US meat exports surge as industry struggles to meet demand

MEAT NOT FOR YOU OR ME ITS FOR EXPORT

 In this April 8, 2020, file photo, the Smithfield pork processing plant stands in Sioux Falls, S.D. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (AP Photo/Stephen Groves, File)


OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — U.S. meat exports are surging even as the industry is struggling to meet domestic demand because of coronavirus outbreaks at processing plants that have sickened hundreds of workers and caused companies to scramble to improve conditions.

Although the situation could cause concern that American workers are risking their health to meet foreign demand, experts say it shouldn’t because much of the meat sold to other countries is cuts that Americans generally don’t eat. And at least one of the four major processors says it has reduced exports during the pandemic.

If companies manage to keep their workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy domestic and foreign markets, according to industry officials.

“I really feel like the industry is well positioned to serve all of its customers both here and abroad,” said Joe Schuele, a spokesman for the industry trade group U.S. Meat Export Federation.

Meat exports, particularly pork exports to China, grew significantly throughout the first three months of the year. This was partly due to several new trade agreements that were completed before the coronavirus outbreak led to the temporary closure of dozens of U.S. meatpacking plants in April and May and to increased absenteeism at many plants that reduced their output.

The Meat Export Federation said pork exports jumped 40% and beef exports grew 9% during the first three months of the year. Chicken exports, meanwhile, grew by 8% in the first quarter. Complete figures weren’t yet available for April, but Agriculture Department figures for the last week of April show that pork exports jumped by 40% as shipments to China and Japan surged and exports to Mexico and Canada remained strong. Beef exports declined by 22% in that last week of April.

China’s demand for imported pork has risen over the past year because its own pig herds were decimated by an outbreak of African swine fever, and China pledged to buy $40 billion in U.S. agricultural products per year under a trade pact signed in January. China also became the fourth-largest market for American poultry in the first quarter after it lifted a five-year ban on those products. A trade agreement with Japan and a new North American free trade agreement also helped boost exports.

Part of the reason why exports have continued to be so strong this spring is that much of the meat headed overseas was bought up to six months ahead of time — before the virus outbreak took hold in the U.S.


In this May 7, 2020, file photo, workers leave the Tyson Foods pork processing plant in Logansport, Ind. The plant has closed April 25 after nearly 900 employees tested positive for the coronavirus. Workers won't be able to return to work until they get tested. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy, File)

“A lot of these sales were made before COVID-19 hit. China had already made these purchases and then COVID-19 hit. They had actually pre-purchased a lot of this before the plant problems hit,” said Chad Hart, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University.

It’s also worth noting that meat exports to China and other Asian markets include cuts such as pig feet, snouts and internal organs that have little value in the United States. The most popular cuts in the U.S., including bacon and pork chops, largely stay in the domestic market. More than half of the chicken exports to China were chicken feet. And the Meat Export Federation says demand from the export market helps boost meat production in the U.S. because more animals are slaughtered to help meet all the demand.

Iowa Agriculture Secretary Mike Naig said he doesn’t think it makes sense to restrict exports because so much of the meat sold internationally isn’t popular in the U.S.

“I think it’s important to prioritize,” said Naig, whose state leads the nation in pork production. “I think companies should meet the domestic market first and then be free to sell the things that the American consumer doesn’t purchase and the types of things that we don’t normally consume. That’s economically important.”

MONOPOLY CAPITALISM
Meat production in the United States is dominated by a few huge companies — JBS, Smithfield, Tyson Foods and Cargill. Cameron Bruett, a spokesman for JBS, said that Brazilian-owned company has reduced exports to help ensure it can satisfy U.S. demand for its products. Tyson Foods and Cargill didn’t respond to questions about their exports.

Smithfield Foods, which is owned by a Chinese company, said in a statement that it isn’t controlled by any government and that the free market determines what products it exports. JBS declined to respond to questions about its foreign ownership. Purdue University agricultural economist Jayson Lusk said it’s not clear what role the foreign owners play in deciding how much meat is exported.

The industry has been dealing with a number of production challenges caused by the coronavirus, and several large plants had to close temporarily because of outbreaks of COVID-19, the disease it causes. At least 30 U.S. meatpacking workers have died of COVID-19 and another 10,000 have been infected or exposed to the virus, according to the United Food and Commercial Workers union, which represents roughly 80% of the country’s beef and pork workers and 33% of its poultry workers.


In this May 7, 2020, file photo, ghe Pilgrim's Pride packing plant is seen in an aerial view in Cold Spring, Minn. Meat exports are surging this spring at the same time the processing industry is struggling to meet domestic demand as workers get sick with the coronavirus and companies scramble to make plants safer for employees. The meat industry says that if companies manage to keep workers healthy and plants operating, there should be plenty of supply to satisfy both U.S. and export markets. (Aaron Lavinsky/Star Tribune via AP, File)/Star Tribune via AP)

Kansas State agricultural economist Glynn Tonsor said he thinks the industry will get past the shortage concerns within the next several weeks.

“I think it’s important that we note that the U.S. hog industry is large enough to sufficiently supply our domestic market and export. We’ve done that for some time. We’ve been growing volumes in both places for some time,” Tonsor said.

Tyson and Smithfield have both been able to reopen huge pork processing plants that were temporarily closed in Iowa and South Dakota, which should help the industry keep up with demand even if some plants aren’t running at full capacity, said David Herring, of the National Pork Producers Council.

“I really don’t think we’ll see a big problem with meat shortages,” said Herring, who raises hogs near Lillington, North Carolina. “As long as the plants are able to come back up and operate maybe not at 100% but at 80% or 90%, I think we should be good.”

