Category Archives: China

What About the P5+1 and Iran/North Korea

Posted on by

If you are inclined to read about the technical cooperation agreement between North Korea and Iran go here.

 

Ed Schroeder’s Military Intelligence Report: Does Iran Have Secret Nukes in North Korea?

In October 2012, Iran began stationing personnel at a military base in North Korea, in a mountainous area close to the Chinese border. The Iranians, from the Ministry of Defense and associated firms, reportedly are working on both missiles and nuclear weapons. Ahmed Vahidi, Tehran’s minister of defense at the time,denied sending people to the North, but the unconfirmed dispatches make sense in light of the two states announcing a technical cooperation pact the preceding month.

The P5+1—the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany—appear determined, before their self-imposed March 31 deadline, to ink a deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding its nuclear energy program, which is surely a cover for a wide-ranging weapons effort. The international community wants the preliminary arrangement now under discussion, referred to as a “framework agreement,” to ensure that the country remains at least one year away from being able to produce an atomic device.

The P5+1 negotiators believe they can do that by monitoring Tehran’s centrifuges—supersonic-speed machines that separate uranium gas into different isotopes and upgrade the potent stuff to weapons-grade purity—and thereby keep track of its total stock of fissile material.

The negotiators from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China are trying to get Tehran to adhere to the Additional Protocol, which allows anytime, anyplace inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog. If Iran agrees to the IAEA’s intrusive inspections, proponents of the deal will claim a major breakthrough, arguing for instance that Iran will not be able to hide centrifuges in undisclosed locations.

There were so many North Korean nuclear and missile scientists, specialists, and technicians at Iran’s facilities that they took over their own coastal resort there.

But no inspections of Iranian sites will solve a fundamental issue: As can be seen from the North Korean base housing Tehran’s weapons specialists, Iran is only one part of a nuclear weapons effort spanning the Asian continent. North Korea, now the world’s proliferation superstar, is a participant. China, once the mastermind, may still be a co-conspirator. Inspections inside the borders of Iran, therefore, will not give the international community the assurance it needs.

The cross-border nuclear trade is substantial enough to be called a “program.” Larry Niksch of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., estimates that the North’s proceeds from this trade with Iran are “between $1.5 billion and $2.0 billion annually.” A portion of this amount is related to missiles and miscellaneous items, the rest derived from building Tehran’s nuclear capabilities.

Iran has bought a lot with its money. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, thought to be Tehran’s chief nuclear scientist, was almost certainly in North Korea at Punggye-ri in February 2013 to witness Pyongyang’s third atomic test. Reports put Iranian technicians on hand at the site for the first two detonations as well.

The North Koreans have also sold Iran material for bomb cores, perhaps even weapons-grade uranium. The Telegraph reported that in 2002 a barrel of North Korean uranium cracked open and contaminated the tarmac of the new Tehran airport.

In addition, the Kim Jong Un  regime appears to have helped the Islamic Republic on its other pathway to the bomb. In 2013, Meir Dagan, a former Mossad director,charged the North with providing assistance to Iran’s plutonium reactor.

The relationship between the two regimes has been long-lasting. Hundreds of North Koreans have worked at about 10 nuclear and missile facilities in Iran. There were so many nuclear and missile scientists, specialists, and technicians that they took over their own coastal resort there, according to Henry Sokolski,  the proliferation maven, writing in 2003.

Even if Iran today were to agree to adhere to the Additional Protocol, it could still continue developing its bomb in North Korea, conducting research there or buying North Korean technology and plans. And as North Korean centrifuges spin in both known and hidden locations, the Kim regime will have a bigger stock of uranium to sell to the Iranians for their warheads. With the removal of sanctions, as the P5+1 is contemplating, Iran will have the cash to accelerate the building of its nuclear arsenal.

So while the international community inspects Iranian facilities pursuant to a framework deal, the Iranians could be busy assembling the components for a bomb elsewhere. In other words, they will be one day away from a bomb—the flight time from Pyongyang to Tehran—not one year as American and other policymakers hope.

The North Koreans are not the only contributors to the Iranian atom bomb. Iran got its first centrifuges from Pakistan, and Pakistan’s program was an offshoot from the Chinese one.

