Monday, March 25, 2019

The West eradicated white terrorists in the 70s, 80s, with conventional law enforcement methods ,but refuses to do the same with jihadis

by Ganesh Sahathevan








ITALY

NameFoundedDisbanded
Armed Proletarian Nuclei19741978
Armed Revolutionary Nuclei19771988
New Order19531978
October 22 Circle19691971
Partisan Action Groups19691972
Prima Linea19761983
Red Brigades19701984
Red Brigades Fighting Communist Party19811988
Red Brigades Guerrilla Party19811982
Red Brigades Walter Alasia19801983
As one can see, the Italians have had no trouble dismantling terrorist groups.



Since it is not about religion, and since the "experts" and our "leaders" believe that the "vast majority " of Muslims would have nothing to  do with the small minority of a minority from a "counter culturalsubculture", why are we not following the lead of the West German police , indeed other European agencies, who battled and defeated lone wolves like the Baader-Meinhof Gang? Anyone old enough to read the newspapers or watch TV in the 70s , 80s will recall how law enforcement agencies in Western countries were quite ruthless in their pursuit of the terrorist gangs of the time;and may wonder why the same dedication and professionalism is not evident in the pursuit of jihadis.
The paper below describes how it was done.


West German Law Enforcement Intelligence Analysis and Reaction to the Red Army Faction

