What legacy for Hillary on gay rights?






STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Frida Ghitis: As secretary of state, Clinton made equality for gays a foreign policy value

  • She says treatment of LGBT citizens is a microcosm of a nation's human rights approach

  • She says Clinton used U.S. sway to advance LGBT rights as global standard

  • Ghitis: Clinton gave a boost to human rights for all and nudge to process of freedom




Editor's note: Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review. A former CNN producer and correspondent, she is the author of "The End of Revolution: A Changing World in the Age of Live Television." Follow her on Twitter: @FridaGColumns


(CNN) -- As Hillary Clinton makes a whirlwind round of appearances in her last days as secretary of state, one groundbreaking aspect of her work deserves a moment in the spotlight: In a bold departure with tradition, Clinton made the promotion of equality for gay people a core value of U.S. foreign policy.


That is a transformative change, one that advances the cause of human rights around the world -- not just for gays and lesbians, but for everyone.



Frida Ghitis

Frida Ghitis



The way governments treat their LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) citizens can tell us much about their overall approach to human rights and democracy. Mistreatment of sexual minorities is a microcosm of greater repression.


Take a look at the gruesome spectacle of young gay men executed by the government of Iran in the streets, for all to see. Or, look at the new anti-gay laws coming into effect in Russia's increasingly authoritarian regime. It is no accident that the growing repression of LGBT Russians coincides with a dramatic deterioration of political freedom and what the nonpartisan Freedom House called "the return of the iron fist in Russia."


It is clear that gays and lesbians are the canaries in the coal mine of human rights. When gays live under pressure, everyone should worry.



That, however, is not how Clinton explained it 14 months ago, when she stood before the Human Rights Council in Geneva, in front of an audience filled with representatives from Arab and African countries, from places where homosexuality is a crime, even one punishable by death, and declared that gay rights and human rights "are one and the same." Gay people, she explained, deserve equality simply because everyone does.


It was Human Rights Day, the commemoration of the signing of the 1948 U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and she used the occasion to send a message to the world on behalf of the United States. She declared unequivocally that there is no exception for gay people when it comes to human rights.


Opinion: President Hillary Clinton? If she wants it


She admitted that the U.S. record on human rights for gays and lesbians "is far from perfect." But by proclaiming, without caveat or qualification, the American stance on the issue, she sent a signal to the rest of the world that, while equality for gay people is far from reached, the rightness of the goal is beyond debate, much like it is with equal rights for women or for racial minorities.


In doing this, she announced it was now the official policy of the U.S. government to promote the rights of LGBT people everywhere. Clinton has always been a couple of steps ahead of President Barack Obama when it comes to gay rights. It's a safe bet she persuaded him to jump on board and put the full force of the administration behind this new policy.


In Geneva that day, she announced that the president had instructed all U.S. government agencies working in other countries to "combat the criminalization of LGBT status and conduct" to help protect vulnerable LGBT, helping refugees and asylum seekers and responding to abuses.






Today, American diplomats, as part of their official mandate and as an explicit tenet of U.S. values, must speak up for the rights of individuals experiencing persecution on the basis of their sexual orientation, as when a couple were sentenced in Cameroon for "looking" gay.


News: Hillary Clinton talks future 'adventures'


America may be not as influential as it once was, but no country carries more weight; there's not even a close second. America's opinion matters if you want foreign aid or political assistance.


But it matters even more to people on the ground, eager, perhaps desperate to make their case before the authorities, their boss or their family. In the latter case, that it was the popular and respected Hillary Clinton making the argument undoubtedly made a difference on a personal level, even if dictators did not relent.


Clinton also noted that "being gay is not a Western invention; it is a human reality," and noted nations that have enacted protections for their gay citizens, including South Africa, Colombia and Argentina.


It was a rebuke to that tragicomic moment in 2007, when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told an audience in New York, "In Iran, we do not have homosexuals like you do in your country," prompting an explosion of laughter from the crowd. Of course, gay people live in Iran, where homosexuality is punishable by death.


America's stance, promoted so passionately by Clinton, is gradually becoming the global standard for human rights.


Under intense lobbying from America, the usually feckless and frequently counterproductive U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a measured entitled "Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity," and another supporting equality, important symbols that this is a standard for the entire world.


Clinton moved the issue of equality for members of the LGBT community to the front of America's diplomatic agenda; in the process, she gave a boost to human rights for all and a considerable nudge to the inexorable progress of freedom. Let's hope her successor doesn't let up.


Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.


Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frida Ghitis.






Read More..

US stocks dive after Fed minutes






NEW YORK: US stocks piled up losses Wednesday after Federal Reserve minutes showed divisions over asset purchases, with some officials suggesting to wind them down before the jobs market picks up.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average finished down 108.13 points (0.77 percent) at 13,927.54.

The S&P 500-stock index fell 18.99 points (1.24 percent) to 1,511.95 and the tech-rich Nasdaq Composite dropped 49.18 points (1.53 percent) to 3,164.41, dragged down by heavyweight Apple, off 2.4 percent.

After opening mostly lower amid mixed housing and wholesale inflation data, the indexes hit fresh session lows after the Fed released the minutes of the January 29-30 Federal Open Market Committee meeting.

A "number" of participants said that an ongoing evaluation of the $85 billion per month asset purchases "might well lead the committee to taper or end its purchases before it judged that a substantial improvement in the outlook for the labor market had occurred," the minutes said.

Paul Edelstein of IHS Global Insight said in a research note that "if markets do not expect the Fed to stay the course, then expectations for economic growth and inflation will stay depressed and demand for safe assets (cash and government securities) will remain high."

Office Depot and OfficeMax meanwhile confirmed their merger after a premature announcement of the news.

The all-stock merger would create an $18 billion office supplies retailer. Office Depot shares slumped 16.7 percent and OfficeMax shed 7.0 percent.

Hotel chain Marriott fell 2.7 percent after posting quarterly results that missed expectations.

Luxury home builder Toll Brothers also suffered from disappointing earnings, losing 9.1 percent.

Dell, which reported a 32 percent profit fall in 2012 that was nevertheless slightly better than expected, rose 0.2 percent.

Yahoo! fell 1.7 percent after unveiling a new homepage.

Sony slid 1.2 percent ahead of its PlayStation 4 news conference

The bond market was mixed. The yield on the 10-year Treasury bond fell to 2.02 percent from 2.03 percent late Tuesday, while the 30-year edged up to 3.21 percent from 3.20 percent. Bond prices and yields move inversely.

-AFP/ac



Read More..

Lance Armstrong won't cooperate with USADA probe








By Jason Hanna, CNN


updated 4:40 PM EST, Wed February 20, 2013





































Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years


Lance Armstrong over the years





<<


<





1




2




3




4




5




6




7




8




9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25




26




27



>


>>







STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Agency had given cyclist until Wednesday to decide whether he would cooperate under oath

  • Armstrong's lifetime competition ban could have been altered had he cooperated

  • Cyclist was stripped of Tour de France titles after drug and blood-doping accusations




(CNN) -- Cyclist Lance Armstrong will not cooperate with the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's investigation of performance-enhancing drug use in the sport, an Armstrong attorney said Wednesday.


USADA had given Armstrong -- who publicly admitted such drug use last month -- until Wednesday to decide whether he would cooperate under oath with investigators as part of a possible path to altering his USADA-imposed lifetime competition ban.


"Lance will not participate in USADA's efforts to selectively conduct American prosecutions that only demonize selected individuals while failing to address the 95% of the sport over which USADA has no jurisdiction," Armstrong attorney Tim Herman said in a written statement Wednesday.








USADA CEO Travis Tygart issued a statement Wednesday saying that "over the last few weeks (Armstrong) has led us to believe that he wanted to come in and assist USADA, but was worried of potential criminal and civil liability if he did so."


"Today we learned from the media that Mr. Armstrong is choosing not to come in and be truthful and that he will not take the opportunity to work toward righting his wrongs in sport," Tygart said. "At this time we are moving forward with our investigation without him and we will continue to work closely with (the World Anti-Doping Agency) and other appropriate and responsible international authorities to fulfill our promise to clean athletes to protect their right to compete on a drug-free playing field."


Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles by international cycling's governing body in October after a damning report by USADA accused him and his team of the "most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program" in cycling history.


He first admitted using performance-enhancing drugs and blood doping during a January television interview with Oprah Winfrey.


The USADA banned Armstrong, 41, for life but said the ban could be reduced to eight years if he cooperated under oath with investigators. Armstrong's competitive cycling career is long over, but he moved on to triathlons and won several of them in 2012.


The agency initially gave Armstrong a February 6 deadline before extending it by two weeks.


CNN's Jason Morris, Wayne Sterling and Steve Almasy contributed to this report.











