China's latest dystopian creation: A machine gun-mounted robo-dog

Lynn Chaya - Thursday

China has unveiled its newest weapon of war: The “combat dog.” Private military contractors Kestrel Defense Blood-Wing posted a video via Weibo, the Chinese social media platform, showing a machine gun-mounted robot dog capable of being transported by a drone.

In the video shared on Oct. 3, a robotic dog can be seen being carried by a drone onto an empty rooftop with dramatic music playing in the background.

“War dogs descend from the sky!” the post reads. “The heavy-duty drones can deliver combat dogs, to be directly inserted behind enemy lines and spring surprise attacks on weak links. They can also be placed on the rooftops and work with troops on the ground to ambush enemies inside buildings.”

Earlier in August, Kestrel trialed another robotic dog capable of carrying a munitions launcher.

“Welcome to your next war tech,” tweeted defence technology expert Samuel Bendett.

In season four of Netflix’s critically acclaimed show “Black Mirror,” episode five, “Metalhead,” follows a young woman attempting to flee from robotic dogs after the unexplained collapse of human society. These fictional dogs are reminiscent of Kestrel’s creation, some have pointed out.

“It reminds me of the monster from the Metalhead episode of Black Mirror,” said one Twitter user.

China’s affinity for robo-dogs doesn’t end here. At Beijing’s Robot Expo this year, dancing robotic dogs welcomed attendees during the annual World Robot Conference.

“They’re going to be attacking next,” a Twitter user commented.

THE U$ DID IT FIRST

 

CONSTRUCTING THEIR OWN GUILLOTINES

Twitter staff have been told to work 84-hour weeks and managers slept at the office over the weekend as they scramble to meet Elon Musk's tight deadlines, reports say

gdean@insider.com (Grace Dean) - TODAY

Twitter managers have told some staff work 12-hour shifts, seven days a week, CNBC reported.

Some managers told The New York Times they slept at Twitter's office on Friday and Saturday nights.

Staff are trying to prove themselves amid the looming threat of layoffs under new owner Elon Musk.



Staff at Twitter have been clocking up much longer hours than usual since Elon Musk took over, CNBC reported. This comes as staff face the looming threat of layoffs amid the tech mogul's planned overhaul of the company.

Twitter managers have told some staff to work 12-hour shifts, seven days a week — equivalent to 84 hours a week — to meet Musk's deadlines, CNBC reported, citing internal communications.

Musk's $44 billion purchase of the social-media platform went through on Thursday evening, but concerns about layoffs at the company have been swirling since well before that. It remains unclear how many staff will be laid off and when, as well as which teams will be most affected.

Since Friday, staff at the company have been set tasks which some see as a test by Musk's team to see who works hard.

Insider previously reported that Musk's team assigned some of Twitter's engineers coding projects to work on over the weekend, known as sprints. Other tasks include making major changes to Twitter's verification service.

Related video: Elon Musk Orders Managers To Prepare List For Job Cuts After Completing Twitter Deal | English News
Duration 2:36
View on Watch

Insider previously reported that an internal message was sent to Twitter staff working on changes to the company's verification process telling them that: "The expectation is literally to work 24/7 to get this out."

CNBC reported that staff haven't been told whether they'll get overtime pay, time off in lieu, or job security for working on the assignments.

Staff worry that their careers at Twitter could be over if they don't complete their tasks by the early November deadlines, CNBC reported.

Twitter's managers, meanwhile, have been asked to carry out performance reviews and send Musk's team lists of which employees should be kept on, people familiar with the discussions told Insider.

But the managers themselves are also feeling the strain, with some telling The New York Times that they slept at Twitter's office on Friday and Saturday nights.

Twitter's top managers were pulled into meetings with Musk and his team last week at Twitter's San Francisco headquarters, where they were asked to describe their division's work, two people involved in the meetings told The Times.

Some Twitter managers told the publication that they felt like they were being assessed.

The Washington Post reported that Musk's team plans to cut around a quarter of Twitter's staff in a first round of layoffs, citing a person familiar with discussions that took place at Twitter HQ last week.

Twitter didn't immediately respond to Insider's request for comment on working hours, staff sleeping at the office, and layoffs.

Musk dissolved Twitter's board of directors, a Monday SEC filing shows, cementing his position as Twitter's sole director.

Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans

Elizabeth Dwoskin, Faiz Siddiqui - Yesterday 

Musk’s inner circle worked through weekend to cement Twitter layoff plans© Amy Osborne for The Washington Post

SAN FRANCISCO — Members of billionaire Elon Musk’s inner circle huddled with Twitter’s remaining senior executives throughout the weekend, conducting detailed discussions regarding the site’s approach to content moderation and spam, as well as plans to lay off 25 percent of the workforce to start.

Alex Spiro, a well-known celebrity lawyer who has represented Musk for several years, led those conversations. Spiro is taking an active role in managing several teams at Twitter, including legal, government relations, policy and marketing, according to four people familiar with the discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe them, as well as tweets from some of the people involved.

Longtime Musk associates David Sacks and Jason Calacanis appeared in a company directory over the weekend, according to photos obtained by The Washington Post. Both had official company emails, and their titles were “staff software engineer.” Musk’s title in the directory was CEO, although that position had not been publicly announced. He refers to himself as “Chief Twit.”

A document filed with financial regulators Monday showed Twitter’s board had been dismissed, another step leaving the company in Musk’s sole control.

Later Monday, a financial filing officially revealed that Musk is CEO of the company.

Elon Musk's ownership of Twitter begins

Meanwhile, the team was deciding on what is expected to be a first round of layoffs, which will target roughly a quarter of the staff totaling more than 7,000, according to one of the people. Layoffs will touch almost all departments, and are expected to specifically impact sales, product, engineering, legal, and trust and safety in the coming days, the person said. After engineers, some of Twitter’s highest-paid employees work in sales, where several earn more than $300,000, according to documents viewed by The Post.

Twitter, Musk, Spiro, Sacks and Calacanis did not respond to requests for comment.

The billionaire Tesla owner bought Twitter for $44 billion last week after several strenuous months of negotiations and legal wrangling. Musk first made a bid for the company in the spring, then tried to back out months later. Twitter sued to force him to complete the deal, and eventually the entrepreneur acquiesced and offered to buy the company for his original offer price.

Musk has turned to several longtime allies as he begins his overhaul of Twitter. Members of Musk’s team were in New York City, where Twitter has a corporate office, taking meetings on Monday, according to social media posts.

Sacks, a conservative firebrand and donor, has worked with Musk from their days running PayPal together two decades ago. Sacks has posted strong ideas about content moderation online and has criticized censorship from Big Tech.

Calacanis is also a longtime Musk friend who texted him frequently to offer advice on the deal, including about job cuts, court records showed.Documents detail plans to gut Twitter’s workforce

Calacanis tweeted that Saturday was “Day Zero” alongside a photo of a Twitter coffee mug, adding that he had discussed safety issues, along with bots and trolls, with Yoel Roth, a Twitter executive responsible for content moderation policy. Roth then posted details about those policies.

On Sunday, Musk posted apparent internal messages from Roth about Twitter metrics, arguing they show Twitter’s board and lawyers “deliberately hid … evidence from the court.” The tweet showed Musk using his newly gained access to internal information to potentially settle scores.

The new leadership team is asking questions about every aspect of the business, including details of content moderation, spam and the risks of upcoming elections, the people said. They also discussed identity verification on the platform, including verifying high profile users with blue check marks, according to a Musk tweet and the people.

Another Musk associate who tweeted about his involvement, Sriram Krishnan, a partner focusing on cryptocurrency at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, also tweeted he was helping out with the deal. The firm invested $400 million. He describes himself as a former Twitter executive on his LinkedIn page.

On Monday, a financial filing revealed Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey — the company’s former CEO — rolled over his Twitter shares into the new company, making him one of Musk’s investors.

Less than three days into Musk’s ownership, Twitter employees remained in the dark about any new plans for the company as of Sunday evening, according to numerous employees contacted by The Post, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to protect their jobs. The company has yet to release a formal announcement of the acquisition. The communications department has gone silent. Rumors have swirled about layoffs, with some notices going out quietly.Twitter layoffs are imminent

Layoffs are expected to begin ahead of Nov. 1, when Twitter employees are slated to receive additional compensation related to stock grants. On Sunday, Musk tweeted that reporting about impending layoffs at Twitter next week was “false.”

