vrijdag 13 september 2019

Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House


Afbeeldingsresultaat voor POLITICO




Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House

The likely Israeli spying efforts were uncovered during the Trump presidency, several former top U.S. officials said.

Updated 

Illustration of spying devices in D.C.



The U.S. government concluded within the past two years that Israel was most likely behind the placement of cellphone surveillance devices that were found near the White House and other sensitive locations around Washington, according to three former senior U.S. officials with knowledge of the matter.

But unlike most other occasions when flagrant incidents of foreign spying have been discovered on American soil, the Trump administration did not rebuke the Israeli government, and there were no consequences for Israel’s behavior, one of the former officials said.

The miniature surveillance devices, colloquially known as “StingRays,” mimic regular cell towers to fool cellphones into giving them their locations and identity information. Formally called international mobile subscriber identity-catchers or IMSI-catchers, they also can capture the contents of calls and data use.

The devices were likely intended to spy on President Donald Trump, one of the former officials said, as well as his top aides and closest associates — though it’s not clear whether the Israeli efforts were successful.

Trump is reputed to be lax in observing White House security protocols. POLITICO reported in May 2018 that the president often used an insufficiently secured cellphone to communicate with friends and confidants. The New York Times subsequently reported in October 2018 that “Chinese spies are often listening” to Trump’s cellphone calls, prompting the president to slam the story as “so incorrect I do not have time here to correct it.” (A former official said Trump has had his cellphone hardened against intrusion.)

By then, as part of tests by the federal government, officials at the Department of Homeland Security had already discovered evidence of the surveillance devices around the nation’s capital, but weren’t able to attribute the devices to specific entities. The officials shared their findings with relevant federal agencies, according to a letter a top Department of Homeland Security official, Christopher Krebs, wrote in May 2018 to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

Based on a detailed forensic analysis, the FBI and other agencies working on the case felt confident that Israeli agents had placed the devices, according to the former officials, several of whom served in top intelligence and national security posts.

That analysis, one of the former officials said, is typically led by the FBI’s counterintelligence division and involves examining the devices so that they “tell you a little about their history, where the parts and pieces come from, how old are they, who had access to them, and that will help get you to what the origins are.” For these types of investigations, the bureau often leans on the National Security Agency and sometimes the CIA (DHS and the Secret Service played a supporting role in this specific investigation).

“It was pretty clear that the Israelis were responsible,” said a former senior intelligence official.

An Israeli Embassy spokesperson, Elad Strohmayer, denied that Israel placed the devices and said: “These allegations are absolute nonsense. Israel doesn’t conduct espionage operations in the United States, period.”

A senior Trump administration official said the administration doesn’t “comment on matters related to security or intelligence.” The FBI declined to comment, while DHS and the Secret Service didn’t respond to requests for comment.

After this story was published, Trump told reporters that he would find it "hard to believe" that the Israelis had placed the devices.

"I don't think the Israelis were spying on us," Trump said. "My relationship with Israel has been great...Anything is possible but I don't believe it."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also denied after publication that Israel was behind the devices. "We have a directive, I have a directive: No intelligence work in the United States, no spies," he said in a gaggle with reporters. "And it's vigorously implemented, without any exception. It [the report] is a complete fabrication, a complete fabrication."

But former officials with deep experience dealing with intelligence matters scoff at the Israeli claim — a pro forma denial Israeli officials are also known to make in private to skeptical U.S. counterparts.

One former senior intelligence official noted that after the FBI and other agencies concluded that the Israelis were most likely responsible for the devices, the Trump administration took no action to punish or even privately scold the Israeli government.

“The reaction ... was very different than it would have been in the last administration,” this person said. “With the current administration, there are a different set of calculations in regard to addressing this.”

The former senior intelligence official criticized how the administration handled the matter, remarking on the striking difference from past administrations, which likely would have at a very minimum issued a démarche, or formal diplomatic reprimand, to the foreign government condemning its actions.

“I’m not aware of any accountability at all,” the former official said.

