Do you ever wonder where the Barack Obama anti-Israel attitude comes from? Do you ever wonder why Hillary Clinton kept her distance from standing at the side of Israel? Do you ever wonder how John Kerry has been even more assertive in his aggression on Israel? Do you ever wonder why the New York Times maintains their journalists that write pro-Hamas and pr0-Palestinian news items? There are many in the Obama circle that maintain visual and highly vocal opposition to Israel but one you should come to know and meet in Philip Gordon. Gordon was a senior policy advisor to Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. He was later named as the Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasian Affairs, responsible for 50 countries. NSC top advisor Tom Donilon completely endorses Philip Gordon. All involved completely ignore Hamas, the PLO and the fact that 20 years of peace negotiations have never advanced, so Israel is to blame according to Gordon. Why you ask? Top Obama Official Blasts Israel Over West Bank Military Occupation Amid Heightening Conflict by: RAPHAEL AHREN, The Times Of Israel Israel’s ongoing occupation of the West Bank is wrong and leads to regional instability and dehumanization of Palestinians, a top American government official said Tuesday in Tel Aviv, hinting that the current Israeli government is not committed to peace. In an unusually harsh major foreign policy address, Philip Gordon, a special assistant to US President Barack Obama and the White House coordinator for the Middle East, appealed to Israeli and Palestinian leaders to make the compromises needed to reach a permanent peace agreement. Jerusalem “should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate” such a treaty with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who has proven to be a reliable partner, Gordon said. “Israel confronts an undeniable reality: It cannot maintain military control of another people indefinitely. Doing so is not only wrong but a recipe for resentment and recurring instability,” Gordon said. “It will embolden extremists on both sides, tear at Israel’s democratic fabric and feed mutual dehumanization.” Delivering the keynote address at the Haaretz newspaper’s Israel Conference on Peace, Gordon reiterated Obama’s position that a final-status agreement should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps. The administration is aware that Israel is facing threats on several fronts and Obama remains committed to Israel’s security, he said, speaking on the day that Israel launched Operation Protective Edge to counter rocket fire from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip. Indeed, mere hours before Gordon addressed the conference, hundreds of participants were forced to quickly evacuate the event hall and enter a safe room after an alert signaled a missile approaching Tel Aviv. After about 10 minutes, participants returned to the hall and the conference resumed. “The United States will always have Israel’s back. That’s why we fight for it every day at the United Nations,” Gordon said. But as Israel’s greatest friend and strongest defender, Washington should be allowed to ask some fundamental questions, he added. Specifically, Gordon went on: “How will Israel remain democratic and Jewish if it attempts to govern the millions of Palestinian Arabs who live in the West Bank? How will it have peace if it’s unwilling to delineate a border, end the occupation and allow for Palestinian sovereignty, security and dignity? How will we prevent other states from supporting Palestinian efforts in international bodies, if Israel is not seen as committed to peace?” The administration was disappointed that the last round of US-brokered peace negotiations failed and that currently “we find ourselves in an uneasy pause,” Gordon said. “At the same time we have no interest in a blame game. The unfortunate reality is that neither side prepared their publics or proved ready to make the difficult decisions required for an agreement. And trust has been eroded on both sides. Until it is restored, neither side will likely be ready to takes risk for peace, even if they live with the dire consequences that resolve from its absence.” The “past few weeks” show that the inability to resolve the Israeli-Palestinians conflict “inevitable means more tension, more resentment, more injustice, more insecurity, more tragedy and more grief,” he said. “And the sight of grieving families, Israeli and Palestinian alike, reminds us that the cost of this conflict remains unbearably high.” In his 25-minute speech – which marked the first time a senior White House official had directly addressed the Israeli people since Obama’s March 2013 speech in Jerusalem — Gordon rejected any alternatives to the two-state solution. He called on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resume peace talks with the PA, suggesting that Abbas is the best Palestinian leader Jerusalem could hope for. “Israel should not take for granted the opportunity to negotiate such a peace with Abbas, who has shown time and again that he’s committed to non-violence and co-existence and cooperation with Israel.” At one point in his speech, Gordon appeared to directly contradict an assessment Netanyahu made last week regarding Israel’s security needs vis-à-vis its eastern border. Referring to deliberations retired US General John Allen held with IDF officers regarding ways to secure Israel’s border with Jordan, Gordon said that Allen’s plans include “a full range of contingencies, including rising threats that we see around the Middle East.” Allen was likely referring to the territorial gains made in recent weeks by the radical terror group Islamic State (formerly known as ISIL or ISIS). “The approaches that are being discussed would create one of the most secure borders in the world along both sides of the Jordan River,” Gordon said. “By developing a layered defense that includes significantly strengthening the fences on both sides of the border, ensuring the right level of boots on the ground, deploying state of the art technology, the comprehensive program of rigorous testing, we can make the border safe against any type of conventional or unconventional threat – from individual terrorists or a conventional armored forces.” On June 29, Netanyahu declared that one of Israel’s central security challenges was to “stabilize the area west of the Jordan River security line.” In this part of the West Bank, the prime minister said, “no force can guarantee Israel’s security other than the IDF and our security services… Who knows what the future holds? The ISIS wave could very quickly be directed against Jordan,” he said at a conference in Tel Aviv. Israel would thus have to maintain long-term security control of the territory along the Jordan River in any future accord with the Palestinians, the prime minister said. “The evacuation of Israel’s forces would most likely lead to the collapse the PA and the rise of radical Islamic forces, just as it did in Gaza. It would also severely endanger the State of Israel.” In his speech at the David Intercontinental Hotel in Tel Aviv, Gordon also referred to the hail of rockets that rained down on Israel throughout the day from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip. “The US strongly condemns these attacks. No country should have to live under the constant threat of indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians,” said Gordon, whose administration was heavily criticized by the Israeli government for quickly agreeing to work with the new Hamas-backed Palestinian unity government when it was established last month. The administration supported Israel’s right to defend itself against these attacks, he added. “At the same time, we appreciate Prime Minister Netanyahu’s calls for acting responsibly and we in turn call on all sides to do all they can to restore calm and to protect civilians.”
