WHIPLASH Alert--Justice Department Retracts Court Filings That Undercut FBI's Anthrax Case

- OPEN SOURCE  US/1; ATTN:

ANX-SG(A)

[ed.note: It is now official: even the BlackNET can get whiplash…and migraines…

At least it doesn’t work at the DOJ, where all the USAMIID BlackLYOPHILIZERs are actually stored. Yesterday's original ProPublica/Frontline/McClatchy story is post on the BlackANX page http://blacknetintel.blogspot.com/p/blackanx.html]

 Justice Department Retracts Court Filings FBI’s Anthrax Case

by Greg Gordon, McClatchy Newspapers, Mike Wiser, FRONTLINE, and Stephen Engelberg, ProPublica July 19, 2011, 9:36 p.m.

This story was co-published with PBS Frontline and McClatchy.

WASHINGTON -- Rushing into court to undo a major blunder, Justice Department lawyers defending a civil suit Tuesday retracted statements that question the FBI's finding that a former Army microbiologist mailed the anthrax-filled letters that killed five people in 2001.

But the unusual seven-page correction, filed in federal court in Florida, does not erase testimony from government scientists who challenged the FBI's finding that the late Bruce Ivins was the perpetrator.

The department's legal dance stems from its two seemingly conflicting roles: backing up the FBI's finding that Ivins, who committed suicide in July 2008, was the killer; and defending an Army bio-weapons lab at Fort Detrick, Md., against allegations of negligence.

The department's Civil Division is attempting to limit federal liability over the death of the first anthrax victim, a Boca Raton, Fla., man whose family is seeking $50 million in damages for alleged negligence by the lab at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), where Ivins worked on anthrax vaccines.

In trying to minimize USAMRIID's liability, government lawyers have had to walk a fine line, because the FBI says Ivins produced the anthrax powder at the facility while the civil lawyers seemed to suggest it could have been prepared elsewhere.

Tuesday's retraction came a day after a collaborative report by McClatchy, the Public Broadcasting System's Frontline news magazine and ProPublica, disclosing what appeared to be an explosive Justice Department revelation.

In a legal filing last week, department lawyers in the civil case said that the lab lacked the "specialized equipment in a containment suite" needed for Ivins to have dried the deadly powder.

That and other statements raised hackles at the FBI and among prosecutors in the criminal case, leading to hurried huddles at the Justice Department.

In a statement Tuesday, department spokesman Dean Boyd said that Civil Division lawyers had submitted "inaccurate information" and that "the Justice Department and FBI stand behind their findings that Dr. Ivins had the necessary equipment in the containment suite" to produce the spores.

They noted that Ivins had ordered his own machine, known as a lyophilizer, that could be used for drying anthrax spores. The machine was labeled "property of Bruce Ivins" and was located in a nearby biocontainment suite.

Although it amended the filing, the Justice Department could not take back what government scientists had said in sworn depositions.

Stephen Little, a technician at the Army lab, was asked whether the equipment could have been used to make the dried spore preparation used in the letters.

"Not any equipment I have seen," Little replied.

Little said that there was "no way" Ivins could have moved the lyophilizer to the into the biocontainment suite, where Ivins' lab space was located.

"The thing is as big as a refrigerator," Little said.

Another scientist, Susan Welkos, said, "We don't have any way to produce the massive amount of (anthrax) material that would have been necessary to grow up and dry in a way that wouldn't have killed everybody in the institute."

Both quotations were highlighted by Justice Department lawyers in their submission to the court last week.

Friday's filing also said that Ivins sent anthrax from a flask in his lab—a flask that the FBI contends provided the parent material for the letter anthrax—to two outside laboratories, the Battelle Memorial Institute in West Jefferson, Ohio, and a lab operated by BioPort in Lansing, Mich.

The amended filing said that Ivins sent the spores only to Battelle, narrowing the number of parties who might have been considered suspects.

Boyd said that the department and the FBI "have never wavered from that view that Dr. Ivins mailed the anthrax letters."

Ivins overdosed on Tylenol and two other drugs not long after learning that federal prosecutors were preparing to indict him on capital murder charges.

