Clintons, Panama Papers and this Iranian/Iran Contra

Farhad Azima, Wins Ellis Island Medal of Honor

Farhad Azima, chairman of Aviation Leasing Group, was awarded the Ellis Island Medal of Honor on May 9, 1998. Born in Iran, Azima is of Azerbaijani descent and currently lives in the United States.

Each year, the National Ethnic Coalition of Organizations (NECO) gives Ellis Island awards to ethnic Americans from all backgrounds who have made valuable professional and patriotic contributions.

Since 1981, Mr. Azima has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Aviation Leasing Group of Companies (ALG). ALG is directly involved in airline operations and technical support of the aviation industry. The Group currently owns, operates, and/or manages over 50 aircraft, many of which are operated by ALG’s associated company Buffalo Airways.

fazimaFarhad Azima is Chairman of Buffalo Airways which, in addition to its airline operations, conducts a sophisticated training program which includes training for the FAA, a number of other airlines, and training for the U.S. Navy E6 program, a program which is also under consideration by the U.S. Air Force.

The Company specializes in creating turnkey airlines and provides services to clients in South America, Africa, St. Lucia, a number of USSR Republics, the U.S. and Canada. Services include aircraft leasing, procurement, financing, management, training, operations and technical support, and automation. More here.

*****

Related reading: The Clinton Global Initiative 2007 List of Members

Meet The Iranian-Born, Major Clinton Donor Caught Up In The Panama Papers Scandal

DailyCaller: The Panama Papers investigation led by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) shows a prominent Clinton donor worked with the law firm Mossack Fonseca.

Farhad Azima, who ended up in the spotlight during the Iran-Contra affair during former President Ronald Reagan’s years in office, reinvented himself after the scandal as a politically pragmatic bipartisan donor. Azima went to the White House during Bill Clinton’s presidency 10 times, “between October 1995 and December 1996, including private afternoon coffees with the president,” according to ICIJ.

Then, when former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was mounting her Senate campaign, Azima “in December 1999, hosted her and 40 guests for a private dinner that raised $2,500 a head.”

Azima’s generosity towards the former president and former secretary of state continued beyond the White House years, and The New York Times reported that Azima “pledged $1 million to the [William J. Clinton Presidential] library.”

The Iranian-born Azima made his living as an aviation executive. It is his work that gave him access to a Boeing 707 cargo jet, which he allegedly lent to the CIA to send weapons to Nicaraguan Contras — though Azima denies this.

The Clinton donor told ICIJ, “I’ve had nothing to do with Iran-Contra.”

“[I was] investigated by every known agency in the U.S. and they decided there was absolutely nothing there,” Azima told ICIJ. In a final remark, he said the whole investigation into his Iran-Contra involvement, “was a wild goose chase. The law enforcement and regulators fell for it.”

The Iran-Contra affair did not stop Azima from making quite the fortune, which in part has gone to the Clinton Foundation. According to a list of donors released by former President Clinton himself in December 2008, Azima gave a donation “from $50,001 and $100,000.”

Apparently the controversial donor’s money is so irresistible that even in 1997, while still dealing with the damage to his reputation from Iran-Contra, Azima gave $143,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which the DNC at first turned down but then ultimately accepted, according to The New York Times.

Related reading: The World Affairs Council of America, Oman and Iran and Beyond

FEC records show that Azima gave Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign $2,300 in November 2007. Once President Barack Obama became the Democratic nominee, Azima gave Obama’s Victory Fund a total of $30,800 in October 2008.

Azima also has ties to known Iran sanction evader Iranian national Houshang Hosseinpour, ICIJ reports. Back in 2011, the Clinton donor was involved in a joint venture with Hosseinpour to buy a hotel in Georgia, according to ICIJ.

At the time of Azima and Hosseinpour’s collaboration, former Secretary Clinton was still at the Department of State attempting to enforce sanctions against Iran. The actions of Hosseinpour were publicly admonished by the Department of Treasury in 2014 when they referred to him by name as trying to get around sanctions.

*****

Yes of course there is more.

Following the release of the Panama Papers, we learned that a company named FlyGeorgia was being used as a conduit to circumvent economic sanctions against Iran. An Iranian national named Hosshang (or Houshang) Hosseinpour has been targeted by the U.S. Treasury Department as part of a broader effort to enforce the sanctions. Hosseinpour and two others set up a number of front companies, some based in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, to facilitate their plan. To quote from the Irish Times article cited above:

The files show that [Farhad] Azima and Hosseinpour appeared on corporate documents of a company that planned to buy a hotel in the nation of Georgia in 2011. That was the same year treasury officials asserted that Hosseinpour, who co-founded the private airline FlyGeorgia, and two others first began to send millions of dollars into Iran, which led to sanctions being taken against him three years later.

