WH Coordinated Propaganda with Think Tanks on Iran Deal

White House paid and coordinated for pay to play, pay to write, pay to exploit, paid for loyalty, paid for messaging and all paid to lie. By the way, this is against the law.

See a short summary of the Smith Mundt Act here.

There is also NIAC and Trita Parsi.  There is also Laura Rozen, another anti-Semite.

Group that helped sell Iran nuke deal also funded media

WASHINGTON (AP) — A group the White House recently identified as a key surrogate in selling the Iran nuclear deal gave National Public Radio $100,000 last year to help it report on the pact and related issues, according to the group’s annual report. It also funded reporters and partnerships with other news outlets.

The Ploughshares Fund’s mission is to “build a safe, secure world by developing and investing in initiatives to reduce and ultimately eliminate the world’s nuclear stockpiles,” one that dovetails with President Barack Obama’s arms control efforts. But its behind-the-scenes role advocating for the Iran agreement got more attention this month after a candid profile of Ben Rhodes, one of the president’s top foreign policy aides.

In The New York Times Magazine article, Rhodes explained how the administration worked with nongovernmental organizations, proliferation experts and even friendly reporters to build support for the seven-nation accord that curtailed Iran’s nuclear activity and softened international financial penalties on Tehran.

“We created an echo chamber,” said Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, adding that “outside groups like Ploughshares” helped carry out the administration’s message effectively.

The magazine piece revived Republican criticism of the Iran agreement as they suggested it was evidence of a White House spin machine misleading the American people. The administration accused opponents of trying to re-litigate the deal after failing to defeat it in congressional votes last year.

Outside groups of all stripes are increasingly giving money to news organizations for special projects or general news coverage. Most news organizations, including The Associated Press, have strict rules governing whom they can accept money from and how to protect journalistic independence.

Ploughshares’ backing is more unusual, given its prominent role in the rancorous, partisan debate over the Iran deal.

The Ploughshares grant to NPR supported “national security reporting that emphasizes the themes of U.S. nuclear weapons policy and budgets, Iran’s nuclear program, international nuclear security topics and U.S. policy toward nuclear security,” according to Ploughshares’ 2015 annual report, recently published online.

“It is common practice for foundations to fund media coverage of underreported stories,” Ploughshares spokeswoman Jennifer Abrahamson said. Funding “does not influence the editorial content of their coverage in any way, nor would we want it to.”

Ploughshares has funded NPR’s coverage of national security since 2005, the radio network said. Ploughshares reports show at least $700,000 in funding over that time. All grant descriptions since 2010 specifically mention Iran.

“It’s a valued partnership, without any conditions from Ploughshares on our specific reporting, beyond the broad issues of national and nuclear security, nuclear policy, and nonproliferation,” NPR said in an emailed statement. “As with all support received, we have a rigorous editorial firewall process in place to ensure our coverage is independent and is not influenced by funders or special interests.”

Republican lawmakers will have concerns nonetheless, especially as Congress supplies NPR with a small portion of its funding. Just this week, the GOP-controlled House Oversight Committee tried to summon Rhodes to a hearing entitled “White House Narratives on the Iran Nuclear Deal,” but he refused.

Ploughshares’ links to media are “tremendously troubling,” said Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas, an Iran-deal critic.

Pompeo told the AP he repeatedly asked NPR to be interviewed last year as a counterweight to a Democratic supporter of the agreement, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, who he said regularly appeared on the station. But NPR refused to put Pompeo on the air, he said. The station said it had no record of Pompeo’s requests, and listed several prominent Republicans who were featured speaking about the deal or economic sanctions on Iran.

Another who appeared on NPR is Joseph Cirincione, Ploughshares’ president. He spoke about the negotiations on air at least twice last year. The station identified Ploughshares as an NPR funder one of those times; the other time, it didn’t.

