- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Havana Syndrome, Sonic Weapons - INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INNOVATION
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

Cognitive liberty is not currently recognized as a human right by any international human rights treaty.[11] <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_liberty#cite_note-Bublitz_and_Mer…> While freedom of thought <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_thought> is recognized by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights> (UDHR), freedom of thought can be distinguished from cognitive liberty in that the former is concerned with protecting an individual's freedom to think *whatever* they want, whereas cognitive liberty is concerned with protecting an individual's freedom to think *however* they want.[29] <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_liberty#cite_note-29> Cognitive liberty seeks to protect an individual's right to determine their own state of mind and be free from external control over their state of mind, rather than just protecting the content of an individuals’ thoughts.[30] <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_liberty#cite_note-Boire,_Part_II-…> It has been suggested that the lack of protection of cognitive liberty in previous human rights instruments was due to the relative lack of technology capable of directly interfering with mental autonomy at the time the core human rights treaties were created.[21] <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_liberty#cite_note-Boire,_Part_I-21> Havana Syndrome bred by Sonic Weapon technology more or less is lazyly playing in regulatory arbitrage loopholes related to cognitive liberty. Recently, we went to the SEC for guidance on consolidation of an ILO (Intiatal Legal Offering). As we await engagement with the SEC on the ILO prospect, ILO’s resemble Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), but rather than raising money for a new coin, app, or service, they’re used to fund specific litigation. Think micro-investing for lawsuits. In an ILO, investors receive tokens entitling them to shares of potential recoveries, an economic right converted to a digital asset. If cases fail, they lose their investments. We are exploring an ILO at the international level (International Criminal Court <https://www.icc-cpi.int/>, International Court of Justice <https://www.icj-cij.org/en>), to solidify the right of Cognitive Liberty. Likely, the broader public will overwhelmly support their individual right to free thinking and systems and processes associated with thinking freely. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) is a pioneer in engaging sonic weapon technology <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_weapon>, An NYPD officer stands ready with the LRAD 500X at an Occupy Wall Street protest on November 17, 2011 near the city hall. The NYPD conducts experiments and other cutting edge innovation strategies as being America's Best Urban Police Force. It should be considered that the NYPD properly file logs of such technology engagement (aka ... what, when, where, why, how) as xNY.io strives to liberate the semantics related to cognitive thinking liberty. Moreover, while the NYPD pioneers new crowd control technology, other private firms have abused the technology for their own selfish agendas. Keeping all this in mind, one of xNY.io's active engagements is closing the semantic loophole related to cognitive liberty. The SEC likely will provide associated guidance in the coming 2022 year. Happy New Year World! Thank you, Gunnar -- *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* MSc <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - Digital Currency MBA <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) G(a)xNY.io +1-646-454-9107 New York, New York 10001

4 7

City Settles Lawsuit From Protesters Who Accused NYPD Of Firing Sound Cannon At Them
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