Farhad Azima is one of the infamous middlemen involved in the Iran-Contra scandal, the Savings and Loan scandal, and other weapons trafficking incidents. Unnamed in any of the Panama Papers reporting on FlyGeorgia is George Cannady. But he is right there lurking in the shadows of Azima and Hosseinpour.

An entry in the Business Registry of Georgia shows that Cannady was a partner in Georgia Transport Management with Levan Tskhadadze. Tskhadadze had formerly been a manager at manager at Hosseinpour’s front company FlyGeorgia. Other people who list FlyGeorgia as an employer are Ursula Freseman, Lalit Dang, and Iranian former intelligence officer General Ali Asgari Reza. Freseman and Dang also list Heavylift International Airlines as a former employer. Heavylift is one of Farhad Azima’s many companies with which notorious weapons trafficker Viktor Bout was at one time affiliated. More here from Fareport

 

 

 

U.S. Puts Former Gitmo Detainee on Terror List, Istanbul Attack

What has he been doing since his release 10 years ago? Planning and recruiting for the Istanbul airport terror attack? And Obama released 3 detainees in 2 days and more to come. What about those ‘forever’ detainees like Khalid Sheik Mohammed? Hummmm

Ex-Gitmo detainee, Islamic State’s leader in Chechnya designated by State Department

The State Department announced today that two jihadists have been added to the US government’s list of designated terrorists.

One of the two, Ayrat Nasimovich Vakhitov, was once detained at Guantanamo and was recently arrested by Turkish authorities. According to Voice of America, Vakhitov is “among 30 people Turkish authorities say they have arrested in connection with” the terrorist attack at Istanbul’s Ataturk airport late last month. No terrorist organization has claimed responsibility for the assault on the airport, which left more than 40 people dead. But it is widely suspected to be the work of the Islamic State.

The second newly-designated terrorist is Aslan Avgazarovich Byutukaev, who leads the jihadists in Chechnya who are loyal to the Islamic State’s so-called Caucasus province.

Former Guantanamo Detainee

Screen Shot 2016-07-13 at 12.26.28 PM

Vakhitov (pictured on the right) was held at Guantanamo for less than two years, from June 2002 until February 2004. He was then transferred to Russia. The State Department’s designation page does not say that Vakhitov was once detained at the American facility in Cuba, but The Long War Journal has confirmed that he is the same individual.

The details of his story, as recounted in a leaked Joint Task Force – Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) threat assessment, are somewhat odd. Vakhitov was “arrested by the Taliban on suspicion of espionage, and incarcerated at the Sarpuza prison complex in Kandahar,” the leaked file reads. He was apparently transferred to Guantanamo because of “his possible knowledge of an American citizen killed” at that same prison “while he was there.”

JTF-GTMO ultimately concluded that Vakhitov was neither affiliated with al Qaeda, nor a Taliban leader. He was recommended for transfer. But JTF-GTMO also thought he would be remain imprisoned inside Russia.

“Because of the Russian government’s agreement to incarcerate this detainee upon his transfer, and provided that he remains incarcerated under the control of the Russian government, the detainee poses no future threat to the U.S. or its allies,” JTF-GTMO’s threat assessment reads.

The State Department says that Vakhitov “is associated with Jaysh al-Muhajirin Wal Ansar” (JMWA, or “the Army of the Emigrants and Helpers”). Part of the original JMWA organization joined the Islamic State, while the rest of the organization continued to operate independently before swearing allegiance to Al Nusrah Front in Sept. 2015. Al Nusrah is al Qaeda’s official branch in Syria and the Islamic State’s rival.

The State Department’s designation page does not mention Vakhitov’s reported arrest in Turkey, but does say he has “used the internet to recruit militants to travel to Syria.”

Islamic State leader in Chechnya

The State Department note Byutukaev was a “prominent leader” in the Islamic Caucasus Emirate (ICE). ICE is openly loyal to al Qaeda, but has suffered a string of defections to the Islamic State.

Russian security forces killed ICE’s top emir and his two successors in less than two years time, from late 2013 until mid-2015. The decapitation strikes likely helped the Islamic State win the loyalty of some of ICE’s most important remaining commanders, including Byutukaev.