Earlier this year, Musk told prospective partners in the deal that he planned to cut nearly 75 percent of Twitter’s total workforce, which would leave the company with about 2,000 employees, according to interviews and documents obtained by The Post. Musk last week told employees when he visited Twitter’s headquarters that he didn’t plan to cut three-fourths of the workforce.

Another person familiar with the deal who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters last week said the total number of layoffs is likely to be closer to 50 percent.

Already, Musk has fired four senior executives, sent Tesla engineers to evaluate Twitter’s software code, and has tweeted that he plans to form a content moderation council of experts.

Meanwhile, illustrating the difficulties of his new task, Musk tweeted out content from a site that is known to publish misinformation this weekend.

On Saturday, Hillary Clinton, the former first lady and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, posted a tweet criticizing the GOP for spreading “hate and deranged conspiracy theories” that she said had emboldened the man who attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, inside the couple’s home in San Francisco early Friday.

Musk wrote, in a reply to the tweet, that “There is a tiny possibility there might be more to this story than meets the eye,” sharing a link to an article in the Santa Monica Observer, a site described by fact-checkers as a low-credibility source favoring the extreme right. The article alleges, without evidence, that Paul Pelosi was drunk and in a fight with a male prostitute, referencing a conspiracy theory that had previously been spread on the right. Other right-wing influencers who Musk has interacted with online also amplified the conspiratorial narrative.

The actions by Musk, who has since removed the tweet, show that Twitter has a complicated path ahead, particularly in navigating Musk’s public actions and squaring that with what he says privately.

Rachel Lerman contributed to this report.

Fired Twitter Execs Face A Long, Ugly Battle With Elon Musk Warns Expert

Chris Davies - TODAY

Elon Musk hasn't just cleaned house at Twitter, but taken a scorched-earth approach. Less than a week has passed since his $44 billion deal to purchase the social network closed, and already Musk has ousted top execs -- including Twitter's former CEO, Parag Agrawal -- and installed himself as new chief executive. The big question is, with Twitter going private, has Musk also opened himself up to legal backlash?


Elon Musk© Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images

According to a report from The New York Times, Musk has not only shown Twitter's former C-suite the door, but is claiming that the terminations were "for cause," too. If that's upheld, it could shield the Tesla CEO from millions in so-called golden parachute payments that Agrawal, chief financial officer Ned Segal, former general counsel Sean Edgett, and former top policy and legal exec Vijaya Gadde would otherwise be contractually due.

It's a big bill if Musk has to pay up: anywhere up to $60 million, according to reports. On the flip side, dragging out that liability through the courts could also be costly. SlashGear spoke to a legal expert to figure out just what Musk's game-plan might be.

There's No Law Against Firing Your Board


Elon Musk twitter profile© mundissima/Shutterstock

"This all boils down to a contract dispute," attorney Ron Zambrano, the employment litigation chair at Los Angeles-based West Coast Trial Lawyers, told SlashGear. "Are the fired executives entitled to their severances under their respective contracts because the contention by Musk that they were fired for cause is either made in bad faith or completely baseless? Or did these executives do things that could be viewed as violating their employment contracts? If they did, then Musk would have grounds to fire them for cause."

What isn't good reason to contest Musk's decision, however, is his new strategy for Twitter. While ousting the whole board and assuming total control himself might seem extreme -- not to mention give Tesla shareholders some legitimate concerns that the chief executive's attentions are divided, albeit with potential benefits there too -- it's actually not grounds for a lawsuit.

"Based on news reports, the motivation behind these terminations of employment is Musk's desire to replace the leadership at the highest executive levels with folks that he wants in those roles," Zambrano explains. "This motivation is lawful."

What Legal Experts Say Elon Musk Should Do Next


Judge with gavel© Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

The question, then, is just what might make for a compelling case? As Zambrano tells it, the only real justifications for a lawsuit from the former Twitter execs would be if it could be proved Musk singled them out because of protected class -- including race, gender, or national origin -- or if they'd been targeted as whistleblowers or similar. "Barring those exceptions," the attorney says, "these folks have not suffered a violation of their employment rights and it all comes back to what's in their contracts."

It won't only be contracts that are being examined with a fine-toothed comb, however. Asked what he'd be recommending Elon Musk do next, Zambrano says the big thing is digging through whatever the former C-suite has left behind that could count against the execs. It's from that evidence that a "for cause" dismissal case could be built.