Part of complete coverage on


Lance Armstrong






updated 10:13 AM EST, Sat January 19, 2013



The fairy tale of a cancer survivor who beat the odds to win the Tour de France a record seven times has crashed and burned. What can we learn?







updated 10:18 AM EST, Sat January 19, 2013



When it comes to seeking public redemption for crimes and misdemeanors, such as cheating in the Tour de France, surely being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey is, well, cheating.







updated 8:21 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013



In July, when the riders of the Tour de France headed into Paris during the final stage of the race, they gave the honor of leading the pack onto the Champs-Elysees to George Hincapie.







updated 10:25 AM EST, Sat January 19, 2013



After years of tenacious spin that he was innocent, Lance Armstrong confessed said he used performance-enhancing drugs.







updated 1:06 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013



Armstrong still must face judgment from a different group of fans: those who have personal experience with cancer.







updated 11:06 PM EST, Thu January 17, 2013



In a sense, Fred Schuster has a permanent reminder of disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong etched into his skin.







updated 1:43 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013



Cheating arises from desires, incentives, pressures.







updated 7:56 AM EST, Fri January 18, 2013



Lance Armstrong admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs. Here's a look at what they are, and how they work.







updated 2:39 PM EST, Fri January 18, 2013



CNN asked for views on whether disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong deserves another chance.







updated 8:46 AM EST, Thu January 17, 2013



Armstrong has not only spent years vehemently denying using banned performance-enhancing drugs; he also has viciously attacked those who told what they knew about doping in the sport and implicated him in the process.







updated 4:27 PM EST, Tue January 15, 2013



The court of public opinion weighed in decidedly against Lance Armstrong, even before the broadcast of an interview in which he is said to acknowledge using performance-enhancing drugs after years of denials.







updated 9:26 AM EST, Tue January 15, 2013



Lance Armstrong's feat of winning seven consecutive Tour de France titles was like the demigod Hercules achieving his "Twelve Labors."







updated 3:40 PM EDT, Mon October 22, 2012



The International Cycling Union announces hat Lance Armstrong is being stripped of his seven Tour de France titles.




















Read More..

Rubio, Netanyahu poke fun at "water bottle" incident

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, and Sen. Marco Rubio, right, grin as they hoist bottles of water to poke fun at Rubio's "water bottle-gate" incident. / R-Fla.,Office of Sen. Marco Rubio

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio met today with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Israeli President Shimon Peres during the course of a trip to the Middle East that includes stops in Israel and Jordan.

At his meeting with Netanyahu, Rubio poked fun at his recent "water bottle-gate" incident, in which he took a sorely needed but inartful swig of water during his televised response to President Obama's State of the Union address. In a photo released by Rubio's Senate office, the two men are shown, grinning broadly, holding aloft bottles of water as bystanders in the room look on.




Play Video


Marco Rubio's "water bottle-gate" moment



Apart from the self-effacing humor, according to a release from Rubio's press office, the senator and the Israeli leaders discussed the "political landscape changes in the Middle East, Israel's relations with its neighbors, peace negotiations with the Palestinians, the Iranian nuclear threat, and further strengthening the U.S.-Israeli strategic relationship."

Rubio, who sits on the both the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees, also made headlines on the trip by declaring that Jerusalem is "of course" the capital of Israel, according to the Associated Press.

The status of Jerusalem, which Palestinians also claim as the capital of a prospective Palestinian state, is one of many issues that have tripped up negotiators working to secure an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. The U.S. embassy in Israel is located in Tel Aviv, not Jerusalem.


The trip to Israel is Rubio's second: he previously visited the Jewish state in 2010 after his Senate victory. He departed for the region last Saturday and is expected to return on Friday.

Read More..

Armstrong Snubs Offer From Anti-Doping Officials











Lance Armstrong has turned down what may be his last chance at reducing his lifetime sporting ban.


Armstrong has already admitted in an interview with Oprah Winfrey to a career fueled by doping and deceit. But to get a break from the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, all he had to do was tell his story to those who police sports doping. The deadline was today, and Armstrong now says he won't do it.


"For several reasons, Lance will not participate in USADA's efforts to selectively conduct American prosecutions that only demonize selected individuals while failing to address the 95 percent of the sport over which USADA has no jurisdiction," said Tim Herman, Armstrong's longtime lawyer. "Lance is willing to cooperate fully and has been very clear: He will be the first man through the door, and once inside will answer every question, at an international tribunal formed to comprehensively address pro cycling."