Category Archives: Middle East
Going Digital to Aid Obama’s Intel
Ah, I learned about it in media reports. This is Barack Obama’s canned response to any crisis nationally or globally. Likely the best suggestion is for Barack Obama to purge his National Security Council, to purge his CIA leadership, to purge his FBI director.
While at least the New York Times is Obama’s personal written mouthpiece, it appears that journalists globally should include a courtesy copy of their news reports items should include the White House. As an example, this news report tells us that Belmoktar is planning more attacks from Libya. This news report tells us who some of the members of ISIS is in Iraq. Most importantly, this news report tells us a General is explaining the real concern of the alien incursion at our southern border.
America could save billions of dollars if the White House would just continue reading items from journalists. But in the end, does that really influence his actions or policy? Well even according to the New York Times, the answer is no. Not even begging the White House to act for a year or more caused Barack Obama to be assertive and or proactive with regard to the building conflicts in Syria and Iraq.
So, what does Barack Obama do all day long anyway? Well that in reality continues to be a secret, there are two versions, one for insiders and one for the media.
Of most concern since his daily schedule is mostly obscure, bombing the fact he says is the most transparent administration in history, does he even attend and review in any form his Presidential Daily Briefings? The short answer is less than have the time. This could say then he is in fact behind on half the issues domestically and globally, enter the plausible deniability.
The Government Accountability Institute conducted an analysis of how much time President Barack Obama has spent attending his Presidential Daily Briefs (PDBs), as recorded on the White House official calendar and Politico’s comprehensive calendar. The study covered the President’s first 1,225 days in office, running from January 23, 2009 through May 31, 2012. Of those, President Obama attended a total of 536 Presidential Daily Briefs.
The chart in the link above shows that in May of 2012, Barack Obama only received a PDB 7 times. Ah 7?
Okay, well all is well in the world today now that his PDB’s have gone digital, meaning he can fire up his tablet and that solves his knowledge base problem, or does it? Well it seems that the office of ODNI is the primary source of PDB’s and that points to James Clapper. But, recently Clapper has been more than honest in his assessments and document releases pertaining to the NSA, so now that duty has fallen to Clapper’s deputy. Problem solves yet? Nah.
“Cardillo spends a lot of time in the White House so he knows his principal client pretty well. As a deputy on the National Security Council he meets one to three times a day in the Situation Room. And then there are those regulars forays to the Oval Office for the “oval briefings.”
He told a small gathering of reporters Thursday afternoon that we wouldn’t be “surprised by the topics” of the PDB. “Today it’s Ukraine; it’s Iran; it’s Korea it’s South Sudan; it’s cyber; it’s terrorism etc.”
It seems Barack Obama went digital two or more years ago and he still gets his information from the media or does he? Well no actually it appears that many others get these briefings as Obama seems to fill his time with appointments that remain a secret.
Well for those reading this perhaps you can tweet to the White House what they need to know as that is the powerful tool being used by our enemies. And maybe since our U.S. Ambassador was asked to leave the country he represents, we may see him attending afternoon tea at the White House, but you wont find that on Barack Obama’s daily schedule just as Hillary’s afternoon tea was omitted as well.
Going digital has not worked either….moving on, all is well in the world so fund-raisers for the DNC takes priority.
Putin Sees a Post America World
Barack Obama in just a few short years has passed the baton to Vladimir Putin such that Putin can now dictate global conditions, economic standards and alter international law as he chooses. The United Nations, the Hague, the International Monetary Fund, Interpol and the World Bank will all fall in line with Putin at the helm, while the equilibrium of the globe will be at the hands of China, Iran and Russia.
Any influence that the United States once had, an policy that the United States once had, any loyalties the United States once had vanished without so much as a debate or whimper.
Putin: Ukraine is a Battlefield for the New World Order
This week in Moscow President Vladimir Putin made a major foreign policy statement, while speaking to a worldwide gathering of Russian ambassadors and permanent diplomatic representatives. According to Putin, the West did not give Moscow a choice, but to move to annex Crimea last March to defend Russians and Russian-speakers “that consider themselves part of the wider Russian world” (“Ruskiy Mir”). Putin insisted that NATO planned to swiftly move its forces into Sevastopol and radically change the balance of power in the region, depriving Russia of everything it had been fighting for since the times of Tsar Peter the Great.
