Sunday, April 18, 2021


Space is the final frontier for archaeology

"Humanity has been staring at the moon for the last 200,000 years. It is the common heritage of humanity. No one owns it, and everyone owns it."

By Katie Hunt, CNN
4/17/2021


The boot prints left by Apollo 11 astronaut Neil Armstrong are a tangible legacy of one of humanity's greatest achievements -- putting a man on the moon.

© NASA/Hulton Archive/Getty Images An astronaut's bootprint leaves a mark on the lunar surface July 20, 1969, on the moon.

It's a technological feat easily on par with Egypt's pyramids, the Great Wall or Stonehenge -- but how should the Apollo 11 mission site and others be preserved and protected for future generations?

Right now, the bootprints, rovers and hundreds of other artifacts from the Apollo missions are not protected like heritage sites are on Earth -- something a small but growing number of space archaeologists want to change.

"These seminal imprints, they're not set in stone, they're set in dust. If they're not preserved -- either by having a cover put over them or by declaring a national park around them -- then they will go," said P.J. Capelotti, a professor of anthropology at Penn State Abington.

"These are critical sites for understanding human movement into space, and there's no reason why this can't be demarcated as space parks or have some kind of protective regime put around them," he added.

It's not an abstract concern.


With the prospect of tourists on the moon and more planned crewed and robotic missions this decade, space archaeologists worry that the footprints and other artifacts could easily be damaged or destroyed. There's also the risk that natural space phenomenon such as radiation and extreme temperatures could have already damaged them.

"All we need is a rocket to land nearby and blow dust all over of them. Or lunar vehicle to drive too close to that site and kicks all the dust up and that's it, they're gone," said Alice Gorman, an associate professor in the College of the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences at Flinders University in Australia.


'Cool stuff up there'


It might be hard to think of the moon as an archaeological site but Gorman, who is also a member of the Space Industry Association of Australian Advisory Council, said that was based on a misperception about archaeology.

"The thing about archaeology, it's not that it has to be old, and it doesn't have to be something you can excavate. The primary aim of archaeology is to look at how humans interact with material objects and environments," she explained.

Many of the objects and traces left on the moon aren't just of scientific and technological value -- they are cultural artifacts. They include family photos left by astronauts and the patch from the Apollo 1 mission, brought by the Apollo 11 astronauts to commemorate the three astronauts who died in a cabin fire during a rehearsal launch in 1967
.
© NASA/Corbis via Getty Images This is a family photo left behind by one of the Apollo 16 astronauts at Descartes Crater on the surface of the moon.


"That patch isn't part of any scientific or technological experiment. It's a memorial. The fact that we take our cultural behavior into space is very interesting," said Beth O'Leary, a professor emerita of anthropology at New Mexico State University.

"There's a lot of cool stuff up there."

Video: See the moon landing as they did 50 years ago (CNN)



The cool stuff includes things clearly worth preserving like the flag planted by Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin but also discarded items such as urine receptacles and wet wipes -- although archaeologists would argue that litter often yields the biggest insights.

Tranquility Base, the spot where humans first set foot on the moon, isn't the only thing of interest to space archaeologists. Vanguard 1, and the upper stage of its launch rocket, are the oldest human-made objects still in space -- part of a cloud of space junk that circles the Earth. It was launched in 1958 and would be a fascinating relic, Gorman said.

More historic missions are on the horizon -- the first settlements on the moon or Mars for example -- but it would be impossible to preserve all these sites as monuments. Gorman said a "reasoned decision-making process" was needed.


Sovereignty vs. protection

On Earth, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, known as UNESCO, decides what deserves World Heritage status from nominations sent by countries that claim ownership of the sites.

Different rules apply in space, with the UN's 1967 Outer Space Treaty stating that space "is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty." However, individual objects on the moon remain the property of the nations that put them there, according to the treaty.

Leadership at NASA is taking the issue seriously, and in 2011 published voluntary guidance to protect the Apollo mission landing sites for scientific investigation and their historic significance. The guidance also catalogs all the items left behind.

The Lunar Xprize sponsored by Google had been launched four years earlier to create an incentive for private enterprises to land a robot on the moon. One of the goals was to take capture images of Apollo mission hardware left on the lunar surface. However, the competition ended without a winner, and the only successful trips to the moon have been government funded and mostly scientific in nature.

The NASA voluntary guidance suggested a 75-meter exclusion zone around the Apollo 11 landing site and advocated controlling the movements of vehicles and landing of spacecraft to prevent scattering dust.

While not legally binding, the guidelines lent weight to the idea that human sites on the moon were of value, and in December 2020 the One Small Step to Protect Human Heritage in Space Act became US law.

It requires companies working with NASA to abide by those guidelines to protect Apollo landing sites -- although there is no way of enforcing them.

"As far as laws go, it's pretty benign. It requires companies that are working with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration on lunar missions to agree to be bound by otherwise unenforceable guidelines intended to protect American landing sites on the moon. That's a pretty small pool of affected entities," said Michelle Hanlon, a space law expert at the University of Mississippi, in an article for The Conversation.

"However, it is also the first law enacted by any nation that recognizes the existence of human heritage in outer space. That's important because it reaffirms our human commitment to protecting our history."

O' Leary said that the focus needed to be on international cooperation.

