Skip navigation

Tag Archives: NSA

El titulo amarillo de abajo contiene un link al documento completo en version PDF

El teniente coronel (R) Rodolfo Richter presento su libro: Lucha Armada del PRT-ERP y Las Condiciones Revolucionarias (Dunken)

AASP EX ENEMIGOS QUE DIALOGAN

AASP EX ENEMIGOS QUE DIALOGAN

Link corto para compartir o regresar >  http://wp.me/p2jyCr-Rk

         Algo muy curioso ocurrió el miércoles 19 de 2017 en esta Ciudad. Lo que en principio parecía la anodina presentación de un libro terminó suscitando un debate esclarecedor sobre el pasado violento de nuestro país y sus perspectivas a futuro, a partir de las opiniones de los protagonistas menos pensados.

Todo sucedió en un aula de la Universidad Católica Argentina. El teniente coronel (R) Rodolfo Richter presentaba Lucha armada: el PRT-ERP y las condiciones revolucionarias (Dunken).     Es un volumen que revisa, con criterio desapasionado, los devaneos doctrinarios que a fines de la década de 1960 llevaron al grupo dirigido por Mario Roberto Santucho a tomar las armas en contra de lo que indicaban ciertos preceptos del marxismo-leninismo. El libro es la versión reducida y adaptada de la tesis que Richter defendió para acceder al doctorado en Ciencia Política.

 

Aquí un primer dato llamativo. Richter es paralítico. Perdió la movilidad de las piernas en febrero de 1975, cuando fue herido en el combate inaugural de la Operación Independencia que dispuso el gobierno democrático peronista para derrotar al ERP en el monte tucumano. Entonces tenía 26 años y era teniente de infantería del Ejército con las aptitudes de paracaidista y comando. Después de una trabajosa recuperación, logró rehacer su vida. Estudió y se convirtió en profesor de Ciencia Política. Lo que sufrió a manos de la guerrilla no le impidió estudiarla con seriedad hasta hurgar en las razones de su derrota estrepitosa.

Advertisements

Link to Share > > > >  http://wp.me/p2jyCr-Ok 

01
02
screen-shot-2016-11-09-at-5-24-39-pm

screen-shot-2016-11-09-at-5-32-51-pm.

 

.

Mensaje anteriorMensaje siguienteVolver a los mensajesArgentina No es un Pais Normal, es IRRESPONSABLE, merece y necesita Proteccion del “Batered Child Syndrome Act”

Cuando nos perdemos, volvemos a la Constitucion 1853, nos reorientamos, y vovemos a comenzar

Allí tenemos al Art. 29,  Herramienta Republicana UNICA en el Mundo! 

Argentina no es un país normal, ni bueno, ni malo; ni capitalista ni comunista, solo un país con 85 años de anarquía que lo ha llevado a la esquizofrenia actual. Soy el editor de este blog, solo un medico binacional de origen Patagónico. No soy político, abogado, historiador, economista, diplomático espía, ni gánster, solo un mediquito patagónico nada malo en diagnostico, pero ni en eso soy “el mejor” me auto sitúo entre los mejores regulares, y/o los peores de los buenos; tolero muchas cosas; pero mi limite ético-moral esta en “la mentira” que no solo es “ilegal” siempre es dañina, aunque se la use con “buenas intenciones” – Pero no solo soy un medico bueno en diagnostico, mi formación primaria fue como pediatra, y con vocación hipocrática, me gusta el dinero y lo necesito para trabajar bien, pero no trabajo para ganar dinero, si crees que no entiendes la diferencia, te digo “si la entiendes, pero no quieres entender. Es solo un “I don’t want to know” mas; en la que hasta se miente para ganar unos asquerosos pesos mas, y para esconder sus remordimientos de cómplices, en la conciencia colectiva ¡como si eso existiese, es solo una omerta” mas. Tengo edad suficiente para haber visto demasiados cambios, ocurrir muy veloces; tales como haber estado entre los “protestones rebeldes “para parar la vacunación antivariólica, pues estábamos matando mas chicos con encefalitis vecinales cuando ya no existía riesgo de viruela en el planeta. O haber sido los impulsores de la ley del “Battered Child Syndrome” Esa fue una ley cojonuda cojones por la que nos obligábamos legalmente a denunciar penalmente al quien no solo pagaba nuestros honorarios, o era el comisario, alcalde gobernador o el mismo Juez, cura o el mismo Papa. la que apaleaba a nuestros pacientes niños o bebes. Y luego nos demandaban. Pero, … si no es el pediatra ¿quien? va a defender a nuestros pacientitos, cuando ni aun muchas madres miran para otro lado sabiendo que su esposo viola repetidamente a su hijos,   para mantener las apariencias de familia “normal” y por temor al “que dirán”. Son los riesgos profesionales para quienes ejercemos con vocación, algo parecido lo a lo que les pasa a los militares,,, los gobiernos, en especial los abogados, políticos en los gobiernos, hacen tan mal las cosas que hasta “parece” que lo hiciesen a propósito, pata “aumentar la demanda e sus servicios y así todos ganan mas. unos defendiendo una parte los otros la otra y ganen o pierdan ganan malignamente su pan, pero no con el sudor de su frente, sino escondiendo sus conciencias. A los militares le ordenan hacer cosas tales como “matar… y si tienen que matar maten rápido … (Henry Kissinger) total después hasta les dan un premio Nobel de La Paz… Y las despelotes armados artificialmente con leyes mal hechas a ordenes sin leyes (que no son ilegales sino lawlessness0 llega a ser tan insolubles como o mas que el nudo gordiano, que Alejandro soluciono de un sablazo; y así esta haciendo el político, abogado Presidente Obama; con los prisiones de por vida, sin condena ni juicio que nos avergüenza ante el mundo a los norteamericanos. ¿No entiendes a que me refiero? Te lo explico mejor, para que no puedas hacerte el distraído o mirar para otro lado como madres entregado de sus hijos al degenerado de su esposo. Sin nudas Barack Obama es un buen abogado, graduado en Harvard. Universidad de mucho mas prestigio que la escuela de leyes en Roca, Rio Negro. Antes de ser electo, entre sus promesas preelectorales esta solucionar el desprestigio de tener –de por vida- gente sin juicio ni condena, en la Base de Guantánamo. Pese a ser un tema que le compite, profesionalmente; El Presidente no pudo hacer nada ni en la primera ni segunda administración. ¿ Porque? ¿Por qué es un mentiroso que prometió cosas que no pensaba cumplir? ¡Esa es una necedad! ¿por qué habría de hacer una cosa así?. Eso es muy de políticos incompetentes ¿porque vamos a pensarlo sencillo, si podemos hacerlo bien difícil? ¿No es mas fácil pensar que si un abogado graduado en Harvard y Presidente de la Unión de 50 estados mas poderosa del planeta no pudo solucionar ese disgusting dilema, es sencillamente porque “no puede” No hay Ley que le permita hacerlo. Es exactamente el mismo caso de los militares encarcelados en Argentina por tener que actuar sin ordenes legales. El presidente esta solo a meses de concluir su s ocho anos y pasar a la historia si posibilidad de regresar para terminar lo que no pudo hacer; y –me imagino_ no quiere pasar a la historia con esa mancha que no le pertenece, esa es una falta del poder Legislativo. Entonces ¿ que hizo “Genio Barack Obama” No pudo juzgar a los pioneros? … bien… lo intentó y no pudo… entonces cambio un poco la iniciativa… Presento al Congreso un “Proyecto de Ley Para Cerrar La Base de Guantánamo. Y que los responsables de haber ocasionado ese problema, que lo discutan y decidan que hacer con la base y su contenido? ¿Los van a fusilar SIN JUICIO? O los van a soltar ¡No será ya problema del poder ejecutivo, ni de el ni del que venga ni que fuese Pato Donald. Termino con una ultima ironía. Los militares durante su carrera estudian y se entrenan para cumplir ordenes sin discutirlas, y al graduarse juran cumplirlas hasta tener que ofrendar su vida. Los pediatras hicimos algo parecido Impulsamos la s leyes del Niño Apaleado) aun arriesgándonos a la ira y venganza de gente poderosa que creen que les debemos lealtad a ellos pus son quienes pagan nuestros honorarios. Y los abogados cuando se gradúan juran cumplir con su deber… y si no lo hago “Que Dios y La Patria me lo demanden”….

