When the World Bank is Corrupt, Anyone Care?

Posted on February 27, 2020February 27, 2020 by Denise Simon

Per the World Bank website:

The World Bank Group considers corruption a major challenge to its twin goals of ending extreme poverty by 2030 and boosting shared prosperity for the poorest 40 percent of people in developing countries. In addition, reducing corruption is at the heart of the Sustainable Development Goals and achieving the ambitious targets set for Financing for Development.

Corruption has a disproportionate impact on the poor and most vulnerable, increasing costs and reducing access to services, including health, education and justice.

Great right? There is even a video of ten steps to stop corruption.

Also on the website:

The United States was a leading force in the establishment of the World Bank in 1944 and remains the largest shareholder of the World Bank today. As the only World Bank shareholder that retains veto power over changes in the Bank’s structure, the United States plays a unique role in influencing and shaping development priorities.

Through the World Bank Group, the United States participates in addressing international development challenges of vital importance. The United States has a long history of generously supporting the World Bank Group’s mission and has been a champion of the International Development Association (IDA), the Bank’s fund for the poorest, which provides low-interest loans and grants to developing countries for education, health, infrastructure, agriculture, communications, economic and institutional development.

Why all the concern?

World Bank Has Expressed This Big Estimate About Indias ...

OCCRP: A paper the World Bank released on Tuesday shows that countries dependent on aid from the organization see increased flows into tax secrecy havens, suggesting that some of its funds is ending up in the wrong hands. The Economist reported last week that the development bank allegedly tried to conceal the findings by neglecting to publish the study, and that Pinelopi “Penny” Goldberg, its chief economist, would be stepping down just 15 months into her tenure.

Because of media reports connecting Goldberg’s resignation and the study, the World Bank issued a public statement, explaining that the paper had undergone “several reviews, and it was improved as a result,” before it was published on the organization’s website. The timing of when it decided to publish the paper has drawn scrutiny, however.

Stefano Feltri, an Italian journalist who reported on the censorship in Pro Market, a University of Chicago-based publication, confirmed to OCCRP that the article was first published on the personal website of Niels Johannesen, a professor of the University of Copenhagen and CEBI, who co-authored it.

The article was then published hours later, by the World Bank, he explained, also confirming this through screenshots he shared with OCCRP.

Goldberg’s reason for resigning is unclear. The Economist said: “After aid to a country spikes, money departs for offshore havens. And after a sensitive paper is spiked, Penny departs for New Haven.”

OCCRP has obtained emails sources say were sent out Feb. 5, before the study controversy went public, showing that she had voiced her intention of returning to her post as an economics professor at Yale University.

Her departure marks the Bank’s second consecutive chief economist who has stepped down — Paul Romer, who served previously, resigned after publicly denouncing the organization for its “politically motivated” methodology that criticized business practice Chile under its socialist president Michelle Bachelet.

“I don’t know what exactly happened,” said Johannesen, who was more focused on the findings of his paper, when asked by OCCRP whether he could provide clarity to the situation.

He said his paper uncovered what he called “leakages” of foreign aid, where the number of offshore transactions going to tax havens designed to hide the origin of the source goes up in aid-dependent countries. He said about 5 percent of aid appears to be flowing illicitly offshore.

“While we can only speculate, the study shows that aid might itself be eroding institutions,” he said.

The professor concluded that the “big task,” in response to the findings, would be “the further disciplining of tax havens, and strengthening anti-money laundering standards.”

*** For context: The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loans and grants to the governments of poorer countries for the purpose of pursuing capital projects.^[6] It comprises two institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), and the International Development Association (IDA). The World Bank is a component of the World Bank Group.

The World Bank’s most recent stated goal is the reduction of poverty.^[7] As of November 2018, the largest recipients of World Bank loans were India ($859 million in 2018) and China ($370 million in 2018).

Remember India just signed a deal during President Trump’s visit to buy $3 billion in military equipment. And China has been buying/loaning money to countries to take over their cargo ports known as debt trapping while building the silk road initiative spending $900 billion.

Anyone asking any real questions on all this?

FCC Charges Mobile Carriers with Selling Your Location Data

Posted on February 27, 2020February 27, 2020 by Denise Simon

Source: The FCC has finished investigating carriers’ unauthorized disclosure and sale of subscribers’ real-time location data, Chairman Ajit Pai has shared with (PDF) lawmakers in the House of Representatives. In his letters, he told Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. and others that the agency has come to a conclusion after an extensive probe: one or more carriers “apparently violated federal law.” Pai has also promised the lawmakers that the agency is going to take action against the offending carriers to ensure that they comply with laws that protect consumers’ sensitive information.

