Friday, December 30, 2016

Obama's UNSC Resolution on Israel may be tainted, possibly made invalid , by his friend Malaysian PM Najib's 1MDB theft

by Ganesh Sahathevan

My selfie with President Obama !
Mohd Najib Tun RazakVerified account‏@NajibRazak

The UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016) on Israeli settlements is reported to have been initiated by US President Barak Obama.According to CNN:

In an interview with Kate Bolduan on CNN's "Erin Burnett Outfront," David Keyes (spokesman for Israel PM Nethenyahu) declined twice to say that the White House lied by denying that it helped push the resolution, which the United States abstained from voting on.
But Keyes did say: "All I can say is we have that information and it is very clear to us. It's not in doubt and we are going to pass it through the proper channels." He added that there is solid information from the Arab world and internationally that the Obama administration helped craft and promote the resolution.

The resolution was promoted by UNSC member Malaysia, whose prime minister Najib Razak said,after the resolution was passed:

"Alhamdulillah, with the grace of God (Allah SWT), the resolution which faced uncertainty when Egypt withdrew the draft, had finally answered the prayers of the people of Palestine.
"Malaysia, together with New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela agreed to put the text of a draft resolution to vote, calling on Israel to stop the construction of illegal settlements," said Najib in his blog posting titled 'Resolusi Menentang Penempatan Haram'(The Resolution Against Illegal Settlements).

However,Najib, members of his family, and their associates are subject of a USDOJ investigation that has already resulted in the DOJ seeking the seizure of billions in assets that are alleged to have been acquired with funds stolen from the Malaysian Government's 1MDB sovereign wealth fund. Najib is not named in the USDOJ's writs, but is instead referred to a Malaysian Official One (MO1).

The matter of that theft, and Obama's friendship with Najib was an issue in the US presidential election when Wikileaks published  an email from George Soros's office which warned that the Obama administration was encouraging Najib is his theft ,and promotion of Islamism and jihadism

There can be no doubt that Obama's promotion of the Israeli settlements resolution would have required lobbying Najib, for Malaysia's UN representatives are bound by Najib's will.

The UNSC ,as does the UN, relies on its moral authority (such as it may be) as well as a theory of international law to give its resolutions standing, and legal force.While opinion on the issue of an UNSC resolution's legal force is divided,the issue does raise the question of whether an UNSC resolution may be declared invalid due to say,members acting in bad faith,or say a perception of bias. In the case of the Israeli settlements resolution Obama's dealings with a person who is subject of an action by his own government's Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative raises at least the matter of a perception of bias, which is by itself grounds to invalidate a decision of a court of law. That was the dilemma faced by the UK House of Lords in Re:Pinochet, ,where the court was forced to admit that even a mere  perception of bias was sufficient to taint its decision. The UN and the UNSC must surely be held to a higher standard, given their claims of moral authority.
UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016) may in fact be invalid, and it may well be in the UNSC's best interest to have the resolution suspended pending review of the conduct of its members who promoted it.



Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

United States Seeks to Recover More Than $1 Billion Obtained from Corruption Involving Malaysian Sovereign Wealth Fund

