White American Stupid People

Convention circuit of delusion gives forum for election lies

MOLOCH ADDRESSES HIS FOLLOWERS
 

Republicans Conspiracy Theories

Former President Donald Trump addresses the crowd via video Saturday, June 12, 2021, at the River's Edge Apple River Concert Venue in New Richmond, Wis. The MAGA rally was organized by pillow salesman-turned conspiracy peddler Mike Lindell. For a few hours last weekend, thousands of Donald Trump’s loyal supporters came together under the blazing sun in a field in Western Wisconsin to live in an alternate reality where the former president was still in office — or would soon return. (AP Photo/Jill Colvin)

JILL COLVIN
Thu, June 17, 2021

NEW RICHMOND, Wis. (AP) — For a few hours last weekend, thousands of Donald Trump’s supporters came together in a field under the blazing Wisconsin sun to live in an alternate reality where the former president was still in office — or would soon return.

Clad in red MAGA hats and holding “Trump 2021” signs, they cheered in approval as Mike Lindell, the MyPillow creator-turned-conspiracy peddler, introduced “our real president.” Then Trump appeared via Jumbotron to repeat the lie that has become his central talking point since losing to Joe Biden by more than 7 million votes: “The election was rigged.”

Lindell later promised the audience that Trump would soon be reinstated into the presidency, a prospect for which there is no legal or constitutional method.

In the nearly five months since Trump’s presidency ended, similar scenes have unfolded in hotel ballrooms and other venues across the country. Attorney Lin Wood has told crowds that Trump is still president, while former national security adviser Michael Flynn went even further at a Dallas event by calling for a Myanmar-style military coup in the U.S. At the same conference, former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell suggested Trump could simply be reinstated and a new Inauguration Day set.

Taken together, the gatherings have gelled into a convention circuit of delusion centered on the false premise that the election was stolen. Lindell and others use the events to deepen their bond with legions of followers who eschew the mainstream press and live within a conservative echo chamber of talk radio and social media. In these forums, “evidence” of fraud is never fact-checked, leaving many followers genuinely convinced that Biden shouldn't be president.

“We know that Biden’s a fraudulent president, and we want to be part of the movement to get him out,” said Donna Plechacek, 61, who traveled from Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, with her sister for the event. “I know that they cheated the election. I have no doubt about that. The proof is there.”

State election officials, international observers, Trump’s own attorney general and dozens of judges — including many Trump appointed — have found no verifiable evidence of mass election fraud. Indeed, Trump’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency called the election “the most secure in American history” and concluded there was “no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

But Plechacek is not alone. A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that two-thirds of Republicans, 66%, think Biden’s victory was not legitimate, while CNN found in April that 70% of Republicans do not think Biden won enough votes to be president. Half, 50%, said there is solid evidence to support that claim.

They are people like Deb Tulenchik and Galen Carlson from Pequot Lakes, Minnesota, who recalled the shock they felt after the election as Trump’s early election night lead faded as additional ballots were counted.

Thanks to the country’s polarization, many Trump supporters didn’t know anyone who voted for Biden and only saw Trump-Pence signs lining the roadways as they drove around their neighborhoods. Carlson, 61, said he went to bed believing Trump won. He didn't heed warnings that mail-in votes take longer to count, so early returns would likely skew toward Trump, who urged his supporters to vote in person and not by mail.

“I was asleep early cause it looked like it was going to be a done deal. And then when we woke up I couldn’t believe it,” he said.

“Disbelief,” echoed Tulenchik, 63.

Trump spent months girding himself against possible defeat, insisting he could only lose if there was massive fraud. It's a lie he's sure to repeat as he steps up his public schedule in the coming weeks.

But the narrative was already resonating under the beating sun at the Wisconsin MAGA rally, where attendees came decked out in Trump gear, including plenty of shirts declaring, “Trump Won!”

While Lindell repeatedly described the event as a free speech festival — paid for by him — it had all the trappings of a Trump rally, including several of his frequent warm-up acts and a large American flag hoisted up by cranes.

It was a carnival atmosphere: a face-painting tent for kids; stands selling corndogs, fresh-cut fries and ice cream; a flyover of old military planes. The 2020 campaign lived on, with vendors selling old campaign merchandise — along with Lindell’s pillows. One older man with a cane walked around shirtless, wearing a sparkly cowboy hat and Crocs and using a Trump flag as a cape. One young woman carried a helmet with horns — reminiscent of the headgear worn by an Arizona man who calls himself the QAnon Shaman and who took part in the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.

Indeed, several people said they were at the U.S. Capitol that day, though they were vague on their roles.

While some were Trump rally devotees, traveling the country to see the former president in person, many said they were attending their first political event. Some said they paid little attention to politics until the election, or began to get involved because they opposed pandemic restrictions.

Again and again, attendees insisted Trump won the election. And several said they sincerely believed that he will be reinstated in the coming months — a belief that has been pushed by Lindell and repeated privately by Trump, even though there is no legal framework under which that could be accomplished.

“Not all Democrats are evil. They will see the truth. Whether they like it or not, they will see the truth,” said Beth Kroeger, 61, who lives in Sussex, Wisconsin, and said she expects Trump back in the Oval Office this time next year, “No doubt about it.”