But the "international tribunal" Armstrong is anxious to cooperate with has one major problem: It doesn't exist.


The UCI, cycling's governing body, has talked about forming a "truth and reconciliation" commission, but the World Anti-Doping Agency has resisted, citing serious concerns about the UCI and its leadership.


READ MORE: Armstrong Admits to Doping






Livestrong, Elizabeth Kreutz/AP Photo







READ MORE: Lance Armstrong May Have Lied to Winfrey: Investigators


WATCH: Armstrong's Many Denials Caught on Tape


U.S. Anti-Doping Agency officials seemed stunned by Armstrong's decision simply to walk away.


"Over the last few weeks, he [Armstrong] has led us to believe that he wanted to come in and assist USADA, but was worried of potential criminal and civil liability if he did so," said Travis Tygart, CEO of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. "Today, we learned from the media that Mr. Armstrong is choosing not to come in and be truthful and that he will not take the opportunity to work toward righting his wrongs in sport."


Armstrong's ongoing saga plays out amid a backdrop of serious legal problems.


Sources believe one reason Armstrong wants to testify to an international tribunal, rather than USADA, is because perjury charges don't apply if Armstrong lies to a foreign agency, they told ABC News.


While Armstrong has admitted doping, he has not given up any details, including the people and methods required to pull off one of the greatest scandals in all of sport.


Armstrong is facing several multimillion-dollar lawsuits right now, but his biggest problems may be on the horizon. As ABC News first reported, a high-level source said a criminal investigation is ongoing. And the Department of Justice also reportedly is considering joining a whistleblower lawsuit claiming the U.S. Postal Service was defrauded out of millions of dollars paid to sponsor Armstrong's cycling team.


READ MORE: 10 Scandalous Public Confessions


PHOTOS: Olympic Doping Scandals: Past and Present



Read More..

How can U.S. deal with cyber war?




Michael Hayden says lack of domestic agreement is driving U.S. to take the offense on cyber attacks.




STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • Obama administration beefing up effort to counter cyberattacks

  • Michael Hayden says emphasis is on striking first, as the U.S. does with drone attacks

  • Ex-CIA director says drone policy reflects lack of consensus on handling prisoners

  • Hayden: Is killing terrorists preferred because of division over how to try them?




Editor's note: Gen. Michael V. Hayden, who was appointed by President George W. Bush as CIA director in 2006 and served until February 2009, is a principal with the Chertoff Group, a security consulting firm. He serves on the boards of several defense firms and is a distinguished visiting professor at George Mason University.


(CNN) -- Human decisions have complex roots: history, circumstance, personality, even chance.


So it's a dangerous game to oversimplify reality, isolate causation and attribute any particular course of action to one or another singular motive.


But let me tempt fate, since some recent government decisions suggest important issues for public discussion.



Michael Hayden

Michael Hayden




Over the past several weeks, press accounts have outlined a series of Obama administration moves dealing with the cyberdefense of the United States.


According to one report, the Department of Defense will add some 4,000 personnel to U.S. Cyber Command, on top of a current base of fewer than a thousand. The command will also pick up a "national defense" mission to protect critical infrastructure by disabling would-be aggressors.


A second report reveals another administration decision, very reminiscent of the Bush Doctrine of preemption, to strike first when there is imminent danger of serious cyberattack against the United States.


Both of these represent dramatic and largely welcome moves.


But they also suggest the failure of a deeper national policy process and, more importantly, the failure to develop national consensus on some very difficult issues.


Chinese military leading cyber attacks


Let me reason by analogy, and in this case the analogy is the program of targeted killings supported and indeed expanded by the Obama administration. Again, I have no legal or moral objections to killing those who threaten us. We are, as the administration rightly holds, in a global state of war with al Qaeda and its affiliates.








But at the level of policy, killing terrorists rather than capturing them seems to be the default option, and part of that dynamic is fairly attributable to our inability to decide where to put a detainee once we have decided to detain him.


Congress won't let him into the United States unless he is going before a criminal court, and the administration will not send him to Guantanamo despite the legitimate claim that a nation at war has the right to detain enemy combatants without trial.


Failing to come to agreement on the implications of the "we are at war" position, we have made it so legally difficult and so politically dangerous to detain anyone that we seem to default to killing those who would do us harm.