"If you think about the important sites, there are a lot more than the US: The earliest Russian site, Lunar 2 -- the first human artifact on the moon in 1959, which is really quite early. There's also China's earliest missions, the first Chang'e didn't go very far but it's still there, you know, that's a very important site. Who would have thought in 1969 China would be on the moon?"

One possible model Capelotti suggested could be the treaty that gives Norway sovereignty over Svalbard, where the Global Seed Vault is located, in the Arctic. Under a 101-year-old treaty, citizens of all its signatory countries, including Russia, can settle and conduct business there.

Final frontier


Most archaeologists agree the artifacts should be left on the moon -- any attempt to retrieve them would likely result in damage. Equally, even if they are left undisturbed by future missions, natural space phenomena such as radiation could put some of the artifacts at risk.

"We do have this idea of the moon as a dead rock but that's not true. Because it has no magnetic field and so little atmosphere, the surface is constantly bombarded. ... with cosmic rays and high-energy particles, micro meteorites," Gorman said.

It's unlikely the moon would ever be excavated by archaeologists, not least because NASA says that degrees in archaeology, along with other social sciences, don't qualify under its astronaut recruitment requirements. But Gorman said it would be feasible to fly a small drone equipped with a camera over the Apollo 11 site to reimage it and see what had changed over the past 50 years.

The moon plays a huge role in many different cultures around the world, and any international moves to protect it should take into account cultural and symbolic beliefs about the moon, as well as the tangible objects that have been left there, O'Leary said.

"Humanity has been staring at the moon for the last 200,000 years. It is the common heritage of humanity. No one owns it, and everyone owns it."


Love Your $1,400 Stimulus Check? Andrew Yang Had Bigger Plans.

Has the former presidential candidate's Freedom Dividend idea, once seen as a pie-in-the-sky solution, been vindicated?

by Stephen Silver

When businessman Andrew Yang ran in the Democratic primaries for president in the 2020 cycle, his signature proposal was what he called the “Freedom Dividend,” which would have given a UBI (universal basic income) of $1,000 a month to every adult in the country.

“This is independent of one’s work status or any other factor,” Yang’s campaign website said of the Freedom Dividend proposal. “This would enable all Americans to pay their bills, educate themselves, start businesses, be more creative, stay healthy, relocate for work, spend time with their children, take care of loved ones, and have a real stake in the future.”

The proposal, Yang claimed at the time, “would permanently grow the economy by 12.56 to 13.10 percent—or about $2.5 trillion by 2025—and it would increase the labor force by 4.5 to 4.7 million people.” Yang proposed to pay for the scheme with a Value-Added Tax (VAT), while also giving those currently receiving federal benefits to either keep their current benefits or enroll in Yang’s Freedom Dividend. The proposal also entailed the establishment of a financial transactions tax, while also assuming that the resulting economic growth would pay for some of the cost as well.

Yang argued at the time that the payments wouldn’t be seen as “welfare,” since everyone was getting a check. He also argued against means-testing, for that same reason. It was a proposal coming from a candidate not considered a socialist, or even necessarily a person of the political left.


Andrew Yang wasn’t the only presidential candidate last time who proposed widespread payments. Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, when he ran for president in the 2020 cycle, proposed “baby bonds,” which would provide $1,000 savings accounts to every child born in the United States, with the recipients unable to
China Doesn't Agitate The USHigh

Indeed, there are versions of Universal Basic Income that already exist. The Alaska Permanent Fund, since the 1970s, has paid out annual payments of around $1,600 from oil revenues to every resident of that state. Something resembling a UBI was proposed in the 1960s under both the Johnson and Nixon administrations, and it was a frequent demand during the civil rights movement, including by Martin Luther King.

In recent years, Stockton, California, under former mayor Michael Tubbs, experimented with sending $500 a month for two years to families. That experiment has been called a success, although Tubbs was defeated in his reelection bid last year.

Yang’s presidential campaign, while it gained a decent amount of media coverage, didn’t progress very far, and Yang dropped out of the race on the night of the New Hampshire primary, after finishing 7th. Yang was out of the primary race prior to the onset of the pandemic in the United States. But since the end of Yang’s presidential campaign, the Trump and Biden Administrations have each passed stimulus packages that have presented checks directly to Americans.

So the question has been asked: has Andrew Yang’s Freedom Dividend idea, once seen as a pie-in-the-sky solution, been vindicated?

That question was raised in Forbes, around the time of the passage of the CARES Act by Zack Friedman.

“While Yang did not create UBI, he advocated for UBI principally due to job losses stemming from automation,” Friedman writes. “Universal basic income has been supported by everyone from Martin Luther King, Jr. and Bernie Sanders to Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. Yang has said that with the advent of robots, self-driving cars and other technologies, our lives will improve. However, Yang believes that automation will cause one-third of all Americans to lose their job in the next 12 years. As a result of these job losses, Yang says, Americans could struggle to start a family, afford living costs or save for education or retirement.”

More recently, HuffPost looked at the question of whether Yang deserves credit for the embrace of stimulus checks.

“I give him a lot of credit for popularizing the idea, but it’s so old,” journalist Annie Lowrey, a staff writer at The Atlantic who wrote a book calling for UBI, said of Yang, in the HuffPost article “Nobody except for him really is talking about UBI, but it’s giving people a new language to discuss what would have been called welfare.”