Some suggested the military would be involved; others are convinced he remains in control today.

Most assailed the mainstream media and said they instead got their news from people like Lindell and former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, as well as the conservative channel Newsmax, talk radio and social media platforms.

Few have gone to greater lengths than Lindell to convince the American public the election was stolen. By his own account, he has spent millions of dollars staging election-related events, hiring private investigators and creating movies that purport to document the alleged fraud — not to mention the $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit that has been filed against him by Dominion Voting Systems. (He has counter-sued.)

He now claims he has evidence that China and other countries hacked voting machines to switch votes from Trump, a Republican, to Biden, a Democrat, in “a cyberattack of historical proportions.” But the evidence he cites in his most recent film, which features a blurred-out, anonymous cyber expert, has been repeatedly debunked for not demonstrating what he claims.

Still, attendees repeatedly referenced his videos as clear proof of fraud.

“There’s just so much evidence that Mike Lindell has,” said Lynda Thibado, 65, who traveled with her husband, Don Briggs, from Menomonie, Wisconsin, by camper and stayed overnight at an adjacent campground.

“I mean, such proof positive,” Briggs agreed.

The couple said they hoped the election would be overturned, but they were less confident that would happen.

“I don’t know if they can legally do anything now,” said Briggs. Still, he said, “I don’t think Biden will be the president come 2024, one way or the other.”

 

  

Activists protest EU migration policies at Croatian border

  

Migration Croatia Protest  A man holds a banner during a protest against the violent pushbacks of migrants, allegedly conducted by Croatian police, near the border crossing

Sat, June 19, 2021

MALJEVAC, Croatia (AP) — Dozens of human rights advocates briefly blocked Croatia’s border with Bosnia on Saturday to protest the European Union’s migration policies.

The protesters demanded that EU’s border agency, Frontex, be dismantled and countries end their pushbacks of migrants trying to reach Western Europe. Waving banners reading “Stop deportation,” or “No human is illegal,” they parked cars at the border and shouted slogans against EU policies.

No incidents were reported as Croatian police stood nearby.


Croatian officers have faced allegations of using violence to turn back migrants trying to come in from Bosnia, which authorities have denied.

Thousands of people remain stranded in Bosnia while waiting for a chance to cross into the EU member state Croatia and move on toward other, wealthier EU nations.

Francesco Cibati, from a rights group based in Trieste, Italy, said protesters came to demand that everyone be granted the right to seek asylum. He said organizations from Spain, Germany, France, Austria and Slovenia supported the protest.

“European Union is violently pushing back people and Croatian police is doing that on behalf of European Union, paid by European Union," he said. "So we are here to protest this situation, which is intolerable.”

Migrants fleeing war and poverty in the Mideast, Africa or Asia come to the Balkans by first arriving in Turkey, then slipping into Greece or Bulgaria before moving on toward North Macedonia, Serbia and Bosnia.

___

Follow all AP stories on global migration at https://apnews.com/hub/migration

‘We will not stop’: pipeline opponents ready for America’s biggest environmental fight



Sheila Regan
Sun, June 20, 2021

As the sun set, more than a dozen young people carried a wooden bridge toward a narrow section of the Mississippi River. The bridge allowed the group to cross more easily from their camp to where the immense oil pipeline was being built on the other side.

They were cited for trespassing – but they had symbolically laid claim to the marshy landscape.

Related: How the US lets hot school days sabotage learning

That same day, Dawn Goodwin’s voice was soft but forceful as she spoke into the camera: “I’m calling on you, Joe Biden, to uphold our treaties, because they are the supreme law of the land.”

Goodwin, an Ojibwe woman and environmental activist, was recording a livestream from a picturesque camp site amid northern Minnesota’s natural beauty – where she and dozens of others had come together to protest the construction of the Line 3 pipeline.

Across the state, along the pipeline’s planned route of construction, activists have traveled from all over the country to do the same: many have locked themselves to construction equipment, and hundreds have been arrested. Goodwin’s preferred method of protest is arguably less physical – she was in the middle of leading a four-day prayer ceremony – but she hoped it would be no less effective to draw attention to the potential harm the pipeline represents.

“We’re done messing around with the process and trusting that the process is going to work, because in the end, it failed us,” she said. “What am I trusting instead? The power of the people, and the creator.”

The proposed Line 3 pipeline – which, if expanded, would move crude oil from Alberta in Canada through Minnesota to Wisconsin – has quickly become the biggest target of US environmental advocates. In addition to attracting protesters from around the country, it’s bringing attention to Biden’s unfulfilled promises so far on the climate crisis, as advocates argue he could step in to stop an expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure but hasn’t. The US already produces more oil than it can use, and is increasing exports of oil and natural gas, despite vowing to cut its own climate pollution.

The ramp-up in protests in Minnesota comes on the heels of a major environment win, with developers canceling the Keystone XL pipeline – something Indigenous activists fought for about a decade. Now, advocates are framing Line 3 as the latest frontier in environmental justice, in part because of the risks it poses to the waterways Indigenous Americans rely on.