Ploughshares boasts of helping to secure the deal. While success was “driven by the fearless leadership of the Obama administration and supporters in Congress,” board chairwoman Mary Lloyd Estrin wrote in the annual report, “less known is the absolutely critical role that civil society played in tipping the scales towards this extraordinary policy victory.”

The 33-page document lists the groups that Ploughshares funded last year to advance its nonproliferation agenda.

The Arms Control Association got $282,500; the Brookings Institution, $225,000; and the Atlantic Council, $182,500. They received money for Iran-related analysis, briefings and media outreach, and non-Iran nuclear work.

Other groups, less directly defined by their independent nuclear expertise, also secured grants.

J-Street, the liberal Jewish political action group, received $576,500 to advocate for the deal. More than $281,000 went to the National Iranian American Council.

Princeton University got $70,000 to support former Iranian ambassador and nuclear spokesman Seyed Hossein Mousavian’s “analysis, publications and policymaker engagement on the range of elements involved with the negotiated settlement of Iran’s nuclear program.”

Ploughshares has set its sights on other media organizations, too.

In a “Cultural Strategy Report” on its website, the group outlined a broader objective of “ensuring regular and accurate coverage of nuclear issues in reputable and strategic media outlets” such as The Guardian, Salon, the Huffington Post or Pro Publica.

Previous efforts failed to generate enough coverage, it noted. These included “funding of reporters at The Nation and Mother Jones and a partnership with The Center for Public Integrity to create a national security desk.” It suggested using “web videos, podcasts, photo-based stories” and other “attention-grabbing formats” for “creatively reframing the issue.”

The Center for Public Integrity’s CEO, Peter Bale, confirmed the grant.

“None of the funding received by Ploughshares was for coverage of the Iran deal,” said Bale, whose company received $70,000. “In general, we avoided that subject because the topic did not lend itself to the type of investigative reporting the Center does.”

Caitlin Graf, a spokeswoman at The Nation, said her outlet had no partnership with Ploughshares. She referred queries to The Nation Institute, a nonprofit associated with the magazine that seeks to strengthen the independent press and advance social justice. Taya Kitman, the institute’s director, said Ploughshares’ one-year grant supported reporting on U.S.-Iran policy, but strict editorial control was maintained.

Mother Jones’ media department didn’t respond to several messages seeking comment.

The AP has taken grants from nonpolitical groups and journalism foundations such as the Knight Foundation. As with all grants, “AP retains complete editorial control of the final news product, which must fully meet AP standards for independence and integrity,” Standards Editor Thomas Kent said.

How Many Times did Russia Buzz the U.S.?

Navy releases nearly two dozen videos of Russian jets, helicopter buzzing USS Donald Cook

PilotonLine:The Navy has released new video of two Russian jets buzzing the USS Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea last month, as well as video of a Russian helicopter circling the destroyer.

Russia 1

Russia 2

Russia 3

The Navy released nearly two dozen videos of the incident in response to a Freedom of Information Act request from The Virginian-Pilot. The Navy had previously uploaded four videos to YouTube of two Russian Su-24 jets making close-range, low-altitude passes near the ship on April 11 and 12.

The newly released videos show additional angles and commentary from sailors. At one point, a sailor is heard saying “Oh my God” as the jets pass close by. The Russian jets repeatedly flew next to and over the Donald Cook in what the Navy says was a simulated attack profile and didn’t respond to repeated safety advisories issued in English and Russian.

The Navy criticized the passes by the jets and the KA-27 Helix helicopter. The Russian jets appeared unarmed and the helicopter’s crew was seen photographing the Donald Cook.

“We have deep concerns about the unsafe and unprofessional Russian flight maneuvers,” the Navy said in an April 13 statement about the incident. “These actions have the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions between countries and could result in a miscalculation or accident that could cause serious injury or death.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry in April said the Navy’s criticism was “not consistent with reality” and that the Russian aircraft had “performed strictly in accordance with the international regulations on the use of airspace.”

