Friday, August 27, 2021

Line 3 protesters removed from Minnesota Capitol lawn
35 minutes ago


Minnesota State Troopers face off with environmental activists, who identify as water protectors, at the Minnesota State Capitol after activists opposing the Line 3 oil pipeline occupied the site overnight in St. Paul, Minn., Friday, Aug. 27, 2021. (Evan Frost/Minnesota Public Radio via AP)

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Minnesota troopers on Friday removed some demonstrators protesting Enbridge Energy’s Line 3 replacement pipeline project on the lawn of the state Capitol.

Videos posted on social media showed troopers carrying protesters onto a bus as dozens of law enforcement officers surrounded a small remnant of the 1,000 or more protesters who had gathered for a major rally calling on Democratic Gov. Tim Walz and President Joe Biden to pull permits and shut down the replacement pipeline project. Officers announced over a loudspeaker that the protesters’ permit had expired Thursday night and refusal to leave would result in arrests.

Indigenous and environmental activists who oppose the pipeline argue the project violates Native American treaty rights and will aggravate climate change and risk spills that would contaminate areas where Indigenous people hunt, fish and gather wild rice.

Line 3 starts in Alberta and clips a corner of North Dakota before crossing northern Minnesota en route to Enbridge’s terminal in Superior, Wisconsin. The 337-mile (542.35-kilometer) segment in Minnesota is the last phase in replacing the deteriorating pipeline that was built in the 1960s. Construction began in December.




Minnesota State Troopers remove and arrest an activist, who identifies as a water protector, from the site of a protest opposing the Enbridge Line 3 oil pipeline at the Minnesota State Capitol in St. Paul, Minn., Friday, Aug. 27, 2021. Line 3 starts in Alberta and clips a corner of North Dakota before crossing northern Minnesota en route to Enbridge’s terminal in Superior, Wis. (Evan Frost/Minnesota Public Radio via AP)


Activtsts, who identify as water protectors, stand outside of an area controlled by Minnesota State Troopers as they remove other activists occupying the site at the Minnesota State Capitol in St. Paul, Minn., Friday, Aug. 27, 2021. Activists had assembled at tipi and made a ceremonial fire at the site in days prior. (Evan Frost/Minnesota Public Radio via AP)

Environmental group outbids rancher for Idaho grazing lease

By KEITH RIDLER
This June 1, 2012, file photo shows the Sawtooth National Recreation Area near Stanley, Idaho. An environmental group that wants to end public-land grazing has outbid a rancher in central Idaho for a grazing lease on state land that includes habitat for bull trout and steelhead. (Darin Oswald/Idaho Statesman via AP, File)

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — An environmental group that wants to end public-land grazing has outbid a rancher in central Idaho for a grazing lease on state land that includes habitat for bull trout and steelhead.

Western Watersheds Project’s bid of $8,200 last week won the 20-year grazing lease on 620 acres (250 hectares) in central Idaho’s Sawtooth Valley in Custer County.

The group and the Idaho Cattle Association say it’s possible other state grazing leases could be sought by other environmental groups.

Bidding on the lease for the allotment that is bordered on the west side by Idaho State Highway 75 started at $250 at the auction held by the Idaho Department of Lands in Jerome. Western Watersheds will also have to pay an annual $800 fee based on the number of sheep or cattle authorized for the allotment.

“That’s still a screaming deal,” said Erik Molvar, executive director of Western Watersheds Project, noting that private-land grazing fees are about three times that much. “Certainly, at those prices, the parcel is a lot more valuable for conservation than it is for grazing livestock.”

Molvar said the group will not graze livestock but instead convert the grazing lease into a conservation lease and allow the area to be used by wildlife, notably a herd of 50 pronghorn that frequent the area. Elk and bighorn sheep are also in the region.

He also said sections of two streams running through the parcel, Fourth of July Creek and Champion Creek, will be protected. The new lease takes effect on Jan. 1.

The current leaseholder, Michael Henslee of Plateau Farms, didn’t return a call from The Associated Press on Friday. Plateau Farms has both sheep and cattle, grazing in locations from southern to central Idaho.

Cameron Mulrony, executive vice president of the Idaho Cattle Association, said the auction result was disappointing.

“It’s a big concern when we start taking productive ground that is properly managed and properly grazed and decide we’re going to convert it,” he said.

He said ranchers are themselves conservation-minded in keeping lands healthy while also preventing overgrowth that could result in wildfires.

The leased area allows grazing amounting to 112 AUMs, or animal unit months. One AUM is the amount of forage necessary to feed one cow, or one cow with a calf less than six months of age, or one bull for one month. Five sheep or five ewes with lambs are considered one AUM.

Mulroney said the $8,200 upfront cost for the lease would have likely made it difficult to profit on the land with grazing.