“For all of the reasons that Keystone XL was shuttered and more, Line 3 needs to be stopped as well,” said Collin Rees, a senior campaigner for Oil Change International. “There’s an increasing understanding that we can’t continue to expand fossil fuels.”

If the pipeline moves forward, Rees said, the Biden administration will be undermining its own authority at international climate negotiations. Other countries – including Denmark, Ireland, and Spain – are moving to ban future licenses for oil and gas drilling.

The 52-year-old pipeline, operated by the Canadian energy company Enbridge, is being replaced because it is deteriorating. Two other Enbridge pipelines have experienced major spills. But the replacement line is on an entirely new route, one that crosses rivers, lakes and wetlands. “Because if there’s a spill, we don’t know what’s going to happen. We don’t fully understand the underground. We want to think we do but we don’t,” Goodwin said.

Goodwin is a “water protector” – the name for Native Americans and allies who are joined in resistance to fossil fuels, and in particular oil pipelines.

Water protectors also fought the Dakota Access pipeline, drawing activists from all over the world to Standing Rock in 2016 and 2017.

It’s a form of activism that is often physically taxing, and not without legal risk: a number of states are initiating greater penalties for protestors who trespass to oppose oil and gas infrastructure. But activists say the water protector strategy has proven effective with the cancelation of the Keystone XL pipeline.

But the movement has had setbacks: a federal judge in Louisisana recently blocked the Biden administration’s pause on certain oil and gas leases. And in an obstacle for opponents of Line 3, a Minnesota court recently sided with Enbridge on challenges to its permit.

Tara Houska, a tribal attorney and founder of the Giniw Collective, which has been protesting the pipeline for years, called the ruling “disappointing” but said the fight continues.

“We cannot stop. And we will not stop,” she said.
Recent escalation

Since December, protesters have been camping, praying, and holding space. But they’ve also gone to greater extremes: Johnny Barber locked his neck to an Enbridge gate in March a statement against the pipeline.

He was inspired by Standing Rock, a Native-led movement in resistance to the Dakota Access pipeline, centered in water protector camps set up near where the pipeline was being constructed. Founded on tenets of Native sovereignty and cultural preservation as well as environmental concerns, it drew allies from all over the world.

“Standing Rock was a watershed moment in the fight to stop these pipelines,” Barber said. “I just promised myself at that point that if there was, if and when that the next battle came up, that I’d make sure I was able to participate.”

“There’s multiple different ways that people are fighting this pipeline,” said Ojibwe water protector Taysha Martineau, who is part of a camp called Mgizi, on land near the pipeline’s route in Cloque. When she was starting out, Martineau was angry and hurt, in part because the reservation where she is from worked out an agreement with Enbridge to build the line through the reservation.

“I was fighting back just to exist,” she said, referring to tensions she had with members of her own tribe. Since then, she has found a sense of community with other water protectors, and seen her work shifting. “I went from screaming down the line of riot police to praying on these easements with sheriff’s departments,” she said.

Martinez said the power of prayer brought her to the headwaters. “I’m not locked down to machinery today, because I recognize that upholding our treaties doesn’t always have to come from a place of anger,” she said.

“It was the women here, who told me that it was my time to stand here with them. And so I’m standing here in solidarity and learning my place as a young Two Spirit, learning where I’ll fit when we do achieve our goal to stop Line 3.”

In the first week of June, more Line 3 protesters from around the country swarmed northern Minnesota. By 7 June, about 200 people had been arrested. About 2,000 environmental advocates arrived at the White Earth Reservation a day earlier for three days of training, according to the Treaty People Gathering.

Keya Chatterjee, the head of the US Climate Action Network, said the non-profit’s policy arm brought three busloads of people from Seattle, Spokane and North Carolina to participate.

Before noon, she said, a Customs and Border Patrol helicopter appeared. “[It] just started severely harassing us, flying really, really low, and kicking up dust.” Nine people from her group were arrested, Chatterjee said.

According to the US Customs and Border Protection in Grand Forks, the agency was responding to a local law enforcement request for assistance in regard to a report of trespassing on private property. “CBP’s headquarters is investigating the facts to determine precisely what occurred and whether the actions taken were justified,” read the agency’s statement.

“All appropriate actions will be taken based on the facts that are learned, including with respect to the incident itself as well as the agency’s applicable policies and procedures.”
A fight for treaty rights

Because Enbridge needs access to land protected by treaties in order to complete construction, activists say the expansion also challenges longstanding agreements that ensure the right to hunt, fish, gather wild rice, and preserve cultural resources for Ojibwe people.

“Our local state and federal governments are violating treaties by allowing this pipeline to go through,” said Nancy Beaulieu, an Ojibwe woman who co-founded the Rise coalition with Goodwin.

“We’re here to make the stand for all living things,” Beaulieu said. In addition to calling on Biden to end the water-crossing permits, she wants the state to disallow Enbridge’s need for more water. “Consider the drought that we’re in,” she said. “Our water levels are very low already.”

In the past, courts have upheld US treaties with the Ojibwe. A court ruled in 1999 that Ojibwe tribes retain their right to hunt, fish and gather, as laid out in the treaties of 1837 and 1854.