The Donald Cook was based in Norfolk until 2014, when it moved to Rota, Spain. A Russian Su-24 Fencer attack aircraft repeatedly flew near the Donald Cook in the Black Sea that year.

The U.S. Navy has released more photographs, taken from aboard USS Donald Cook, an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer that was buzzed by Russian Su-24M attack aircraft on Apr. 12.

Although quite provocative, the low passes that the Russian Sukhois performed near the ship (within 1,000 feet once coming as close as 30 feet to the destroyer) had little to be worried about: the aircraft depicted in the photographs are unarmed Sukhoi Su-24M bombers, most probably conducting “simulated attacks” on the American warship at sea.

According to the Russian MoD the Fencers skirted the Donald Cook in international waters some 70 km from a Russian Navy base.

Aviationist: For sure, close encounters at sea occur: in April 2014, when a Russian Su-24MR, flew within 1,000 yards of the USS Donald Cook, that was operating in the Black Sea following the crisis in Ukraine: a show of force considered  “provocative and inconsistent with international agreements.”

On Mar. 3, 2015, Russian Su-30s and Su-24s aircraft from Russia’s Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea conducted attack runs on NATO warships operating in the Black Sea “to practice penetrating anti-air systems.”

On Oct. 27, 2015, USS Ronald Regan, sailing in international waters east of the Korean peninsula, had to scramble four Hornets after two Russian Navy Tu-142 Bear aircraft flew within a nautical mile of the U.S. Navy nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

In 2008, USS Nimitz operating in the Pacific had to launch some Hornets to intercept and escort two Tu-95s approaching the carrier.

So, such close encounters have occurred since the Cold War and they have never really escalated even though there are rumors of U.S. Navy officers facing active jamming activities by some Russian planes in the past.

Nothing special then. At least, until something more happens…

Image credit: U.S. Navy

Has Jeh Johnson of DHS Stood in Line at TSA?

the TSA also cannot publicly point to many significant attacks thwarted at airport gates, leading experts to insist that its protocols should be considered largely ineffective.

Rafi Sela, president of international transportation security consultancy AR Challenges, said the agency’s nearly $8 billion budget is largely being misspent on a misguided model. Politico 

TheVerge: Security lines at airports around the US are growing longer and longer. And that’s infuriating airlines, airports, passengers, and our elected officials alike. The long lines at the TSA-staffed security checkpoints are delaying fights and causing people to miss their planes. But ironically, passengers and airlines — the two groups most affected — are the ones who can do the least about it.

“Logistically, we don’t have the opportunity to hold flights for hours,” Ross Feinstein, a spokesperson for American Airlines, said in an interview with The Verge. Passengers “get to the gate too late and they can’t get rebooked for days or a week. That’s our concern, the impact it’s having on our customers.” Naturally, frustrated customers take their anger out on airline employees or, increasingly, airline Twitter accounts. “We see it every day on social media. They’re very upset, and our employees are very concerned.”

 Related: Statement By Secretary Jeh C. Johnson On Inspector General Findings On TSA

But the airlines can’t fix the problem. Security lines are handled by the TSA and individual airports. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which is in charge of JFK, LaGuardia, and Newark airports — three of the busiest in the country — recently sent a letter to the TSA urging it to fix the problems and threatening to use private security contractors to handle security screening.

hiring private contractors to handle screening isn’t a crazy idea

Hiring private security isn’t some crazy idea. Though most airport security checkpoints are manned by TSA agents, there are a handful of airports enrolled in the Screening Partnership Program (SPP), a TSA effort that allows private security contractors to screen passengers under federal supervision. It’s a program championed by Congressman John Mica (R-FL), a longtime TSA foe. There are nearly two dozen airports enrolled in SPP, including SFO in San Francisco, and Mica says it’s the way of the future.

