THE NEW KINGFISH

‘This Must be Stopped’: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis Plans to Establish a Militia That Answers Solely to Him

Niara Savage
Mon, December 6, 2021

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis introduced a budget proposal on Thursday that includes plans to establish a militia that would answer solely to him.

Unlike the Florida National Guard, the Florida State Guard wouldn’t receive federal funding or embark on federal missions.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis introduced a budget that would create a militia. (Photo by Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

DeSantis wants to use $3.5 million of the $100 million budget proposal to fund the state guard he said will “not be encumbered to the federal government.”

The guard, made up of up to 200 volunteers, would support the Florida National Guard during state emergencies, the proposal says.

“The $3.5 million to establish the Florida State Guard will enable civilians to be trained in the best emergency response techniques. By establishing the Florida State Guard, Florida will become the 23rd state with a state guard recognized by the federal government.”

DeSantis’ proposal isn’t completely outside of the norm. There are 22 states who currently have defense forces independent from the National Guard.

However, DeSantis’ track record, including violently quelling protesters has some Democrats sounding the alarm over the governor’s plan.

“No Governor should have his own handpicked secret police,” said Rep. Charlie Crist, who represents Florida’s 13th District in Congress.

Crist, who previously served one term governor after being elected to the office in 2006, is running against DeSantis in the 2022 gubernatorial race.

“Can’t believe I have to say this, but Florida doesn’t need a paramilitary force that only answers to @RonDeSantisFL,” tweeted fellow Democratic guberbnatorial candidate and Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried.

“Millions of Floridians know what it’s like to live under regimes like this — and came to our state to escape them. This must be stopped,” she said.

“DeSantis is making moves to advance his own reign of terror. We’ve seen this type of militia before in Syria & Iraq,” tweeted Democratic strategist Ameshia Cross.



The original Florida State Guard was established in 1941 to replace members of the National Guard who were serving overseas during World War II. It was disbanded in 1947 as states dropped those adjunct military groups after the war ended. In the 1980s many states revived state guard forces.

The largest chunk of DeSantis’ $100 million military budget proposal, $87.5 million, will fund the expansion of a readiness center in Miramar and establish three new armories in Homestead, Gainesville and Malabar.

The proposal also includes plans to fund armory maintenance, establish a new headquarters for the National Guard Counter Drug Program and support members of the state National Guard who are seeking college degrees.

“Florida is one of the most veteran friendly states and I think there are very few places that you would rather be on duty than in the state of Florida,” DeSantis said.

“In Florida, we are going to continue our momentum of supporting our military, supporting our veterans and being good stewards of our military installations.”

Cities, buildings, named for Lewis Cass a wrong to Native Americans that must be corrected

Gerry Congleton, guest writer

Lansing State Journal
Sun, December 5, 2021

Cities, roads and bodies of water all across Michigan are named to honor Lewis Cass, appointed governor of the Michigan Territory in 1813 when most of the land belonged primarily to the Native Americans. Cass negotiated 20 different treaties with Native tribes, coercing them to hand over thousands of acres of land to the United States.

Gerry Congleton

President Andrew Jackson and Lewis Cass orchestrated and implemented their "Humane Plan" for the Indian Removal Act. The rationalization for the Indian Removal Act was to save "Indians" from becoming extinct — to become civilized, to become assimilated. The obvious intent was to take the fertile land being in control of the Native Americans east of the Mississippi River.

Cass expressed his attitude about Native Americans in an essay he wrote in 1826. Cass said, "the Indians were inherently savage and incapable of assimilating."

Rationalizing Removal: Anti-Indianism in Lewis Cass's North American Review Essays on JSTOR

In an 1827 essay, Cass wrote, "The Indians are compelled to war of passions, they have not only no principles of religion or morality to repress their passions, but they are urged forward in their career of blood by all around them."

Lewis Cass, excerpts from "Removal of the Indians," North American Review, January, 1830 (nationalhumanitiescenter.org)

American Expansion Turns to Official Indian Removal (U.S. National Park Service) (nps.gov)

cherokeeremoval.pdf (scpronet.com)

Cass was not only a major orchestrator of the Indian Removal Act, but an advocate of "Popular Sovereignty," the doctrine of allowing states to vote whether or not to allow slavery.

This was not an honorable man and we need to do something to remove the Cass name from areas that were named to honor him. Fortunately, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has already started this by removing the Cass name from a government building in Lansing.

We can further correct these wrongs by removing his name from all locations in Michigan, which would include:

Cass Technical High School, Detroit

Cass Avenue, Detroit

Cass Park Historic District, Detroit

Cass County, in southwest Michigan

Cassopolis, a city and county seat of Cass County

Cass City, in Tuscola County

Cass Lake, in Oakland County

Cass Avenue, in Macomb County

Cass River, in Michigan's Thumb region

Cass Cliff on Mackinac Island

Gerry Congleton is a resident of Haslett and is a retired social studies teacher with a masters degree from Michigan State University with an emphasis in Native American Culture.

THE DEBATE OVER INDIAN REMOVAL IN THE 1830’s 

June 2011 

MA THESIS

 George W. Goss, BA, University of Texas 

 MAT, Emmanuel College 

The US in the 1830s debated the relationship between the US and Indian communities of
North America. The principles calling for equal rights and political democracy of the
people in America were in contradiction with the principles calling for the US to follow
colonial principles of the European empires that had begun to invade North America in
the late 1400s.