According to Putin, the present crisis in Ukraine is a manifestation of the core Western policy of “deterring Russia” that continued despite the end of the Cold war. Putin announced Moscow would continue to defend the rights of Russian “compatriots” living abroad “using political, economic and self-defense humanitarian operations.” He declared that the time of U.S. world domination has ended and Russia will be reintegrating the Eurasian landmass [former USSR], while promoting better relations with Europe, “which is our natural partner.” The Russian foreign ministry was ordered to work on preparing “a joint space of economic and humanitarian cooperation from Lisbon to Vladivostok,” based on absolute noninterference in internal political matters and excluding the U.S. Putin accused Washington of blackmailing Paris to stop the delivery of the French-built Mistral helicopter-carrying assault ships to the Russian Navy (kremlin.ru, July 1). The first Mistral is planned for delivery this year and it could be stationed in Sevastopol (Rossyskaya Gazeta, June 25).
Putin’s speech was controversial: while accusing the West of ignoring international law and interfering in others’ affairs by promoting so called “democracy,” Putin strongly asserted Russia’s right to intervene in other nations internal affairs “to defend Russian compatriots abroad.” The Kremlin rejects the West ideologically, politically and militarily, but Putin’s speech did not spell out fully the practical part of the Russian foreign policy agenda (gazeta.ru, July1).
After Putin’s foreign policy statement, the deputy secretary of Russia’s National Security Council, Eugenie Lukyanov, Putin’s appointee from St. Petersburg, told RIA Novosti that “the time of U.S. world hegemony is over,” but Washington is not ready to accept this fact. According to Lukyanov, new international rules must be written together by major world powers that would take into account the interests of all key players. Possibly, a global conference to rewrite international law must be called, because today “there are no agreed rules and the world may become an increasingly unruly place” plagued with constant conflicts. Lukyanov accused Washington of directly promoting conflict and bloodshed in Ukraine and using the conflict to rally European nations against Russia. Russia, according to Lukyanov, could reply by cutting supplies of titanium to Boeing that could seriously hamper the production of passenger aircraft in America. Lukyanov ridiculed President Barack Obama’s administration: “They spent $5 billion to prepare and organize the Maidan protests in Kyiv, but the end result was that Crimea became part of Russia and Putin’s approval ratings are more than 80 percent. It turns out Obama’s advisers are our prime helpers.” Lukyanov accused Poland of harboring training centers of Ukrainian radical nationalists on its territory and expressed hope that attempts to use the Ukrainian crisis to consolidate the West and NATO shall fail eventually (RIA Novosti, July 2).
The Kremlin apparently believes the time is ripe for a decisive drive to undermine U.S. influence and power worldwide and hit at the transatlantic link to undermine NATO, while the White House is occupied by the Obama administration, seen by Moscow as ineffective and indecisive. The Ukrainian crisis may promote the emergence of a new world order that would sideline Western democratic nations and recognize Russia’s own sphere of undisputed influence in the post-Soviet Eurasian landmass. On the practical side, Putin promised the ambassadors gathered in Moscow, who have been tasked to make this happen, a fourfold pay hike for diplomatic staff (kremlin.ru, July 1).
This week the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko announced the termination of a 10-day unilateral ceasefire in fighting with pro-Russian separatists in Donbas. Poroshenko accused the separatists of constantly violating the ceasefire, of killing Ukrainian solders, of failing to liberate hostages and implement Poroshenko’s previously announced peace plan. Poroshenko promised “to liberate our land,” but implied the ceasefire could be resumed, if separatist fighters accept his conditions and that his peace plan was still on the table (Segodnya, July 1). Putin criticized Poroshenko for resuming the so-called anti-terrorist operation in Donbas, but also left open the possibility of a negotiated compromise (kremlin.ru, July 1). The Kremlin is at present concentrating its efforts on pressing for a prolonged ceasefire and “substantial negotiations” between the rebels and Kyiv—an arrangement that would give Putin leverage to keep Kyiv and the unruly Russian nationalist rebels under control, while containing Western influence in Ukraine and possibly inserting wedges into the transatlantic connection between the U.S. and EU. Moscow has been apparently influencing the rebels to scale down their demands and offering some tactical concessions to Poroshenko, while trying to sideline the U.S. and engage European powers as intermediaries (EDM, June 26).
Resumed fighting in Donbas this week seems to be marginal in nature—the Ukrainian forces are improving their positions and trying to secure the border with Russia, while not attempting to decisively defeat the rebels or take over any major rebel-held cities. A meeting in Berlin between the German, French, Ukrainian and Russian foreign ministers on July 2 resulted in a joint press conference and a declaration calling for terms of a ceasefire to be finalized by July 5. Moscow has promised to allow Ukrainian border guards and OSCE observers into its posts on the Ukrainian border to verify that men and arms are not being smuggled into Ukraine. Hostages must be released and OSCE observers deployed to monitor any future ceasefire (Rossyskaya Gazeta, July 3). A pattern is emerging of possible intermittent fighting followed by ceasefire and negotiations. This pattern would seem to largely exclude the U.S. from the picture and be in line with Moscow’s announced overall foreign policy objectives.