“Informador Público”   11:07 a.m.  Para: gsaintmartin@hotmail.com
 Para compartir > http://wp.me/p2jyCr-GF 

CRISTOBAL LOPEZ

La nota de La Nación no avanza sobre el desagregado, pero teniendo en cuenta el lapso en el cual fueron retenidos los recursos apropiados por las empresas de Cristóbal López (2011/2015) no sería aventurado calcular el monto, a valores actualizados, en más de Veinte millones de pesos, tal vez veinticinco. En grandes números podríamos hablar de Mil quinientos millones de dólares.

Ese monto es muy grande. Por lo pronto, es superior al presupuesto de dieciocho provincias argentinas. En efecto, son inferiores a ese monto las cuentas anuales de Tierra del Fuego, San Luis, La Rioja, La Pampa, Catamarca, San Juan, Santiago del Estero, Jujuy, Río Negro, Formosa, Chubut, Santa Cruz, Corrientes, Salta, Misiones, Neuquén, Chaco, Tucumán y bordea los de Entre Ríos y Mendoza.

Es una suma pasmosa. Es muy difícil tratar de imaginar cómo puede habérsele “pasado” a la AFIP semejante apropiación de recursos públicos, de percepción directa y en tiempo real -ya que se recaudan junto a la venta de combustibles, estrictamente controlados no sólo por la AFIP sino también por el Ministerio de Energía.

También es difícil imaginar cómo hará ahora el gobierno nacional para recuperar esos recursos, tal como expresó el presidente Macri que habría instruido a las actuales autoridades de la AFIP. No hay a la vista empresas solventes en ese grupo empresario que alcancen a cubrir semejante deuda.

La complicidad delictiva de las autoridades de control fiscal resulta también inexplicable. Nos dice una nota adicional en La Nación que las empresas no figuraban entre los “grandes contribuyentes”, sujeta a un escrutinio especializado por la central de la AFIP, sino apenas como una empresa mediana inscripta en una agencia del barrio de Palermo, en la Capital Federal. Es una muestra más del deterioro terminal a que fue sometido el Estado durante la administración kirchnerista, que permitió -por complicidad o por inoperancia- semejante daño a las finanzas públicas.

Por prudencia y respeto no seguimos haciendo la lista de equivalencias de lo que el Estado podría hacer con ese dinero en obras públicas, educación, salud o vivienda. Sólo diremos que es mucho. Es un monto que no puede medirse en términos de la economía individual, sino de los grandes números de las finanzas públicas.

Ahora, hay que aplicar la ley. Recuperar lo que se pueda, por supuesto, pero también las normas penales tributarias y las del Código Penal general. La impunidad -de empresarios y funcionarios- es incompatible con el sentido de solidaridad nacional. Ningún sacrificio puede pedirse a quien bordea fin de mes o aún vive en la calle si un despropósito tan descarado se sumerge en las mediaciones burocráticas o termina protegido por la impunidad.

Y por último, tomar este enorme desfalco como un aliente en la tarea de reconstruir el Estado. Lo destrozaron quienes lo invocaban diariamente, ocultando en ese relato su utilización como herramienta delictiva. Lo debemos reconstruir con profesionalidad, para que cumpla su misión elemental: recaudar impuestos para financiar las necesidades de una convivencia civilizada.

Ricardo Lafferriere

POTUS 31 44 45 CFK y la crisis de 1930.doc

Share o Compartir > http://wp.me/p2jyCr-FY 

Esta es una nota del Editor de este Blog  (Dr. Gaston Saint Martin MD former Editor of “La C omuna de Regina) – gsaintmartin@hotmail.com)      que sugiere  al lector lea y escuche a esta publicación con esta disciplina en mente, y vea como “periodistas que no son “estupidos” en lo que estan haciendo (preguntas) ponen en evidencia la  ENOOOORME y peligrosa estupidez de Trump   … y … Como  si se sabe “ver”  un servicio muy especial de Argentina a TOOODA América (de polo a polo) … vean lo que nos espera si NO COMPARAMOS a Cristina Fernández viuda de Kirchner, (Presidente de Argentina (mandato cumplido),   con   Donald Trump (candidato a POTUS 45) y al Presidente Herbert Hoover (POTUS 31 “El Malo” como “exactamente la misma clase de Estúpidos Peligrosos” que anarquizó a Argentina y causó la crisis económica de 1930)   –  

Necesitas comprender al menos ESL (English as Second Language) y Castellano (Spanish) para aprovechar esta publicación. Esta llena de LINKS, todos muy valiosos para darte una idea  que “The World is a Mess” (Este mundo es un Despelote) Nuestro Planeta Azul está, en estos momentos, habitado por 7.000 Millones de estúpidos (Sin ofender a nadie… sigue leyendo Please…) Podemos pensar en Albert Einstein, como el mas importante científico de la humanidad; el creador de La Teoría General de La Relatividad, que usando matemáticas y física de alta complejidad formuló una serie de teorías que aun hoy, se siguen comprobando, una a una. Albert Einstein (filosofo) se declaró a si mismo “ESTÚPIDO” (Dic. Vox estúpido = persona con dificultad para comprender las cosas -) y lo aclaró así: “TODOS somos estupidos, pero cada uno de nosotros ignora distintas cosas…”  (Siguiendo a Einstein, yo me declaro ser el 2do Estúpido) En Otras palabras: Trump NO es un estúpido para hacer guita (dinero) pero SI lo es en todo lo demás.   Lo peligroso de este mundo actual son los estúpidos que no tienen ni idea de lo estúpido que son; y además tienen poder para hacer daño a los demás. (cualquier tipo de “poder” (dinero, mando, estar en algún gobierno, ser Presidente de USA, o El Papa; o pertenecer a la casta política…)  – 

 

__________________

All the times Trump has called for violence at his rallies

SHARES – Compartir > http://wp.me/p2jyCr-FY

RAMOS RUMP 01

Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, left, face off with protesters after a rally on the campus of the University of Illinois-Chicago was canceled due to security concerns.

IMAGE: AP/CHARLES REX ARBOGAST

BY KATE SOMMERS-DAWES

1 DAY AGO

After he canceled a rally at a Chicago university Friday night due to safety concerns, Donald Trump told CNN’s Don Lemon “I certainly don’t incite violence.”

Screen Shot 2016-03-13 at 10.54.57 AM

Trump, however, has a history of calling for violent acts against those who protest at his events that goes back until at least August of last year.

Follow

CNN

‎@CNN

Donald Trump: “I certainly don’t incite violence and … I don’t condone violence”

http://

cnn.it/1RF2Ody

 

‪@CNNTonight

8:30 PM – 11 Mar 2016

And after canceling the rally at the University of Illinois at Chicago Pavilion, which devolved into mayhem when protesters and supporters faced off, Trump pointed the finger at detractors for the violence that erupted.