___

Check out more of the AP’s coronavirus coverage at https://apnews.com/VirusOutbreak and https://apnews.com/UnderstandingtheOutbreak

US report indicates broad risk of COVID-19 at wildfire camps

IN this Aug. 18, 2017, file photo, exhaustion reads on the face of a firefighter from Noorvik, Alaska, while he and his team watch for spot fires that threaten to jump the line on the Lolo Peak fire, in Missoula, Mont. A federal risk assessment says wildland firefighters could see widespread outbreaks of COVID-19 at large U.S. fire camps this summer, and the problem is likely to compound the longer fire season lasts. The draft risk assessment created by the U.S. Forest Service predicts that even in a best-case scenario — with firefighters following social distancing protocols and plenty of tests and equipment available — that nearly two dozen people could be infected by the virus while working at a camp like the one used for the Lolo Peak fire. (Kurt Wilson/The Missoulian via AP, File)


BOISE, Idaho (AP) — Outbreaks of the coronavirus could sweep through large camps where crews typically stay as they fight wildfires across the U.S., according to a federal document obtained by The Associated Press, and the problem is likely to get worse the longer the fire season lasts.

The U.S. Forest Service’s draft risk assessment suggests that even in a best-case scenario — with social distancing followed and plenty of tests and protective equipment available — nearly two dozen firefighters could be infected with COVID-19 at a camp with hundreds of people who come in to combat a fire that burns for months.


The worst-case scenario? More than 1,000 infections.

“The Forest Service is diligently working with partners to assess the risk that COVID-19 presents for the 2020 fire season,” the agency said in a statement Wednesday. “It is important to understand that the figures in this report are not predictions, but rather, model possible scenarios.”

The Forest Service said the document was outdated and being redone, and the newest version wasn’t yet ready to share. The AP obtained the draft from an official who has access to it and didn’t want to be named.

One of the authors of the risk assessment said Tuesday that in the new version, the infection rates remain the same. But while the draft originally said the death rate among infected firefighters could reach as high as 6%, that is being revised sharply downward, to less than 2%, to reflect newer data, said Jude Bayham, an assistant professor in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at Colorado State University.

He said the initial death rate was based on data from early in the pandemic, when testing was far more limited. Based on new data, firefighters — who are largely healthy and young — will likely fare far better if they contract COVID-19 than the general population, he said.

For most people, the coronavirus causes mild or moderate symptoms, such as fever and cough that clear up in two to three weeks. For some, especially people who are older or have health problems, it can cause more severe illness, including pneumonia and death.

Federal guidelines released last week reimagine how to combat wildfires to reduce the risk of firefighters getting the virus. The guidelines urge fire managers to use small crews that can have the close contact that firefighting and travel often require, while staying away from other groups. The guidelines recommend avoiding the traditional large camps and relying on military-issue ready-to-eat or bagged meals instead of catered buffet-style meals at campsites.


Some fire managers also are told to take temperatures with their own touchless thermometers if possible. The guidelines say everyone should wear masks and other protective equipment when around those outside their immediate crew. Good cleaning and sanitation is recommended, as is isolating firefighters and potentially entire crews if COVID-19 is detected.

A review of incident reports from wildfires so far this year show the guidelines are difficult, and sometimes impossible, to follow and could actually increase some risks to firefighters.

“We have developed pinch-points that cause operational lapses in guidance that may very well get confused with policy and doctrine. This situation could result in injury — or even unwanted death — of our multiagency employees,” Greg Juvan, a fire management officer with the Idaho Panhandle National Forests, wrote in a report from a small wildfire last month.

Social distancing was difficult, and firefighters found it unrealistic to meet sanitation standards for truck radios, hand tools and other gear used in the initial attack on the Idaho wildfire, Juvan said. Social distancing guidelines call for more vehicles to transport crews, but that led to congestion on the narrow roads leading to the fire. The guidelines could raise one of the greatest risks to wildland firefighters — traffic wrecks, Juvan said.

Even something as basic as sanitizing vehicles proved problematic, with cleaning supplies difficult to find, the report said.

In New Mexico, several agencies responded to a small wildfire last month, with some not practicing social distancing and other virus policies appearing to vary greatly, George Allalunis, a Carson National Forest engine captain, wrote in a report.

For the Forest Service’s draft risk assessment, researchers created scenarios using three actual fires from 2017 and applied disease modeling. They found testing every firefighter before they started work reduced the coronavirus risk most significantly for short, high-intensity wildfires, said Bayham, the professor. But for longer, drawn-out firefights, initial testing was less important than keeping firefighters spread out in small campsites.

The models showed that even with strict pre-work testing and social distancing, about 21 COVID-19 infections could be expected in a large camp like that used for a 2017 fire in Montana. In the worst-case scenario, more than 1,000 firefighters would be infected. The problem could compound as fire crews are sent to new locations over the monthslong fire season, which has largely begun.

The risk assessment will be updated throughout the season, the Forest Service said.

The American West could see higher-than-normal levels of wildfire this year because of drought

Hikers fight plan for TRUMP border wall at start of scenic trail


In this September, 2019 photo by Shannon Villegas shows the Arizona trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Shannon Villegas via AP)
PHOENIX (AP) — Tess Mullaney remembers looking at endless rolling desert hills, covered in a thin layer of white snow just as the sun was rising the day she embarked on a 2½-month journey through the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile system that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona and ends at the Utah one.

In a picture from that February 2019, Mullaney, 28, is smiling as she poses behind a thin barbed-wire fence that divides Arizona from Mexico. She’s standing next to Border Monument 102, an engraved pillar marking the boundary of the United States. Engraved in the monument is this warning:

“The destruction or displacement of this monument is a misdemeanor punishable by the United States or Mexico”

Now, the government is proposing to do just that. It plans on building a 30-foot (9 meter) border wall there, threatening the view so many hikers marvel at— and the ecological life around it.

Mullaney and others are calling on the government to abandon plans to build two miles (3.2 kilometers) of new fencing they say will destroy the monument that marks the beginning of the Arizona Trail, which is also within the Coronado National Memorial. That southern terminus marks where some believe Spanish explorer Francisco Vázquez de Coronado first crossed into Arizona from Sonora in the mid 1500s in his quest to find gold.

The government also plans to build a ground detection system, a road and new lighting. It’s part of President Donald Trump’s plan to build hundreds of miles of border wall, a campaign promise he has so far maintained.