“I think our campaign contributed mightily towards the mainstreaming of cash relief,” Yang told HuffPost in the article. “I believe this to be true in part because of the resistance I received.

One big difference, of course, is that none of the three stimulus packages passed since the start of the pandemic has offered every American monthly checks forever. While the new child tax credit will be paid out in monthly payments, the $1,400 checks from the American Rescue Plan were a one-time payment.


As for Andrew Yang, he’s now running for mayor of New York City, and is widely seen as the frontrunner in the crowded race, per The Guardian. And among Yang’s proposals in his mayoral campaign is what he calls “A Basic Income For New York City.” Perhaps due to the realities of budgeting at the city government level, Yang’s proposal is a bit different from the one he proposed when he ran for president.

“A Yang administration will launch the largest basic income program in the country,” Yang’s campaign website says. “Through this program, 500,000 New Yorkers with the greatest need will receive a basic income that will help give them a path forward. Our goal is to end extreme poverty in New York City by putting cash relief directly into the hands of those who desperately need help right now, ensuring that every household has an annual income that is at least above extreme poverty, taking into account the true cost of living in New York City.”


Yang also plans to create what he calls a People’s Bank of New York City.

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist, and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver

#FREEPALESTINE

Jews Replace Israeli Flag with Palestinian One in al-Quds

TEHRAN (FNA)- Haredi ultra-orthodox Jews replaced the Israeli flag with a Palestinian one in Jerusalem al-Quds in protest against the 1948 creation of Israel.

A video circulated online showing young men from Neturei Karta, an anti-Zionist grouping of Haredi Jews, raising the Palestinian flag in the neighborhood of Mea She'arim on Thursday, presstv reported.

Clashes erupted between the youths and the Israeli forces who stormed the neighborhood to take down the flag.

Israel marks 5 Iyar in the Hebrew calendar (May 14, 1948) when it proclaimed existence. The day falls on April 15 this year.

The Nakba Day (or the Day of Catastrophe) is officially marked by Palestinians every year on May 15. The day marks eviction of Palestinians from their homeland.

Israel’s Channel 12 reported that members of Neturei Karta also burned Israeli flags during a demonstration in Jerusalem al-Quds on Thursday.

Separately, three Palestinians were hit with rubber bullets fired by Israeli forces at anti-settlement protesters in the village of Beit Dajan, east of Nablus City, on Friday.

Israeli troops also attacked a weekly anti-settlement protest in the village of Kafr Qaddum in the occupied West Bank. A Palestinian man was hit with a rubber bullet during the ensuing clashes.

Palestinians want the West Bank as part of a future independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem al-Quds as its capital.

Palestinian sources said 70,000 worshipers performed Friday prayers at al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, in occupied East Jerusalem al-Quds on the first Friday of the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. Israeli troops barred many more from entering al-Quds.

Earlier this week, Palestinians said Israelis broke into four mosque minarets and cut wires to prevent the call for prayers being broadcast on loudspeakers.


Suez Canal compensation claim is simply outrageous

For the sake of all involved, there must be a just — and rapid — settlement of insurance issues arising from the Ever Given grounding. A deliberately inflated demand helps nobody

16 Apr 2021

OPINION
Lloyd's List

Egypt is wrong to use the crew of the now world famous ship Ever Given as bargaining chips in the insurance claim related to the vessel becoming stranded in the Suez Can
al

Source: ITAR-TASS News Agency / Alamy Stock Photo


OFF THE RECORD, MANY MARINE INSURANCE PROFESSIONALS HAVE EXPRESSED ASTONISHMENT AT THE CHUTZPAH OF THE CLAIM BEING MADE BY EGYPT OVER THE EVER GIVEN.

THE television cameras — and with them the public gaze — have moved on from the Suez Canal.

With traffic flows back to normal, owners and operators not directly involved can be forgiven for thinking no more of the grounding of Ever Given last month.

But marine insurers have been left aghast at the Suez Canal Authority’s arrest of the boxship, as a means of putting leverage behind its blockbuster $916m compensation bill.

Given the delicacy of the situation, public comment is impossible, and the underwriting equivalent of omerta prevails.

Yet behind the scenes, the feeling is very much that the sum sought is not just silly, but simply outrageous.

What we are seeing may be, in sales parlance, a highball bid, proffered tactically in the expectation that insurers will try to beat it down.

There may also be an element of national pride at stake, not to mention genuine penury.

Egypt’s need for dollars is particularly acute now the pandemic has trashed tourism, leaving the key waterway as the country’s biggest foreign exchange earner.

As a publication based in London, also home to some of the insurers involved, it would be tone deaf not to factor in potential historical resonances.

Britain colonised Egypt in all but name after 1882, precisely on account of the canal, and invaded again in 1956, exemplifying Marx’s famous dictum that great events often recur the second time as farce.

The days when pith helmet-clad Brits with double-barrel surnames called the shots while blithely plundering the country’s immense architectural treasures are long gone, and there can be no question of dictating terms. Egypt is legally and morally entitled to a fair deal.

But the quest for close on a billion bucks is taking the mickey, to euphemistically paraphrase some of the comments marine insurance professionals have made in private.

Suez Canal revenue last year was $5.6bn. Divide that by 365, and that works out at around $15m a day.