Clearly, it's an easier path: no debates over the location or conditions of confinement. Frequently such action can be kept covert. Decision-making is confined to one branch of government. Congress is "notified." Courts are not involved.


Besides, we are powerful. We have technology at our fingertips. We know that we can be precise, and the professionalism of our combatants allows them to easily meet the standards of proportionality and distinction (between combatants and noncombatants) in such strikes, despite claims to the contrary.


And we also believe that we can live with the second and third order effects of targeted killings. We believe that the care we show will set high standards for the use of such weapons by others who will inevitably follow us. We also believe that any long-term blowback (akin to what Gen. Stanley McChrystal calls the image of "arrogance" such strikes create) is more than offset by the immediate effects on America's safety.


I agree with much of the above. But I also fear that the lack of political consensus at home can drive us to routinely exercise an option whose long-term effects are hard to discern. Which brings us back to last week's stories on American cyberdefense.


In the last Congress, there were two prominent bills introduced to strengthen America's cyberdefenses. Neither came close to passing.


In the Senate, the Collins-Lieberman Bill created a near perfect storm with the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Chamber of Commerce weighing in strongly against the legislation. That two such disparate bodies had issues with the legislation should suggest how far we are from a national consensus.


In the House, a modest proposal from the Intelligence Committee to enhance cybersharing between the private sector and the National Security Agency was met with a presidential veto threat over alleged privacy concerns and was never even considered by the Senate.


Indeed, my preferred option -- a more active and well-regulated role for NSA and Cyber Command on and for American networks -- is almost a third rail in the debate over U.S. cybersecurity. The cybertalent and firepower at Fort Meade, where both are headquartered, are on a short leash because few dare to even address what we would ask them to do or what we would permit them to do on domestic networks.


And hence, last week's "decisions." Rather than settle the roles of these institutions by dealing with the tough issues of security and privacy domestically, we have opted for a policy not unlike targeted killing. Rather than opt for the painful process of building consensus at home, we are opting for "killing" threats abroad in their "safe haven."


We appear more willing to preempt perceived threats "over there" than spill the domestic political blood that would be needed to settle questions about standards for the defense of critical infrastructure, the role of government surveillance or even questions of information sharing. And we seem willing to live with the consequences, not unlike those of targeted killings, of the precedent we set with a policy to shoot on warning.


I understand the advantage that accrues to the offense in dealing with terrorists or cyberthreats. I also accept the underlying legality and morality of preemptive drone or cyberstrikes.


I just hope that we don't do either merely because we don't have the courage to face ourselves and make some hard decisions at home.


Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter


Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Michael Hayden.






Read More..

BP vows to "vigorously defend" itself at US oil spill trial






CHICAGO: British energy giant BP vowed Tuesday to "vigorously defend" itself in court next week against US government claims for "excessive" fines in the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster.

Prosecutors shot back with a warning that they will be fighting for the stiffest penalties possible at a blockbuster trial which opens Monday with tens of billions of dollars at stake.

"The United States is fully prepared for trial," Wyn Hornbuckle, a spokesman for the US Department of Justice, told AFP.

"We intend to prove that BP was grossly negligent and engaged in willful misconduct in causing the oil spill."

The mammoth trial in a New Orleans, Louisiana federal courthouse consolidates scores of remaining lawsuits stemming from the worst environmental disaster to strike the United States.

The first phase of the trial will focus on liability for the April 20, 2010 explosion that sank the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon drilling rig off the coast of Louisiana.

The blast killed 11 people and unleashed millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf, blackening beaches in five states and crippling tourism and fishing industries.

It took 87 days to cap BP's runaway well in a tragedy that riveted the nation.

BP is fighting civil penalties which could amount to as much as $21 billion if gross negligence is found.

"Gross negligence is a very high bar that BP believes cannot be met in this case," Rupert Bondy, group general counsel at BP, said in a statement.

"This was a tragic accident, resulting from multiple causes and involving multiple parties."

In addition to fighting the federal government over environmental fines, BP is also seeking to shift some of the liability to its subcontractors, drilling rig operator Transocean and Halliburton, which was responsible for the well's faulty cement job.

BP pleaded guilty in November to criminal charges -- including felony manslaughter -- and agreed to pay a record $4.5 billion in criminal fines.

It reached a $7.8 billion settlement early last year that will cover the bulk of the outstanding private claims for economic loss, property damage and medical problems.

It has paid out $10 billion to businesses, individuals and local governments impacted by the spill and spent more than $14 billion on the response and cleanup.