Other activists have taken a more direct approach. At the end of last year, 52-year-old Indigenous activist Tania Aubid built a prayer lodge alongside the Mississippi. Her plan was to stay in the way of the pipeline, and she has held that cultural site since.

In early June, Aubid says law enforcement officers visited the lodge while she was praying, and told her she was trespassing – at which point Aubid pointed out the prayer lodge is a cultural resource, protected by the 1855 Treaty Authority.

The officers left – but the prayer lodge makes obvious what Indigenous activists have been saying for years: The further development of oil and gas infrastructure is in direct conflict with Native ways of life, and the health and safety of Native people who depend on the land being developed.

For now, Aubid feels confident that her message is getting across. “Here, they know that we’re doing what we can to protect the 1855 Treaty territories,” Aubid said.

Four arrested after Extinction Rebellion protest at Ascot aimed at the Queen


Leonie Chao-Fong

THE INDEPENDENT
Sun, June 20, 2021




An XR protestor is escorted from the racecourse during the races (Action Images via Reuters)

Four protesters linked to the Extinction Rebellion climate change movement were arrested after chaining themselves to running rails at the Royal Ascot.

Activists unfurled a banner with the slogan ‘Racing to Extinction’ following the opening race on Saturday, the final day of the races.

As security scrambled to remove the banner, they realised the demonstrators had shackled themselves to the railings and glued to the banner. A screen was erected while the they were removed.

The four protesters, who were dressed as catering staff, are understood to have been employed at Royal Ascot and were later revealed to be linked to Extinction Rebellion.

In a statement, the group said action had been taken to send a direct message to the Queen – who was attending the Berkshire meet for the first time since 2019 – to intervene in influencing environmental policy.

Extinction rebellion protestors at the racecourse during the races (Action Images via Reuters)

On Sunday the police confirmed that all four protesters are in custody while a representative of Ascot described the incident as “minor” and acknowledged the activists “were never intending to cause any harm”.

A police statement read: “Thames Valley Police is aware of a protest which took place yesterday at Ascot racecourse. Officers who were on duty at the scene were able to quickly disrupt the protest, and four people have been arrested. They are currently in police custody.

“No one at the racecourse was in any danger at any point, and the day’s events were able to continue with minimal disruption.”

The actions on Saturday by the Extinction Rebellion activists echoed those by the suffragette Emily Davidson, who in 1913 died after attempting to attach a flag to the King’s horse during the Epsom Derby.

One of the protesters, Sam Smithson, said: “I’m really sorry to be disrupting this event, but unfortunately, like suffragette Emily Davison, we have been left with no other choice, as we are running out of time in the race to tackle the climate and ecological emergency.

“We can’t negotiate with each other or nature for more time by carbon offsetting, whilst also promoting infinite growth on a finite planet and chopping down our ancient woodlands.”

In a statement released after the protest, Extinction Rebellion said it had been started 15 minutes before the next race to avoid any injury to jockeys or horses.

They called on the Queen to use her influence “to tell the truth and act now on the climate and ecological emergency”.

Nick Smith, Director of Racing & Public Affairs at Ascot, said: “It was a minor incident, quickly dealt with by the police and our own teams. It barely got noticed.

“The positive point is how quickly it was dealt with. These protesters were never intending to cause any harm, all they’d have brought on site with them was a banner. We had a plan in place and it was dealt with efficiently and with no delay.”

UK

Climate activists stage protest against Shell at Science Museum

Sean Russell
Sun, June 20, 2021

(EPA)

Youth climate activists have continued a protest against oil giant Shell at the Science Museum on Sunday after being threatened with arrest on Saturday.

Members of the London branch of the UK Student Climate Network (UKSCN London) are demonstrating against the decision of the museum to accept sponsorship for the Our Future Planet exhibition, accusing Shell of “greenwashing.”

The exhibition will feature carbon capture and storage technologies and nature-based solutions to the climate crisis. Meanwhile Shell reportedly poured $25bn of investment into oil and gas in 2018 alone.

Izzy Warren, 17, an A-level student from west London, told PA: “The fact that Shell, an oil company, are sponsoring the exhibition is absurd. It's blatant greenwashing.”

UKSCN London said that, on Saturday evening, a team of police officers had arrived and threatened to arrest them when they tried to spend the night in the museum’s Kensington building.

“We hadn’t been given any warning that the police were coming, they just showed up,” Izzy said.

“They told us they ‘wouldn’t hesitate’ to arrest us all, they had the resources to arrest us all, and that they would arrest us all for aggravated trespass.”

The move prompted the group to abandon the protest for the night but return at 1pm on Sunday.

“(The Science Museum) continues to justify the sponsorship, and so the protest last night was us taking further action because further action needed to be taken,” Izzy said.

“It's really brought attention not just to the Shell sponsorship but also the lengths to which the Science Museum will go to protect that sponsorship deal.”

Groups such as Extinction Rebellion UK have come out in support of the protests tweeting: “London youth strikers are occupying the @sciencemuseum calling on them to drop @Shell. We along with @ScientistsX, @drop_BP and many others call on science museum to listen to the youth, and protect our future. There’s no future with #FossilFuels.”