The six-day shutdown caused by the Ever Given grounding does not necessarily mean six days’ loss of revenue, as most of the backed-up traffic eventually made the transit and paid the toll. But let’s not quibble; $100m should meet the tab.

Legitimate salvage expenses must be met. Let the SCA present an itemised account, which will presumably be in the order of tens of millions.

Some element by way of saying sorry for the aggro and the inconvenience is also arguably reasonable.

Tot everything up, and this is nothing that, say, $225m shouldn’t comfortably cover. Asking for four times that figure — including a $300m for a ‘salvage bonus’, whatever that might be, and a further $300m for ‘loss of reputation’ — is transparently petulant.

The sense that SCA is grandstanding is only heightened by the news that the crew are not able to leave the ship.

This is a row between the Egyptian government, the vessel’s owner, the vessel’s charterer, the cargo interests and the insurers.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with regular guys who work hard for a living, who could now be stuck on board for an extended period while wrangling between desk jockeys of various stripes goes on over their heads.

Unless there are any grounds to suggest culpable navigational error — and no-one has mentioned this possibility so far — they should be allowed to take recreation ashore, and fly home once their tour is concluded.

Seafarers are human beings, not bargaining chips. Most of them are Indian nationals in this instance, and we trust the Indian government will make suitable representations.

From a technical standpoint, American Bureau of Shipping has completed the necessary class surveys and declared Ever Given is fit to sail.

Now the industry now needs to know what happened and what lessons are to be learned. Accident investigations are ongoing, and flag state Panama must complete it with alacrity, and publish the findings as soon as possible.

General average has been declared, and the cargo interests have one hell of a legitimate grievance. Some 20,000 teu-worth of goods are still sitting in the Great Bitter Lake when they should have arrived at destination long ago.

It is in the interests of all concerned to seek rapid resolution of all outstanding concerns.

The UK Club has tabled what it describes as a carefully considered and generous counteroffer. Its size is undivulged, although it may be of the order we suggest above.

The constructive way forward stares everybody in the face; post suitable security; let the vessel finish its voyage; get the cargoes to the consignees; sign the crew off; get the arbitrators on the case; and work out a settlement everybody can live with.

What no rational person should want is for is for the matter to become needlessly politicised, dragging on for months or even years, to the common detriment of all. We can only urge Egypt not to go down that road.
Taiwan's Evergreen weighs options to transfer arrested Ever Given cargo

Author Sameer C Mohindru
Editor Norazlina Jumaat
Commodity Shipping
Topic Suez Canal

16 Apr 2021 | 08:48 UTC


HIGHLIGHTS

Cargo, ship insured separately

Indian crew stranded on ship

Ship fully operational


Singapore — Taiwan's Evergreen Marine Corp, operator of the containership arrested by the Suez Canal authorities and whose thousands of containers are stranded on it, is exploring the possibility of transferring the cargo to another ship, while compensation claims are presently disputed and sub judice.

Not registered?

Receive daily email alerts, subscriber notes & personalize your experience.Register Now

The Ever Given, an ultra large containership that was stuck in the Suez Canal for around six days last month, was formally arrested by the authorities there on April 13 over non-payment of claims of around $916 million.

"Evergreen is investigating the scope of [the] court order and studying the possibility of the vessel and the cargo on board being treated separately," the company said in a statement late April 15.

The Taoyuan-based container transportation and shipping company's plans are very important because if successful, will enable the release of millions of dollars worth of goods, which are meant to be delivered all over northern Europe.

However, maritime lawyers and insurance executives pointed out that such a segregation between the cargo and its ship, or even its crew is not easy. Typically, the insurer will prefer that the ship, cargo and also its crew be treated as a single entity instead of adopting a piecemeal approach. The ship has a protection and indemnity cover from the UK Protection and Indemnity Club.

"All stakeholders have to be on the same page, or else the entire matter will get more complicated," a maritime lawyer said.

Even if the Suez Canal Authority, or SCA, agrees to release the cargo against a security deposit or bank guarantee, eventually the Ever Given's owner, Shoei Kisen Kaisha, has to acquiesce as well, a maritime insurance executive added.


"The cargo is onboard the ship, and it can only be discharged with the owner's permission," he added.

The owner and the SCA could not be reached for comment.

POTENTIAL AGREEMENT

In order to lift the arrest order as soon as possible, Evergreen is urging all concerned parties to facilitate a settlement agreement, the company's statement said.

Prior to the arrest, such a settlement agreement could not be reached because the owner and its insurer considered the magnitude of the claim as very high and not fully supported -- including $300 million for notional damage on reputation, sources said.

"A carefully considered and generous offer was made to the SCA to settle their claim," the UK P&I Club said in a statement.

Evergreen's delivery of goods is indefinitely delayed and so the operator-cum-charterer wants the containers to be off-loaded and delivered to their intended destinations. The Ever Given's scheduled ports of call are Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg and the containers were destined for locations across northern Europe.

However, according to protection and indemnity experts, such enroute discharge and reloading from a stranded ship usually happens if it is damaged in an accident. In this case, Ever Given's classification society, the American Bureau of Shipping, has issued a fitness certificate for it to move from Great Bitter Lake to Port Said where it is to be inspected again before proceeding with its voyage, sources said.

On the other hand, the charterer wants to meet its delivery commitments and generally the vessel itself and its cargo are insured separately.