Below are the recorded instances in which the Republican presidential candidate has called for, rejoiced in, or otherwise encouraged combat between supporters and detractors, in reverse chronological order.

SEE ALSO: Chaos ensues after Trump cancels rally due to safety concerns

“The audience hit back. That’s what we need a little bit more of.”

Screen Shot 2016-03-13 at 10.59.13 AM

Follow      Mashable News     ‎@MashableNews

Donald Trump calls supporters’ violence against protesters “appropriate,” says “that’s what we need more of.”

8:56 AM – 11 Mar 2016

At a press conference in Florida on Friday, Trump was asked about his rhetoric in the wake of an incident in which a supporter at a rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina, sucker-punched a black man in the face.

While he wasn’t asked about that specific altercation, Trump said of violent behavior in general at his events: “The audience hit back and that’s what we need a little bit more of.”

He also praised people using physical force at his rallies as “appropriate.”

“Part of the problem … is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore.”

 

Screen Shot 2016-03-13 at 11.05.31 AM

Protesters Interrupt Donald Trump for 14 Straight Minutes in St. Louis

Intenta ver este video en www.youtube.com o habilita JavaScript en caso de que no lo tengas habilitado tu navegador.

Demonstrators interrupted a Trump rally in St. Louis, Missouri, later that Friday. As they were being escorted out of the venue, the candidate bemoaned the fact that there were no longer “consequences” to protesting and insisted the “country has to toughen up.”

“You know, part of the problem and part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, right?” he explained. His remarks are heard just after the seven-minute mark in the video above.

Outside the event, people screamed profanity and anti-Muslim rhetoric at each other while a bloodied protester was given medical treatment. Thirty two people were arrested.

“In the good old days this doesn’t happen because they used to treat them very, very rough.”

Follow

Mashable News

‎@MashableNews

Trump in NC on Weds: “In the good old days this doesn’t happen because they used to treat them very, very rough.”

9:04 AM – 11 Mar 2016

As protesters were being escorted out of the rally in Fayetteville on Wednesday, Trump told the crowd that the protesters were not being treated poorly enough.

“They used to treat them very, very rough, and when they protested once, they would not do it again so easily,” he said, before lamenting “we’ve become weak.”

“Try not to hurt him. If you do, I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it.”

Trump gives supporters permission to be violent with protesters

Se produjo un error.

Intenta ver este video en www.youtube.com o habilita JavaScript en caso de que no lo tengas habilitado tu navegador.

At a rally in Michigan in early March, Trump again seemed to give the green light to violent behavior. As a protester was being escorted out of the building, Trump marveled at what a “fun time” everyone was having.

“Get him out,” he then said. “Try not to hurt him. If you do, I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it.”

He then told an anecdote about a brawl at a prior rally that was “amazing to watch.”

“I’d like to punch him in the face.”

[if !IE]> <![endif]

Please upgrade your Flash Plugin

[if !IE]> <![endif]

At a Las Vegas rally in late February, as a protester was again being removed from the premises, Trump lamented that “we’re not allowed to punch back anymore” and reminisced about the halcyon “old days,” when a protester would “be carried out on a stretcher.”

The crowd is delighted, cheering, clapping and laughing.

He then said he’d like to punch the man in the face, again to cheers.

“Knock the crap out of them.”

 

POLITICO Video

@POLITICOvideo

 

POLITICO Video

@POLITICOvideo

 

POLITICO Video

@POLITICOvideo

Follow

Trump: If you see someone getting ready to throw a tomato, ‘knock the crap out of them’

pic.twitter.com/100AA2Bjww

2:44 PM – 1 Feb 2016

 

After a protester threw a tomato at Trump at a previous event, he encouraged fighting at a later campaign stop in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, in early February.

“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously.” He again promised to pay for any legal fees associated with an assault.

“Maybe he should have been roughed up.”

use_old

HACK: ontouchstart=”” is a workaround that enables the use of the CSS :active psuedo class on iOS

 

After a Black Lives Matter activist was kicked, punched and, he said, called the N-word at a campaign event in Birmingham, Alabama, in November, Trump expressed his approval.

“Maybe he should have been roughed up because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,” the now frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination told Fox & Friends the next day.

Trump said the man deserved the treatment because he had been “very obnoxious” and “so loud.” The remarks can be heard just after the 11-minute mark in the video above.

“I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will.”

 

Trump Responds to Activists Taking Over Bernie Sanders Event

Se produjo un error.

Intenta ver este video en www.youtube.com o habilita JavaScript en caso de que no lo tengas habilitado tu navegador.

Black Lives Matter activists took over a Bernie Sanders campaign event in Seattle in August, asking for a moment of silence for Michael Brown, the teenager who was killed by a policeman in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014. Trump was asked how he would respond to a similar situation.

The candidate was defiant, and curious about who would get into a physical altercation when faced with protesters — him or his supporters.

That much, now, is clear.

This post has been updated with the addition of Trump’s comments at Friday’s St. Louis rally.

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

 TOPICS: DONALD TRUMP, PROTESTERS, RALLY, VIOLENCE, WORLD

February 16, 2016 A Message to Our Customers

The United States government has demanded that Apple take an unprecedented step which threatens the security of our customers. We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand.

LINK para comartir > http://wp.me/p2jyCr-FG 

This moment calls for public discussion, and we want our customers and people around the country to understand what is at stake.

Answers to your questions about privacy and security

The Need for Encryption
Smartphones, led by iPhone, have become an essential part of our lives. People use them to store an incredible amount of personal information, from our private conversations to our photos, our music, our notes, our calendars and contacts, our financial information and health data, even where we have been and where we are going.

All that information needs to be protected from hackers and criminals who want to access it, steal it, and use it without our knowledge or permission. Customers expect Apple and other technology companies to do everything in our power to protect their personal information, and at Apple we are deeply committed to safeguarding their data.

Compromising the security of our personal information can ultimately put our personal safety at risk. That is why encryption has become so important to all of us.

For many years, we have used encryption to protect our customers’ personal data because we believe it’s the only way to keep their information safe. We have even put that data out of our own reach, because we believe the contents of your iPhone are none of our business.

The San Bernardino Case
We were shocked and outraged by the deadly act of terrorism in San Bernardino last December. We mourn the loss of life and want justice for all those whose lives were affected. The FBI asked us for help in the days following the attack, and we have worked hard to support the government’s efforts to solve this horrible crime. We have no sympathy for terrorists.

When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal.

We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.

Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession.

The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.

The Threat to Data Security
Some would argue that building a backdoor for just one iPhone is a simple, clean-cut solution. But it ignores both the basics of digital security and the significance of what the government is demanding in this case.

In today’s digital world, the “key” to an encrypted system is a piece of information that unlocks the data, and it is only as secure as the protections around it. Once the information is known, or a way to bypass the code is revealed, the encryption can be defeated by anyone with that knowledge.

The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that’s simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks — from restaurants and banks to stores and homes. No reasonable person would find that acceptable.

The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers — including tens of millions of American citizens — from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals. The same engineers who built strong encryption into the iPhone to protect our users would, ironically, be ordered to weaken those protections and make our users less safe.

We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack. For years, cryptologists and national security experts have been warning against weakening encryption. Doing so would hurt only the well-meaning and law-abiding citizens who rely on companies like Apple to protect their data. Criminals and bad actors will still encrypt, using tools that are readily available to them.

A Dangerous Precedent
Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority.

The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.

The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge.

Opposing this order is not something we take lightly. We feel we must speak up in the face of what we see as an overreach by the U.S. government.