The Covert Reality of Bloomberg’s New York
There are some clues that are so visible we don’t see them but you can bet the real stories are well known by many. Secrets and dealings in New York and beyond are discussed over cocktails hosted by elites and circles within circles. Just examine New York and the globalists that in fact determine how to finesse regulations, sanctions, local law, international law and steal and smuggle creating wealth beyond the reach of media or any scrutiny.
Hidden in Plain Sight: New York Just Another Island Haven
By Michael Hudson, Ionut Stanescu and Samuel Alder-Bell Lax U.S. rules and real estate industry’s no-questions-asked approach make it easy for dodgy characters to funnel wealth through high-end Manhattan apartments.One day during Chen Shui-bian’s second term as Taiwan’s president, several people lugged what a witness described as “five or six” fruit boxes into the presidential residence in Taipei. Inside the crates, the witness later said, was 200 million in New Taiwan Dollars, equal to about $6 million in U.S. currency.
The cash was a bribe intended for first lady Wu Shu-jen, a sweetener encouraging her to prod her husband to provide regulatory relief to a securities firm involved in a contested merger, according to court claims by U.S. and Taiwanese authorities. Pulling strings in such situations, the witness said, required getting “consent from Madam.”
Documents in U.S. District Court in Manhattan describe the circuitous path that authorities believe the cash followed after it was unpacked from the fruit boxes: First it was stored in a bank vault in Taipei along with other piles of loose cash that the first lady described as political donations . Later much of the cash in the vault was stuffed into seven suitcases and stored in a basement at the home of an executive involved in the corporate merger. After a time it was moved, in a roundabout way, through banks in Hong Kong and the U.S. and into a Swiss account controlled by the first couple’s son.
In the spring of 2008, a chunk of that money was wired into an account in Miami. U.S. authorities claim that on May 29, 2008 — nine days after Chen had completed his second and final term as Taiwan’s president — money from the Miami account was used to buy a prime piece of a real estate in yet another destination in the money’s global odyssey.
The property: a $1.575 million apartment in Manhattan’s Onyx Chelsea, a glass and metal tower “steps away,” as real estate promoters say, from Chelsea Park and Madison Square Garden.
The movement of dirty money from fruit boxes in Taipei into America’s real estate capital illustrates, in vivid detail, one of New York’s dirty secrets: High-end New York real estate is an alluring destination for corrupt politicians, tax dodgers and money launderers around the globe.
New York is among an elite group of destinations — along with Miami, London, Dubai and a few other cities around the world — that attract large numbers of international property buyers. Manhattan condos are popular with wealthy Chinese, Russians and South Americans. Since 2008, roughly 30 percent of condo sales in pricey Manhattan developments have been to buyers who listed an international address or bought in the name of a limited liability company or some other corporate entity, a maneuver often employed by foreign purchasers.
Because many buyers go to great lengths to hide their interests in New York properties, it’s impossible to put a number on what proportion of buyers from overseas are laundering ill-gotten gains. Many act in an above-board manner and use tax loopholes that are legal in their home countries. But it’s clear that New York’s public officials and its real estate industry embrace the wealthy and powerful without much thought to where their money comes from.
During his time in office, former Mayor Michael Bloomberg was a cheerleader for encouraging the mega-wealthy to relocate to the city. “Wouldn’t it be great if we could get all the Russian billionaires to move here?” he told New York magazine in September.
Combine that give-us-your-rich ethos with state and local policies that lavish tax breaks on Manhattan’s wealthiest homeowners and federal policies that allow real estate agents to close their eyes to whether their clients are trafficking in illicit money, and the results are predictable: New York is a magnet for the super-rich homebuyers from other lands bearing money of sometimes dubious provenance. The flood of foreign capital pouring into New York properties makes it easy for suspect figures to hide their fortunes amid Manhattan’s residential gold rush, according to interviews with money laundering experts and court documents and secret offshore records reviewed by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.
Jaikumar Ramaswamy, chief of the U.S. Justice Department’s anti-money-laundering section, says oligarchs and despots like to put their money into high-end real estate for a number of reasons: they need an escape option if things take a turn for them in their home countries, they want to park their assets in an investment that’s known to preserve value, and they want to be able to enjoy and flaunt their wealth. “They’re not buying real estate in Detroit,” he says. “They’re buying in places that give them some sort of status: London, Paris, New York, Malibu.”
Many walk a fine line between showing off and staying on the down low. Instead of putting property in their own names, they may arrange to put the names of their spouses, children, lawyers or other proxies on property deeds. Often, the buyer of record isn’t even a flesh-and-blood person — it’s an anonymous limited liability company set up in a U.S. state, or an offshore company established in the British Virgin Islands or some other overseas haven.
The offshore maze
The story of the Manhattan apartment purchased by Taiwan’s former first family illustrates how offshore structures are used to steer ill-gotten gains into real estate. Along with passing through a tangle of bank accounts, the bribe money’s origins and the identities of the people associated with it were obscured by the use of offshore entities, including a trust registered on the Island of Nevis and shell companies in the British Virgin Islands.