 The colonies that had revolted against British rule in the late 1700s had
continued the expansion of settlements and political incorporation that had been practiced since the founding of colonies at Jamestown and Plymouth. The proposal of Indian Removal debated in the US Congress was a straightforward expression of that
expansionism, which dispensed with the past policies of the US that had combined
expansion with treaty negotiations that had the form of a meeting and agreements of
equals, and proclamations of Indian rights and sovereignty.

 There was a national campaign developed in support of the Indian resistance, particularly from the Cherokee, that involved polemics and petitions, pubic meetings and Congressional debates. The opposition to Removal was advancing principles that in effect called for the US to develop practical policy that was in line with its past proclamations that upheld its treaty commitments to the Indian communities. The proponents of Removal, supporting a campaign of the state of Georgia to dispossess and expel Indian communities within its drawn borders, advanced principles that favored the prerogatives of US states. The US treaty commitments to the Indians were argued to be invalid; because the Indians were an inferior race the agreements with them could be annulled by a superior race. The arguments for Georgia’s superior rights and US expansion, based on principles of white supremacy and colonial rights of discovery and conquest, won the day.

#PFAS

Outdoors advocacy group wants Maine to create instate lab to test for 'forever chemicals'


Pete Warner, Bangor Daily News, Maine
Mon, December 6, 2021

Dec. 6—David Trahan was aware that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) were discovered in well water near a dairy farm in Fairfield in 2020.

But the revelation by the Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife that the contaminants were also in deer meat sounded a new alarm for the executive director of the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine, who is an avid hunter and fisherman.

"It caught us by surprise that this made it into deer; not just the liver, but in the meat of the deer," Trahan, a Clinton native, said. "That was a shocker. Nobody saw that one coming."

After the discovery of "forever chemicals" in eight deer in Fairfield last month, DIF&W will test more deer at other sites suspected to have been affected by toxic sludge. But the testing timeline is a long one, and there are limited facilities in the U.S. where animal samples can be tested for PFAS. That means the wait to receive test results can take several weeks.

"If I'm living in those areas, the shortest period of time we can leave them in limbo, the better, because it's always the fear of the unknown," Trahan said.

Trahan said there is a simple solution to that issue.

"I think it begins with an investment in a laboratory here in Maine," he said, noting that such a facility should be able to handle testing of water, soil, plants and animal tissue.

Trahan said the equipment needed to perform PFAS testing costs approximately $450,000 but represents a significant and critical investment if Maine is to aggressively investigate PFAS contamination.

With a state budget surplus of $8 million and federal money available, Trahan said establishing and staffing a lab should be a priority. Sportsman's Alliance of Maine is contacting legislators and has been in contact with Sen. Susan Collins' office in the hope of generating support for such a project.

"This has to, in my opinion, elevate to one of the highest priorities the state has right now," Trahan said.

"We can't do anything but wonder and be afraid until we have good information. And the faster we get the information, the better."

The testing performed on eight deer in Fairfield found that five contained high levels of the chemicals. DIF&W immediately issued a "do not eat" advisory for deer taken from in and around Fairfield and suggested that all meat harvested there be destroyed.

The news triggered a whirlwind of worry and questions about how wildlife in other parts of Maine may be sickened by PFAS. There is serious concern about people's exposure to the chemicals near other sites where industrial sludge and septic waste have been applied to farm fields as fertilizer.

"It's extremely disturbing," said Trahan, who has been spearheading Sportsman's Alliance of Maine's efforts to help facilitate a speedy and effective response to what he called an environmental crisis.

DIF&W will conduct future testing of deer — and possibly fish, turkeys and other wildlife — based in part on the findings of the Maine Department of Environmental Protection at sites in 33 towns suspected to have been affected by toxic sludge.

More vigorous and expanded PFAS testing is likely to require more funding and staffing for state agencies such as the Department of Environmental Protection and DIF&W, which Trahan said will need more manpower to execute the studies.

DIF&W enlisted the assistance of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services to kill and process the deer at the Fairfield location.

"[The Sportsman's Alliance of Maine] have some influence in the Legislature and we're going to use it to get them the resources that they need," Trahan said.

Even though DIF&W has thus far issued a "do not eat" advisory only for venison from deer harvested near Fairfield, hunters — particularly those who live in and around other suspected contaminated sites — may in the meantime want to consider not eating deer liver or kidneys, Trahan said.

DIF&W already had a recommendation in place not to consume moose or deer liver and kidneys because of possible contamination with the heavy metal cadmium.

Trahan's hope is to make people aware of what's going on so they can take whatever steps are needed to help protect themselves.

"This is an environmental crisis," Trahan said. "It's also a crisis of information and figuring out how to get all this information accurately and effectively as soon as possible. We have to make people as safe as they can possibly be."

BIOMASS IS NOT GREEN

Idle biomass plant near Delano would reopen under carbon burial proposal


John Cox, The Bakersfield Californian
Sat, December 4, 2021

Dec. 4—Kern's ambitious list of carbon burial proposals has lengthened with the addition of an early-stage, relatively inexpensive plan for reusing an idle biomass plant near Delano to combust local ag waste then burying the byproduct gas while generating small amounts of electricity or hydrogen.

A company based in Rancho Cordova that uses rocket technology to increase burn efficiency has initiated preliminary talks with Kern County government as it pursues a similar biomass plant-reuse project in Mendota under a new partnership with Microsoft and oil industry giants Chevron and Schlumberger.