It was unclear how the court filings by the Civil Division ended up so at odds with the narrative developed by prosecutors, and the department did not offer an explanation.

http://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-retracts-court-filings-that-undercut-fbis-anthrax-case

[Information contained in BKNT E-mail is considered Attorney-Client and Attorney Work Product privileged, copyrighted and confidential. Views that may be expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of any government, agency, or news organization.]

FLASH--PBS hacked in retribution for Frontline Wikileaks episode--LD

- FLASH – LIMITED DISSEMINATION

CID/2; US/301; US/1; ATTN: HST/2; NSNS/1; VS/2; US/12

[ed.note: Very interesting. Monday night, US/1 was repeatedly unable to get on any Frontline hyperlinks from the BlackNETintel Page, than being directed to a generic PBS page. Thanks CID/2!

Last week, http://blacknetintel.blogspot.com had it’s first comment posted from “Anonymous,” complaining about a report on US interference in IRAN.

Also, several internet searchs for BKNT website posting on 22 May 2011 = BKNT--FRONTLINE: WikiSECRETS - Tues. 24 MAY 9 PM ET--OS, seeming to orginate from, www.google.com.au (AUSTRALIA).

Perhaps by fortunate happenstance, BKNT-HQ posted this sidebar after actually viewing the film:

WikiSECRETS - New!

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/
WiKiLEAKI: Exposed...or Explained?

In addition, the following two BKNT website IMAGEs were searched for: the SixTeamSIX emblem (unofficial) and the Al-Awlaki soliciting MUGSHOT BKNT--Anwar al-Awlaki - A Taste for the Ladies--OS.

       . LIMITED DISSEMINATION, ABOVE:]

OPEN SOURCE BELOW:

PBS hacked in retribution for Frontline Wikileaks episode

Xeni Jardin at 10:27 PM Sunday, May 29, 2011 

The PBS.org website, and data associated with the PBS television network, its programs, and its affiliate stations, appear to have just been hacked by an entity calling itself LulzSec (or "The Lulz Boat"). The hack was made public around 1130pm ET, Sunday, May 29, and included cracking the PBS server, posting a bogus news story and some defacements, and publishing what appear to be thousands of passwords.
The information compromised and published included network, server, and database details and logins, as well as user login data for some PBS staff and contractors. As of 3:24am ET Monday, some defacements are still live on pbs.org.


The group that carried out the hack claims they are not affiliated with "Anonymous", and that the action is retribution for the recent "Wikisecrets" episode on Wikileaks, which was perceived by Wikileaks and its supporters to be unfair to Wikileaks.


According to an article in the Australian edition of IT security publication SC Magazine, LulzSec has gone after other media entities in recent weeks: Fox News Network and the TV show X-Factor are reported as prior targets. As the name implies, LulzSec would appear to be in it for the proverbial lulz, rather than, say, financial gain.


A statement from LulzSec:

Greetings, Internets. We just finished watching WikiSecrets and were less than impressed. We decided to sail our Lulz Boat over to the PBS servers for further... perusing. As you should know by now, not even that fancy-ass fortress from the third shitty Pirates of the Caribbean movie (first one was better!) can withhold our barrage of chaos and lulz. Anyway, unnecessary sequels aside... wait, actually: second and third Matrix movies sucked too! Anyway, say hello to the insides of the PBS servers, folks. They best watch where they're sailing next time.

The PBS program Frontline (and specifically the producers of the "Wikisecrets" episode), may have been the stated target, but the scope of intrusion was significantly more broad. And the Frontline site and its "Wikisecrets" subsite don't show any signs of a hack at all. 

LulzSec posted an overview of the data and defacements here.


Here's a cache of the fake "Tupac still alive in New Zealand" story the intruders posted. Unfortunately, Tupac remains dead, and PBS NewsHour social media and online engagement point person Teresa Gorman spent Sunday night on Twitter repeating this fact to dozens of incredulous individuals and news organizations [partial screengrab of @gteresa's Twitter feed here].


Here's a copy of the "Free Bradley Manning" defacement page LulzSec posted, featuring the "nyan cat" meme.


Below, a screengrab of @LulzSec's Twitter timeline documenting the attack. Click for full size.