by John Catherine

Journal Article | March 1, 2013 - 3:30am
The West German student movement of the late 1960’s sought to address perceived injustices found in West German society. Many of these demonstrations often resulted in clashes between students and the police. On June 2nd 1967, a state visit by the Shah of Iran to West Berlin sparked particularly turbulent protests against the Shah by various left leaning German student movements. When some of the Shah’s secret police clashed with German students, the demonstration erupted into chaos, resulting in the police shooting of Beno Ohnesorg.  Ohnesorg’s death was the impetus for the formation of one of Europe’s most dreaded terrorist organizations. Initially they were referred to as the Baader-Meinhof Gang and eventually more officially known as the Red Army Faction (RAF). This band of international terrorists would operate throughout the world for a little over two decades. Operations carried out by the RAF inspired leftists in other countries to form similar terror organizations engaging in crimes such as kidnappings, bank robberies, assassinations, and bombings based on a political agenda. This article discusses some of the evolving methods and tactics used by West German law enforcement by utilizing combinations of intelligence analysis and Human Intelligence (HUMINT) collection while simultaneously engaging and disrupting RAF operations during the initial stages of their terror campaign in the 1970’s. The flexibility and detailed analysis exhibited by West German law enforcement enabled police to mitigate the overall effectiveness of the RAF.
West German law enforcement and intelligence communities were forced to adapt and respond to a politically motivated form of crime. By 1972, the three founding members of the RAF, Andreas Baader, Ulrike Meinhof, and Gundrun Ennslin were in prison and awaiting trial. Their arrests were the result of a combination of dogged police and intelligence work carried out by West German law enforcement and domestic intelligence services. Leading the effort were Horst Herold and Alfred Klaus of theBundeskrimminalamt (BKA). Herold was ultimately responsible for bringing computer analysis and intelligence sharing to the forefront of counter-terrorism and law enforcement operations. Klaus was responsible for providing law enforcement with in-depth intelligence analysis of individual RAF members. These profiles focused on their political philosophy, education, writings, and childhood up-bringing.    
The BKA, HUMINT and the Investigators
The RAF situation in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s was truly a unique kind of criminal activity for law enforcement. After a successful raid freeing Baader from imprisonment; BaaderMeinhof, and Ensslin and others traveled to Jordan to receive military style training from the terror organization Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Each RAF member was provided with a passport from the United Arab Republic for their journey to Jordan. While at the PFLP terror training facility, Baader and Ensslin became confrontational with the PFLP leadership over the type of training being conducted. Engaged in an infantry style of combat training, due to the ongoing struggle with Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), the PFLP leadership was unwilling to alter their training regimen based on demands made by Baader and Ensslin. Baader insisted that the RAF were in need of an urban warfare type of training as the RAF was an urban guerilla movement. Eventually the group was expelled and forced to return to Western Europe through East Germany.[1] Once back in West Germany, the group made arrangements to begin the armed struggle to “expose” what they believed was a fascist state hidden within the West German government.[2] Using her numerous contacts with left-wing political sympathizers, Ulrike Meinhofcoordinated a series of safe houses for the RAF while in West Berlin. After conducting a string of successful RAF bank robberies, the frustrated Berlin Police seized on an opportunity when they received an anonymous tip on an RAF meeting.
The police and intelligence officials in the RAF case did not have access to surveillance technology that intercepts telephone traffic or uses computer software that can keyword search conversations that reveal possible terrorist conversations, locations, and plans. The West German law enforcement community relied heavily on HUMINT in order to take advantage of any opportunity presented by their human sources. Berlin Police detective Kotsch’s intuitive decision to act on this tip—the first bit of real actionable intelligence they received—ultimately resulted in the first victory over the seemingly evasive RAF.
Kotsch received a telephone call from an individual identifying himself only as Mueller. Mueller provided Kotsch with information about a meeting between members of the RAF in a West Berlin apartment and gave Kotsch license plate numbers, two addresses, meeting times, and then abruptly hung up.[3] It is critical to note that Mueller advised Kotsh that previous attempts were made to provide similar information to other police officials and that his information had gone ignored. Cooperative intelligence is usually provided by defectors like Mueller. Unlike the other law enforcement officials that did not think Mueller’s information credible, Kotsch must have recognized that Mueller’s information was something that only a defector would be able to provide.  Kotsch dispatched several detectives to stakeout the location of the meeting. This proved to be a watershed moment for the war with the RAF; Mueller’s information was accurate and the stakeout proved to be fruitful. The conclusion of the operation saw several key RAF figures in police custody along with weapons, explosives, and key documents.
Detective Kotsch’s decision to act resulted in the first success of West German counter-terrorism and provided further information to be exploited. Captured documents revealed the group’s financial status and established that Gundrun Ensslin was the group’s chief financial officer.[4] Among those arrested was an RAF attorney by the name of Horst Mahler. Mahler’s membership in the RAF gave police insight into the kind of role left-wing activist attorneys would play later as the investigation wore on. For example, their role in smuggling weapons and communications between incarcerated RAF members were some examples of how the attorney client privilege could be abused.[5]
Exploring the Culture of Terrorist Groups
During the early stages of the RAF crisis, the BKA assembled the Bonn Security Group. BKA investigator Alfred Klaus was reassigned from another BKA detail to oversee this new investigative body. Once reassigned, Klaus began his investigation of the RAF with an extensive examination of the entire philosophy of the RAF. Klaus studied Marx, Mao, and numerous RAF publications like The Urban Guerilla Concept authored by Ulrike Meinhof. He would read and reread news stories and magazine articles that focused on the group’s activities and crimes.[6] Like Klaus, the West German internal intelligence service, Bundesamt fuer Vassungsschutz (BfV), also studied the culture of the radical left. BfV investigators made extensive use of open source intelligence collection by examining the speeches, theses, and brochures of prominent leftist leaders, students, and political agitators.[7] Ulrich Wegener, the founder and first commanding officer of the GSG 9, also analyzed terrorism from this target centric perspective. Wegener studied theories on guerilla warfare, political motives, methods of operation, strategies, and tactics.[8]
Adopting this target centric approach, Klaus, Wegener, and the BfV investigators assisted in establishing an accurate model of the RAF culture, individual members, and their supporters. This form of analysis and profiling permits police to narrow their field of focus.[9] While West German agencies used a high degree of professionalism in their investigation of their adversary, BKA investigator Klaus took his research to an entirely different level using determination and his interpersonal skills to advance his investigation. Most notably, Klaus was gifted with a personality that people generally found charming, disarming, and magnetic.  Klaus used this, as well as his determination, as he went out and visited the families and associates of known RAF members. By doing so, he was able to conduct an assessment of individual RAF members and associates. For example, Klaus interviewed Gundrun Ensslin’s parents and is reported to have had wine with Andreas Baader’s mother while discussing Andreas’s childhood. Interestingly, Klaus made it a point to never ask the family members to turn in the RAF member; he would only ask that if they did come into contact with the RAF member that they ask the member to stop committing these violent acts. Klaus’s efforts allowed him to skillfully develop individual personality profiles of each known RAF member by innocuously eliciting information from family members and associates. Klaus’s studies convinced him that the RAF was not just a bunch of criminals committing random acts of violence for some obscure ideology.[10] Instead, Klaus’ innovative intelligence collection approach allowed him to establish a solid understanding of the personalities, psychology, and culture within the RAF which he assembled in a sixty page analytical report. Klaus also traveled to the various police precincts around West Germany to give lectures on the personalities, political motives, intentions, and political philosophy of the RAF. Klaus’s intelligence collection, analysis, writings, and presentations covering the RAF helped overcome some biases that existed within German law enforcement with respect to the RAF.[11] Klaus was able to understand and circulate the view that the objectives of the RAF were forms of political actions and not an ordinary crime spree as many in the West German law enforcement community had suspected.
Some in the law enforcement community were shocked at what appeared to be Klaus’s admiration of the RAF. Fellow police officers were stunned when Klaus remarked that he was impressed at the planning and thought that went into some of the RAF operations.[12] Klaus’s analysis of the RAF helped to limit any bias traps or analytical vulnerabilities that he may have developed as a long standing BKA investigator.[13] These analytical efforts were clearly designed to give law enforcement an advantage in addition to addressing the principles of counter-deception.
Horst Herold, the BKA, and Computer Analysis
When Horst Herold took over the BKA in 1971, it was a relatively small federal institution with little law enforcement authority. When Herold left the agency, it had doubled in size and had become one of the Federal German Republic’s best weapons against crime and terrorism. Herold is probably best known for his development of criminal computer analysis within West German law enforcement. The system that he developed has been compared to the internet for German law enforcement. His idea ultimately used a combination of the target centric analytical approach and computer analysis against the RAF. [14]Herold believed that how he approached the RAF problem and used the potential advantage gained by his use of technology helped law enforcement to focus limited resources on the RAF and gain an advantage.
The fight against terrorism, in Herold’s view, was somewhere between military operations and a political policy struggle.[15] He clearly shared the views of Klaus in that both men believed that the conflict between the German state and the RAF was political. Herold considered the possibility that terrorism at the time may have been the result of the situation as it existed between the eastern and western spheres of political influence. Herold surmised that the type of terrorism promulgated by the RAF must be destroyed at its origins and this required that the police respond independently with accurate and reliable intelligence.[16] As such, computer analysis, access to intelligence, and communications among a decentralized police community like West Germany’s were essential in defeating the RAF.
Herold’s computer system, used by a highly dispersed police force among the independent states and districts throughout West Germany, enabled intelligence to pass throughout the entire West German law enforcement community. Ensuring that BKA agents, police officers, and detectives in the field had timely access to the intelligence that they all needed gave the police the advantage over the terrorists. Researcher David Gugerli notes that Herold’s computer system eventually contained all the information that had been assembled by the German police. Herold further strengthened the BKA position by providing open channels of communication between local police and detectives in the field so they could collect and analyze information rapidly, while keeping the BKA informed.[17]
Information from police reports and documents were transcribed into the BKA database.  This system was designed so that the search engine could assemble information based on statistical patterns based on the description of the criminal being sought. This enabled law enforcement managers and supervisors to effectively deploy their resources.   Every police station in West Germany was connected to the new BKA computer system, with some 800 computer work stations in total available to police. The system contained thousands of names of known RAF associates, suspect organizations, millions of fingerprints, and photographs. Detectives found that the system offered them easy and quick access to some fundamental law enforcement information. In the 1970’s, this was the state of the art technical surveillance system.[18] Herold would use his computer system to coordinate his RAF dragnet across West Germany using computerized profiles of potential terrorists and supporters.[19]
Movement around West Germany became increasingly difficult for the RAF because of Herold’s police computer system. The RAF developed an elaborate and deceptive counter measure designed to evade police check points and traffic stops. One of these methods was known as “the doubles game.” In “the doubles game,” a particular make, color, and year of vehicle was stolen. RAF members then made efforts to find an innocent civilian who operated the same make, model and color car. Once a person was found and identified, duplicate license plates were manufactured along with identification documents that were made from stolen blank driver’s licenses and identity documents. In the event of a police road block or traffic stop, all of the corresponding identification and vehicle information appeared legitimate. In order to assist police in countering “the doubles game,” Herold hoped to enlist the help of the nation’s gas station employees. BKA flyers were circulated to gas stations around West Germany requesting that they look for individuals exhibiting suspicious behavior or individuals with hair that appeared to have been dyed and report it to police.[20] Even in the dawning age of sophisticated computerization, the BKA had to resort to public reporting.
The detailed research conducted by the West German law enforcement community forced the RAF to burro further underground, thus limiting their effectiveness. The RAF was able to cross the border into East Germany with the help of the East German security services in order to receive additional training and get some rest. This placed West German intelligence and security services at a great disadvantage.[21]
The focus on the background of individual terrorists, their philosophy, and the RAF’s organizational culture assisted West German law enforcement to effectively engage the RAF thus diminishing their overall effectiveness. Dieter Munzinger’s account of the GSG 9’s operations during their pursuit of Christian Klar provides insight into how effective West German police intelligence was becoming. Munzinger claims that the GSG 9 and BKA were often arriving at identified RAF safe houses only moments after Klar was believed to have abandoned it. By maintaining pressure on the terrorist Klar, West German police limited his ability provide leadership and to coordinate terrorist attacks until his eventual arrest outside of Aumuele, Germany at an RAF weapons cache. The BKA learned this information from HUMINT sources.[22]
The introduction of computer technology in conjunction with HUMINT management and group cultural study were paramount in assisting the West German authorities in defeating the RAF. The study and understanding of the culture of any group must not be underestimated. This is how we come to understand the intentions of an enemy or competitor. HUMINT played a major role in this type of investigation and contributed significantly to the eventual dismantling of the RAF. Once the information was synthesized into intelligence, it was then disseminated to those operating on a national level thus assisting in making their investigations successful.  