Evergreen is doing its utmost to complete the deliveries entrusted by its customers and keep adverse impact at its minimum, its statement said. The UK P&I Club has insured the owner of Ever Given for certain third party liabilities that might arise from such incidents.

The ship is loaded almost to its capacity of just over 20,000 TEU, or Twenty-foot Equivalent Units, though most of the containers onboard are of 40 foot each.

DISPUTED CLAIM

A major concern, the reason why insurers avoid segregation of the cargo and ship, is the fate of the crew.

"Hypothetically, if a large security amount is deposited and the cargo is released and later something similar is done for the ship, it is the crew which will be held back until full and final payment," an insurance executive tracking such disputes said.

There have been instances in the past where a crew has been stuck at port for years due to such disputes as complete processing of such claims take a long time.

The UK P&I Club has stated that its priority is "fair and swift resolution of this claim to ensure the release of the vessel and cargo and, more importantly, her crew of 25 who remain on board".

During the meeting between the shipowner and SCA on April 12, no consensus was reached on the claims that are largely unsupported and lack detailed justification, Evergreen's statement said, citing information from the insurer.

When the grounding occurred, the vessel was fully operational with no defects in her machinery and equipment, and was manned by a competent and professional crew, UK P&I Club's statement added.
POLICE BRUTALITY

Anti-Black police brutality may lead to an armed insurgency in the US

To avoid violence, the country needs urgent reforms criminal justice system.
TEACHES SOCIOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA
4/17/2021


After George Floyd’s death at the hands of police in Minneapolis, protestors all over the United States demonstrated against police brutality. | Eduardo Munoz / Reuters

The killings of African Americans at the hands of police officers has continued unabated in the United States. In the past year, the deaths of Breonna Taylor in her bed and George Floyd by public asphyxiation are two of the most egregious.

As the officer who knelt on Floyd’s neck was being tried for the killing in court, another officer shot and killed Daunte Wright.

Scholarly research has begun to document the traumatic consequences of police killings on African Americans. One study finds the effects on Black males meet the “criteria for trauma exposure”, based on the latest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, used for psychiatric diagnoses.

Besides police use of force in North America, one of the trajectories of my research focuses on armed insurgency in sub-Saharan Africa. I am beginning to observe in the United States some of the social conditions necessary for the maturation and rise of an armed insurgency. The United States is at risk of armed insurgencies within the next five years if the current wave of killings of unarmed Black people continues.
Conditions for insurgency

To begin, the armed insurgencies would not have a defined organisational structure. They may look like Mexico’s Zapatista movement or the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta in Nigeria.

Entities operating independently will spring up, but over time, a loose coalition may form to take credit for actions of organisationally disparate groups for maximum effect. There will likely be no single leader to neutralise at the onset. Like the US global counter-terrorism efforts, neutralising leaders will only worsen matters.


Using research and contextual experience from the developing world to make predictions about the US in this regard is apt. There are many interrelated conditions for the rise of an armed insurgency. None of them in and of itself can lead to an armed insurgency but requires a host of variables within social and political processes.

Transgenerational oppression of an identifiable group is one of the pre-conditions for an armed insurgency, but this is hardly news. What the US has managed to institute on a national and comprehensive scale is what sociologist Jock Young calls “cultural inclusion and structural exclusion”.

A strong sense of injustice, along with significant moments, events and episodes – like the killings of Taylor and Floyd – are also important.

Historically, police officers are not held to account for the extra-judicial killings of Black people.

The racialised trauma from police killings adds to the growing sense of alienation and frustration felt by African Americans, but police killings are not the only way they experience disproportionate death rates.

African Americans have the second-highest per capita death toll from the Covid-19 pandemic: 179.8 deaths per 100,000 (second only to Indigenous Americans with 256.0 deaths per 100,000). They are also at a higher risk of death from cancer, for example. The pandemic has compounded these deaths, adding to the disproportionately high unemployment rate and the impact of layoffs during the pandemic.
Potential insurgents

There is another, related variable: the availability of people willing and able to participate in such insurgency. The US has potential candidates in abundance. Criminal records – sometimes for relatively minor offences – that mar Black males for life, have taken care of this critical supply. One study estimates that while eight per cent of the U.S. general population has felony convictions, the figure is 33% among African American males.

Some of these men may gradually be reaching the point where they believe they have nothing to lose. Some will join for revenge, others for the thrill of it and many for the dignity of the people they feel have been trampled on for too long. Although 93% of protest against police brutality is peaceful and involves no major harm to people and property, there is no guarantee that future protests about new police killings will remain peaceful.

The legitimacy of grievances of Black Americans among their fellow citizens is also an important variable. Their grievances appear to have found strong resonance and increasing sympathy within the broader population. Many Latino, Native American and white people see the injustices against Black people and are appalled. Black Lives Matter protests are now major multicultural events, particularly among young adults.

A sense that there are no legitimate channels to address the grievances or that those channels have been exhausted is also crucial. This is evident in the failure to convict or even try police officers involved in several of the incidents. A grand jury could not indict the officer whose chokehold led to the death of Eric Garner, despite video evidence. Such cases have led to a troubling loss of trust in the criminal justice system.
Mode of operation

Any anti-police insurgency in the US will likely start as an urban-based guerrilla-style movement. Attacks may be carried out on sites and symbols of law enforcement.