The projects are not without skeptics who question claims the process is carbon negative and doubt the technology itself. Environmental groups have been critical of carbon capture and sequestration generally; they're no more receptive to burning biomass and burying its byproduct carbon dioxide.

If Clean Energy Systems' project in Mendota lives up to its billing as a safe, financially viable, zero-emission solution for handling the Central Valley's massive production of ag waste, the company's proposal in northern Kern could join at least three other projects in the county that, though unrelated to biomass, all aim to address climate change by injecting CO2 deep underground.

CES has purchased the former 50-megawatt, 1,200-ton-per-day Covanta Delano LLP biomass plant that was shut down in 2015. That was after a large share of the state's biomass power plants shut down several years ago in the face of competition from against other renewable energy producers.

The loss of facilities that had taken in ag waste resulted in a glut of feedstock, leading many farmers to burn their woody waste openly. Regulations on such pollution have since tightened while mulching of shredded orchards and vineyards has become more common. Even so, some growers are finding customers for their biomass.

After CES initiated a conversation with officials in Kern, the county did a preliminary assessment that led it to inform the company in early 2020 it would have to perform a full environmental review and pay certain fees. Things have stopped there.

"We are not actively processing any permit for any Clean Energy Systems project anywhere in unincorporated Kern County," the county's top energy-permitting official, Lorelei Oviatt, said by email.

Environmental advocates who would prefer the project remain on hold have raised a number of concerns not unique to the CES proposal near Delano.

They question calculations suggesting biomass combustion combined with carbon sequestration is truly carbon negative. They note it takes a great deal of energy to capture, compress and inject carbon, not to mention the associated activities of gathering and transporting biomass.

Environmental groups point to the risks of transporting carbon dioxide by pipeline to an injection site, considering its dangers as an asphyxiant. Plus, they worry what might happen decades later after the company that buried it is no longer legally liable for its safe sequestration.

"Bringing the Delano facility back online presents real dangers to air quality, public health and our climate," Victoria Bogdan Tejeda, staff attorney for the Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity, said by email.

"Instead of investing in more carbon burning and risky pipelines, the (Central Valley) needs clean energy solutions like distributed solar," she continued. "Communities in the San Joaquin Valley shouldn't be made a dumping ground for carbon waste."

Clean Energy Systems President and CEO Keith L. Pronske promised there will be no emissions at all in Delano but that it will sequester more than half a million tons per year of carbon dioxide while also producing hydrogen or electricity for the transportation sector on the order of 5 to 10 megawatts.

The operation will employ 35 to 50 people when it opens within five years, Pronske said. He added that the project's cost is in the hundreds of millions of dollars — well below the price tag of billions attached to other local carbon burial projects — and that the privately held company is talking to potential financial partners.

He acknowledged there's plenty of work to do in Delano but that the focus now must be on the Mendota project, which has applied for a federal carbon injection permit and last month hosted a public hearing.

"We shut down half the biomass plants in the state," he said, "so the plan is to get them back on but without the pollution."

Trump's new social media company is under investigation by the US Securities and Exchange Commission




Kelly McLaughlin,Bryan Metzger
Mon, December 6, 2021, 8:19 AM·2 min read


The SPAC backing Trump's new social media venture disclosed in a SEC filing that it's under investigation.


Regulators have requested information from the company, but there's no indication of wrongdoing yet.


The SPAC has seen investment from 2 Republicans in Congress, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The deal between a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) and former President Donald Trump's new social media company is being investigated by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulators, according to a report filed with the SEC that was first reported by the New York Times.

According to the document from Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DWAC) — the SPAC that intends to merge with Trump's new media venture, Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. (TMTG) — the SEC has requested documents about meetings of the SPAC's board of directors, "policies and procedures relating to trading," identification of certain investors, and copies of communication between DWAC and TMTG.

Trump first announced on October 20 that he was launching a new social media company, "TRUTH Social," under the auspices of TMTG.

"We live in a world where the Taliban has a huge presence on Twitter, yet your favorite American President has been silenced," Trump said in his statement announcing the launch. "Everyone asks me why doesn't someone stand up to Big Tech? Well, we will be soon!"

The investigation, according to the filing, began in early November. The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), a private regulator, also began looking into the partnership in late October following the October 20 merger announcement.

The company noted that neither FINRA nor the SEC had found any indication of wrongdoing, and the company said it was cooperating with both agencies.

"The inquiry should not be construed as an indication that FINRA has determined that any violations of Nasdaq rules or federal securities laws have occurred," the document states. "According to the SEC's request, the investigation does not mean that the SEC has concluded that anyone violated the law or that the SEC has a negative opinion of DWAC or any person, event, or security."

The investigation comes after Trump's digital media company, TRUTH Social, and Digital World Acquisition Corp. announced that they were raising nearly $1 billion from investors.

Two Republican members of congress — Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Larry Bucshon of Indiana — have invested in Digital World Acquisition Corp.

Banned for decades, releasing oilsands tailings water is now on the horizon

FIFTY YEARS AND THEY STILL HAVE NOT SOLVED THIS PROBLEM

Kyle Bakx 

© Jeff McIntosh/Canadian Press Tailings drain into a pond at the Syncrude oilsands mine facility near Fort McMurray, Alta. on July 9, 2008. That year, some 1,600 ducks died in one of the company's toxic tailings ponds.