[1] Tom Vague (1994). Televisionaries: The Red Army Faction Story 1963-1993. AK Press. Edinburgh, UK. Pp.20-24. 
[2] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. Pp. 72-73
[3] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. Pp. 81-84.
[4] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. P 83.
[5] Tom Vague (1994). Televisionaries: The Red Army Faction Story 1963-1993. AK Press. Edinburgh, UK. P. 96.
[6] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. Pp.101-102.
[7] J. Smith & Andre Moncourt (2009). The Red Army Faction: A Docuemntary History, Volume 1: Projectiles for the People. PM Press, Oakland, CA.  P.116
[8] Rolf Tophoven (1985). GSG 9: The German Response to Terrorism.  Bernard & Graefe Verlag. Oldenburg, Germany. P. 18
[9] John O. Koehler (1999). Stasi: The Untold Story of the East German Secret Police. West View Press. Boulder Colorado. P. 399.
[10] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. Pp. 103-104.
[11] Roger Z. George and James B. Bruce (Editors)(2001).  Analyzing Intelligence: Origins, Obstacles, and Innovations.  George Washington University Press. Washington DC. P.127-130.
[12] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. Pp. 103.
[13] Roger Z. George and James B. Bruce (Editors)(2001).  Analyzing Intelligence: Origins, Obstacles, and Innovations.  George Washington University Press. Washington DC. P.127-130.
[14] David Gugerli (2009). “Search Engines: The World as a Database.”http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/query/2009/06/16/a-new-view-on-old-seargh-engines/ [accessed June 10, 2012].
[15] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. P. 138.
[16] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. P. 140.
[17] Stefan Aust (Trans. Anthea Bell) (2008). Baader-Meinhof: The Inside Story of the RAF. Oxford University Press, UK. P. 140.
[18] J. Smith & Andre Moncourt (2009). The Red Army Faction: A Documentary History, Volume 1: Projectiles for the People. PM Press, Oakland, CA. P.116.
[19] John O. Koehler (1999). Stasi: The Untold Story of the East German Secret Police. West View Press. Boulder Colorado. P. 399.
[20] J. Smith & Andre Moncourt (2009). The Red Army Faction: A Documentary History, Volume 1: Projectiles for the People. PM Press, Oakland, CA. P. 335.
[21] John O. Koehler (1999). Stasi: The Untold Story of the East German Secret Police. West View Press. Boulder Colorado. P. 399.
[22] Dieter Munzinger (Winter 2009). “Firsthand:  GSG 9 Terrorist Apprehension.” The Counter-Terrorist: Official Journal of the Homeland Security Professional. Volume 2, Number 6. Security Publications International. Miami, FLA. USA. Pp. 8-18.


