a statement:

“Following our longstanding calls to take action, the FCC finally informed the Committee today that one or more wireless carriers apparently violated federal privacy protections by turning a blind eye to the widespread disclosure of consumers’ real-time location data. This is certainly a step in the right direction, but I’ll be watching to make sure the FCC doesn’t just let these lawbreakers off the hook with a slap on the wrist.”

Rosenworcel, who repeatedly brought the issue up over the past years, also said that it was a “shame that it took so long for the FCC to reach a conclusion that was so obvious.” Especially when “shady middlemen could sell your location within a few hundred meters based on your wireless phone data.”

We’ve reached out to AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint and CTIA, the trade group representing the wireless communications industry in the US, for a statement.

*** source: Google has been tracking Android users even when location services are disabled

House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) said that Pai’s response to lawmakers “is a step in the right direction, but I’ll be watching to make sure the FCC doesn’t just let these lawbreakers off the hook with a slap on the wrist.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said that he is “eager to see whether the FCC will truly hold wireless companies accountable or let them off with a slap on the wrist.”

Source: An investigation by Motherboard in January 2019 found that “T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T are [still] selling access to their customers’ location data and that data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters and others not authorized to possess it, letting them track most phones in the country.”

The carriers made further promises to stop selling the data and later confirmed to the FCC that they had phased out the data-selling programs.

Pai’s letter today did not say exactly which federal law the carriers broke, but Section 222 of the Communications Act says that carriers may not use or disclose location information “without the express prior authorization of the customer.” Carriers have also been accused of violating rules on the usage of 911 location data.

AG Sessions Lawsuit and Big Win for President Trump

Posted on February 26, 2020February 26, 2020 by Denise Simon

A 3 judge panel…unanimous decision by the way.

The program began in 2006. The Federal government created a grant assistance program for states, local and tribal governments to reduce crime and violence….let that sink it. It is called the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program….let that sink in….justice.

This would have been easy to argue in court actually to stop the violators from receiving the grants. Just understand the simple premise —>

BJA helps to make American communities safer by strengthening the nation’s criminal justice system: Its grants, training and technical assistance, and policy development services provide state, local, and tribal governments with the cutting edge tools and best practices they need to reduce violent and drug-related crime, support law enforcement, and combat victimization.

BJA is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office for Victims of Crime, and Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.

FILE – In this Tuesday, March 20, 2018 file photo, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, left, speaks during a roundtable talks on sanctuary cities hosted by President Donald Trump, third from right, in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, in Washington. The Trump administration can withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement grants to force states to cooperate with U.S. immigration enforcement, a federal appeals court in New York ruled Wednesday, Feb. 26, 2020 in a decision that conflicted with three other federal appeals courts. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Anyway…

(AP) — The Trump administration can withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement grants to force states to cooperate with U.S. immigration enforcement, a federal appeals court in New York ruled Wednesday in a decision that conflicted with three other federal appeals courts.

The ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan overturned a lower court’s decision ordering the administration to release funding to New York City and seven states — New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Washington, Massachusetts, Virginia and Rhode Island.

The states and city sued the U.S. government after the Justice Department announced in 2017 that it would withhold grant money from cities and states until they gave federal immigration authorities access to jails and provide advance notice when someone in the country illegally is about to be released.

Before the change, cities and states seeking grant money were required only to show they were not preventing local law enforcement from communicating with federal authorities about the immigration status of people who were detained.

At the time, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions said: “So-called ‘sanctuary’ policies make all of us less safe because they intentionally undermine our laws and protect illegal aliens who have committed crimes.”

In 2018, the Justice Department imposed additional conditions on the grant money, though challenges to those have not yet reached the appeals court in New York.

The 2nd Circuit said the plain language of relevant laws make clear that the U.S. attorney general can impose conditions on states and municipalities receiving money.

And it noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly observed that the federal government maintains broad power over states when it comes to immigration policies.

In the past two years, federal appeals courts in Chicago, Philadelphia and San Francisco have ruled against the federal government by upholding lower-court injunctions placed on the enforcement of some or all of the challenged conditions.

“While mindful of the respect owed to our sister circuits, we cannot agree that the federal government must be enjoined from imposing the challenged conditions on the federal grants here at issue,” the 2nd Circuit three-judge panel said in a decision written by Judge Reena Raggi.

“These conditions help the federal government enforce national immigration laws and policies supported by successive Democratic and Republican administrations. But more to the authorization point, they ensure that applicants satisfy particular statutory grant requirements imposed by Congress and subject to Attorney General oversight,” the appeals court said.

The Justice Department praised the decision, issuing a statement calling it a “major victory for Americans” and saying it recognizes that the attorney general has authority to ensure that grant recipients are not thwarting federal law enforcement priorities.

The department added that the ruling’s effect will be limited because other courts have ruled the other way, giving the plaintiffs in the New York case the opportunity to point to those as reasons to ignore the new conditions.

Cody Wofsy, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, called the decision a “real outlier,” saying he believed the 2nd Circuit was the nation’s first court to side with the Trump administration on the issue.

“Over and over, courts have said the Department of Justice doesn’t have authority under governing statutes to impose these conditions,” he said. “These conditions are part of the administration’s attempts to bully, cajole and coerce state and local governments into participating in federal immigration enforcement activities.”

Under the Constitution’s federalism principles and the 10th Amendment, Wofsy said, states and municipalities “are entitled to decline to become part of the administration’s deportation force.”

The appeals rulings pertain to the issuance of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.