Small arms and improvised explosive devices will likely be weapons of choice, which are relatively easy to acquire and build, respectively. The US has the highest number of civilian firearms in the world with 120.5 guns per 100 persons or more than 393 million guns.

Critical infrastructure and government buildings may be targeted after business hours. The various groups will initially seek to avoid civilian casualties, and this may help to garner a level of support among the socially marginal from various backgrounds. The public would be concerned but relatively secure in understanding that only the police are being targeted. Escalation may ensue through copycat attacks.

The US government will seem to have a handle on the insurgency at first but will gradually come to recognise that this is different. African American leaders will likely be helpless to stop the insurgency. Anyone who strongly denounces it in public may lose credibility among the people. Authenticity would mean developing a way to accommodate the insurgents in public rhetoric while condemning them in private.
Moving forward

I am often amazed that many people appear unaware that Nelson Mandela was co-founder of uMkhonto we Sizwe, the violent youth wing of the African National Congress, which carried out bombings in South Africa. The rationale provided in court by Mandela regarding his use of violence is instructive.

Mandela told a South African court in 1963:

I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I have any love of violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people…. We chose to defy the law. We first broke the law in a way which avoided any recourse to violence; when this form was legislated against, and then the government resorted to a show of force to crush opposition to its policies, only then did we decide to answer violence with violence.

To predict that an armed insurgency may happen in the US is not the same as wishing for it to happen: it is not inevitable and it can and should be avoided.


Police reform is a first step. A comprehensive criminal justice overhaul is overdue, including addressing the flaws inherent in trial by jury, which tends to produce mind-boggling results in cases involving police killings. Finally, the judgment in the trial of Derek Chauvin for George Floyd’s death will have an impact on the trajectory of any possible future events.


   

        Report: US at Risk of Armed Anti-Police Insurgency within Five Years

TEHRAN (FNA)- Temitope Oriola, an expert in armed insurgency in sub-Saharan Africa, issued a chilling warning that the US may soon witness its own armed insurgency if significant police and criminal justice reform is not enacted quickly.

Oriola is the joint Editor-in-Chief of the African Security journal and associate professor at the University of Alberta. Based on his years of experience studying armed uprisings across the globe, he now believes that the US is potentially on the brink of disaster. 

In an article published in The Conversation, he cites recent examples including the shooting death of Breonna Taylor, the asphyxiation death of George Floyd and the shooting death of Daunte Wright during a traffic stop as examples of deteriorating sociopolitical conditions for African Americans.

Without significant intervention and reform, Oriola believes the social conditions in the US may well lead to an armed insurgency within the next five years, and posits an anti-police insurgency as the most likely to occur.

After examining the development of the Zapatista uprising in Mexico, or militant insurgencies in the Niger Delta in Nigeria, Oriola believes were such an armed uprising to take place in the US, it would begin with disparate groups who would gradually form some sort of loose coalition with no centralized leadership. This decentralized power structure already exists in social justice movements like Antifa, for example.

Oriola highlights the fact that one direct root cause is insufficient for such armed uprisings to take shape, rather that a number of social, political and economic factors must coalesce simultaneously in order for the balance to tip in favor of organised insurgency. 

He points to “transgenerational oppression of an identifiable group” as one such precursor which, combined with an overriding sense of ongoing injustice and numerous flashpoints of police brutality, provides sufficient kindling for the situation to reach the point of armed conflict. 

Repeated group “radicalized” trauma in the form of police killings and other forms of brutality, combined with disproportionately bad healthcare outcomes for African Americans, in areas such as COVID-19 and cancer survival rates, add further fuel to the fire, in Oriola's estimation.

These poor healthcare outcomes exacerbate the already precarious employment numbers among the African American community, which has consistently struggled economically throughout US history. 

Oriola next highlights the disproportionately high rate of incarceration among the African American community as providing a willing and able source of recruits for any potential insurgency.

Some estimates indicate that eight percent of the overall US population has felony convictions on their records, but this skyrockets to 33 percent when examining the African American community in isolation. 

“Any anti-police insurgency in the US will likely start as an urban-based guerrilla-style movement,” Oriola suggests.

He adds that attacks would be sporadic at first, and would employ small arms and Improvised Explosive Devices, predominantly targeting symbols of law enforcement. 

This was to a certain extent already foreshadowed in the summer of 2020 in the wake of the murder of Floyd, with numerous “autonomous zones” established in cities like New York, Seattle and Portland (Oregon), on top of months of riots sprawled across media coverage of the wider, mostly peaceful BLM protests. 

To make matters worse, Oriola highlights the fact that the US has “the highest number of civilian firearms in the world, with 120.5 guns per 100 persons or more than 393 million guns”.

Worryingly, Oriola posits that, as the situation deteriorates, African American leaders will be powerless to stop the escalating violence as the government slowly comes to grips with the outbreak of an armed insurgency.

Oriola cites the words of Nelson Mandela during his trial in a South African court in 1963 as precedent for what may be about to occur in the US in the coming years.

“I did not plan it in a spirit of recklessness, nor because I have any love of violence. I planned it as a result of a calm and sober assessment of the political situation that had arisen after many years of tyranny, exploitation, and oppression of my people….” Mandela said, prior to his incarceration. 

“We chose to defy the law. We first broke the law in a way which avoided any recourse to violence; when this form was legislated against, and then the government resorted to a show of force to crush opposition to its policies, only then did we decide to answer violence with violence,” he continued.