Some argue that China proliferated nuclear weapons through the infamous black market ring run by Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan. There is no open source proof of that contention, but Beijing did nothing while Khan merchandised Chinese parts, plans, and knowhow—its most sensitive technology—from the capital of one of its closest allies. Moreover, Beijing did its best to protect the smuggler when Washington rolled up his network in the early part of last decade. The Chinese, for instance, supported General Pervez Musharraf’s controversial decision to end prematurely his government’s inquiry, which avoided exposing Beijing’s rumored involvement with Khan’s activities.

And there are circumstances suggesting that Beijing, around the time of Khan’s confession and immediate pardon in 2004, took over his proliferation role directly, boldly transferring materials and equipment straight to Iran. For example, in November 2003 the staff of the IAEA had fingered China as one of the sources of equipment used in Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons effort. And as reported in July 2007 by The Wall Street Journal, the State Department had lodged formal protests with Beijing about Chinese enterprises violating Security Council resolutions by exporting to Tehran items that could be used for building atomic weapons.

Since then, there have been continual reports of transfers by Chinese enterprises to Iran in violation of international treaties and U.N. rules. Chinese entities have been implicated in shipments of maraging steel, ring-shaped magnets, and valves and vacuum gauges, all apparently headed to Iran’s atom facilities. In March 2011, police in Port Klang seized two containers from a ship bound to Iran from China. Malaysian authorities discovered that goods passed off as “used for liquid mixing or storage” were actually components for potential atomic weapons.

In the last few years, there has been an apparent decline in Chinese shipments to Iran. Beijing could be reacting to American pressure to end the trade, but there are more worrying explanations. First, it’s possible that, after decades of direct and indirect illicit transfers, China has already supplied most of what Iran needs to construct a weapon. Second, Beijing may be letting Pyongyang assume the leading proliferation role. After all, the shadowy Fakhrizadeh was reported to have traveled through China on his way to North Korea to observe the North’s third nuclear test.

Fakhrizadeh’s passage through China—probably Beijing’s airport—suggests that China may not have abandoned its “managed proliferation.” In the past, China’s proxy for this deadly trade was Pakistan. Then it was China’s only formal ally, North Korea. In both cases, Chinese policymakers intended to benefit Iran.

In a theoretical sense, there is nothing wrong with an accommodation with the Islamic Republic over nukes, yet there is no point in signing a deal with just one arm of a multi-nation weapons effort. That’s why the P5+1 needs to know what is going on at that isolated military base in the mountains of North Korea. And perhaps others as well.

Widespread Refugees from Middle East to Europe

Posted on by

From hundreds of thousands to millions of refugees from one country to another speaks to failed policy, failed government and failed control. There is Cuba, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya. An examination of Libya speaks to a global problem and the costs to Europe. Not only is Europe failing in a duty, but the United States and the United Nations fail equally. I had a little communications exchange with the journalist from the WSJ to gain more insight.

When there is mass evacuation, humanitarian conditions take a nose dive. Can there be integration? What about housing, education or healthcare?

Where does the money come from and what about the country of origin, does it get classified as a failed nation with no solution?

Immigrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean to seek asylum in Europe have disrupted shipping. Above, the Italian navy rescued shipwrecked immigrants off the coast of Africa in June.

Europe’s Cargo Ships Diverted to Sea Rescues

Commercial vessels on busy Mediterranean routes asked to assist with waves of migrants

By: Liam Moloney

ROME—In September, Italian authorities ordered oil tankers owned by Mediterranea di Navigazione SpA to help in five operations to rescue 600 boat people trying to cross from Libya to Italy in flimsy vessels.

The rescue operations cost the group €100,000 ($109,473) in extra costs, such as fuel and personnel. Now, managing director Paolo Cagnoni is considering changing his vessels’ routes to avoid the flow of migrant boats that is likely to surge this spring.

“We’ve been drawn into this human exile, but our crews aren’t equipped,” Mr. Cagnoni said. “It’s a disaster.”

The waves of African and Middle Eastern seaborne migrants attempting to reach Europe—218,000 tried to get to Greece and Italy last year—are causing a little-noticed but serious problem for the mercantile ships that ply the Mediterranean.

Last year, Italian authorities called on 700 mercantile vessels to help rescue about 40,000 migrants. One ship supplying the oil platforms off the Libyan coast participated in 62 operations. Many of the ships are Italian, but Greek vessels, as well as ships of other nationalities, are also involved in rescues of migrants trying to reach the Greek coast.