0
Your rating: None

About the Author

John Catherine is curently employeed with the Department of Homeland Security. He has nearly twenty years of experience with the US Air Force Security Forces in Antiterrorism and Force Protection, Law Enforcement, Military police investigations, and Explosive Detector Dog handling. He has a Bachlor of Arts degree in Intelligence Studies and is about to complete a Master of Arts degree in Intelligence Collection from American Military University.

Sunday, March 24, 2019

A Singapore academic asks Singapore Govt the question Guan Eng seems too afraid to ask: What's happened to the USD 620 Million Najib "returned", and why have the seized assets not been returned to Malaysia?

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Guan Eng: Asset recovery on 1MDB much slower than 
expected



A Singapore academic has asked the Monetary Authority Of Singapore (MAS) the simple question that Malaysia's Minister For Finance Lim Guan Eng and others seem too afraid to ask.The academic, Professor Sattar Bawany ,has asked of the MAS, via a letter published in the Straits Times on 23 March 2019:

............ it is a matter of public interest for the central bank to clarify that out of the US$620 million that was returned, how much money belonging to 1MDB is currently being held by MAS or the proper authorities in Singapore.

Has the money been disbursed or transferred out to third parties?

Finally, why were the fraudulently obtained funds from 1MDB not returned to the Malaysian government or the US DOJ, which has instituted legal proceedings to recover these funds?



Lim, PwC which he appointed to recover 1MDB assets, Rajah & Tann, appointed by the AG Malaysia to recover assets in Singapore, and others involved in the 1MDB asset recovery seem unable to put that simple question to the Singaporeans, and even if they have, seem unable to recover what are easily recoverable funds.

END

See also
Chartered accountant & banker Lim Guan Eng said 1MDB asset recovery slower than expected;and little will be recovered:Here are some of the reasons he should have stated to explain why







Questions for MAS on 1MDB




Questions for MAS on 1MDB


PUBLISHEDMAR 23, 2019, 5:00 AM SGT
FACEBOOKWHATSAPPTWITTER



I am delighted to note that as a result of the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS)  thorough
 investigations into Malaysian state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB),                                                                                                                                                                 "two Swiss private banks were shuttered and several other banks were fined a total of $30 million 
for failing to meet anti-money laundering standards"
(Singapore's 1MDB probe not due to political influence, March 21).

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) filings detail how the money laundering was facilitated by a 
number of things, such as international banks not being vigilant enough, jurisdictions that allowed 
companies to operate without  transparency and shell companies that were set up in areas with lax 
regulation, among others.

It has been ascertained by the DOJ that US$835 million (S$1.13 billion) in proceeds was diverted to a local 
bank account held in the name of Tanore Finance Corporation at Falcon Bank in Singapore and another 
US$430 million was sent to the Falcon Bank account of Granton Property Holdings in Singapore.


In March 2013, US$681 million from the Tanore account in Singapore was transferred and deposited 
in former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak's personal private banking account with AmBank 
Malaysia.