"Musk and his team should start scouring internal Twitter communications and activity to support a for cause finding for terminating the executives he has fired," Zambrano says he'd advise Musk, were the new Twitter owner his client. "If there are in fact admissions and evidence by these affected employees that should have led to their involuntary exit beforehand, that would totally bolster his defense to any claim that firing these executives for cause was done in bad faith."

Even An Expensive Lawsuit Is Small Change, Comparatively


Elon Musk smiling© Michael Gonzalez/Getty Images

While litigation is seldom inexpensive, it may not be the dissuading factor to drag the former Twitter execs through the courtroom that you might think. In fact, Zambrano says, Musk's costs for that -- even if considerable by normal lawsuit standards -- would still likely only amount to a fraction of what the golden parachute payouts would reach.

"In a worst-case scenario, Musk may be looking at a $1 million legal tab," Zambrano suggests. "Strategically, Musk will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to reduce what he has surely been told is the money these employees are probably owed in payouts. He can drag this out in the courts for so long the fired executives will eventually compromise just to get it over with and receive some money."

While the Twitter purchase may have been completed relatively quickly, with Musk rapidly stepping in -- complete with a sink in his arms -- to seize control at the social media company, a lawsuit with the former execs would be a far longer affair. In fact, Zambrano predicts, it could stretch from three to five years following appellate review. In the end, it may all come down to who has the most patience.

Read this next: Everything We Know About Elon Musk's Hyperloop Concept

ATHABASCA TAR SANDS / OIL SANDS 1967 BECHTEL CORP. PROMO FILM ALBERTA CANADA 10494

This is a color film, produced in 1967 by Bechtel corporation called, "The Fabulous Oil Sands". The film looks at the development of the Athabasca Tar Sands, one of largest petroleum deposits in the world, and its effect on the nearby community of Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. The film features photography by William Heick, supplementary photography by Richard Finney and Kenneth R.L. Hill and a Script and Narration by Richard Finney. The movie opens with some heavy excavation units digging into the site of a quarry wall and then an aerial view of Edmonton, capital of Alberta 1:00. The city streets of Alberta 1:20. A map of Edmonton is shown in shows the distance to Fort McMurray. Peter Pond visited Fort McMurray in the 18th century as a fur trader. Aerial view of Fort McMurray 2:00. The railroad depot called Waterways is shown 2:33. Steamship pushes a barge, 2:40. 1940s seaplane at Fort McMurray 3:00. Outcroppings at Fort McMurray 3:35. Max W. Ball, built a plant in 1936, with Canadian capital opened Abasand Oils, Ltd in 1940. Trains taking military equipment to Waterways to expedite the building and launching of barges for the war effort 4:40. The Canoil project. 4:43. Equipment on barges 5:13. Scientist test sand for oil 5:52. Sun Oil and Great Canadian Oil Sands (GCOS) Limited. 6:30. Forest clearing on Tar Island, 7:00. Aerial view of plant 7:15. GCOS and Bechtel do oil experiments at the plant 7:35. Edmonton businessmen sit down 8:05. Bechtel designers 8:21. Disassembling scale model of the plant, 8:38. Building of the plant begins 9:50. Plant workers board a bus to boarding house 10:15. The mess hall and the crew eats 10:35. Curling lanes for the men, 11:34. Man commutes to work by dogsled 12:11. Supplies are trucked in over icy winter roads 12:50. The Alberta Athabasca Bridge opens 13:20. Oil tankers come down the road with crude and equipment 13:45. Fort McMurray expands 14:41. Construction at Tar Island 15:00. Aerial view of the new refinery 15:50. Superstructures are built 16:10. Buildings are insulated for the second winter of plant building 17:43. Men lay the first pipeline for the refinery 18:30. Men fill in dirt over the pipeline 19:30. Workers try to keep warm in the frigid cold 20:00. Truckers continue to bring equipment to the site 20:18. Two giant bucket wheel excavators are brought, in exported from Germany, to dig out tar sand 21:20. The ice flow under the Alberta Athabasca Bridge 22:00. Testing of bucket wheel excavators. TCO control room 22:40. Older houses versus new ones in Fort McMurray after plant development. Aircraft land on paved runways in Fort McMurray. Opening Day luncheon for the plant 25:00. J. Howard Pew gives a speech 25:12. GCOS president, Clarence Thayer is honored 27:23. Robert McClements, JR gives a speech of welcome 28:03. An electric shovel is shown digging the sand 28:40. Dump trucks dump the sand 29:00. Bucket wheel excavators mine the tar sand 29:25. Tar sands are moved by conveyor into primary extraction plant 30:00. Sand is fed into conditioning drums with steam and caustic 30:30. Bitumen separation 30:47. Bitumen pumping station 31:40. Diluted bitumen goes into the storage tanks 32:00. Gas and oil power tanks 32:45. Coke is burned to use steam to power the plant 33:00. Blending tanks that lead to pipeline 33:48. Ernest C Manning the premiere of Alberta makes a speech 34:31. Sidney Blair, petroleum engineer wrote first oil report in 1950.Sid Blair’s original report is shown 36:30. Aerial view of finished plant 37:00. The Athabasca oil sands, also known as the Athabasca tar sands, are large deposits of bitumen or extremely heavy crude oil, located in northeastern Alberta, Canada – roughly centered on the boomtown of Fort McMurray. These oil sands, hosted primarily in the McMurray Formation, consist of a mixture of crude bitumen (a semi-solid rock-like form of crude oil), silica sand, clay minerals, and water. The Athabasca deposit is the largest known reservoir of crude bitumen in the world and the largest of three major oil sands deposits in Alberta, along with the nearby Peace River and Cold Lake deposits (the latter stretching into Saskatchewan). This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD, 2k and 4k. For more information visit http://www.PeriscopeFilm.com