Beyond trying to intercept the private conversations of top officials — prized information for any intelligence service — foreign countries often will try to surveil their close associates as well. With the president, the former senior Trump administration official noted, that could include trying to listen in on the devices of the people he regularly communicates with, such as Steve Wynn, Sean Hannity and Rudy Giuliani.

“The people in that circle are heavily targeted,” the former Trump official said.

Another circle of surveillance targets includes people who regularly talk to Trump’s friends and informal advisers. Information obtained from any of these people “would be so valuable in a town that is like three degrees of separation like Kevin Bacon,” the former official added.

That’s true even for a close U.S. ally like Israel, which often seeks an edge in its diplomatic maneuvering with the United States.

“The Israelis are pretty aggressive” in their intelligence gathering operations, said a former senior intelligence official. “They’re all about protecting the security of the Israeli state and they do whatever they feel they have to to achieve that objective.”

So even though Trump has formed a warm relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and made numerous policy moves favorable to the Israeli government — such as moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, ripping up the Iran nuclear deal and heavily targeting Iran with sanctions — Israel became a prime suspect in planting the devices.

While the Chinese, who have been regularly caught doing intelligence operations in the U.S., were also seen as potential suspects, they were determined as unlikely to have placed the devices based on a close analysis of the devices.

“You can often, depending upon the tradecraft of the people who put them in place, figure out who’s been accessing them to pull the data off the devices,” another former senior U.S. intelligence official explained.

Washington is awash in surveillance, and efforts of foreign entities to try to spy on administration officials and other top political figures are fairly common. But not many countries have the capability — or the budget — to plant the devices found in this most recent incident, which is another reason suspicion fell on Israel.

IMSI-catchers, which are often used by local police agencies to surveil criminals, can also be made by sophisticated hobbyists or by the Harris Corp., the manufacturer of StingRays, which cost more than $150,000 each, according to Vice News.

“The costs involved are really significant,” according to a former senior Trump administration official. “This is not an easy or ubiquitous practice.”

Among professionals, the Israeli intelligence services have an especially fearsome reputation. But they do sometimes make mistakes and are “not 10 feet tall like you see in the movies,” a former senior intelligence official noted.

In 2010, the secret covers of a Mossad hit team, some of whom had been posing as tennis players, were blown after almost 30 minutes of surveillance video was posted online of them going through a luxury Dubai hotel where they killed a top Hamas terrorist in his room.

Still, U.S. officials sometimes have been taken aback by Israel’s brazen spying. One former U.S. government official recalled his frequent concern that Israel knew about internal U.S. policy deliberations that were meant to be kept private.

“There were suspicions that they were listening in,” the former official said, based on his Israeli counterparts flaunting a level of detailed knowledge “that was hard to explain otherwise.”

“Sometimes it was sort of knowledge of our thinking. Occasionally there were some turns of phrase like language that as far as we knew had only appeared in drafts of speeches and never been actually used publicly, and then some Israeli official would repeat it back to us and say, ‘This would be really problematic if you were to say X,’” said the former official.

Back when the Obama administration was trying to jump-start negotiations with the Palestinians, for example, the Israelis were eager to get advance knowledge of the language being debated that would describe the terms of reference of the talks.

“They would have had interest in what language [President Barack] Obama or [Secretary of State John] Kerry or someone else was going to use and might indeed try to find a way to lobby for language they liked or against language that they didn’t like and so having knowledge of that could be advantageous for them,” the former official said.

“The Israelis are aggressive intelligence collectors, but they have sworn off spying on the U.S. at various points and it’s not surprising that such efforts continue,” said Daniel Benjamin, a former coordinator of counterterrorism at the Obama State Department and now director of the John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding at Dartmouth.

Benjamin, who emphasized that he was not aware of the FBI's investigation into the cell-phone spoofing, recalled once meeting with a former head of Mossad, the premier Israeli intelligence agency, when he was out of office. The first thing the former Mossad official told Benjamin was that Israel didn’t spy on the U.S.

“I just told him our conversation was over if he had such a low estimate of my intelligence,” Benjamin said.

Israeli officials often note in conversations with their American counterparts — correctly — that the U.S. regularly gathers intelligence on Israeli leaders.