Najib has publicly acknowledged the receipt of these funds and, in August 2013, returned the amount 
of US$620 million via the same bank account that he received the funds from in Singapore.

In view of the above facts, I am seeking clarification from MAS as to whether our central bank was 
alerted  through its own internal monitoring system or processes to a large number of funds being 
transferred from the Singapore bank to the Malaysian bank account.



If so, why was the transfer to an overseas bank account belonging to a "politically exposed person" 
such as the then Prime Minister of Malaysia not prevented or examined closely?

Furthermore, it is a matter of public interest for the central bank to clarify that out of the US$620 million 
that was returned, how much money belonging to 1MDB is currently being held by MAS or the proper 
authorities in Singapore.

Has the money been disbursed or transferred out to third parties?

Finally, why were the fraudulently obtained funds from 1MDB not returned to the Malaysian 
government or the US DOJ, which has instituted legal proceedings to recover these funds?

I hope that MAS will be able to enlighten us.

Sattar Bawany (Professor)

Thursday, March 21, 2019

Chartered accountant & banker Lim Guan Eng said 1MDB asset recovery slower than expected;and little will be recovered:Here are some of the reasons he should have stated to explain why

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Guan Eng: Asset recovery on 1MDB much slower than 
expected



As reported by The Star and Reuters in September last year:


Asset recovery in the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) multi-billion fraud investigation is going much slower than expected, says Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng.  
Lim, a former banker and chartered accountant, said at the CLSA Investors’ Forum in Hong Kong on Thursday (Sept 13) that realistically, ”we will be lucky if we get 30 percent back”.  

Meanwhile, even as Guan Eng spoke the US Department of Justice was getting on with the job of recovering the assets; the latest seizure of 1MDB related assets being from Riza Aziz and associates just over a month ago (See notes below)..

The reasons for the delay should have been more than obvious to Guan Eng,these are listed bel



Add to the above the perennially delayed 1MDB  criminal prosecutions , despite the DOJ having done much of the groundwork gathering evidence and seizing assets, and even providing Malaysian judges with training in the management of money laundering cases;  and one can see why there is a real danger that nothing of substance will ever be recovered.

END

NOTES 

The Riza Aziz asset seizures 
'Wolf of Wall Street' maker settles US lawsuit for $60 million  



Now see links at 

Excerpt from document at the last link 

  The defendants in this action are: (1) up to $28,174,145.52 in escrow account number ‘7176 held by escrow agent Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP at Huntington National Bank; 


(2) up to $1,148,739.35 in account number ‘6111 held in the name of Christopher Joey McFarland at Barclays Bank of Delaware; and 


(3) up to $162,486.88 in account number ‘9340 held in the name of Christopher Joey McFarland at Fidelity Investments, Inc., all of which being traceable to equity in COMPANY 1, a facilities management company headquartered in Newport, Kentucky (“DEFENDANT ASSETS”).


 3. The persons and entities whose interests may be affected by this action are Riza Shariz Bin AbdulAzizChristopher Joey McFarland, Nina Partners, LLC, Red Granite Investment Holdings, LLC, andRed Granite Pictures, LLC. 