The federal government has begun developing regulations to allow oilsands operators in northern Alberta to begin releasing treated tailings water back into the environment, something that's been prohibited for decades.

Currently, companies must store any water used to extract oil during the mining process because it becomes toxic. The massive above-ground lakes are known as tailings ponds, which are harmful to wildlife and have resulted in the death of birds who land on the water, on multiple occasions.

For years, local Indigenous groups have raised concerns about contamination from development, and how tailings ponds could further pollute their land and drinking water.

But now, industry leaders and some scientists are convinced the water can be treated enough so it can be safely discharged and they say it can reduce the environmental risk of storing an ever-increasing volume of tailings.

Something's got to give

For decades, oilsands companies have used freshwater to help separate the oil from the sand and other materials found in mines.

Over the years, the industry has improved its techniques to recycle more and more of the water it uses. Still, mines require about three to four barrels of new water to produce one barrel of bitumen.

After the water is used, it is stored in tailings ponds since the material contains various toxins, bitumen residue and elevated levels of salt.

The tailings ponds in northern Alberta, adjacent to oilsands mines, store about 1.4 trillion litres of waste water. That's the equivalent volume of more than 560,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools, which would stretch from Edmonton to Melbourne, Australia, and back if placed end-to-end.

"The biggest challenge is that we have a massive amount of water that needs to be treated," said Mohamed Gamal El-Din, a University of Alberta professor who specializes in oilsands tailings water treatment.

In order to return tailings ponds water to the environment, the water does not need to be clean enough to drink, he said, but safe enough to meet the government's forthcoming standards. It's similar to how towns and cities across the country treat sewage to the point where it can be released to the environment.

In both situations, Gamal El-Din said the fluids can be purified to a point where it can be drinkable water, but municipalities and industry have deemed that too costly.

"There are technologies that can do that," he said, but "it's not economically feasible."

A Crown-Indigenous working group has been working on the creation of oilsands tailings water release standards since the beginning of the year and the federal government wants to release the draft regulations in 2024 and final regulations in 2025, under the Fisheries Act.

In a statement, Environment and Climate Change Canada said allowing treated wastewater to be released "will help slow the growth of oil sands tailings ponds, and reduce the associated environmental and health risks" of storing the toxic material.
The risk of the status quo

Some experts are quick to point to examples in some other countries where harmful mining water was unexpectedly released because infrastructure failed, including a dam disaster in Brazil that killed 270 people.

They argue that continuing to build more tailings ponds in the oilsands region only heightens the risk of an unexpected release, which could damage the environment even more.

Currently, companies that are polluting water have to keep building more tailings ponds and hold the fluid in perpetuity.

"This scenario is not tolerable," said Les Sawatzky, a Calgary-based water resources engineer who has worked on projects around the world, including with oilsands companies.

Others point to the recent flooding in British Columbia, and the way that natural disaster has caused a mess with various harmful materials like fertilizer and fuels, as a reason why a potential discharge of treated oilsands tailings water is preferable to just letting the tailings ponds continue to grow.

"If the oilsands release is controlled and satisfies the appropriate criteria, then I would have more comfort than something that's a huge phenomenon and uncontrolled at the moment," said Greg Lawrence, an engineering professor at University of British Columbia in Vancouver, who has researched water and tailings in the oilsands since 2013.

"There's been flooding in the Fraser Valley and that is of a far greater concern, I would say, than any regulated and controlled release," he said.

 CBC News Graphics

Oilsands operators are required to clean up the land they disturb and return it to a state similar to how it was before development began. The industry argues those remediation efforts are prolonged by decades without the ability to release treated tailings water.

"The more water that's stored on site, the less of the site itself is able to be reclaimed until there's an opportunity to release water and free up that space," said Brendan Marshall with the Mining Association of Canada.

Marshall is confident the industry will be able to meet the standards created by regulators and the focus should be on achieving water quality, rather than concerns about the volume of tailings that exist.

"If you have a lot of water that can be safely treated to an acceptable threshold then gradually releasing that water over time will do that river no harm," he said.
Stuck with bad options

Some Indigenous and environmental groups aren't convinced and are concerned the tailings water release will cause even more harm to the Athabasca River which flows northeast from Jasper National Park through the oilsands region before emptying into Lake Athabasca.

The river is considered the lifeline for many communities.

First Nations and Métis Nations have complained for years how the oilsands, as well as other industries, have caused water volumes and quality to drop, which they say has caused fish populations to decrease sharply over the years and some species to disappear.

Research has found elevated cancer rates in Fort Chipewyan, a community located north of Fort McMurray on the western tip of Lake Athabasca, and high levels of heavy metals, such as mercury, and arsenic in animals that are hunted and consumed in the region.

"I'm angry that we have to be having this discussion of what do we want to happen," said Jesse Cardinal, executive director with Keepers of the Water, an Indigenous environmental group.

"The fact that they're even entertaining releasing the tailings ponds into the Athabasca River — this is an international human crime," she said from her home in the Kikino Métis Settlement, about 175 kilometres northeast of Edmonton.

She feels like communities are stuck because they oppose the release of the tailings water, but the status quo is also unacceptable because of the seepage and dam failure risks of tailings ponds.

Cardinal doesn't understand why the oilsands sector is allowed to expand operations and cause more tailings while this issue remains unresolved.