In this February, 2019 self-portrait, Tess Mullaney of Phoenix, Ariz., poses at the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

“To remove not only this symbolism, but also the beauty, seclusion, protection, and wildlife migratory abilities in this area would be saddening to all who enjoy it,” Mullaney said.

Known as “thru-hikers,” an estimated 700 people traverse the entirety of the Arizona Trail in one trip, and thousands more hike different parts of the trail, each year. Thru-hikers have to first be dropped off at a trailhead two miles from the border. They then hike down to the monument that marks where the trail starts, a crucial marker for adventurers, said Matthew J. Nelson, executive director of the Arizona Trail Association.

For years, that part of the border has been protected by a small barbed-wire fence, and Nelson said he doesn’t know of any issues with illegal border crossers there. The area is mountainous and rugged, difficult to access from the south.

Nelson said his opposition to the border wall project at that location isn’t political, but about preserving the crucial point of a massive trail that took volunteers years to complete. He says the trail attracts thousands of visitors who stimulate the local economies of nearby communities, like the city of Sierra Vista.

“It’s a point of pride, and so I hope that people recognize that impact to a quarter-mile of the trail is an impact to the entire 800-mile organism,” Nelson said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection didn’t immediately answer questions about the project at the trail. During a press briefing in Tucson on Tuesday, Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Chad Wolf said the administration’s top goal is border security and that officials routinely meet with concerned stakeholders. Wolf was addressing a question about concerns that environmental groups have expressed about construction on federally protected land.

In this February, 2019 self-portrait, Tess Mullaney of Phoenix, Ariz., poses at the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

\
“But at the end of the day, I think the administration has been very clear on this front, which is border security is national security is homeland security. So we’re gonna secure that border every way we can,” Wolf said.

Wolf said decisions about where to build border barriers and where to rely more on technology for surveillance depend on factors like illegal traffic in that area and how accessible it is.

“Those decisions are not being made by the secretary. They’re being made by the operators on the ground. So I think the best thing this administration has done is we’ve actually listened to the operators,” Wolf said.

The proposed project along the Coronado National Memorial is one of several planned for Arizona, which shares about 370 miles of border with Mexico.

Although the spot is federally protected by the National Trail System Act, the government has the power to override such a designation in the name of national security. It has already done that in places like Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, where construction workers have removed hundreds of protected cactuses and blasted through a mountain to build a new wall.

Greg Kilroy, a 50-year-old residential real estate agent, remembers first approaching the trail’s southern terminus— Border Monument 102— in August, when most of Arizona is scorching, but when the high altitude and mountainous area is nice and cool.

“It’s really epic,” Kilroy said. “It was also the beginning of our trip, and so it was really exciting, really kind of magical, and, not gonna lie, a little bit of fear and anxiety of what are we taking on here as part of the really long journey.”

It took Kilroy and his friend four years and about 17 different trips to complete the 800-mile trail. He said they found discarded trash they think was probably left behind by border crossers, but never encountered another person there.

“It was a true kind of wilderness experience. And boy the wall would sure fly in the face of that,” Kilroy said.

In this February, 2019 photo by Tess Mullaney shows the southern terminus of the Arizona Trail, an 800-mile path that starts at the U.S.-Mexico border near Hereford, Ariz., and ends at the Utah border. Mullaney opposes plans for a two-mile stretch of border wall that would go through the monument and destroy the trail's first stop, which hikers consider symbolic and important. (Tess Mullaney via AP)

Nine U.S. states sue EPA for easing environmental enforcement amid pandemic

By Valerie Volcovici

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nine states on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for relaxing a range of companies' compliance and monitoring requirements with federal clean air and water laws in response to the coronavirus pandemic, arguing the policy is too broad and not transparent.

ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTING AGENCY

© Reuters/LUCY NICHOLSON The Environmental Protection Agency headquarters is seen in Washington, D.C.

Under the temporary policy announced on March 26, the EPA said it would not seek penalties for violations of routine compliance monitoring, integrity testing, sampling, laboratory analysis, training, and reporting or certification obligations in situations where the EPA agrees that COVID-19 was the cause.

The states, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, argued that the EPA issued a broad and open-ended policy that gives polluters too much leeway instead of using enforcement discretion "as authorized by law."

"The policy’s effective waiver of these requirements, which are foundational to our federal environmental laws, exceeds EPA’s authority," the attorneys general said.

The coalition of the nine states - New York, California, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont and Virginia - argue that the EPA lacks legal authority to waive "critical monitoring and reporting obligations that inform regulators and the general public of pollution hazards" and failed to weigh the impacts the relaxation policy will have on public health amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Their lawsuit comes a month after more than a dozen environmental groups led by the Natural Resources Defense Council, whose president is former Obama EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy filed their own challenge in the same New York federal court.

Former Obama EPA enforcement chief Cynthia Giles, who filed a brief last week supporting the environmental group lawsuit, told Reuters that the agency has never applied this kind of policy so broadly.

"In the past, EPA has only eased compliance obligations in a targeted way to address specific problems, such as Superstorm Sandy," she said.

Current EPA chief Andrew Wheeler told reporters in March that the coronavirus outbreak was an unprecedented national crisis and that he expected "regulated facilities to comply with regulatory requirements, where reasonably practicable."

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

Elon Musk has a lot to say about COVID-19. Some of it isn't true

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has called stay-at-home orders "fascist" and spread misinformation about Covid-19 on Twitter. Now, he says he's reopening a factory despite government orders.

Elon Musk truly entered the public consciousness just over a decade ago, when Tesla was a quirky upstart putting batteries in the chassis of a little Lotus sports car. Musk grew it into an electric powerhouse, building cars that he promised would one day drive themselves, with doors that swung upward much like the time machine from Back to the Future.


Musk deftly played the part of a new kind of CEO, one who made jokes on Twitter, engaged with fans, and even sought to re-define the very idea of what "fun" could be in a car. Then things began to change. Increasingly, the risks Musk has been taking are not with his own money, or even his own life, but with the money, careers, reputations and lives of others. And the boundaries that once held him back are caving under the pressure.