InvolvingMalaysianSovereignWealthFund

Date 23/02/2019
The Justice Department announced today the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of approximately $38 million in assets allegedly associated with an international conspiracy to launder funds misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund.  Combined with civil forfeiture complaints filed in July 2016 seeking more than $1 billion in assets, and civil forfeiture complaints filed in June 2017 seeking approximately $540 million in assets, this case represents the largest action brought under the Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative.  Assets now subject to forfeiture in this case total approximately $1.7 billion.
Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Nicola T. Hanna of the Central District of California, Assistant Director Robert Johnson of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division and Chief Don Fort of the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) made the announcement.
According to the complaints, from 2009 through 2015, more than $4.5 billion in funds belonging to 1MDB were allegedly misappropriated by high-level officials of 1MDB and their associates.  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. 
“The complaints filed today demonstrate the Department of Justice’s steadfast commitment to recovering assets traceable to the alleged multi-billion dollar looting of Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “The Criminal Division and our law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the U.S. financial system and ensuring that the proceeds of overseas corruption and other criminal conduct find no safe haven here.”
“These new lawsuits target assets collected by corrupt officials and their associates through a massive scheme that stole billions of dollars from the people of Malaysia and laundered the proceeds across the world,” said U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna.  “Through a series of cases filed over the past three years, we have pursued a wide variety of assets purchased with stolen 1MDB funds, and so far we have successfully forfeited hundreds of millions of dollars. Collectively, these cases send a strong message that the United States cannot be used as a safe haven or a conduit for money pilfered by corrupt officials.”
“Today’s announcement is a testament to the FBI’s relentless effort to investigate kleptocracy and hold corrupt foreign officials accountable,” said FBI Assistant Director Johnson.  “At the onset of this investigation, we promised to work with our foreign and domestic partners to identify and return stolen assets to the Malaysian people.  This filing demonstrates our unwavering commitment to keep that promise.  We want to thank our partners, both domestic and foreign, for their hard work in helping to bring justice for the Malaysian people.  The recovery of these assets is another step in that direction.”
“The investigation into the misappropriation of the 1MDB funds represents a model for international cooperation in significant cross-border money laundering matters, and sends a message that criminals cannot evade law enforcement authorities simply by laundering money through multiple jurisdictions and through a web of shell corporations,” said IRS-CI Chief Fort.  “We are proud of the investigative work on this case and the work of our fellow law enforcement agencies in this and other complex financial investigations.”
As alleged in the complaints, the members of the conspiracy – which included officials at 1MDB, their relatives and other associates – diverted more than $4.5 billion in 1MDB funds.  Using fraudulent documents and representations, the co-conspirators allegedly laundered the funds through a series of complex transactions and shell companies with bank accounts located in the U.S. and abroad.  These transactions allegedly served to conceal the origin, source and ownership of the funds, and ultimately passed through U.S. financial institutions to then be used to acquire and invest in assets located in the U.S. and overseas.
As alleged in the earlier complaints, in 2009, 1MDB officials and their associates embezzled approximately $1 billion that was supposed to be invested to exploit energy concessions purportedly owned by a foreign partner.  Instead, the funds were allegedly 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 close to $1.4 billion in funds raised through bond offerings in 2012, and more than $1.2 billion following another bond offering in 2013.  The complaints also allege that in 2014, the co-conspirators misappropriated approximately $850 million in 1MDB funds under the guise of repurchasing certain options that had been given in connection with a guarantee of the 2012 bonds.
The complaints filed today in the Central District of California identify additional assets traceable to the 2012 and 2013 bond offerings.  These assets include luxury real estate in London, proceeds from the sale of luxury real estate in New York City, and converted equity in a facilities management company headquartered in Kentucky.    
The FBI’s International Corruption Squads in New York City and Los Angeles and the IRS-CI are investigating the case.  Deputy Chief Woo S. Lee and Trial Attorneys Kyle R. Freeny, Jonathan Baum, Barbara Levy and Joshua L. Sohn of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys John Kucera and Michael R. Sew Hoy of the Central District of California are prosecuting the case.  The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs is providing substantial assistance.
The Department also appreciates the significant assistance provided by the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia, the Royal Malaysian Police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Attorney General’s Chambers of Singapore, the Singapore Police Force-Commercial Affairs Division, the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Office of Justice of Switzerland, the judicial investigating authority of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, and the Criminal Investigation Department of the Grand-Ducal Police of Luxembourg.
The Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative is led by a team of dedicated prosecutors in the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, in partnership with federal law enforcement agencies, and often with U.S. Attorney’s Offices, to forfeit the proceeds of foreign official corruption and, where appropriate, to use those recovered assets to benefit the people harmed by these acts of corruption and abuse of office.  In 2015, the FBI formed International Corruption Squads across the country to address national and international implications of foreign corruption.  Individuals with information about possible proceeds of foreign corruption located in or laundered through the U.S. should contact federal law enforcement or send an email to kleptocracy@usdoj.gov (link sends e-mail) or https://tips.fbi.gov/.
A civil forfeiture complaint is merely an allegation that money or property was involved in or represents the proceeds of a crime.  These allegations are not proven until a court awards judgment in favor of the United States.



realpolitikasia: Maika and the Oriental Assurance Capital sale-Maik...

realpolitikasia: Maika and the Oriental Assurance Capital sale-Maik...: by Ganesh Sahathevan T he way forward: Ruben Gnanalingam (L) and Tony Fernandes, pic courtsey of  BackPageImages.tsEmir Gnanalingam oper...

Maika and the Oriental Assurance Capital sale-Maika shareholders can recover hundreds of millions, perhaps billions from the trustees, Tune Group.

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Related image
The way forward: Ruben Gnanalingam (L) and Tony Fernandes, pic courtsey of 
BackPageImages.tsEmir Gnanalingam operates his father Tan Sir G.Gnanalingam's
varied business interests. The OAC Capital acquisition and the Tune Insurance IPO
was one of a number of deals in which the Gnanalingam and Tony Fernandes interests
collaborated. The QPR Football Team was another.




Fernandes and wife. The OCA shares, the proceeds from the saleof the shares, and the gains from the profits from the IPO wentinto a number of privately held companies. Maika shareholders would have to seek recovery from all these privately held entities.

Maika shareholders in search of what is rightfully theirs ,the Oriental Assurance Capital  (OAC) company, have a number of targets that they can pursue for the recovery of that asset.

The asset lost and which they can recover is not merely the cash consideration for the OAC shares, it would  now include their fair share of the listed entity , Tune Protect Group Bhd which was formed out of OAC,as well as any IPO profits.
The entities that they can pursue include those controlled by the trustees, including family companies, and the relevant private entities controlled by Tony Fernandes. Trusts for the benefit of these individuals'  families may also be targets for asset recovery.





6d18c2e9-a5d6-4616-ae16-9d0600d42e5c-2-940x580
Tony Fernandes and wife.Family interests including trusts could also be targeted for asset recovery.







