Brazil/Olympics Under Islamic State Threat

Posted on June 22, 2016November 21, 2017 by Denise Simon

Brazil threat

TRAC: South America has not historically been considered a high priority target for Islamic State for reasons ranging from practical to ideological. It has instead been used for remote finance and small-scale recruitment operations by Shia groups and IS’ predecessor, al-Qaeda. It would appear, however, that Islamic State has recognized that political and economic turmoil in countries like Brazil, Venezuela, and Mexico have presented opportunity in the Western Hemisphere.

A sample of recent activity documented by TRAC includes:

A small, but effective, Islamic State financing ringin Brazil • A new Portuguese-language Nashir IS-news Telegram channel • A former Guantanamo detainee, Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab, believed now to be in Brazil

Image: A map of the particularly vulnerable border region referred to as the Triple Frontier.

All of this activity, combined with the backdrop of border insecurity at the Triple Frontier, IS recruitment in Mexico, and an active cell in São Paulo present terrorists with copious soft targets in South America, highlighted by the 2016 Olympics.

*****

Threat Assessment

Based on the information currently available, the threat of an IS-directed attack on the Olympics remains low, though the possibility of an IS-inspired small scale assault always looms. Preventing such an attack will rely on security arrangements at the venue, hotels, and transportation facilities where crime has already been listed as a high risk concern.

Never a High Priority Target

South America has not historically been considered a high priority target for Islamic State or other Sunni jihadist groups for many reasons, ranging from the practical to the ideological. Unlike many European nations, some of whom have a long history of interests in in the Middle East, South American countries are not typically viewed by Sunni militants as potent allies of the US. Instead, Brazil (among others) has served as a place to base remote finance and small-scale recruitment operations.

Outside Historical Caliphate Lands

Central and South America are not part of the lands claimed by historic Islamic conquest and thus fall outside the scope of Islamic State’s ideological priority of extending the Caliphate to the lands that at one time or another were considered belonging to the Umma. (Even the world maps created for Islamic State propaganda don’t bother to identify South America.)

New Focus on Portuguese & Spanish Speakers

This de-emphasis of targets south of the US may be coming to an end, however, on the part of Islamic State. ISIS has recognized the importance of shifting focus from its loses and struggles to new frontiers and opening linguistic doors to recruitment candidates. Following the 11/13 Paris Attacks a tweet attributed to Maxime Hauchard named Brazil as “our next target,” although TRAC has not been able to find a primary source record of this threat. In Spring 2016, Dabiq announced ISIS’ desire to proselytize Mayas with an “anti-colonial” message. Additionally, the approaching 2016 Olympics present an opportunity for Islamic State focus its narrative in a South American nation where it has already seen some support: Brazil.

TRAC has documented a small, but effective, Islamic State financing ring out of Brazil
New all Portuguese Speaking Nashir Channel
Former Guantanamo detainee Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab

Images: Jihadi Jean Luc identified as Steve Duarte. A Luxemburger of Portuguese descent, Duarte was featured in major Islamic State video release as a French-Speaking executioner. In the video he refers to Andalusia and its Muslim cities, threatening Spain. For More on (Video) Islamic State : Filtering Apostates – Five Simultaneous Executions Featuring French Speaking Executioner Wilayat Nineveh

Political Context

In the final week of February 2016, Brazil’s legislature approved a controversial anti-terrorism law after months of debate.

President Rousseff signed to enact the law in the final week of March 2016.

Allows for sentences of 12-30 years.

Opponents consider it a tool for restraining and silencing Brazil’s political dissident movements.

With Brazil’s corruption rankings plummeting and successful Olympics on the line, there is reason to believe some in power seek to silence opposition groups.

The law’s advocates, however, seek not only to avoid sanction but to have additional tools ready to combat global jihad.

Specific wording: “the practice by one or more individuals of acts for the reason of xenophobia, discrimination or prejudice of race, color, ethnic group or religion with the aim to generate social or generalized terror, endangering people, assets, the public peace or safety.”

Israeli officials heralded the law citing years of exploitation of Brazil by Iran and Iranian proxy Hezbollah

Recruitment of Portuguese Speakers

Islamic State Messaging

On 03 June 2016 Telegram IS affiliated channel “Online Dawah Operations” shared a general post in English calling for Spanish and Portuguese speakers:

Reads: “Dear brothers and sisters, we are in need of brothers and sisters who can speak either Portuguese or Spanish to help us on our project in’shaa Allah. If you speak one of those languages and you are willing to join our translation team please Wickr me: ismailbrazili.”