The busy maritime traffic around the world’s biggest seaborne migration route leaves private vessels on the front line of a major problem. Mercantile traffic in the Mediterranean accounts for about a fifth of the world’s total. And the area between North Africa and Italy—which has the highest flow of migrants—represents about a third of total Mediterranean traffic.

As a result, the rescue operations have placed a heavy burden on private vessels, which typically have crews of fewer than 20 and lack the training, medical support and life jackets to help several hundred migrants at a time. Crews often ransack their own food and clothing supplies to help the migrants once they get on board.

The ships—which must, according to maritime law, come to the aid of a boat in distress—have also been drawn into dangerous situations. In February, the Italian coast guard ordered one ship to act as a barrier to help pull scores of migrants from an inflatable dinghy in gale-force winds. Coast guard officials from the command center in Rome often have to guide crews on very large vessels to assist flimsy boats and dozens of migrants who often don’t know how to swim.

For instance, last year vessels owned by Denmark’s Maersk Line, which move huge cargoes of electronics, clothing and food and can be 1,312 feet long, rescued 1,100 refugees in four separate operations and played a supporting role in an additional six incidents. A couple of weeks ago, a Maersk ship helped rescue 150 migrants near the Libyan coast, it had to divert its course and sail some 150 miles to bring them to a Sicilian port.

“Container ships are big vessels that don’t maneuver easily” and are packed with containers, leaving limited space for migrants, says Steffen Conradsen, Maersk Line’s head of incident and crisis management. “We are not equipped for such operations.”

The diverted ships lose as much as a week disembarking the migrants, cleaning the vessel and resupplying, at an extra cost of up to $500,000. Insurance covers only part of the extra costs, and appeals from owners for government compensation have had little impact.

Now, shipping groups fear the problem will explode this year. Last year, Italian Navy ships patrolled close to the Libyan coast to help migrant boats as part of an operation dubbed Mare Nostrum. But the Italian patrols were replaced a few months ago by EU patrols whose mandate is to venture no farther than 30 miles from the Italian coast.

Meanwhile, the number of boat people continues to soar, up 43% in the first two months of 2015 compared with a year earlier. The head of EU border control agency Frontex recently said that hundreds of thousands of people in Libya could be ready to make the passage.

The EU’s limited patrols and the expected surge in boat people when the weather improves in the spring mean that coast guard authorities are likely to call on mercantile vessels more often. Shipping owners’ appeals for countries to mount large-scale sea patrols to deal with the problem—akin to the international response to piracy around the Horn of Africa—have fallen on deaf ears.

“We have become part of a rent-a-vessel program because countries can’t get their act together,” says Luca Sisto, a senior official at the Italian shipping lobby Confitarma.

Mr. Sisto says that concern about the safety of their vessels and crew—particularly when oil and natural-gas tankers are involved—may push some captains to refuse calls for help.

Big players such as Maersk Line, the world’s biggest container operator and a unit of shipping and oil giant A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S, can absorb the extra costs resulting from the rescue operations. But smaller ones more dependent on the central Mediterranean corridor grumble that the rescues could result in serious financial problems.

“The flow of refugees has reached a size where we can no longer cope,” says Thomas Rehder, president of the European Community Shipowners’ Associations. “This is the responsibility of governments, not merchant ships.”

Frontex Joint Operation Triton

Concerted efforts for managing migrator flows in the Central Mediterranean

What is Triton?

Triton is a Frontex coordinated joint operation, requested by the Italian authorities that will start its activity as from 1 November 2014 in the Central Mediterranean to support Italy.

How have the details of the operation been defined?

The details of Triton, including the operational area and the necessary assets, have been agreed between Frontex and Italy as the host state on the basis of the requests for assistance made by the Italian authorities. The final setting of the operation fully matches the requests made by the Italian authorities. Triton will rely on human and technical resources made available by the participating Member States.

How many Member States have made available technical and human resources and what?

Today 21 Member States have indicated their willingness to participate with human (65 guest officers in total) and technical resources (12 technical assets) at the start of the joint operation Triton; others might follow in the coming months. Technical equipment: 4 Fixed Wing Aircrafts, 1 Helicopter, 4 Open Shore vessels, 1 coastal Patrol Vessel, 2 Coastal patrol boats. Human Resources: 65 men/months in total.