"We know that the industry has other options to treat the tailings ponds, but they cost a lot more money. We're saying do what's right, not what's fast and easy," she said.

Geneviève Normand/CBC Radio-Canada Located on the northwest shore of Lake Athabasca, Fort Chipewyan can only be accessed by plane or boat in the summer.

The Fort McKay First Nation is surrounded by nine different oilsands mines and 20 tailings ponds. The community is one of nine First Nations and Métis Nations in the Athabasca region who are part of the federal government's working group to discuss potential impacts to Treaty and Indigenous rights.

Releasing mine waste water is a major concern for the community, said Bori Arrobo, Fort McKay's director of sustainability.

"We don't want to swap one environmental liability, which is the tailings ponds at the moment, for another, which could be the deterioration of the quality of the water in the Athabasca River and the downstream," he said.

"It's important to be able to participate at all the tables where these discussions are happening."
No silver bullet to treat tailings

While the federal government develops regulations, the industry is testing various chemical and biological methods of treating tailings water.

The trick is to find the most effective methods that are also cost-effective and don't produce other environmental impacts, like more greenhouse gases.

"In other words, it treats the water the way you want it to, but it doesn't have any of these other ancillary effects that no one wants," said John Brogly, the water director for Canada's Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA).

In 2020, there were 57 active research projects through COSIA at a cost of $150 million and an additional 86 projects focused on water.

There are different obstacles to overcome in treating tailings water, mainly the toxicity and the salinity.

As the industry has become better at recycling water, the salt levels increase every time the water is used in the extraction process. Similarly, the water quality degrades the more it is re-used.

The tailings water also contains thousands of different naphthenic acids and other organic compounds, some of which are harmful to aquatic life.

Much more intensive research is needed to develop treatment technology and to help craft regulations to release tailings water, said Lesley Warren, a professor with the University of Toronto's department of civil and mineral engineering. She's spent almost a decade studying Syncrude's pit lake, which the oilsands company created by filling an empty mine pit with tailings and capped with fresh water.

Canadians across the country should care about the environmental issues surrounding the oilsands, Warren said, since everyone consumes products that come from oil.

"We have to recognize that our way of life is founded on all of these resources that we're mining and so, we're part of this discussion," she said.

Navy halts use of fuel storage complex above Hawaii aquifer

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii (AP) — The U.S. Navy announced Monday that it has suspended use of a massive World War II-era fuel storage complex above a Hawaii aquifer that supplies nearly 20% of Honolulu’s drinking water — following days of complaints that tap water smells like fuel and has sickened some people.

Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro traveled to Pearl Harbor and told reporters he was apologizing to everyone affected by what he called a “horrible, horrible tragedy.”

Nearly 1,000 military households have complained about their tap water and some have said they have suffered physical ailments such as cramps and vomiting recently after drinking it.

A water sample returned last week showed the presence of petroleum in water that comes from a well near the underground fuel tank complex that has been the source of multiple fuel leaks over the years.

Del Toro said officials were getting close to determining the cause of the problem and that when the investigation is completed and reviewed, the Navy will adopt water safety precautions.

“This will allow us to implement new safety actions before resuming operations,” Del Toro said.

When asked if the Navy is considering permanently shutting down the fuel tank farm, Del Toro said all possibilities are being explored.

“We’re looking at some very serious option here in the very near future,” he said.

Fuel from the tanks is used to power many U.S. military ships and planes that patrol the Pacific Ocean, but Del Toro said the cutoff's impact on military operations would “have a very minimal effect, if any, at all right now."

“I don’t want to get into topics with conversations with regards to how long we can continue to do this for national security reasons, but there’s really no minimum operation to our fleet’s activities or activities impacting the Air Force or the Army or the Marine Corps for any near term at all,” Del Toro said.



Video: Safe ways to dispose of used batteries (Global News)



Pause
Ad 00:03 - up next "Safe ways to dispose of used batteries"
Loaded: 0.00%


Unmute
0

Safe ways to dispose of used batteries




The announcement came after Hawaii’s governor and congressional delegation called on the Navy to suspend operations at the fuel storage complex that sits above an aquifer that supplies water to urban Honolulu.

Rear Admiral Blake Converse, deputy commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said that the use of the tank farm was suspended on Nov. 27 but officials did not say why the Navy waited until Monday to make that announcement.

“I know there are concerns that we have not been transparent with the results of our testing and our procedures," Del Toro said. "You have my commitment and promise that the information that we provide is the most accurate information that we have available.”

The Navy last week said a water sample from one of its wells showed the presence of petroleum. The well is near the underground fuel tank complex that has been the source of multiple fuel leaks over the years.

The Navy’s water system serves about 93,000 people. Nearly 1,000 military households complained about their tap water smelling like fuel or of ailments like stomach cramps and vomiting.

The Navy said it would flush clean water through the distribution system to clear residual petroleum products from the water. The process, along with testing, could take up to 10 days to make sure the water meets Environmental Protection Agency drinking standards.

The tap water problems have afflicted one of the military’s most important bases, home to submarines, ships and the commander of U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific region. They also threaten to jeopardize one of Honolulu’s most important aquifers and water sources.

During World War II, the Roosevelt administration was concerned about the vulnerability of above-the-ground fuel tanks to attacks — so the Navy built the tank farm named the Red Hill Bulk Fuel Storage Facility.