Islamic State Nashir channel in Portuguese appeared on Telegram 29 May 2016:

Five days before Islamic State member Ismail Brazili called for Portuguese speakers on a general Telegram channel, a Nashir Portuguese channel appeared on Telegram. It was created 29 May 2016 but did not make its first post until 02 June 2016. Though the posts are merely reprints of the main Nashir Arabic Channel, its important to recognize the out-reach to get news from IS controlled areas and IS Wilayats to Portuguese speakers.

Important Hashtags

Islamic State relies on hashtags to spread news on both Telegram and Twitter. In almost all the Portuguese Telegram posts the following hashtags are used to spread the propaganda:

#ReportagemFotográfica
#EstadoIslâmico
#CalifadoPT

Plus the hashtag of the specific Wilayat that is being propagated.

Examples of Portuguese claims of credit

Posted 19 June 2016

Posted 20 June 2016

Posed 08 June 2016

The red over blue claims of credit (as well as light blue over darker blue) are very typical of traditional Islamic State claims, however the Portuguese are slightly different: the Wilayat appears to the left (opposed to the right) and each are marked “Urgente” which the Islamic State does not print on the claims of credit in Arabic or other languages.

Former GITMO detainee latest Lebanese immigrant to raise alarm in Brazil

The announcement that former Guantanamo detainee Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab may have legally traveled to Brazil has recently recast Brazil into the spotlight for concerns of jihadist activity. After being transferred to Uruguay in December 2014, Dhiab — whose mother is Argentine –reportedly attempted to travel legally to Brazil, but was denied entrance, according to the statement of an official in Uruguay. Contrary to these reports, another official responsible for working with the Uruguay resettlement, Christian Mirza, said Dhiab traveled legally first to Argentina (in 2015) and then to Brazil, but that his whereabouts are unknown. Dhiab also apparently walks with crutches as a result of poor health, making an undocumented, illegal border crossing more difficult, but not impossible with assistance. On the other hand, Uruguay did not agree to the US request to retain for two years the six resettled detainees.

Jihad Ahmed Mustafa Dhiab.

Dhiab is not the fist Lebanese Sunni to make headlines in Brazil. A suspected ISIS-finance cell associated with an Egyptian jihadist in São Paulo has been profiled by TRAC and is available here:

Islamic State Brazil : São Paulo Cell — (Islamic State / ISIS) — CELL PROFILE

In an operation called Menzad, 18 search warrants were issued to halt the Alameddine family’s fraudulent activity in money transfers suspected of supporting ISIS. It included the arrest of Egyptian Hesham Eltrabily, accused by Egypt of involvement in the 1997 Luxor Massacre.

Khaled Hussein Ali is yet another Lebanese transplant to Brazil of great concern in light of Islamic State’s growing influence. Although his affiliation with Al Qaeda reaches high into the organization, it is likely that his role in spreading propaganda and operating internet cafes in Vila Matilde has created fallow ground for Islamic State’s message in São Paulo and beyond.

Border Security and Soft Targets Concern

Border security has long been problematic for Brazil and its neighbors dealing with drug trafficking and militias. Additionally, the Rio Olympics present copious soft target opportunities for jihadist and other groups. Below are a map of the particularly vulnerable border region referred to as the Triple Frontier:

This area is relatively under-policed and concerns are that exploitation by Sunni jihadists would create fall-out with the Shia community, whose large mosques dot the Brazilian border facing Paraguay.

WH: Ben Rhodes is to Iran Deal ~ Valerie Jarrett is to Gun Control

Posted on June 21, 2016June 21, 2016 by Denise Simon

Ban the AR-15….heh….right Val Gal…. This is a White House full of ahem….experts that think AR stands for Automatic Rifle…sheesh…The Federal ‘Assault’ Weapons ban happened in 1994.

Valerie Jarrett’s war on guns

Loretta Lynch Fully Opposes Obama on Gitmo

Posted on June 21, 2016June 21, 2016 by Denise Simon

Say it isn’t so…pigs flying? Video calls between soccer or basketball games?

The Obama White House has a habit of altering assessments and reports especially noted by the CENTCOM scandal. The Obama regime also did the same with the assessment profiles of those forcibly released to other countries in an effort to close Gitmo. One such country that was betrayed by the Obama administration was Ghana.