What is Triton’s budget?

Its monthly budget is estimated at €2.9 million per month. In order to finance the launch and the first phase of the operation, funds have been reallocated from the Internal Security Fund and from within the Frontex budget. An increase of the Frontex 2015 budget has to be agreed by the European Parliament and the Council in order to finance the operation with the same intensity in the year 2015 and in the longer run.

Which rules will apply to the Frontex coordinated operation when it comes to migrants’ rights?

As for all Frontex operation, Triton will be operating in full respect of international and EU law, including respect of fundamental rights and of the principle of non-refoulement.

Will Triton also be participating in search and rescue activities?

The role of Frontex is key to support Member States towards effective border control in the Mediterranean region, and at the same time to provide assistance to persons or vessels in distress during these operations. Frontex is entrusted with assisting Member States in circumstances requiring increased technical assistance at the external borders, taking into account that some situations may involve humanitarian emergencies and rescue at sea. Although Frontex is neither a search and rescue body nor does it take up the functions of a Rescue Coordination Centre, it assists Member States to fulfil their obligation under international maritime law to render assistance to persons in distress.

Will Triton replace Mare Nostrum?

Joint operation Triton is intended to support the Italian efforts at their request, and does not replace or substitute Italian obligations in monitoring and surveying the Schengen external borders and in guaranteeing full respect of EU and international obligations1 in particular when it comes to search and rescue at sea. It implies that Italy will have to continue making continued substantial efforts using national means, fully coordinated with the Frontex operation, in order to manage the situation at the external borders.

Background on Frontex assistance to Italy

Weeks after the tragic drowning of over 300 persons around the Island of Lampedusa in October 2013, Italy launched a major search and rescue operation called ‘Mare Nostrum’ operated by the Italian Navy.

The Mare Nostrum operation is on-going close to the Libyan coast with Italian naval assets. The EU has supported the operation financially with €1.8 million from the emergency actions under the External Borders Fund.

Frontex has also provided assistance to Italy through the two coordinated joint operations Hermes and Aeneas. Both these operations will be replaced by Triton.

The joint operation Hermes coordinated by Frontex has, in one form or the other and with few interruptions, been going on for several years. Italy has acted as the sole host state.

This joint operation has been on-going close to the Italian coast to control the EU external borders in line with the mandate of the Frontex Agency with a yearly budget for 2014 of around €5 million. In accordance with the host state’s request, sea borne assets in the joint operation come from Italy (Coast Guard and/or Guardia di Finanza); other Member States have contributed with one surveillance aircraft and guest officers on land to help with screening/debriefing.

Frontex also coordinated joint operation Aeneas with Italy as host state. This operation mainly focussed on migratory flows from Egypt and Turkey (via Greece) to Italy.

Among others, the obligations stemming from the Schengen Borders Code and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as well as the International convention for the safety of life at sea (SOLAS), the International convention on maritime search and rescue (SAR) as well as resolutions from the International maritime organisation (IMO).

 

The Global Corrupt Clinton Dynasty

Posted on by

When it comes to Hillary, the challenge is to have an imagination and begin to ask peculiar questions. There are hedge funds, gold, hidden cable communications, affairs, people known only by an alias and more. But here are yet a few more items for the corruption dossier.

“If she gets in the race, of course this time will be different. And her team will reflect that,” said Nick Merrill, who is currently Clinton’s only on-the-record spokesman.

The expected campaign manager, Robby Mook, values organizing as much as he does data, strategy and messaging. He and campaign chairman John Podesta will be tasked with juggling competing interests and personalities within the campaign and outside of it, from the Clintons on down. Communications head Jennifer Palmieri, who left the Obama administration last week, is seen by reporters and operatives alike as someone who can disagree with those who cover the campaign but will do so respectfully and professionally.

During her last campaign, Clinton’s team was rife with backstabbing, credit claiming, and finger-pointing. Decisions were often put off indefinitely and then made under duress. Her communications staff could be abusive and uncooperative with reporters. For much of the campaign, she was cloistered from voters, reluctant to even hint at the historic nature of her candidacy. And Bill Clinton, at times one of his wife’s greatest assets, was also often huge liability, letting his anger toward Barack Obama show throughout the early months of 2008.