We are challenging the FBI’s demands with the deepest respect for American democracy and a love of our country. We believe it would be in the best interest of everyone to step back and consider the implications.

While we believe the FBI’s intentions are good, it would be wrong for the government to force us to build a backdoor into our products. And ultimately, we fear that this demand would undermine the very freedoms and liberty our government is meant to protect.

Tim Cook

Answers to your questions about privacy and security

Why is Apple objecting to the government’s order?
The government asked a court to order Apple to create a unique version of iOS that would bypass security protections on the iPhone Lock screen. It would also add a completely new capability so that passcode tries could be entered electronically.

This has two important and dangerous implications:

First, the government would have us write an entirely new operating system for their use. They are asking Apple to remove security features and add a new ability to the operating system to attack iPhone encryption, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by “brute force,” trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.

We built strong security into the iPhone because people carry so much personal information on our phones today, and there are new data breaches every week affecting individuals, companies and governments. The passcode lock and requirement for manual entry of the passcode are at the heart of the safeguards we have built in to iOS. It would be wrong to intentionally weaken our products with a government-ordered backdoor. If we lose control of our data, we put both our privacy and our safety at risk.

Second, the order would set a legal precedent that would expand the powers of the government and we simply don’t know where that would lead us. Should the government be allowed to order us to create other capabilities for surveillance purposes, such as recording conversations or location tracking? This would set a very dangerous precedent.

Is it technically possible to do what the government has ordered?
Yes, it is certainly possible to create an entirely new operating system to undermine our security features as the government wants. But it’s something we believe is too dangerous to do. The only way to guarantee that such a powerful tool isn’t abused and doesn’t fall into the wrong hands is to never create it.

Could Apple build this operating system just once, for this iPhone, and never use it again?
The digital world is very different from the physical world. In the physical world you can destroy something and it’s gone. But in the digital world, the technique, once created, could be used over and over again, on any number of devices.

Law enforcement agents around the country have already said they have hundreds of iPhones they want Apple to unlock if the FBI wins this case. In the physical world, it would be the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks. Of course, Apple would do our best to protect that key, but in a world where all of our data is under constant threat, it would be relentlessly attacked by hackers and cybercriminals. As recent attacks on the IRS systems and countless other data breaches have shown, no one is immune to cyberattacks.

Again, we strongly believe the only way to guarantee that such a powerful tool isn’t abused and doesn’t fall into the wrong hands is to never create it.

Has Apple unlocked iPhones for law enforcement in the past?
No.

We regularly receive law enforcement requests for information about our customers and their Apple devices. In fact, we have a dedicated team that responds to these requests 24/7. We also provide guidelines on our website for law enforcement agencies so they know exactly what we are able to access and what legal authority we need to see before we can help them.

For devices running the iPhone operating systems prior to iOS 8 and under a lawful court order, we have extracted data from an iPhone.

We’ve built progressively stronger protections into our products with each new software release, including passcode-based data encryption, because cyberattacks have only become more frequent and more sophisticated. As a result of these stronger protections that require data encryption, we are no longer able to use the data extraction process on an iPhone running iOS 8 or later.

Hackers and cybercriminals are always looking for new ways to defeat our security, which is why we keep making it stronger.

The government says your objection appears to be based on concern for your business model and marketing strategy. Is that true?
Absolutely not. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is and always has been about our customers. We feel strongly that if we were to do what the government has asked of us — to create a backdoor to our products — not only is it unlawful, but it puts the vast majority of good and law abiding citizens, who rely on iPhone to protect their most personal and important data, at risk.

Is there any other way you can help the FBI?
We have done everything that’s both within our power and within the law to help in this case. As we’ve said, we have no sympathy for terrorists.

We provided all the information about the phone that we possessed. We also proactively offered advice on obtaining additional information. Even since the government’s order was issued, we are providing further suggestions after learning new information from the Justice Department’s filings.

One of the strongest suggestions we offered was that they pair the phone to a previously joined network, which would allow them to back up the phone and get the data they are now asking for. Unfortunately, we learned that while the attacker’s iPhone was in FBI custody the Apple ID password associated with the phone was changed. Changing this password meant the phone could no longer access iCloud services.

As the government has confirmed, we’ve handed over all the data we have, including a backup of the iPhone in question. But now they have asked us for information we simply do not have.

What should happen from here?
Our country has always been strongest when we come together. We feel the best way forward would be for the government to withdraw its demands under the All Writs Act and, as some in Congress have proposed, form a commission or other panel of experts on intelligence, technology, and civil liberties to discuss the implications for law enforcement, national security, privacy, and personal freedoms. Apple would gladly participate in such an effort.

Read Tim’s letter

 Vimos Un Mundo De Estupidos(1), Donde Abogados Politicos  Son Los Profesores

22/01/2016  URL> http://wp.me/p2jyCr-E0 

22/01/2016  URL> http://wp.me/p2jyCr-E0 

HAY QUE USAR EL ARTICULO 29 CN1853  PARA ARREGLAR ESTE BODRIO CAOTICO!  

¿FUERON ALFONSIN y MENEM QUIENES METIERON TANTA BASURA EN NUESTRA  CONSTITUCIÓN?   ¿CUANDO LO APROBAMOS? …¿CUANDO LO CONCENTIMOS?  … ¿CUANDO LO VOTAMOS

¿DESDE CUANDO  NUESTROS DERECHOS NOS LO DAN o QUITAN LOS GOBIERNOS y POLÍTICOS CORRUPTOS?

Juan Bautista ALBERDI  NOS ADVIRTIÓ QUE ESTO NOS PASARÍA si permitíamos que “INFAMES TRAIDORES A LA PATRIA” consolidaran LA SUMA DEL PODER PUBLICO…

¿FUE LA LLAMADA  “CONVENCIÓN PROSTITUYENTE DE ALFONSÍN”… la que nos vendio tanta esquizofrenia de NULIDAD INSALVABLE?

Nuestra CONSTITUCIÓN es la única en el mundo    que tiene una herramienta tan poderosa como el ARTICULO 29 USÉMOSLO para arreglar este MAMARRACHO LEGAL  fuente de TODA INJUSTICIA IMAGINABLE

Gastón Saint Martin

ARTICULO 29 

ARTICULO 29 Solo Castellano

Boletines, Grupos    Para: viendo mas alla

Carta pública al Presidente de la Corte Suprema

21/01/2016

De : Bernardo Nespral

Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, enero de 2016.-

Señor Presidente de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación

Doctor D. Ricardo Lorenzetti

Con la más alta consideración

Señor Presidente:

Nos permitimos molestar la atención de V.E. por entender que un asunto judicial sólo está en manos del Poder Judicial, que es y debe ser independiente de los otros poderes. Si bien no es asunto que por el momento esté en manos de la Excma. CSJN, ni Su Excelencia puede intervenir en la causa, el tema nos preocupa y por su intermedio nos dirigimos ante quien corresponda, siempre dentro del Poder Judicial de la Nación.

Los mencionados al pie hace 47 años cumplimos con el servicio militar obligatorio en la Policía Federal Argentina (Decreto 18231/50). Nuestro destino fue el Cuerpo de Policía Montada. Era sólo un año, en nuestro caso del 1 de abril de 1968 al 31 de marzo de 1969.

En ese carácter conocimos a mucha gente, oficiales, suboficiales y colegas de promoción anteriores y posteriores, que se renovaban cada tres meses. Entre los oficiales conocimos bastante a quien era nuestro jefe directo, por entonces el joven Oficial Inspector Humberto Santiago Trotta.