What is mind boggling is whether we should trust our President or the external people who are proving him wrong. According to US pundits, the said description as given by our leaders isn’t true for either of the men. Bin Atef in particular is a cause of concern. Long before his transfer, the intelligence analysts at Joint Task Force Guantanamo assessed him as a ‘high risk’ and ‘likely to pose a threat to the US, its interest and allies’. Atef is actually a fighter in Usama bin Laden’s former 55^th Arab Brigade and an admitted member of the Taliban.

This is in sharp contrast to the claim by Mahama, who portrays the deal as an act of humanitarian assistance, likening the Yemeni men to non-threatening refugees who have been cleared of any involvement in terrorist activities. More here.

Those former detainees released to Uruguay were to be managed and controlled by the government under the Memorandum of Understanding and release. Well, at least one has fled, allegedly to Brazil.

Exclusive: Justice Department opposes new Obama proposal on Guantanamo

Reuters: President Barack Obama is again facing dissent from within his administration – this time from Attorney General Loretta Lynch – over his plans to shutter the Guantanamo Bay military prison, according to senior administration officials.

Lynch, a former federal prosecutor whom Obama appointed to head the Justice Department two years ago, is opposing a White House-backed proposal that would allow Guantanamo Bay prisoners to plead guilty to terrorism charges in federal court by videoconference, the officials said.

Over the past three months, Lynch has twice intervened to block administration proposals on the issue, objecting that they would violate longstanding rules of criminal-justice procedure.

In the first case, her last-minute opposition derailed a White House-initiated legislative proposal to allow video guilty pleas after nearly two months of interagency negotiations and law drafting. In the second case, Lynch blocked the administration from publicly supporting a Senate proposal to legalize video guilty pleas.

“It’s been a fierce interagency tussle,” said a senior Obama administration official, who supports the proposal and asked not to be identified.

White House officials confirmed that President Obama supports the proposal. But the president declined to overrule objections from Lynch, the administration’s top law-enforcement official.

“There were some frustrations,” said a White House official who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The top lawyer in the land has weighed in, and that was the DOJ’s purview to do that.”

If enacted into law, the Obama-backed plan would allow detained terrorism suspects who plead guilty to serve their sentences in a third-country prison, without setting foot on U.S. soil. The plan would thus sidestep a Congressional ban on transferring detainees to the United States, which has left dozens of prisoners in long-term judicial limbo in Guantanamo, the American military enclave in Cuba.

Obama has vowed to close the prison on his watch. But while he has overseen the release of some 160 men from the prison, the facility still holds 80 detainees.

The video plea plan has broad backing within the administration, including from senior State Department and Pentagon officials. A Defense Department spokesman declined to comment.

The most enthusiastic backers of the plan have been defense lawyers representing up to a dozen Guantanamo Bay detainees who are eager to extricate their clients from seemingly indefinite detention.

Republicans in Congress have opposed the president’s plans to empty the prison, on the grounds that many of the detainees are highly dangerous. But there is some bipartisan support for the proposal as well, a rarity in the Guantanamo debate.

Kevin Bishop, a spokesman for Senator Lindsey Graham, a leading Republican voice on defense and national security issues, said Graham was “intrigued” by the proposal.

While support from a Republican senator would by no means guarantee the votes needed to pass, it does give the proposal a better chance than schemes that would transfer detainees from the Cuban enclave to the United States.

Obama views the video feed proposal as a meaningful step toward closing the facility and making good on one of his earliest pledges as president, administration officials said.

Of the 80 prisoners remaining in Guantanamo, roughly 30 have been approved for transfer to third countries by an interagency review board. Most of those 30 men are expected to be released from Guantanamo in coming weeks, according to administration officials.

The officials said they think that as many as 10 more prisoners could be added to the approved-for-transfer list by the review board. Finally, another 10 detainees are standing trial in military commissions.

That leaves roughly 30 detainees whom the government deems too dangerous to release but unlikely to be successfully prosecuted in court. As a result, those men would likely have to be transferred to detention in the United States if the prison were closed.

Administration officials say that allowing video feeds could reduce that number to somewhere between 10 and 20. The administration believes that with such a small number of prisoners requiring transfer to the United States, it would be easier to win support for closing the facility, which is run by a staff of 2,000 military personnel.

“This is the group that gives the president the most heartburn,” said the senior administration official.