As a final step, a Miami-based wealth advisor, a German national named Stefan R. Seuss, set up a New York company, West 28th Street LLC, that stood in as the Chelsea condo’s owner of record. Any check of the LLC’s ownership would have traced back to one of the British Virgin Islands companies and hit a dead end.
Financial crime experts have a name for the process of creating mazes of bank accounts and offshore companies to move and hide money: layering. When the layers are laid down skillfully, it’s often impossible for authorities to detect flows of illicit cash. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that as little as one-fifth of 1 percent of money that’s laundered around the world is identified and intercepted.
In the case of Taiwan’s former first couple, though, an amateurish blunder in the laundering process – having the corporate executive store the cash in his basement – may have helped unravel the scheme. The executive later provided evidence against the ex-president and first lady, who were eventually sentenced to lengthy prison terms on an array of corruption charges.
Court records indicate that Seuss, the wealth advisor, also betrayed the presidential family’s secrets — acknowledging that the first couple’s son and daughter-in-law had asked him to help them buy real estate in New York and Virginia but conceal their ownership of the properties. It appears Seuss provided this inside information to the government sometime after he was indicted in 2009 in Philadelphia on unrelated money laundering charges. He later pleaded guilty, paid a fine and served a short stint in jail.
Despite evidence marshaled by authorities in Taiwan and the U.S., American prosecutors had to battle for nearly 2½ years to seize the Chelsea condo as the proceeds of foreign corruption. An attorney representing the first couple’s son denied the family had done anything wrong and charged that the U.S. Justice Department’s forfeiture action was an effort to “curry favor with the current government of Taiwan.”
In April 2013 the condo was auctioned for $1.5 million. As part of a settlement of the litigation, $225,000 of that went to the offshore company that controls West 28th Street LLC. The rest sits in the U.S. Treasury, apparently waiting for a decision on Taiwan’s request that the U.S. share a portion of its take from the sale.
Ramaswamy, the Justice Department official, says seizing real estate under such circumstances is often difficult. Authorities can’t just show that the owner of the property is corrupt. “You have to prove the nexus between the corruption and the property itself,” he said. “Sometimes judges are skeptical: Why are we are going after some foreign guy who did something in a foreign country?”
Easy access
Other than the occasional after-the-fact legal action — often sparked by investigations in other countries — U.S. authorities don’t put up many roadblocks for foreigners who want to launder money through American real estate. Escrow and real estate agents aren’t required to find out the real identities of property buyers and, unlike bankers, stockbrokers and other financial middlemen, they aren’t required to report suspicious transactions to law enforcement.
The Patriot Act, passed after the 9/11 attacks, requires that banks, securities houses and other financial firms follow stringent anti-money-laundering rules. Real estate and escrow agents were included on the list, but a loophole in the law gave an opening for the U.S. Treasury to “temporarily” exempt the real estate industry from these requirements.
A dozen years later, the exemption still stands.
Investigations led by U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, have highlighted the role of real estate agents in helping corrupt foreign officials and their families move looted cash into the U.S. Levin has called for Treasury to revoke the Patriot Act exemptions “so that real estate and escrow agents will have to know their customers, evaluate the source of their funds, and turn away suspect clients.”
Louise I. Shelley, director of the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center at Virginia’s George Mason University, believes that money laundering into real estate has increased since 9/11 as scrutiny of other kinds of transactions has increased.
The use of real estate as a haven for dirty money, she says, is “terribly overlooked” by researchers, politicians and regulators. “I’ve even written people in Treasury who have asked me about this, and they haven’t gotten back to me,” Shelley says. “It’s a big hole.”
A-list destination
The lax standards for real estate transactions in the U.S. — money talks, few questions asked — sometimes mean that Manhattan’s financial and cultural elite end up with mysterious figures as their neighbors.
In early 2008, a British Virgin Islands company, Jolly Star Holding Limited, paid more than $15 million to buy an apartment and maid’s quarters in Fifteen Central Park West, an A-list address whose residents have included Sting, Denzel Washington, former Citibank chief Sanford Weill and baseball superstar Alex Rodriguez.
Who was really behind the purchase was hidden behind the cover of British Virgin Islands law, which closely guards the identities of the shareholders of companies chartered there.
The owners of Jolly Star Holding — and thus the owners of Apartment 14B at 15CPW — would have remained a secret if not for confidential records obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. These documents show Jolly Star Holding’s owners were a Hong Kong power couple, Sun Min and her husband Peter Mok Fung. The couple runs a shipping and trading company and are known to buy and sell shares on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in batches of $10 million or more.
A few months after they purchased the Manhattan condo, the couple made another big investment, buying more than 8 million shares in Huiyuan, a Chinese juice company. After it was announced in September 2008 that Coca-Cola wanted to buy Huiyuan, the juice maker’s stock value soared and Min began selling off the couple’s shares. The Coke deal eventually fell through, but not before Min and her husband had reaped millions of dollars in profit, Hong Kong authorities later charged.
Regulators claim that the windfall wasn’t the result of luck or acumen, but rather due to illegal information obtained by Min before Coke’s interest in Huiyuan was made public. In 2013 Hong Kong’s Market Misconduct Tribunal found Min guilty of insider trading, fining her more than $3 million, the largest penalty ever laid down by the tribunal.