Byutukaev, also known as Emir Khamzat, was a close confidant of Dokku Umarov and led ICE’s Riyad-us-Saliheen Martyr Brigade. But Umarov perished sometime in late 2013 or early 2014. His replacement, Aliaskhab Kebekov, more commonly known as Ali Abu Muhammad al Dagestani, was subsequently killed by Russian forces in April 2015.

Less than two months after Kebekov’s demise, Byutukaev officially broke with ICE, declaring himself to be one of Baghdadi’s men.

The pro-al Qaeda contingent in the Caucasus then suffered another blow when Abu Usman, Kebekov’s successor, was hunted down in August 2015. Both Kebekov and Abu Usman were vocal opponents of Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s Islamic State, so much so that al Qaeda’s main propaganda arm continues to feature clips of their anti-Baghdadi lectures in its productions.

High value targeting, as it is commonly called, is an essential part of any government’s counterterrorism strategy. But it can lead to unintended consequences as well. In this instance, the deaths of ICE’s top leaders probably helped drive Byutukaev and his comrades into the Islamic State’s arms. The large contingent of fighters from the Caucasus region in the Islamic State’s ranks in Iraq and Syria most likely added to the pressure on the jihadists back home to flip as well.

The State Department notes that Byutukaev is “responsible for directing numerous deadly suicide bombing operations, including the January 2011 attack at the crowded international arrivals hall of Moscow’s Domodedovo Airport.” The bombing killed at least 35 people and wounded more than 100 others.

Umarov, who was ICE’s emir at the time, quickly claimed credit for the airport attack in a video released online.

Doku-Riyah-video-Kavkaz

Umarov also appeared in another video alongside Byutukaev (seen on the left in the photo included here) and a suicide bomber identified only as “Saifullah.” Umarov said that he had visited the Riyad-us-Saliheen Martyr Brigade’s base before sending Saifullah on a “special operation,” meaning the bombing at Domodedovo.

At the end of video, both Umarov and Byutukaev were shown embracing Saifullah. [See LWJ report, Caucasus Emirate leader threatens Russia with ‘a year of blood and tears.’]

“Since becoming an ISIL [Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant] leader in June 2015,” State reports, “Byutukaev has planned attacks on behalf of the group.” One of these operations took place in November 2015, when “Russian Special Forces discovered a large bomb hidden on the side of the road in Kantyshevo, Ingushetiya, Russia.”

The Caucasus “province” was announced in June 2015, after Islamic State spokesman Abu Muhammad al Adnani publicly accepted the oaths of allegiance sworn by jihadists throughout the region. The Caucasus branch is reportedly led by Rustam Asilderov, a former ICE leader who defected to the Islamic State in late 2014. Asilderov’s defection set off a firestorm of controversy and bickering among the Caucasus jihadists.

In Sept. 2015, Foggy Bottom designated the Islamic State’s Caucasus “province” as a terrorist organization and also identified other ICE defectors who had joined its cause.

Thomas Joscelyn is a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Senior Editor for The Long War Journal.

*****

Aiat Nasimovich Vahitov, also spelled Ayrat Wakhitov or Vahidov (Tatar Cyrillic: Айрат Вахитов, Latin: Ayrat Waxitov) is an ethnic Tatar citizen of Russia who was held in extrajudicial detention in the United States Guantanamo Bay detention camp, in Cuba.[1] He was repatriated with six other Russians in February 2004. Fluent in Arabic, Pashto, Persian, Urdu and Russian, he also spoke basic English.[2]

On May 15, 2006 the Department of Defense released its first full official list of all the Guantanamo detainees who were held in military custody.[3] Airat Vakhitov’s name is not on that list. The list includes an individual named Aiat Nasimovich Vahitov.who was born on March 27, 1977, on Naberezhnye Chelny, Tatarstan, Russia.

Russian authorities released the detainees after investigations into whether they had broken any Russian laws.

Vakhitov spoke publicly on June 28, 2005 about torture in Guantanamo when he announced he was planning to sue the United States for his mistreatment.[4] He was invited, by Amnesty International, to speak about Guantanamo torture, in London, on November 2, 2002.

Geydar Dzhemal, chairman of the Islamic Committee of Russia, reported that he was hosting Vakhitov, and another former Guantanamo detainee, Rustam Akhmyarov, following threats by security officials.[5] According to Dzhemal the security officials had visited Vakhitov, and warned him that he should only talk about torture in Guantanamo Bay, not Russian torture. Dzhemal reported that security officials subsequently seized Vakhitov and Akhmyarov from his apartment on August 29, 2005. He called their seizure a kidnapping because they refused to show their identification. He predicted that the pair would be arrested on trumped up charges, to curtail their human rights activities.