Lynch and her deputies at the Justice Department argued that the laws of criminal procedure do not allow defendants to plead guilty remotely by videoconference.

Even if Congress were to pass the law, Lynch and her aides have told the White House that federal judges may rule that such pleas are in effect involuntary, because Guantanamo detainees would not have the option of standing trial in a U.S. courtroom.

A defendant in federal court usually has the option to plead guilty or face a trial by jury. In the case of Guantanamo detainees, the only option they would likely face is to plead guilty or remain in indefinite detention.

“How would a judge assure himself that the plea is truly voluntary when if the plea is not entered, the alternative is you’re still in Gitmo?” said a person familiar with Lynch’s concerns about the proposal. “That’s the wrinkle.”

Lawyers for Guantanamo detainee Majid Khan, a 36-year-old Pakistani citizen, first proposed allowing Khan to plead guilty by videoconference in a legal memo submitted to the Department of Justice in November. In 2012, Khan confessed in military court to delivering $50,000 to Qaeda operatives who used it to carry out a truck bombing in Indonesia, and to plotting with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, on various planned strikes.

Senate investigators found internal CIA documents confirming that Khan’s CIA interrogators subjected him to forced rectal feedings. Khan’s lawyers say the experience amounted to rape. He was also water-boarded.

That treatment makes it difficult for the Department of Justice to successfully prosecute Khan in federal court, according to administration officials.

When White House officials learned that Khan and other detainees were ready to plead guilty to terrorism charges in federal court, they thought they had found a solution.

Efforts to try detainees, including Mohammed and other Sept. 11 suspects, in military tribunals at Guantanamo have bogged down over legal disputes. Only eight defendants have been fully prosecuted. Three verdicts have been overturned.

“The beauty of a guilty plea is you don’t need a trial,” said the senior administration official who supports the video plea proposal.

In February, senior Obama aides proposed pushing ahead with video guilty pleas at an interagency meeting at the White House on the closure of Guantanamo, according to officials briefed on the meeting.

Justice Department officials said they opposed video guilty pleas. Matthew Axelrod, the chief of staff to Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, said the proposal would violate laws of criminal procedure, according to the officials.

The meeting ended with an agreement to pursue new legislation allowing the guilty pleas, the officials said, which the Department of Justice supported.

One week later, President Obama rolled out his plan to close the prison in a nationally televised announcement from the Roosevelt Room. Obama’s plan included seeking “legislative changes … that might enable detainees who are interested in pleading guilty” in U.S. federal courts.

Administration officials spent much of the next two months drafting the new law. On a Friday afternoon in mid-April, White House staff emailed all the involved agencies with a final draft of the bill, according to the officials. The bill would be submitted to Congress the following Monday, the White House email said.

That weekend, Lynch intervened unexpectedly and said the Justice Department opposed the bill. The eleventh-hour move frustrated White House staff. Deciding again to not overrule Lynch, the White House shelved the bill.

In late May, White House officials found a sympathetic lawmaker who inserted language authorizing video pleas into the annual defense spending bill. The White House drafted a policy memo publicly supporting the proposal, which is known as a Statement of Administration Policy, or SAP.

Lynch opposed the idea, according to administration officials, sparking renewed tensions between the Justice Department and White House.

A SAP is the president’s public declaration on the substance of a bill, according to Samuel Kernell, a political science professor at the University of California at San Diego. Without one, it’s often more difficult to get lawmakers on the fence to vote the way the White House wants.

The White House again bowed to Lynch’s objections and declined to issue the SAP.

Russian Hackers Also Hit the Clinton Foundation

Posted on June 21, 2016June 21, 2016 by Denise Simon

So, global adversaries came to understand early that much of the covert and diplomatic work and connections by Hillary Clinton during her term as senator and later as Secretary of State was going on in a dual location, meaning the Clinton Foundation and the U.S. State Department. So….let the hacking begin, and they did.

Now there is a question: Are there more than one servers? Evidence speaks to the answer, YES. See this item from Forbes where there are clues.

Records reveal that Hillary Clinton’s private clintonemail.com server shared an IP address with her husband Bill Clinton’s email server, presidentclinton.com, and both servers were housed in New York City, not in the basement of the Clintons’ Chappaqua, New York home.

Web archives show that the Presidentclinton.com Web address was being operated by the Clinton Foundation as of 2009, when Hillary Clinton registered her own clintonemail.com server.