As for Israel’s recent surveillance of the White House, one of the former senior U.S. intelligence officials acknowledged it raised security concerns but joked, “On the other hand, guess what we do in Tel Aviv?"

This article has been updated to clarify that Daniel Benjamin had no knowledge of the alleged Israeli spying, and that the Israeli official he was speaking with was a former official at the time of their conversation.

woensdag 11 september 2019

Arab leaders denounce Netanyahu’s plan to annex Palestinian territories







Arab leaders denounce Netanyahu’s plan to annex Palestinian territories

Israeli prime minister’s proposal would ‘kill all chances of peace’, says Jordan


Benjamin Netanyahu said he would permanently seize up to a third of the West Bank if elected.Benjamin Netanyahu said he would permanently seize up to a third of the West Bank if elected. Photograph: Amir Cohen/Reuters



Arab leaders have denounced Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to annex large swathes of the Palestinian territories if he is re-elected next week as an election stunt that would “kill all chances for peace”.
The Arab League held an emergency session on Tuesday evening after the Israeli prime minister announced the plan in a live press conference.
Netanyahu, who is fighting for his political life before elections on 17 September, said he would permanently seize up to a third of the West Bank, a move that for decades has been considered an endgame scenario for Palestinians’ aspirations of statehood.
“We haven’t had this kind of opportunity since the [1967] six-day war, and may not have it again for another 50 years,” Netanyahu said, referring to the war in which Israel captured the land.
Arab foreign ministers meeting in Cairo condemned the plan as “a dangerous development and a new Israeli aggression by declaring the intention to violate the international law”.
“The league regards these statements as undermining the chances of any progress in the peace process and will torpedo all its foundations,” the ministers said.
Jordan’s foreign minister, Ayman Safadi, said Netanyahu’s plan was an outrageous election ploy and a “dangerous escalation that shatters the foundations of the peace process”.
Netanyahu made the announcement in front of a large map showing Israeli sovereignty extending over the vast majority of the Jordan Valley and slicing off the eastern border with Jordan.
“Killing all chances for peace for electoral purposes is irresponsible, dangerous,” Safadi added in a tweet.
Turkey’s foreign minister said the plan was racist and incendiary. “The election promise of Netanyahu, who is giving all kind of illegal, unlawful and aggressive messages before the election, is a racist apartheid state,” Mevlüt ÇavuÅŸoÄŸlu wrote on Twitter.
“Will defend rights and interests of our Palestinian brothers & sisters till the end,” he added.
The president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, said he would pull out of any previous agreements signed with the Israeli government if it went ahead with the move – a threat he has previously made without following through.
“[We maintain] the right to defend our rights and achieve our goals through all available means regardless of the consequences,” Abbas said, according to a report by the state-run Wafa news agency.
Ayman Odeh, the leader of an alliance of Arab parties in Israel, called Netanyahu’s statement “not just election spin” but “a vision of apartheid”.
Netanyahu hinted on Tuesday night that the plan had the support of the White House. “I am waiting to do this in maximum coordination with [Donald] Trump,” he said in a speech broadcast live on Israeli television.
A White House official said there had been no change in US policy and would not comment further.
Late on Tuesday evening, Netanyahu was dragged away by his security team from a campaign rally in the southern city of Ashdod after air sirens sounded. The Israeli military said two rockets had been launched from Gaza, both of which were intercepted by its aerial defence system.
Despite the implications for a future two-state solution, Arab states would be under significant pressure not to escalate if the annexation went ahead, analysts said.
The fate of the Palestinians has diminished as a priority in many Arab capitals as the geopolitics of the region has shifted. Saudi Arabia and Israel share an interest in combating Iranian influence in the Middle East. Jordan and Egypt have long ago signed peace treaties with Israel, easing the flow of American aid and military equipment on which both depend.
Significant implications are likely to be felt across the border with the West Bank in Amman. “Jordan has real existential fears with any outcome other than a two-state solution,” said Osama al-Sharif, a Jordanian analyst and columnist.
Roughly 2 million Palestinians live in Jordan, most of them naturalised but barred from certain jobs on the basis they will one day be able to return to their own state. Jordanians living in the East Bank also fear that Israeli consolidation of its occupied territories could push new waves of refugees into Jordan, at a time when the country is already hosting an estimate 1.4 million Syrian refugees.
The international community considers Israeli settlements illegal under international law, built on land confiscated from Palestinian families. Extending Israeli sovereignty over such a large area would also be seen as putting an end to fading hopes for a Palestinian state, as there would be little unbroken land on which to create it.
Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital early in his term further damaged the two-state ideal. The Palestinians regard the occupied eastern section of Jerusalem as the capital of any future state, and cut contact with Washington after the declaration.
Earlier this year, Trump also recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a plateau Israel captured from Syria in the same 1967 conflict and annexed in 1981. The move broke from the international consensus following the second world war that forbids territorial conquest during war.
In Israeli politics, annexation is a popular position. Israel has long stated it would want to keep the 2,400 sq km (927 sq mile) Jordan Valley to maintain control over the international border.