UPDATE, 3:50am ET: Wired story here

[: Hacktivists Scorch PBS in Retaliation for WikiLeaks Documentary

By Kevin Poulsen

A hacker group unhappy with PBS Frontline’s hour-long documentary on WikiLeaks has hit back at the Public Broadcasting System by cracking its servers, posting thousands of stolen passwords, and adding a fake news story to a blog belonging to the august PBS Newshour…”]

, New York Times story here.

[:Hackers Disrupt PBS Web Site and Post a Fake Report About a Rap Artist

By JOHN MARKOFF

Published: May 30, 2011

The PBS Web site briefly carried a fake article claiming that the famed rapper Tupac Shakur was alive and living in New Zealand after a group of hackers took over the organization’s computer systems on Saturday night.

In  addition to posting the fake news article, the group, which identified itself on Twitter as @LulzSec or The Lulz Boat, began posting passwords and e-mail addresses of people from a wide range of news organizations and other information belonging to PBS.

As late as 2:30 a.m. on Monday, PBS had still not regained control of its Web site as the hackers continued to post defaced pages.

Comments posted by LulzSec indicated that the group was unhappy with a Frontline program about WikiLeaks that was recently shown on PBS. The group began posting messages on Twitter about midnight on Sunday: “What’s wrong with @PBS, how come all of its servers are rooted? How come their database is seized? Why are passwords cracked?”  That message was followed by a succession of posts with links to lists of passwords and other data…]

---

UPDATE, 5:50pm ET, Monday: PBS issued a statement on the hack; shortly afterwards, new evidence of hacking/takeover/defacement was visible at the PBS Frontline url (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/), then disappeared. (via Greg Mitchell)
News, Technology, security, television • Tags: Anonymous, bradley manning, Frontline, julian assange, Lulzsec, NewsHour, PBS, Wikileaks

http://www.boingboing.net/2011/05/29/pbs-hacked-in-retrib.html

 

FRONTLINE statement on PBS hacking

Hackers attacked PBS' servers late Sunday night, publishing internal login information and posting fake news on PBS.org sites. A hackers' group said the attack was a protest against a FRONTLINE film broadcast last week examining the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks. PBS said that no viewer information was compromised and that the sites were repaired quickly.

Following the broadcast last Tuesday of "WikiSecrets," about alleged leaker Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks, FRONTLINE received both praise and criticism from viewers. Some supporters of Manning and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange objected to what they saw as negative portrayals of the two men. FRONTLINE published and addressed criticism at its website, including comments from Manning's father Brian, Manning supporter David House, WikiLeaks supporter Gavin MacFadyen and Julian Assange.

FRONTLINE Executive Producer David Fanning called the hackers' attack "irresponsible and chilling."

"We see it as a disappointing and irresponsible act. We have been very open to publishing criticism of the film, and the film itself included multiple points of view. Rather than engaging in that spirit, this is an attempt to chill independent journalism."

You can watch "WikiSecrets" and read the discussions here.

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/2011/05/frontline-statement-on-pbs-hacking.html#ixzz1O6UY7qkD

[Information contained in BKNT E-mail is considered Attorney-Client and Attorney Work Product privileged, copyrighted and confidential. Views that may be expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of any government, agency, or news organization.]

BKNT--FRONTLINE: WikiSECRETS - Tues. 24 MAY 9 PM ET--OS

Channel

                Intelligence - OPEN SOURCE

SR-6; US/1; ATTN: HST/2; NSNS/1; JAG/1; JAG/5; HD/23; US/12; NavySEALs.com; Mil.COM

VIDEO Preview

Excerpt 1: Don't Ask, Don't Tell http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/#pressrelease

Excerpt 2: Welcome to the Hacker Space

PRESS RELEASE

It's the biggest intelligence breach in U.S. history—the leaking of more than half-a-million classified documents on the WikiLeaks website in the spring of 2010. Behind it all, stand two very different men: Julian Assange, the Internet activist and hacker who published the documents, and an Army intelligence analyst named Bradley E. Manning, who's currently charged with handing them over. Private Manning allegedly leaked the secret cables—along with a controversial video—in the hope of inciting "worldwide discussion, debates and reforms." Assange's stated mission has been to force the U.S. and other governments into maximum transparency through his whistle-blowing website. Through in-depth interviews with Manning's father, Assange, and others close to the case, veteran FRONTLINE correspondent Martin Smith tells the full story behind the leaks. He also reports on the U.S. government's struggle to protect national security information in a post 9/11 world.