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch announced today the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of more than $1 billion in assets associated with an international conspiracy to launder funds misappropriated from a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund.  Today’s complaints represent the largest single action ever brought under the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative.
Attorney General Lynch was joined in the announcement by Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Eileen M. Decker of the Central District of California, FBI Deputy Director Andrew G. McCabe and Chief Richard Weber of the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI).
According to the complaints, from 2009 through 2015, more than $3.5 billion in funds belonging to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) was allegedly misappropriated by high-level officials of 1MDB and their associates.  With today’s complaints, the United States seeks to recover more than $1 billion laundered through the United States and traceable to the conspiracy.  1MDB was created by the government of Malaysia to promote economic development in Malaysia through global partnerships and foreign direct investment, and its funds were intended to be used for improving the well-being of the Malaysian people.  Instead, as detailed in the complaints, 1MDB officials and their associates allegedly misappropriated more than $3 billion. 
“The Department of Justice will not allow the American financial system to be used as a conduit for corruption,” said Attorney General Lynch.  “With this action, we are seeking to forfeit and recover funds that were intended to grow the Malaysian economy and support the Malaysian people.  Instead, they were stolen, laundered through American financial institutions and used to enrich a few officials and their associates.  Corrupt officials around the world should make no mistake that we will be relentless in our efforts to deny them the proceeds of their crimes. ”
“According to the allegations in the complaints, this is a case where life imitated art,” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell.  “The associates of these corrupt 1MDB officials are alleged to have used some of the illicit proceeds of their fraud scheme to fund the production of The Wolf of Wall Street, a movie about a corrupt stockbroker who tried to hide his own illicit profits in a perceived foreign safe haven.  But whether corrupt officials try to hide stolen assets across international borders – or behind the silver screen – the Department of Justice is committed to ensuring that there is no safe haven.”
“Stolen money that is subsequently used to purchase interests in music companies, artwork or high-end real estate is subject to forfeiture under U.S. law,” said U.S. Attorney Decker.  “Today’s actions are the result of the tremendous dedication of attorneys in my office and the Department of Justice, as well as law enforcement agents across the country.  All of us are committed to sending a message that we will not allow the United States to become a playground for the corrupt, a platform for money laundering or a place to hide and invest stolen riches.”
“The United States will not be a safe haven for assets stolen by corrupt foreign officials,” said Deputy Director McCabe.  “Public corruption, no matter where it occurs, is a threat to a fair and competitive global economy.  The FBI is committed to working with our foreign and domestic partners to identify and return these stolen assets to their legitimate owners, the Malaysian people.  I want to thank the FBI and IRS investigative team who worked with the prosecutors and our international partners on this case.”
“Today’s announcement underscores the breadth of the alleged corruption and money laundering related to the 1MDB fund,” said Chief Weber.  “We cannot allow the massive, brazen and blatant diversion of billions of dollars to be laundered through U.S. financial institutions without consequences.”
As alleged in the complaints, the members of the conspiracy – which included officials at 1MDB, their relatives and other associates – allegedly diverted more than $3.5 billion in 1MDB funds.  Using fraudulent documents and representations, the co-conspirators allegedly laundered the funds through a series of complex transactions and fraudulent shell companies with bank accounts located in the Singapore, Switzerland, Luxembourg and the United States.  These transactions were allegedly intended to conceal the origin, source and ownership of the funds, and were ultimately processed through U.S. financial institutions and were used to acquire and invest in assets located in the United States.
In seeking recovery of more than $1 billion, the complaints detail the alleged misappropriation of 1MDB’s assets as it occurred over the course of at least three schemes.  In 2009, the complaints allege that 1MDB officials and their associates embezzled approximately $1 billion that was intended to be invested to exploit energy concessions purportedly owned by a foreign partner.  Instead, the funds were transferred through shell companies and were used to acquire a number of assets, as set forth in the complaints.  The complaints also allege that the co-conspirators misappropriated more than $1.3 billion in funds raised through two bond offerings in 2012 and $1.2 billion following another bond offering in 2013.  As further detailed in the complaints, the stolen funds were laundered into the United States and used by the co-conspirators to acquire and invest in various assets.  These assets allegedly included high-end real estate and hotel properties in New York and Los Angeles, a $35 million jet aircraft, works of art by Vincent Van Gogh and Claude Monet, an interest in the music publishing rights of EMI Music and the production of the 2013 film The Wolf of Wall Street.
The FBI’s International Corruption Unit and the IRS-CI investigated the case.  Deputy Chief Woo S. Lee and Trial Attorney Kyle R. Freeny of the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys John Kucera and Christen Sproule of the Central District of California prosecuted the case.  The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs provided additional assistance. 
The Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative is led by a team of dedicated prosecutors in the Criminal Division’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, in partnership with federal law enforcement agencies to forfeit the proceeds of foreign official corruption and, where appropriate, to use those recovered asset to benefit the people harmed by these acts of corruption and abuse of office.  Individuals with information about possible proceeds of foreign corruption located in or laundered through the United States should contact federal law enforcement or send an email to
Email links icon
* * *
Updated July 27, 2016

Thursday, December 29, 2016

An officer and an imbecile : Greg Sammut, DIO officers responsible for Scorpene intelligence mishandling should be made to pay-Cost to taxpayers will run into billions

by Ganesh Sahathevan

That Greg Sammut, this country's most senior submariner, in charge of the "future " submarine project, would think this and then admit to it raises questions about his intellectual ability:

“Given the possibility that Mr Patrick could have come into ­possession of the information as a result of his privileged position as a contractor to provide training to the Malaysian navy, which ­operates Scorpene submarines, and uncertain of its provenance, I informed him that I was not the ­appropriate person to receive any such material and I said I would inform the proper author­ities,” Admiral Sammut told The Australian.

He and all others involved int his debacle need to be demoted; the cost to taxpayers will run into the billions.