The Idaho Department of Lands manages more than 1,100 grazing leases on 2,700 square miles (7,000 square kilometers) that are mostly in the southern two-thirds of the state.

The Idaho Land Board, comprised of the governor and four other statewide elected officials, directs the Department of Lands and is constitutionally required to maximize long-term profit. In all, the board manages about 3,900 square miles (10 million square kilometers) that generate money mainly for public schools.

The Land Board is open for business on those lands. It does have some discretion, but is typically required to take the best deal.

“In this case, the conservation lease was the use that won the auction and made the most money for the Public School Beneficiary,” Sharla Arledge, spokeswoman for the Idaho Department of Lands, said in a statement.

In the 1990s, Western Watersheds Project, then known as Idaho Watersheds Project, won a grazing lease at an auction but was denied the lease by the Land Board, which awarded the new lease instead to the rancher who had the previous lease.

The group sued and prevailed when the Idaho Supreme Court ruled the Land Board didn’t have that discretion. That court decision made possible the new lease in the Sawtooth Valley.

Molvar said it was an expensive way to achieve conservation and not applicable to all public lands, but worth it in an area rich with wildlife and that’s also a tourist destination for outdoor enthusiasts.

“The Sawtooth Valley is one of the crown jewels of Idaho that is really valuable for wildlife and for fisheries,” he said.
PRIVATE EDU U$A
Virtual schools saw little disruption, got equal virus aid

By COLLIN BINKLEY and CAMILLE FASSETT
IT Support Specialist Joe Coladonato, left, and Tech Support Specialist Jaquan Robinson, right, work at Agora Cyber Charter School, Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2021, in King of Prussia, Pa. At Agora, officials said they have no plans to use the full $38 million the school was awarded and are exploring whether it’s possible to return unused money.
 (AP Photo/Jacqueline Larma)


BOSTON (AP) — While many schools scrambled to shift to online classes last year, the nation’s virtual charter schools faced little disruption. For them, online learning was already the norm. Most have few physical classrooms, or none at all.

Yet when Congress sent $190 billion in pandemic aid to schools, virtual charters received just as much as any other school because the same formula applied to all schools, with more money going to those in high-poverty areas, an Associated Press investigation found.

“It’s scandalous that they’re getting that much money,” said Gordon Lafer, an economist at the University of Oregon and school board member in Eugene, Oregon. “There were all kinds of costs that were extraordinary because of COVID, but online schools didn’t have any of them.”

The infusion of federal relief has inflamed a decades-long debate about the role of the nation’s 200-plus fully virtual charter schools, which are publicly funded schools that operate independently or under the umbrella of public school districts. They generally offer classes through online learning platforms provided by private companies.

Leaders of online schools say virtual charters offer a valuable option for students who don’t do well in traditional classrooms. But critics say they drain money from other schools and often lead to poor outcomes for students.

Using data provided by state governments, The Associated Press tracked more than $550 million that went to virtual charters across the country over three rounds of pandemic relief. The analysis, which covered allocations to 76 virtual schools in 10 states, showed that some online charters received among the highest funding rates in their states, getting as much per student as some of the poorest districts.

The federal government has not released nationwide data on the money given to virtual charters. Some states, including Wisconsin and Texas, said allocations for online schools were managed by local districts and not tracked by the state.

Most of the pandemic aid was distributed using the same formula as Title I money, the largest federal funding source for public schools. But some states also used discretionary pools of federal money to send additional help to virtual charters, including in Idaho, Minnesota and Ohio.

Of the 76 virtual schools tracked by the AP, more than a third are operated by the industry’s two largest companies, Stride Inc. and Connections Academy. Others are run by different for-profit companies, while some are run by nonprofits or state or local governments.

Officials at virtual schools say the money was needed to serve a wave of students who transferred from traditional schools during the pandemic. But leaders of some traditional schools wonder why any aid went to virtual charters that were mostly conducting business as usual and did not have to worry about social distancing or sanitizing.

In Philadelphia, the Esperanza Cyber Charter School received $11,300 per student, the highest rate among virtual schools tracked by the AP. That’s compared with $12,300 in Harrisburg public schools, one of Pennsylvania’s poorest districts, and $7,500 in Pittsburgh schools.

Esperanza, operated by a local nonprofit, teaches about 800 students in Philadelphia’s Latino neighborhoods, with more than 90% coming from poverty.

When the pandemic hit last year, Esperanza never halted classes. Teachers started working from home instead of at the school’s single building, but little changed for the student experience, said Jon Marsh, the school’s CEO.

Marsh said he sees both sides of the debate over federal relief. His school’s transition to pandemic teaching was relatively smooth, he said, but there were some new costs. The federal funding helped purchase computers and monitors for teachers, for instance, and new software to help students who are learning English.

