NYC Honors Ethel Rosenberg, Executed for Treason

From the hearing transcripts in part:

VERDICT

COURT: Bring the jury in.

CLERK: Will the jurors please answer as their names are called? (Juror’s names called by the clerk.)

CLERK: Mr. Foreman, have you agreed upon a verdict?

FOREMAN: Yes, your Honor, we have.

CLERK: How say you?

FOREMAN: We, the jury, find Julius Rosenberg guilty as charged. We, the jury, find Ethel Rosenberg guilty as charged. We, the jury, find Morton Sobell guilty as charged.

CLERK: Members of the jury, listen to your verdict as it stands recorded. You say you find the defendant Julius Rosenberg guilty, Ethel Rosenberg guilty, and Morton Sobell guilty and so say you all?

JURORS: Yes.

There are countless files in the FBI vault on the Rosenbergs.

Rosenberg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Via NYPost:

City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for ‘great bravery’

The New York City Council this week honored convicted spy Ethel Rosenberg for “demonstrating great bravery” during a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co., the New York Post reports.

Rosenberg, along with her husband, Julius, and brother David Greenglass, were convicted of passing nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union in 1951. The Rosenbergs were executed in 1956, and Greenglass served 10 years of a 15-year sentence.

The council issued two proclamations, saying that Rosenberg was “wrongfully” executed for helping her husband. Decoded Russian cables released in the 1990s indicated that Julius Rosenberg passed secrets to the USSR, but they do not mention his wife.

“A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed,” Councilman Daniel Dromm, a Queens Democrat said.

Three members of the council joined Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer in issuing the proclamations honoring Rosenberg on the 100th anniversary of her birth. She was a resident of New York’s Lower East Side.

 

Obama did not Invite FBI Director to Seminar

Place this story and decision into the WTH file.

F.B.I. Chief Not Invited to Meeting on Countering Violent Extremism

NYT > WASHINGTON — The White House did not invite the most senior American official charged with preventing terrorist attacks — the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey — to the three-day conference this week on countering violent extremism in the United States and abroad because the administration did not want the event too focused on law enforcement issues, according to senior American officials.
But Mr. Comey’s Russian counterpart — Aleksandr V. Bortnikov, the director of the Russian Federal Security Service, the post-Soviet K.G.B. — was at the meeting, even though international human rights groups have repeatedly accused the Russian security service of unjustly detaining and spying on Russians and others.


The service also declined to provide American counterterrorism and intelligence officials with information before the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings that would probably have led to more scrutiny of one of the suspects.

Several other foreign law enforcement officials attended the conference, which was held in Washington. The meeting has been criticized as ineffectual and irrelevant, and not focused on immediate and tangible solutions to stop terrorists. And some Republicans said that President Obama’s speech to the assembled leaders on Wednesday did not lay out a strategy for defeating groups like the Islamic State.
The omission of Mr. Comey adds further uncertainty over who in the government is in charge of the anti-extremist effort. Just a few months ago, the F.B.I. put out a lengthy bulletin on its website about how it was leading “a new approach to countering violent extremism.” Many of the strategies listed by the F.B.I. appear similar to ones mentioned at the meeting.


An Obama administration official defended the decision not to invite Mr. Comey, saying that “while the F.B.I. works tirelessly to keep the country safe, this conference was not centered on federal law enforcement.”
The official said that the administration’s efforts to counter violent extremists “are premised on the notion that local officials and communities can be an effective bulwark against violent extremism, and most of the participants — spanning community leaders, local, law enforcement, private sector innovators, and others — reflected this bottom-up approach.” A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment.
Mr. Comey’s boss, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., attended the conference, and several F.B.I. officials participated in its panels, the official said.
The administration did not specifically invite Mr. Bortnikov, the official said. Instead, it had sent a general invitation to the Russian government, which chose Mr. Bortnikov, along with others, to come to Washington.
The administration did not try to prevent Mr. Bortnikov, who rarely visits the United States, from attending, said the official, who did not want to be identified discussing internal White House deliberations. Mr. Bortnikov is on the European Union sanctions list in response to the crisis in Ukraine, but he is not subject to American sanctions.
The programs intended to prevent Americans from becoming extremists are led by the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.
The Obama administration said in a news release on Wednesday that the effort to counter violent extremism “encompasses the preventive aspects of counterterrorism as well as interventions to undermine the attraction of extremist movements and ideologies that seek to promote violence.”
Stopping terrorist attacks has been the F.B.I.’s highest priority since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The bureau oversees joint terrorism task forces in every major American city that bring together federal, state and local authorities to investigate terrorism.

***

This is not the first little confab concocted by Barack Obama. Back in February of 2015, Obama had the same session calling on 60 nations. Progress? Not so much.