Fact of life
Money laundering and New York real estate have a long history.
For much of the 20th century, Mafia clans put money squeezed from gambling and other rackets into properties around New York’s Five Boroughs — often low-end, low-profile addresses rather than high-end ones.
“You didn’t have any large-scale real interests in New York without coming in touch with this problem,” says Shelley, the corruption expert. “It was just a fact of life.”
Her father owned apartment buildings all over Manhattan from the 1940s into the 1960s. The stories she heard from him about the underworld’s influence in the market — it turned out, for example, that a real estate operator he shared an office with was connected to the mob — helped inspire her to devote herself to studying organized crime.
One of the most famous scandals involving money laundering through New York real estate starred a seven-bedroom condo on the 43rd floor of Midtown’s famed Olympic Tower and the former first couple of the Philippines, Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos. In 1976, the couple used a series of offshore companies, investigators later charged, to quietly channel almost $700,000 into the purchase and consolidation of three apartments near the top of the tower, which had recently been built by Greek-Argentine shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis.
Investigators claimed that the front man for the purchase was a Marcos ally, Antonio Floirendo, known as the “Banana King” for his vast plantations in the southern Philippines. After the Marcoses fled to Hawaii in 1986, the Philippines’ newly formed Presidential Commission on Good Government moved to seize the Manhattan showplace as part of its push to recover billions of dollars it claimed the couple looted from the country. The Philippines government sold the condo for just under $3.7 million. It also auctioned off the apartment’s contents — including a Fantin-Latour painting that went for $400,000 — at Christie’s. Proceeds from the condo and furnishings, Philippine officials promised, would be used to help bankroll the country’s agrarian land reform.
Position of privilege
A few years later, money traced to another suspect Philippine official also ended up in a luxury property in New York.
The paper trail began to emerge in December 2003 , after customs officers at San Francisco International Airport detained two sons of a powerful Philippine army general and accused them of trying to smuggle $100,000 into the U.S.
Their mother got involved by submitting a handwritten affidavit in which she frankly explained that the position held by her husband, Maj. General Carlos Garcia, “is one of privilege,” allowing him to benefit from “gifts and gratitude money from several Philippine companies that are awarded military contracts to build roads, bridges and military housing.” (Clarita Garcia also noted, in another odd aside, that the Philippine military provided her five drivers and five vehicles and a cook who played the piano for her “upon request.”)
The sons’ arrest and the mother’s statement to U.S. officials helped spark an investigation back in the Philippines that turned up evidence her husband had acquired as much as $6 million in undeclared income. He was court martialed, convicted of perjury and sent to prison.
Among the assets that U.S. authorities went after in the wake of the investigation was a condo at New York’s Trump Park Avenue tower. Clarita Garcia and a third son, Timothy, purchased Unit 6A in the luxury building for $765,000 in 2004. U.S. prosecutors said the money, funneled through a joint account held by mother and son at Citibank , had been amassed through the general’s corrupt activities.
In 2009, as the forfeiture claim and extradition cases against Clarita Garcia and her three sons dragged on, Timothy Garcia was working as a publicist for Marc Jacobs’ fashion empire, getting photographed at Fashion Week wearing an electronic monitoring device and complaining that the court-ordered ankle bracelet was so uncomfortable, “I can’t even wear my knee high croc boots by Sergio Rossi for the fall.”
In late 2012, federal prosecutors in Manhattan won a court order turning over control of the Trump Park Avenue unit to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Island of intrigue
Manhattan real estate has a knack for turning up amid intrigues involving some of the most politically explosive regions in the world. In September, a judge approved U.S. prosecutors’ bid to seize 650 Fifth Avenue, a commercial tower at edge of Rockefeller Center, ruling the property’s owners had violated international embargoes by secretly siphoning profits from tenants’ rental checks to Iran’s government. U.S. authorities said it could be “the largest-ever terrorism-related forfeiture.”
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan have charged that some of the money stolen from Russia’s treasury as part of an alleged $230 million tax fraud known as the Magnitsky affair was used to buy luxury apartments at 20 Pine Street, a 35-story building just off Wall Street that had once been home to the J.P. Morgan banking empire. Prosecutors claim the money to buy the New York properties was routed through more than 20 banks and companies on its path from Russia to New York, including a brief stopover in Moldova, Europe’s poorest country. Authorities are trying to seize four apartments at 20 Pine as well as two commercial spaces that they claim were purchased with tainted cash. Lawyers for a British Virgin Islands company and related U.S. firms that are the owners of record of the properties claim there’s no evidence that the firms or their managers were involved in a Russian tax fraud.
Allies of both the winner and the loser in Ukraine’s 2010 presidential election, meanwhile, have been accused of money-laundering schemes involving New York properties. A lawsuit in federal court in Manhattan claims that illicit cash gathered by that election’s loser, former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, was invested by her business associates in an array of New York properties. The suit alleges that a former assistant finance minister in Russia plowed part of a $10 million bribe he received from Tymoshenko into real estate in the city. Another associate, the suit alleges, used money spun off from Tymoshenko’s “corrupt schemes” to buy 14 Wall Street, an office tower across from the New York Stock Exchange.
