Category Archives: Terror

Hotel Chains Credit Cards Hacked

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

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

Hilton Hotels investigates customer credit card security hack

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

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

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

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

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

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

500,000 Migrants in Europe so Far in 2015

Posted on by

So far this year:

Geneva (AFP) – More than half a million migrants have crossed the Mediterranean to Europe so far this year — 383,000 of them arriving in Greece, the United Nations said on Tuesday.

At the same time, some 2,980 people have perished or disappeared trying to make the perilous journey, the UN’s refugee agency (UNHCR) said.

The agency put the number of migrant arrivals by sea at nearly 515,000 since January 1, noting that 54 percent of that group were Syrian.

Syrian nationals made up 71 percent of arrivals in Greece, UNHCR further said.

The four-year civil war in Syria has forced about four million people to flee the country and internally displaced more than seven million others.

The European Union is facing rising pressure to form a unified strategy for handling the influx of migrants.

Many European leaders, including in Greece, have also increasingly called for renewed efforts to forge a peace deal in Syria, describing that as the only permanent solution to the migrant crisis.

After Greece, Italy has received the most migrants in Europe since January 1, with 129,000 arrivals by sea.

BBC:

One way to measure where migrants have ended up is through asylum applications. Although not all of those arriving claim asylum, over half a million have done so, according to the EU statistics agency, Eurostat.

Germany continues to be the most popular destination for migrants arriving in Europe. It has received the highest number of new asylum applications, with almost 222,000 by the end of August.

Hungary has moved into second place, as more migrants have tried to make the journey overland through Greece and the Western Balkans. It had 96,350 applications by the end of July.

Map of asylum claims in 2015

Although Germany has had the most asylum applications in 2015, the surge of people arriving in Hungary meant it had the highest in proportion to its population.

Almost 665 refugees per 100,000 of Hungary’s local population claimed asylum in the first half of 2015. The figure for Germany was 190 and for the UK it was 23 applications for every 100,000 residents.

Asylum applications per 100,000 local population

Where do the migrants come from?

The conflict in Syria continues to be by far the biggest driver of the migration. But the ongoing violence in Afghanistan, abuses in Eritrea, as well as poverty in Kosovo are also leading people to look for new lives elsewhere.

Chart showing origin of asylum seekers

Resettlement plan

Tensions in the EU have been rising because of the disproportionate burden faced by some countries, particularly Greece, Italy and Hungary where migrants have been arriving by boat and overland.

At an emergency meeting in Brussels, EU ministers voted by a majority to relocate 120,000 refugees EU-wide, but for now the plan will only apply to 66,000 who are in Italy and Greece.

The other 54,000 were to be moved from Hungary, but now this number will be held “in reserve”, until the governments decide where they should go.

chart showing number of migrants EU countries will accept

The UK has opted out of any plans for a quota system and, according to Home Office figures, has accepted 216 Syrian refugees under the Vulnerable Persons Relocation scheme since it began in January 2014. Prime Minister David Cameron has said the UK will accept up to 20,000 refugees from Syria over the next five years.

Granting asylum

Although huge numbers have been applying for asylum, the number of people being given asylum is far lower.

In 2014, EU countries offered asylum to 184,665 refugees. In the same year, more than 570,000 migrants applied for asylum – although applying for asylum can be a lengthy procedure so many of those given refugee status may have applied in previous years.

Chart showing approved asylum applications

There were more than 25,000 asylum applications in the UK in the 12 months up to June 2015. Most applications are typically rejected and in 2014, more than 60% of initial decisions on asylum applications were refusals.

In the same period, 6,788 asylum seekers and their dependents were removed or departed voluntarily from the UK.

How do migrants get to Europe?

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates that more than 350,000 migrants were detected at the EU’s borders between January and August 2015, compared with 280,000 detections for the whole of 2014. The figures do not include those who got in undetected.