Oriola cautions, however, that such a (for now) hypothetical US insurgency is not inevitable and is, in fact, avoidable with sufficient police and criminal justice system reform. He also suggests that the outcome of the Derek Chauvin trial for the alleged murder of Floyd will prove crucial to the trajectory of the socio-political situation in the US for years to come.

                                                    

Defense expert in Derek Chauvin trial faces Maryland lawsuit

The former chief medical examiner for Maryland who testified on behalf of the officer accused of killing George Floyd is a defendant in a federal lawsuit over the death of a man who died under circumstances similar to Floyd

VIDEO Closing arguments set for Monday in Derek Chauvin’s trial

BALTIMORE -- The former chief medical examiner for Maryland who testified on behalf of the officer accused of killing George Floyd is a defendant in a federal lawsuit over the death of a man who died under circumstances similar to Floyd.

Dr. David Fowler was chief medical examiner in Maryland for 17 years before retiring in 2019.

He served as a key defense witness for Officer Derek Chauvin. Fowler testified that he would have ruled Floyd's cause of death as “undetermined” rather than homicide. He also testified that Floyd's heart disease contributed to his death, contradicting prosecution experts who cited asphyxiation as a result of Chauvin's knee being pressed into Floyd's neck for more than nine minutes.

The case bears similarities to that of 19-year-old Anton Black, who died in 2018 while in police custody on Maryland's Eastern Shore. A federal lawsuit filed in Baltimore alleges that officers with the Greensboro police department and nearby agencies kept their weight on Black for several minutes even after he was prone and handcuffed.

The lawsuit alleges that the officers' actions caused Black to die of asphyxiation. It alleges that Fowler and the medical examiner who conducted Black's autopsy intentionally covered up for police by ignoring evidence of asphyxiation and playing up other factors that supported the police narrative.

The Maryland Attorney General's Office is representing Fowler and filed a motion earlier this month seeking to have the lawsuit against him dismissed. A hearing has not yet been scheduled.

FedEx’s Phone Policy Meant Workers Were Unable to Reach Families After Shooting
Crime scene investigators walk through the parking lot of the mass shooting site at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis, Indiana, on April 16, 2021.
JEFF DEAN / AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

PUBLISHED
April 16, 2021

A gunman opened fire at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis, Indiana, Thursday evening, killing at least eight individuals.

All eight who were killed were employees of the company. Multiple other individuals were also injured in the shooting and taken to hospitals in the area. The gunman reportedly died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound, authorities said.

The shooting happened around 11 pm Thursday evening. The shooter’s motives and connection to the facility were not immediately clear. “With less than 12 hours since the shooting, it would be premature to speculate” on what the shooter’s motive was at this time, said Paul Keenan, special agent in charge of the FBI Indianapolis Field Office.

One witness described the shooter as using an automatic weapon of some kind. It’s believed that the individual was acting alone.

For some time, loved ones of the FedEx workers were unable to find out whether their friends or family members were victims of the shooting, The Indianapolis Star reported, because of a FedEx policy prohibiting employees from carrying cell phones with them at work.

“It is hard because if my friend had a phone, he would be able to contact me right away,” said Jose Lopez, a friend of someone who works at the Indianapolis FedEx facility. “Even if it’s a message with one letter, you know he is living.”

The company has said it is reviewing the policy in the aftermath of the mass shooting that took place on Thursday night.

According to analysis from CNN, which defines a mass shooting as a “shooting incident that results in four or more casualties (dead or wounded),” there have been 45 such shooting events in the U.S. over the past month.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has been briefed on the situation, a source in the Justice Department told ABC News. President Joe Biden was also briefed on the matter on Friday morning, and issued a statement later in the day regarding the tragedy.

Biden ordered the nation’s flags lowered out of remembrance of the victims, noting he had taken the same action very recently for a different mass shooting.

“I have the solemn duty of ordering the flag lowered at half-staff at the White House, public buildings and grounds, and military posts and embassies, just two weeks after I gave the last such order,” Biden said in his statement.
Indianapolis’ Sikh community calls for U.S. gun reforms after FedEx shooting

By Casey Smith And Rick Callahan The Associated Press
Posted April 17, 2021 

‘What is going on?’: Family members react after shooting at FedEx facility in Indianapolis leaves 9 dead, several injured


Members of Indianapolis’ tight-knit Sikh community joined with city officials to call for gun reforms Saturday as they mourned the deaths of four Sikhs who were among the eight people killed in a mass shooting at a FedEx warehouse.

At a vigil attended by more than 200 at an Indianapolis park Saturday evening, Aasees Kaur, who represented the Sikh Coalition, spoke out alongside the city’s mayor and other elected officials to demand action that would prevent such attacks from happening again.

“We must support one another, not just in grief, but in calling our policymakers and elected officials to make meaningful change,” Kaur said. “The time to act is not later, but now. We are far too many tragedies, too late, in doing so.”

The attack was another blow to the Asian American community a month after authorities said six people of Asian descent were killed by a gunman in the Atlanta area and amid ongoing attacks against Asian Americans during the coronavirus pandemic.

About 90% of the workers at the FedEx warehouse near the Indianapolis International Airport are members of the local Sikh community, police said Friday.