Tymoshenko denies wrongdoing, and asserts that the corruption investigation that landed her in jail after the 2010 election was politically tainted. She in turn has accused a key contributor to Viktor Yanukovych, the 2010 election’s winner, of engaging in money laundering via New York real estate. In a lawsuit in federal court in Manhattan, she claims that one of Yanukovych’s political patrons, billionaire businessman Dmytro Firtash, moved money through American banks by pretending he was using it to invest in New York real estate projects. After the cash had been “sufficiently laundered,” the suit alleges, Firtash and other defendants sent much of it back to Ukraine to bankroll “political corruption and other racketeering activities.”
Firtash was arrested in March in Austria, at the request of U.S. authorities, on suspicion of bribery and organized crime activities.
Family trust
Other notorious figures in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union whose names have been linked to pricey Manhattan properties include a famed Romanian shopping-mall developer and Russia’s fertilizer king.
Gabriel Popoviciu became one of Romania’s richest men by helping introduce his country to KFC and other American fast-food icons. Research by a European news organization, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, has revealed that his family has shelled out more than $8 million over the past decade to buy three apartments on the 44th floor of the Olympic Tower, one flight up from where Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos once held luxury space. He and his wife bought an apartment from American banker John Chalsty in 2004. The couple’s daughter was listed as the buyer of nearby apartments in 2006 and 2012. The last one was bought from Christie’s for $3.6 million.
Recently, though, Garbriel Popoviciu removed his name from the family holdings in the Olympic Tower. This move came amid two unfolding life events for him — a divorce from his long-time spouse and a criminal investigation of his business dealings in Romania. Prosecutors allege he and his associates bribed government officials as part of the behind-the-scenes machinations that allowed him to gain control of valuable state-owned land and develop a huge project that includes supermarkets, restaurants and the U.S. Embassy. Popoviciu denies wrongdoing.
Authorities have frozen Popoviciu’s assets in Romania, but have put no restrictions on his property outside the country. In March, Popoviciu sold his newly ex-wife his half-share of the apartment they purchased in 2004. The sale price: zero dollars.
A trust created from the fortune of Russian fertilizer magnate Dmitry Rybolovlev made an even bigger splash in New York real estate. It paid $88 million in February 2012 to buy a 10-room penthouse at 15 Central Park West from the wife of the former Citigroup chair Sandy Weill. The trust was set up to benefit Rybolovlev’s oldest daughter, Ekaterina, as part of a “succession planning” program, his lawyer says. The Telegraph, a U.K. newspaper that closely follows the activities of Russian billionaires, reported that Ekaterina — “a Monaco resident and keen horsewoman” — was expected to use the penthouse “during trips to New York when she takes a course this autumn at Harvard.”
Rybolovlev’s estranged wife, Elena, claims that her husband was the real buyer of the property. She charges in a lawsuit in New York that the trust is a “sham entity” and the purchase of the penthouse is part of a scheme to hide his assets amid their divorce battle.
“It’s a joke to claim that he spent $88 million on such a huge apartment so that his daughter can supposedly use it on occasional visits to the city when she is not even studying here,” her New York attorney, David Newman, told The Telegraph. “You could fit her whole class in there. Imagine the student parties.”
Influence
The massive flow of foreign money — licit and illicit — into New York real estate helps deprive the buyers’ home countries of wealth and tax revenues. Housing advocates say it also helps inflate property values, pricing average New Yorkers out of buying or renting and helping increase the city’s huge homeless population.
Critics say tax and development policies have been skewed to favor the rich because New York’s real estate interests are skilled at wielding clout. “It’s like the oil industry in Texas,” Jaron Benjamin, executive director of New York’s Metropolitan Council on Housing, says. “They have so much power and so much money. They’re going to make sure they have the best lobbyists at the state Capitol and City Hall, pulling our elected officials one way or the other.”
Last August the New York Daily News reported that a state anti-corruption commission had subpoenaed New York developers to determine how they won tax breaks for luxury projects through language “mysteriously placed” in state legislation. Four developers benefiting from the bill contributed $1.5 million to state politicians in recent years, the paper said.
In interviews with New York magazine, some real estate operatives acknowledged that money laundering was a serious issue when it comes to international buyers of properties in the city. Several added, though, that they try to screen out bad actors in the process. “Like somebody said, Karl Marx or whatever, if the capitalist is going to see a triple return, he’s going to close his eyes,” Mark Reznik, a real estate broker at a firm that often deals with Russian clients, told the magazine. “But we are trying not to deal with scumbags.”
Shelley, one of the few academics who’s studied real estate-based money laundering, says many real estate operatives don’t check or don’t care about whether the cash sustaining big deals is clean or dirty.
In recent years, many of the world’s biggest banks have paid huge settlements with the U.S. government to settle claims that they helped rich clients hide their money. In May Credit Suisse agreed to pay $2.6 billion to settle criminal charges that it used secret accounts and shell companies to help Americans evade taxes. Shelley believes that the real estate industry should be forced to follow the same standards as other big financial players.
“Nobody has been holding the real estate industry accountable to the extent that other sectors of the economy are being held accountable,” she said. “I think we need congressional hearings on this issue, and greater resources for law enforcement to deal with this problem.”
The story is part of a joint investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, New York magazine and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.