The EU’s external border force, Frontex, monitors the different routes migrants use and numbers arriving at Europe’s borders.

A map showing movements of migrants in Europe
Image caption The eastern Mediterranean route has overtaken the central route as the most commonly used this year – with Syrians forming by far the largest migrant group

Most of those heading for Greece take the relatively short voyage from Turkey to the islands of Kos, Chios, Lesvos and Samos – often in flimsy rubber dinghies or small wooden boats.

How many migrant die?

The voyage from Libya to Italy is longer and more hazardous. According to the IOM, more than 2,500 migrants are reported to have died trying to make the crossing this year – altogether, 2,643 people have died in the Mediterranean in 2015.

Chart and map showing numbers who have died in the Mediterranean this year

The summer months are usually when most fatalities occur as it is the busiest time for migrants attempting to reach Europe.

But so far this year the deadliest month for migrants was April, which saw a boat carrying about 800 migrants capsize in the sea off Libya. Overcrowding is thought to have been one of the reasons for the disaster.

Migrant deaths in Mediterranean by month

Impact of the Syrian crisis

Asylum applications from Syrians in Europe have surged in 2015, fuelled by the country’s vicious civil war which began more than four years ago and shows no sign of ending.

The vast majority of refugees have fled to neighbouring countries such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and the number of Syrians there far outweighs those who have made the difficult journey to Europe.

Map: Syrian asylum claims in Europe and registered refugees in the Middle East

Migrants redistributed within Germany

Germany is currently the preferred destination for tens of thousands of migrants in central Europe. More than 800,000 people are expected to claim asylum there this year, four times the figure for 2014.

Germany has a quota system which redistributes asylum seekers around its federal states based on their tax income and existing population density.

Map: Distribution of asylum seekers across German states

A note on terminology: The BBC uses the term migrant to refer to all people on the move who have yet to complete the legal process of claiming asylum. This group includes people fleeing war-torn countries such as Syria, who are likely to be granted refugee status, as well as people who are seeking jobs and better lives, who governments are likely to rule are economic migrants.

 

Why the Taliban Attack is a Big Deal

Posted on by

 

CNN in part: Earlier Monday, the insurgents seized the main roundabout in the city and made it to the prison, where they freed more than 500 inmates, who flooded the streets of Kunduz, Hussaini told CNN.

One of the released inmates told CNN, “We were hearing gunshots throughout the day, but it was 4:00 p.m. when the Kunduz prison guards left the compound. Then, the inmates broke all the doors and fences and started running towards the main gate.”

“As soon as we opened the main gate, we saw a group of armed Taliban outside the gate. They told us that we were free and could go home. … We all headed towards our homes,” he said.

The Taliban also claimed to have seized a 200-bed hospital — posting photos to social media that they claimed proved their control of the facility.

Sediqqi said at least four civilians had died and 50 others were wounded as Taliban forces were firing heavy weapons indiscriminately throughout the city.

In addition, 25 Taliban fighters were killed, Sediqqi said, and two Afghan policemen died and four others were wounded.

Will Barack Obama evaluate the rules of engagement in Afghanistan?

Politico: Barack Obama may not call what American troops will do in Afghanistan next year “combat,” but he has quietly laid the groundwork for continuing battle against the Taliban.  Obama has authorized the military to provide air support to Afghan troops next year after the U.S. has completed the transition to its “advise- and-assist” mission, the White House says.

At the same time, administration officials say they aren’t increasing the number of troops, slowing the drawdown or changing their mission, but are allowing commanders in Afghanistan to have the authority to order attacks if necessary.

That was clear in guidance Obama issued to preserve broad discretion for American commanders, who asked for a robust ability to protect U.S. troops and support the Afghan National Security Forces even though the Afghans bear main responsibility for the war against the Taliban.  Further details.

The Taliban taking over Kunduz is a big Deal

WSJ: On Monday, Taliban fighters seized Kunduz, city of about 300,000 people in the country’s north. Government forces have reportedly fled to the outskirts of town, and Taliban flags have been seen around the city.