WASHINGTON — President Obama called on Americans and more than 60 nations on Wednesday to join the fight against violent extremism, saying they had to counter the ideology of the Islamic State and other groups making increasingly sophisticated appeals to young people around the world.
On the second day of a three-day meeting that comes after a wave of terrorist attacks in Paris, Sydney, Copenhagen and Ottawa, Mr. Obama said undercutting the Sunni militant group’s message and blunting its dark appeal was a “generational challenge” that would require cooperation from mainstream Muslims as well as governments, communities, religious leaders and educators. “We have to confront squarely and honestly the twisted ideologies that these terrorist groups use to incite people to violence,” Mr. Obama told an auditorium full of community activists, religious leaders and law enforcement officials — some of them skeptical about his message — gathered at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building next door to the White House. “We need to find new ways to amplify the voices of peace and tolerance and inclusion, and we especially need to do it online.”

POTUS Granted Refugee Status to Terror Connectors

Courtesy of Judicial Watch:

During Fiscal Year 2014, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) applied 1,519 exemptions to individual applicants under the Secretary of Homeland Security’s exercises of discretionary authority.1 Of those 1,519 exemptions:

 

 806 were processed for refugee applicants,

 19 were processed for asylum applicants,

 614 were processed for applicants for lawful permanent resident status,

 29 were processed for beneficiaries of petitions for derivative refugee or asylum status,

 34 were processed for applicants for Temporary Protected Status,

 9 were processed for applicants for Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA); and

 7 were processed for applicants for relief before the U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).

Regarding the reasons for the 1,519 exemptions:

 627 were processed for an applicant’s provision of material support, while under duress, to an undesignated terrorist organization as defined at INA section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III) (Tier III terrorist organization), under the Secretary of Homeland Security’s February 26, 2007 exercise of authority relating to Tier III organizations,

 189 were processed for an applicant’s provision of material support, while under duress, to a designated terrorist organization as defined under INA section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(I)-(II), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)(I)-(II) (Tier I or II terrorist organization), under the Secretary’s April 27, 2007 exercise of authority relating to Tier I and Tier II organizations,

 9 were processed for an applicant’s receipt of military-type training, while under duress, from a terrorist organization, under the Secretary’s January 7, 2011 exercise of authority relating to Tier I, Tier II and Tier III organizations,

 28 were processed for an applicant’s provision of voluntary medical care to members of a terrorist organization in the course of their professional responsibilities without assisting in the violent activities of an organization or individual, under the Secretary’s October 13, 2011 exercise of authority relating to Tier I, Tier II and Tier III organizations,

37 were processed for certain qualified aliens with existing immigration benefits under the Limited General Exemption2 who: provided material support to, solicited funds for, solicited individuals for membership in or received military-type training from certain qualified Tier III terrorist organizations, under the Secretary’s August 10, 2012 exercise of authority relating to certain Tier III organizations;3 and

 628 were processed for applicants who had certain activities or affiliations with specific groups which the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, has approved for consideration of an exemption.4

Exemptions allow certain refugees and other aliens the opportunity to receive a benefit or protection following the successful completion of a thorough vetting process. USCIS procedures require that all applicants’ names and fingerprints be checked against a broad array of records of individuals known to be security threats, including the terrorist watch list, and those of law enforcement concern. In addition to rigorous background vetting, including checks coordinated across several government agencies, the Secretary of Homeland Security’s discretionary authority is only applied on a case-by-case basis after careful review of all factors and all security checks have cleared.

Read the full DHS report here.

 

Hotel Chains Credit Cards Hacked

Not the first case for hotel chains not protecting guest records.

FromHotelManagement: A U.S. appeals court said the Federal Trade Commission has authority to regulate corporate cyber security, and may pursue a lawsuit accusing hotel operator Wyndham Worldwide Corp of failing to properly safeguard consumers’ information.

The 3-0 decision by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on Monday upheld an April 2014 lower court ruling allowing the case to go forward. The FTC wants to hold Wyndham accountable for three breaches in 2008 and 2009 in which hackers broke into its computer system and stole credit card and other details from more than 619,000 consumers, leading to over $10.6 million in fraudulent charges.

The FTC originally sued Wyndham in 2012 over the lack of security that led to its massive hack. But before the case proceeded, Wyndham appealed to a higher court to dismiss it, arguing that the FTC didn’t have the authority to punish the hotel chain for its breach. The third circuit court’s new decision spells out that Wyndham’s breach is exactly the sort of “unfair or deceptive business practice” the FTC is empowered to stop, reports Wired.