“The TSA is destined to fail in its current structure,” Mica told The Verge. “It’s a huge bureaucracy.” The TSA is currently funded for 45,000 screeners, up from 16,000 when the Administration was formed in 2002. “We have 13,000 more administrative personnel, of which 4,000 are located within a few miles of the US Capital making an average of $104,000 per year. Incompetence highly paid, screeners not well paid.”

Mica says that TSA is staffed with government bureaucrats who have no incentive to execute well and are focused on “hassling innocent passengers.” He says the agency knows how many passengers will be passing through an airport checkpoint weeks in advance and that it still fails to “staff to traffic” — scheduling enough screeners to properly handle the number of passengers.

His solution is to have TSA set protocols, requirements, and guidelines, and have private contractors handle the day-to-day passenger screenings. Both the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy use private security contractors at military bases and nuclear installations. If it’s good enough for nuclear plants, Mica asks, why isn’t it good enough for our airports?

getty tsaPhoto by John Moore/Getty Images

Unsurprisingly, not everyone in Congress agrees. One of them is Rep. Donald M. Payne, Jr. (D-NJ), who is on the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security and whose district includes Newark airport. “I think TSA is more than capable, if it has the manpower to do the job,” Payne told The Verge. “TSA, when given the manpower and proper utilization, has done an outstanding job and there has not been another attack on an American airport since TSA has been on the job.”

And that’s true. But luck may be playing a role. A leaked report showed that TSA failed to detect weapons and explosives 95 percent of the time in an internal Homeland Security test. A Homeland Security Inspector General’s report called an $878 million screening program, meant to detect suspicious behaviors at checkpoints, “expensive and ineffective.” That program reportedly failed to detect a single terrorist.

morale is a big problem at the TSA

It’s not easy to be on the front lines for the TSA agents either. “Morale is a big problem with the TSA. It’s a thankless job,” says Payne. “All you’re dealing with are people who arrive at the airport late, that want to move through the line expeditiously, and weren’t necessarily there when they should have been. But now they want the whole process to be expedited for their benefit. Sometimes it just doesn’t work that way.”

TSA, for its part, puts most of the blame on the increased number of passengers and on the fact that travelers use more carry-ons because of airline baggage fees. The airlines disagree. “There has not been a huge surge,” says Feinstein. “There are more people traveling, yes, but it’s around a 4 percent increase [over last year]. I don’t think anyone saw two-and-a-half hour wait times last summer. It’s not proportional. It doesn’t equate to a 500 percent increase in wait times.”

“Encouraging passengers to check more bags will not help and would actually exacerbate current checked baggage screening issues that are resulting in passengers missing their connections and having their bags delayed,” said Melanie Hinton, a spokesperson for Airlines for America, an industry trade group. “Even at Midway [Airport in Chicago], served predominantly by an airline that doesn’t charge bag fees, wait times are in excess of 90 minutes, further demonstrating that this problem is not a result of bag fees,” she said. (Southwest Airlines, the largest carrier at Midway, doesn’t charge fees for checked baggage.)

TSA refused our requests for an interview.

the entire industry is frustrated

Some airlines are trying to ease the dire situation by deploying their own forces. American Airlines, for example, has assigned employees to help manage non-screening functions at security checkpoints in an attempt to free up more TSA employees for screening. They’re handling things like telling flyers to remove their shoes or throw out water bottles, as well as moving plastic trays from one end of the security line to the other. But that’s only a short-term solution, and something of a last-ditch attempt at that.

“The entire industry is frustrated,” says Feinstein. “We have issues at DFW, LAX, Denver, Newark. It’s not isolated to a hub, it’s across the board.”

The situation isn’t likely to improve any time soon. Peak travel season begins around Memorial Day and really gets going in mid-June. “This isn’t even peak summer and we can’t rebook passengers on these flights,” Feinstein says. What we’re seeing with the long lines “really does concern us.”

Hey State Dept. What’s the Hurry?

Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
May 19, 2016

Terrorist Designations of ISIL-Yemen, ISIL-Saudi Arabia, and ISIL-Libya

U.S. State Department: The Department of State has announced the designation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL’s) branch in Libya (ISIL-Libya) as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Today, the Department is also simultaneously designating ISIL-Libya, along with the ISIL branches in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Section 1(b) of Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, which imposes sanctions and penalties on foreign persons that have committed, or pose a serious risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.

The consequences of the FTO and E.O. 13224 designations include a prohibition against knowingly providing, or attempting or conspiring to provide, material support or resources to, or engaging in transactions with, these organizations, and the freezing of all property and interests in property of these organizations that is in the United States, or come within the United States or the control of U.S. persons. The Department of State took these actions in consultation with the Departments of Justice and the Treasury.

ISIL-Yemen, ISIL-Saudi Arabia, and ISIL-Libya all emerged as official ISIL branches in November 2014 when U.S. Department of State-designated Specially Designated Global Terrorist and ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi announced that he had accepted the oaths of allegiance from fighters in Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Libya, and was thereby creating ISIL “branches” in those countries.

While ISIL’s presence is limited to specific geographic locations in each country, all three ISIL branches have carried out numerous deadly attacks since their formation. Among ISIL-Yemen’s attacks, the group claimed responsibility for a pair of March 2015 suicide bombings targeting two separate mosques in Sana’a, Yemen, that killed more than 120 and wounded over 300. Separately, ISIL-Saudi Arabia has carried out numerous attacks targeting Shia mosques in both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, leaving over 50 people dead. Finally, ISIL-Libya’s attacks have included the kidnapping and execution of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians, as well as numerous attacks targeting both government and civilian targets that have killed scores of people.

After today’s action, the U.S. Department of State has now sanctioned eight ISIL branches, having previously designated ISIL-Khorasan, ISIL-Sinai, Jund al-Khilafah in Algeria, Boko Haram, and ISIL-North Caucasus. Terrorism designations are one of the ways the United States can expose and isolate organizations and individuals engaged in terrorism, impose serious sanctions on them, and enable coordinated action across the U.S. Government and with our international partners to disrupt the activities of terrorists. This includes denying them access to the U.S. financial system and enabling U.S. law enforcement actions.

About that Prison in the Heart of London

Belmarsh prison: ‘The jihadi training camp right in the heart of London’

Jamal, 27, a Muslim university graduate, served part of his sentence for bank fraud in Belmarsh maximum-security prison. He was released two weeks ago and turned whistleblower. This is his shocking testimony, as told to David Cohen

StandardUK: Soon after I arrived in Belmarsh in 2014, news came through that Mosul in Iraq had fallen to Islamic State and the prison erupted. There were chants of “Allahu Akbar”, wild banging on the doors and joyous shouting of “we are going to take over” throughout the wing. It was like a big party that went on unchecked for several hours.

 belmarsh13.jpg

I was devastated because I watched how prison officers seemingly took no action, leaving new inmates like myself with the impression that the real people in charge were not the warders, but a terrifying group of radical Islamists known as “the Brothers” or “the Akhi”, which is Arabic for brother.

Related reading: List of most notorious prisoners at Belmarsh

We had around 200 people on our wing, about half of them Muslim, but there was a hard core of 20 “brothers” in for terrorism or terror-related of-fences who were very popular and had enormous influence. They were treated like celebrities by the other inmates and included the guy who in 2007 tried to blow up Glasgow airport.

They were intelligent, well read and soft-spoken and they welcomed me with open arms because, as a fellow Muslim, they thought they could turn me into one of them. They would drape their arm around me, call me “my brother”, offer me cigarettes, food and any support I needed.

Their next step was to drum home their message about Islam and to tell us that we were inside because of the evil system. They would say that the kuffar [a derogatory term for non- Muslims] had been killing our women and children and that our calling was to become “a soldier of peace”. They talked about going to fight in Syria and Iraq when they got out and joining the war for a Muslim caliphate.