We should be very concerned about the fall of Kunduz for four reasons:

1.) A Taliban takeover of a large urban area is no longer an abstraction.

Since losing power 14 years ago, the Taliban’s territorial triumphs in Afghanistan have been limited to taking control of pockets of rural and remote areas. This can be attributed to the international combat mission, improvements in Afghan war-fighting capacities, and an increasingly fractured and vulnerable insurgency. With the Kunduz seizure, however, the Taliban has pulled off what it could not do in nearly the last decade and a half, and what arguably no militant group other than ISIS has been able to achieve over the same period.

2.)  The Taliban now boasts a bonafide bastion far from its traditional stronghold.

The Taliban’s main areas of strength have been eastern and southern Afghanistan, near the Pakistan border. It is in these regions where much of the international coalition’s combat missions were centered. In recent years, however, the Taliban and its allies have sought to develop new bases and footholds to the north and northeast. Ominously, nearly two years ago the journalist and Taliban expert Ahmed Rashid warned that militants were trying to secure Afghanistan’s entire northeastern corridor to establish a base for operations against the government in Kabul.

3.)Afghan forces are in big trouble.

The fall of Kunduz did not come out of nowhere. Taliban forces had been chipping away at the city’s security for weeks. Afghan government forces, however, were unable or unwilling to pre-empt this threat. For all the improvements that Afghan troops have made in recent years, the country’s fighting forces remain a major work in progress. And when your country faces an insurgency capable of seizing a big city, “work in progress” is not good enough—and is, in fact, quite dangerous.

4.)The government is in a very tough spot.

It’s hard to be optimistic that Afghanistan’s national unity government will mount a robust and rapid response to the Kunduz seizure. After all, this administration—which recently marked its first anniversary in power—still lacks a full cabinet, including a defense minister. Kabul’s capacity to confront an emboldened insurgency is questionable given its inability to achieve even the most basic tasks of governance.

Fortunately, there may be a silver lining to all this: a potential blow to ISIS. The terror group has gradually made inroads in Afghanistan, winning the allegiances of disaffected Taliban leaders. However, the Kunduz takeover underscores that the Taliban remains the biggest militant threat in Afghanistan, and that it can pull off, albeit on a smaller scale, the type of dramatic acts that ISIS can pull off in Iraq and Syria. This could boost Taliban recruitment efforts in Afghanistan, and dampen those of ISIS.

Either way, today’s news from Kunduz is a very big deal, and deserves a fair share of airtime.

 

 

Obama At UN Ignored Israel and Palestine

Posted on by

There was an official Palestinian flag raising at the United Nations this year. Last March, Pope Francis announced the Vatican’s full recognition of Palestine as a state. So the work continues to lobby all factions for a Palestinian State, but, somehow, Barack Obama missed the memo, or did he?

So, while some speechwriter did an eloquent job of writing Obama’s opening speech, it really spoke to climate change, refugees, challenging Russia and China. But when it came to another major elephant in the Middle East, Obama ignored mentioning Israel and the conflict with Palestine, when Mahmoud Abbas will be challenging the matter in his speech. In fact, Abbas is about to retire and is likely out of options for the near future.

It is almost impossible to hear what is not said, unless you are really listening.

The NYT’s has the text of Barack Obama’s remarks. Meanwhile, it appears the topic of Palestine and Israel was perhaps coordinated with Sheik Tamin bin Hamad al Thani of Qatar.  The White House has used Qatar as the single ‘go-to’ source for working deals in the Middle East.

It was a large agenda item a few years ago for the White House, where Hillary Clinton passed the Palestinian peace talk baton to John Kerry. Today, with a completed Iran nuclear deal, the White House and the Secretary of State, how no further interest in Palestine, rather it is left to the Qataris, the Palestinian Authority and anyone else who cares.