Defence closes ranks on French submarine data leak

  • The Australian
Australia’s peak military intelligence agency has refused to ­explain why it failed to act on a tip-off that France’s submarine builder had suffered a massive leak of confidential data on India’s new submarines.
If the Defence Intelligence ­Organisation had acted on the tip-off in 2013, it could have prevented disclosure of the leaks that embarrassed the governments of Australia, France and India.
The Australian revealed in Aug­ust that 22,400 pages of secret data disclosing the highly sensitive combat capabilities of the French-built Indian fleet of ­Scorpene submarines had been stolen from the French offices of the ­submarines’ builder, DCNS, which is designing Australia’s ­future ­submarines.
The disclosure has sparked ongoing investigations in France and India and has forced the Turnbull government to tighten information security requirements of Australia’s $50 billion future submarine project to prevent a similar security breach.
It has since emerged that a tip-off given to Defence in 2013 about the leaked submarine data was referred to the DIO for investigation but the intelligence agency failed to act on the information.
Rex Patrick, a former sub­mariner and adviser to independent senator Nick Xenopohon, received the leaked submarine data by accident from a Malaysian company in 2013 and later that year tried to show some of it on his computer to Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, who is now the head of Defence’s Future Submarine Program.
Admiral Sammut has confirmed the short meeting with Mr Patrick in a room in Canberra’s Parliament House in May 2013 but said the exchange was not long enough for him to view the leaked information in any detail or determine its significance.
Even so, Admiral Sammut says he informed Defence of the exchange with Mr Patrick and the matter was referred to the then head of the DIO, Major General Paul Symon.
“Given the possibility that Mr Patrick could have come into ­possession of the information as a result of his privileged position as a contractor to provide training to the Malaysian navy, which ­operates Scorpene submarines, and uncertain of its provenance, I informed him that I was not the ­appropriate person to receive any such material and I said I would inform the proper author­ities,” Admiral Sammut told The Australian.
“On the same day I spoke ­directly with the deputy secretary intelligence and security (then Steve Meekin), who arranged for me to speak with the director of the Defence Intelligence Organ­isation (General Symon).
“In my discussion with Major General Symon, it was agreed that his staff would take up the matter,” he said.
Mr Patrick said he was never contacted by any staff from the DIO in relation to the leaked­ ­information.
The Australian has submitted detailed questions to Defence about why the DIO took no action but a spokesman replied only that “Defence has no further comment on this matter”.
France’s Defence Minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, visited Australia last week and repeated claims that the leak was the work of malicious foreign or com­mercial rivals.
The French public prosecutor is investigating how the documents were taken from a supposedly secure DCNS site by a former DCNS sub-contractor in 2011.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

The Podesta/Clinton ISIL email-Obama implies the Clintons were running a Mid East protection racket:Echoes of Douglas McArthur's USD 500,000 gift from Manuel Quezon

by Ganesh Saahathevan 

Reuters reported:

US President Barack Obama © Kevin Lamarque

US President Barack Obama © Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

Outgoing US President Barack Obama reiterated allegations that Russia helped Donald Trump by hacking Democrat emails, but downplayed its importance. He also lamented that the hack story received so much media coverage during the US election season.
“Russia trying to influence our elections dates back to the Soviet Union. What they did here, hacking some emails and releasing them, is not a particularly fancy brand of espionage or propaganda,” Obama said in an interview with the host of Comedy Central’s Daily Show, Trevor Noah. “We were frankly more concerned in the run-up to the election to the possibilities of vote tampering, which we did not see evidence of.”
He said his administration accused Russia of hacking the Democratic National Committee (DNC) a month before the election took place, and that “it was no secret.”

It is understood that the material the Russians obtained, which Obama does not dispute is accurate, included the email below from Hillary Clinton, published by Wikileaks.Most of the reporting on this email has been concerned with this part,and the role of the Saudis, Qataris in financing ISIL and other jihadis:
“We need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” the document states.

However, few if any have asked asked why Hillary Clinton suggested the use of  "diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets"when contact at the highest levels would have been more appropriate and effective , given the gravity of the situation. 

There has also been a lack of interest in analyzing her suggestions on the light of the Clinton Foundation's financial dealings with the Saudis and Qataris, which include a USD 1 million gift to Bill Clinton which is likely to have been deemed a gift to him  personally.

The above taken together with Hillary's suggestions contained in the email below, which Obama says was obtained from the DNC, suggests that her recommendations were designed to keep some sort of pressure on the Saudis,the Qataris and other Middle East leaders, using ISIL as a threat. Readers are reminded that by 2014 ISIL had become a force on its own, no longer reliant on the Saudi or Qatari governments, which it was threatening to overthrow. The Saudis, Qataris and one suspects all other Middle East governments would have been happy for the US to employ whatever means necessary to get rid of the ISIL threat.There would have been no need to 
use "diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets" to "pressure"  them into ceasing support for ISIL. 
It does seem therefore that the Clintons were attempting to craft a scheme which would involve the use of jihdis, Pashmega forces, and private contractors to keep the ISIL threat alive in an attempt to keep the Middle East money flowing to themselves.Some might think this a conspiracy theory, but Americans especially are reminded of the USD 500,000 then Philippine president Manuel Quezon paid Douglas McArthur for , in essence, providing him protection against the invading Japanese Imperial Army.