The facility has 20 steel-lined underground tanks, which can collectively store up to 250 million gallons (946 million liters) of fuel. The tanks are encased in concrete and stored inside cavities of a volcanic mountain ridge near Honolulu. Pipelines from the tanks run 2.5 miles (4 kilometers) inside a tunnel to fueling piers at Pearl Harbor.

The fuel in the tanks is used by the U.S. Air Force, Army, Marines, Navy, Coast Guard and Hawaii National Guard for ships and aircraft. The Navy has said Red Hill is vital to maritime security, regional stability, humanitarian assistance and continued prosperity in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.

The Department of Defense has spent more than $200 million on updating the facility and conducting environmental testing since 2006, according to the Navy.

___

Associated Press writers Julie Watson in San Diego and Mark Thiessen in Anchorage, Alaska, contributed to this report.

Audrey Mcavoy, The Associated Press

Rep. Lauren Boebert and the politics of outrage: Why lawmakers reap rewards from firebrand tactics

Erin Mansfield
Sun, December 5, 2021

Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., has been criticized for anti-Muslim comments she made about her colleague Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.

When video surfaced of Rep. Lauren Boebert making anti-Muslim comments about her colleague Rep. Ilhan Omar, other lawmakers were quick to condemn her.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., called Boebert "TRASH" on Twitter. Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., wrote that the Colorado Republican's comments were "Shameful, deeply offensive & dangerous. Yet another blatant display of Islamophobia targeting (Omar)."

While Boebert's incendiary remarks on Nov. 20 likening Omar to a terrorist prompted some Democrats to call for Boebert to be disciplined, the comments also instantly raised her profile, which experts said may fuel campaign contributions. Those contributions could put Boebert in a stronger position to win reelection in 2022 and boost her clout within a faction of conservative lawmakers who are also known for inflammatory statements.

The calls to discipline Boebert came on the heels of the House censuring Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., for posting an anti-immigrant anime video that depicted him killing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. In February, the House removed Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., from her committees for actions that included posting a campaign ad of herself holding guns next to three members of the group of liberal lawmakers known as "The Squad": Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, D-Minn., and Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.

Gosar video: When does speech become dangerous? Lawmakers ties to white nationalists add to concerns

Before her latest comments, Boebert was already a prolific fundraiser who hauled in $2.8 million in the first nine months of 2021, according to her filings with the Federal Elections Commission. The average House candidate running in 2022 raised $426,283 during the same time period. The median was $161,411.

“The average person who might give political donations in this country probably couldn’t name another member besides Lauren Boebert in the House, but they do know who she is, so that automatically expands her fundraising base,” said Alison Craig, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
'We are not a scapegoat'

Brendan Quinn, a spokesman for the Campaign Legal Center, a government watchdog group that supports enforcement of campaign finance laws, said the right “has a media operation that can’t be matched and puts these people out in front of their very very loyal potential donors.” He pointed to networks like Newsmax, where Boebert appeared Thursday to discuss her comments about Omar.

Tlaib, who is also Muslim, said at a news conference Tuesday that she should not have to stop speaking out against Islamophobia out of fear that the media attention is helping people like Boebert raise money. "We are not a scapegoat," she said. "You can’t raise money off of violence towards us. That’s enough."

Reps. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., left, and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., are two members of the liberal group of lawmakers known as the Squad

Boebert’s comments also came about a month after she created a joint fundraising committee with Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Texas, a former mayor of a Dallas suburb who said during her tenure that Muslims were trying to impose Shariah law in the United States and who in 2016 received an award from an anti-Muslim advocacy organization critics have described as a hate group.

The joint fundraising committee, which has not yet reported how much money it has raised, will make accounting easier if the two decide to hold joint campaign appearances. The pair also will be able to essentially pool their donor lists so Boebert’s donors can support Van Duyne and vice versa.

USA TODAY analyzed fundraising by six of the most prominent Republicans known for inflammatory rhetoric and fundraising by the six members of the "Squad" and found that the Republicans are doing better. The six Republicans raised an average of $2.8 million from Jan. 1 through the end of September, while the "Squad" members raised an average of $1.9 million.

GOP Women Are Leaning Into Mudslinging and Total Villainy

Kali Holloway
Mon, December 6, 2021

Photo Illustration by Thomas Levinson/The Daily Beast/Getty

“We are not the fringe,” Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene said a few days ago. “We are the base of the party.”

She was defending her alliance of right-wing congressional racists—with a tacit emphasis on Lauren Boebert, who in recent weeks has gotten criticism for being just slightly more overtly racist and Islamaphobic than usual—from those who have labeled them an aberration within the GOP conference. And on this issue, Greene, like some real-life manifestation of the Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point meme, is right. She and Boebert spew racist talking points and stoke white terror like it’s their jobs, mostly because it is. The GOP “big tent” has a come-one-come-all policy for white racists, white supremacists, and white nationalists from every walk of life. Boebert and Greene are just faithfully representing a voting base that overwhelmingly thinks America’s most pressing problem is that white status-loss leaves white people vulnerable to being treated like Black people.

Just as it’s a mistake to regard Boebert and Greene as outliers in their party, it’s also wrong to overlook the ways in which they carry on a long tradition of white women doing the work of white supremacy. It used to be that white ladies fueled, defended and maintained white power from the political margins—diligently but quietly, mostly out of the limelight as a consequence of limited political opportunity due to misogynist convention. But powerful white racist politicians like George Wallace, Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and Ronald Reagan could not have ensured the durability of institutionalized white power without the countless white women who eagerly and continuously helped perpetuate racial discrimination and oppression through whatever grassroots means were available to them. Those “constant gardeners” of white power, as historian Elizabeth McRae has labeled them, “performed myriad duties to uphold white over black: censoring textbooks, denying marriage certificates, deciding on the racial identity of their neighbors, celebrating school choice, canvassing communities for votes, and lobbying elected officials.”