This week, the fun CEO from the past has become something different. What that is exactly may depend on your view of him and the current pandemic. Maybe he's a figure out of an Ayn Rand novel standing up against "sweeping, authoritarian and undemocratic restrictions on individual liberty" that are holding back business and the public, working for the greater good and ensuring that his workers can keep earning a living. Or maybe he's just another old-school executive (albeit one who's very attached to Twitter) demanding that he be allowed to send his non-unionized factory workers back to assemble cars at potential risk to their health and in violation of orders from the local health department in service of no greater purpose than his company's profits.

Musk's public persona today could not be more different from its beginnings. Once there was an entrepreneurial executive, helpfully cheering on popular cartoonists, urging on workers and mocking the established investors who doubted the company could survive.

Tesla and Musk promised big things that car companies had never done before, and when critics doubted those promises could ever be met, the company exceeded them. Musk promised an SUV that could go more than 300 miles on a charge and accelerate faster than a Porsche, seemingly impossible feats but soon enough, customers were driving them. Tesla cars could do the seemingly miraculous. They could be updated over the air in real time, even getting reminders to recharge when their electricity supply was threatened by wildfires. Tesla's market capitalization grew and grew in ways that looked just as miraculous.

Musk entertained notions of flights to Mars, and at the same time denied that it was his home planet. He behaved unlike any other car company CEO before him, and legions of adoring fans fell in line, giving his Twitter account a level of attention rivaling that of President Donald Trump. When Elon Musk tweets a vague hint about an upcoming product reveal or reports of potential planetary destruction, news outlets pick it up immediately. Even Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has asked Musk's advice on how to improve the service.

Ford's CEO, Jim Hackett, doesn't have a Twitter account.

Everything seemed great until it didn't.

In the summer of 2018, a boys' soccer team in Thailand became trapped in a cave that was quickly filling with water. As the 12 boys and their coach waited desperately for rescue, Musk stepped in to offer his services. His team could use much of the same capsule technology developed by Musk's rocket company, SpaceX, to build a submarine capsule to aid in the rescue, he said at the time.

But after one of the rescuers involved in the life-saving effort criticized the vessel, Musk lashed out, baselessly calling the rescuer a "pedo," which is often shorthand for "pedophile," but which Musk maintained merely meant "creepy."

It was the first time that Musk's apparent belief that he can do anything, that he knows better than the traditional experts, brought a wide public backlash down on him.

The rescuer sued Musk for defamation. Musk won, and the civil victory only seemed to embolden him and appeared to defuse the effect any criticism had had on him. Whereas Musk was once the rebellious leader of a scrappy upstart, he was now the wealthy tycoon who had crushed a lone emergency responder in court after publicly calling him, at best, "creepy."© Yasin Ozturk/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, on March 9, 2020. (Photo by Yasin Ozturk/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Even before the lawsuit victory, however, Musk's Twitter account veered in another expensive direction. On August 7, 2018, Musk tweeted that he was taking Tesla private at a price of $420 per share, and that the funding for the deal was "secured." An announcement like that would send shockwaves through the business world however it was made. That it was tweeted out with such relative nonchalance was either the hallmark of an unconventional executive getting deals done — or, perhaps, of something going off the rails.

It quickly emerged that the deal was far from done, and the would-be funding from Saudi Arabia never materialized. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission stepped in, saying that "in truth and in fact, Musk had not even discussed, much less confirmed, key deal terms, including price, with any potential funding source."

Surely this would be the straw that broke the back of Musk's Twitter feed. It's one thing to target a cave diver without Musk's own vast resources. It's entirely different to take on the regulators of the American federal government. Shareholders filed lawsuits alleging that he was intentionally manipulating Tesla's stock price.

The SEC wanted to prohibit Musk from acting as an officer or director of a publicly traded company, effectively demanding that he be removed from Tesla entirely.

But it didn't stick. Musk spent the next few weeks mocking the SEC from, of course, his Twitter account. After months of negotiations, the SEC agreed to a weakened settlement, the only significant result of which was that Tesla would appoint a new chairman, and Musk's tweets on some topics -- largely limited to the company's financial well-being and production numbers -- would now be reviewed by "an experienced securities lawyer."

It didn't seem to matter to investors. Tesla's share price soared ever-higher, soon totaling a market capitalization greater than the former "Big Three" of Ford, General Motors and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles combined.

Then the coronavirus pandemic began.

In a county that is one of the hardest hit by coronavirus in the area, Tesla workers are returning to the company's factory in Fremont, California. Despite an order from local health authorities prohibiting the manufacture and assembly of non-essential goods, the Tesla factory began churning out vehicles once more over the weekend.

Musk, as usual, took to Twitter, saying that if anyone was to be arrested for violating the order, it should be him.

The local health department capitulated, acceding to Musk's demands that the factory reopen next week, even though production has already re-started.

It is a situation that has been months in the making. Musk has long questioned the actual risk from the coronavirus. As early as January he tweeted that the coronavirus was no more dangerous than other common viruses despite expert opinions that it is, in fact, far more deadly.

By March, when there were just over 15,000 confirmed Covid-19 cases nationally he was tweeting that the U.S. would have "close to zero" new cases by the end of April.

"The coronavirus panic is dumb," he wrote.

Also in March, when Alameda County, California, where Tesla's headquarters and a manufacturing facility are located, put in place stay-at-home orders, Tesla delayed its shutdown for a week.

But by the end of April, the country was fast approaching the 1 million cases mark. By the time Musk forced his factory to reopen, more than 80,000 Americans had died.

On a recent conference call with investors Musk took time to rail against stay-at-home restrictions that, he said, were hampering his business, likening them to "forcibly imprisoning people in their homes."

In re-opening the factory, Musk and Tesla have said that steps are being taken to ensure workers' safety. County health officials have said they would be monitoring those efforts to ensure that workers are, as much as possible, protected from infection.

Musk and Tesla are not known for erring entirely on the side of caution even when it comes matters of safety. This is, after all, the company that provides Autopilot semi-autonomous driving software for its cars that comes with the warning that it is still in "beta test" mode. Musk and Tesla have insisted that the software is, on balance, safer than an unaided human driver when used as intended. Other automakers that offer such technology, though, have said that they would not ask driver to "beta test" the software on public roads.