https://gothamist.com/news/city-settles-lawsuit-protesters-who-accused-nypd… The City has agreed to pay $748,000 to settle a lawsuit brought by Black Lives Matter protesters who said the NYPD illegally targeted demonstrators with Long Range Acoustic Devices [LRAD] in 2014. Under the settlement, the NYPD will also ban the use of the LRAD’s powerful “deterrent tone” and, for the first time, generate a written policy governing the use of the devices. The suit stems from a demonstration in December of that year, when a group was marching in midtown Manhattan to protest a grand jury’s refusal to indict the officer who killed Staten Island resident Eric Garner using a banned chokehold. As part of an effort to disperse the crowd, two police officers repeatedly used the powerful tone generated by their LRAD. Some of the journalists and protesters who were in close range at the time complained afterwards of pain, ringing in their ears, and migraines that lasted for days afterwards. The LRAD was initially developed for the U.S. Navy after terrorists attacked the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, using a small boat laden with explosives. Like its successors, the original LRAD served a dual function, on the one hand serving as a public-address system capable of communicating ship-to-ship over very long distances, and on the other hand capable of creating a cone of noise so loud and painful that it could deter anyone from approaching. Police forces soon realized these dual functions could be used in policing protests, and began adding them to their arsenals. The NYPD used its first LRAD to address protesters during the 2004 Republican National Convention, though it wouldn’t begin regularly deploying LRADs to protests until 2014. Less frequently, police have also used the device’s piercing sound-weapon function against protesters. The NYPD devices are capable of producing sound as loud as 137 decibels, well over the threshold that can cause pain and lasting damage to human ears. In 2012, Captain Anthony Raganella, the commander of the NYPD’s Disorder Control Unit, requested the department replace his unit’s LRADs with new models: a truck-mounted 500X LRAD at $23,000, and two handheld 100X LRADs at $7,680 each. (The request was included in a larger proposal that included $30,000 for pepper spray and pepper-ball weapons, thousands more for rubber pellet grenades and chemical irritant grenades, and $16,000 for orange crowd-control netting.) In an internal email explaining to the NYPD grants unit the necessity of his request, Raganella cited the threat posed by the Animal Liberation Front, the Earth Liberation Front, and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. “The requested equipment would be used to train and ensure the readiness of the Department to respond to any civil unrest caused by these terrorist groups,” Raganella wrote. Today’s settlement brings final resolution to a landmark case first filed five years ago, but the City’s legal defeat dates back to a judge’s 2017 ruling. The de Blasio administration had argued that police couldn’t be held liable for excessive force in using an LRAD because they never actually touched anybody. “The officers' creation of a sound that plaintiffs happened to hear cannot be considered 'physical contact,’” City lawyers claimed. “the LRAD is not an instrumentality of force, but a communication device.” Judge Robert Sweet rejected the argument, ruling, “This is force, and the kind that could be used excessively.” The de Blasio administration appealed the decision, but in 2018 the 2nd Circuit affirmed it, forcefully rejecting the City’s argument that subjecting people to dangerously loud sound isn’t a use of force. “Even though sound waves are a novel method for deploying force,” the court wrote in its opinion, “the effect of an LRAD’s area denial function is familiar: pain and incapacitation.” The 2nd Circuit also reaffirmed that just because there isn’t case law governing a new technology for hurting people, that doesn’t give police a blank check to use that technology however they want. “Novel technology,” the court wrote, “does not entitle an officer to qualified immunity.” Still unwilling to concede the point, the de Blasio administration petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 to overturn the lower courts’ rulings, but the court declined to hear the request. Notwithstanding courts’ repeated findings that the deployment of LRADs could constitute use of force, current NYPD training takes pains to assert that the LRAD is not a weapon. “The LRAD is not any of these,” reads one slide from an LRAD training program for the Disorder Control Unit: “Sound Cannon; Sound Gun; Wave Gun; Sonic Weapons; Active Denial System.” “The tone does not create a sonic wave, blast or have the ability to cause physical injury like a weapon,” one training presentation reads, explaining that NYPD officers may use the tone “to help gain attention of individuals” in bursts of up to three seconds separated by at least a second. In settling the suit, the City does not concede that police officers using the LRAD broke any laws or violated anyone’s rights. But under the terms of the settlement, the NYPD commits to update its administrative guide and its officer training to ban the use of the deterrent tone altogether, and require police using LRADs to “make reasonable efforts to maintain minimum safe distances between the LRAD and all persons within its cone of sound.” Officers who fail to do so “may be subject to such further discipline as deemed appropriate.” The City will also pay the five plaintiffs in the case a total of $98,000, as well as $650,000 in fees for their lawyers, Gideon Oliver, Elena Cohen, and Michael Decker, all affiliated with the National Lawyers Guild. Annika Edrei, the lead plaintiff in the case, was a journalism student in 2014 when she found herself caught in the LRAD’s cone of sound, and suffered migraines for a week afterwards. The experience, she said, discouraged her from attending protests for years. “I actually gave up on a major part of my photography career,” she said. Speaking of the settlement, she said, “I hope that protesters in the future are more protected because of our actions.” “The City could have and should have decided to make policy change and pay our clients for their injuries much earlier,” said Oliver. “But instead of doing that, they fought tooth and nail for years in this case, and so in addition to damages and policy change, the city has to pay attorneys’ fees that are much higher than they would have been.”

2 8

Havana Syndrome, Part 2: How a dog's brain may help solve the mystery of Canadian diplomats' Cuban nightmare
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