Siempre nos dio un trato cordial, ameno, muy humano. No tuvimos ni tenemos ninguna crítica en su contra. Pese a que éramos agentes conscriptos, entre 19 y 20 años de edad, siempre fue respetuoso de nuestra persona y de nuestra dignidad como seres humanos.

Pese al largo tiempo transcurrido, cercano al medio siglo, desde entonces seguimos reuniéndonos periódicamente compartiendo alguna cena. No sólo para recordar nuestra época del servicio militar sino, principalmente, para compartir nuestra vida personal, familiar y profesional. También nos comunicamos en los momentos buenos y malos que nos da la vida. Algunos somos graduados universitarios y otros no, pero todos fuimos trabajadores. Éramos treinta, algunos fallecieron, otros se perdieron con el paso de los años y unos pocos debimos exiliarnos temporariamente por razones de trabajo, porque esa fue nuestra única manera de vivir, trabajando honradamente.

De muchas de esas reuniones participó el oficial Humberto Santiago Trotta que iba ascendiendo en su carrera policial hasta llegar al grado de comisario, y retirarse con ese grado. Pero para nosotros fue siempre el mismo, antes un jefe que nos trataba con respeto, después un amigo. Siempre una gran persona.

A mediados de agosto de 2015 tuvimos la triste noticia de que el comisario ® Humberto Santiago Trotta estaba detenido en el Complejo Penitenciario Federal de Marcos Paz, Provincia de Buenos Aires. Nos sorprendió muchísimo y todavía nos cuesta creerlo por el concepto que siempre tuvimos y tenemos de su persona. Efectivamente, habría sido detenido en su domicilio y a mediados del mes de septiembre se le habría tomado declaración indagatoria (creemos que en la Causa 401.015/2004, que desconocemos, pero estaría referida a delitos de lesa humanidad). No sabemos concretamente la imputación que pesa en su contra. Averiguando pudimos saber que en 1975, siendo subcomisario, había sido enviado a la Delegación Tucumán de la Policía Federal con carácter de subjefe. Nunca se escondió, nunca se fugó, se lo podía ubicar fácilmente en su domicilio particular.

Algunos de nosotros, con más conocimientos jurídicos se informaron sobre los delitos de lesa humanidad que habrían sido definidos por el Estatuto de Roma que entró en vigor el 1° de julio de 2002, de la responsabilidad de jefes y superiores (Art. 28), de los principios “nullum crimen, nulla poena, rationae personae” que, pese a la gravedad de los hechos que se define y condena, están fundados en derechos humanos. También nos informamos de la incorporación al derecho positivo argentino por las Leyes 24.820 y reiteramos, no los justificamos. El motivo de esta presentación es otro y no se refiere a esa etapa triste de la historia de nuestro país.

Afortunadamente, además de esa leyes 24.820 y 25.778, también adquirieron jerarquía constitucional varios tratados de derechos humanos (Art. 75, inc. 22 de la Constitución Nacional): Declaración Americana sobre los Derechos y Deberes del Hombre, Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos, Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos (o Pacto de San José de Costa Rica), Pacto Internacional de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales, Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos, Convención para la Prevención y Sanción del Delito de Genocidio, Convención Internacional sobre la eliminación de todas las formas de Discriminación Racial, Convención de todas las formas de Discriminación contra la Mujer, Convención contra la Tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanas o degradantes y Convención sobre los Derechos del Niño.

Y en un Grupo de Trabajo presidido por Argentina se elaboró la de la que habrían participado la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS), el Fondo de Población de las Naciones Unidas (UNFPA) y representantes de la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA).

Nuestra preocupación se centra en el hecho de que nuestro amigo Humberto S. Trotta, en el mes de septiembre de 2015 cumplió . Y no sólo eso, sino que fue operado de un del que debe controlarse periódicamente, además de padecer otras afecciones propias de la edad. Quizás esto no lo pueda determinar una Junta Médica, aunque es indudable la vulnerabilidad que produce el paso de los años y que fue operado de esa grave enfermedad de la que sin control podría producirse una recidiva. Habría que ver qué médico arriesgaría su título profesional afirmando lo contrario.

Al juez le atañe convertir la norma estática en fenómeno dinámico, esto es, (conf. Díaz de Guijarro, Abogados y Jueces, 1959, pág. 39). Al decidir, el juez opera con su razonamiento, su conocimiento y su conciencia. La conciencia juzga al propio juzgador y lo impulsa, lo induce, lo orienta. Es una gran custodia de la justicia misma. La conciencia es la consejera permanente del entendimiento (Cipriano, “Misión y jerarquía de abogados y jueces”, Depalma, pág. 20). El reconocimiento de la dignidad y de los derechos, iguales e inalienables de todos los seres humanos constituye el fundamento de la libertad, de la justicia y de la paz en el mundo.

Como amantes del Estado de Derecho conocemos nuestra Ley Fundamental, la Constitución de la Nación Argentina. Esta reconoce garantías que, al decir de Joaquín V. González son “todas aquellas seguridades y promesas que ofrece la Constitución al pueblo argentino y a todos los hombres, de que sus derechos generales y especiales, han de ser sostenidos y defendidos por las autoridades y por el pueblo mismo; y se consignan, ya porque son inherentes a toda la sociedad de hombres libres e iguales, ya porque se ha querido reparar errores o abusos del pasado” (Manual de la Constitución Argentina, pág. 86). Con más actualidad, Miguel A. Ekmekdjian dice: “Las garantías constitucionales se desdoblan en genéricas y específicas. Las garantías genéricas sirven para la protección de todos los derechos. Las garantías específicas son instrumentos diseñados para la protección de los derechos de jerarquía superior: dignidad e intimidad, dignidad, vida y salud y libertad física” (Tratado de Derecho Constitucional, Tomo II, Depalma, pág. 284). Los derechos y garantías constitucionales deben respetarse.

Reiteramos, no justificamos ningún delito. Aunque pueda haber muchos otros detenidos en la misma situación, esta carta pública se basa solamente en nuestra preocupación por el estado del comisario ® Humberto Santiago Trotta. Como dijimos anteriormente, y puede comprobarse, se lo podía ubicar con mucha facilidad en guías telefónicas, clubes; nunca se escondió, nunca eludió la acción de la justicia. Esto no lo hace alguien que se sabe culpable de algún hecho ilícito. No intervenimos en la causa penal ni interferimos en la labor de su abogado. Creemos que al Comisario ® Humberto S. Trotta bien pudo habérsele otorgado la eximición de prisión o la excarcelación (conf. Arts. 318, 319 y 320 del Código Procesal Penal de la Nación), aunque de esta última siempre se está a tiempo.

Si el juez de la causa no lo creyó posible, sobre lo que no opinamos, de lo que no nos cabe duda, atendiendo a los Tratados de Derechos Humanos antes mencionados, a su edad (80 años) y a su estado de salud, es que debe otorgársele la detención domiciliaria.

El Art. 314 del Código Procesal Penal de la Nación dice textualmente: “El juez ordenará la detención domiciliaria de las personas a las cuales pueda corresponder, de acuerdo al Código Penal, cumplimiento de la pena en el domicilio”.

Y el Art. 10 del Código Penal de la Nación prevé para estos casos de prisión domiciliaria al interno mayor de setenta (70) años; y al interno enfermo cuando la privación de la libertad en el establecimiento carcelario le impida recuperarse o tratar adecuadamente su dolencia.