The pair were released from detention on September 2, 2005  More details here.

Leaked U.S. Proposal with Russia on Syria

From the Washington Post  For a shorter summary of which the Pentagon is noted to be rejecting and for which Russia denies exists, go here.

 

It calls for  joint bombing operations, a command-and-control headquarters and other synchronized efforts. U.S. and Russian officials with expertise in intelligence, targeting and air operations will “work together to defeat” the extremist groups, the eight-page paper states. Such a partnership would undercut months of U.S. criticism of Russia’s military intervention in Syria. And it would put the U.S. alongside Syrian President Bashar Assad’s chief international backer, despite years of American demands for Assad to leave power.

Russia would be getting what it has wanted since intervening in Syria in late September: An international alliance of sorts. Washington previously rebuffed Moscow’s requests for military cooperation, accusing the Russians of using anti-terrorism objectives as a pretext for protecting Assad’s position. The U.S. also says Syria’s military and Russia’s air force have repeatedly violated truces with moderate rebel groups backed by the U.S. or its allies. More from ABC

Terms of Reference for the Joint Implementation Group

These terms of reference describe organization, functions, and procedures for

the Joint Implementation Group (JIG.)

The purpose of the JIG is to enable expanded coordination between the United

States and the Russian Federation beyond the established safety of flight

procedures. The participants, through the JIG, are to work together to defeat

Jabhat al Nusra and Daesh within the context of strengthening the Cessation of

Hostilities (CoH) and supporting the political transition process outlined in

UNSCR 2254. The United States and the Russian Federation, hereafter referred

to as “the participants”, intend to act in accordance with these terms of

reference. Unless otherwise stated, the participants will conduct their efforts

through the JIG.

The participants are to implement the provisions of the “Approach for Practical

Russian-American Efforts against Daesh and Jabhat al Nusra and Strengthening

the Cessation of Hostilities.”

The participants are to conduct all efforts consistent with the intent to take all

reasonable measures to eliminate non-combatant casualties.

The participants also commit to all efforts, including operations subject to

cooperation or otherwise addressed by these terms of reference, occurring in

compliance with international humanitarian law and the terms of the CoH.

1. JIG Location, Organization and Composition

a. Location. The JIG is to be located in the vicinity of Amman, Jordan.

Participants intend to negotiate their own support requirements with the host

nation.

b. Organization. The participants intend to maintain separate, national

headquarters in which they will install systems to exchange information with their

respective headquarters responsible for tactical actions against Nusra and

Daesh. The participants, through the JIG, intend to establish a coordination

center at which they are to exchange intelligence and operational information.

d. Composition. Participants intend to staff the JIG in numbers sufficient to

accomplish the JIG’s functions. The participants intend to match, as practicable,

the ranks of their counterparts.

i. Staffing. The participants intend to staff the JIG with subject matter

experts and professionals with expertise in intelligence, targeting and air

operations. Intelligence expertise includes knowledge of the disposition,

operations, and tactics of the relevant armed actors in Syria. Targeting

expertise requires familiarity with national procedures to choose, confirm

and prosecute deliberate targets.

ii. Language and Translation. The participants intend to provide

information to the JIG in their native language. Participants are

responsible for translating material received. Participants intend to staff

the JIG with a sufficient number of bilingual personnel familiar with military

intelligence and operational terminology, in order to enable the real-time

translation of conversations and documents.

iii. Senior National Representative. The participants intend to provide

the JIG with senior national representatives — Colonels (0-6) or civilian

employees of the equivalent ranks – with the authority to transmit, on

behalf of their respective operational commanders, their participants’

national decisions or positions.

iv. Intelligence Personnel. The participants intend to staff the JIG with

intelligence personnel who can exchange information and resolve

differences between how the participants represent information -grid

reference systems, place names and other such technical

details. Intelligence personnel are to include subject matter experts Nusra

and Daesh in Syria. The participants, through the JIG, should develop

mutually acceptable formats for information to be exchanged.

v. Operations Representatives. The participants intend to staff the JIG

with operations representatives with expertise in national procedures for

strike planning, targeting, weaponeering, operational law and other

functions. Operations representatives are to resolve differences in how

the parties present information. The participants, through the JIG should

develop mutually acceptable formats for how information is exchanged.

vi. Support Personnel. The participants may staff the JIG with

personnel, as required, to manage logistics, force protection,

communications and other requirements.