BEWARE FRACKQUAKE

TransAlta sues Alberta government to prevent oilpatch fracking near hydro dam

Kyle Bakx - CBC


Calgary-based electricity producer TransAlta Corp. is suing the Alberta government and the Alberta Energy Regulator to prevent oil and gas companies from fracking near its largest hydroelectric dam in the province because the technique can cause earthquakes.

The court action, which was filed in September in the Court of King's Bench of Alberta, takes place as two oil and gas companies have applied to frack within five kilometres of the dam.

TransAlta is concerned about possible seismic activity causing damage to the Brazeau power plant, near Drayton Valley in central Alberta, as well as the loss of wildlife, habitat and human life.

The company points to an agreement from the 1960s, when the Brazeau Hydroelectric Dam was built, which states that TransAlta should "peacefully enjoy and possess the premises" without any "interruption or disturbance from the province, or any other person."

TransAlta also refers to a section of the Brazeau Agreement, which states that the provincial government had agreed not to allow oilpatch activity that will restrict or interfere with the power plant.

In court documents, the company said the province "has not developed, implemented or enacted any clear policy directives that will protect the Brazeau Storage and Power Development from "unacceptable" risks posed by hydraulic fracturing in close proximity."


The Brazeau Hydroelectric Dam was built in the 1960s and is currently owned by Calgary-based TransAlta. The electricity producer is suing the Alberta government to prevent fracking near the dam, as two oil and gas companies have applied to frack within five kilometres of the structure.© Kyle Bakx/CBC

The case highlights a growing debate in the scientific community about the risk of earthquakes posed by fracking.

Fracking is a common technique in the oilpatch. When drilling an oil or natural gas well, a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and chemicals are injected into an underground rock formation to create cracks and access the hydrocarbons. The injection of those fluids has the potential to cause earthquakes.

There have been thousands of documented cases of fracking activity causing earthquakes in North America, including in Alberta and British Columbia.

Limitations near Brazeau dam

The Brazeau power plant is located about 200 kilometres southwest of Edmonton.

Fracking activity is currently not permitted within three kilometres of the power plant. However, the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) does allow fracking between three and five kilometres in certain instances based on several factors, such as a review of the risk, the potential for seismic events and mitigation measures.



Calgary-based Ridgeback Resources is one of several oil and gas producers that operate in the area near Rocky Mountain House in Alberta and the Brazeau power plant.© Kyle Bakx/CBC

Westbrick Energy Ltd. and Ridgeback Resources Inc. both want to frack in the three-to-five-kilometre zone. A 10-day hearing is scheduled for the first half of 2023.