Es una normativa de carácter eminentemente humanitario que no puede ser desconocida por quienes defienden los derechos humanos. Es una humana modalidad de prisión. Durante el debate de la Ley 26.472 no prosperó privar a los condenados por delitos de lesa humanidad de este derecho por la evidente violación del principio de igualdad ante la ley. Además el “otorgará” no quiere decir “podrá otorgar”. La privación de la libertad de una persona de 80 años de edad y con una enfermedad puede transformarse en una pena de muerte, afectando el primero y más fundamental derecho: el derecho a la vida. Téngase presente que nunca se escondió por lo que siempre estuvo a disposición de la justicia.

El comisario ® Humberto Santiago Trotta tiene 80 años de edad (cumplidos el 8-9-15), padece una grave enfermedad algo controlada (cáncer), cardiopatías, artrosis y alguna otra. Es una persona especialmente necesitada de protección en un lugar adecuado como es su domicilio por estar inmerso en situaciones de vulnerabilidad, tal como lo contempla la Convención Interamericana sobre la Protección de los Derechos Humanos de las Personas Mayores.

Conocemos al ser humano Humberto Santiago Trotta desde hace cerca de medio siglo, nos entristece profundamente la situación que está viviendo y tememos por el agravamiento de su salud. Queremos verlo en libertad a la mayor brevedad. 

Dios Guarde a V.E.

Bernardo Nespral (ex juez de la Nación) y otros*

promocion70cpm@gmail.com 

 

* Fernando Arbarello, Juan Carlos López Martí, Rodolfo Hugo Corvalán, Gastón C. Laclau Ugarteche, Edgardo García, Alberto Lioy, Raúl H. Monge, Jorge A. Luchia, Adolfo Luis Morales, Osvaldo J. Slimmens, Ricardo Levi, Horacio E. Palma, Víctor Daniel Pelizza, Daniel A. Conno, Salvador Patané, Miguel Tortorelli, Alberto Barissan, Antonio J. Medic Skontra (EEUU), Eduardo Daniel Hazán (Chile).

http://www.informadorpublico.com/opinion/carta-publica-al-presidente-de-la-corte-suprema

(1)    Estupido:  Persona con dificultad para aprender las cosas.  (Diccionario Vox)

Keeping Americans Safe from ISIS

Short Link:   http://wp.me/p2jyCr-zN

Dear Friend,

This week, I urged President Obama to ensure no refugee related to the Syrian crisis is admitted to our country unless the U.S. government can guarantee, with 100 percent assurance, that they are not affiliated with ISIS. A copy of the letter is below.

Sincerely,

Senator Mark Kirk

Dear Mr. President:

We stand in solidarity with the people of France and against the terrorists who carried out the horrific attacks of November 13th that clearly were designed deliberately to kill as many innocent people as possible.  Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.  As we mourn the loss of life and provide France all the support and assistance it needs, the U.S. government must redouble its efforts to keep the American people safe.  We believe that an essential component of that effort is ensuring that no refugee related to the Syrian crisis is admitted to the United States unless the U.S. government can guarantee, with 100 percent assurance, that they are not members, supporters, or sympathizers of the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), also known as Daesh or ISIL.

It is already clear that ISIS is responsible for the barbaric attacks.  Reports indicate that at least one of the attackers apparently utilized the flow of refugees to infiltrate into Europe.  These facts require a serious and objective reexamination of the Administration’s policy toward Syrian refugees to avoid unnecessary risks.

While our country has a long history of welcoming refugees and has an important role to play in the heartbreaking Syrian refugee crisis, our first and most important priority must be to ensure that any refugee who comes to the United States does not present a threat to the American people.  Compassion for Syrian refugees is important, but a fierce determination to protect the American people is also important.

The fact that ISIS may have utilized the flow of refugees to infiltrate Europe and potentially the United States is not a surprise.  In September, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper, publicly warned the U.S. intelligence community has a “huge concern” that ISIS may seek to infiltrate Syrian refugees who are flowing into Europe and potentially the United States.  “As they [refugees] descend on Europe, one of the obvious issues that we worry about, and in turn as we bring refugees into this country, is exactly what’s their background?”  DNI Clapper added:  “We don’t obviously put it past the likes of ISIL to infiltrate operatives among these refugees.

On October 21, 2015, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey told the House Committee on Homeland Security that the U.S. government may not have the ability to vet thoroughly all Syrian refugees coming into the United States.  He explained that if a Syrian person is not already in the FBI’s database, that person is unknown to the agency, leaving an inadequate basis for the person’s background to be screened for terrorism risk.  “We can only query against that which we have collected,” Director Comey cautioned.  He also said, “So if someone has never made a ripple in the pond in Syria in a way that would get their identity or their interest reflected in our database, we can query our database until the cows come home but we are not going to—there will be nothing … because we have no record on that person.

”Given DNI Clapper’s stated concern that ISIS may try to infiltrate Syrian refugee movements as well as FBI Director Comey’s public acknowledgment of the U.S. government’s limitations in thoroughly vetting all Syrian refugees, we respectfully request your Administration:

  • List comprehensively the challenges, prior to the November 13th terrorist attacks, in the process for checking the background of Syrian refugees and checking potential risks to national security, including potential terrorism risks;
  • Detail what special or enhanced measures will be added to the screening process for Syrian refugees in the aftermath of the November 13th terrorist attacks; and
  • Describe how it plans to address the vetting challenges that Director Comey describes.

We ask that your Administration immediately share this information with the American people. We look forward to a timely response.  We cannot imagine a more urgent or higher priority.

 

Contra el Corrupto poder en todos los gobiernos, nos alertó El Profesor de Filosofia Moral Adam Smith.

APRIL 21, 2015 4:33PM   –   By PATRICK G. EDDINGTON

Share: > > > >   http://wp.me/p2jyCr-JQ 

http://www.cato.org/blog/patriot-act-reauthorization-fight-begins-week?utm_source=Cato+Institute+Emails&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=b8a4d3d497-Cato_at_Liberty_RSS&utm_term=0_395878584c-b8a4d3d497-141820070&mc_cid=b8a4d3d497&mc_eid=37a4448f40

If the House Judiciary Committee keeps to its current schedule, on Thursday it will meet to consider the third version of the USA Freedom Act in the last two years. I’ve seen a very recent draft of the bill, and from my perspective in its current form the bill effectively acts as if the Snowden revelations and several independent reviews of the PATRIOT Act Sec. 215 metadata program never happened.

The bill ignores the fact that both the Congressional Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks and the 9/11 Commission itself found that the attacks happened because of information sharing and analytical failures, not because of intelligence collection shortfalls. The bill claims to end the controversial telephone metadata program, but a close reading of the bill reveals that it actually leaves key PATRIOT Act definitions of “person” or “U.S. Person” intact—and under 50 U.S.C. sec. 1801(m) of the PATRIOT Act, “person” is defined as “any individual, including any officer or employee of the Federal Government, or any group, entity, association, corporation, or foreign power.” It’s the “group, entity, association or corporation” language that leaves open the possibility of continued mass telephone metadata surveillance under the PATRIOT Act.

The bill also grants the government sweeping “emergency” collection authority not tied to an imminent threat of death or bodily harm, which has generally been the standard for such programs in the past. The bill allows the government to retain U.S. Person call detail records if the government alone determines such records are “foreign intelligence information”. The bill’s FISA court revisions include the creation ofamicus curiae (previously called “special advocates” in earlier version of the USA Freedom Act) that in theory would help the court work its way through particularly thorny cases potentially involving major interpretations of law. But there are two key caveats to this provision: the FISA court has sole discretion to appoint—or not appoint—theseamicus curiae and the government still retains the ability to invoke the “state secrets” privilege, which would render the presence of the amicus curiae moot.