2. JIG Role in Military Operations. The participants, through the JIG, should

enable coordination between the participants for military operations against

Nusra. Participants, through the JIG, may work to maximize independent, but

synchronized, efforts against Daesh in Syria. Coordination should begin with

information exchange on both Nusra and Daesh. If national authorities determine

that integrated operations against deliberate targets is in the interest of both

participants, the participants should coordinate procedures to permit integrated

operations.

a. Nusra Targeting. The participants will commit to supporting deliberate

targeting of Nusra. Once senior representatives to the JIG decide that

information exchange has produced commonly understood information,

the participants, through the JIG, intend to begin coordinating the targeting

of Nusra. The participants are to develop target packages for Nusra

targets under their national targeting processes. The participants, through

the JIG, should coordinate on targets that have been developed. Once a

decision has been reached on targets, the participants should coordinate

the participants’ proposals on how these targets are to be addressed.

Initial efforts against mutually-decided-upon targets will be deconflicted by

geography or time. With the exception of imminent threats to the

participants where prior agreement on a target is infeasible, the

participants will only take action against Nusra targets that are agreed to

in advance, pursuant to procedures developed by the JIG and deconflicted

through existing channels.

i. Targeting. The participants are to select and prioritize targets, as

outlined in previous paragraph, at their respective operational

headquarters. The participants are to manage the exchange of

information between targeting organizations.

ii. Actionable Targets. The participants are to coordinate

agreement on Nusra targets that have been deemed “actionable”

through the participants’ respective national processes. National

headquarters are to provide information on actionable targets in a

format to be developed and decided upon by the participants.

Actionable targets are those that have been “vetted” – targets for

which participants have accurate supporting intelligence. The

participants may commit additional Intelligence, Surveillance and

Reconnaissance resources to support vetting of potential targets

consistent with their respective national priorities. The participants

anticipate “validating” actionable targets under their respective

national processes to ensure they meet the appropriate

commander’s guidance, and may be targeted consistent with

international humanitarian law and applicable rules of engagement.

iii. Target Development. Only those targets that both participants

agree are actionable will be further developed for strikes. The

participants are to facilitate precision targeting by exchanging

mensurated target locations. Actionable targets, as decided

mutually by the participants, are to receive the same treatment as

do other national targets – there is no presumption of priority simply

because the participants mutually decided that a target is

actionable.

b. Daesh Targeting: The participants may communicate targeting

information for targets that permit independent, but synchronized,

operations against Daesh in Syria. The participants are to select and

prioritize targets at their respective operational headquarters. The

participants are to manage the exchange of information between targeting

organizations. Any decision to jointly validate and execute a Daesh target

should be made pursuant to procedures developed by the JIG and

deconflicted through existing channels. [Both participants reserve the right

to conduct unilateral strikes against Daesh targets outside of designated

areas].

c. Operational Deconfliction and Coordination. The JIG is a liaison

body; it is to expose portions of a participant’s targeting and airstrike

planning functions to the other participant. The United States and Russia

should inform one another through the JIG of final plans for operations

against a mutually selected target no later than the day before

execution. The JIG is to communicate assessments of national actions

against Nusra and to the participants. The JIG may communicate

assessments of national actions against Daesh in Syria to the participants.

i. Timelines. The JIG is to operate on timelines that permit the

participants to incorporate information developed by the JIG into

their normal, national procedures.

ii. Strike Details. The participants commit to developing a format

for the information about intended operations to be exchanged,

including the general time of the strike, the intended method of

target attack, general force composition, routing of the strike and

precise details of the target being struck. The participants commit to

ensuring that the intended actions are deconflicted by time and/or

geography. The participants commit to coordinating to ensure strike

packages are not targeted by air defenses of either party or by

those of the regime.

iii. Battle Damage Assessment. Each participant intends to

collect BDA on JIG-coordinated targets it strikes; participants may

choose to expose the details of the BDA they collect. Either

participant may collect BDA on targets the other participant strikes.

iv. Collateral Damage. The participants intend to facilitate the

consideration of any allegations that mutually-decided-upon strikes

caused unacceptable collateral damage or loss of life, and explore

additional measures to avoid such strikes in the future.

v. Coordination of Integrated Operations. At some point,

national authorities may authorize the participants to coordinate on

integrated operations. Should such a decision be taken, the

participants intend to host a conference of national representatives

to develop procedures for integrated operations.