Date: 2014-09-27 15:15 
Subject: Congrats!
Send our love to Chelsea, Marc and Grandpa. Can't wait to meet Charlotte. 
On Aug 19, 2014 9:22 AM, "H" wrote: 
Agree but there may be opportunities as the Iraqi piece improves. Also, any idea whose fighters attacked Islamist positions in Tripoli, Libya? Worth analyzing for future purposes. 
*From*: John Podesta [
*Sent*: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 09:19 AM 
*To*: H 
*Subject*: Re: 
Here's what I mentioned Hit send too soon. Meant to say Syria elements are vexing. 
On Aug 19, 2014 9:17 AM, "John Podesta" wrote: 
I think we are headed down this path in Iraq, but the Syria elements are 
On Aug 17, 2014 3:50 PM, "H" wrote: 
Note: Sources include Western intelligence, US intelligence and sources in the region. 
1. With all of its tragic aspects, the advance of ISIL through Iraq gives the U.S. Government an opportunity to change the way it deals with the chaotic security situation in North Africa and the Middle East. 
The most important factor in this matter is to make use of intelligence resources and Special Operations troops in an aggressive manner, while avoiding the old school solution, which calls for more traditional military operations. 
In Iraq it is important that we engage ISIL using the resources of the Peshmerga fighters of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), and what, if any, reliable units exist in the Iraqi Army. 
The Peshmerga commanders are aggressive hard fighting troops, who have long standing relationships with CIA officers and Special Forces operators. However, they will need the continued commitment of U.S. personnel to work with them as advisors and strategic planners, the new generation of Peshmerga commanders being largely untested in traditional combat. 
That said, with this U.S. aid the Kurdish troops can inflict a real defeat on ISIL. 
2. It is important that once we engage ISIL, as we have now done in a limited manner, we and our allies should carry on until they are driven back suffering a tangible defeat. Anything short of this will be seen by other fighters in the region, Libya, Lebanon, and even Jordan, as an American defeat. 
However, if we provide advisors and planners, as well as increased close air support for the Peshmerga, these soldiers can defeat ISIL. They will give the new Iraqi Government a chance to organize itself, and restructure the Sunni resistance in Syria, moving the center of power toward moderate forces like the Free Syrian Army (FSA). In addition to air support, the Peshmerga also need artillery and armored vehicles to deal with the tanks and other heavy equipment captured from the Iraqi army by ISIL. 
3. In the past the USG, in an agreement with the Turkish General Staff, did not provide such heavy weapons to the Peshmerga, out of a concern that they would end up in the hands of Kurdish rebels inside of Turkey. The current situation in Iraq, not to mention the political environment in Turkey, makes this policy obsolete. 
Also this equipment can now be airlifted directly into the KRG zone. 
4. Armed with proper equipment, and working with U.S. advisors, the Peshmerga can attack the ISIL with a coordinated assault supported from the air. This effort will come as a surprise to the ISIL, whose leaders believe we will always stop with targeted bombing, and weaken them both in Iraq and inside of Syria. 
At the same time we should return to plans to provide the FSA, or some group of moderate forces, with equipment that will allow them to deal with a weakened ISIL, and stepped up operations against the Syrian regime. This entire effort should be done with a low profile, avoiding the massive traditional military operations that are at best temporary solutions. While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.
This effort will be enhanced by the stepped up commitment in the KRG. The Qataris and Saudis will be put in a position of balancing policy between their ongoing competition to dominate the Sunni world and the consequences of serious U.S. pressure. By the same token, the threat of similar, realistic U.S. operations will serve to assist moderate forces in Libya, Lebanon, and even Jordan, where insurgents are increasingly fascinated by the ISIL success in Iraq. 
6. In the end the situation in Iraq is merely the latest and most dangerous example of the regional restructuring that is taking place across North Africa, all the way to the Turkish border. 
These developments are important to the U.S. for reasons that often differ from country to country: energy and moral commitment to Iraq, energy issues in Libya, and strategic commitments in Jordan. At the same time, as Turkey moves toward a new, more serious Islamic reality, it will be important for them to realize that we are willing to take serious actions, which can be sustained to protect our national interests.
This course of action offers the potential for success, as opposed to large scale, traditional military campaigns, that are too expensive and awkward to maintain over time. 
7. (Note: A source in Tripoli stated in confidence that when the U.S. Embassy was evacuated, the presence of two U.S. Navy jet fighters over the city brought all fighting to a halt for several hours, as Islamist forces were not certain that these aircraft would not also provide close ground support for moderate government forces.)
8. If we do not take the changes needed to make our security policy in the region more realistic, there is a real danger of ISIL veterans moving on to other countries to facilitate operations by Islamist forces.
This is already happening in Libya and Egypt, where fighters are returning from Syria to work with local forces. ISIL is only the latest and most violent example of this process. If we don’t act to defeat them in Iraq something even more violent and dangerous will develop. 
Successful military operations against these very irregular but determined forces can only be accomplished by making proper use of clandestine/special operations resources, in coordination with airpower, and established local allies. 
There is, unfortunately, a narrow window of opportunity on this issue, as we need to act before an ISIL state becomes better organized and reaches into Lebanon and Jordan. 
9. (Note: It is important to keep in mind that as a result of this policy there probably will be concern in the Sunni regions of Iraq and the Central Government regarding the possible expansion of KRG controlled territory. 
With advisors in the Peshmerga command we can reassure the concerned parties that, in return for increase autonomy, the KRG will not exclude the Iraqi Government from participation in the management of the oil fields around Kirkuk, and the Mosel Dam hydroelectric facility. 
At the same time we will be able to work with the Peshmerga as they pursue ISIL into disputed areas of Eastern Syria, coordinating with FSA troops who can move against ISIL from the North. This will make certain Basher al Assad does not gain an advantage from these operations. 
Finally, as it now appears the U.S. is considering a plan to offer contractors as advisors to the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, we will be in a position to coordinate more effectively between the Peshmerga and the Iraqi Army.) 