Right now, I am under entrapment (again) and Brody (my beautiful 13 year old St. Bernard) is nervous. Here is research on dogs getting nervous under such conditions: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/havana-syndrome-part-2-how-a-dogs… Could a dog’s brain offer any clues to the mysterious concussion-like syndrome affecting Canadian and American diplomats who were posted to Cuba? That is one of the many threads being pulled in an effort by researchers and scientists — and those affected — to better understand the condition referred to as Havana Syndrome, which has been blamed for debilitating some Canadian diplomats and their families. Little is known about what could have caused the symptoms shared by some diplomats who were posted in Cuba, although U.S. investigators have ruled out sonic weapons, according to the Washington Post. A doctor who examined some of the Canadian and U.S. diplomats has suggested the damage stems from a microwave weapon. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Previous Slain Eganville mom Lisa Sharpe spent years seeking help for troubled son TRENDING Lisa Sharpe, 48, was killed last week in her Eganville home. Her son, Trey Gagnon, has been charged with second-degree murder. (Photo courtesy The Eganville Leader) Ukrainians raise questions about Ottawa charity as allegations swirl around donations TRENDING Ukrainian journalist Olga Khudetska (right), who now provides tactical medical training to Ukrainian troops, raised concerns about equipment donated by Mriya Aid. Suspect arrested after man stabbed to death in south Ottawa overnight, police say TRENDING Ottawa Police are investigating the stabbing death of a man at an apartment in the 2700 block of Saratoga Place in Ottawa Tuesday morning. Ottawa firefighter denies choking comrade TRENDING Eric Einagel's lawyer says his client is "devastated" by the charges levelled against him. 'Far beyond' reasonable: Federal union wants 47 per cent compensation increase over three years TRENDING The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) headquarters in Ottawa. The TBS says the union’s demands for its 120,000 employees would cost nearly $10 billion over the next three years.Next Breadcrumb Trail Links Politics National Local News Havana Syndrome, Part 2: How a dog's brain may help solve the mystery of Canadian diplomats' Cuban nightmare Author of the article:Elizabeth Payne Published Feb 27, 2019 • Last updated Feb 28, 2019 • 5 minute read Join the conversation Andrew King sketches of Elizabeth Payne's Havana Syndrome series. PHOTO BY ILLUSTRATION BY ANDREW KING /Postmedia Article content Could a dog’s brain offer any clues to the mysterious concussion-like syndrome affecting Canadian and American diplomats who were posted to Cuba? Advertisement 2 STORY CONTINUES BELOW This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content That is one of the many threads being pulled in an effort by researchers and scientists — and those affected — to better understand the condition referred to as Havana Syndrome, which has been blamed for debilitating some Canadian diplomats and their families. The brains of those diplomats and their spouses are being tested at Dalhousie’s Brain Repair Centre. Officials there were unavailable for interviews, but one of the diplomats involved told this newspaper that early findings have amazed researchers. Little is known about what could have caused the symptoms shared by some diplomats who were posted in Cuba, although U.S. investigators have ruled out sonic weapons, according to the Washington Post. A doctor who examined some of the Canadian and U.S. diplomats has suggested the damage stems from a microwave weapon. Still others have suggested the sounds being reported were actually crickets and that the symptoms are psychosomatic or a form of mass hysteria, hypotheses that anger those living with the after-effects. Dr. Michael Hoffer, a professor of otolaryngology and neurological surgery at the University of Miami, who examined 25 people linked to the diplomatic community in Havana, is frustrated by suggestions that the harms done to some of the diplomats are not real. Hoffer was the lead author of a paper that found all of the diplomatic personnel complaining of dizziness, ear pain and tinnitus suffered from an otolithic abnormality (affecting inner ear organs related to balance) and cognitive dysfunction. Such injuries could result in other symptoms such as cognitive difficulties and exhaustion, he said. “Here is the thing: These people did have an injury. I don’t know who injured them. I don’t know what injured them. But I am impatient with the fact that a lot of people are saying it was crickets or an infectious disease. “These people did have an injury. I don’t know who injured them. I don’t know what injured them. But I am impatient with the fact that a lot of people are saying it was crickets or an infectious disease. “Something happened to them. These findings of the inner ear disorder cannot be faked,” he said. “It is not hysteria. It is not crickets.” The suggestion that the symptoms could be psychosomatic has added to the frustration of affected Canadian diplomats. According to documents obtained through access to information by the National Post, a federal government official suggested early on that the symptoms could be psychosomatic. When contacted by this newspaper, one of those diplomats was wary about people questioning the syndrome. That diplomat, who uses the pseudonym Diplomat Allen, is among 15 Canadian diplomatic staff and their families suffering from Havana Syndrome. They are suing the federal government for $28 million, citing lack of support, information and treatment, among other things. He and his family began experiencing mysterious symptoms now associated with the syndrome when they were living in Havana in 2017. Allen and his family left Havana in the fall of 2017 after a series of unexplained events, including a screeching metallic sound in the middle of the night that left them with a variety of symptoms including nausea, uncontrolled nosebleeds, headaches and cognitive difficulties. During the summer of 2017, before the family returned to Ottawa, their three Shih Tzu dogs were behaving strangely, said Allen. Almost every night, the dogs would run to the corner of their yard backing on to a house where American diplomatic staff lived and bark frantically, for no apparent reason. “There was nothing there.” The dogs were shipped back to Ottawa after the family returned. One of them, a seven-year-old, subsequently began behaving strangely — suddenly biting at non-existent flies, arching its back and lying on its back and putting its feet in the air. A veterinarian diagnosed seizures and told the family there was something wrong with the dog’s brain. The vet recommended the dog be euthanized. Allen passed the information to a medical official at Global Affairs who asked if they could arrange for a necropsy on the dog. The necropsy (similar to an autopsy but performed on an animal) was conducted in Kemptville, where the University of Guelph has a campus. Later, Allen and his wife, along with other Canadian diplomats from Havana, travelled to Halifax where they are being assessed and studied at Dalhousie University’s Brain Repair Centre. Doctors there obtained a sample of the dog’s brain, said Allen. In December, researchers at Dalhousie told Allen they had found “something significant” in the dog’s brain and needed more samples. “It could be related,” Allen was told. Any links may help fill in the many blanks surrounding the mysterious syndrome. Researchers at Dalhousie are continuing to study the Canadian diplomats and spouses. Allen said he has been told “they were amazed” at what they found through MRIs of the diplomats’ brains and other tests. “All of us have brain bleeds that we shouldn’t have — and our thought processes are slower than people our age,” he said. MRIs show bleeds coming from small capillaries in their brains, he said, which are completely different from the control group. “For us, this is the concrete evidence we needed that this was real.” Canadian diplomats and families have also been diagnosed with vestibular and vision disorders, cognitive disorders and other issues. There is a small sense of relief at seeing some concrete evidence, but for Allen and others, that does little to allay fears about the future. Those with young children are particularly worried about how they might be affected in the long term. Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland said the affected diplomats have Canada’s “utmost sympathy and support.” Meanwhile, there are more questions than answers about how and why the damage occurred. Were Canadians collateral damage or targets? What kind of weapons were used? And why? Daniel Livermore, a former foreign service officer who is a senior fellow at uOttawa’s department of public and international affairs, said there is little more than speculation about the source of the mysterious injuries to diplomats — one is that Havana Syndrome resulted from some sort of eavesdropping device gone awry, another is that the injuries are the result of targeted weapons. Cuba, which has always had good international relations with Canada, is not considered to be behind the attacks, if that is what they were. Russia and China are both considered possible suspects if there were attacks with weapons. As to what kind of weapons, there are still more questions. “I don’t know how this is being weaponized,” Livermore said of speculation that the damage was done with microwave weapons. “I don’t even know what the motivation would be. I don’t see a motive,” he said.