END

See also

Maika and the Oriental Assurance Capital sale: Trustees led by Gnanalingam have no right to the proceeds ; RM 145 Million sent to Gnanalingam's Pembinaan Redzai should be clawed back;together with Tune Insurance IPO profits

In 2001 ,the SBS and ABC were concerned about the Spore Govt's surveillance of the Internet-In 2019 the ABC and SBS are campaigning hard for Australia to do the same

by Ganesh Sahathevan

 The transcript below is from the SBS Dateline archives.It was reported by Sarah Ferguson who is now better known as the ABC 4 Corners anchor. 
The issue of Singapore's interest in Australian infrastructure interested SBS enough to air this story;ABC had a similar version which went to air later in the year on Lateline.

This story concerned the Singtel takeover of Optus ,and Singtel' s spying on its  customers in the name of national security
.
Today the SBS and ABC seen determined to have the internet policed, to ensure that nothing they deem offensive never gets to air.
The bleating about "online radicalization" and "white supremacists" is irrelevant. Singapore justified its surveillance on similar grounds, ie having to ensure  racial and religious harmony in a multicultural country.






Archives - April 11, 2001i
SingTel plays the spying game

To the world of telecommunications, 
and the proposed takeover bid for 
Optus. Last week, Defence Minister 
Peter Reith announced an investigation 
into the security implications of the 
deal proposed by SingTel, the majority 
state-owned Singapore 
telecommunications company.


If SingTel`s bid is successful, the
company will own satellites which
carry sensitive Australian military
information, a fact that has many in
the defence establishment concerned.
According to critics of the Singapore
Government and its human rights
record, SingTel and its methods 

warrant close examination. 
.


REPORTER: SARAH FERGUSON


Going online in Singapore - a routine event in one of the most wired cities in the world.


DES BALL, STRATEGIC & DEFENCE CENTRE, ANU: But those same mechanisms are also used to monitor everything that those Singaporeans citizens listen to, and SingTel plays a very central role in that.


In 1999, Ann Lee, a student at the National University of Singapore, discovered the Home Affairs Ministry had hacked into her personal computer. Unusually for a Singaporean, she complained to the police. Their investigation showed she wasn`t alone - 200,000 computers, half of all Singapore`s Internet subscribers, had been secretly scanned. The Singapore telecommunications company, SingTel, claimed the whole operation was to look for a virus. Without telling their customers, they`d engaged Home Affairs to do the hacking.


DES BALL: These organisations in Singapore work extremely closely together - they`re not sort of compartmentalised like they are within Australia. SingTel, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Singapore Telecommunications Bureau, many of them are the same people. They move back and forwards, and on operations like that, they would work very, very closely together.


And now that company is bidding to take over Australia`s second-largest telco. There are obvious commercial advantages for Optus. But it`s the links between SingTel and a government regarded by many as intrusive, even repressive, that have caused questions to be raised about the bid.


RICHARD ALSTON, COMMUNICATIONS MINISTER: There will obviously be discussions to explore the nature and extent of the Singapore Government`s involvement, whether it`s an active or passive player, whether it directs the company in a way that we don`t do.


Last week, SingTel`s CEO, Brigadier General Lee Sien Yang, was in Sydney to talk up the deal.


BRIGADIER GENERAL LEE SIEN YANG, SINGTEL CEO: SingTel will be the leading regional telco. There will be no other telco with a footprint that is comparable to us.


Lee is part of Singapore`s ruling dynasty. He`s the son of the country`s founder, Lee Kuan Yew, and brother of Singapore`s present deputy PM. That may sound like nepotism, but the island`s rulers have never worried too much about appearances. Also prominent on the SingTel board is the present army chief of staff.


REPORTER: It`s been widely reported in Singapore that SingTel is used as a surveillance tool by the Singaporean Government, and particularly against opponents of the Singaporean Government. Is that true?


BRIGADIER GENERAL LEE SIEN YANG: I think you would understand in all countries, there are rules by the authorities for monitoring activities in relation to proper procedures, and clearly whether we are in Australia, whether we`re in the US or the UK or Singapore, there is due process for this and if the authorities deem that there`s a reason to do it, we have to obey the laws of the country.


REPORTER: So SingTel is used as a surveillance tool against political opponents of the Singaporean Government?


BRIGADIER GENERAL LEE SIEN YANG: I think that in any country, we`ll comply with the laws of country.


DES BALL: They actually lay out a variety of situations in which it is quite legal for them to do this, and when you add those situations up, it basically makes anything legal for them to do.


Despite the importance of the deal, there`s been little debate about it so far in Australia. By far the strongest criticism has come from dissidents who know what the Singapore Government is capable of.


FRANCIS SEOW, FORMER SINGAPORE SOLICITOR-GENERAL: You will be providing SingTel and the Singapore Government not only a window of opportunity, but I think the Singapore Government will have a very real say, in more ways than one, in what goes on in Australia.