Greenpeace UK have also shown support for the group asking the Science Museum to listen to UKSCN London and “Drop Shell immediately”.

This content is not available due to your privacy preferences.Update your settings here to see it.

Lizzy added: “People are angry and rightfully so, and they will hopefully come and join us outside the museum now.”

An open letter to the museum published on UKSCN’s website said: “We condemn the Science Museum’s decision to accept this sponsorship and provide Shell with an opportunity for brazen greenwashing.”

It said Shell had a history of committing “horrific human rights violations” in the developing world.

The letter continued: “Solving the climate crisis goes beyond cutting carbon emissions; this must be a fight for climate justice.

“We stand alongside the activists in the Global South who face violence from fossil fuel corporations, such as Shell, and the communities who are and will be hit hardest by climate change, despite contributing the least to cause it.”

The Independent has approached the Science Museum for comment

From burgers to chocolate to beer: How climate change will affect what we eat

David Knowles
·Senior Editor
Sat, June 19, 2021

LONG READ

Unless climate change can be greatly minimized, rising temperatures will disrupt food production around the world and potentially alter the way we eat, a new study finds.

The continued buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could imperil "nearly one-third of global food crop production and over one-third of livestock production" by 2081-2100, the peer-reviewed study, published in May by researchers at Aalto University in Espoo, Finland, concludes.

The findings put a fine point on what climate scientists have warned for decades: that climate change will render certain parts of the globe incapable of producing food for the people who live there.

The study notes that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at their current rate, the most vulnerable areas will be South and Southeast Asia, as well as Africa's Sudano-Sahelian zone. But the vast majority of land on earth will be affected.

There is hope, however: If the world's nations are successful in their goal of limiting global mean temperatures to warming between 1.5° and 2°C, the impacts on food production will be lessened.

Numerous other studies have looked at how climate change will affect individual crops or growing areas, and some have concluded that global warming is already wreaking havoc on food production. Others make the case that dietary changes are imperative to prevent temperatures from rising even further.

The following is a sample of the growing body of research on how climate change will affect the world's diet. As certain food industries feel the impact, their products won't go away, but prices could rise and change behaviors.

Wine

A worker picks grapes at a vineyard in California's Napa Valley. (Robert Galbraith/Reuters)

In early April of this year, following an unusually warm March, France experienced several days of severe frost that devastated grape crops, resulting in an estimated $1.7 billion to $2.3 billion in losses. A study released by the research consortium World Weather Attribution concluded that climate change had made the "false spring" event 60 percent more likely.

Previous studies have concluded that rising temperatures will shrink the area in California's Napa Valley and other vaunted wine-growing regions in the U.S. that will be able to continue producing premium grapes.

"Over the next century, the area suitable for premium wine grape production is likely to shrink and shift," a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists concluded. "According to the higher emissions projections, premium wine grapes could only be grown in a thin strip of land along the coast of California, with premium wine-producing regions shifting northward to coastal Oregon and Washington."

Beer

Beer mugs in Abensberg, Germany. (Michael Dalder/Reuters)

A 2018 study published in the journal Nature found that weather disruptions spurred by climate change will also affect the production of beer, thanks to the impact on barley crops.

"Beer is the most popular alcoholic beverage in the world by volume consumed, and yields of its main ingredient, barley, decline sharply in periods of extreme drought and heat," the study's authors wrote.

Depending on the severity of drought and rising temperatures, barley yields are forecast to decline anywhere from 3 to 17 percent annually. As a result, the Chinese and American researchers concluded, beer prices could double in some parts of the world by the end of the century.

Coffee and chocolate

Coffee beans in the window of a store in Dublin, Ireland. (Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Alarm bells went off in Europe, which accounts for one-third of global coffee consumption, when research released this month found that 35 percent of the regions where the EU imports crops, including coffee beans, will be threatened by severe drought brought on by climate change that will likely disrupt food production.

An April study found that coffee production in Ethiopia will be especially vulnerable. "We conclude that depending on drivers of suitability and projected impacts, climate change will significantly affect the Ethiopian speciality coffee sector and area-specific adaptation measures are required to build resilience," wrote the authors of the study, published in Nature.

Cocoa beans, which are used to make chocolate, face a similar threat due to rising temperatures and drought. A 2018 study published in the journal PLOS One concluded that "drought effects on cocoa agroforestry could be a ‘canary in the coal mine’ warning of problems to come both in agriculture and in semi-natural and natural vegetation due to increased intensity and frequency."

Meat

Cattle at a ranch in Tomales, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

According to the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, meat and dairy production accounts for 14.5 percent of annual greenhouse gas emissions. Citing deforestation that is carried out to create grazing land for livestock, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change included a section in its landmark 2019 special report that declared that the prospect of eating less meat could "present major opportunities for adaptation and mitigation while generating significant co-benefits in terms of human health."

“We don’t want to tell people what to eat,” Hans-Otto Pörtner, an ecologist who co-chairs the IPCC’s working group on impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, told Nature. “But it would indeed be beneficial, for both climate and human health, if people in many rich countries consumed less meat, and if politics would create appropriate incentives to that effect.”