Back in 2018, it came to light that carriers sell their customers’ real-time location data to aggregators, which then resold it to other companies or even gave it away. Last year, a Motherboard report also revealed that bail bond companies and bounty hunters have been buying people’s location data for years, allowing them to use that information to track their targets.

All four major US carriers promised to stop selling customer location data to aggregators after the information first came out. The companies made good on their word, though it took them a year to do so: They informed FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel that they had already halted sales to aggregators after she requested for an update in 2019.

Pallone said in a statement:

“Following our longstanding calls to take action, the FCC finally informed the Committee today that one or more wireless carriers apparently violated federal privacy protections by turning a blind eye to the widespread disclosure of consumers’ real-time location data. This is certainly a step in the right direction, but I’ll be watching to make sure the FCC doesn’t just let these lawbreakers off the hook with a slap on the wrist.”

Rosenworcel, who repeatedly brought the issue up over the past years, also said that it was a “shame that it took so long for the FCC to reach a conclusion that was so obvious.” Especially when “shady middlemen could sell your location within a few hundred meters based on your wireless phone data.”

We’ve reached out to AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint and CTIA, the trade group representing the wireless communications industry in the US, for a statement.

*** source: Google has been tracking Android users even when location services are disabled

House Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) said that Pai’s response to lawmakers “is a step in the right direction, but I’ll be watching to make sure the FCC doesn’t just let these lawbreakers off the hook with a slap on the wrist.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said that he is “eager to see whether the FCC will truly hold wireless companies accountable or let them off with a slap on the wrist.”

Source: An investigation by Motherboard in January 2019 found that “T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T are [still] selling access to their customers’ location data and that data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters and others not authorized to possess it, letting them track most phones in the country.”

The carriers made further promises to stop selling the data and later confirmed to the FCC that they had phased out the data-selling programs.

Pai’s letter today did not say exactly which federal law the carriers broke, but Section 222 of the Communications Act says that carriers may not use or disclose location information “without the express prior authorization of the customer.” Carriers have also been accused of violating rules on the usage of 911 location data.

AG Sessions Lawsuit and Big Win for President Trump

Posted on February 26, 2020February 26, 2020 by Denise Simon

A 3 judge panel…unanimous decision by the way.

The program began in 2006. The Federal government created a grant assistance program for states, local and tribal governments to reduce crime and violence….let that sink it. It is called the Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program….let that sink in….justice.

This would have been easy to argue in court actually to stop the violators from receiving the grants. Just understand the simple premise —>

BJA helps to make American communities safer by strengthening the nation’s criminal justice system: Its grants, training and technical assistance, and policy development services provide state, local, and tribal governments with the cutting edge tools and best practices they need to reduce violent and drug-related crime, support law enforcement, and combat victimization.

BJA is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office for Victims of Crime, and Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking.

FILE – In this Tuesday, March 20, 2018 file photo, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, left, speaks during a roundtable talks on sanctuary cities hosted by President Donald Trump, third from right, in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, in Washington. The Trump administration can withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement grants to force states to cooperate with U.S. immigration enforcement, a federal appeals court in New York ruled Wednesday, Feb. 26, 2020 in a decision that conflicted with three other federal appeals courts. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

Anyway…

(AP) — The Trump administration can withhold millions of dollars in law enforcement grants to force states to cooperate with U.S. immigration enforcement, a federal appeals court in New York ruled Wednesday in a decision that conflicted with three other federal appeals courts.

The ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan overturned a lower court’s decision ordering the administration to release funding to New York City and seven states — New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Washington, Massachusetts, Virginia and Rhode Island.

The states and city sued the U.S. government after the Justice Department announced in 2017 that it would withhold grant money from cities and states until they gave federal immigration authorities access to jails and provide advance notice when someone in the country illegally is about to be released.

Before the change, cities and states seeking grant money were required only to show they were not preventing local law enforcement from communicating with federal authorities about the immigration status of people who were detained.

At the time, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions said: “So-called ‘sanctuary’ policies make all of us less safe because they intentionally undermine our laws and protect illegal aliens who have committed crimes.”

In 2018, the Justice Department imposed additional conditions on the grant money, though challenges to those have not yet reached the appeals court in New York.

The 2nd Circuit said the plain language of relevant laws make clear that the U.S. attorney general can impose conditions on states and municipalities receiving money.