1 6

Litigating Universal Cognitive Liberty
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

https://litigationfinancejournal.com/litigating-universal-cognitive-liberty/ Litigating Universal Cognitive Liberty Freedom of thought is recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Interestingly,, cognitive liberty is not recognized as an international human right. Some want to change that, making the argument that humanity has the right to be free to think whatever they want (freedom of thought). The Ottawa Citizen reports <https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/military-leaders-saw-…> that the Canadian armed forces have launched ‘psychological operations’ as an experiment in government propaganda to counter civil disobedience. International human rights scholars are quick to point out that the lack of protection of cognitive liberty in such instances is due to the relative lack of technology capable of directly interfering with mental autonomy at the time the core human rights treaties were created. Similar to a ransomware attack, the technology behind such operations can be abused. Canada is said to have exploited advanced technologies without the authority to do so. Even worse, it is alleged that Canada forcefully abused technology in the unsanctioned production of reports that appeared to be aimed at cognitive activities of Canadians. - Other reports highlight similar technologies being explored by the New York City Police Department. - In 2021 <https://gothamist.com/news/city-settles-lawsuit-protesters-who-accused-nypd…>, members of the National Lawyers Guild won $650,000 in litigation financed fees from abuse of the technology in New York. The semantics empowering freedom of thought as a human right hold new opportunities for modern international recognition of the right to cognitive liberty.

1 12

Pro Bono Platform Launches Election Protection Portal
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

Pro Bono Platform Launches Election Protection Portal <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879906?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> By Matt Perez Free legal assistance platform Paladin announced the launch of a new volunteer portal for attorneys and other professionals focused on election protection. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879906?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879906?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…>

1 1

Fwd: New Message :: R000433-082224 - Shelf Charter Rule Change Records
by Gunnar Larson 29 Sep '24

29 Sep '24

xNY.io - Bank.org to the Moon and back again! Gunnar ✌️ ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: NYS DFS FOIL Records Access Center <dfsny(a)govqa.us> Date: Fri, Sep 27, 2024, 11:55 AM Subject: New Message :: R000433-082224 To: g(a)xny.io <g(a)xny.io> Cc: Joanne.Verdejo(a)dfs.ny.gov <Joanne.Verdejo(a)dfs.ny.gov> --- Please respond above this line --- [image: Logo] ------------------------------ RE: FOIL Records Request of August 22, 2024, Reference # R000433-082224 Dear Gunnar Larson, The NYS Department of Financial Services received a FOIL request from you on August 22, 2024. You requested: *"Today xNY.io - Bank.org seeks access to Shelf Charter records from January 1, 2021 to August 22, 2024 that correspond to New York State's Shelf Charter rule changes. Additionally, we seek access to NY-DFS records concerning xNY.io - Bank.org's Shelf Charter dealings with the Department. Separately to seeking Shelf Charter rule change records, today xNY.io - Bank.org seeks access to NY-DFS policy records concerning the Department’s approach to:-Harassment and Discrimination Policies -Conflict of Interest Policy-Insider Trading Policy-Records Management Policy-Corporate Opportunity Policy"* The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) requires additional time to respond to your request, assigned the tracking number R000433-082224, because we are still processing your request. DFS will endeavor to provide you the determination of your FOIL request by November 8, 2024, or sooner if possible. However, if DFS is unable to complete its review by that time, you will then be provided an update on the progress of your FOIL request. Your continued patience is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Joanne Verdejo Administrative Assistant 2 NYS Department of Financial Services Office of General Counsel ------------------------------ To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the FOIL Records Access Center <https://u8387778.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=u001.VEsWrlMiJDg0mXafq1mEXauM…> . [image: GovQA logo]

1 1

DC Circ. Seizure Ruling Deepens 4th Amendment Circuit Split
by Gunnar Larson 28 Sep '24

28 Sep '24

DC Circ. Seizure Ruling Deepens 4th Amendment Circuit Split <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879951?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> The D.C. Circuit’s recent Asinor v. District of Columbia decision, holding that the government’s continued possession of seized property must be reasonable, furthers a split among circuit courts and portends how the text, history and tradition method might influence Fourth Amendment cases, say Ty Howard and Wayne Beckermann at Bradley Arant. Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879951?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1879951?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…>

1 0

Immigrant Legal Aid Group Sues Over Texas AG's Probe
by Gunnar Larson 28 Sep '24

28 Sep '24

Immigrant Legal Aid Group Sues Over Texas AG's Probe <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1882795?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> By Andrea Keckley The nonprofit legal services provider Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday accusing Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton of trying to chill protected activity — suing two days before it was due to turn over information from the low-income immigrants it serves to the AG. Complaint attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1882795?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1882795?nl_pk=ab5ce197-c1…>

1 0

What Did Madoff, Jeffrey Epstein and Sanctioned Russian Mercenary Group, Wagner, Have in Common? They All Banked at JPMorgan Chase
by Gunnar Larson 27 Sep '24