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Marise Payne mishandled information provided by a whistleblower: Payne's dealings with the French embassy require investigation

by Ganesh Sahathevan

The Defence Minister Marise Payne has no right whatsoever to hand over ,especially to a foreign government,  information brought to her attention by anyone claiming whistle-blower protection: 

Payne told The Australian yesterday she did not access the data drive and had no way to verify its contents. “I conveyed the drive to the secretary of my department. The drive was provided to a senior official at the French embassy, given its purported contents were the property of French company DCNS.”

In her own words, she handed over to the French a USB that could have contained anything, including classified Australian Government information.Even if it was not classified, there was no telling what there was on that USB that might be useful to the French in their dealings with Australia.Then, she assumed the French were the rightful owners, based on what she felt were "its purported contents".

Information coming into the possession of the Government Of Australia must be properly  analyzed,and its relevance to the interests of Australia properly determined. The Australian Government is not an arm of the French or any other government.Its only interest is that of the Australian people.
This familiarity with DCNS and the French Government is disturbing, to say the least, in any Asian country Payne would have long since been sacked. 

Navigating the submarine leaks scandal: the story behind a scoop

Rex Patrick, a former navy submariner, left his former role as a training officer for foreign navies to join Nick Xenophon as an adviser early this year.
On August 29, independent senator Nick Xenophon walked into the office of Defence Minister Marise Payne and handed her a data stick containing the stolen secrets of India’s new submarine fleet.
Xenophon also told her that the person behind the explosive story in The Australian five days earlier — which revealed the leak of 22,400 pages of secret data on the French-designed Indian fleet — was his own senior adviser Rex Patrick.
The senator told Payne that the actions of Patrick, a former submariner, were those of a whistleblower who had acted in Australia’s national interest by helping to protect the integrity of the $50 billion future submarine project.
Then came an unexpected twist. Xenophon told the Defence Minister that in 2013, Patrick had shown a part of the confidential leaked data to Defence’s most senior submariner, Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, but nothing had come of it.
Sammut says he passed the information on to Defence Intelligence, who never followed it up with him.
It was an astonishing claim in a story that already had become a global scandal and front-page news in France and India.
This was just one in a series of remarkable backroom developments in the submarine leaks controversy that The Australian can now reveal. They have embroiled navy top brass, the Turnbull cabinet, diplomats and spies as investigators in three countries try to contain the damage and ­apportion blame for the massive international security leak.
Now Patrick, who has agreed to speak about his role for the first time, has told of his meeting with Sammut and his decision to become a whistleblower.
Patrick received the data stick containing the 22,400 leaked files by accident in April 2013 after the data had been stolen from DCNS by a former subcontractor in 2011 and had made its way from France to Southeast Asia and on to Sydney.
The 49-year-old Patrick left his former role as a training officer for foreign navies to join Xenophon as an adviser early this year. He says that after he sat on the leaked submarine documents for more than three years, it was time to make public the fact that the French company that will design Australia’s new submarine fleet had suffered a catastrophic criminal leak of confidential data on its Indian submarine project in 2011.
“It was time to get the issue out into the open. It alerted Australian taxpayers to the problem … they have a right to know that the problem exists, that they (the government) need to work with France to solve,” he says.
At first the government was furious when it learned of Xenophon’s role in sanctioning Patrick’s decision to disclose the leak to this newspaper. The public revelation was hugely embarrassing for Australia, France and India.
It was a black eye for the global reputation of French shipbuilder DCNS, in which the Turnbull government had invested heavily by announcing it as the winner of the competition to design Australia’s new submarine fleet.
In the eyes of the government, the South Australian senator had sanctioned a leak that had harmed the reputation of DCNS and, by extension, Australia’s ­future submarine project.
Defence Industry Minister Christopher Pyne did not accept Xenophon and Patrick’s argument that the disclosure was in the public interest because it would prompt France and Australia to redouble efforts to prevent a similar leak on the Australian submarine project.
Pyne was furious at his South Australian political rival and said publicly that whoever leaked the story could not be classified as a whistleblower.
Yet Pyne and Payne knew within hours of The Australian breaking the story on August 24 that Xenophon was linked to the leak.
That morning, Xenophon had called Payne’s office to confess his and Patrick’s role in the story, but the minister was travelling overseas so he told a staffer he would tell Payne the full story when she returned. Once Xenophon confessed Patrick’s identify to Payne, it became an open secret in government and Defence circles.
Soon after The Australian revealed news of the leak, Sammut, as head of the Future Submarine Project, told Defence secretary Dennis Richardson and Payne of his brief discussion with Patrick three years earlier.