dinsdag 10 september 2019

3 Publishers Delete Pro-Jeffrey Epstein Stories After NY Times Inqui



3 Publishers Delete Pro-Jeffrey Epstein Stories After NY Times Inquiry

Lindsey Ellefson

Three news sites — Forbes, HuffPost, and National Review — pulled pieces from contributors painting Jeffrey Epstein in a positive light in the past week after a New York Times inquiry into the disgraced hedge funder’s efforts at image rehabilitation.
Forbes published a piece in 2013 attributed Drew Hendricks that has since been partially removed, though the Times reported that he was given the piece by a public relations firm and paid $600 to post it on Forbes using his byline.
The Times also reported that Christina Galbraith, the woman whose byline is attached to the now-removed 2013 National Review article that is still archived here, worked as a publicist for Epstein himself.
And HuffPost said it removed a 2017 piece by Rachel Wolfson that praised Epstein for “taking action to help a number of scientists thrive during the ‘Trump Era'” at the author’s request.
Wolfson, a self-described “professional listener” who covers blockchain and whose Twitter bio advertises her work in Forbes, did not immediately respond to request for comment, nor did HuffPost. Hendricks and Galbraith did not immediately return requests for comment.
Epstein was arrested earlier this month and charged with sex trafficking by federal prosecutors, but over a decade prior to that, he pleaded guilty in Florida to soliciting a minor for prostitution. He served 13 months of an 18-month sentence and was released in 2009.
The Times reported that the billionaire soon afterward began a campaign of public rehabilitation.
The now-deleted stories are remarkably similar in language. The Forbes story called Epstein “a hedge funder with a zealous science background.” While the National Review post called him “hedge-fund manager with a passion for cutting-edge science.”
In early 2018, HuffPost ended its practice of publishing work from unpaid contributors like Wolfson, citing the proliferation of false information that comes with allowing, when it was all said and done, about 100,000 people to publish with little to no editorial review or oversight.
“Certainly the environment where fake news is flourishing is one where it gets harder and harder to support the idea of a ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ kind of publishing platform,” editor-in-chief Lydia Polgreen said at the time, adding that unpaid content lacking editorial controls had created “messy, hard-to-hear places where voices get drowned out and where the loudest shouting voice prevails.”
On the Forbes site, where the “Hendricks” article once appeared, readers can still see his byline, headshot and work — to an extent.
“After review, this post has been removed for failing to meet our editorial standards,” an update at the top of the page reads, right under the headline, “Science Funder Jeffrey Epstein Launches Radical Emotional Software For The Gaming Industry.”
It goes on: “We are providing our readers the headline, author and first paragraphs for context only. We regret any inconvenience or confusion.”
There is no mention of specific details surrounding the removal of the piece.
Randall Lane, the chief content officer of Forbes Media, told the Times the process for screening outside contributions has been strengthened since the piece’s publication in 2013.
Similarly, NRO editor-in-chief Rich Lowry told the paper his publication “had a process in place for a while now to weed out such commercially self-interested pieces from lobbyists and PR flacks.”
Lowry and representatives for HuffPost and Forbes did not immediately return requests for comment.