Beef is, by far, one of the worst food sources in terms of its impact on climate change, in part because of the methane gas that cows produce. Beef production generates 60 kilograms of greenhouse gas emissions per kilogram of meat, more than double that of lamb, which ranks second, Forbes reported.

Wheat and corn

A damaged corn crop in Kansas in 2012. (Jeff Tuttle/Reuters)

A staple of the global diet that accounts for 20 percent of all calories consumed by people, wheat is one crop that humans need to ensure survives in the coming decades. While wheat yields have, in some countries, increased in the short term as the concentration of carbon dioxide has risen in the atmosphere, a major concern is the prevalence of drought in parts of the world where it is grown.

A 2019 study published in Science Advances found that unless global mean temperatures can be kept from rising, major droughts will affect 60 percent of areas where wheat is grown. That is dramatically higher than the current 15 percent of wheat-growing areas affected by drought conditions. The backdrop to the rise in the prevalence of drought, the study noted, is that demand for wheat was projected to increase 43 percent from 2006 to 2050.

A similar dynamic is at play with corn, 30 percent of the world's supply of which is grown in the U.S. Weather patterns resulting in drought or widespread flooding that can overlap with the growing season for corn are projected to reduce yields by 20 to 40 percent over the decade spanning 2046-2055, a study released in April concluded.

"That poor weather can take the form of extremes in temperature such as cold snaps or heat waves during the growing season," the authors wrote. "It can also be expressed as excessive variation in rainfall resulting in drought or flood, including floods before a crop’s growing season that prevent the planting of that crop in the first place."

Almonds

A field of dead almond trees next to a field of growing almond trees in California's Central Valley in 2015. (Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)

California, which is currently in the grip of a mega-drought, is the world's leading producer of almonds, growing roughly 80 percent of the global supply. Thanks to rising temperatures and the drought, which has depleted groundwater and deprived the state of a robust snowpack, the future of the water-intensive crop has been made more precarious.

Yet, as with many other crops, climate change may present the opportunity for almonds to be grown in latitudes currently too cold to support them.

Researcher Lauren Parker of the University of California, Davis, is studying whether, as temperatures continue to rise, almond trees could thrive in states like Oregon and Washington.

"Under climate change, what we anticipate is seeing a reduction in the frost risk even for almonds, which bloom pretty early in the year," Parker told Yale Climate Connections.

Pet food

Fly larvae waiting to be harvested at a farm near Cape Town, South Africa. (Mike Hutchings/Reuters)

What people feed their pets, it turns out, also has a big impact on climate change. A 2020 study published in the journal Global Environmental Change found that the annual production of pet food worldwide resulted in average greenhouse gas emissions of 106 million metric tons of CO2. In terms of emissions, that is the equivalent of a country the size of the Philippines, the study noted.

In part, that's due to the rise in "premium" pet food, according to the study, which more closely mirrors a meat-heavy human diet. At present, pets consume roughly 20 percent of the meat and fish in a given country. But what if humans changed what they fed their pets, substituting insect protein for meat? While that idea may sound lifted from a dystopian science fiction film, it's already happening in many countries.

In fact, a 2017 study recommended that insect protein replace that of meat for humans, too, as a way to fight climate change, though with some caveats attached.

"Insect production has great potential with respect to sustainably providing food for the growing population," the study authors wrote. "However, further technological development of this sector and monitoring of the effects of these developments on the environmental impact of insect production are needed."

Women protest Erdogan’s withdrawal from Istanbul Convention on gender-based violence

Issued on: 19/06/2021 - 

Text by: Lara BULLENS|
Video by: Shona BHATTACHARYY

Women in Istanbul took to the streets on Saturday to protest Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s decision to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, effective July 1. Established by the Council of Europe in 2011, the convention targets violence against women and domestic violence.

Protesters gathered on the streets of Istanbul on Saturday to voice their anger at the government’s decision to withdraw from the measure, which is aimed at protecting women from gender-based violence. Turkey was the convention’s first signatory in 2011, lending it the name of its commercial capital. Since then the convention has been signed by 45 countries, along with the European Union.

Erdogan issued a decree annulling Turkey’s ratification of the convention on March 20. Turkey will officially renounce its membership on July 1.

“People are really afraid that their rights, which are already at a very fragile point today in Turkey, will be further deteriorated [and that] the state will protect them even less,” said FRANCE 24’s Shona Bhattacharyya, reporting from Istanbul.

She says protesters are determined to keep fighting through July 1, and are asking for a law to be passed in parliament ensuring that women’s rights are further protected.



The convention requires signatory states to investigate allegations of violence and prosecute those responsible. Additionally, signatories agree to promoting gender equality through legislation and education.

Critics fear that the withdrawal will add to an already increasing number of femicides in Turkey. In May alone, 17 cases of confirmed femicides were reported and another 20 suspected cases were reported, according to a study published by women’s rights group Kadin Cinayetlerini Durduracagiz Platformu (We Will Stop Femicide Platform). Turkey does not log official figures on femicides.

“These murders often go unpunished,” said Marc Pierini, a visiting scholar from Carnegie Europe. This is why the Istanbul Convention was such a “crucial reassurance” for Turkish women, he said.