*** While there is a team of Republicans that have a Hillary war-room assigned to researching her entire history, Hillary is hiring a legal team to fend off political attacks. Questions are bubbling to the surface with what media and operatives are uncovering and with good reason.

Emails and Benghazi

Hillary Clinton emailed with her top advisers at the State Department about the 2012 attacks in Benghazi on their own personal emails, despite repeated assurances that she contacted employees on their official addresses, The New York Times is reporting. Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan, as well as senior aides Huma Abedin and Philippe Reines, all occasionally emailed Clinton with personal email addresses of their own, the newspaper reported.

The news comes as Clinton continues to face controversy related to her exclusive use of a private email address while at the State Department. Clinton’s team partly justified that email address, which remained on a private server outside the grasp of State, by assuring reporters that it was “her practice to email government officials on their .gov accounts” in order to be sure that they were “immediately captured” as public records.

On top of the more than 30,000 emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department, the House Select Committee on Benghazi is reviewing about 300 that could be related to its investigation. While those emails are not yet public, the Times report sheds light on their content.

The emails reportedly do not lend credibility to allegations of a cover-up of the Benghazi attacks, but they do show her correspondence after a House hearing about a month after the September attacks. Clinton didn’t testify until January, but another State Department official appeared at that hearing.

“Did we survive the day?” Clinton reportedly wrote in an email to an adviser.

“Survive, yes,” the adviser responded, adding that he’ll monitor the public’s reaction, according to the Times.

The emails also reportedly show that Clinton’s camp had initially been worried that she had publicly blamed the attacks on a spontaneous protest instead of an orchestrated terror attack. That initial characterization dogged then-United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice, who made the Sunday show rounds connecting the attacks to outcry from an anti-Muslim YouTube video.

Rice was criticized for playing down the attack once the administration began to refer to it as an act of terror. Sullivan emailed Clinton to assure her that she never “characterized the motivation” of the attackers as “spontaneous.”

House Republicans, specifically in the select Benghazi committee, continue to spar with Clinton over her private emails.

Committee Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C) officially requested that she turn over her private server so that an independent investigator can explore whether she deleted any official emails to hide them from public scrutiny.

Mezvinsky, the Son-in-Law

The NYTimes suggesting that Mezvinsky–who is married to Chelsea Clinton–has been able to gain access to investors with ties to the Clintons for the hedge fund he cofounded that’s had “underwhelming returns.”

Back in 2011, Mezvinsky, now 37, and two former Goldman Sachs colleagues–Bennett Grau and Mark Mallon–began raising money for Eaglevale Partners LP.

Some of Eaglevale’s investors include hedge fund billionaire Marc Lasry and Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, the report said.

Lasry, a longtime Clinton friend, runs Avenue Capital where Chelsea previously worked after graduating from Stanford. Lasry told the NYTimes that he “gave them money because I thought they would make me money.”

A Goldman spokesman told the NYTimes that Blankfein invested in Eaglevale because of his relationship with Grau, the fund’s chief investment officer. At the DealBook Conference in December, Blankfein, who has been a strong supporter of Democrats in the past, said he’s “always been a fan of Hillary Clinton.” Hillary is expected to announce her presidential campaign soon.

One source said Mezvinsky didn’t raise that much money though.

From the NYT:

A person briefed on the matter and close to the firm said the amount of investor money recruited by Mr. Mezvinsky is not large, amounting to less than 10 percent of the firm’s total outside capital. Clinton supporters also say there are more direct ways to cultivate favor with the family, such as giving to the foundation, where Chelsea Clinton is vice chairwoman, than by investing with a hedge fund that her husband co-founded.

Eaglevale currently manages around $400 million in assets.

Haiti, Gold and Hillary’s Brother

It also has become a potentially problematic issue for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she considers a second presidential run, after it was revealed this month that in 2013, one of her brothers was added to the advisory board of the company that owns the mine.

Tony Rodham’s involvement with the mine, which has become a source of controversy in Haiti because of concern about potential environmental damage and the belief that the project will primarily benefit foreign investors, was first revealed in publicity about an upcoming book on the Clintons by author Peter Schweizer.

In interviews with The Washington Post, both Rodham and the chief executive of Delaware-based VCS Mining said they were introduced at a meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative — an offshoot of the Clinton Foundation that critics have long alleged invites a blurring of its charitable mission with the business interests of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their corporate donors.