And it noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly observed that the federal government maintains broad power over states when it comes to immigration policies.

In the past two years, federal appeals courts in Chicago, Philadelphia and San Francisco have ruled against the federal government by upholding lower-court injunctions placed on the enforcement of some or all of the challenged conditions.

“While mindful of the respect owed to our sister circuits, we cannot agree that the federal government must be enjoined from imposing the challenged conditions on the federal grants here at issue,” the 2nd Circuit three-judge panel said in a decision written by Judge Reena Raggi.

“These conditions help the federal government enforce national immigration laws and policies supported by successive Democratic and Republican administrations. But more to the authorization point, they ensure that applicants satisfy particular statutory grant requirements imposed by Congress and subject to Attorney General oversight,” the appeals court said.

The Justice Department praised the decision, issuing a statement calling it a “major victory for Americans” and saying it recognizes that the attorney general has authority to ensure that grant recipients are not thwarting federal law enforcement priorities.

The department added that the ruling’s effect will be limited because other courts have ruled the other way, giving the plaintiffs in the New York case the opportunity to point to those as reasons to ignore the new conditions.

Cody Wofsy, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, called the decision a “real outlier,” saying he believed the 2nd Circuit was the nation’s first court to side with the Trump administration on the issue.

“Over and over, courts have said the Department of Justice doesn’t have authority under governing statutes to impose these conditions,” he said. “These conditions are part of the administration’s attempts to bully, cajole and coerce state and local governments into participating in federal immigration enforcement activities.”

Under the Constitution’s federalism principles and the 10th Amendment, Wofsy said, states and municipalities “are entitled to decline to become part of the administration’s deportation force.”

The appeals rulings pertain to the issuance of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program.

Operation Mega Flex

Posted on February 25, 2020February 25, 2020 by Denise Simon

From July to September last year, Customs and Border Patrol in that 3 month period seized 1061 shipments of counterfeit goods at our cargo ports of entry. Items from Louis Vuitton bags to sports equipment with faulty parts. Other items included children’s toys, drug paraphernalia, deadly opioids, and really scary were (are) counterfeit drivers’ licenses. Recreational drugs, clothing, jewelry and even food and nutritional items (may contain toxins) are part of the counterfeit items affecting likely every American and business.

Image result for cbp counterfeit

Unlike legitimate drug manufacturers that are subject to inspections by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, labs that manufacture counterfeits have no such oversight. According to a 2019 Better Business Bureau study, “companies based in China, Hong Kong, Singapore, and India shipped 97 percent of the counterfeit medicines seized in the U.S.”In March 2019, Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement agency, seized 13 million doses of counterfeit medicine ranging from opioids to heart medication. Europol noted that this type of counterfeiting is on the rise due to the relatively low risk of criminal detection.

Check those items in retail operations of all sorts and locations and what you purchase in the e-commerce realm, not the from the street vendor at the corner and when purchasing books, movies or music, you could be in real trouble for a transaction that violates copyright protected work.

Image result for cbp counterfeit

Watches and jewelry follow at 13 percent of total seizures. During the Mega Flex operation on August 21, 2019, for example, CBP officers seized counterfeit Rolex watches valued at over $1.4 million. Handbags and wallets represented nearly 11 percent of all seizures, including counterfeits of luxury brands such as Louis Vuitton, Michael Kors, and Gucci. Consumer electronicsrepresented 10 percent of seizures, including products such as iPhones, hover boards, earbuds, microchips, and others. Pharmaceuticals and personal care items account for only 7 percent of total seizures. However, as discussed in the next section, many of the products in these categories pose significant dangers to the consumer. Fake prescription drugs can lack active ingredients, contain incorrect dosages, or include dangerous additives. Fake personal care items such as cosmetics have been found to contain everything from harmful bacteria to human waste. Between 2017 and 2018, CBP and ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) seized over $31 million in fake perfumes from China.

Law enforcement officials have uncovered intricate links between the sale of counterfeit goods and transnational organized crime. A study by the Better Business Bureau notes that the financial operations supporting counterfeit goods typically require central coordination, making these activities attractive for organized crime, with groups such as the Mafia and the Japanese Yakuza heavily involved. Criminal organizations use coerced and child labor to manufacture and sell counterfeit goods. In some cases, the proceeds from counterfeit sales may be supporting terrorism and dictatorships throughout the world.