27 Sep '24

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2024/09/what-did-madoff-jeffrey-epstein-and-… By Pam Martens and Russ Martens: September 26, 2024 ~ Yevgeniy Prigozhin Yevgeniy Prigozhin On Tuesday, the Financial Times broke the story that JPMorgan Chase and HSBC had been named in a new report by the U.S.-based think tank, the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (C4ADS), for their role in laundering payments for the notorious mercenary group, Wagner, that has supported Russian military operations in Ukraine, the Middle East, Latin America and Africa. The think tank wrote that the involvement of the banks with Wagner had been done “unwittingly.” That’s also how JPMorgan Chase explained its money laundering for Ponzi kingpin Bernie Madoff for decades and for the international sex trafficker of children, Jeffrey Epstein, for at least 15 years. Curiously, neither the Wall Street Journal nor the New York Times found the information in the think tank’s report worthy of sharing with their readers. Wall Street On Parade, on the other hand, finds it highly relevant to report to our readers that the largest bank in the United States, with a storied history of laundering money for unsavory characters over long stretches of time, has now been linked to Wagner, which was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury and designated as a Russian proxy and Transnational Criminal Organization. The U.S. Treasury wrote this about Wagner last January: “PMC Wagner (Wagner Group) is a Russian private military company led by Yevgeniy Prigozhin, a Putin crony and the target of multiple U.S. sanctions. Wagner Group has been involved in Kremlin-backed combat operations around the world in support of Putin’s war on Ukraine. As Russia’s military has struggled on the battlefield, Putin has resorted to relying on the Wagner Group to continue his war of choice. The Wagner Group has also meddled and destabilized countries in Africa, committing widespread human rights abuses and extorting natural resources from their people. Today, the Wagner Group is being redesignated pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13581, as amended by E.O. 13863, for being a foreign person that constitutes a significant transnational criminal organization. Wagner personnel have engaged in an ongoing pattern of serious criminal activity, including mass executions, rape, child abductions, and physical abuse in the Central African Republic (CAR) and Mali.” Prigozhin died in a plane crash on August 23, 2023. The private jet was carrying him and his top lieutenants. All 10 people on board the jet were killed in the crash, which came just two months after Prigozhin had staged a failed Wagner mutiny against Russian military leadership. The think tank revelations come one year after JPMorgan Chase settled two federal lawsuits for a combined $365 million which alleged that the bank had laundered money for the international sex trafficker of children, Jeffrey Epstein, from at least 1998 to 2013. One of the lawsuits had been brought by Epstein’s sex assault victims. JPMorgan Chase settled that case for $290 million after the plaintiffs’ lawyers agreed to dubious terms. The second lawsuit was brought by the Attorney General of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where Epstein had owned a private island compound. JPMorgan Chase was able to settle that case for just $75 million after launching a scorched-earth public relations campaign that focused on politicians in the U.S. Virgin Islands’ unsavory ties to Epstein themselves. Lawyers for the bank seemed particularly angry at just how much internal bank information the Attorney General for the U.S. Virgin Islands chose to share with the American people. In one court filing, the Attorney General wrote this: “Even if participation requires active engagement…there is no genuine dispute that JPMorgan actively participated in Epstein’s sex-trafficking venture from 2006 until 2019. The Court found allegations that the Bank allowed Epstein to use its accounts to send dozens of payments to then-known co-conspirators [redacted] provided excessive and unusual amounts of cash to Epstein; and structured cash withdrawals so that those withdrawals would not appear suspicious ‘went well beyond merely providing their usual [banking] services to Jeffrey Epstein and his affiliated entities’ and were sufficient to allege active engagement.” The U.S. Virgin Islands had previously alerted the court to the unfathomable sums of hard cash that Epstein was able to take from the accounts he maintained at JPMorgan Chase without the bank filing the legally mandated Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) to law enforcement. In one court filing, it tallied up the giant piles of cash, writing as follows: “Between September 2003 and November 2013, or approximately ten years, JPMorgan handled more than $5 million in outgoing cash transactions for Epstein — ignoring its own policy discouraging large cash withdrawals….” The U.S. Virgin Islands’ attorneys cited to internal emails at JPMorgan Chase showing that employees at the bank were aware of Epstein’s “[c]ash withdrawals … made in amounts for $40,000 to $80,000 several times a month” while also being aware that Epstein paid his underage sexual assault victims in cash. Epstein was found dead in his New York City jail cell on August 10, 2019 while awaiting trial. The Medical Examiner ruled his death a suicide. There is a serious and deeply disturbing pattern of looking the other way at crime in order to gain a business advantage at JPMorgan Chase under its long-tenured Chairman and CEO, Jamie Dimon. The bank has admitted to an unprecedented five criminal felony counts brought against it by the U.S. Department of Justice since 2014. Two of those felony counts were for money laundering for Ponzi mastermind Bernie Madoff. In January 2014, JPMorgan Chase paid $2.6 billion in fines and restitution, signed a deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department, and walked away from their 22-year involvement with Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme. The Justice Department prosecutors who settled the case against JPMorgan Chase used much of the investigative material from Irving Picard, the Trustee of the Madoff victims’ fund, to bring their charges against JPMorgan Chase. According to Picard, JPMorgan Chase used unaudited financial statements from Madoff and skipped the required steps of bank due diligence to make $145 million in loans to Madoff’s business. Lawyers for Picard write that from November 2005 through January 18, 2006, JPMorgan Chase loaned $145 million to Madoff’s business at a time when the bank was on “notice of fraudulent activity” in Madoff’s business account and when, in