Numerous Clinton Foundation employees used the presidentclinton.com server for their own email addresses, which means that they were using email accounts that, if hacked, would have given any hacker complete access to Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails, as well. More here.

Clinton Foundation Said to Be Breached by Russian Hackers

Bloomberg: The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation was among the organizations breached by suspected Russian hackers in a dragnet of the U.S. political apparatus ahead of the November election, according to three people familiar with the matter.

The attacks on the foundation’s network, as well as those of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, compound concerns about her digital security even as the FBI continues to investigate her use of a personal e-mail server while she was secretary of state.

A spokesman for the foundation, Brian Cookstra, said he wasn’t aware of any breach. The compromise of the foundation’s computers was first identified by government investigators as recently as last week, the people familiar with the matter said. Agents monitor servers used by hackers to communicate with their targets, giving them a back channel view of attacks, often even before the victims detect them.

For a primer on recent cyber intrusions, click here.

Before the Democratic National Committee disclosed a major computer breach last week, U.S. officials informed both political parties and the presidential campaigns of Clinton, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders that sophisticated hackers were attempting to penetrate their computers, according to a person familiar with the government investigation into the attacks.

The hackers in fact sought data from at least 4,000 individuals associated with U.S. politics — party aides, advisers, lawyers and foundations — for about seven months through mid-May, according to another person familiar with the investigations.

Thousands of Documents

The thefts set the stage for what could be a Washington remake of the public shaming that shook Sony in 2014, when thousands of inflammatory internal e-mails filled with gossip about world leaders and Hollywood stars were made public. Donor information and opposition research on Trump purportedly stolen from the Democratic Party has surfaced online, and the culprit has threatened to publish thousands more documents.

Related reading: Clinton Investigation for Public Corruption

Related reading: FBI Maintaining Server for Evidence

A hacker or group of hackers calling themselves Guccifer 2.0 posted another trove of documents purportedly from the DNC on Tuesday, including what they said was a list of donors who had made large contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

The Republican Party and the Trump campaign have been mostly silent on the computer attacks. In an earlier statement, Trump said the hack was a political ploy concocted by the Democrats.

Information about the scope of the attacks and the government warnings raises new questions about how long the campaigns have known about the threats and whether they have done enough to protect their systems.

The Clinton campaign was aware as early as April that it had been targeted by hackers with links to the Russian government on at least four recent occasions, according to a person familiar with the campaign’s computer security.

U.S. Inquiries

The U.S. Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Security Agency are all involved in the investigation of the theft of data from the political parties and individuals over the last several months, one of the people familiar with the investigation said. The agencies have made no public statements about their inquiry.

The FBI has been careful to keep that investigation separate from the review of Clinton’s use of private e-mail, using separate investigators, according to the person briefed on the matter. The agencies didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Clinton spokesman Glen Caplin said that he couldn’t comment on government briefings about cyber security and that the campaign had no evidence that its systems were compromised.

“We routinely communicate and cooperate with government agencies on security-related matters,” he said. “What appears evident is that the Russian groups responsible for the DNC hack are intent on attempting to influence the outcome of this election.”

The DNC wouldn’t directly address the attacks but said in a written statement that it believes the leaks are “part of a disinformation campaign by the Russians.”

Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks didn’t respond to e-mails seeking comment about the government warnings. The Republican National Committee didn’t respond to e-mail messages. A Sanders spokesman, Michael Briggs, said he wasn’t aware of the warnings.

IDing the Hackers

The government’s investigation is following a similar path as the DNC’s, including trying to precisely identify the hackers and their possible motives, according to people familiar with the investigations. The hackers’ link to the Russian government was first identified by CrowdStrike Inc., working for the Democratic Party.

A law firm reviewing the DNC’s initial findings, Baker & McKenzie, has begun working with three additional security firms — FireEye Inc., Palo Alto Networks Inc. and Fidelis Cybersecurity — to confirm the link, according to two people familiar with the matter, underscoring Democrats’ concerns that the stolen information could be used to try to influence the outcome of the November election.

A spokesman for Baker & McKenzie didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. DNC spokesman Luis Miranda said the party worked only with CrowdStrike.

If the Democrats can show the hidden hand of Russian intelligence agencies, they believe that voter outrage will probably outweigh any embarrassing revelations, a person familiar with the party’s thinking said.