Evolution at Harvard [Hagiographic article about Epstein deleted]

National Review Online
Evolution at Harvard



How financier Jeffrey Epstein changed the course of evolutionary studies at Harvard.



Jeffrey Epstein


If the scientist’s job is to ponder the stars, the banker’s is to funnel his vision into stellar panels. For while scientific theory can be enthralling, it’s in danger of racking up lost gigabytes and circuitry dust. But when a smart businessman and a top scientist get together, not only can the partnership lead to pragmatic accomplishments, it can actually change the course of scientific inquiry.

Such has been the case at Harvard. The study of evolution is always moving, but nowhere has it been livelier than in Brattle Square, where, ten years ago, a financier named Jeffrey Epstein set up the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics with a $30 million gift to the university, $6.5 million of which was a current-use gift to the PED. His mission was not to coddle neo-Darwinian theorists (because, honestly, couldn’t $30 million be used to vaccinate the entire country of Zaïre?) but to embolden a pragmatic use for the study of natural selection.

It was in August 2003, with the cooperation of Lawrence Summers, then president of Harvard, that the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics set up for business, and, under the direction of Martin Nowak, a professor of mathematics and biology, it revolutionized the way in which evolution is studied and utilized. PED became one of the first programs to give a high priority to the use of mathematics in studying the evolution of microbiology. It also became one of the first departments to develop a mathematical model of how human cancer cells evolve, as well as infectious bacteria and viruses such as HIV. The program’s models have led to key discoveries toward combatting diseases of all kinds and have encouraged researchers around the world to make new discoveries of their own.

It all started in early 2000 when Epstein, a New York hedge-fund manager with a passion for cutting-edge science, invited Nowak to organize a conference on the evolution of language. Nowak was then head of the Program in Theoretical Biology at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton and had already published a substantial amount of work on the mathematics of the HIV virus, infectious bacteria, and cancer cells. Before going to Princeton, Nowak had been the head of the mathematical-biology group at Oxford University. His work was not just theoretical but keenly practical.

By 2003, Epstein already had a substantial track record in science philanthropy. He had supported the research of many prominent scientists, including Stephen Hawking, Marvin Minsky, Eric Lander, George Church, and Nobel laureate physicists Gerard ’t Hooft, David Gross, and Frank Wilczek. He was also a member of the New York Academy of Science, a member of Rockefeller University’s board, and actively involved in the Santa Fe Institute, the Quantum Gravity Program at the University of Pennsylvania, and the Mind, Brain & Behavior Advisory Committee at Harvard. Epstein himself was not a scientist per se. He had studied physics at Cooper Union in New York and mathematics at the Courant Institute in New York, leaving both without a degree, and moved on to teaching calculus and physics at the Dalton School in Manhattan. He was then scooped up into options trading on Wall Street and applied his acumen and mathematical wit to the markets.

But Epstein’s heart remained in the pure sciences. He was fascinated by fundamental questions on the one hand and, on the other, eager to apply scientific theory to the real world. It was this combination that drew him to Nowak. For not only was Epstein eager to probe a brilliant mind about the origins of life, but, with his connections at Harvard, he was able to provide Nowak a powerful platform to put groundbreaking medical research into immediate practice.

One of the major diseases that the program studies is human cancer. In 2012, Nowak and two postdoctoral students, Benjamin Allen and Ivana Bozic, developed the first mathematical model of how human colon-cancer cells evolve and specifically how they become immune to inhibitor-drug therapy. Their research was conducted at the request of the Pathology and Oncology Department at Johns Hopkins University. The department was trying to understand how the KRAS gene in colon-cancer cells becomes activated after inhibitor-drug therapy, making the cells resistant to treatment.