A 2016 technical report by a government committee stated that there was "unacceptable risk associated with hydro-fracture induced seismicity to the ... Brazeau infrastructure within the five-kilometre buffer zone."

However, a followup report in 2021 stated that "an action to reduce the risk is clearly necessary if the risk is unacceptable, which appears not to be the case."


TransAlta wants the court to intervene and prohibit fracking near the dam, among other safety measures.

"As we prioritize the safety of all our facilities, TransAlta is taking this prudent step to confirm the government's contractual obligations to not restrict or interfere with the safe operation of the facility," the company said in an email.

In its statement of defence filed in September, the provincial government argues that the court should dismiss the case, in part to avoid interfering with the AER's jurisdiction as the regulator of all oil and gas operations in the province.


In its statement of defence filed in response to TransAlta's lawsuit, the provincial government argues that the court should dismiss the case, in part to avoid interfering with the AER's jurisdiction as the regulator of all oil and gas operations in the province.

© Kyle Bakx/CBC

In court documents, government lawyers state that "there is considerable debate among interested stakeholders about the risks posed by hydraulic fracturing in the five-kilometre area," including some who say any fracking is "dangerous," while others say fracking "presents zero, or close to zero, risk if conducted within specific shallow geological formations."

The government did not provide comment to CBC News. Westbrick Energy and Ridgeback Resources did not respond to interview requests.

Ongoing scientific research

There is no doubt in the scientific community that fracking can cause earthquakes, but researchers aren't able to accurately predict when a large earthquake will occur.

Statistics show that only a small amount of fracking activity will actually cause a noticeable earthquake, so researchers are focusing on trying to figure out why, said Honn Kao, a senior seismology research scientist with the Geological Survey of Canada.

Without knowing whether or not an earthquake will occur, experts will instead create a risk model to come up with the probability.

"Then the debate begins. The probability is very much like the weather, right? You say there is a 50 per cent chance of rain. What do you mean? For an operator and the local community, if an earthquake happens, it's 100 per cent. If an earthquake doesn't happen, it's zero," Kao said in an interview.

"But from a scientific point of view, we say, well, there is a 50 per cent chance. That actually is subject to interpretation, and I think a great amount of debate comes from there."

Induced earthquakes are felt strongest at the oil well drilling site and then slowly diminish in strength the further the distance away.

The earthquakes are caused by a buildup of stress on tectonic plates from fracking activity, although scientists can't measure how much tectonic energy has accumulated and how close the plates are to failure. Fracking also acts like a trigger for the earthquake.

At some point, regulators have to make a decision about safety standards and decide their level of risk tolerance, but others in the community will disagree. This difference of opinion is central to the court action taken by TransAlta about how close fracking can occur to its hydro dam.



In opposing fracking near the Brazeau dam, TransAlta says it has a strong interest in maintaining its physical plant and the safety of its workers, in addition to potential downstream impacts on the environment from an earthquake.© Kyle Bakx/CBC

"How far do you want to set up that exclusive zone? That actually is subject to debate," Kao said. "How high or how low of a risk tolerance level can you accept?

"We know a lot more about injection-induced earthquakes over the past decade. But certainly, in my opinion, I think we still have a lot to learn," he said.

AER subject of separate court action

In a separate case, TransAlta is also taking court action against the AER for approving an oil and gas company's application to frack between five and 10 kilometres of the dam "immediately," which "deprived TransAlta of the opportunity to submit a statement of concern to the AER."

The company is asking the courts to allow it to address its safety concerns about the proposed fracking activity to the regulator.

The AER said it wouldn't comment on an active legal matter, but it did refer to information about its rules for fracking near the Brazeau dam. The regulator has 50 seismic monitoring systems throughout the province.

Some of the largest earthquakes caused by fracking in Western Canada include a 4.5-magnitude event near Fort St. John in northeastern British Columbia. In the Fox Creek area of Alberta, there have been a pair of 4.4-magnitude earthquakes and a 4.8-magnitude event.

In the Brazeau dam area, an earthquake with a magnitude of more than 4.0 occurred in 2019. The epicentre was about 75 kilometres south of the power plant.

The number of earthquakes has risen rapidly in Texas, Oklahoma and other parts of the United States with oil and gas production. As a result, the number of lawsuits against the industry has also increased significantly.