d. Emergent Circumstances.

i. Imminent Threats. The participants can target imminent threats

to their respective personnel if prior agreement on a target is

infeasible. In addition, participants can target imminent threats

against their respective nationals by named senior Shura council

members of Nusra and active external plotters, as agreed by the

United States and Russia.

ii. Other Circumstances. The Syrian military can employ military

action, including air activities, against the Nusra Front outside of

designated areas if Nusra acquires territory there. Russia can use

airpower in defense of Syrian government forces in the event of

attack by Nusra from within a designated area, if agreed in advance

with the United States. All actions should be consistent with the

terms of the cessation of hostilities.

iii. Cessation of Hostilities Violations. The participants may

report information that could corroborate allegations of COH

violations to the Geneva Cell.

3. JIG Role in Monitoring the Grounding of Syrian Air Activities. The

participants intend to collect and report information on regime air activities in

support of monitoring the grounding of Syrian aircraft in designated areas.

a. Information to be Collected. The JIG is to be provided advance

notice of regime air operations that are permitted as exemptions to the

grounding of Syrian military aircraft. The JIG is to maintain a current

Syrian air order of battle; changes to the disposition of regime aircraft are

to be reported daily. The participants should develop measures to help

confirm the Syrian military’s compliance with the grounding. The JIG is to

report regime violations to the participants.

b. Prohibited Activities and Exemptions. The regime is prohibited from

flying in designated areas; designated areas include areas of most

concentrated Nusra presence, areas of significant Nusra presence, and

areas where the opposition is dominant, with some possible Nusra

presence. Exempted circumstances are:

• MEDEVAC

• Humanitarian Assistance

• Personnel recovery

c. Advance Notice of Regime Air Operations. The Russian Federation is to

provide the JIG advance notice of all regime air operations. For exempted

missions, the JIG is to be provided the general time of the Syrian mission,

general force composition and details of the routing of the package no later than

the day prior to execution. Routing for operations in areas under Daesh control

from areas under regime control is to be provided to the JIG in advance of such

operations taking place, no later than the day prior to execution

Approach for Practical Russian-American Cooperation against Daesh and

Jabhat al Nusra and Strengthening the Cessation of Hostilities

The following is designed to allow Russia and the U.S. to intensify joint and

mutual efforts to bring about the destruction of Nusra and Daesh in the context of

a strengthened COH with all COH parties adhering to COH terms.

To this end, Russia and the U.S. reconfirm their commitment to intensifying

support and assistance to regional allies to help them prevent the flow of fighters,

weapons, or financial support to UN designated terrorist groups across the

Syrian border.

Delineation of territories controlled by Daesh, Nusra, and moderate opposition

forces remains a key priority. Nusra shall enjoy no safe haven anywhere within

Syria.

Russia and the United States will also work in parallel to bring about the political

transition process as outlined in UNSCR 2254.

Mechanisms:

1) Russia and the United States will intensify their efforts to ensure full

compliance with the COH, including the suspension of all offensive ground

and air operations against signatories to the COH and civilians in Syria.

2) In the context of a strengthened COH, which will have been restored

with the target of reaching the level that had been achieved in late February

and maintained for a period of at least 7 days, the United States and Russia

will establish a Joint Implementation Group (JIG) comprised of subject matter

experts on Syria and professionals with expertise on targeting. The JIG is to

be established NLT [DATE] and located at [LOCATION].

3) The JIG is to take on the following tasks, in sequence:

a) Complete, to the extent possible, no later than five days after formation of

the JIG, a common map of territories with high concentrations of Nusra

formations, to include areas where Nusra formations are in close proximity to

opposition formations, for precise target development.

b) Share intelligence and develop actionable targets for military action against

Nusra, including, but not limited to, leadership targets, training camps, logistical

depots, supply lines, and headquarters.

c) Designate a set of targets for airstrikes by the Russian Aerospace Forces

and/or U.S. military forces related to Jabhat al-Nusra operations in designated

areas. Designated areas include areas of most concentrated Nusrah Front

presence, areas of significant Nusrah Front presence, and areas where the

opposition is dominant, with some possible Nusrah Front presence. Even prior to

the establishment of the JIG, technical experts from the U.S. and Russia will plot

the geo-coordinates of these designated areas.

d) Devise mechanisms to monitor and enforce the Syrian military’s cessation

of military air activity over the designated areas described in paragraph c, with

appropriate non-combat exceptions to be decided.

d) Decide on a date, shortly after the initial set of targets is agreed, to

simultaneously: 1) begin Russian and/or U.S. strikes against agreed Nusra

targets, and 2) stop all Syrian military air activities – fixed and rotary wing – in

agreed designated areas, with appropriate exceptions for non-combat purposes.

e) If Syrian military activity in conflict with paragraph 3.d or airstrikes in conflict

with paragraph 5 occur, either participant may pull out of the JIG.