fact, Madoff’s business was insolvent. The reason for the JPMorgan Chase loans was because Madoff’s business account was “reaching dangerously low levels of liquidity, and the Ponzi scheme was at risk of collapsing.” JPMorgan, in fact, “provided liquidity to continue the Ponzi scheme,” according to Picard. But was Madoff also generating new business deals or profits for JPMorgan Chase as was the case with Epstein? The accounts of Norman F. Levy come immediately to mind. JPMorgan Chase and its predecessor banks extended tens of millions of dollars in loans to Norman F. Levy and his family so they could invest with the insolvent Madoff. (Levy died in 2005 at age 93 without being charged with any crimes.) According to Picard, Levy had $188 million in outstanding loans in 1996, which he used to funnel money into Madoff investments. Picard’s lawyers told the court that JPMorgan Chase referred to these investments as ‘special deals,’ adding: “Indeed, these deals were special for all involved: (a) Levy enjoyed Madoff’s inflated return rates of up to 40% on the money he invested with Madoff; (b) Madoff enjoyed the benefits of large amounts of cash to perpetuate his fraud without being subject to JPMC’s due diligence processes; and (c) JPMC [JPMorgan Chase] earned fees on the loan amounts and watched the ‘special deals’ from afar, escaping responsibility for any due diligence on Madoff’s operation.” A critical piece of evidence against JPMorgan was that despite funneling loans to both Madoff and Levy, the bank “advised the rest of its Private Bank customers not to invest with Madoff,” according to Picard. On paper, according to Picard, Levy was worth $1.5 billion in 1998. He was such an important customer to JPMorgan and its predecessor firms that he was given his own office at the bank. Levy was a commercial real estate broker and, according to a 2009 Vanity Fair article, at one point Levy “had an ownership stake in 70 properties, including the Seagram Building and 21 shopping centers across America…” According to Picard, once Levy was a Madoff client, the relationship included classic, unchecked evidence of money laundering for years and years that should have resulted in legally-mandated Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) filed with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a unit of the U.S. Treasury. But even after a different bank detected the suspicious activity in the late 1990s and reported the transactions to FinCEN, JPMorgan Chase and its predecessor banks failed to file their own mandated SARs. JPMorgan Chase not only allowed the activity to continue but allowed it to increase dramatically in dollar terms. In September of 2020, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) dropped a bombshell investigative report on money laundering by international banks. The ICIJ investigation was based on secret documents leaked from FinCEN. The documents “show that five global banks — JPMorgan, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, Deutsche Bank and Bank of New York Mellon — kept profiting from powerful and dangerous players even after U.S. authorities fined these financial institutions for earlier failures to stem flows of dirty money.” The report had this to say about JPMorgan Chase: JPMorgan Chase was involved in moving illicit funds for Jho Low, involving the notorious looting of public funds in Malaysia. JPMorgan Chase moved $1.2 billion in money for Jho Low from 2013 to 2016, according to the report. The ICIJ bombshell includes the charge that JPMorgan also “processed more than $50 million in payments over a decade, the records show, for Paul Manafort, the former campaign manager for President Donald Trump. The bank shuttled at least $6.9 million in Manafort transactions in the 14 months after he resigned from the campaign amid a swirl of money laundering and corruption allegations spawning from his work with a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine.” More troubling activity at JPMorgan Chase includes the following, according to ICIJ investigators: “JPMorgan also moved money for companies and people tied to corruption scandals in Venezuela that have helped create one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises… “One of the Venezuelans who got help from JPMorgan was Alejandro ‘Piojo’ Isturiz, a former government official who has been charged by U.S. authorities as a player in an international money laundering scheme. Prosecutors allege that between 2011 and 2013 Isturiz and others solicited bribes to rig government energy contracts. The bank moved more than $63 million for companies linked to Isturiz and the money laundering scheme between 2012 and 2016, the FinCEN Files show…” Wall Street megabanks like to brag about their “KYC” rule (Know Your Customer). But the ICIJ investigators reveal that JPMorgan Chase paid little attention to that rule. The report found this: “Take the case of a mysterious shell company called ABSI Enterprises. ABSI sent and received more than $1 billion in transactions through JPMorgan between January 2010 and July 2015, the FinCEN Files show. “This amount included transactions through a direct bank account with JPMorgan, which ABSI closed in 2013, and through so-called correspondent banking arrangements, in which a bank with significant U.S. operations, such as JPMorgan, allows foreign banks to process U.S. dollar transactions through its own accounts. “Compliance watchdogs based at the bank’s Columbus, Ohio, operations hub decided to try to figure out ABSI’s actual owner in 2015 after a Russian news site reported that a similarly-named shell company — which JPMorgan’s records indicated was the parent of ABSI — was linked to an underworld figure named Semion Mogilevich. “Mogilevich has been described as the ‘Boss of Bosses’ of Russia mafia groups. When the FBI put him on its Top Ten Most Wanted list in 2009, it said his criminal network was involved in weapons and drug trafficking, extortion and contract murders. The chain-smoking, beefy Ukrainian’s signature method of neutralizing an enemy, The Guardian once reported, is the car bomb. “The records show the compliance officers searched in vain through their files on the shell company, unable to determine who was behind the firm or what its true purpose was. “While those details still remain unclear, JPMorgan had plenty of reasons to examine ABSI years earlier: it operated as a shell company in Cyprus, considered a major money laundering center at the time, and it was directing hundreds of millions of dollars through JPMorgan… “Through a spokesperson, Mogilevich said he had no knowledge of ABSI.” In March 2022, the United States ranked number one on the Financial Secrecy Index, “earning the worst rating ever recorded since the ranking began in 2009.”