BusinessInsider: In August, Visa alerted numerous financial institutions of a breach. Five different banks determined the commonality between the cards included in that alert was that they were used at Hilton properties — including Embassy Suites, Doubletree, Hampton Inn and Suites, and the upscale Waldorf Astoria Hotels & Resorts, Krebs reports.

Hilton Hotels investigates customer credit card security hack

FNC: Hilton Hotels announced that it is looking into a possible security breach that occurred at gift shops, restaurants, bars, and other stores located on Hilton owned properties across the U.S.

According to cyber-security expert Brian Krebs, Visa sent confidential alerts to several financial institutions warning of a security breach at various retail locations earlier this year from April 21 to July 27. While the alerts named individual card numbers that had allegedly been compromised, per Visa’s policy, the notifications did not name the breached retail location. But sources at five different banks have now determined that the hacks all had one thing in common–they occurred at Hilton property point-of-sale registers.

Currently, the breach does not appear to have comprised the guest reservation systems at the associated properties. The company released the following statement regarding the incident:

“Hilton Worldwide is strongly committed to protecting our customers’ credit card information. We have many systems in place and work with some of the top experts in the field to address data security.  Unfortunately the possibility of fraudulent credit card activity is all too common for every company in today’s marketplace.  We take any potential issue very seriously, and we are looking into this matter.”

The breach includes other Hilton brand name properties including Embassy Suites, Doubletree, Hampton Inn and Suites, and Waldorf Astoria Hotels & Resorts. The hotel group is advising customers who may have made purchases at Hilton properties during the time indicated to carefully scan bank records for any unusual activity and contact their bank immediately.

According to USA Today, evidence from the investigation indicates that the hack may have affected credit card transactions as far back as Nov. 2014 and security breaches could possibly be ongoing.

Union Corruption Runs Far and Wide

For a listing of union members corruption, investigations and indictments, go here.

For a chilling read of an 84 page report on union corruption and how cases play into the RICO Act, go here.  There is a long history of criminal activity and it is an enterprise that still occurs and grows.

Report: Government Unions Take from the Poor to Give to the Rich

FreeBeacon: The government employees who now make up a majority of the nation’s union members are a far cry from the blue-collar archetype of old, according to a new report.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute will release a report on Tuesday morning documenting the changing nature of unionism in America, as white-collar professionals in the public sector overtake the private sector working class as the face of unionism.

“Public sector unions may claim they stand up for the little guy, but generally they aren’t representing blue collar workers against a better-educated, white-collar management,” said Carrie Sheffield, a scholar at the institute, in a release. “Government unions represent skilled, white-collar workers who enjoy big benefits and job security, courtesy of the taxpayer.”

Government workers are more likely to work behind a desk and enjoy civil service protections than the manufacturing workers who stood at the forefront of the labor movement at the start of the 20th century, according to the report. A majority of them have college educations.

“A larger share of public sector than private sector workers are employed in “management, professional, and related occupations.” In 2013, 56.2 percent of public sector workers and 37.8 percent of private sector workers were employed in these occupations,” the report says. “As the percentage of public sector union members increased between 1971 and 2004, the fraction of union members in the top third of the nation’s income distribution increased by 24 percent, while the proportion of unionists in the bottom third of the distribution declined by 45 percent. This is because better-educated and more affluent workers are more likely to belong to public rather than private sector unions.”

Sheffield said that these paychecks and costs have grown rapidly—retired New York City cops, the report notes, now outnumber active duty ones—in recent years and have the effect of pitting taxpayers, including the working class, against well-paid civil servants.

Pension debt and other unfunded compensation for government workers have led to several major municipal bankruptcies. Detroit, for example, declared bankruptcy when it was unable to meet nearly $20 billion in debt, about half of which was attributed to worker retirement benefits.

“Unfortunately for taxpayers, government unions donate huge amounts to elected officials who then vote on those expanding benefit packages—much to the detriment of cities like Detroit and Stockton, California, and states like Illinois and New Jersey that are on the brink of fiscal insolvency,” Sheffield said in a release.

The shift has created incentives to grow government and spur political involvement from public servants. The current system allows government unions to pump millions of dollars to candidates, who become the agents that the unions negotiate with at the bargaining table.

Sheffield recounts how early private sector union boosters were skeptical of government unions. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a champion of organized labor, once said that “Collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.”

The institute says that lawmakers should enact reforms akin to that of Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin to return to the balance outlined by Roosevelt. Walker was able to become the first sitting governor to survive a recall vote by highlighting the high costs associated with union-negotiated benefits and its effect on his state’s working class. Sheffield said that lawmakers should do the same.

“Government unions are a powerful interest group that is uniquely privileged in being funded by taxpayers. Their members generally have higher levels of education than the average private sector worker, and enjoy greater compensation and job security. David taking on Goliath they are certainly not,” the report says.