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/#pressrelease#ixzz1N6dPJZLO

 

Press Release

FRONTLINE INVESTIGATES THE STORY OF PRIVATE BRADLEY MANNING AND THE WIKILEAKS CONTROVERSY

FRONTLINE presents
WikiSecrets
Tuesday, May 24, 2011, at 9 P.M. ET on PBS
www.facebook.com/frontlinepbs
Twitter: @frontlinepbs
www.pbs.org/frontline/wikileaks

It’s the biggest intelligence breach in U.S. history—the leaking of more than a half million classified documents on the WikiLeaks website throughout 2010. At the center of the controversy stands Bradley E. Manning, the Army intelligence analyst who’s charged with handing them over.

Who is Bradley Manning, and what does his story tell us about how and why the secret cache of documents may have been leaked? In WikiSecrets, airing Tuesday, May 24, 2011, at 9 P.M. ET on PBS (check local listings), FRONTLINE correspondent Martin Smith gains exclusive access to those closest to Manning— including his father, close friends and his Army bunkmate—and uncovers video of Manning taken around the time of the alleged handover of classified information.

Smith also examines the events surrounding the publication of the leaked documents, interviewing key players like WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange; Assange’s former colleague Daniel Domscheit-Berg; and Adrian Lamo, a well-known figure in the cyber underground who eventually turned Manning over to the authorities and is now living in an undisclosed location over fears for his safety.

“I got the sense that Bradley was very depressed,” Lamo tells FRONTLINE of his impressions of Manning after the Army private sought him out in May 2010. During an online chat with Lamo that stretched over four days, Manning wrote: “Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public.”

As the film tracks Manning from his deployment to Iraq through his arrest and imprisonment, several key questions emerge—among them, the shocking ease with which Manning browsed and downloaded so much classified information from Pentagon servers despite the widely available systems developed to prevent exactly this. The case presents an important cautionary note to the theory that lower-level analysts like Manning should have access to such a wide range of intelligence: “9/11 surfaced the fact that there was less than adequate sharing of information across the government,” says former Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte. “We went from a need-to-know philosophy to a need-to-share.” Former State Department official Larry Wilkerson says the government may have shared the information too widely: “Bradley Manning does not need to know what the secretary of defense said to his counterpart in Paris.”

WikiSecrets also examines the relationship between Manning and Julian Assange, the founder of WikilLeaks. In public statements, and in his interview with FRONTLINE, Assange has denied any direct contact with Manning or any WikiLeaks source. But hacker Lamo says that Manning indicated otherwise in their online chat: “He mentioned Julian Assange in the context Julian was the individual at WikiLeaks who he had initially establish contact with.”

Wired.com’s Kim Zetter tells FRONTLINE of an email she received from Assange not long after the story broke. “He contacted me, and he wanted the chat logs,” she said. “He said that he needed it in order to prepare Manning’s defense. ... I can only speculate, but I think that he was concerned about what was in the chat logs about himself.”

“We don’t really know whether Manning approached WikiLeaks or people around WikiLeaks or if it was the other way around,” says Eric Schmitt, the New York Times reporter first assigned by the paper to vet the leaked material. “But my theory is whichever way it is, there’s an intermediary. ... So somewhere in this mix you have Manning with access to this information; you’ve got WikiLeaks and Julian Assange with the desire to get it; and you’ve got a helpful intermediary. And somewhere in between here there’s a transfer I believe takes place.”

Was Julian Assange prepared to publish some of the leaked documents without adequately redacting the names of people who could have been harmed by the disclosures? “Julian was very reluctant to delete those names, to redact them.” David Leigh of the Guardian newspaper tells FRONTLINE of meetings he attended with Assange in the run-up to publication of the war logs. “And we said: ‘Julian, we’ve got to do something about these redactions. We really have got to.’ And he said: ‘These people were collaborators, informants. They deserve to die.’ And a silence fell around the table.”

Assange maintains WikiLeaks employed a thorough “harm-minimization process,” but insiders within the organization said the redactions were carried out in haste just prior to publication.