By developing a mathematical model of the growth of colon-cancer cells, Nowak and his team showed that the KRAS gene is not actually activated or “switched on” by inhibitor therapy; rather, a small percentage of colon-cancer cells with an already activated KRAS gene are immune from the start and come to predominate as the other cancer cells are destroyed by the inhibitor drug. The discovery was critical in changing the approach to inhibitor-drug therapy. Instead of applying drugs in sequence to fight secondary and tertiary resistance, the researchers at Johns Hopkins are now exploring the effects of using a cocktail of inhibitor drugs to capture all colon-cancer cell types: those with the activated KRAS gene and those without. The same tailored approach is underway for other cancers.

In 2010, Ivana Bozic and Martin Nowak co-authored a pivotal mathematical study that showed that most solid tumors contain 40 to 100 genetic mutations, but that on average only 5 to 15 of those actually drive tumor growth. The findings were essential to the researchers at Johns Hopkins and elsewhere because they demonstrated the importance of isolating a key minority of mutated tumor cells for effective inhibitor treatment.

“Mathematics in medical research reveals patterns that are otherwise hidden,” remarked Epstein, who maintains a frequent presence at PED. “It’s exhilarating when a mathematician can determine molecular and cellular behavior with the precision of an engineer and share those findings with physicians.”

Also in 2010, PED presented to Bert Vogelstein, professor and director of the Ludwig Center for Cancer Genetics and Therapeutics at the Johns Hopkins Kimmel Cancer Center and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, a mathematical model showing the genetic evolution of pancreatic-cancer cells from the time of initial mutation to non-primary malignant cells. What Nowak’s team had found was surprising: that pancreatic cancer, one of the most lethal forms of cancer, is not fast and furious as had been thought, but rather slow growing. In fact, given the amount and type of genetic disparity between the cellular stages, it appears that it takes about ten years for an initiating mutation to develop to a parental, non-metastatic founder cell and another six years for cells to become malignant.

The significance of these findings is that they highlighted the importance of isolating pancreatic mutations prior to metastasis. Johns Hopkins scientists are now focusing on developing a screening method for pancreatic cancer similar to the protocol used for breast and colon cancers. Though early stages of pancreatic cancer cause no known symptoms, the Johns Hopkins team is looking into pancreatic-screening endoscopies for patients of a certain age.

Over the past two years, Nowak and his team have also collaborated with Johns Hopkins to develop a database to map and predict the effect of drugs on the HIV virus. Like cancer cells, HIV often develops resistance to drug cocktails. This is a major problem for patients, and the trial and error of clinical trials can be hugely debilitating. Using data collected from thousands of blood tests on more than 20 anti-HIV drugs, the model calculates each drug’s ability to suppress viral replication and avoid resistant HIV strains. The model also factors in different drug combinations and dosages, and information about the patient such as blood type, age, and sex, to arrive at the most precisely engineered predictor of results for future patients.

At least on the surface, Epstein’s motivation for applied science differs from Nowak’s. While Nowak is a practicing Roman Catholic and a declared humanist with a desire to serve society, Epstein is first and foremost a problem solver, interested in strategy and intellectual puzzles. He is equally devoted to physics, artificial intelligence, and the human brain. According to Nowak, Epstein was fascinated with his game theory of win–stay, lose–shift and eager to see how it could be applied to the markets. That is not to say that Epstein has no interest in purely humanistic endeavors. He has given thoughtfully to countless organizations that help educate underprivileged children, notably in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where his foundation is based. But his essence is in uncovering unsolved problems, a perhaps insatiable desire.

Much has been written about the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics and Martin Nowak’s work. Nowak is the recipient of numerous awards and the author of several books. And while Jeffrey Epstein remains an obscure figure, tarnished now by a series of scandals involving underage women, one of which led to an 18-month jail sentence, he is nonetheless the talented catalyst, the accelerator of all this medical discovery. Whatever his ignominy, Epstein’s continued bond with Nowak and PED emphasizes that nature is not fastidious nor judgmental, nor is its dynamic always gradual. Discovery can be sparked into being by an unlikely source, and its value does not depend on the makeup of its originator.


— Christina Galbraith is a science writer and the head of media for the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation. Her press has been picked up by CNBC, Reuters, Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, and other outlets. Her work can be found at www.jeffreyepstein.org.