What is missing from the bill is at least as significant as what it contains.

The bill does not address bulk collection under EO 12333 as reported by former State Department official John Napier Tye. Further, the bill fails to address bulk collection and retention of US Person records under Sec. 702 of the FISA Amendments Act.

The bill lacks mandatory US Person data destruction and audit compliance provisions for information previously collected on US Persons not currently the subject of a criminal investigation. It contains no protections for national security whistleblowers; has no bar on the government imposing “back doors” being  built into electronic devices, software or hardware; does not bar the USG from targeting U.S. Persons solely on the basis of their use of internet anonymizing technology such as Tor; and does not address the recently revealed DEA telephony metadata program.

Whether supporters of the far more sweeping Surveillance State Repeal Act will be able to get a hearing on that bill or have the chance to take provisions of the SSRA and offer them as amendments to the USA Freedom Act—either in committee or on the House floor—remains to be seen. One thing is certain: the fight over reforming our nation’s surveillance laws is about to get much more intense, and quickly.

Topics:

Foreign Policy and National SecurityLaw and Civil Liberties

_______________

Look up this update too (February 18, 2016)

MULTIMEDIA

About JW Player 6.11.4923 (Premium edition)

code

http://www.cato.org/longtail-iframe/node/63016/field_longtail_player/0

Select

http://www.cato.org/multimedia/media-highlights-radio/patrick-g-eddington-discusses-ethics-what-fbi-wants-apple-do-kexs

Select

Patrick G. Eddington discusses the ethics of what the FBI wants Apple to do on KTSE’s The Armstrong and Getty Show

February 18, 2016

http://vejainternational.com/news/the-teheran-caracas-buenos-aires-connection/

NEWS 3/14/2015 21:34

The Teheran-Caracas-Buenos Aires Connection

Three former members of the leadership from the Hugo Chavez era tell VEJA that Iran sent money to Cristina Kirchner´s election campaign in exchange for nuclear secrets and impunity in the Amia case, using Venezuela as an intermediary

by Leonardo Coutinho, Washington

 

Argentinians have been wondering for the last two months what happened on January 18, the day in which federal prosecutor Alberto Nisman was found dead in the bathroom of his apartment in Buenos Aires. Only four days previously, he had presented the justice ministry with an indictment against president Cristina Kirchner and another four people he accused of covering up Iran´s participation in the terrorist attack which resulted in 85 deaths and 300 wounded in the headquarters of the Israeli Argentina Mutual Association (Amia) in 1994.

IRAN, CARACAS, BUENOS AIRES, CONNECTIONS

IRAN, CARACAS, BUENOS AIRES, CONNECTIONS

Nisman explained in his document that, besides the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding that would allow Iran to interfere in the investigation of the case, the Islamic Republic wanted the Argentinians to remove the names of five Iranians and one Lebanese from the list of people wanted by Interpol. The Argentinian government went out of its way to disparage Nisman´s findings. Three weeks ago a judge formally turned down Nisman´s indictment that had been presented once again by a new prosecutor. Without even trying to hide her political alignment with the government, the judge took advantage of the decision which overturned Nisman´s denunciation to praise the president and her administration.

Everything indicated that the crime for which Cristina Kirchner and other members of her government were accused of by Nisman would become one of the many mysterious episodes in Argentina´s recent history. However, an agreement between countries, even when made in the shadows, leaves traces. Since 2012, 12 senior members of the Chavez government have sought political asylum in the United States, where they are cooperating with the authorities in investigations on the Caracas government´s participation in international drugs trafficking and supporting terrorism. VEJA spoke separately to three of the 12 exiled former Chavez supporters in the United States. To prevent any retaliation to their relatives in Venezuela, they asked not to be identified in this article. They were all part of Chavez´s cabinet. After Chavez´s death in 2013, they shared power with Maduro but fell out with him after a couple of months. The former members of the Chavez government said they had been present in Caracas when the leaders of Iran and Venezuela discussed the agreement that the prosecutor Nisman denounced in Buenos Aires. They said that the representatives of the Argentinian government received large amounts of dollars in cash. In exchange for the money, the Chavez dissidents said Iran had asked that those behind the terrorist attack should be covered up. The Argentinians would also have to share with the Iranians their long experience in heavy water nuclear reactor, an old-fashioned, expensive and complicated system but one that allows plutonium to be obtained from natural uranium. This shortcut is of great advantage to a country that is interested in building atomic bombs without the need to enrich the uranium and, therefore, draw the attention of the international supervisory authorities.

The former Chavez defectors said the then president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, landed in the Venezuelan capital on the morning of Saturday January 13, 2007 for his second visit to the country. Once the protocol ceremonies were over, Chavez received Ahmadinejad for a meeting in the Miraflores Palace, accompanied only by their bodyguards, interpreter and top tier members of the Venezuelan government. The meeting occurred around noon, just before lunch, and the conversation lasted around 15 minutes. They spoke about bilateral agreements, investments in the oil sector and student interchange. It was then that Ahmadinejad told Chavez he needed a favor. A member of the military who was a witness to the meeting told VEJA that the following dialogue occurred:

Ahmadinejad – This is a matter of life or death. I need you to be an intermediary with Argentina to get help for my country´s nuclear program. We need Argentina to share its nuclear technology with us. It will be impossible to advance with our program without Argentina´s cooperation.

Chavez – I will do this very quickly, comrade.

Ahmadinejad – Don´t worry about the cost involved in this operation. Iran will back it up with all the money needed to convince the Argentinians. There is another question. I need you to discourage Argentina from continuing to insist with Interpol that authorities from Iran be imprisoned.

Chavez – I will take care of this personally.

The presidents got up and went to lunch. Afterwards, they returned for a new meeting. The Iranian interpreter was the only outsider present this time. The former Chavez staff members exiled in Washington told VEJA that they participated directly in the arrangements made by Chavez to meet Ahmadinejad´s request. The two presidents saw an opportunity to make an agreement attractive to Argentina by having Venezuela buy Argentinean bonds which it had been doing since 2005. The Venezuelan Treasury bought US$ 1.8 billion of Argentinean debt in 2007. At the end of 2008, Venezuela held US$ 6 billion dollars in Argentinean sovereign debt. It was a great deal for Argentina as it faced the constant threat of a moratorium which frightened investors off. The Kirchners, Nestor and Cristina, thanked Chavez in public on a number of occasions for the financial operation.

The direct transfer of money from Caracas to Buenos Aires was less sophisticated and more problematic. In August 2007, Guido Antonini Wilson, a Venezuelan businessman based in the United States, was caught by the Argentinean customs trying to enter the country with a suitcase containing US$ 800,000. He later claimed that the money was destined for the campaign of Cristina Kirchner who was elected President of Argentina two months later, succeeding her husband, Nestor Kirchner. By coincidence, Chavez had an official visit to the Argentinean capital scheduled for two days after Antonini was imprisoned. One of the former members of the Chavez government VEJA heard was with Chavez when he was informed of the imprisonment by Rafael Ramirez who was then president of the state-owned oil company PDVSA and is now Venezuelan ambassador to the United Nations. Chavez swore and asked who the “idiot” was who had coordinated the operation. “The money was originally from Iran for Cristina Kirchner´s campaign,” said the eyewitness. “I cannot confirm that she knew the money was Iranian but there is no doubt she knew that it came from a clandestine source,” he added.