 

 

Immigration Scams, Tourism and Colleges

Posted on by

The numbers are staggering when it comes to fraudulent scams as they relate to immigration. We cant begin to know all of them, but it should challenge our imagination and then we must begin to ask questions calling for more research. Here are but two symptoms of problems that rarely hit media radar.

What is more chilling is members of Congress are well aware of the two conditions below as is the Governor of California. Since the White House learns about issues and situations in the news. perhaps help out by sharing this post with the Obama team as it seems the full news media cant seem to report it.

Children born in the US automatically qualify for citizenship, one of the reasons behind the popularity of ‘maternity tourism’

Row over US-born immigrant children heats up
Federal agents in California have raided more than a dozen hotels that cater to pregnant foreigners who want their children to be born US citizens.

The “birth tourism” hotels hosted mainly Chinese women who paid between $15,000 (£9,756) to $50,000 for the services.

The raids focused on hotels suspected of engaging in visa fraud.

Court records said companies would coach women to falsify records and claims for their visa screening.

Birth tourism is not always illegal and many agencies openly advertise their services as “birthing centres”.

The raids represent a rare federal crackdown against the widespread practice of foreign nationals giving birth in the US.

Undercover operation

It is estimated that 40,000 of 300,000 children born to foreign citizens in the US each year are the product of birth tourism, according to figures quoted in court documents filed to obtain search warrants for the schemes.

In one of the investigations into an Irvine “birthing centre”, an undercover agent posed as a pregnant mother.

She was helped to provide false proof of income and a college diploma, told to enter through popular US destinations like Hawaii or Las Vegas and make reservations with hotels and tours.

A China-based “trainer” assigned to help put together the visa application asked for full-length frontal and side photo of the undercover agent’s belly to see how visible her pregnancy was, according to agents.

Agents were also concerned that the schemes defrauded hospitals. Even though the women were paying birth tourism operators between $15,000 and $50,000 for their service, they paid local hospitals nothing or a reduced sum for uninsured, low-income patients, according to the affidavit.

No arrests were expected on Tuesday, according to the Los Angeles Times, but authorities said investigators would be seizing evidence and interviewing the mothers to build a criminal case against scheme operators.

*** Going Further:

Businesses engaged in maternity tourism, also known as “birth tourism,” are believed to have been operating for several years, relying on websites, newspaper advertising and social media to promote their services, immigration officials said.

Based on the results of previous investigations, the women who subscribe apparently pay cash for pre-natal medical treatment and actual delivery of their babies.

As part of the package, clients were promised they would receive Social Security numbers and U.S. passports for their infants – documentation the mothers would take with them when they returned to their home countries, ICE said.

Once the children, who by birth are U.S. citizens, reach adulthood they can apply for visas for family members living abroad.

More expensive packages “include recreational activities, such as visits to Disneyland, shopping malls and even an outing to a firing range,” the ICE statement said.

The practices came to public attention in California in recent years when residents of some Los Angeles-area communities complained about what they said were maternity hotels springing up in their neighborhoods, causing sanitation and other issues.

Ah, but hold on there is more.
Federal Agents Raid Suspected Fake Schools
Foreigners on U.S. student visas allegedly paid millions but didn’t take classes
LOS ANGELES—Amid a widening crackdown on immigration fraud, federal agents on Wednesday raided a network of schools alleged to be part of a scheme to collect millions of dollars from foreigners who came to the U.S. on student visas but never studied.

Agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations arrested three individuals who ran four schools in the Los Angeles area alleged to serve as a front for the purported scheme.

Hee Sun Shim, 51 years old, was arrested at his Beverly Hills home, and his alleged associates, Hyung Chan Moon and Eun Young Choi, were arrested in their offices near downtown Los Angeles.

They were taken into custody and charged in Los Angeles federal court with conspiracy to commit visa fraud, money laundering and of other immigration offenses, U.S. authorities said. They weren’t immediately available for comment and their attorneys weren’t known.

Wednesday’s action was the latest in a series targeting visa fraud nationwide.

“It’s a priority for us,” said Claude Arnold, special agent in charge of HSI in Los Angeles. “It is something that can be exploited by types who want to do harm to the country.”

He added that authorities haven’t seen any evidence in this case that suspected terrorists used the alleged scheme to enter the country.