Currently, Manning remains jailed in the Army brig in Fort Leavenworth, Kan., awaiting his first pretrial hearing this summer, and Assange lives under police watch in a home northeast of London. He tells FRONTLINE that the work of WikiLeaks continues: “History is on our side. ... When you expose powerful organizations, there will be ad hominem attacks. Yes, in my personal case, they’ve been rather hard. But it’s not an unusual circumstance. ... WikiLeaks is continuing to step up its publishing speed, ... and it does good. We can see the effects all around us.”

WikiSecrets is a FRONTLINE production with RAIN Media, Inc. The producers are Marcela Gaviria and Martin Smith. The reporters are Marcela Gaviria, Ryan Knutson, and Martin Smith. The writers are Marcela Gaviria and Martin Smith. The series senior producer of FRONTLINE is Raney Aronson-Rath. The executive producer of FRONTLINE is David Fanning. FRONTLINE is produced by WGBH Boston and is broadcast nationwide on PBS. Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Major funding for FRONTLINE is provided by The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and by Reva and David Logan. Additional funding is provided by the Park Foundation and by the FRONTLINE Journalism Fund. FRONTLINE is closed- captioned for deaf and hard-of-hearing viewers by the Media Access Group at WGBH. FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of the WGBH Educational Foundation.

pbs.org/pressroom
Promotional photography can be downloaded from the PBS pressroom.
Press contact
Diane Buxton 617-300-5375 diane_buxton@wgbh.org

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/#pressrelease#ixzz1N6cZzeff

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/wikileaks/#pressrelease

Former Haitian Dictator Taken Away by Police--OS
BlackNETIntelligence Channel- OPEN SOURCE

[ed.note: BlackVAULT - After tracking down Philippines Dictator Ferdinand MARCOS’ $2.1 Billion in stolen assets (including approximately $500 Million is stolen Central Bank gold) in 1986, FRONTLINE next sicked US/1 onto Baby Doc DUVALIER. Turned out the guy was piker compared to the master MARCOS. Yet BABY DOC probably caused more of his people, per capita, to be tortured or starved, than MARCOS (both pail, of course, in comparasion either overall or per capita, to Chairman MAO and Comrade STALIN).

US/1, your affiant, actually first took up the ‘cause’ of Haiti’s DUVALIER family and their legendary shadow henchmen, the always torturous TON TON MACOUTE--under both the father, PAPA DOC, and his successor/son—twenty years earlier, in the fall of 1966. His Arlington, VA fifth-grade elementary school class had formed-up a mock Organization of American States (OAS). The 10-year-old US/1 chose to become the mock-representive for Haiti—attracted, of course, to the fact that Haiti was said to still practice VOODOO, and was then (and still IS) the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere.

Chief educational benefit: US/1 gained an early mastery of the Machevellian ways of Roberts Rules of Order, and was able to usurp influence to Haiti’s benefit and to deny its deployment by the mock US-OAS Ambassador and the mock CUBAN Non-Member observer.

Now that’s how to learn international affairs—fast and furious.*

Members of Miss Nelson’s advanced-fifth-grade Mock-OAS class were rewarded for their efforts at the end of the school year--during the blossoming Spring of 1967--with a special road trip to the actual, ornate OAS Headquarters building, katty-conner across the Elipse from the White House. This rambunctious crew of 11-year-olds were the FIRST outsiders ever allowed into the chambers to actually occupy the council seats of their respective members states at the real OAS.

For one, brief, shinning moment--outside of their just and fear-inducing slave-revoltution of 1803--HAITI ruled…

_OAS+ *

And finally, by February 1986, the last of the Duvalier clan and WIFES had fled to FRANCE.

US/1 was dragged out of bed on this VOODOO deal only following the success (and soon-to-be Emmy Award-winning) 1987 FRONTLINE investigation of ‘In Search of the Marcos Millions’ ($2.1 Billion, actually). Only road trip, however, was upto NYC to uncover about $120 Million in cancelled checks paid to various secret overseas bank accounts. Some of the intial tracking had already been done by Nick PECK, then with security consulting giant, KROLL Associates, who had taken up the BABY DOC gauntlet on a pro-bono basis. US/1 also got to chat with Jonathan DEMME, the New York-based Hollywood director (Silence of the Lambs), who had just completed a rather artful documentary: ‘Haiti Dreams of Democracy.’

on Haiti.