Now that holding political office is an option for women, it’s an optimal choice for women like Boebert and Greene. White women racist agitators walked so Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene could run.

Racist Republicans Try To Use Ilhan Omar to Somehow Excuse Marjorie Taylor Greene

And run they have, very often outpacing the racist belligerence of their fellow bigots in the GOP. The two freshman congresswomen, subscribers to the “there’s no bad press” philosophy of public life, are now among the most visible figures in the Republican political echo chamber, spouting explicit racism and Islamophobia so loudly and proudly that they often drown out even the white men they compete with for OANN guest spots.

They do this in part through plain old racist politicking, as when Greene announced plans for a caucus based on “Anglo-Saxon political traditions,” or faked a move to introduce legislation that would give a Congressional Gold Medal to Kyle Rittenhouse for killing two people at a Black Lives Matter protest, or similarly, the time that Boebert performatively filed a bill to designate BLM a domestic terror organization.

But mostly, they do this by attacking women of color, drawing a line between themselves as the arbiters of white American patriotism and casting Black and brown Democratic women as threats to the country and white survival itself. For the last few weeks, Boebert has increased her name recognition by relentlessly maligning Ilhan Omar, a Black and Muslim woman who also serves in the House—calling her a terrorist; repeating a fabricated story depicting her as a suicide bomber; labeling both Omar and Muslim congresswoman Rashida Tlaib “evil… black-hearted women”; and dubbing the progressive collective of Omar, Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “the Jihad Squad.”

“It’s disheartening to see someone who hates America serving in the United States of Representatives,” Boebert said during an appearance on Fox News this week, again taking aim at Omar. “I love America and at the end of the day, that is the fundamental difference here.”

Boebert is traveling a road first laid by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has stalked—through both digital and analog methods—Omar and other non-white congresswomen. Early this year, a maskless Greene ambushed Cori Bush in the Capitol’s halls, ultimately inspiring the fatigued Black congresswoman to find an office further “away from hers for my team's safety.” Before she was even elected to Congress, an uninvited Greene skulked through congressional offices with the goal of forcing Omar and Tlaib to retake their oaths on a Bible instead of the Koran and tweeted a photo of herself brandishing a gun toward photos of Omar, Tlaib, and AOC. She has repeatedly accused Omar of supporting terrorists, and promoted debunked conspiracy theories about her marriages. And of course, she has also taken part in Boebert’s anti-Black, Islamophobic smear campaign against Omar, cheering on Boebert’s attacks and labeling Omar an “Islamic terrorist sympathizer.”

No, the White Women Who Got Us Trump Won’t Save Us From Him

These two white women know exactly what they are doing when they go after Omar and other non-white congresswomen they pointedly insult and verbally assault. Even as they terrorize and bully those women, they paint themselves as victims; chalk it up to the white-woman urge to weaponize race and gender in service of self.

Boebert—after making up an incredibly offensive and racist story in which a Capitol officer assumed the need to protect her precious white femininity from the mere presence of Omar’s Black Muslimness—issued a blatant non-apology to Omar and refused to make public amends, yet somehow still painted herself as the wronged party because Omar hung up on her as she delivered yet another insulting tirade. (She then had the nerve to say that Omar’s self-preservationist decision not to endure any more abuse was “really showing her character.”)

Greene, who’s been booted from committee for her nastiness, can’t even pretend to focus on lawmaking, she’s so busy harassing and haranguing the non-white women who serve with her—while constantly claiming that her suffering is unsurpassed. There was the self-owning video in which she lied about being verbally attacked by Cori Bush while unwittingly proving herself the instigator; the speech before her committee removals when she claimed that her unhinged racist and antisemitic conspiracy rantings happened because she had been “allowed to believe things that weren't true”; the tweet in which she suggested that she faced discrimination for being, first and foremost, a white woman; and the statement she made last month about how she has been made to “constantly take the abuse by the Democrats."

Maybe the grossest proof of their motivations is that Greene and Boebert have both leveraged their phony victimhood, in a package deal with their racism, to endlessly fundraise. Boebert tweeted just days ago that “the far left,” which presumably includes anyone who has called out her Islamophobia, has designated her “their biggest enemy,” and which ended with a request for donations. Greene’s social media fundraising appeals were really just tweets featuring photos of Omar and AOC.

This is what white women have done forever, which is to use their whiteness and womanhood to incite would-be protectors to commit violence (or just acts that they pretend amount to violence), while leaning into the protections afforded white womanhood. Omar shared a terrifying death threat she received after Boebert’s latest Islamophobic rants, but this is the kind of vitriol she deals with daily. Back in 2019, members of the Squad reported that threats against their lives were so commonplace they had requested not to receive notice of them unless they seemed credible.

While Boebert and Greene are egging on their racist followers and then pleading mistreatment—throwing stones to hide their hands, as the old saying goes—Omar is dealing with the prospect of real violence they have conjured through stochastic terror. It may seem like a game of clicks, likes, and attention-seeking for the likes of Boebert and Greene, but there’s real and tremendous danger for the non-white women they’re targeting. Same as ever.