At the time the convention was ratified, the Turkish parliament agreed to act on eradicating violence against women. The Women and Democracy Association (Kadem), whose vice-chair is Erdogan’s daughter, also fully supported the move.

But views on the convention have since shifted. Conservatives in Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AK Party) now claim the convention actually encourages violence by undermining Turkey’s traditional family structures.

Erdogan further justified his withdrawal in March by accusing the convention of “normalising homosexuality”.

XI THE ALL FATHER
Sun, June 20, 2021
BEIJING, June 20, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- A good example is the best sermon. For Chinese President Xi Jinping, words and deeds from his father Xi Zhongxun are a great family heirloom that runs deep in Xi's outlook on life, work and governance, inspiring him to solemnly honor his duties towards the nation and the people.

Over the years, Xi Zhongxun taught his son three important lessons: maintain close ties with the people; attach importance to investigation and research; and practice thrift and hard work.

File photo of Xi Zhongxun (R) with his sons Xi Jinping and Xi Yuanping.

Xi Jinping has vividly interpreted what is maintaining close ties with the people.


During one summer, Xi Zhongxun visited 21 counties in the scorching heat to familiarize himself with the local situation. Xi Jinping, then a student in Tsinghua University, went to the province with his father to take part in social practice activities. He was influenced by his father's down-to-earth working approach.

Xi Zhongxun (C) visits rural Huiyang, south China's Guangdong Province, August 1978.

File photo of Xi Zhongxun (R) talking to people in Guangdong Province, China.

On Nov 3, 2020, the proposal for formulating the 14th Five-Year Plan was published. To this end, Xi Jinping successively went to Jilin and other places for investigation, and presided over seven symposiums. He said "without investigation, there will be no right to speak, let alone decision-making."

What else Xi Jinping learned from his father is thrift and hard work.

Xi Jinping once recalled his childhood life and said his worn-out clothes were patched up instead of being thrown away and he and his younger brother used to wear clothes and shoes handed down from their elder sisters.

File photo of Xi Jinping (R, rear) with his father Xi Zhongxun (R, front), his wife Peng Liyuan (L, front) and his daughter (C, front).

While making inspection tours, Xi chose to spend the night in the train for several times to reduce the spending burden for local authorities. As for overseas trips, he said the living place should not be luxurious.

Xi said the spirit of hard work should be upheld although the living conditions have greatly improved nowadays. He called on all the Chinese people to pass on the treasure of staying frugal and abstaining from extravagance.

View original content to download multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fathers-day-xi-takes-father-as-role-model-in-life-work-governance-301316006.html

SOURCE CCTV+

Fauci pushes back against the 'craziness' of attacks on his evolving pandemic response, saying 'that's the way science works'

Tyler Sonnemaker
Sun, June 20, 2021


Dr. Anthony Fauci in Washington, DC, on February 25, 2021. Saul Loeb /AFP via Getty Images


Dr. Anthony Fauci pushed back against attacks on his evolving response to the pandemic, Axios reported.


Fauci said attacks on his shifting positions are "actually criticizing science."


Fauci has become a frequent punching bag among right-wing media and politicians.


Dr. Anthony Fauci is pushing back more pointedly against attacks criticizing his evolving response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Axios reported Sunday.

"The people who are giving the ad hominems are saying, 'Ah, Fauci misled us. First he said no masks, then he said masks,'" Fauci told New York Times columnist Kara Swisher, according to Axios. "Well, let me give you a flash. That's the way science works. You work with the data you have at the time," he said.

"It is essential as a scientist that you evolve your opinion and your recommendations based on the data as it evolves," Fauci said, according to Axios. "And that's the reason why I say people who then criticize me about that are actually criticizing science."

As hospitals experienced a severe shortage of personal protective equipment, or PPE, during the early months of the pandemic, Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, along with the CDC and World Health Organization, initially told people not to wear masks.

But as PPE suppliers ramped up production and data emerged that asymptomatic carriers could spread the virus, Fauci and public health agencies reversed course, with the CDC saying in July that "universal masking" could help the US control the virus in four to eight weeks.

"It was not a change because I felt like flip-flopping. It was a change because the evidence changed, the data changed," Fauci told Swisher, according to Axios, in his latest defense of his position on masks.

Masks have been a political flashpoint for nearly the entire pandemic, while Fauci became a frequent punching bag for former President Donald Trump as well as right-wing media figures who repeatedly downplayed the virus and spread conspiracies and misinformation about everything from the health risks of COVID-19 to Fauci himself.

But Fauci, according to Axios, said he puts "very little weight in the adulation, and very little weight in the craziness of condemning me," and that what has bothered him the most is death threats against him and his family.

Read the original article on Business Insider

OBAMA WAS DRONE PREZ
The future of drone warfare


The Week Staff
Sun, June 20, 2021

The view from a military drone. Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Unmanned aerial weapons are reshaping the battlefield — and starting to think for themselves. Here's everything you need to know:

When were drones first deployed?