Francis Seow may have earned the right to sound a little paranoid. He was an establishment figure, an associate of PM Lee Kuan Yew. As Singapore`s Solicitor-General in the 1980s, he was part of the system.


FRANCIS SEOW: I know that their surveillance did take place when I was solicitor-general, but I put it down to being all these official activities, you know - proper surveillance being carried out for security reasons.


The scales fell from his eyes when he started criticising the government in 1986 and became a target himself.


FRANCIS SEOW: I know that my office telephones were bugged; so was my home telephone. Confirmation of the fact came about when I was arrested and detained by the internal security department people and they told me exactly what, in fact, I said.


Charged with seeking US support for the opposition, Francis Seow spent the next 72 days in prison, with long periods of intense interrogation.


FRANCIS SEOW: It was an eye-opener, if you like, to find that all these years these vast powers, these arbitrary powers, had been misused by the government.


His family was also targeted.


FRANCIS SEOW: My son, his wife, his home was bugged and they followed him. They knew exactly what he was doing.


His son Ashleigh, also a lawyer, became active in the political opposition to the ruling party.


SINGAPOREAN NEWSCAST: Mr Ashleigh Seow spoke on town councils and how ordinary people can also run them.


ASHLEIGH SEOW: More than half of our society has got nothing to do with the government or the PAP. We ordinary Singaporeans do not need the PAP.


Eventually, though, both father and son went into exile. Ashleigh moved to Perth, but even in Australia, he says, the surveillance continued.


ASHLEIGH SEOW: On one occasion, somebody put photographs of my home and my car in my letterbox, which I interpreted to be a reminder or a tip-off, if you like, that the Singapore security services still considered me a Singaporean and a subject of interest for them.


Surprisingly, perhaps, he says SingTel would be unlikely to jeopardise its profits here by spying on Australians, but adds the takeover should be assessed on moral grounds.


ASHLEIGH SEOW: Morally, you might find it repugnant to deal with a company or with a government which systemically invades the privacy and human rights of its citizens.


The Optus CEO, Chris Anderson - who, to declare his interest, stands to make $10 million from the deal - says he doubts SingTel was ever used against the government`s critics.


CHRIS ANDERSON, CEO OPTUS: I doubt if it`s so. In fact, like all telecommunication companies - British Telecom, AT&T;, Telstra in Australia, and Optus, and I`m sure SingTel - we obey the law, and if there are various government requirements or surveillance requirements imposed by government, like any carrier, SingTel would carry them out.


But the Australian Defence Department has some specific security concerns. One of Optus`s most valued assets is its communications satellite. Through it passes not only international phone calls and internet traffic, but 70% of the Defence Department`s secret signals traffic.


DES BALL: This is of the utmost seriousness. This comes to the heart of the security of Australia`s telecommunications - not just the telephone calls of private citizens, but the most confidential, sensitive communications of Australian government authorities, which are now, potentially at least, at some risk.


BRIGADIER GENERAL LEE SIEN YANG: I think we have said that the satellites are a sensitive issue. We recognise it, and we will satisfactory the authorities to make sure that whatever arrangements that are in place today with Cable & Wireless as a shareholder would continue to remain so.


REPORTER: So are you currently talking to the Australian security and defence departments about those security issues?


BRIGADIER GENRAL LEE SIEN YANG: I think that`s an ongoing discussion which we`ll have. We believe that any concerns that they have, we`ll try and address them.


But the issue is also one of protecting sensitive technology. Optus and the Defence Department are building a new-generation satellite to be launched next year. The satellite will carry secure communications between Australian military ships and aircraft, monitored from the Optus earth station at Belrose.


DES BALL: The Optus C-series of satellites really is leading-edge, global, worldwide, leading-edge technology, particularly with the KU-band and X-band transponders, and there must be a very real fear that Singapore could do reverse technology engineering - in other words, there would be technology leakage.


REPORTER: In terms of the C-series satellite, which I understand is under construction in the US, given that that has such a large defence payload, doesn`t that offer some concerns to Australia about it coming under the management of a Singaporean government-owned company?


CHRIS ANDERSON: It won`t come under the management of anything. It comes under the management of Optus in arrangements with the Defence Department. But just as SingTel is majority-owned by the Singaporean Government, Telstra is majority-owned by the Australian Government, and they operate very well offshore. So it`s not an issue.


Brigadier General Lee will want to convince the Australian Government of just that, though he`ll have a harder time trying to argue that SingTel is free of government influence. Though Singapore might look like a bastion of free enterprise, the company that controls the island`s communications is 78% government-owned - a government which, according to Francis Seow, would have a real vested interest in the deal.


FRANCIS SEOW: Optus is actually a security industry, and it`s one of great use and benefit, advantage, to the Singapore Government.


It`s a view that puts a rather different light on SingTel`s catchy jingle.


TV ADVERTISEMENT: You`re ahead because you can always be reached, no matter how far. You`re ahead because you can speak straight from the heart.


Just don`t say anything you wouldn`t want Big Brother to hear. 

END

(Disclsoure: This writer was the researcher for the above story,having proposed it to SBS Dateline)