But the best thing that came out of this eventually frustrated Haitian documentary effort, US/1 got to meet the 'fabulous G,’

otherwise known as Her Gness, who--under US/1’s ‘exquisite hindsight’ concept (i.e. being an admitted moron on possibly more than one occasion)--was probably the love of his sorry life…

Go figure.

* - Also see 15-year-old US/1’s 1972 ‘White Paper’ on the Pakistan/Bangaladesh/Indian conflagration, ATTACHED.]

The New York Times - January 18, 2011

Former Haitian Dictator Taken Away by Police

By GINGER THOMPSON

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Haitian police officers on Tuesday took away Jean-Claude Duvalier, the former dictator who abruptly returned to this country nearly 25 years after being forced from power, leading him out of the high-end hotel where he has been huddled since his arrival.

Surrounded by heavily armed police officers, Mr. Duvalier emerged from his room at noon in a blue suit and walked down three flights of stairs, never letting go of his companion’s hand as he waved to supporters chanting his name and calling him “president.”

“We are with you,” some supporters shouted as police officers led Mr. Duvalier out of the back of the hotel. With United Nations peacekeepers standing by, police officers put him and several of his associates into a waiting vehicle and drove off. Small clusters of his supporters outside the hotel cried “revolution.” Hunks of concrete were thrown into the convoy’s path.

It remained unclear whether Mr. Duvalier would be arrested or simply questioned. He has faced threats of prosecution in the past for the many human rights abuses committed during his rule, and for the hundreds of millions of dollars government officials have said he looted from the country.

A Haitian justice official and one of Mr. Duvalier’s lawyers said that Mr. Duvalier was being brought to a meeting with prosecutors for questioning. Another Haitian official said separately that Mr. Duvalier could be released by the end of the day.

Still, in a country with a long history of impunity, where leaders rarely face prosecution, it was a striking scene, underscoring the political volatility that has gripped Haiti since a contested presidential election late last year.

One year after the nation was hit by a devastating earthquake that killed more than 200,000 people, the country has been grappling to absorb the potentially destabilizing blow of Mr. Duvalier’s surprise return this week, which drew condemnations from around the world and ignited new fears of conflict.

At a courthouse where Mr. Duvalier was taken on Tuesday, his companion, Veronique Roy, denied that Mr. Duvalier had been arrested. “Absolutely not,” she told The Associated Press by phone. “We are very relaxed, drinking coffee and water," she added. “They said they are making photocopies. We don’t know why.”

Mr. Duvalier, known as Baby Doc, returned to Haiti 24 years and 11 months after he was forced to flee the country by a tide of social upheaval driven by severe poverty and his regime’s brutal political repression. In a brief radio interview, Mr. Duvalier said he had returned only to help his country, not to get involved in politics. He spent the rest of his first day back in Haiti out of the public eye, huddled with his advisers and relatives at a high-end hotel in the mountains overlooking Port-au-Prince, the capital.

His silence left Haitians and the rest of the world to wonder what Mr. Duvalier was really up to.

Neither France, which had granted Mr. Duvalier asylum, nor the United States, Haiti’s largest benefactor, said they had anything to do with his return. In fact, both governments said they had been unaware that Mr. Duvalier had left Paris until his flight was close to landing in Port-au-Prince.

[ed.note: So much for pre-screened advance passenger flight manifests…]

The Haitian government — in disarray since the earthquake — seemed to respond in fits and starts, initially dismissing Mr. Duvalier’s arrival as well within his rights as a Haitian citizen, and later suggesting that the Justice Ministry had begun an investigation into his return.

Angry reactions poured in from around the world, with human rights groups demanding that the Haitian government charge Mr. Duvalier with crimes against humanity — including the kidnapping, torture and murder of thousands of his opponents — and with stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the nation, the poorest in the hemisphere...

...continue reading...

[Information contained in BKNT E-Posts is considered Attorney-Client and Attorney Work Product privileged, copyrighted and confidential. Views that may be expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of any government, agency, or news organization.]