BP also remains on the hook for billions in additional damages, including the cost of environmental rehabilitation.

But while it was willing to settle the civil charges on "reasonable terms" BP said it will not accept the US government's assertion of gross negligence, or its estimation of how much oil was spilled.

"Faced with demands that are excessive and not based on reality or the merits of the case, we are going to trial," Bondy said in the statement.

"We have confidence in our case and in the legal team representing the company and defending our interests."

In a preview of an argument that will not reach trial until the second phase begins later this year, BP said the official US government estimate that 4.9 million barrels of oil was unleashed from the runaway well was "overstated" by at least 20 percent.

"BP believes that a figure of 3.1 million barrels should be the uppermost limit of the number of barrels spilled that should be used in calculating a Clean Water Act penalty," it said.

Meanwhile, the judge overseeing the consolidated trial on Tuesday approved a $1 billion settlement for civil penalties against rig operator Transocean.

The decision came after a $400 million settlement of criminal penalties against the Swiss drilling giant was approved last week.

Transocean pleaded guilty to one criminal count of violating the Clean Water Act and agreed to pay the $400 million fine for negligence that led to the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon rig.

The $1 billion civil penalty is for fines related to the oil spilled into the Gulf.

It is also responsible for implementing measures to improve operational safety and emergency response capabilities at all their drilling rigs working in waters of the United States.

-AFP/ac



Read More..

Masked robbers steal $50M in diamonds at airport






STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • NEW: Thieves were dressed like police and threatened air crew at gunpoint, prosecutor says

  • Team of eight takes only minutes to steal the rough and polished stones from a plane's cargo hold

  • They breached the periphery and sped off with their haul in 2 vehicles, the spokesman says

  • The stones were en route from Antwerp to Zurich, Switzerland, Antwerp diamond center says




(CNN) -- Night had fallen. Some 20 airplane passengers had taken their seats for the short hop from Brussels, Belgium, to Zurich, Switzerland.


Unknown to them, a precious cargo was being loaded into the airplane hold along with their suitcases: $50 million in rough and polished diamonds.


But the diamonds would never reach their final destination.


Shortly before 8 p.m. Monday, eight masked men in two vehicles burst through the perimeter fence of Brussels Airport and sped toward the aircraft on the tarmac.


The men, who authorities said wore clothing resembling police uniforms, were heavily armed.




While no shots were fired and no one was injured, the pilot, co-pilot and a transport security guard were all threatened at gunpoint, said Ine Van Wymersch, of the Public Prosecutor's Office in Brussels.


Within three minutes, the thieves had snatched the diamonds from the hold, said airport spokesman Jan Van der Cruysse.


Drag queens, fake beards and chocolates: Notable diamond heists


Moments later they left the scene, racing out through the same breach in the airport periphery through which they had entered.


The robbers, four in each car, had broken a hole in the fence where it ran between two construction sites, Van Wymersch told a news conference.


"This was a very precise, almost military-organized and well-executed robbery," Van der Cruysse said.


He said it was a "big surprise" that such a slick heist been possible -- but pointed the finger at organized crime.


"We are an airport that is, as all international airports are, subject to very strict aviation security and safety regulations," he said.


The aircraft targeted was a regular passenger flight operated by Helvetic Airways on behalf of Swiss, Switzerland's national airline.


It's not yet clear how the thieves knew that the diamonds would be on board.


But this was not a chance hold-up, said Van Wymersch, describing the men involved as "professionals."


Antwerp, the city known as the world's diamond-cutting capital, lies only about 25 miles away from Brussels.


The Antwerp World Diamond Centre has on average $200 million in stones coming in and out daily, and it takes security very seriously, a spokesman told CNN.


He was unable to confirm reports that gold and platinum were stolen along with the diamonds.


It's not the first time that Antwerp's centuries-old diamond trade has been targeted.


The city was the scene of a spectacular robbery in 2003 when thieves made off with the contents of more than 100 safes at the diamond center. Those gems were never recovered.


Some 34,000 jobs in the city are connected to the diamond trade, according to the Antwerp World Diamond Centre, from mining company representatives to dealers to the craftsmen who polish the stones.


Netherlands art heist suspects arrested


3 arrested in massive maple syrup heist







Read More..

Police identify gunman in LA freeway shooting spree


Investigators stand next to a tarp covered body in Orange, Calif., Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013. Police say a chaotic 25-minute shooting spree through Orange County left a trail of dead and injured victims before the shooter killed himself.