READ MORE: 9 dead, including gunman in shooting at Indianapolis FedEx facility: police

Kiran Deol, who attended the vigil in support of family members affected by the shooting, said loopholes in the law that make it easier for individuals to buy guns “need to be closed now,” and emphasized that anyone who tries to buy a firearm should be required to have their background checked.

“The gun violence is unacceptable. Look at what’s happened … it needs to be stopped,” Deol said. “We need more reform. We need gun laws to be harder, stronger, so that responsible people are the ones that have guns. That’s what we want to bring awareness to.”

Satjeet Kaur, the Sikh Coalition’s executive director, said the entire community was traumatized by the “senseless” violence.

“While we don’t yet know the motive of the shooter, he targeted a facility known to be heavily populated by Sikh employees,” Kaur said.

 
There are between 8,000 and 10,000 Sikh Americans in Indiana, according to the coalition. Members of the religion, which began in India in the 15th century, began settling in Indiana more than 50 years ago.

One of the victims of Thursday night’s shooting was Amarjit Sekhon, a 48-year-old Sikh mother of two sons who was the breadwinner of her family.

Kuldip Sekhon said his sister-in-law began working at the FedEx facility in November and was a dedicated worker whose husband was disabled.

“She was a workaholic, she always was working, working,” he said. “She would never sit still … the other day she had the (COVID-19) shot and she was really sick, but she still went to work.”

In addition to Sekhon, the Marion County Coroner’s office identified the dead as: Matthew R. Alexander, 32; Samaria Blackwell, 19; Amarjeet Johal, 66; Jasvinder Kaur, 50; Jaswinder Singh, 68; Karli Smith, 19; and John Weisert, 74.

Kuldip Sekhon said his family lost another relative in the shooting — Kaur, who was his son’s mother-in-law. He said both Kaur and Amarjit Sekhon both began working at the FedEx facility last year.




READ MORE: Former FedEx worker behind Indianapolis mass shooting was on FBI’s radar last year

“We were planning to have a birthday party tonight, but now we’re here instead. This … this is tough for us,” Sukhpreet Rai, who is also related to Kaur and Sehkon, said Saturday. “They were both very charming.”

Komal Chohan, who said Amarjeet Johal was her grandmother, said in a statement issued by the Sikh Coalition that her family members, including several who work at the FedEx warehouse, are “traumatized” by the killings.

“My nani, my family, and our families should not feel unsafe at work, at their place of worship, or anywhere. Enough is enough — our community has been through enough trauma,” she said in the statement.

The coalition says about 500,000 Sikhs live in the U.S. Many practicing Sikhs are visually distinguishable by their articles of faith, which include the unshorn hair and turban.

The shooting is the deadliest incident of violence collectively in the Sikh community in the U.S. since 2012, when a white supremacist burst into a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and shot 10 people, killing seven.

In Indianapolis, police said Brandon Scott Hole, 19, a former worker at the FedEx facility killed eight people there before killing himself. Authorities have not released a motive.

Police: Suspect in FedEx Shooting Used Two Assault Rifles He Bought Legally


2021-April-18 

TEHRAN (FNA)- The suspect in a mass shooting at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis, Ind., used two assault rifles during the attack that he purchased legally, police announced Saturday.

Brandon Scott Hole, 19, allegedly open fire on a Fedex facility late Thursday evening, resulting in the deaths of eight people. He was identified as the suspect by Friday afternoon, The Hill reported.

The Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department confirmed on Twitter that Hole was “witnessed using assault rifles in the assault”.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) traced the two weapons, and found that Hole legally purchased them in July and September of 2020.

The update comes after the FBI revealed that Hole's mother in March of 2020 warned that her son might try to commit "suicide by cop".

The Indianapolis Metro Police Department last year placed Hole “on an immediate detention mental health temporary hold” after officials received the warning, according to the FBI.

The FBI investigated after a shotgun was uncovered in Hole's bedroom, which was not returned to him following interviews.

Indianapolis Police Chief Randal Taylor told The New York Times that Hole's ability to legally purchase a gun despite his mother's warning meant that he was not subjected to the state's "red flag" law, which prohibits those deemed a risk by a judge from possessing a firearm.

Hole, a former FedEx employee, drove into the parking lot of the facility and began opening fire. He then went inside the building, where he shot himself before officers arrived, according to police.

Deputy Police Chief Craig McCartt noted Friday that about 100 employees were present at the facility during the shooting.

The victims were identified as 32-year-old Matthew Alexander, 19-year-old Samaria Blackwell, 66-year-old Amarjeet Johal, 64-year-old Jaswinder Kaur, 68-year-old Jaswinder Singh, 48-year-old Amarjit Sekhon, 19-year-old Karlie Smith and 74-year-old John Weisert.

Four members of the Sikh community were killed, prompting the Sikh Coalition to call for an investigation into whether racial bias played a role in the attack.

Hole’s family issued a statement on Saturday apologizing for the “pain and hurt” the victims' families feel.

The shooting in Indianapolis came after a mass shooting in Boulder, Colo., left ten dead in March.

The Gun Violence Archive on Friday recorded 45 shootings in the US in the past month alone, and 147 overall this year.

President Joe Biden has previously called on Congress to pass gun control legislation, including banning assault-style weapons. Earlier this month, he unveiled multiple executive actions addressing the issue.