1 1

An Open Letter to Bloomberg on Modern BitLicense Logic
by Gunnar Larson 27 Sep '24

27 Sep '24

Dear Bloomberg: Thank you for pioneering innovation spanning all facets of global finance. For the last 15 years, Bloomberg has served as a wise friend offering daily, quality inspiration. Interviewing Mayor Mike Bloomberg on occasion as a young journalist and advancing to become a global executive and regular Bloomberg Breakaway attendee has fostered a dream of learning from top global business idols. Forever inspired by Bloomberg’s pioneering contributions to the culture of New York and global financial innovation, today’s memo highlights our now eventful journey to fundamentally modernize New York's BitLicense and global regulatory logic. - Our global team <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3hI4G7QYR7PmlKlc7oQHhl4RnroLYF-/view?usp=…> is comprised of seasoned professionals who cumulatively represent decades of industry experience across various fields and disciplines. - Our strategic partnerships <https://news.bitcoin.com/ternio-joins-visas-fast-track-program-as-new-enabl…> with the world’s leading financial, healthcare services <http://mydr.co/> and mobile payments providers support the key aim of our endeavor: to attain the legitimate financial inclusion and economic prosperity of all the excluded, under-privileged and under-served, offering financial inclusion and global citizenry. Pioneering global virtual currency innovation is in part due to pedigree responsibility as a “Bill and Melinda Gates Scholar,” (UG) a “Blockchain Scholar” (GR) and a principle creator of “United Nations AudioVisual Library on International Law <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BweeaClFZ8c0dDNDWGFveVFTXzlOTjhXY2tKS2FZN2…>.” Humble scholars and UN esteem are indeed supportive. However, our working example of success is modeled on Bloomberg's business of international excellence, pioneering many of the world's greatest financial systems and technology frameworks out of New York. *The New York BitLicense vs. Global Regulatory Arbitrage* The 2015 BitLicense mandate was envisioned as synonymous with New York’s leadership of next-generation global innovation. New York’s contemporary virtual currency innovation rests with a modern BitLicense with cross-border logic (similar to New York human rights law <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a>). 1. Today many New York firms have various legacy regulatory arbitrage frameworks. 2. The utility concept behind virtual currency is in its cross-border appeal. 3. Modern European regulation shares this logic. New York’s BitLicense does not, therefore creating a virtual currency “Crypto Bank” regulatory arbitrage loophole between Europe and New York. New York banks’ traditional engagement of regulatory arbitrage has overflowed the BitLicense and correspondingly is responsible for global virtual currency marketplace manipulation. Circumnavigating this problem is key to modern BitLicense logic. Given the inherent universal cross-border nature of virtual currencies, there is no real good reason for New York firms under the BitLicense mandate to manipulate other global markets via regulatory arbitrage. Engaging the New York Department of Financial services’ new “Conditional BitLicense” framework as a vehicle, we have signed our clear intent to win the Superintendent's Conditional Approval and other necessary regulatory approvals of modern virtual currency logic. - BitLicense members today should not be surprised by New York wasting no time issuing modern logic and that virtual currency regulatory arbitrage is a lawless New York rights concern affecting <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a> over 1 billion people. - European regulation has allowed our team to build these concepts which are theoretically illegal in New York, thus creating global loopholes. - Africa is the most concerning “virtual currency regulatory arbitrage market” directed outside of New York and Europe jurisdictions. African consumers are being manipulated most. United States consumers also are affected at various levels. European consumers have a favorable environment, but do not have the “dynamism” New York affords. Working in New York, European and African jurisdictions as “Blockchain Scholars,” we tested the concept of our Modern BitLicense Logic at our “sister” University in Africa <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3hI4G7QYR7PmlKlc7oQHhl4RnroLYF-/view?usp=…>, and interestingly Goldman Sachs out of New York was a lead investor. The key observation is that New York banks “own,” or lead investment in, the European and African marketplace leaders. At every level, New York’s BitLicense is the most significant hurdle to the global virtual currency industry. Given our own experience in these markets, we have found that Goldman Sachs has fine tuned global virtual currency regulatory arbitrage. To be fair, we have reported on various other Silicon Valley firms leveraging the BitLicense, given that Valley firms like Robinhood <https://thecapital.io/article/robinhoods-brand-fake-vs-paypals-crypto-corru…> use New York banks, like Goldman Sachs, as a key actor. Note, as some of the industries top “real global scholars” we understand it would be a mistake to be adversarial to the current New York environment. Like Boomberg, we aim to be very impressive in terms of successfully shepherding/persuading meaningful New York innovation. *The Art of Diplomacy* Rather than a merry-go-round, the process of change is like a slide, and Modern BitLicense Logic is necessary. As a matter of New York law, there is no other option. The process of filing complaints or legal mediation is sub-par. Furthermore, if virtual currency firms want to game regulatory markets they honestly should forfeit the prestige of New York’s BitLicense. 2020 will go down in history as New York banks continued to profit heavily under regulatory arbitrage frameworks while virtual currency reached global proportions. New York’s newly announced “Conditional BitLicense” framework offered our group the perfect opportunity to earn a “Conditional License” and suggests advancing the BitLicense mandate with “modern logic.” - The interests ensured through interpretations of specific provisions in the existing national and supra-national legal framework (civil law, securities law, bankruptcy law, international human rights law) call for New York to clarify the rights of the public and obligations of BitLicense members engaged in the global virtual currency economy. - BitLicense regulation must preserve a technology-neutral, principle-based, non-discriminatory framework for the next generation of modern New York virtual currency public policy, naturally to support innovation within the limits imposed by overriding international public interests. As a proud New Yorker, the only option is to be a “real scholar,” and the job would not be complete without New York regulator approval