As a rule, Black women with arrest records and rap sheets, GEDs earned just months before their first election campaigns, who walk around open-carrying and bragging about the Glocks they own, as Boebert has done, are not elected to Congress. Were a Muslim Black woman to start a campaign of harassment against her colleagues, like the one Marjorie Taylor Greene has waged from the moment she got into office, she would have been ejected from Congress long ago.

But Boebert and Greene can stand on the frontlines of the GOP’s fight for white supremacy, lob all the vitriol they please and become stars in the process, and then blame the folks they harm for sport and political profit for any fallout. It’s basically guaranteed that, seeing how the formula is working for them, Boebert and Greene will only continue to wreak more racist havoc. Even if it means that violence will almost assuredly result.

Trump Just Wanted to Remind America that He Committed Obstruction of Justice

Ryan Bort

THE DAILY BEAST
Mon, December 6, 2021

President Trump Hosts The Inaugural Law Enforcement Officers And First Responders Reception At The White House - Credit: Andrew Harrer-Pool/Getty Images

Former President Trump went on Mark Levin’s show on Sunday to promote his new picture book, a MAGA holiday essential you can get your hands on for a mere $74.99 (or $229.99 if you want one autographed by the “author” himself). The provides a glossy overview of Trump’s four years in office, which might not have been possible, Trump told Levin, if he hadn’t fired James Comey as FBI director in May 2017.

“If I didn’t fire Comey, they were looking to take down the president of the United States, Trump said after griping about the Deep State. “Some people said ‘he made a mistake when he fired Comey.’ Now those same people say it’s one of the most incredible, instinctual moves they’ve ever seen. … I don’t think I could have survived if I didn’t fire him. It was like a hornet’s nest.”

Trump, as is often the case, did not specify who exactly the “some people” are who lavished him with praise.

Trump is pretty clearly saying here that he fired Comey because the FBI was investigating his administration’s ties to Russia. This is obstruction of justice, regardless of whether Trump believes the investigation was being carried out by a “hornet’s nest” of crooked Deep State actors.

The people around Trump knew it would be a problem to cite the investigation as the reason he relieved Comey of his duties. The White House initially said Trump fired him only after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein recommended he do so, citing how Comey handled the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server. Trump said the same thing in his letter announcing Comey’s firing.

Trump couldn’t help but take the credit, though. “I was going to fire Comey — my decision,” Trump told NBC’s Lester Holt in the days following the firing. “I was going to fire regardless of recommendation.”

“And in fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,'” the new president added. “It’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.”

Trump’s public admission that he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation was big news at the time, given, again, that he essentially broadcast that he obstructed justice. The media coverage of the admission even led Trump to tweet that he hadn’t said what everyone heard him say. “Not that it matters but I never fired James Comey because of Russia!” he wrote on May 31. “The Corrupt Mainstream Media loves to keep pushing that narrative, but they know it is not true!”

The primary reason the Corrupt Mainstream Media thought it was true — other than how obvious it was that it was true — was that Trump said it himself. He all but confirmed it on Sunday, over four years later, and barely anyone noticed.

Trump was right about one thing, then: It didn’t matter.

Colombia launches strategy to tackle environmental crimes




Launch of a new strategy for environmental protection at the DIJIN Cyber Center, in Bogota


Mon, December 6, 2021

BOGOTA (Reuters) - Colombia's national police has deployed 100 criminal intelligence and investigation officers in a strategy to tackle environmental crimes in the Andean country, the government said on Monday, citing illegal mining and animal trafficking among the gravest threats.

Fifty officers will investigate environmental crimes while 40 will work on intelligence gathering. The remaining 10 will monitor websites, including social media, for trafficking and selling of wildlife.

"Environmental crimes don't just affect Colombia's heritage ... the environment is the heritage of all humanity," Brigadier General Jesus Alejandro Barrera, director of Colombia's rural police, told journalists.

Colombia, one of the world's most biologically diverse countries with tens of thousands of animal and plant species, is beset by crimes damaging the environment, including deforestation, illegal mining, oil theft from pipelines, and trafficking of flora and fauna.

In 2020 some 171,685 hectares (424,000 acres) in Colombia were deforested, most of that in the Amazon region, up 8% from levels of destruction recorded in 2019.

The main drivers of deforestation are extensive cattle ranching, crops of coca, the main ingredient in cocaine, and illegal mining, the government said.

Wildlife trafficking is also a major issue. Last week two German citizens were caught https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/colombia-seizes-hundreds-arachnids-being-illegally-smuggled-europe-2021-12-02 trying to carry hundreds of arachnids out of the country.

So far in 2021 authorities have seized 5,801 birds, 2,472 mammals, 11,290 reptiles and 285,237 plant specimens, according to police statistics.

Colombia's environment ministry will launch a new page on its website to maintain contact with environmental defenders whose work puts them at risk of being killed, Environment Minister Carlos Correa added.

The government recognizes the killings of eight environmentalists between 2018 and 2020, based on U.N. figures. But advocacy group Global Witness recorded 65 such homicides last year alone, making it the second year in a row that Colombia was the most dangerous country in the world for environmental defenders.

The government accuses illegal armed groups of committing environmental crimes and killing environmental leaders.

(Reporting by Oliver Griffin and Luis Jaime Acosta; Editing by David Gregorio)