The main school in the alleged scam is Prodee University, located in Los Angeles’s Koreatown neighborhood. It is affiliated with three other schools: Walter Jay M.D. Institute and American College of Forensic Studies in Los Angeles and Likie Fashion and Technology College in nearby Alhambra.

Catering primarily to Korean and Chinese nationals, the schools enrolled 1,500 students, the government said, most of whom live outside of Los Angeles, including in Texas, Nevada and Hawaii. They generated as much as $6 million a year in purported tuition payments, authorities said.

Sham colleges across the U.S. are believed to attract thousands of foreigners who pay fees, some of them with the promise of an education they don’t receive and others with assurance that no classes need be taken.

“It’s never clear to what extent the students are victimized or are in on the scheme,” said Barmak Nassirian, policy analysis director at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities.

The crackdown comes at a time when U.S. colleges and universities are attracting a record number of foreign students—about one million currently.

The spate of student-visa scams has prompted some lawmakers to call for better government monitoring of both schools and students. In recent years, authorities have raided schools in Virginia, New Jersey and California, the state considered the center of the illicit activity.

A 2012 Government Accountability Office report concluded that Immigration and Customs Enforcement was failing in its mission to detect fraud by school operators.

The agency last year began deploying field representatives to foster compliance with regulations; a compliance unit makes surprise visits to schools and a new risk-assessment tool helps identify suspicious activity at schools. ICE also says it has enhanced electronic record keeping of students.

“We have been working to fix vulnerabilities,” said Rachel Canty, deputy director of ICE’s Student Exchange and Visitor program, which certifies schools that enroll foreigners.

Concern about the legitimacy of foreign students and institutions they attend first surfaced after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Since then, schools have been required to provide information about students to an online government database, the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, overseen by ICE.

The Sevis contains a student’s personal record, including country of origin, age, coursework and U.S. address and other details. Schools that fail to comply can lose their certification.

More than three-quarters of some 9,000 certified schools have fewer than 50 international students, which makes it more challenging to comply with regulations. “People think foreign students come to UCLA and Harvard. We have a lot of mom-and-pop schools,” said Ms. Canty.

Security concerns resurfaced in 2013 after the deadly Boston Marathon bombing. Authorities learned that Azamat Tazhayakov, who hid evidence about the attack, had entered the U.S. on a student visa that was no longer valid. Since then, the government has integrated the SEVIS database into the screening process at airports. Mr. Tazhayakov, a Kazakhstan national, was convicted last July of obstruction of justice in the bombing.

Investigators say the defendants misrepresented students on federal forms, enabling them to secure student visas in what amounted to a pay-to-stay scheme. In exchange for the so-called Form I-20, a student made “tuition” payments for up to $1,800 to “enroll” for six months in one of the schools, according to the indictment.

As part of the suspected conspiracy, the defendants allegedly created bogus student records, including transcripts, for the purpose of deceiving immigration authorities.

The indictment further alleges that purported students often were transferred from one school to another to avoid arousing suspicion of immigration authorities about individuals in the country for long periods.

“We have nothing to indicate the students were getting education for anything,” said Mr. Arnold, the special agent.

After Wednesday’s raid, the schools’ access to Sevis was ended and authorities are seeking to withdraw the schools’ certification to enroll foreign students, ICE said.

The students’ fate is unclear. Foreign pupils enrolled at the schools should contact the Student Exchange Visitor Program office in Washington, officials said.

The largest student-visa fraud case, involving Tri-Valley University in northern California, left more than 1,000 students in limbo and sparked protests in India. The school’s president, Susan Su, was imprisoned in 2013 for making millions of dollars in the scheme.

That scandal prompted U.S. Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) and others to call for action.

“The potential for bad actors to abuse the student-visa program has increased significantly over recent years,” Ms. Feinstein said, noting that a Senate-passed bill to overhaul immigration in 2013 included a provision to combat such fraud.

Where Were You America on Net Neutrality?

Posted on by

Going back as far as 2010, for the Federal government to take over the internet has been a building coup and while America did not care….the FCC assumed control.

After McCain-Feingold passed, several of the foundations involved in the effort began shifting their attention to “media reform”—a movement to impose government controls on Internet companies somewhat related to the long-defunct “Fairness Doctrine” that used to regulate TV and radio companies. In a 2005 interview with the progressive website Buzzflash, Mr. McChesney said that campaign-finance reform advocate Josh Silver approached him and “said let’s get to work on getting popular involvement in media policy making.” Together the two founded Free Press.