and campaign for cross-border modernization of the BitLicense logic in any way possible. *Vast Undue Economic Hardship* Bloomberg has championed actions to promote an inclusive economy -- one in which people have the chance to move themselves and their families out of poverty, one in which systemic racism does not limit opportunities and one in which all people can fully participate. Without this inclusivity, the global economy will not be able to live up to its full potential and people will suffer. As we have reported <https://thecapital.io/article/new-yorks-raging-regulatory-arbitrage-racket-…>, virtual currency fraud is a serious problem for such a developed country as the United States, whose bank regulators have drawn attention to the increase of these crimes. Having discovered that an unregulated virtual currency sphere (such as in Africa, or other developing markets) is very popular among virtual currency fraudsters <https://www.americanbanker.com/news/jpmorgan-chase-warns-of-upcoming-fine-o…>, the New York State Department of Financial Services concluded that this kind of regulatory fraud was threatening US national security. Research on the social importance and credibility <https://thecapital.io/article/robinhoods-brand-fake-vs-paypals-crypto-corru…> of good institutional design from an organizational perspective seeks to prevent undue hardship requiring significant expense or difficulty (including a significant interference with the safe or efficient operation of international operations due to the seniority system of New York banks who are playing global markets). - Factors to be considered in determining whether an undue economic hardship exists shall include, but not be limited to, special requirements or conditions that are imposed upon an applicant or class of applicants in circumstances where similar requirements or conditions are not imposed upon other applicants. - Consumer protection is an umbrella term covering a group of laws and organizations that protect the rights of consumers and foster the free flow of accurate information in the marketplace. Consumer protection laws are designed to prevent businesses from engaging in fraud or unfair practices, to protect individuals from scam artists, and to identity thieves and crooks. - A New York State resident or corporation is in violation if found to have contributed to an act committed outside New York State against a resident of this state or against a corporation organized under the laws of this state (or authorized to do business in this state) that would constitute an unlawful discriminatory practice if committed within New York State. - If the New York State has reason to believe that a non-resident person or foreign corporation has committed or is about to commit outside of this state an act which if committed within this state would constitute an unlawful practice, such act is in violation. Speaking generally, at least during its 2015-2020 implementation phase, the BitLicense has likely contributed to increased cross-border virtual currency market manipulation. Specifically, we reference our individual hardship example in New York, Europe and Africa with concern to Goldman Sachs’ cross-border manipulation as a violation of New York Human Rights law. *New York Human Rights Law* Our analysis of the factors that drive cross-border differences in the implementation of BitLicense reform link the resulting heterogeneity to cross-jurisdictional arbitrage. In this manner we identify New York in a “virtual currency regulatory crisis” – to the extent that the BitLicense is unevenly implemented – as a source of new and unchecked global financial risk. Given the nature of traditional regulatory arbitrage, it is key to differentiate the BitLicense and understand New York’s universal nature <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a> of Human Rights Law. - The science of pure virtual currency design and human rights are universal movements to end ins <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutionalisation>titutionalized <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutionalisation> discrimination and disenfranchisement <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disenfranchisement_in_the_United_States>, and to offer quality consumer financial product access without cross-border regulatory segregation. - We trust that virtual currency regulatory arbitrage can be addressed via BitLicense modernization and that New York regulators share our logical provisional interpretation of cross-borders with respect to human rights. Our experience in Europe and Africa points to the necessity to work with New York regulators directly without BitLicense member interference. This approach is not to purposely irritate the esteemed Superintendent or rock the boat that is New York State and risk disrupting the system that guarantees our future. *Conditional BitLicense Approval* Modern BitLicense Logic’s opportunity is to meet a new global standard for virtual currency regulatory innovation while protecting market integrity by stringent standards applicable to all law-abiding business enterprises. In our case, a few approvals are necessary and are proposed via a hybrid model under the supervision of the Superintendent. Following this desire, we have navigated the five step process for Conditional review. 1. *Inform*: Applicants inform NYDFS of the intent to collaborate with a specific BitLicensee and provide a copy of the draft agreement between the applicant and the BitLicensee. 2. *Submit: *Applicants submit information on the expected type of business and the perceived risks, among other things. 3. *Review: *NYDFS begins its substantive review after all of the requested documentation has been submitted. 4. *Contract: *NYDFS and the applicant enter into a supervisory agreement defining the scope of the applicant’s business, shared responsibilities with its sponsor BitLicensee and NYDFS’ level of oversight. 5. *Approve:* If NYDFS approves the application, a Conditional BitLicense is issued. Every day of delay in ambiguity of Modern BitLicense Logic poses a problem for those who want to offer additional products and services at international scale while staying within the letter of the law. Currently, we believe that our Conditional application is ready to enter stage four and seek to begin negotiation of the supervisory agreement. Bloomberg as the prime example of global prestige and success fuels our desire to be best in class in providing global virtual currency financial services out of New York. Warm regards, *Gunnar Larson* Bill and Melinda Gates Scholar | Blockchain Scholar Conditional BitLicense Applicant (Global Team Lead) New York, New York 10001 -- *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* MSc <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - Digital Currency MBA <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) G(a)xNY.io +1-646-454-9107 New York, New York 10001

1 2