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been in use for decades. Radio-controlled B-24s were sent on bombing missions over Germany in World War II, and American forces used remote-controlled surveillance aircraft to snap photos during the Vietnam War. But the real breakthrough in drone warfare came in 1995 with the development of the Gnat — later renamed the Predator — an American UAV with a 49-foot wingspan that could stay airborne over a target for up to 12 hours, transmitting a live-video feed to a pilot who could be stationed hundreds or even thousands of miles away. On October 7, 2001, the first targeted strike by a remotely piloted aircraft took place in Afghanistan. A CIA Predator blasted a Hellfire-missile at a compound housing Taliban leader Mullah Omar; it missed and destroyed a nearby vehicle, killing several bodyguards. The U.S. drone program steadily expanded in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, and by 2014 the Air Force was training more drone pilots than airplane pilots. Some 20 countries now have UAVs in their arsenals, up from eight in 2015.

What advantages do drones have over warplanes?

Unlike fighter jets, which need to be refueled regularly and have crews that get tired, drones can loiter in the air for up to 24 hours while carrying out surveillance, probing air defenses, or waiting for a suitable target. While drones such as the Predator are armed with missiles, a new generation of low-cost "kamikaze" drones are flown into their targets and then explode. Pentagon officials worry that the spread of these cheap and deadly-effective drones could help shift the global strategic balance away from the U.S. "Our adversaries are already fielding technologies that will hold our legacy platforms at risk," acting Air Force Secretary John Roth recently told Congress.


Where are these drones being made?

NO MENTION OF ISRAEL
China is a top exporter. At least 10 countries — including Nigeria and the United Arab Emirates — have used Chinese-made UAVs to kill adversaries. Turkey has also emerged as a drone powerhouse. Its utilitarian Bayraktar TB2, a 21-foot-long UAV armed with four laser-guided missiles, first grabbed international attention in Syria in February 2020. After 36 Turkish troops were killed in a Syrian government airstrike, Turkey used a fleet of radio-guided TB2s — which are quiet and hard to spot on radar — to destroy Russian-made air defenses and kill hundreds, possibly thousands, of Syrian troops. TB2s also proved crucial in the Libyan civil war last year, helping the central government repel an assault on the capital, Tripoli, by the Russian-backed forces of rebel leader Khalifa Haftar. But the biggest demonstration of how drones are changing the nature of warfare was the 2020 conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian enclave inside Azerbaijan.

How were drones used there?

At the start of the war, Azerbaijan sent slow-flying Soviet-era aircraft that had been converted to drones to bait Armenian air defense units — tempting them to fire and expose their location, at which point they could be hit by TB2s or Israeli-made kamikaze drones. Having achieved aerial dominance, Azerbaijani drones then devastated Armenian forces, destroying at least 106 Armenian tanks, 146 artillery pieces, and scores of other vehicles. After six weeks of fighting, the Armenians had no choice but to sign a humiliating truce. Nagorno-Karabakh, said Malcolm Davis of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, was "a potential game changer for land warfare."

How else are drones changing warfare?

Experts worry that the proliferation of UAVs could make bloody conflicts more common, because countries that are reluctant to start a war and risk their soldiers' lives won't hesitate to send in drones. "For states that seek to break long-standing geopolitical deadlocks, the rise of relatively cheap, disposable, armed drones offers a tempting opportunity," says Jason Lyall, an expert in military technology at Dartmouth College. Others fear a rise in autonomous drones that don't need a human controller. The United Nations recently reported that a 15-pound Turkish-built quadcopter independently targeted and launched a suicide attack on retreating rebel forces in Libya. If anyone died in that March 2020 strike, said security consultant Zachary Kallenborn, it would be the "first known case of artificial intelligence–based autonomous weapons being used to kill."

Are other nations making AI drones? 

NO MENTION OF ISRAEL

The U.S., China, Russia, and India are all experimenting with AI-driven drone swarms, in which dozens or hundreds of UAVs act in concert to overwhelm enemy forces. Some human rights organizations and AI researchers are calling for a ban on killer robots, saying that even if this technology does not result in the nightmare scenario from the Terminator movies — in which intelligent bots turn on their human inventors — drone proliferation is dangerous. "Lethal autonomous weapons cheap enough that every terrorist can afford them are not in America's national security interest," says MIT physicist Max Tegmark. But the major countries developing intelligent drones have shown no interest in a ban that they believe their rivals would not honor. "We're moving toward a situation with cyber or autonomous weapons," said German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, "where everyone can do as they please."

Defending against drones

The drone arms race has sparked an anti-drone arms race. In 2019, the U.S. Army began using the Raytheon-developed Howler system, which can be attached to tanks and other vehicles and scans for enemy UAVs with radar. If it detects an incoming UAV, the Howler launches a 3-foot interceptor drone called the Coyote that detonates on impact, destroying itself and the threat. But using such a defense in a heavily populated area carries a high risk of civilian casualties, and so researchers are examining less explosive options. One interceptor drone created by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) blasts what appears to be silly string at the UAV, gumming up its rotors and causing it to fall from the sky. China, meanwhile, has developed a 20-barrel Gatling gun, which weapons experts believe is intended to counter the threat of drone swarms by throwing up a wall of bullets. But anti-drone research is still in its infancy, says Dartmouth's Lyall. "The defense is playing catch-up, while the offense marches downfield."