I was brought up the son of a bookkeeper in a mainstream Muslim household that mixed with Jewish and Christian people and respected all religions. I was in prison because of what I had done as a stupid young bank clerk signing off documents at the request of others. I had not benefited by one penny financially and naively thought my reward would be fast promotion, but I was balanced enough to know that I was in the wrong, not the system.

In my second week, on the way to Friday prayers, I said something about showing tolerance to other religions and one of the Akhi, who was in for terrorism, turned to me and said emphatically: “No, there is zero tolerance, they are all kuffar and we have to destroy them.” After that he let it be known that I was kuffar and that nobody should greet me or associate with me.

I felt vulnerable because I saw what happened to people branded kuffar. In the cell be-side mine, there were two black Muslims and a Christian and one day there was a lot of petty arguing over a kettle. The next day, the Muslims made up a story about the Christian disrespecting Islam and next thing 25 prisoners stormed his cell and beat him up. He got moved after that. In my cell there were also two black guys who had converted to Islam, and when I was made kuffar, they let it be known that if anybody stormed our cell, they would not protect me. I was scared so I asked to see the imam, but that was another mistake.

There are about six imams in Belmarsh and apart from one, who was supportive, the other imams either ignored me or appeared to be sympathetic to the extremists. It was shocking. After that I kept my head down and only left my cell if I had to. All around I witnessed people being radicalised. Instantly you could see the change. They would start to wear their trousers rolled below the knee, something Prophet Muhammad did, they would grow facial hair, they would call each other “Akhi” and they became hyper-aggressive towards anybody not into radical Islam.

Three quarters of those being radicalised had been involved in gangs  and were in for violent crime or drugs. They understood that the biggest gang inside Belmarsh was the Brothers and that they needed them for their protection. But it also gave them a sense of identity.

People would boast that as soon as they got out, they were going out to Syria. They were young and impressionable. There were so many would-be jihadists in there I felt like an intruder at a jihadi training camp. There were also plenty of moderate Muslim inmates like myself who suffered because we couldn’t speak out. I couldn’t believe how the flaws in the system effectively support the extremists.

After five months I got moved to Highpoint, a category C men’s prison in Suffolk. I was there for the Charlie Hebdo attack in January 2015 and again there were prisoners openly praising the attackers and embracing one an-other, although not as many as in Belmarsh. I complained to a chief prison officer who said: “We know what’s going on but we don’t have the funding or staff to do anything about it.” Again, the imams were useless. When I told one imam that we were being asked to take on jihad and sought guidance as to what our duties were, he said: “It’s not clear-cut. Do whatever you think is right.” People took their passivity as a licence to follow jihadism.

Because there was no challenge to this from the authorities, you are left to your own devices. Later I was transferred to Brixton prison where the imam was excellent, but he was seen as “a weak imam” by many inmates because they associate moderateness with weakness. The higher the category of prison, the more the Brothers have impact. The prisons need to isolate the extremists from impressionable young prisoners under the age of 30. The imams could be playing a huge role as they are the ones who can identify them.

I’ve decided to speak out, at some danger to myself, because I want to expose the reality of what’s going on. The Government has sunk cash into their Prevent programme to tackle radicalisation in the community, but ignored the fact that the biggest jihadi training camp in the UK is right here in Belmarsh in the heart of London. It’s beyond belief. We need the counter-terrorism budget to extend to prisons, otherwise it’s useless.

Since I’ve come out, I have been working with my mentor, Sab Bahm, founder of the Salaam Peace charity in east London. I have been reminding myself that I was once “gifted and talented” at school, captain of the football team, a straight-A star student. I have to pick myself up and start again. But before I do, I feel a responsibility to pass this on. Somebody in power needs to do something about it. It is appalling and outrageous what they are being allowed to get away with.

  • Jamal’s name has been changed