4) The process of target development through the JIG and airstrikes

against Nusra targets by Russian Aerospace Forces and/or U.S. military

forces will be ongoing and continuous. The JIG is to exchange information on

the effects of targeting Nusra and the developing situation on the ground.

5) With the exception of imminent threats to the United States or Russia

where prior agreement on a target is infeasible, Russia and the United States

will only take action against Nusra targets that are agreed to in advance and

pursuant to appropriate procedures through existing de-confliction channels.

6) The JIG will also work to maximize independent but synchronized

efforts against Daesh.

7) All efforts outlined above will be conducted in a manner consistent with

the Laws of Armed Conflict and full implementation of the cessation of

hostilities.

8) Compliance with the CoH will be required for this understanding to

remain in effect.

9) Modalities for the mechanism described above will be further developed

in bilateral negotiations to be concluded as soon as possible given the

urgency expressed by both Russia and the U.S.

10) The steps outlined above are intended as steps toward a more

comprehensive understanding between the U.S. and Russia, with a target

date ofJuly 31, 2016, on three inter-related issues designed to produce a

durable end of the conflict and the defeat of Daesh and Nusrah:

a) military and intelligence cooperation between Russia and the U.S. to defeat

Daesh and Nusrah;

b) translation of the CoH into a durable, nationwide ceasefire, phased with

steps on the political transition, inclusive of provisions on the disposition and

separation of forces, control of heavy weapons, regulation of the flow of weapons

into Syria , independent monitoring and verification, and enforcement; and

c) a framework on political transition in Syria consistent with UNSCR 2254, to

include provisions on how and when a transitional government with full executive

authority formed on the basis of mutual consent will be established, security and

intelligence institutions will be reformed, and constitutional and electoral

processes will be conducted.

 

Facebook Faces $1 Billion Lawsuit, Aids Terror

Privacy is one thing, but offering encrypted platforms with no oversight for terror communications is quite another. Since at least 2014, Islamic State, al Qaeda and  al Nusra have all used Facebook and other social media platforms where Twitter has been especially uncooperative with security and investigation officials fighting against terrorist exploitation. Is it really a 1st Amendment protection when communications are generated by declared enemy combatants? Then there is the New Black Panthers and Black Lives Matters. The debate continues.

Due mostly to Edward Snowden revealing abilities of the United States to capture intelligence of terror networks, global terrorists have successfully sought other platforms.

Some popular social media platforms are seeing a drop in use by terror groups, yet there are countless others replacing them including apps like Telegram and WhatsApp. Islamic State has a robust program on these apps for their sex trade.

Facebook began rolling out a new end-to-end encryption feature on Friday called “secret conversations” with the goal of making users feel more comfortable chatting about sensitive subjects in the app.

“We’ve heard from you that there are times when you want additional safeguards — perhaps when discussing private information like an illness or a health issue with trusted friends and family, or sending financial information to an accountant,” the company said in a release announcing the new feature.

With the new feature, Facebook Messenger’s 900 million users can choose to encrypt specific conversations so that the messages can only be read on one specific device. Facebook is also giving users the option to determine how long each message can be read for. More from CNN

Families of Victims of Hamas Terror Sue Facebook for $1 Billion

 

PJMedia: Facebook is being hit with a $1 billion lawsuit after allegedly allowing the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas use its platform to plot attacks in Israel and the West Bank that killed and wounded Americans. According to Bloomberg News: “Plaintiffs include the families of Yaakov Naftali Fraenkel, a 16-year-old abducted and murdered in June 2014 after hitching a ride in the West Bank, and 3-year-old Chaya Braun, whose stroller was struck intentionally by a Palestinian driver in October 2014 at a train station in Jerusalem.”

“Facebook has knowingly provided material support and resources to Hamas in the form of Facebook’s online social network platform and communication services,” making it liable for the violence against the five Americans, according to the lawsuit sent to Bloomberg by the office of the Israeli lawyer on the case, Nitsana Darshan-Leitner.“Simply put, Hamas uses Facebook as a tool for engaging in terrorism,” it said.

Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., European Union and Israel. The suit said the group used Facebook to share operational and tactical information with members and followers, posting notices of upcoming demonstrations, road closures, Israeli military actions and instructions to operatives to carry out the attacks.

Mushir al-Masri, a senior Hamas leader, said by phone that “suing Facebook clearly shows the American policy of fighting freedom of the press and expression” and is evidence of U.S. prejudice against the group and “its just cause.”

It’s not at all clear that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg — an influential Obama ally — would disagree with al-Masri. It’s not clear that the president would either.

While Hamas has been designated a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State since 1997 President Obama and his national security team seem to have a far more favorable view of them. Rather than reject the Hamas and the Palestinian Authority unity government that was formed in 2014, the Obama administration continued to fund it to the tune of $500 million a year.

This alarmed American lawmakers so much, 88 senators from across party lines sent a message of “grave concern” to the White House, warning that the new PA unity effort might jeopardize direct negotiations with Israel. “Any assistance should only be provided when we have confidence that this new government is in full compliance with the restrictions contained in current law,” the letter read. More here.

 

 

NATO Website Goes Dark During Summit

Those Russians are good, good at hacking…

A suspicious outage was reported and interesting that Obama was there too. The Warsaw Summit hosted by Poland where several distinct events happened. 1. There was an agreement to strengthen the alliance with military presence in the East that includes Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. 2. The alliances also agreed to operational strength of ballistic missile defense as well as cyber defenses and applying cyberspace as an operational domain. 3. For Afghanistan, a resolution was approved to continue the mission and funding forces through 2020. 4. A comprehensive assistance package for Ukraine passed. 5. The NATO website/domain was likely hacked.

 

So….the chatter at more casual breakout sessions and in formal session did include escalating protections in the cyber realm. Obama got the message. Certainly on the heels of the Hillary emailgate scandal, Barack Obama finally admits there things still to be done to tighten up security.

Obama says U.S. government must improve cyber security

Reuters: U.S. President Barack Obama said on Sunday that the U.S. government has to improve its cyber security practices for the modern age of smart phones and other technology, saying that hackers had targeted the White House.

“I am concerned about it, I don’t think we have it perfect. We have to do better, we have to learn from mistakes,” Obama told a news conference in Madrid. “We know that we have had hackers in the White House,” he added.

Concerns have been raised about the security of government information after the head of the FBI said presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s email servers may have been accessed by foreign actors when she was Secretary of State.

****

In 2015, Obama held a cyber security summit. Also there was an Executive Order. He wants better coordination between government and the private sector to fight online threats. Companies on board include Apple and Intel. It was a busy year in 2015 as Obama Announces New Cybersecurity Legislative Proposal and Other Cybersecurity Efforts.

Earmarking $19 billion for cyber programs by Obama also included a czar, Howard A. Schmidt. So how smart is Schmidt, or rather how UN-smart is he?

So far, there is no official proof that any country has ever engaged in a cyber attack, although certain malware attacks have been linked to different nations. The Stuxnet worm, which disrupted Iran’s nuclear facilities, has been attributed to the United States and Israel and the recently uncovered cyber espionage operation Red October is rumored to be either a Russian or a Chinese operation.

To avoid a cyber arms-race and an escalation in cyber attacks, Kaspersky has openly advocated for more online regulation, including international treaties limiting the use of malware — just like there are treaties against biological and nuclear weapons.

For Schmidt, that’s not a viable solution because it would be hard to enforce such a treaty. “At some point in the future maybe that will work but right now, number one, we have enough difficulty enforcing treaties of physical things that you can actually count, whether it’s weapon systems or whether it’s export import of these things, it’s extremely difficult,” he said.

Instead of a treaty that will take decades to become reality, Schmidt thinks countries should just respect the rules of engagement that already apply in real warfare. In war “we don’t just arbitrarily start shooting at people, we don’t send planes, we have respect for airspace, we have respect for a lot of the international laws,” he said. “Cyberspace should not be any different.” More here from Mashable.

One more thing to Obama and Mr. Schmidt….don’t forget the Office of Personnel Management, that experienced one of the largest intrusions of data belonging to and managed by the Federal government. Furthermore, that lady, Mrs. Katharine Archuleta who ran OPM never had any security experience with cyber and directly after the hearings on the cyber hack of the agency, well….she quit.

Cyber doom is here and no one talks about it….most of all the media…it is the best kept secret and classified condition inside the beltway.