In FY 2018, 12 percent of DHS seizures included counterfeit versions of critical technological components, automotive and aerospace parts, batteries, and machinery. Each of these industrial sectors have been identified as critical to the defense industrial base, and thus critical to national security. One example drawn from a 2018 study by the Bureau of Industry and Security within the Department of Commerce featured the import of counterfeit semiconductors or “Trojan chips” for use in defense manufacturing and operations. Such Trojan chips can carry viruses or malware that infiltrate and weaken American national security. The problem of counterfeit chips has become so pervasive that the Department of Defense has referred to it as an “invasion.” Companies from China are the primary producers of counterfeit electronics.

According to a 2019 report, Instagram and Counterfeiting, nearly 20 percent of the posts analyzed about fashion products on Instagram featured counterfeit or illicit products. More than 50,000 Instagram accounts were identified as promoting and selling counterfeits, a 171 percent increase from a prior 2016 analysis. Instagram’s Story feature, where content disappears in twenty-four hours, was singled out as particularly effective for counterfeit sellers.

For the full report, go here.

Bernie Sanders/AOC Manifesto

Posted on February 24, 2020February 24, 2020 by Denise Simon

Okay, so there is now chatter that since Alexandra Ocasio Cortez is campaigning for presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, she would likely become his pick for Vice President.

AOC is much more radical for modern day political policy than Bernie Sanders, while Sanders has a deep history with communists which cannot be denied and he admits to including full support of Fidel Castro.

Is Bernie or AOC the real problem or is the scary part of all this, the supports of socialism, communism and Marxism?
If you are energetic enough to read the Communist manifesto by Marx and Engels, go here.

But to make is easier for you, a more modern day manifesto is available and it is known as Prairie Fire. Copyrighted in 1974, it is authored by four people you may recognize: Bernadine Dohrn, Billy Ayers, Jeff Jones and Celia Sojourn. Yes, The Weather Underground.

Just the preface includes in part: Prairie Fire is written to communist-minded people, independent organizers and anti-imperialists: those who carry the traditions and lessons of the struggles of the last decade, those who join in the struggles of today. Prairie Fire is written to all brothers and sisters who are engaged in armed struggle against the enemy, It is written to prisoners, women’s groups, collectives, study groups, workers’ organizing committees, communes, GI organizers, consciousness-raising groups, veterans, community groups and revolutionaries of all kinds, to all who will read, criticize and bring its content to life in practice. Prairie Fire is based on a belief that the duty of a revolutionary is to make revolution.

How many times has Senator Sanders used the term revolution or movement? Lost count also eh?

The contents of the Prairie Fire manifesto (163 pages) is quite interesting and excellent for reference. Just a few items of distinction include:

1. Arm the Spirit

2. Why Revolution is Necessary

3. The Real and Phony Energy Crisis

4. Black Resistance to Slavery and the Rise of the Abolitionist and Women’s Movement

5. Monopoly Capital

6. Imperialism Means Underdevelopment

7. Imperialism Means Racism and Genocide

8. Neocolonialism

9. Imperialism Means Sexism

10. The Palestinian Liberation Movement

Any of that in your recent memory? To review or scan the manifesto, click here.

Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti ...

Bernie has a long history and this piece from the Washington Examiner complete with graphics may help with that evidence.

As for AOC, words and deeds do matter. Her reason to endorse Bernie”

“When I was a baby, my family relied on Planned Parenthood for prenatal care,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “Then, Bernie Sanders fought for me. When I was growing up and education was being gutted for kids in the ‘wrong ZIP code,’ Bernie Sanders fought for us. When I was a child that relied on CHIP [Children’s Health Insurance Program] so that I could see a doctor, Bernie Sanders fought for a single-payer health care system … Bernie Sanders did not do these things because they were popular, and that’s what we need to remember.”

“I feel decided,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “It would be dishonest of me not to let folks know how I feel about this race.”

“For me, this is not about ‘Why not any other candidate?’ ” Ocasio-Cortez said. “The fact that [Sanders] has been fighting for these issues for so long struck me in a very personal way.” Source

Gotta wonder how much of that is true since her father was an architect and she was a graduate of Boston College. Nonetheless: Ocasio-Cortez is among the first female members of the Democratic Socialists of America elected to serve in Congress. Ocasio-Cortez advocates a progressive platform that includes Medicare for all, a federal jobs guarantee, a proposed Green New Deal, abolishing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, free public college and trade school, and a 70% marginal tax rate for incomes above $10 million. All of that was learned by her work for former Senator Ted Kennedy, Senator Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential bid and her collaboration with MoveOn, Black Lives Matters and Democracy for America.

Some interesting pieces of information right?