Mounties' union says allowing trucks to park near Parliament was a mistake, Emergencies Act inquiry docs show

Catharine Tunney - Yesterday -

The union representing RCMP members says the decision to allow heavy trucks to park near the parliamentary precinct as part of last winter's convoy protests in Ottawa posed an unacceptable risk, according to documents tabled with the Emergencies Act inquiry.


People walk past fuel cans in front of Parliament Hill on Feb. 9, during the trucker convoy protest against COVID-19 measures that gridlocked Ottawa for more than three weeks last winter.

© Patrick Doyle/The Canadian Press

Lawyers with the Public Order Emergency Commission interviewed two members of the National Police Federation in the summer, ahead of official hearings currently underway.

Both Dennis Miller, a 29-year veteran of the force on leave to serve as vice-president of the federation, and Steve Madden, a board member with the group who previously served with the RCMP for 16 years, including with the Parliamentary Protective Services unit, liaised with commanders and other members during the convoy protests.

A summary of their joint interview was recently entered into evidence.

Both men raised concerns about allowing the self-described Freedom Convoy protesters to park near the parliamentary precinct.

"Mr. Madden observed that placing heavy fuel trucks near Parliament Hill posed an unacceptable risk because of the potential for those trucks to explode, whether by accident or design," reads a summary of the interview.

Miller told the commission's lawyers that he had policed G20 summits where the RCMP had directed protesters to park away from the central location and then arranged for buses to transport people to the protest site.

Former Ottawa police chief Peter Sloly has testified that he did not think he had the legal standing under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to prevent protesters from parking their trucks and other vehicles downtown.

"I'm a police officer, not a lawyer," he testified on Friday.

Concerns with resources

Related video: Former Ottawa police chief defends handling of convoy protest
Duration 2:38  View on Watch


The need for more RCMP officers was almost immediately apparent after the convoy rolled into town on Jan. 28.

The two RCMP union reps said that by Jan. 30, the head of the force's national division declared a state of emergency.

Under the RCMP's collective agreement, a state of emergency allows the RCMP to redeploy members and temporarily waive scheduling and maximum work hours provisions to ensure public safety and delivery of policing services.

Miller said he was told that assistant commissioner Ches Parsons decided to declare an emergency "because he had exhausted RCMP assets and resources based in the National Division."

Sloly was asking publicly for roughly 1,800 extra officers to bolster the Ottawa police response, including hundreds from the RCMP.

As the commission has already heard, both the RCMP and the Ontario Provincial Police had concerns with the Ottawa police force's lack of an operational plan and were skeptical about how their additional officers would be used.

Miler told the commission that the Ottawa request resulted in an OPS-RCMP meeting, which he did not attend but was filled in on after.

"Mr. Miller was advised that during the meeting, OPS representatives compared the Freedom Convoy to a terrorist attack at Parliament Hill and argued that RCMP should be the lead policing agency because protesters were protesting federal government policies," said the interview summary.

"RCMP representatives attending the meeting disagreed and stated that OPS was responsible for policing the Freedom Convoy because OPS was the police of jurisdiction in the protest site."

In Ontario and Quebec, RCMP officers can enforce federal laws but must be sworn in as provincial or municipal special constables to enforce provincial and municipal laws.

Miller and Madden told the inquiry's lawyers that the RCMP's lack of authority to enforce provincial and municipal laws was a barrier to using RCMP resources effectively to police protests in Ottawa.

"Miller mentioned that RCMP officers could only act if protesters were openly committing an offence under the Criminal Code, but would lack authority to act in the significantly more common circumstance of protesters committing provincial offences, such as under Ontario's Highway Traffic Act, or disobeying municipal orders or bylaws," the interview summary said.

He also said that even before the convoy arrived in Ottawa, the RCMP had been reducing its policing responsibilities in the Ottawa area. The RCMP used to maintain about 120 officers in Ottawa to patrol areas surrounding embassies and National Capital Commission lands, but it had only 60 patrol officers at the time of the convoy protest, according to Miller's interview.

On behalf of the union, both Miller and Madden told the commission they believe the RCMP should assume responsibility for security and policing in and around Parliament Hill.

A parliamentary committee is currently studying whether Ottawa police should cede control of Wellington Street.