Tesla's way is not to wait, though. While other automakers wait until lockdown orders have been lifted to even begin reopening their plants Tesla pushes ahead. For better or worse, that is what Tesla and Musk do. But now, with seemingly nothing in government or his company holding back Musk's impulses, the well-being and the lives of their workers rest on that decision.

And for better or worse, the barriers that are set up by society are dependent on the institutions that maintain them to ensure their strength. But those barriers were not designed to withstand an assault from an aggressive CEO backed by vast personal wealth, workers faced with a soaring unemployment rate, and a regulatory framework that crumbles when faced with a genuine, calamitous test. With an Elon Musk-sized hole smashed in those barriers, it's unclear that anything is holding Musk back.

VIDEO 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/analysis-what-happened-to-elon-musk/ar-BB142JsI

RECYCLED UFO STORY

Newly released incident reports detail US Navy's 'UFO' encounters


By Ryan Browne and Mike Conte, CNN  2 hrs ago MAY 13, 2020

Newly released "hazard reports" detailing encounters between US Navy aircraft and "unidentified aerial phenomena," reveal new details about incidents which were thrust into the spotlight when the Pentagon officially declassified and released videos of three encounters late last month.

© To The Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences

"The unknown aircraft appeared to be small in size, approximately the size of a suitcase, and silver in color," one report describing an incident from March 26, 2014 said.

During that encounter one of the Navy F/A-18 jets "passed within 1000' of the object, but was unable to positively determine the identity of the aircraft," the report added, saying the US Navy pilot "attempted to regain visual contact with the aircraft, but was unable."

CNN obtained the Navy Safety Center documents, which were previously labeled "For Official Use Only."

The reports were first published by the Drive which obtained the documents through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The Pentagon late last month officially released three short videos showing "unidentified aerial phenomena" that had previously been released by a private company.

The videos show what appear to be unidentified flying objects rapidly moving while recorded by infrared cameras. Two of the videos contain Naval aviators reacting in awe at how quickly the objects are moving. One voice speculates that it could be a drone.


Objects could be drones

The newly released reports appear to share this assessment, describing many of the unidentified aircraft as "Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)," the Pentagon's official name for drone aircraft.

According to another incident report from November 2013 a Navy F/A-18 pilot "was able to visually acquire a small aircraft. The aircraft had an approximately 5 foot wingspan and was colored white with no other distinguishable features."

"Due to the small size, the aircraft was determined to be a UAS," the report said.

Another incident from June 27, 2013, said the encountered "aircraft was white in color and approximately the size and shape of a drone or missile," according to the report.

But the reports say that even when the unidentified flying objects are assessed to be drones the military was unable to identify who was operating the drone, presenting a major safety and security challenge to the Navy jets training in the area which are restricted military training airspace ranges off the east coast of Virginia.

"Post flight, the controlling agency contacted numerous local UAS operators, but none claimed knowledge of" the unidentified aircraft, the November report said.

"I feel it may only be a matter of time before one of our F/A-18 aircraft has a mid-air collision with an unidentified UAS," one of the authors of a report warned.

"In many ways" drones "pose a greater midair risk than manned aircraft. They are often less visually significant and less radar apparent than manned aircraft," the report said.

There is also the possibility that the drones could be operated by an adversary such as Russia or China who may have been seeking to collect information about the US military's operations.

The Navy now has formal guidelines for how its pilots can report when they believe they have seen possible UFOs.

The videos of the encounters were first released between December 2017 and March 2018 by To The Stars Academy of Arts & Sciences, a company co-founded by former Blink-182 musician Tom DeLonge that says it studies information about unidentified aerial phenomena.


The truth is out there

The Pentagon has previously studied recordings of aerial encounters with unknown objects as part of a since-shuttered classified program that was launched at the behest of former Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada. The program was launched in 2007 and ended in 2012, according to the Pentagon, because they assessed that there were higher priorities that needed funding.

Nevertheless, Luis Elizondo, the former head of the classified program, told CNN in 2017 that he personally believes "there is very compelling evidence that we may not be alone."

"These aircraft -- we'll call them aircraft -- are displaying characteristics that are not currently within the US inventory nor in any foreign inventory that we are aware of," Elizondo said of objects they researched. He says he resigned from the Defense Department in 2017 in protest over the secrecy surrounding the program and the internal opposition to funding it.

President Donald Trump called the recently officially released Pentagon footage a "hell of a video" and told Reuters he wonders "if it's real."

"I just wonder if it's real," Trump said of the videos. "That's a hell of a video."

Microsoft, Visa and others worth combined $11.5 trillion want Congress to include climate in COVID-19 recovery plan

Published: May 13, 2020 Rachel Koning Beal

Solar cells are joined together as solar panels are manufactured at SunSpark Technology Inc. in Riverside, Calif. A business effort known as LEAD on Climate wants Congress to put Americans into clean-energy jobs as part of the COVID-19 recovery. Bloomberg News/Landov
Chief executives and other representatives from more than 330 businesses, including Capital One COF, -7.10% , General Mills GIS, +1.68% , Microsoft MSFT, -1.51% , Nike NKE, -2.53% , Salesforce CRM, -4.45% , Visa V, -1.16% and more are calling on bipartisan federal lawmakers to build back a better economy from COVID-19 by infusing resilient climate solutions.

The businesses, in lobbying Congress Wednesday through an effort they call LEAD on Climate 2020, represent combined annual revenues of more than $1 trillion and a shared market valuation of nearly $11.5 trillion. They employee more than 3 million people. The group, supported by sustainable investing advocates Ceres, claims they are the largest ever to advance a call to action from the business community to Congress on climate change.

Read:Microsoft aims to be ‘carbon negative’ by 2030

House Democrats unveiled their opening bid Tuesday in the next debate on Capitol Hill over how to fight the coronavirus and revive the economy. The sweeping bill, projected to cost a little over $3 trillion, was set to be voted on at the end of the week. The proposal includes bolstering the direct payments program put in place in the $1.8 trillion coronavirus bill passed in late March, additional monies for state and local governments, and extending the expiration date for some unemployment benefits related to the pandemic.

The businesses behind the pledge want Congress to work toward putting Americans into clean-energy jobs, as well as foster an accelerated transition to a net-zero emissions economy by 2050 or sooner and provide more investment in sustainable infrastructure. The business leaders also urge Congress to consider a goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 and setting a carbon price. Setting a market-based carbon price remains a policy sticking point in a divided quest for a solution to man-made accelerating climate change, although has been increasingly, if slowly, adopted.

Some economists believe that raising the cost of burning coal, oil and gas can be a cost-effective way to curb emissions. But countries using the practice have found it politically difficult to set prices that are high enough to spur truly deep reductions in emissions. Many carbon pricing programs today are fairly modest.

Several participants LEAD on Climate call for plans that put the U.S. on a 1.5° Celsius warming target, the more aggressive end of a range of temperatures deemed a manageable level of average warming in coming decades by the Paris Climate accord and other initiatives. The Paris pact, for instance, has called for slowing to at least 2°C by 2050.

Read:5 ways to slow global warming that share the burden with the oil patch: McKinsey

The LEAD on Climate businesses include more than a dozen Fortune 500 firms as well as trade associations, including the skiing-tourism sector, medium and small businesses from all 50 states. The companies and investors calling for climate action as part of economic recovery efforts span across the American economy, including retailers, manufacturers, health-care services, food and beverage companies, outdoors industries, technology companies and energy providers.

The high level of participation is notable given the disruption most of the companies and investors are experiencing due to the economic collapse, as well as the current social distancing constraints on in-person advocacy.

This increased corporate and investor policy engagement comes at a time when the consequences of the climate crisis have never been clearer or more dire. Last year, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were at their highest levels in at least the last 800,000 years, and the World Meteorological Organization recently found that the last decade was the hottest on record.

As U.S. and global emissions have steadily grown over the years, so has corporate and investor ambition to reduce emissions even amidst the current pandemic. In April, General Mills committed to source 100% renewable electricity by 2030 after joining the RE100 global corporate initiative, while both the clothing brand Eileen Fisher and the commercial real estate company JLL had their ambitious science-based targets approved by the Science Based Target initiative to limit their greenhouse gas emissions in line with the 1.5 degrees Celsius ambition of the Paris Agreement. All three belong to LEAD on Climate.

Also announced Wednesday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the New York Democrat, will co-head the climate policy group that presidential contender Joe Biden has set up in collaboration with his one-time rival Bernie Sanders, his campaign confirmed on Wednesday. The panel’s other co-chair will be former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, a Biden ally who helped craft the Paris climate accord when he was President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State. Ocasio-Cortez and co-writers of a proposed New Green Deal share some of the objectives of the LEAD on Climate effort, including green-job promotion.

Below, select quotes from the participants:

“Today we have a health crisis, an economic crisis and a climate crisis all happening at once. The best solutions will tackle all three together. We have a distinct opportunity at this unique moment in history to define what we want our future to look like,” said Patrick Flynn, vice president for sustainability at Salesforce.

“At Nestlé, our ambition to achieve zero net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 is at the heart of our strategy to build a resilient business,” said Meg Villarreal, government affairs manager at the food giant.

“We urge Congress to enact policies that leverage private sector investment and innovation, such as a carbon dividend,” said Hannon Armstrong HASI, -5.68% Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Eckel. “This is how we turn the tide on the climate crisis and propel our country toward a thriving economy that is good for people and the planet.” Hannon Armstrong is the first U.S. public company that provides capital to companies in energy efficiency, renewable energy and other sustainable infrastructure markets.

“Policymakers must ensure that the decisions that are being taken today to rebuild our economy also factor in the dire climate consequences that are not too far behind,” said Mindy Lubber, CEO and president at Ceres. “They have the potential to reshape a new resilient economy in fundamental ways that prevent the next climate-fueled crisis.”

“Through smart investments in infrastructure and clean energy, we can create and build on industries and pave the way for family-sustaining careers, all while keeping our families healthy and making our communities more resilient for decades to come,” said Rep. Kathy Castor, a Democrat of Florida, and chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.

“Cement and ultimately, concrete, is a fundamental part of society, literally creating the foundation and structure of every city and community in the United States,” said Jamie Gentoso, CEO, U.S. Cement at LafargeHolcim. “As the leader in cement manufacturing in the U.S., LafargeHolcim actively seeks ways to decrease our carbon footprint. In participating with such a diverse, accomplished group of companies, I believe our combined experience, expertise and advocacy efforts will prompt Congress to take action on the climate crisis.”

“In the face of a global pandemic, America’s farmers have displayed tremendous resolve to ensure we remain fed and fueled—but grower profitability is at even greater risk due to the economic impact of the virus,” said David Perry, CEO of Indigo Ag. “By paying farmers for storing carbon in their soil we can create a new income stream for farmers during this challenging time, while leveraging one of the most scalable, affordable and immediate opportunities to address climate change: agriculture. Indigo is proud to stand by industry-leading companies to encourage Congress to build back better with climate positive stimulus funding, including incentives for agricultural carbon sequestration.”

“Tiffany & Co. TIF, +0.03% has long been committed to operating in a manner that respects both people and the planet,” said Anisa Kamadoli Costa, chief sustainability officer at Tiffany & Co. “Businesses must continue to lead in this way but cannot tackle climate change alone. We need smart public policies to advance our economy while protecting society’s most vulnerable citizens and facilitating a net-zero emissions future.”

“The ski industry has been increasingly vocal about the need for climate action at the federal level. Now, the opportunity exists to rebuild our economy and future focused on renewable, clean energy,” said Kelly Pawlak, president and CEO, National Ski Areas Association. “Ski areas have paved the way for other small and rural businesses by installing and investing in wind and solar energy, and making broad-scale change to their operations to reduce their carbon emissions. This pandemic has given us a preview of the havoc climate change can wreak on our industry, and our way of life. It’s time to raise our collective voice and advocate for the policies that ensure a sustainable future.”

FEMA cancels $55.5 million contract for masks with company that has no history of selling masks


May 12, 2020 By Associated Press


Panthera failed to provide 10 million N95 face masks by deadline

N95 particulate respirators. Bloomberg News

The federal government said it canceled a $55.5 million contract for respiratory masks, signed last month with a small Virginia firm with no history in the mask business and a parent company in bankruptcy.

The no-bid contract, with Panthera Worldwide LLC, was one of the largest mask orders signed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as it has raced in recent weeks to find masks and other protective equipment during the coronavirus pandemic.


Panthera originally had agreed to provide 10 million N95 masks to FEMA by May 1. The contract had been extended once to May 11, FEMA has said.

A FEMA spokeswoman said the contract was canceled Tuesday “on the grounds of nondelivery.” FEMA has said it wouldn’t pay Panthera until the masks were delivered.

Panthera’s two owners have been accused of fraud in lawsuits by business associates—which the owners deny—and both had IRS tax liens filed against them in 2018 for alleged unpaid taxes, The Wall Street Journal reported last month.

FORTRAN, COBOL, COMTRAN, DOS, OMG!!!  

OLD TECH DOMINATES GOVERNMENTS AT ALL LEVELS

Retired coders to the rescue: They’re helping state agencies respond to the crisis by working on the outdated, overloaded computer systems 

May 11, 2020  Michelle V. Rafter

They’re part of a generation who can still program in computer languages that are no longer taught in schools

iStock

This article is reprinted from NextAvenue.org.

Last September, Brian Boyer celebrated turning 60 by retiring after a long career at Citibank CIT, -9.56% starting as a software programmer and ending as a tech project manager. He couldn’t have known he’d be back in the digital trenches six months later, putting his skills to use fighting the effects of the coronavirus pandemic.

Boyer, of Key West, Fla., is one of a legion of software developers and tech talent over 50 who’ve answered the call to remotely volunteer or work for pay on older government computer systems overloaded by the economic crisis caused by the coronavirus.

“I’m learning a bunch, doing a bunch, and pushing myself, which is fun,” Boyer said.

He’s part of a generation —make that two generations — of coders who can still program in computer languages like COBOL that are no longer taught by most college computer science departments or in coding bootcamps. Though these languages might seem antiquated, they continue to power everything from computer systems some states use to process unemployment benefits to ATMs.

In the weeks since the coronavirus has spread throughout the country, hundreds of older coders proficient in COBOL, .net, Linux and other languages have come out of retirement or otherwise stepped forward to help. Some are doing so through public-interest technology initiatives such as U.S. Digital Response and Code for America. According to job board Indeed.com, full-time jobs for programmers who know COBOL pay $30 to $70 an hour or more.

Calling all COBOL programmers

Mainframe companies also have responded to states’ call for help by making it easier for men and women with COBOL skills to share what they know. Less than a month after IBM IBM, -3.76% launched its Calling All COBOL Programmers forum, asking coders to post their profiles, more than 1,610 have signed up, according to spokeswoman Elizabeth Banta.

The Gainesville, Texas-based job placement agency Cobol Cowboys has been overrun with recent requests from programmers in their 40s, 50s and older to be added to its pool of people available for paid private- or public-sector work.

Co-owners Bill and Eileen Hinshaw named the firm after “Space Cowboys,” the 2000 movie about four retired astronauts who rocket into space to repair aging equipment). They’ve recently had so many inquiries, they posted a message to the firm’s LinkedIn page asking applicants to be patient while they work through the backlog.

Cobol Cowboys has around 350 coders in its database. The average age of the independent contractors they work with is 45 to 60.

“Our goal is pretty simple,” said CEO Bill Hinshaw. “People who started in the IT [information technology] business in the ’60s, ’70s and ’80s — we want to reward them and help them earn a little money.”

In the initial months after Boyer retired, he did some volunteering, including helping low-wage earners file their tax returns and assisting students who have reading disabilities. When shelter in place orders put an end to volunteering in person, Boyer looked for other ways to contribute.

Buckling state agency computer systems

That was just as U.S. companies began shutting down and laying off millions of workers, inundating state employment departments with new benefits claims. States sent out virtual flares for help when their older computer systems and online and phone-based processes began to buckle.

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy described the situation his state faced in an April 4 press conference, saying: “There’ll be lots of postmortems and one of them on our list will be how the heck did we get here when we literally needed Cobol programmers?” Other states were in a similar bind. For instance, Florida’s unemployment claims system was so overwhelmed, the Sunshine State government reverted to using paper applications.

Boyer applied to volunteer through U.S. Digital Response, created in the initial days of the pandemic by four public-interest technologists — including three Obama administration technology officials — to match people with digital skills with federal, state and local agencies needing help. Since then, the group has attracted more than 5,000 prospective volunteers. To date, it has placed 200 people in about 160 projects with agencies in multiple states and cities, according to U.S. Digital Response CEO Raylene Yung. About 300 know COBOL or other mainframe languages.

U.S. Digital Response is working with New Jersey state agencies on several projects, including helping small-business owners determine their eligibility to receive funds from the $2.2 trillion CARES Act federal stimulus package and an online tool for residents to see if they’ve exhibiting COVID-19 symptoms.
A good feeling helping others

Boyer signed up thinking he’d use his COBOL skills, which he hadn’t tapped since the first decade of his career. Instead, he was asked to use his project management expertise to lead a pilot program tracking state compliance with the federal stimulus package’s requirements. If the pilot goes well, the program may be rolled out to multiple states, Yung said.

Boyer works about 20 hours a week, just enough to feel busy while sheltering in place.

“It helps with that aspect,” he said. “And in addition, just the idea of it feels good, for everybody to help out.”

Some states are only working with software developers who know their particular computer systems.

Oregon’s Employment Department, for example, recently brought back two retirees and expects to get two more to assist with changes to its unemployment insurance system. “The department is experiencing historically high demand for benefits, in addition to an expansion of programs and eligibility,” department spokesman Matt Shelby said.

Connecticut’s Labor Department was due to migrate to a new unemployment insurance system in 2021 but stopped working on the upgrade to deal with the influx of COVID-19 related benefits claims.

The agency brought back retirees and used IT staff from other departments to upgrade its 40-year-old system, said Nancy Steffens, communications head for the department. “Some of the retirees returning to work are programmers knowledgeable in COBOL,” she said.
Coming to the aid of restaurants, too

State governments aren’t the only public agencies turning to seasoned coders for assistance.

The Eugene, Ore. chapter of the nonprofit group Code for America is helping the city’s Chamber of Commerce create a map and database of local restaurants now open for take-out orders. Mark Davis, 51, a local software developer and entrepreneur, started Code for America’s local branch, called Open Eugene, in 2018.

Davis devotes one day a week to what he calls “Civic Day,” where he works on projects with volunteers from Open Eugene and other local tech groups.

When he’s not volunteering, Davis and partner Doug Frazier run Dark Matter Consulting, which works on web, mobile and cloud-computing projects, including some based on .net, C# and other time-tested computer languages.

Half of the dozen software developers and freelance tech talent working for Dark Matter are over 50. “I’d like to help the state if I can,” said Davis, who has put feelers out to several Oregon agencies.

When states call for COBOL developers, “what they’re really saying is: ‘We didn’t invest in our infrastructure,’” Davis said.

Michelle V. Rafter is a Portland, Oregon, business reporter and longtime chronicler of the intersection of technology and work.

This article is reprinted by permission from NextAvenue.org, © 2020 Twin Cities Public Television, Inc. All rights reserved.

Social Capital
Opinion: Native Americans are being hit hard by coronavirus, an echo of colonial pandemics that nearly wiped them out

Published: May 13, 2020 By Pedro Nicolaci da Costa MARKET WATCH


Lack of jobs, lack of health care, and lack of respect predate the COVID-19 crisis


A home on the Lower Brule Indian Reservation in South Dakota. AFP via Getty Images

ative Americans comprise the original peoples and cultures of an entire continent, yet the coronavirus pandemic is highlighting just how depressed economic and social conditions already were for millions of U.S. tribal residents even before the pandemic hit.

Evidence is mounting that Native Americans, like other minority groups, are getting infected and dying at higher rates than whites due the coronavirus. The Navajo Nation’s official count tallies 3,204 confirmed cases and 102 deaths at latest count.

This is a trend associated with “pre-existing” social conditions like poverty, lack of access to health care, and in some cases, even lack of clean water — a basic in normal times but paramount for the public welfare during a viral pandemic.

The pre-existing disparities are vast, and captured morbidly in statistics showing death rates nearly 50% higher for American Indian and Alaska Native people than those of non-Hispanic whites.

Economic vulnerability

A recent report from the Minneapolis Fed’s Center for Indian Country Development highlights the economic corollary of this disproportionate health risk — a severe impact on already frayed job and housing markets.

“Unlike other recent economic shocks, COVID-19 is significantly affecting service occupations and industries impacted by social distancing. Compared to non-Native communities, the share of employment in tribal communities is much more heavily concentrated in the service sector,” the report says.
Over 30% of jobs in some tribal areas are in the service occupations — such as food, health, cleaning and personal services — a much higher share than the 18% national average.


Native Americans are more like to work in low-paying service occupations than non-tribal Americans are. Minneapolis Fed

The same general pattern holds for the percentage of work concentrated in industries likely to be heavily affecting by social distancing measures, including the arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, food service, and personal-care industries.

This reliance is due in part to the limited scope of activity that is officially sanctioned on reservations, which are widely known for their large involvement in the very hard-hit casino industry.

Indian gaming employment generated 787,878 direct or indirect jobs nationwide contributing to $34.5 billion in direct or indirect wages, according to the National Indian Gaming Association.


“Another way Native American employment and communities are more vulnerable to social-distancing policies is that tribal enterprise revenues often fund the operational activities of tribal governments, which are themselves large employers in reservation communities,” the report said.

“When tribal enterprise revenues fall, tribal government jobs, services, and basic functions are at risk,” the report said. Tribal communities’ economic vulnerability to COVID-19 is thus underestimated, it concluded.
Solutions

So what can be done to address the issue?

Thankfully, this Congress has the first two ever Native American congresswomen among its ranks, Rep. Sharice Davids in Kansas and Rep. Deb Haaland in New Mexico.

Haaland is leading the charge to make sure tribal communities are not forgotten about when it comes to the large stimulus packages coming out of Washington.

She has introduced legislation aimed at ensuring tribes have the same rights in applying for emergency medical assistance from the Center for Disease Control as states and municipalities.

Native Americans make up just 11% of New Mexico’s population but account for 57% of cases and half of COVID-19 deaths.

Worse, Native peoples with COVID-19 are being “severely undercounted” because their ethnicity is too often misclassified, according to Abigail Echo-Hawk, director of the Urban Indian Health Institute in Seattle.

“Native peoples are a small population because of genocide and colonization,” she said in a statement. “The elimination of our people from public health data is a further erasure of our experience.”
Fighting back

Some tribes are fighting back. In South Dakota, two tribes have set up checkpoints on roads leading into their lands, banning nonessential travel and requiring visitors to fill out a health questionnaire. They argue that their health-care facilities could be overwhelmed if the virus takes hold. The tribes have ordered residents to stay home, but the state is one of the few that has not.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem threatened on Monday to take the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Oglala Sioux Tribe to federal court.

It’s not just Native communities in the United States who are at risk. Brazil’s Yanomami tribe, which resides in the Amazon, recently reported its first coronavirus case. Actual instances are likely higher.

Native communities, which rely on their elders for oral history and tradition, are concerned not just about their immediate well-being and survival but, in some cases, are fighting for the very continued existence of their ancient cultures and traditions.

Allowing these truly American values to get erased from history would be a crime against human heritage. We must pay attention and focus our resources to ensure it doesn’t happen.