Sammut, who then was a commodore in charge of submarine capability, is one of the most respected officers in Defence. At that time, there was no competition for the future submarine and DCNS was not a contender.
Patrick and Sammut give different versions of their meeting on that day. Patrick says he approached Sammut in the waiting room of a Defence estimates hearing in May 2013 with the leaked Scorpene data.
“I put a USB stick into my computer and presented the front screen of the Scorpene datafile to Greg,” says Patrick.
“I then told him how the data came into my possession and took him through a couple of pages of the disk.”
Patrick says he made the significance of the data clear to Sammut. “I offered to surrender the disk to him but required an undertaking that my name, as the source of the disk, not be provided to anyone,” he says. “He told me he was not sure he could do that and would have to seek advice.”
Sammut disputes Patrick’s version of events and says he was not made aware of the significance of the data during their short discussion. “I did not view the information regarding a Scorpene submarine Mr Patrick claimed to hold in any detail,” Sammut said in a statement last night. “I did see one page of indeterminate material on his computer screen. He did not indicate that this information concerned India’s Scorpenes.”
Sammut said he reported this encounter to the then deputy ­director of intelligence and sec­urity and it was agreed that the Defence Intelligence Organisation would take up the matter.
Patrick says the DIO did not make contact with him and as far as he is aware, nothing further happened.
Yet the decision by Xenophon and Patrick in August to surrender the stolen DCNS data file to Payne created a dilemma for the government, which had to decide what to do with 22,400 pages of highly sensitive data on the submarine fleet of a major regional power.
Payne told The Australian yesterday she did not access the data drive and had no way to verify its contents. “I conveyed the drive to the secretary of my department. The drive was provided to a senior official at the French embassy, given its purported contents were the property of French company DCNS.”
France is believed to have provided a copy to the Indian government, although the Indian high commission in Canberra could not confirm this yesterday.
Investigators in both countries are trying to gauge the extent of the damage that may have been caused if the leaked data were ­accessed by a foreign power.
French public prosecutors and French intelligence agencies are also tracking down a French ­former DCNS subcontractor who was also a former French naval officer and who is believed to have stolen the data from DCNS and taken it to Malaysia for use in a naval training course.
The former officer lost control of that data when he was sacked and locked out of his workplace with the data still on his work computer inside the building. That company placed the data — apparently thinking that it was routine naval training data — on an internet server before posting it by regular mail to ­Patrick at a Sydney post office box address.
The Australian understands French prosecutors have identified the former employee who stole the data and are building a prosecution case against him.
DCNS is also aware of Patrick and Xenophon’s role in disclosing the leak to The Australian.
Yet despite knowing this, DCNS reportedly believes its rival German submarine bidder, TKMS, is behind the story.
The company’s global head, Herve Guillou, called the leak “economic warfare” and The Australianunderstands the French government has formally complained to Berlin about Germany’s alleged role.
TKMS is angered by the implication and anxious to refute it, fearing it could damage its own reputation and place at risk lucrative defence contracts.
Late last month, TKMS quietly dispatched two investigators to Australia to examine if any of its Australian employees played a role in the leak story.
The company is expected to soon tell the French government it has found no evidence to support the allegations from Paris.
The Australian has been told TKMS did not know of the leak until it appeared in this paper.
The DCNS accusation against Germany has also puzzled Patrick, who says he did not have a preference among the three bidders. He says if he had wanted to harm the French bid, he would have leaked the story during the bidding process rather than four months after.
For DCNS, the leak has already come at a high price, with reports India will no longer pursue a $2 billion option to purchase more Scorpene submarines.
In Australia, disclosure of the leak has served the purpose Patrick intended. Despite Canberra’s initial attempts to play down the leak’s significance, it has led the government to conduct a comprehensive review into all aspects of the information security regime that will apply to Australia’s new submarine fleet.
It has also triggered a review of secrecy procedures within DCNS in France.
Xenophon is adamant Patrick did the right thing in revealing the leak. “I have no doubt the French will help us build first-class submarines but if there is another sec­urity breach then it will put the nation’s defence and in particular those submariners in the ocean at serious risk,” he says.
“This disclosure has huge benefits for our national security and could potentially save the lives of our submariners by ensuring that security is as tight as it must be.”
The government remains unimpressed and at the weekend said it would review Patrick’s defence security clearance despite knowing his role in the leak since Aug­ust. 
“The government does not consider the unauthorised disclosure of information to be appropriate or in the public interest,” Payne says.
Xenophon says this is a case of the government trying to hide its embarrassment, “a classic case of shoot the messenger who disclosed information in the public interest”.