/

AP Photo/Jae C. Hong

(CBS/AP) TUSTIN, Calif. - Southern California law enforcement authorities have identified the gunman in an unexplained shooting rampage as a 20-year-old unemployed part-time student named Ali Syed.

Tustin police Chief Scott Jordan says Syed lived at the Ladera Ranch residence where the first victim was slain.

Orange County sheriff's spokesman Jim Amormino says that victim is a young woman in her 20s who has not been identified and is not related to the shooter.

The rampage early Tuesday left several wounded and four dead, including the shooter who killed himself.

Police say after killing the first victim in Ladera Ranch, the gunman headed north and within 30 minutes carjacked a Dodge pickup truck in Tustin, about 20 miles away. The driver was uninjured, but a bystander was hit by gunfire and taken to a hospital.

Tustin police Chief Scott Jordan said Syed stated to one carjacking victim: "I don't want to hurt you. I killed somebody. Today is my last day."

The suspect then began firing at vehicles in the area where Interstate 5 and State Route 55 connect.

Three people reported being targeted, including one who suffered a minor injury, Tustin police Lt. Paul Garaven said. Two cars were damaged.

When the truck he was driving got low on gas, the gunman stopped at State Route 55 and McFadden Avenue in Santa Ana, stole a BMW and killed the driver, Bertagna said.

The shooter then drove to a Tustin business called Micro Center and carjacked another small truck, killing one person and wounding another, Garaven said.

Officers trailed the gunman to Orange, a city about five miles away.

As they closed in, Syed got out of the vehicle at a busy intersection and shot himself, police said.

A shotgun was recovered at the scene.

More on Crimesider
February 19, 2013 - Los Angeles Freeway Shooting Update: Police say four dead including gunman after shooting spree
February 19, 2013 - Los Angeles Freeway Shooting: At least 3 dead, others wounded in shooting spree, police say


Read More..

Report Fingers Chinese Military Unit in US Hacks











A Virginia-based cyber security firm has released a new report alleging a specific Chinese military unit is likely behind one of the largest cyber espionage and attack campaigns aimed at American infrastructure and corporations.


In the report, released today by Mandiant, China's Unit 61398 is blamed for stealing "hundreds of terabytes of data from at least 141 organizations" since 2006, including 115 targets in the U.S. Twenty different industrial sectors were targeted in the attacks, Mandiant said, from energy and aerospace to transportation and financial institutions.


Mandiant believes it has tracked Unit 61398 to a 12-story office building in Shanghai that could employ hundreds of workers.


"Once [Unit 61398] has established access [to a target network], they periodically revisit the victim's network over several months or years and steal broad categories of intellectual property, including technology blueprints, proprietary manufacturing processes, test results, business plans, pricing documents, partnership agreements, and emails and contact lists from victim organizations' leadership," the report says.


The New York Times, which first reported on the Mandiant paper Monday, said digital forensic evidence presented by Mandiant pointing to the 12-story Shangai building as the likely source of the attacks has been confirmed by American intelligence officials. Mandiant was the firm that The Times said helped them investigate and eventually repel cyber attacks on their own systems in China last month.






Peter Parks/AFP/Getty Images







The Chinese government has repeatedly denied involvement in cyber intrusions and Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei said today that the claims in the Mandiant report were unsupported, according to a report by The Associated Press.


"To make groundless accusations based on some rough material is neither responsible nor professional," he reportedly said.


Mandiant's report was released a week after President Obama said in his State of the Union address that America must "face the rapidly growing threat from cyber attack."


"We know hackers steal people's identities and infiltrate private e-mail. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. Now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, and our air traffic control systems. We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy," he said.


Though Obama did not reference China or any country specifically, U.S. officials have previously accused the Asian nation of undertaking a widespread cyber espionage campaign.


Referring to alleged Chinese hacking in October 2011, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said in an open committee meeting that he did not believe "that there is a precedent in history for such a massive and sustained intelligence effort by a government agency to blatantly steal commercial data and intellectual property."


Rogers said that cyber intrusions into American and other Western corporations by hackers working on behalf of Beijing -- allegedly including attacks on corporate giants like Google and Lockheed Martin -- amounted to "brazen and widespread theft."


"The Chinese have proven very, very good at hacking their way into very large American companies that spend a lot of money trying to protect themselves," cyber security expert and ABC News consultant Richard Clarke said in an interview last week.



Read More..