Obama’s UN Speech Ignores Israel but Hits Hard at Putin and Assad

JewishPress: Obama finally understands: “There are no simple answers to the changes that are taking place in much of the Middle East and North Africa.”

President Barack Obama’s address to the United Nations General Assembly Monday was extraordinary in its total exclusion of Israel and the Palestinian Authority and its hard-hitting attack on the Assad regime in Syria and its ally Russia.

A strong indication that President Obama has finally realized what he and numerous predecessors did not understand was this statement:

There are no simple answers to the changes that are taking place in much of the Middle East and North Africa.

It is not the first time he has said that, but unlike previous speeches, it was not followed up by the usual pie-in-the-sky statements that “Peace is made with enemies.” or “Solving the Israel-Palestinian Authority struggle is the key to bringing peace to the Middle East.

Saeb Erekat, who chief negotiator for the Palestinian Authority and is secretary-general of the parent PLO, was extremely disappointed with Obama’s speech. He said:

Does President Obama believe that he is able to defeat the Islamic State (ISIS) and terror or bring stability and security to the Middle East by ignoring the continuing Israeli occupation, settlements and the ongoing Israeli attacks on Al Aqsa [the mosque on the Temple Mount]?

Obama’s speech was a resounding “yes” to Erekat.

The “occupation” never was a threat to the Middle East, but the United States foreign policy gurus couldn’t figure that out, even when the Arab Spring rebellions upended stability and brought anarchy, termed by the United States as democracy, to Egypt, Libya, Iraq and other boiling pots in Arab Muslim countries.

Years after the United States ignored ISIS, it has become Public Enemy No. 1 and is being used brilliantly by Russian President Vladimir Putin to justify direct Russian military force in Syria.

When Putin told the United Nations he is fighting the Islamic State, he could have been more accurate, Russia may be the only country fighting ISIS.

The American-led strike force has proven to be pitiful, as TheJewishPress.com reported here last week on the Americana-trained Syrian rebels who betrayed the United States and delivered American weapons to Al Qaeda.

The President verbally attacked ISIS but he was extremely careful to be polite to Islam, stating:

Part of that effort [against ISIS] must be a continued rejection by Muslims of those who distort Islam to preach intolerance and promote violence, and it must also a rejection by non-Muslims of the ignorance that equates Islam with terror.

President Obama mentioned “Israel” zero times in his speech. Ditto for the terms “Palestinian Authority” and Palestine.”

The only time he mentioned “Middle East” was in the context quoted above, that there are no simple solutions.

But he mentioned Syrian eight times and Russia 15 times with harsh comments that were nothing short of cold war speech.

For example:

The history of the last two decades proves that in today’s world, dictatorships are unstable.

Consider Russia’s annexation of Crimea and further aggression in eastern Ukraine. America has few economic interests in Ukraine. We recognize the deep and complex history between Russia and Ukraine. But we cannot stand by when the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation is flagrantly violated. If that happens without consequence in Ukraine, it could happen to any nation gathered here today. That’s the basis of the sanctions that the United States and our partners impose on Russia. It’s not a desire to return to a Cold War.

But his speech was remarkably chilly towards Moscow. He flatly stated:

Russia’s state-controlled media may describe these events as an example of a resurgent Russia… And yet, look at the results. The Ukrainian people are more interested than ever in aligning with Europe instead of Russia. Sanctions have led to capital flight, a contracting economy, a fallen ruble, and the emigration of more educated Russians.

Pages: 1 2

Iran Busy Schedule in New York

Posted on by

Too busy in fact to attend Barack Obama’s opening United Nations General Assembly salvo, Iran is quite preoccupied.

Hassan Rouhani delivered his remarks and then left the chamber.

On the side, there are several meetings with Iran and one such provocative session is the Iranian proposal to swap 4 U.S. citizens held in prison for 19 Iranians the United States has jailed for violating sanctions.