Payne's valiant defence of DCNS against Xenophon raises the question: Is l'affaire Adelaide a repeat of DCNS's l'affaire Karachi?

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Marise Payne & partner Stuart Ayres, who "tried" to contact DCNS
in the week before the Australian submarince contract was awarded

Here is the Australian Minister For Defence fighting for DCNS, against enquiries Senator Nick Xenophon , whose converns are understood to have been motivated by the leak at DCNS of Indian Scorpene plans:

In a letter, Senator Payne told him the IP provisions would not be
released because they were "of significant commercial value and
highly sensitive to DCNS".Releasing this and other information
"could disadvantage DCNS and advantage its competitors in business operations", Senator Payne said."Given the role of DCNS in delivering French national submarine programs, such disclosure
could reasonably be expected to also damage international relations with France," she says.

Remember, this is the Australian Minister for Defence staunchly
defending a company that cannot protect its own "secrets" and which has compromised its contract to build submarines for Australia.

And,as if that is not bad enough, she has determined that a former submariner who discovered the leak must be punished for compromising ,apparently, French interests:

Defence Minister Marise Payne said the government "does not consider the unauthorised disclosure of information to be appropriate or in the public interest".

"The Australian government will review the security clearance of any individual or individuals who may have been involved in the alleged unauthorised disclosure," she said on Saturday.

DCNS  has a "colourful" history, a history that raises, again, questions aboutwhat exactly her partner Stuart Ayres was up to in Paris.This writer asks again , is  l'affaire Adelaide a repeat of DCNS's l'affaire Karachi?


Doing business with the corruption prone DCNS-Are Australian politicians ,civil servants, exceptionally honest,pure ,possessing moral fortitude lacking in others?

by Ganesh Sahatevan

It is being reported that DCNS of France is to be awarded the AUD 50 billion contract to build Australia's next generation of submarines.

Meanwhile, there has been no commentary in Australia about DCNS's history of corruption.

In Malaysia:

Malaysia's government has denied allegations of corruption in its $1.25 billion purchase of two submarines as it responded for the first time to a French investigation into alleged bribery payments in the deal.

The allegations have emerged in a French investigative case examining whether French shipbuilding giant DCNS paid bribes to Malaysian officials.

Malaysian human rights group SUARAM and its French lawyers have alleged that DCNS bought classified Malaysian defence ministry documents to help its bid for the 1 billion euro ($1.25 billion) contract it won in 2002. They say investigation documents show that about 36 million euros ($44.90 million) were paid by Thales International, a subsidiary of DCNS, to a company called Terasasi, controlled by a former associate of Najib.

In Taiwan:

The Taiwanese government has filed a US$98.4 million lawsuit against the French state-owned DCNS over a long-running, massive corruption case that puts added pressure on the defense contractor at a time when it faces multiple investigations that could bring down top French politicians.

The allegations, announced by Taiwan’s Defense Minister Kao Hua-chun in Parliament last week, are also an indication that the French contractors apparently continued with illegal activities well after the original scandal was uncovered. Kao said additional kickbacks prohibited by a 1996 order agreement have been found relating to supplying parts for the problem-plagued stealth frigates, which cost US$2.8 billion in 1991. Taiwan is seeking the additional penalty for alleged violation of the 1996 agreement, bringing the total to well over US$1 billion.