So far the released documents have revealed little that is new or explosive, but that could change. Guccifer 2.0 has threatened to eventually release thousands of internal memos and other documents.

Line of Attack

Sensitive documents from the Clinton Foundation could have the most damaging potential. The Trump camp has said it plans to make the foundation’s activities a subject of attacks against Clinton; the sort of confidential data contained in e-mails, databases and other digital archives could aid that effort.

An analysis by Fidelis confirmed that groups linked to Russian intelligence agencies were behind the DNC hack, according to a published report.

The government fills a crucial gap in flagging attacks that organizations can’t detect themselves, said Tony Lawrence, a former U.S. Army cyber specialist and now chief executive officer of VOR Technology, a computer security company in Hanover, Maryland.

“These state actors spend billions of dollars on exploits to gather information on candidates, and nine times out of ten [victims] won’t be able to identify or attribute them,” he said.

Google Accounts

Bloomberg News reported Friday that the hackers who hit the DNC and Clinton’s campaign burrowed much further into the U.S. political system than initially thought, sweeping in law firms, lobbyists, consultants, foundations and policy groups in a campaign that targeted thousands of Google e-mail accounts and lasted from October through mid-May.

Data from the attacks have led some security researchers to conclude that the hackers were linked to Russian intelligence services and were broadly successful in stealing reports, policy papers, correspondence and other information. Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for President Vladimir Putin, denied that the Russian government was involved.

Russia uses sophisticated “information operations” to advance foreign policy, and the target audience for this kind of mission wouldn’t be U.S. voters or even U.S. politicians, said Brendan Conlon, who once led a National Security Agency hacking unit.

“Why would Russia go to this trouble? Simple answer — because it met their foreign policy objectives, to weaken the U.S. in the eyes of our allies and adversaries,” said Conlon, now CEO of Vahna Inc., a cyber security firm in Washington. Publishing the DNC report on Trump “weakens both candidates — lists out all the weaknesses of Trump specifically while highlighting weaknesses of Clinton’s security issues. The end result is a weaker president once elected.”

Russia Link

Russia has an expansive cyber force that it has deployed in complex disinformation campaigns throughout Europe, according to intelligence officials.

BfV, the German intelligence agency, has concluded that Russia was responsible for a 2015 hack against the Bundestag that forced shutdown of its computer systems for several days. Germany is under “permanent threat” from Russian hackers, said BfV chief Hans-Georeg Maassen.

Security software maker Trend Micro said in May that Russian hackers had been trying for several weeks to steal data from Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party, and that they also tried to hack the Dutch Safety Board computer systems to obtain an advance copy of a report on the downing of a Malaysian aircraft over Ukraine in July 2014. The report said the plane was brought down by a Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile.

The cyber attacks are part of a broader pattern of state-sponsored hacking by Russia focused on political targets, with a goal of giving Russia the upper hand in dealing with other governments, said Pasi Eronen, a Helsinki-based cyber warfare researcher who has advised Finland’s Defense Ministry.

Obama’s Retribution Against Florida, Orlando Terror Attack

Posted on June 20, 2016June 20, 2016 by Denise Simon

Shameful…yet this administration knows no shame. Reprehensible….

FEMA denies request for emergency declaration following Pulse shooting

OrlandoSentinel: A request to the federal government to declare an emergency for the state of Florida following the Pulse nightclub shooting was denied today, according to statement from Gov. Rick Scott‘s office.

“Because your request did not demonstrate how the emergency response associated with this situation is beyond the capability of the State and affected local governments… your request for an emergency declaration is denied,” W. Craig Fugate, administrator for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said in a letter to Scott.

On Twitter, Scott called the denial “disappointing” and “unthinkable.”

If grated, the formal declaration of emergency would have made available $5 million in federal funding.

Scott said the money would have been used to cover the expense of provisions for health and safety measures and managing, controlling and reducing the immediate threat to public health and safety.

“It is incredibly disappointing that the Obama Administration denied our request for an Emergency Declaration,” Scott said on Twitter. “It is unthinkable that (the president) does not define the Orlando terror attack, the deadliest shooting in U.S. history, as an emergency.

“We’re committing every state resource possible to help the victims and the community heal and we expect the same from the federal government.”

Scott’s office has 30 days to appeal the denial.

Despite the denial, the federal government will allocate $253,000 to pay for overtime for the first responders who assisted the victims of the Pulse shooting, Scott’s office said.