Contributors to this story: Andrew Rice, Margot Williams, Mar Cabra, Titus Plattner and Pavla Holcova
Islamic State in the West
If you don’t think that the Islamic State is not a threat to the West or beyond, then you are not paying attention. ISIS/ISIL/IS has full cross border freedom between Iraq and Syria, the borders are gone.
What is more chilling is this is an army of Islam, not just conventional fighters and they are supported with additional fighters from as many as 81 countries, they are supported financially from factions even considered allies to the West but there are thousands pledging full allegiance to this Islamic army and they could be your neighbor. If you don’t believe that then read on.
In case you have no interest to read further, then click here for a simply photo-essay to see the people and countries that are in full solidarity with ISIS. (Photo below is from the ISIS Facebook page, sadly Facebook allows this)
Expressions Of Solidarity With ISIS In The West
In April 2013, a rift was created in the global jihadi movement when the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) announced that it was expanding into Syria and that it was changing its name to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Following this announcement, another jihadi organization in Syria, Jabhat Al-Nusra (JN), rejected ISIS’s authority, remaining loyal to Al-Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri. ISIS even challenged Al-Zawahiri himself, refusing to follow his instructions to restrict itself to operating in Iraq. In early 2014, the rift escalated to violent conflict – ISIS versus JN and other jihadi organizations in both Iraq and Syria.
Having taken control of large areas of Iraq in recent months, ISIS is now enjoying increasing shows of solidarity from the Middle East and from across the Muslim world – and also from Western countries. Several factors contribute to its popularity, among them its jihad against the Americans in Iraq prior to its expansion into Syria, when it was ISI; its current struggle against Iraq’s Shi’ite government and its security forces – perceived as apparatuses for Shi’ite suppression of Sunnis; and its war against the Alawi Assad regime, which is an ally of the Shi’ites. ISIS’s activity on these fronts has helped bolster its image as the spearhead in the war against the enemies of Islam within and without the Muslim world, and raised its stature among supporters of global jihad.
Further adding to its popularity are ISIS’s achievements on the battlefields of Iraq and Syria, and its image as the only organization today that is actualizing authentic Islamic ideals and striving towards establishing the Islamic idea of a greater caliphate. It casts itself, and its propagandists depict it, as a legitimate sovereign body implementing shari’a law in areas under its control, and spreading Islam by means of jihad, thus forming the core of this future caliphate. Recently, ISIS spokesman Abu Muhammad Al-‘Adnani even called on Al-Qaeda to swear fealty to his organization, because the “state” it embodies supersedes any organization.[1]
Sympathy for ISIS extends also to its leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, who is seen by the organization’s fans as the legitimate leader of all Muslims. This is because of his religious education, his lineage, and his jihadi past. As a challenger to Al-Zawahiri, he is considered more charismatic and more capable of leading the Muslim ummah towards the longed-for caliphate. Thus, under Al-Baghdadi’s leadership, ISIS is emerging as an alternative to Al-Qaeda, and is seen as working diligently to actualize the Muslims’ goals without Al-Qaeda’s religion-based reservations about, for example, imposing the jizya poll tax on Christians or conducting mass killings of Shi’ites.
The persecution of ISIS, even by Al-Qaeda, adds to its status in many circles as an “underdog” fighting for the goals of Islam and the good of all Muslims. Additionally, its highly efficient propaganda apparatus circulates videos and publications via jihadi forums and social media, praising itself and criticizing its rivals and opponents.
Westerners Joining And Promoting ISIS
The Westerners who are leaving their home countries to join ISIS in its fight in Iraq and Syria also add to the organization’s prestige, both inside and outside the Muslim world. These volunteers are widely covered by the media in their own countries, and each new arrival also receives a fanfare in the organization’s local press outlets and social media; these volunteers themselves are usually very active users of social media, communicating with friends and family back home as well as followers and engaging in their own efforts to promote and recruit for the organization in the West.
Further evidence of its sweeping popularity was the June 19, 2014 “One Billion Muslims Support ISIS” campaign, which urged ISIS sympathizers worldwide to express their support for the organization on Friday, June 20, and even devised a special Twitter hashtag for the purpose. The campaign elicited considerable response from supporters in numerous participants, who posted images and videos expressing their support for ISIS.[2]
This Western support for ISIS is crucial to the group’s propaganda efforts; in addition to swelling the ranks of its fighters and bringing in funds and logistical support, it increases its prestige and deters its rivals.
Elements Used In Expressions Of Support For ISIS
These expressions of solidarity with ISIS on social and other media use common ISIS symbolism. They include posters of support for it and for Al-Baghdadi; the use of the slogan baqiya wa-tatmaddad, “will remain and spread”;[3] the black tawhid flag, widely used by other global jihad elements; and ISIS nasheeds, or Islamic songs.
Other expressions of solidarity include: photos of ISIS posters next to Western landmarks such as the Eiffel Tower in Paris, Big Ben in London, the Atomium building in Brussels, and the Coliseum in Rome; photos of ISIS posters alongside Western passports; and other images shared on social media. All these add to ISIS’s image of an organization on the rise, and may also indicate its expansionist ambitions.
Thank you to MEMRI for their good work and message here.