The purchase of the six frigates has been marked by earlier allegations of massive corruption, multiple murders, and demands for fines against the French shipbuilder for US$950 million, most of it already owed by the defense contractor and the French state under international court rulings. The French government has already agreed to pay €457 million in damages to Taiwan, which is a big enough amount to require an emergency amendment to the national operating budget.

In Pakistan,The Karachi Affair
So convoluted, one report is reproduced in full:

Political scandal brews over 11 Frenchmen killed in Pakistan
By Michael Cosgrove Jun 19, 2009 in Politics
A major political scandal is gaining momentum in France after revelations that 11 Frenchmen killed in a 2002 Karachi bus bombing were victims of a Pakistani plot to punish France for non-payment of commission on a deal involving the sale of submarines.

Not only is it a scandal here in France, but it may well turn into an international affair.
The Karachi bombing victims were all engineers employed by the DCN, the French company which holds a quasi-monopoly on the construction of French warships and submarines. The attack also killed three Pakistanis and injured many others.
They were in Pakistan to work on three Agosta 90 B submarines which were sold to the Pakistan military in a deal signed in 1994. Payment was to be spread over ten years and, as is usual in business deals involving military hardware, commission was promised to the middlemen involved. These middlemen included Pakistani and Saudi Arabian nationals. Saudi Arabia has traditionally been a source of cash funding for Pakistan, and its role in the deal was that it paid up front for the submarines.
The attack shocked the French, who immediately sent investigators to Karachi. They almost instantly claimed that Al Qaida, which was very active at that time, was behind the bombing. The affair slowly drifted out of public view in the months that followed.
It has resurfaced with a bang with revelations that the attack was indeed carried out by Islamic militants, but with the help of the Pakistani military and secret services.
The claims have been made by family members of those killed, lawyers representing them, and even judges, in the context of the official enquiry into the bombing, which is still ongoing.
At the time the deal was signed, French politicians, notably Edouard Balladur and Jacques Chirac, were trying to outdo each other in their search for campaign funds for the upcoming Presidential elections in 1995. Balladur was the French Prime Minister at that time, and as such he was an essential player in any international arms deal.
Balladur's Budget Minister at the time was current French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Sarkozy supported Balladur's candidature for the Presidency, a gesture for which Chirac would never forgive him.
The deal represented a lot of money and a source of campaign funding too.
Balladur was beaten in the election however and Chirac became President. Soon afterward, he ordered the cancellation of the progressive commission payments being made to senior Pakistani military personnel and others.
“The Al Qaida track has been totally abandoned. The mobile for the attack now appears to be linked to the stopping of commission payments. This is turning into a state affair” said Olivier Morice, lawyer for seven of the bereaved families, after a recent meeting with anti-terrorist judges Marc TrĂ©vidic and Yves Jannier.
“The commission payments (to Pakistan) were stopped when Jaques Chirac became President in 1995 in order that retro-commissions (..destined for the financing of Balladur’s campaign..) were not paid” he continued.
One of the anti-terrorist judges “said that this scenario had a cruel logic to it” said Magali Drouet, the daughter of one of the victims.
In this scenario, the attack was carried out in reprisals for the non-payment of commission. The current Pakistani President, Asif Ali Zardari, was the Investment Minister at the time in his wife Benazir Bhutto’s government. Zardari has been accused of corruption and money laundering many times.
Drouet went on to say that “this is a state-level affair which implicates France, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, a source of funding for Pakistan.”
This new track was uncovered last year by police but has only just been revealed. The police, acting under orders from judges, were investigating affairs of corruption and arms deals. They found documents on the premises of the DCN (now called DCNS) which revealed the names of companies who transited arms sales commissions.
One of the documents mentions the “instrumentalisation” of Islamic militants by Pakistani Secret Service and Army personnel. It says that “the Karachi attack was carried out thanks to connivance from within the Army and from elements of support for Islamic guerrillas” within the Pakistani Secret Services. It goes on to mention that the bombing was carried out “for financial reasons....designed to obtain the payment of unpaid commission.”
In another strange development, investigators are also looking into the judicial aspects of the bombing enquiry carried out at the time by French police in Pakistan. The judicial enquiry was suddenly halted in 2003.
Initially included in the evidence was a collection of photographs taken by Randall Bennett, the head of the American diplomatic security service in Pakistan at that time. Bennett also ran the investigation into the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl, the American journalist later executed by Al Qaida.
The photographs in question were those that Bennett took at the scene of the bombing. They were later destroyed under a French court orde

Read more:


Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 6:53 PM