Antonini was then released and sought out the FBI when he returned to the United States to explain what had happened with the suitcase. Chavez´s intelligence service tried to dissuade Antonini from doing so. The operation is described in the book “Chavistas en el Imperio” by the Cuban-American journalist Casto Ocando and is based on the FBI information on Antonini. Ocando said the agents of Henry Rangel Silva, Venezuela´s chief of intelligence, offered to provide Antonini with lawyers and when he refused the offer, threatened him and his son with death. The conversations with the lawyers paid for by the Venezuelans were taped by the FBI. In one of them, dated September 7, 2007, they said that Caracas was willing to pay two million dollars for Antonini´s silence. The spies were arrested and accused of conspiracy. In his book, Ocando is right in concluding that Chavez was ready to do anything to cover up the origin of the money, including assuming the blame for the remittance and attributing it to the PDVSA. What Ocando did not know and now knows is that the resources came from Iran.

The money arrived in Venezuela in the same form as it had been sent to Argentina: in suitcases. At the meeting in which Ahmadinejad had asked Chavez to make a deal attractive to Argentina, the two presidents also decided to create a flight on the Caracas, Damascus and Tehran route which the Chavez leadership later nicknamed “aeroterror”. Between March 2007 and September 2010, an A340 Airbus flew this route twice a month. According to the former Chavez loyalists heard by VEJA, the plane carried cocaine when it left Caracas. It also carried documents and equipment although the ex-Chavez staff had no details about them. The drugs were unloaded in the Syrian capital from where they were redistributed by Hezbollah, a terrorist group from Lebanon. The American authorities have known since 2012, when the first Chavez defectors began to go into exile in the United States, that drug trafficking overtook Iran as the main source of Hezbollah´s financing. When the plane made its return flight, it carried cash and terrorists on the international wanted list.

One of the main operators of the Caracas-Teheran flights was Venezuela´s interior minister, Tareck El-Aissami, currently the governor of the state of Aragua. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) collected a number of statements that showed he was the link between the FARC rebels in Colombia and Hezbollah. El-Aissami had an agent called Ghazi Nasr al-Din, a Lebanese who was at that time the commercial attaché at the Venezuelan embassy in Damascus. Al-Din, who was put on the FBI´s most wanted list at the end of January, had the mission of producing and distributing Venezuelan passports to hide the real identities of the terrorists who travelled throughout the world. Among those whose identity he covered up was the cleric Mohsen Rabbani who Nisman claimed was the executor of the Amia attack. Rabbani visited Brazil at least three times using a passport provided by Al-Din. Even when the “aeroterror” flights ended in 2010, Venezuela continued to supply documents to hide the real identities of terrorists. One of the exiled former Chavez staff said that the Caracas government gave shelter to at least 35 members of the Hezbollah group in May 2013.

The ex-Chavez loyalists interviewed for this article did not know whether the Iranians succeeded in obtaining the information on the Argentinean nuclear program that Ahmaninejad had wanted so badly. Although they belonged to Chavez´s inner circle, the discussions on this issue were reserved for the Venezuelan and Iranian defense ministers. The negotiator on the Argentinean side was Nilda Garré who is currently the country´s ambassador to the Organization of American States (OAS). She is a former Montonero guerrilla who met Chavez a number of times and had a close relationship with him which was made official in 2005 when she was nominated as Argentina´s ambassador to Caracas. One of the Chavez deserters said it was Chavez himself who had asked Nestor Kirchner to nominate Garré for the post. Chavez and Garré also had an intimate personal relationship which is only of public interest as it was one of the components of the political alliance between the two countries. “It was something like ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’”, said the former Chavez supporter who added that when Chavez and Garré met in his office in the Miraflores Palace, the sounds of partying could be heard from a long way off. Garré returned to Buenos Aires after six months to take up the defense post where she remained until 2010. “I cannot confirm that the Argentinean government handed over nuclear secrets but I know it received a lot through legal means (bonds) and illegal means (suitcases filled with cash) in exchange for something that was very valuable to the Iranians.” Another exiled former Chavez staff member said:” The person who knows these secrets in Argentina is the ex-ambassador Garré.” There are similarities between the nuclear reactors at Arak in Iran and Atucha in Argentina. Both were planned to produce plutonium, an essential element in building atomic weapons, using only natural uranium. The difference is that Arak should have come into operation last year but there are no signs that this has actually occurred. The Atucha reactor has been operating since 1974 and generates 2.5% of Argentina´s electrical energy. The Argentineans´ nuclear technology was also useful in starting up the Bushir plant that had been left unfinished since 1979. Bushir was inaugurated in 2011. Perhaps minister Garré can provide a clearer picture of the Teheran-Buenos Aires agreement that was stitched up in Caracas.

 

 

DICK DURBING US SENATOR FOR ILSenator Durbin’s eNewsletter

1/24/15  Newsletters

Dick Durbin US Senator for Illinois

Dick Durbin US Senator for Illinois

This week, President Obama delivered the State of the Union Address. In an optimistic and powerful speech, he spoke about the American economy and the progress we’ve made since the recession. The national unemployment rate is down, millions of jobs are being created and this past year was the best year for the labor market since 1999.Though the progress we’ve made is real, there is work left to do to lift up America’s middle-class. The President announced proposals that working families in Illinois care about and now it’s up to Congress to come together and take his initiatives seriously.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) released the following statement after President Barack Obama gave is 6th State of the Union Address.Expand Access to Education: I believe the President’s proposal to make two years of community college free for responsible students is a moonshot of an idea. It would give motivated students a path to receiving a solid educational foundation without the debt. Community colleges have always provided a springboard for students who wish to continue their education and get the training they need to land a quality job. It’s time to look beyond K through 12, start thinking about K through 14 and bring our educational achievements to the 21st century. I applaud the president for this effort and support it wholeheartedly.Strengthen Our Infrastructure: During his address, the President made it clear how important it is for Congress to pass a long-term bill to fund our transportation and infrastructure projects by May. In Illinois, we know funding transportation projects support thousands of construction jobs, will lead to future economic activity and will make our communities better. Congress needs to work together and pass a federal transportation bill soon.Close Corporate Tax Loopholes: Something I’ve been a strong supporter of is fixing our broken tax system and the President noted he wants to do the same. Any tax reform proposal must address the many loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share while middle-income families pick up the tab. Through a business practice known as corporate inversion, companies move their tax domicile overseas so they can pay lower corporate tax rates. We should eliminate the ability of companies to invert now and then work toward tax reform that closes the many loopholes that contributes to our growing income inequality.Invest in Cutting Edge Research: Lastly, President Obama told Congress he would like to see increased investments in biomedical research. One of my upcoming public health priorities will be the continued and increased funding for biomedical research. I plan to once again introduce legislation which builds on this goal and will look for more opportunities to increase funding in this vital area of our budget.
OBAMA STATE OF THE UNION 2015 ADDRESSU.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) met with retired Air Force Captain Anthony ‘Tony’ Simone and his wife, Andrea, who were his guests for President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address. Durbin first met Captain Simone and Andrea in 2013 at Edward Hines, Jr. VA Hospital in Maywood, IL.The President reminded us this week that we live in a great country and our economy is recovering. We have made extraordinary sacrifices abroad and have lifted ourselves up by the bootstraps back home. Let’s keep moving forward, help those families trying to make ends meet and invest in America and its future..Stay InformedStay informed on what I am doing for Illinois and what is happening in Congress by visiting mywebsite.  If you have a question, a comment, or are in need of assistance, please contact my office at one of the phone numbers below or send me an email.Office phone numbers:

Washington, DC: (202) 224-2152
Chicago: (312) 353-4952
Springfield: (217) 492-4062
Carbondale: (618) 351-1122
Rock Island: (309) 786-5173

You can also follow me on these services: