CHINESE EQUIPMENT BAN —

Small ISPs “stunned” by FCC move to ban Huawei/ZTE gear during pandemic

AMERICAN JEALOUSY & ENVY IS THE OBVERSE OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM 

Huawei/ZTE ban’s timing “puts rural carriers in a precarious situation.”

CUTTING NOSE TO SPITE FACE 

JON BRODKIN - 7/1/2020

Enlarge / Huawei sign displayed at CES 2020 in Las Vegas on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020.
Getty Images | Bloomberg

Small Internet service providers are "stunned" that the Federal Communications Commission is enforcing a ban on Huawei and ZTE network gear during the ongoing pandemic.

The FCC already voted unanimously in November 2019 to ban Huawei and ZTE equipment in projects paid for by the commission's Universal Service Fund (USF). But the ban, inspired by fears that the Chinese vendors' equipment poses national security risks, is just now coming into effect, with the FCC announcing yesterday that USF money "may no longer be used to purchase, obtain, maintain, improve, modify, or otherwise support any equipment or services produced or provided by these suppliers."

FURTHER READINGFCC finalizes ban on Huawei and ZTE equipment in Universal Service Fund

The Rural Wireless Association (RWA), a trade group that represents ISPs that serve fewer than 100,000 subscribers each, said yesterday it is "stunned by [the] FCC's decision to immediately bar use of USF funds on Huawei and ZTE equipment and services during a time when it is critical to keep rural Americans connected."

The RWA statement said:

As a result, rural carriers who have deployed Huawei or ZTE equipment or services in their networks will now lack the ability to support their critical networks that are serving hundreds of thousands of rural Americans and those traveling through rural America. Given the difficulty in demonstrating where specifically their USF support is being utilized in their networks, this puts rural carriers in a precarious situation while they strive to offer extended payment terms for their customers as requested by FCC Chairman [Ajit] Pai, adjust to the fallout of the T-Mobile/Sprint merger, and continue to keep rural Americans connected to broadband and telephone services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The FCC's public notice said ISPs "may seek a waiver of this prohibition if necessary," but the RWA said ISPs should have been given more time to seek waivers. "RWA members appreciate the opportunity to submit waivers of this prohibition but ask the commission to give them sufficient time to submit such waivers before pulling away their USF support which is scheduled to start tomorrow, July 1," the group said yesterday.
FCC defends ban but needs funding

The FCC said its ban targets Huawei and ZTE "because of their substantial ties to the Chinese government, Chinese law requiring them to assist in espionage activities, known cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities in their equipment, and ongoing Congressional and Executive Branch concern about this equipment."

FURTHER READING 

Congress gives small ISPs $1 billion to rip out Huawei, ZTE network gear

"We cannot and will not allow the Chinese Communist Party to exploit network vulnerabilities and compromise our critical communications infrastructure," Pai said, calling the companies' gear a risk "to our 5G future."

The ban has support from Pai's Republican majority and the FCC's Democrats. Democratic Commissioner Geoffrey Starks said that yesterday's action "will help secure our networks against new threats from Huawei and ZTE equipment" and that the FCC "must not... lose sight of the untrustworthy equipment already in place."

But Starks said Congress has not yet provided funding to help ISPs replace Huawei and ZTE network gear with other companies' equipment:

Funding is the missing piece. Congress recognized in the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act that many carriers will need support to transition away from untrustworthy equipment, but it still has not appropriated funding for replacements. I look forward to working with Congress and my colleagues to ensure there are sufficient funds to get the job done.

The legislation Starks referred to became law in March and says that $1 billion shall be provided in "reimbursement funds to remove, replace, or dispose of any covered communications equipment or service." However, the FCC said in a recent public notice that while the "reimbursement program created by the Secure Networks Act appears to require an express appropriation from Congress," the bill itself "does not provide funding for the reimbursement program and states that the program must be 'separate from any federal universal service program established under section 254 of the Communications Act.'" That apparently means the FCC can't use money it already has for Huawei/ZTE replacements and hasn't gotten money it can use for that purpose from Congress.

While ISPs can no longer use USF money to maintain Huawei and ZTE equipment, they technically aren't required to stop using the equipment entirely. But the FCC is considering another plan to require removal of Huawei and ZTE equipment from USF-funded networks that have already been built.
Huawei: FCC offered “no evidence”

When contacted by Ars, a Huawei spokesperson said that "Huawei believes this order is unlawful as the FCC has singled out Huawei based on national security, but it provides no evidence that Huawei poses a security risk. Instead, the FCC simply assumes, based on a mistaken view of Chinese law, that Huawei might come under Chinese government control."

A ZTE filing in February said the company "conducts business only in compliance with all applicable laws where we are operating, including US export and sanctions laws and regulations." We contacted ZTE today about the FCC decision and will update this story if we get a response.


JON BRODKIN is Ars Technica's senior IT reporter, covering the FCC and broadband, telecommunications, wireless technology, and more.

REBRANDING, SERIOUSLY

Realtor groups drop 'master' bedroom, bathroom terms from listings

By Katie Kindelanvia 1 July 2020

At least two realtor groups are now no longer using the word "master" to describe bedrooms and bathrooms in their listings.

The Houston Association of Realtors replaced the phrases "master bedroom" and "master bathroom" with "primary bedroom" and "primary bathroom" on its property listing database.

"We changed the terms Master Bedroom and Master Bath to Primary Bedroom and Primary Bath in our internal MLS entry platform after a diverse group of members expressed concern that some consumers might perceive the terms to be sexist or racist," a spokesperson for HAR told ABC News. "No one felt Primary would be objectionable."

The idea to stop using the term "master" in listings has been a topic of discussion among HAR members for several years. Some members did not personally view the term "master" as either racist or sexist but were willing to change it for others who may find it objectionable, according to the spokesperson.

MORE: Mrs. Butterworth's, Cream of Wheat join Aunt Jemima, Uncle Ben's in changing brand amid racial protests

However, HAR said its agents will not be fined or banned from using the terms "master bedroom" and "master bathroom" in their own marketing materials and remarks.

In this undated file photo, a home is shown with a sold sign in the front lawn.In this undated file photo, a home is shown with a sold sign in the front lawn.Getty Images, FILE

Several states away, in Illinois, Holly Connors, the managing partner of GetBurbed, a brokerage firm, also made the decision this month to discontinue using the term "master" and use "main" instead in her agency's materials and listings.

"It pretty much suggests that a white, Anglo-Saxon male lives in that room," she said of the term "master bedroom." "As a woman and a woman-owned business I think it's appropriate to change our line of thinking."

People have called for the end of using the term for some time, but now amid racial protests across the country after George Floyd's death, it is a change whose time has come, according to Connors.

#GetBurbed #BeTheChange #Realtors @properties @ChicagoREALTORS @CrainsChicago @dailyherald @chicagotribune @Dennis_Rodkin @nardotrealtor pic.twitter.com/kejw2bChx6— Get Burbed (@GetBurbed) June 29, 2020


In recent weeks, companies including Aunt Jemima, Mrs. Butterworth, Uncle Ben's and Cream of Wheat have all announced plans to change their brands and packaging in response to calls for racial justice in the U.S.

Connors is now calling on other realtors and industry sites like MLS.com, the real estate listing service, to make the change too.
MORE: Hollywood is addressing its racist past -- but there's still more work to be done

"There's a lot of things that people do in everyday life that we don't necessarily realize are derogatory and if people have opened their eyes to the ideas or they're open to it, I think the world is ready for change," she said. "The major online real estate websites have to get on board with the idea too. It can't be as simple as some brokerages in Illinois making the change, or some in Texas."

PulteGroup, an Atlanta-based national home construction company, confirmed to ABC News that it phased out the term master bedroom several years ago. It now uses the terms "owner's suite" and "owner's bath" in its floor plans.

The exact origins of the term master bedroom are debated. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as "a large or principal bedroom" and says its first known use was in 1925.

The term master though on its own is defined as the male head of a household and the owner or employer of slaves and servants.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has determined in the past that the term master bedroom is not discriminatory and its use does not violate fair housing laws.

The National Association of Realtors, which represents 1.4 million members, said it does not oppose realtors using other terms to describe a listing's main bedroom and bathroom.

"Even though there may be no historical connection to discrimination and HUD finds it does not violate fair housing laws, NAR has no objection to the use of other terminology if consensus evolves that the word has taken on new meaning," Vince Malta, the 2020 president of the National Association of Realtors, told ABC News in a statement. "NAR is laser-focused on effecting accountability, culture change and training to address the discrimination that still occurs too often in housing transactions, which we believe to be the most pressing and significant issue at hand."

Germany disbands elite army unit over extremism concerns

Germany’s defense minister has disbanded a company of special forces, saying a culture of right-wing extremism had been allowed to develop in it behind a “wall of secrecy.”


WE HAD A PROBLEM LIKE THIS WITH THE RACIST CANADIAN AIRBORNE WHICH WERE DISBANDED IN THE NINETIES
By DAVID RISING Associated Press 1 July 2020


BERLIN -- Germany’s defense minister disbanded a company of special forces on Wednesday saying a culture of right-wing extremism had been allowed to develop behind a “wall of secrecy.”

Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer told reporters that “toxic leadership” in the company was found to have fostered an extreme right attitude among some members of the Kommando Spezialkraefte, or KSK, unit.

Some of the 70 soldiers in the unit will be distributed among the KSK's other three combat companies, while “those who made clear they are part of the problem and not part of the solution must leave the KSK," she said.

The entire organization's training and deployments are being scaled back as the investigation into extremism continues, and reforms are implemented.

It comes at a time of broader concerns that Germany has not done enough to tackle right-wing extremism within its Bundeswehr military in general.

Kramp-Karrenbauer emphasized, however, that she felt reform was the right course rather than the dissolution of the entire unit, saying “we need the KSK.

“The vast majority of the men and women in the KSK and in the Bundeswehr as a whole are loyal to our constitution, with no ifs or buts,” she said.

The KSK was formed as an army unit in 1996 with a focus on anti-terrorism operations and hostage rescues from hostile areas. It has served in Afghanistan and the Balkans and its operations are kept secret.

Military investigators have been looking into the unit since a group of public German broadcasters reported in 2017 that at a going-away party, members displayed the Hitler salute, listened to right-wing extremist music and participated in a game that involved tossing a pig’s head. In January, the military reported 20 soldiers are under suspicion of being right-wing extremists.

In May, the head of the unit, Brig. Gen. Markus Kreitmayr, told soldiers that he wouldn’t tolerate extremism in the ranks.

That month, Kramp-Karrenbauer established an independent commission to investigate the KSK and propose reforms, after a cache of weapons, explosives and munitions were found at one of the suspected extremist's homes in Saxony which she said revealed a “new dimension” to the problem.

She said the investigation has revealed “grave deficiencies” in the unit's record keeping and that there were many missing items, including ammunition and explosives. It was not clear whether the munitions were used, left behind after deployments, or pilfered, she said.

“We cannot rule any of these out and are not,” she said.

A general inventory has been ordered, to include all KSK equipment and supplies.

How air purifiers and cleaners may help keep you safer indoors from COVID-19

Every time we open our mouth we exhale particles that may contain the virus.

By Eden David 1 July 2020,


As states begin to adjust to a new normal and people start spending more time indoors, experts and local officials are starting to consider the role air filtration and ventilation may play in slowing the spread of COVID-19 in indoor spaces.

Most recently, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced that all large malls in New York will have to install “air filtration systems that can filter out the COVID virus” before reopening.

This requirement comes as infectious disease experts start more aggressively studying the ways in which the virus can spread through inhaling small particles that could hang around in the air for hours -- otherwise known as aerosolized particles.

"As we are understanding more about this virus there is consensus that aerosolized transmission plays an important role in the transmission of the virus," said Dr. Rajat Mittal, professor of mechanical engineering at Johns Hopkins University, who is studying the dynamics of COVID-19 particles and mask efficacy.

Every time we breathe or open our mouth to speak we can exhale or inhale particles that may contain infectious viruses.

“You don’t have to be coughing or doing anything vigorous for these droplets to come out of your mouth, and if you have the infection in your mouth, those particles can carry the virus," said Dr. Jodie Dionne-Odom, Assistant professor in UAB’s Division of Infectious Diseases. “They hang out in the air and someone coming after you just has to breathe the air to get the infection."

MORE: Federal records show thousands of desperate pleas from health care workers seeking better COVID protective gear

This risk of infection through these small particles is especially high in small enclosed spaces like offices, and restaurants, where the air is not being circulated as often and many people are spending prolonged, direct contact with one another. Experts agree that efficient ventilation may likely be an important part in safely resuming indoor activities.

“Obviously cleaning surfaces is still important but cleaning the air that recirculates through buildings is now a huge focus,” according to Nancy McClellan, an industrial hygiene specialist.

Effective ventilation can clean the air through recirculation while filtering out small, potentially infectious particles. Experts are also evaluating special technologies that can disinfect incoming viral particles, like UV light.

"There are some really fascinating technologies out there but they do not get established quickly or cheaply and the research putting them into place isn’t there yet," said Dr. David Krause, a certified industrial hygienist, who is the owner of Healthcare Consulting and Contracting (HC3) and currently leading the American Industrial Hygiene Association’s initiative to develop recommendations on engineering controls in non-health care work spaces.

Experts agree that the most practical method as of right now for small business and homeowners is high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration systems. HEPA filters, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, can theoretically remove at least 99.97% of particles as small as .3 microns.

“That is potentially good because almost all the droplets that are going to be carrying viruses are all within that range,” said Mittal.

The performance of a filter is characterized by its Minimum Efficiency Reporting Values, otherwise known as MERV rating. On the MERV rating scale, HEPA filters are rated anywhere between 17-19.

“The higher the MERV rating the more efficient and effective that filter is,” said Krause.

McClellan explained, “I think Cuomo is making a fair assumption that large malls have well-developed and hopefully well-maintained heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems that are typically capable of upgrades such as improved filtration capacities that MERV filtration offers."

MORE: 'Extreme inequality was the preexisting condition': How COVID-19 widened America's wealth gap

Most HVACs found in homes or small workplaces, however, cannot accommodate these fine HEPA filters, since they do not have motors that can produce a strong enough pressure to pull air and push it through a HEPA filter. Krause said some HVACs may be able to accommodate a filter with a MERV rating of up to 13 but that still would not achieve the necessary number of air changes per hour that would effectively reduce the viral particles in the air.

He said the three most practical steps small businesses and homeowners can take to upgrade the effectiveness of their ventilation system is to install the highest efficiency filter their HVAC system can handle, increase the amount of outside air circulating through their HVAC system and buy in-room air cleaners and purifiers with HEPA rated filters that will increase the overall amount of air exchanges.

Effective infection control in small business or homes requires a 6 to 10 air exchange rate per hour, explained Krause. He said that this can be calculated for a given space's ventilation setup using the available tools online developed by the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency also recommends running your "system fan for longer times, or continuously, as HVAC systems filter the air only when the fan is running. Many systems can be set to run the fan even when no heating or cooling is taking place."

Experts say opening a window might also be a simple yet effective solution.

“Natural ventilation doesn’t require any advanced technology or any significant change to building codes,” said Mittal.

Although these forms of interventions are promising and experts are actively working on publishing clearer guidelines for smaller businesses, many questions still remain around the virus' transmissibility that make it difficult to quantify just how effective these air control measures may actually be.

According to Dr. John Richards, president of Air Control Techniques, “The selection of the most appropriate type of control system depends on accurate data concerning the droplet size range containing the virus.”
MORE: How risky is flying during the coronavirus pandemic?

Mittal also raised concerns that maintenance teams must also develop safety measures for replacing HEPA filters, since used filters will collect viruses and could become infectious.

More importantly, experts still don't know how much exposure to the virus a person needs in order to be infected, otherwise known as the minimum infectious dose.

“I wish we knew more about the infectious dose. That would help us in understanding what’s going on when people stand close to each other,” said Dr. Lisa Brosseau, an aerosol specialist and research consultant at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota .

Moreover, some experts theorize that small virus containing particles in the air may be more dangerous and more easily produce an infection.

“It could be that smaller droplets are more dangerous because they deposit deeper in the lungs, which is less protective to infection,” said Mittal.

To make matters even more complicated, your age, preexisting health conditions and immune system strength may also affect what minimum dose of virus is necessary to cause infection.

Experts also want to understand how long the virus stays infectious in the air and over what distances.

"We need to be able to culture the virus from airborne particles in the room," said Dionne-Odom. "Those studies are yet to be definitive to prove that these viral particles are capable of human infection."

Krause, however, said that even though these questions persist, “it should not stop us from implementing these air controls because they are available off the shelf.” He said that knowing the infectious dose is critical in quantifying the precise risk reduction but that “historically engineering controls are always effective and achieve significant reduction as has been proven in high risk hospital settings.

Ventilation may emerge as an important tool in reducing spread of COVID-19 indoors, but Krause cautioned that it should be “part of the overall new contract we have as a society.”

Crowded indoors spaces and prolonged close contact with people can still be risky even with enhanced ventilation because the virus containing particles can reach you before they have a chance to be filtered.

“You cannot ignore cleaning and hygiene and cannot overcrowd places,” warned Krause. “Engineering controls should be layered on top of distancing, minimizing occupancy of indoor environments, personal conduct and personal behaviors inside and outside the workplace.”

Eden David, who studied neuroscience at Columbia University and is matriculating to Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai later this year, is a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.

America's national parks face existential crisis over race
A mostly white workforce, visitation threatens parks' survival and public health

By Stephanie Ebbs and Devin Dwyer 1 July 2020, 

LONG READ
18 min read

Visitors watch Old Faithful erupt in Yellowstone National Park on June 15, 2020.Visitors watch Old Faithful erupt in Yellowstone National Park on June 15, 2020.George Frey/Getty Image

As millions of Americans escape home quarantine to the great outdoors this summer, they'll venture into parks, campgrounds and forest lands that remain stubborn bastions of self-segregation.

"The outdoors and public lands suffer from the same systemic racism that the rest of our society does," said Joel Pannell, associate director of the Sierra Club, which is leading an effort to boost diversity in the wilderness and access to natural spaces.

New government data, shared first with ABC News, shows the country's premier outdoor spaces -- the 419 national parks -- remain overwhelmingly white. Just 23% of visitors to the parks were people of color, the National Park Service found in its most recent 10-year survey; 77% were white. Minorities make up 42% of the U.S. population."That tells me that we've got a lot of work to do," said David Vela, acting director of the National Park Service.

The career park administrator, appointed by President Donald Trump to the post in 2017, is the first Latino to lead the agency.


Acting National Park Service Director David Vela.Acting National Park Service Director David Vela.ABC News

Government officials and environmental advocates agree that the racial disparity in the outdoors is an existential crisis.

"If we don't address this, and we don't see how all these things are interrelated, then we're going to risk losing everything," said Pannell. "You're not going to have public lands to enjoy."

The U.S. Census Bureau projects people of color will be a majority in America by 2044 -- a demographic shift that will impact park attendance and finances. Community advocates say physical and mental health for minority communities is also at risk.

"I feel like nature is a right to everyone, and we should all feel safe enough to experience it," said Lauren Gay, a Tampa, Florida, mother who chronicles her experiences as a woman of color in the wilderness on her blog and podcast "Outdoorsy Diva."

"We need better ways to cope with stress, to cope with some level of trauma. We all have some level, honestly, of PTSD from a lot of the things we've lived through as people of color -- and nature is a way to do that," Gay said.

A not-so-inclusive experience for some

Ambreen Tariq, creator of the "Brown People Camping" social media campaign, learned to camp with her family in Minnesota after they emigrated to the U.S. from India. She now advocates for representation of families like hers and people of color to enjoy the outdoors.

"The future of our country is more and more diverse, ... we're going to have more people of color in this country than white people, but our parks, our green spaces, our conservation spaces, those demographics are remaining white. What does that mean for the future of our land, for environmentalism? We need everyone to experience and then love the land so that they will stay and fight," Tariq said.

"So you think the parks are at risk? Absolutely. The parks are at risk, just like every other natural resource in this country. Land, water, air. These are resources to be preserved. And it not just takes money. It takes people fighting for it," she continued.

Still, racial profiling and stereotyping remain a big concern for Tariq and many people of color in the outdoors.

"When I was a child, I felt like an outsider trying to gain entrance, except now I am American and this is my country," she said.

However, when she camps or hikes as an adult, Tariq said she still faces assumptions that she doesn't belong and a sense of "imposter syndrome" and fear -- even facing questions from rangers about whether she has followed park rules when she doesn't see white visitors asked the same questions.


Ambreen Tariq started the instagram page Brown People Camping to... moreAmbreen Tariq started the instagram page Brown People Camping to increase representation of people of color in the outdoors.Courtesy Ambreen Tariq

Danielle Williams, a fourth-generation Army veteran who leads the "Diversify Outdoors" coalition, said people often ask her how she became interested in the outdoors, assuming she didn't grow up spending time outside and devaluing her relationship with outdoor spaces as a child.

"We have to kind of tone down the elitism and just think about our language when we talk about the outdoors, because car camping -- that's great. And camping in your backyard, if you live in a family home, that's also wonderful," she said.

Advocates like Williams and Tariq say they hope the moment since George Floyd's death in police custody brings attention to systemic racism in the outdoors as well as other parts of society and translates into a long-term change in attitudes and behavior.


Diversify Outdoors advocate Danielle Williams.Diversify Outdoors advocate Danielle Williams.Courtesy of Danielle Williams

"We are urging people who are maybe having this conversation for the first time to do the work. It's not just about a moment. It's about committing yourself to completely change your lifestyle," Williams said.

MORE: Death of George Floyd sparks conversation about race, violence and protests

The National Park Service has tried improving diversity in parks by marketing to non-white communities, training staff on racial sensitivity, and working to hire rangers from more diverse backgrounds. But despite the effort less than 20% of the 20,000 employees are non-white, the agency said.

And after years of effort the number of Black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American visitors to national parks has only seen minor improvements, according to the report shared with ABC News.
Who is under-represented and why?

In national parks, the most prominent and famous natural spaces in the country, Black Americans are consistently the most underrepresented. In 2018, only 6% of visitors identified as Black, according to the new report, a slight decline from the previous year.

"We need to communicate that national parks, one, are part of your birthright," Vela told ABC News Live in an exclusive interview.

"Two, they're places of reflection and comfort -- recharge your battery, to learn about your history, whether it's your Latino history as an example, African American history, LGBTQ history. We have those sites and places and stories in national parks."


Visitors gather at the South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, located in northwestern Arizona.Visitors gather at the South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, located in northwestern Arizona.Paul Harris/Getty Images

Lack of transportation to national parks and the cost of visiting were cited as the top reasons people -- especially Black and Hispanic Americans -- don't visit them more often, according to the study. Twice as many black and Hispanic Americans said they don't know what to do in national parks than whites. When asked if they share the same interests as people who visit national parks, 34% of Black respondents and 27% of Hispanics said no, compared with only 11% of whites.

Vela said the lack of transportation is an issue but they also want to raise awareness of parks closer to urban areas and online national park experiences.
A broader challenge

Advocates for diversifying the outdoors say stereotypes around who enjoys camping and hiking create a big barrier: what they wear, what gear they have and even when they do it. Combined with attitudes that people do outdoor activities to relieve stress has made it difficult to have tough conversations about race.

"When I'm walking to work with park rangers or with other campers and hikers who treat me in some sort of way that make me feel unwelcome, that make me feel unsafe, that is startling," Tariq said. "And that goes unchecked because there's, there's just no channel for us to be able to challenge that in such remote places."


Associate Director of Sierra Club Outdoors Joel Pannell discusses the program with ABC Senior Washington Reporter Devin Dwyer on June 24, 2020.Associate Director of Sierra Club Outdoors Joel Pannell discusses the program with ABC Senior Washington Reporter Devin Dwyer on June 24, 2020.ABC

Many advocates say public information about parks and outdoor activities are not tailored to communities of color. Posted signs, for example, are mostly in English rather than Spanish. Park ranger uniforms that resemble what is worn by law enforcement are intimidating to some immigrants and minorities in light of documented cases of profiling.

Williams said she adjusts her behavior in parks and public spaces, smiling or moving aside on a trail to let white visitors pass even though she's disabled and walks with a crutch. She called it an ingrained behavior to avoid any negative connotation with being a Black person in a predominantly white space.

"You're worried about somebody calling the police on you. You're worried about just having a negative interaction based solely on the color of your skin," she said.

MORE: What do terms like systemic racism, microaggression and white fragility mean?

National parks and the conservation movement were created as a way for people to escape cities during the industrial revolution, which Pannell said is one example of systemic racism in the outdoors that hasn't been confronted.

"In many ways, they are created by removing indigenous people from those lands and creating refuges for more affluent white people to get away from the city, which were becoming black and brown. So we have to -- we have to deal with that history and that legacy," he told ABC News.

Carolyn Finney, a storyteller and cultural geographer whose book "Black Faces, White Spaces" focuses on African Americans' relationship to the outdoors said the dominant narrative around national parks doesn't include that they were considered primarily with white visitors in mind.

She said that despite the value of the ideas that conceptualized the National Park Service and laid the groundwork for the modern environmental movement in the early 1900s, figures like John Muir and Theodore Roosevelt did not consider how those spaces would include people of color because they were actively segregated at the time. And some figures close to the conservation movement like Madison Grant, who founded organizations like the Bronx Zoo, espoused actively racist ideologies.

"You're looking at time during Jim Crow segregation, it didn't stop because we were talking about a conservation trail, or because we're talking about the environment. It did not stop," she said in a phone interview.

"And so for me, you know, we jumped ahead to a Christian Cooper experience or my own personal experience, or anybody of color's personal experience out in nature, walking that trail in the park. You know, they're not anomalies. Now it's all part of a -- is a long experience of things that have never been thoroughly addressed here and that it is really hard when something becomes normalized."

Many people of color say that history of the parks is another psychological barrier white Americans don't have to face.

"Historically, in the South, in particular, many atrocious things that happened to Black people were in the woods," said Frank Peterman, an outdoors enthusiast who began visiting the national parks with his wife Audrey 25 years ago.

Vela said he recognizes that history and fear it instills and is developing strategies to combat it.

"We have to be responsive to those needs and -- and deal with those needs because they're going to be different. And it's going to require a different approach. And so, we have to own that," he told ABC News.

Part of the solution, Vela and advocates agree, is to openly confront the racism associated with the parks and highlight the important stories of black, Hispanic, Native American and LGBTQ people in American history.

"I think that as a person of color, I think that our national parks and what I've found, is opportunities to really reflect on the most difficult and challenging times in our nation's history," Vela said.

MORE: In the South, Confederate monuments aren't simply a black-and-white issue

And even on the current debate around the future of Confederate monuments in national parks, Vela said he won't remove any statue or memorial from national park land, saying it risks removing the story of why they were put there in the first place.

"If we do that on park land we then remove the stories that they contain. And if those stories are further sanitized in the history text, we can -- we may completely lose that narrative. We can't," he said.

Vela said he wants the National Park Service to provide information and facilitate conversations about that history so visitors are inspired to learn more and can decide what it means for themselves.

"Hopefully you're going to want to learn more. And do further research. And if that's the case, we did our job. But we're not going to make that decision for you," he added.
The future of national parks

Americans of all races in the new Park Service study said they value the nation's iconic parks and landmarks as important to America's national identity and think they should be protected. And advocates say they hope the current moment leads to future change and more attention to combating systemic racism in national parks and the outdoors industry and culture.

"(The parks) tell the story of the evolution of America. So if you want to know that story -- and now there's so much confusion about the 'real' American story -- you will find them in the national parks," said Audrey Peterman, who has visited 185 parks in 47 states with her husband.

"There's been a tremendous improvement and it's largely coming from inside our communities," she said.

And that future is a part of why Vela said further integrating national parks is a priority.

"If we don't make ourselves relevant to current and future generations, who is going to be the advocates for the protection and preservation of our nation's public lands at every level, whether it's at the local level, the state level and the federal level? And, who's going to wear these uniforms?" Vela told ABC News.

"We've got a lot of work to do. And you know we keep talking internally, about we're in a second century of service. We can learn from that first century our values aren't going to change. But how we do business has to," he said.

Q WHY DON'T FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE VISIT NATIONAL PARKS?

A  BECAUSE IT'S THEIR LAND

DEFENDING TEA PARTY HEROES OF THE  CONFEDERACY

DHS launches rapid deployment teams to federal monuments over the July 4th weekend

AND AN A COUPLE OF INDIAN KILLERS

The President has been tweeting about jailing protesters for up to 10 years.  

WITH ONLY BREAD AND WATER

By Luke Barr 1 July 2020, ABC NEWS

As President Donald Trump ramps up his hard-line rhetoric against protesters, The Department of Homeland Security said Wednesday it is launching rapid deployment teams to federal monuments over the Fourth of July weekend.

The effort comes amid nationwide protests over the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody in May -- many of which have targeted Confederate and other statues and monuments.

"As we approach the July 4th holiday, I have directed the deployment and pre-positioning of Rapid Deployment Teams (RDT) across the country to respond to potential threats to facilities and property," said DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf. "While the Department respects every American’s right to protest peacefully, violence and civil unrest will not be tolerated."

The Department says the task force will work with the Department of the Interior and Department of Justice to establish information sharing but would not provide specifics as to what the teams would do and how many personnel would be deployed. It is also unclear whether DHS is responding to any specific threat or planned protest.

The Federal Protective Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard will be the primary agencies assisting in the deployment, according to a senior DHS official.

A locked gate surrounds the Emancipation Memorial debate in Lincoln Park, June 26, 2020, in Washington, D.C., to protect it as controversy and protests erupted around monuments that many find offensive.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Trump has been focusing on protecting statues and monuments, last week signing an executive order to do so.

“I just had the privilege of signing a very strong Executive Order protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues - and combatting recent Criminal Violence,” Trump tweeted. “Long prison terms for these lawless acts against our Great Country!”

The Department says Trump's executive order "directs DHS, within its statutory authority, to provide personnel to assist with the protection of federal monuments, memorials, statues, or property."

MORE: Trump vows jail for 'anarchists' toppling monuments, warns protesters trying to establish 'Black House Autonomous Zone'

Trump has tweeted numerous times about protecting statues, even tweeting the FBI wanted poster for some of the alleged suspects who tried to take down the Andrew Jackson statue outside the White House.

MORE: Robert E. Lee’s descendant says taking down Confederate symbols a ‘no-brainer’

"We are tracking down the two Anarchists who threw paint on the magnificent George Washington Statue in Manhattan. We have them on tape. They will be prosecuted and face 10 years in Prison based on the Monuments and Statues Act. Turn yourselves in now," the president tweeted.

Over the weekend, DOJ charged four people with allegedly trying to take down the statue.

On Fox News' "Fox and Friends" Wednesday morning, Wolf said that because of the "lawlessness" of the past few weeks "the president, the administration, we are taking some really strong action."


Acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chad Wolf prepares for a television interview outside the White House, June 23, 2020.Stefani Reynolds/EPA via ShutterstockBut the American Civil Liberties Union said the government, specifically DHS, should be focused on other critical issues.

"DHS should not be prioritizing the protection of property over the wellbeing of Black and Brown communities. DHS has proven time and time again that it cannot be trusted to protect human life. The fact that they are now being deputized to protect property shows exactly where this administration's priorities are," Andrea Flores, deputy director of immigration policy for the ACLU said in a statement to ABC News.

 "Our government should be focusing resources on keeping communities of color safe and investing resources in investigating threats to the wellbeing of these communities not turning additional law enforcement resources against them and further militarizing our streets."

Trump calls Russia bounty reports 'hoax' even as White House briefs intel on it

A top adviser said the U.S. had shared the information with other countries.
By Ben Gittleson and Jordyn Phelps 1 July 2020,


Pressure builds on Trump to address Russian bounty scandal

The White House is still refusing to say if President Donald Trump received information on the suspected Russian bounty plot in his intelligence briefing months ago.Even as the White House provided briefings this week to members of Congress on the intelligence behind reports Russia offered bounties to Taliban militants to kill U.S. troops, President Donald Trump on Wednesday tried to discredit them as "made up" and a "hoax" designed to "slander" him.

"The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party," Trump tweeted Wednesday, going after The New York Times, which first reported on the intelligence on Friday and also reported that Trump had been briefed on it. "The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!"

The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party. The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 1, 2020

But just as Trump repeated the message in a second tweet -- saying it was "all a made up Fake News Media Hoax started to slander me & the Republican Party" -- top White House aides tried to argue that the president wasn’t actually calling the underlying intelligence “fake” but was instead taking issue with media reporting.


National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House in Washington, May 21, 2020.National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House in Washington, May 21, 2020.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images, FILE"I think what is a hoax is the initial reporting,” National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told reporters at the White House Wednesday. "And I believe this was The New York Times -- that the president had been briefed about this unverified, uncorroborated intelligence, and chose not to take action on it. That was a hoax, and there's no question about it."
MORE: Trump White House under growing pressure for intel, answers on reported Russian bounties in Afghanistan

Trump first used the word "hoax" in connection to the new reporting on Sunday night, writing in a tweet it was "possibly another fabricated Russia Hoax."

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said Wednesday she thought the “hoax” the president was referring to was the idea that “he was somehow briefed on it and didn't take action on it and looked the other way.”

Even as the White House sticks to its narrative that the intelligence never rose to the level to warrant a formal briefing of the president, O'Brien noted the U.S. had previously shared the information with other countries fighting in Afghanistan.

Military personnel carry a transfer case for a service member killed in Afghanistan during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base on Feb. 10, 2020, in Dover, Del.Military personnel carry a transfer case for a service member killed in Afghanistan during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base on Feb. 10, 2020, in Dover, Del.Mark Makela/Getty Images

The White House has repeatedly said Trump was not briefed on the intelligence before The New York Times first reported on it, although top officials have been more vague about whether it had been included in the president's written briefing materials months ago. Multiple news outlets, citing unnamed sources, have reported that the intelligence had been included in the written materials, known as the President's Daily Brief.

MORE: Marine commandant says families of fallen service members are 'entitled' to answers on alleged Russian plot

The White House this week provided separate briefings for groups of select Republican and Democratic members of Congress but has so far not acceded to Democratic congressional leaders' request that all members of both the Senate and House of Representatives get briefed.

The first bipartisan briefing for the "Gang of Eight" -- a group of senior lawmakers from both parties that is regularly informed of sensitive intelligence -- is expected to take place on Thursday on Capitol Hill, according to a White House official and a senior aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The meeting had previously been expected for Wednesday.



President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn after arriving on Marine One at the White House in Washington, June 25, 2020.President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn after arriving on Marine One at the White House in Washington, June 25, 2020.Alex Brandon/AP

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday attacked lawmakers expressing outrage now, saying they had previously seen the same intelligence, although he did not clarify about exactly whom or when he was referring.

"They saw the same intelligence that we saw, so it would be interesting to ask them what they did when they saw whatever intelligence it is they're referring to," Pompeo told reporters. "They would have had access to this information as well -- not just the intelligence committees, by the way, even more broadly than that."

Pompeo and other Trump administration officials have forcefully defended the president's approach to Russia, as a bipartisan chorus of members of Congress have expressed concern that Russia's actions may have potentially cost U.S. lives.

"The president has been consistently aware of the challenges that Russia presents to us, and he is aware of the risk in Afghanistan," Pompeo said.



Civil engineers from the 405th Expeditionary Support Squadron, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, begin recovery operations before the "all clear" is given after an attack near Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, Dec. 11, 2019.Civil engineers from the 405th Expeditionary Support Squadron, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, begin recovery operations before the "all clear" is given after an attack near Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, Dec. 11, 2019.Brigitte N. Brantley/U.S. Air Force

The criticism has forced the White House to rush to contain the political fallout of the revelations. Democrats, sometimes joined by those on the other side of the aisle, have long alleged Trump has not responded forcefully enough to Russia's provocative behavior.
MORE: Dems say Russia bounty intel is 'red flag' that Trump-Putin relationship could be compromised

In the four days since the first report on the intelligence, Trump avoided questions and did not appear publicly. He did not have any public appearances on his schedule on Wednesday either, although he planned to be interviewed by the Fox Business network.

The White House has faced mounting questions Tuesday about how much and how long Trump has known about the alleged Russian bounties. Lawmakers called on the administration to share more information and potentially take action.

ABC News' Conor Finnegan contributed reporting.

Busted: Taliban commanders admit Russia is paying to murder US soldiers as Trump calls cash-for-killings a ‘hoax’

July 1, 2020 David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement

President Donald Trump, the Director of National Intelligence, the former acting Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the White House press secretary, and other Trump-appointed administration officials all have offered varying denials that Russia is paying terrorists in the Taliban to kill American soldiers, and that President Trump was briefed on the bounty program as far back as March of 2019.

Those who are not denying that Russia is paying he Taliban to kill American troops?
The Taliban.Two current Taliban commanders and one former Taliban commander have confirmed to Business Insider “that Russia pays extremists in Afghanistan to attack US soldiers.”

“The Taliban sources were clear that this took place, and said Iran and Pakistan do it too,” Business Insider, a right-leaning news site, adds in its report.

Russia is not only paying cash – via wire transfers as The New York Times reports – to the Taliban to kill Americans, but “Taliban commanders have confirmed” Russia has also offered “material support to its members in exchange for attacking US forces in Afghanistan.”

The former Taliban commander, now a refugee in Greece, explains that the Russians “did not spend the money because we are friends. They spent it to kill their American enemies.”

Trump, as recently as Wednesday morning, has denied that the Russian cash-for-killings bounty program exists, and that he was ever briefed on it. As with many things that are true, Trump labeled it a “hoax.”

The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party. The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 1, 2020

ROGUE NATION VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS

Immigration judges challenge DOJ limits on public speaking

The judge's union said the Justice Department is effectively issuing gag orders.

By Quinn Owen1 July 2020, 

Administrative judges who decide asylum and deportation cases are challenging a Department of Justice policy dictating who is allowed to speak publicly about immigration.

MORE: Judge urges release of children from ICE detention centers

The National Association of Immigration Judges, which represents over 400 of the immigration adjudicators across the country, joined a lawsuit filed Wednesday that accuses the Justice Department’s Executive Office of Immigration Review of using a recently implemented pre-approval process to infringe on free speech.

The Justice Department this year expanded a 2017 policy which requires additional layers of approval for public speaking engagements, according to policy documents revealed by lawyers with Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, which brought the lawsuit.

"Part of the job of an immigration judge is to educate the public about the immigration courts and the role they play in society," said Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor, president of NAIJ. "This policy prevents us from doing this critical work, undermining public understanding of and trust in the immigration courts in the process."

MORE: Judge blocks removal of Honduran teen being deported under CDC coronavirus rule

One example cited in Wednesday's legal complaint describes an immigration judge who was barred from speaking to a group of students studying immigration law at his alma mater even after he had been previously approved.

Another judge filed a request in February 2019 to speak with a seventh-grade class about immigration and asylum law and was informed by his supervisor months later that the request would be denied despite a lack of formal notice, according to the court filing.

The Trump administration has made a flurry of policy changes dictating who is granted asylum in the U.S. Those changes can impact how judges decide cases and have often left immigration lawyers scrambling to decipher the new rules.

A federal court on Tuesday struck down one policy that prevented migrants traveling through multiple countries before reaching the U.S. from obtaining asylum. The rule was previously upheld by the Supreme Court after back and forth among lower courts that repeatedly implemented and reversed the policy.

"The judges are on the front line of what’s happening to the court system," Tabaddor said, adding that complex legal changes require guidance only administrative judges can provide.

At U.S. immigration courts -- where the cases are civil, not criminal and legal representation is not guaranteed -- judges routinely explain court procedure to immigrants who appear without a lawyer.

"There’s a much greater efficiency and benefit to the court as well as to the community if you have the ability to educate a large group of people," Tabaddor said.

NEXT

Fox News fires Ed Henry after sexual misconduct allegation

Fox News has fired news anchor Ed Henry after it received a complaint about workplace sexual misconduct by him

BY DAVID BAUDER AP Media Writer
1 July 2020


NEW YORK -- Fox News on Wednesday fired daytime news anchor Ed Henry after an investigation of sexual misconduct in the workplace.

The network said it had received a complaint last Thursday from an attorney about the misconduct. An outside investigator was hired and, based on the results of that probe, Fox fired Henry.

Henry, who co-anchored “America's Newsroom” between the hours of 9 a.m. and noon on weekdays, had slowly rehabilitated his career on Fox following a four-month leave of absence that ended in 2016. That followed published reports of Henry's extramarital affair with a Las Vegas cocktail waitress.

Fox offered no details of the complaint that resulted in Henry's firing, only to say that it happened “years ago.” Henry did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Meanwhile, HarperCollins said Wednesday that it would no longer publish a book by Henry that had been scheduled for September. Titled “Saving Colleen: A Memoir of the Unbreakable Bond Between a Brother and Sister," it was about Henry donating part of his liver to his sister.

The alleged victim is represented by noted sexual harassment attorney Douglas Wigdor. He also would not provide any details of the case.

Henry's former co-anchor, Sandra Smith, announced the firing on the air. Fox said she'll continue in her role with rotating co-anchors until a full-time replacement is hired.

Henry, a former White House correspondent for Fox, was only recently elevated to the role on “America's Newsroom.” He got the job after Bill Hemmer moved to Shepard Smith's afternoon time slot.

In a memo to staff, Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott and President Jay Wallace reminded employees of Fox's 2017 overhaul of its human resources operation and the avenues they can follow with a sexual harassment complaint.

Fox's late former chairman, Roger Ailes, was fired in 2016 following harassment allegations made by former anchor Gretchen Carlson. Prime-time anchor Bill O'Reilly lost his job a year later following the revelations of settlements reached with women who had complaints about his behavior.

Hiker captures stunning cloud on hilltop
A hiker captured the cloud rolling across a hill in England.

A LITTLE BIT O' HEAVEN SEAMUS O' MOCHERY