Free Press and allied groups such as MoveOn.org quickly got funding. Of the eight major foundations that provided the vast bulk of money for campaign-finance reform, six became major funders of the media-reform movement. (They are the Pew Charitable Trusts, Bill Moyers’s Schumann Center for Media and Democracy, the Joyce Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Institute, the Ford Foundation, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.) Free Press today has 40 staffers and an annual budget of $4 million.

 

 

FCC Cites Soros-Funded, Neo-Marxist-Founded Group 46 TIMES In New Regs

New internet regulations finally released by the Federal Communications Commission make 46 references to a group funded by billionaire George Soros and co-founded by a neo-Marxist.

The FCC released the 400-page document on Thursday, two weeks after it passed new regulations, which many fear will turn the internet into a public commodity and thereby stifle innovation.

“Leveling the playing field” in that way has been a clear goal of Free Press, a group dedicated to net neutrality which was founded in 2003.

As Phil Kerpen, president of the free-market group American Commitment, first noted, Free Press is mentioned repeatedly in the FCC document. Most of the references are found in footnotes which cite comments by Free Press activists supporting more internet regulation.

The term “Free Press” is mentioned 62 times in the regulations. Some are redundant mentions referring to the same Free Press activists’ comments in favor of more oversight. In total, the FCC cited Free Press’ pro-net neutrality arguments 46 times.

The FCC received more than 4 million public comments as it was weighing the net neutrality initiative, but Free Press and other activist groups have received the most attention by pressuring the FCC and the White House on behalf of their cause.

One argument made against the FCC’s regulatory push is that the general public is largely happy with its internet service. Support for net neutrality was seen as the domain of special interest groups like Free Press.

The activist group has big money behinds its effort. It has received $2.2 million in donations from progressive billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and $3.9 million from the Ford Foundation.

And one of Free Press’ co-founders, Robert McChesney, a communications professor at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, has not been shy about his desire to see the internet regulated heavily. (RELATED: A Leading Net Neutrality Activist’s Neo-Marxist Views)

But internet regulation appears to be only part of McChesney’s more radical agenda of completely revamping how the media operate in the U.S.

“In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles,” McChesney wrote in a 2009 essay.

“Only government can implement policies and subsidies to provide an institutional framework for quality journalism,” he said.

“The news is not a commercial product. It is a public good, necessary for a self-governing society. Once we accept this, we can talk about the kind of media policies and subsidies we want,” McChesney once argued.

Sentiments such as these have raised questions about whether the FCC’s new regulations will eventually led to oversight of internet content.

“The unthinkable has become thinkable, and the free-market Internet – one of freedom’s greatest triumphs – is set to be reduced to a public utility, subject to pervasive economic regulation and, in turn, to content control,” American Commitment’s Kerpen wrote in an open letter to McChesney after the FCC voted 3-2 in favor of the regulations.

McChesney, who is currently on Free Press’ board of directors, made a series of progressive proposals in a 2010 book, “The Life and Death of American Journalism.” He suggested spending $35 billion on federal subsidies for public media outlets. He also proposed creating a journalism branch of AmeriCorps and said it would be a good idea to give each American a $200 news voucher which could be given only to publicly-owned media outlets.

“Advertising is the voice of capital,” McChesney said in a 2009 interview with the Socialist Project. “We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimize it, and perhaps even eliminate it. The fight against hyper-commercialism becomes especially pronounced in the era of digital communications.”

FCC commissioner Ajit Pai blew the whistle on the agency’s attempt to sneak the new regulations in under the radar. He pressed FCC chairman Tom Wheeler to release the proposed regulations so that the public could view them before the commission voted on the measure. Wheeler refused.

In his dissent, Pai, a Republican, slammed the commission’s secrecy and also mentioned Free Press as one of the activist groups which received special attention on the matter.

“What the press has called the “parallel FCC” at the White House opened its doors to a plethora of special-interest activists: Daily Kos, Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, Free Press, and Public Knowledge, just to name a few,” Pai wrote.

Indeed, even before activists were blocking Chairman Wheeler’s driveway late last year, some of them had met with White House officials. But what about the rest of the American people? They certainly couldn’t get White House meetings. They were shut out of the process. They were being played for fools.”