There are still on going side discussions over the Iran deal and many open items remain unresolved as well as how the United Nations as a global body will address the human rights violations in Iran, if at all.

Rather than listen to the countless speeches on climate change, which Francois Hollande of France pushed hard, you can bet covert operations are in full swing following who is taking Iranian representatives to lunch, cocktails and dinner.

Lining up to do business with Iran is the order of the day by U.S. corporate CEO’s.

Rouhani meets with American CEOs, seeks Iran investment

Iranian president says economic conditions created by nuke deal should be used by major firms; US companies currently banned from doing business with Tehran

TimesofIsrael: Iranian President Hassan Rouhani met on Saturday with a group of American CEOs and managers to discuss possibilities for future, private US investment in Iran once the nuclear deal signed in July is implemented and sanctions are lifted in exchange for Tehran curbing its nuclear activities.

The meeting came on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York and a day after Rouhani met with a group of editors of American media outlets.

“The post-sanctions atmosphere has created new economic and political conditions which should be used by major trade, economic and industrial firms,” Rouhani told the group of American business leaders.

Following the signing of the nuclear agreement in Vienna in July, many European states rushed to renew trade relations with Iran with countries sending delegations to Tehran to discuss possibilities. European firms were also flocking to Tehran to sniff out lucrative business deals.

The US remains an exception as core sanctions imposed by Washington will remain even after the nuclear-related sanctions are lifted, meaning US companies would not be able to do business with Tehran.

These secondary sanctions are linked to US charges of Iranian human rights violations, terrorism and other allegations of wrongdoing. They have the effect of banning doing business with Iran, with only few exceptions, such as supplying parts for Iran’s civilian aviation sector.

But Rouhani expressed his conviction that these measures would also be lifted, according to the semi-official Fars news agency.

“Tehran has not impeded the presence of the US firms, and these companies can also use the competitive atmosphere resulting from the post-sanction conditions for investment and transferring technology to Iran,” Rouhani said at the meeting.

There is a lot to miss out on for US firms in Iran. The country of 80 million people generates a $400 billion economy, boasts the world’s fourth-largest oil reserves, the second-biggest stores of natural gas, and has well-established manufacturing and agricultural industries. It is also investing heavily in the tourism industry.

Rouhani was on a sort of charm offensive in New York ahead of his speech before the UNGA Monday. On Friday, he met with a group US editors to discuss a series of topics including the nuclear deal, developments in the Mideast and US-Iran ties and investment in Iran.

Rouhani said that in the wake of the nuclear deal, a door has opened for foreign investment in Iran.

“I think there are great opportunities, unrivaled opportunities, for American investment in Iran,” if the US government permits, he said.

Rouhani said relations between the two countries had improved in recent years but that there was “still a long road to travel” until they establish normal ties.

The Iranian president said the opposition expressed by some US lawmakers on the Iranian nuclear deal reflected “extremely bitter extremist judgments,” and was not well-received in Iran.

“It was as if they were on another planet,” he said, according to Reuters. “They did not seem to know where Iran was.”

“The nuclear issue is a big test within the framework of issues between the United States and Iran,” Rouhani told the group. “If we can see that we can reach success…and both sides have contributed to that success in good faith, then perhaps we can build on that.”

Rouhani said implementation of the nuclear deal would improve the atmosphere to allow progress to be made.

He also said that Iran can play a constructive role in addressing the threat of the Islamic State group, which has seized control of large swaths of Syria and Iraq, and that world powers were wrong to try to keep Iran out of the discussions on how to deal with the threat.

Iran is “a powerful and effective country in the region, this is undeniable,” Rouhani said. Without Iranian intervention on the side of the Baghdad government at a crucial juncture last year, he said, the Islamic State might already have taken over all of Iraq.

“Had it not been for Iran’s help, Baghdad would have fallen and certainly Daesh would have been ruling in Baghdad,” he said.