Still, Esperanza’s funding was immense for its size. It received nearly $9 million, more than the school spends in a typical year. And so far, it has spent less than half of that sum, leaving school officials wondering how to use the remaining $5 million.

“I would love to have the ability to distribute this money to families in need, but you can’t. That’s not on the list,” Marsh said.

Other states with online schools include Ohio, where virtual charters received $101 million in federal funding, and Oklahoma, where they got $82 million. Smaller amounts went to virtual schools in states including Arizona, California, Idaho and Michigan.

Pennsylvania, long a battleground in the cyber school debate, saw the largest sum, with $235 million going to 11 virtual schools. Those allotments rankled leaders of some traditional schools who said the money was desperately needed in public districts.

“It just doesn’t add up to me when you look at the intent of the legislation,” said Chris Celmer, who until recently served as acting superintendent in Harrisburg, which used its money to buy computers for students and is now improving ventilation across the district’s 12 building. “Those dollars could have been distributed across the other 500 school districts across the state of Pennsylvania.”

Commonwealth Charter Academy, the largest virtual school in Pennsylvania, saw its enrollment double last school year, to nearly 20,000 students.

Commonwealth was awarded about $4,000 per student, totaling more than $60 million. Much of the early funding was used to hire new teachers and buy laptops for students. More recent funding will be used to help students who are behind in reading, said Timothy Eller, a school spokesperson.

“Cyber charter school students are not second-class students,” Eller said. “Just because they attend a cyber charter doesn’t mean they should receive less funding.”

For the online schooling industry, the pandemic has delivered an unprecedented financial boost.

In April 2020, as students flocked to online charters, the financial chief for Stride Inc. told investors that COVID-19 would bring “a lasting tailwind to online education.” Virtual schools, some of which spend millions of dollars a year on advertising, promoted themselves as a better alternative to public schools that were struggling to offer online classes.

Stride’s latest financial reports showed a 48% increase in revenue since last year, with most of it coming from contracts with schools. The company did not respond to a request seeking information about its schools’ federal aid.

The cost of adding new students is typically covered by schools’ state funding, Lafer said, and virtual schools are designed to scale up services at a low cost.

“As far as I can see, the money is 100% pure profit,” said Lafer, who has researched online charter schools.

Recognizing that virtual charters have lower costs, some states routinely fund them at lower rates than traditional schools. Some states applied the same logic when they disbursed discretionary pools of pandemic aid.

In South Carolina, Republican Gov. Henry McMaster gave charter schools $9 million to offset enrollment increases. But while traditional charters received $220 per student, virtual schools were given $116 per student. Separately, McMaster wanted to use $32 million of the federal pandemic aid to provide scholarships for students to attend private schools, but the state Supreme Court blocked the plan.

Even some virtual charters are questioning whether they need their full allotments. At Agora Cyber Charter School, a Pennsylvania school affiliated with Stride, officials said they have no plans to use the full $38 million the school was awarded. Agora officials are exploring whether it’s possible to return unused money.

“We’re trying to be very deliberate to make sure that any dollar we take from this is focused on servicing students,” said Richard Jensen, the CEO. “That’s the end game for me.”

COVID-19 surge pummels Hawaii and its native population

By JENNIFER SINCO KELLEHER
In this Thursday, Aug. 26, 2021, photo State Sen. Jarrett Keohokalole, at podium, speaks at a gathering of Native Hawaiian leaders urging Hawaiians to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and wear masks in Honolulu. Hawaii is experiencing a COVID-19 surge as hospitals are overflowing, vaccinations are stagnating and Hawaiians experiencing a disproportionate share of the suffering. (AP Photo/Jennifer Sinco Kelleher)


HONOLULU (AP) — Kuulei Perreira-Keawekane could barely breathe when she went to a Hawaii emergency room. Nausea made it difficult for her to stand and her body throbbed with pain.

Like many Native Hawaiians, she was not vaccinated against COVID-19.

Perreira-Keawekane’s situation highlights the COVID-19 crisis that is gripping Hawaii as hospitals are overflowing with a record number of patients, vaccinations are stagnating and Hawaiians are experiencing a disproportionate share of the suffering.

Hawaii was once seen as a beacon of safety during the pandemic because of stringent travel and quarantine restrictions and overall vaccine acceptance that made it one of the most inoculated states in the country. But the highly contagious delta variant exploited weaknesses as residents let down their guard and attended family gatherings after months of restrictions and vaccine hesitancy lingered in some Hawaiian communities.

Now, the governor is urging tourists to stay away and residents to limit travel, and leaders are re-imposing caps on sizes of social gatherings. And in an effort to address vaccine hesitancy, a group of businesses and nonprofits launched a public service campaign Thursday aimed at Native Hawaiians, many of whom harbor a deep distrust of the government dating back to the U.S.-supported overthrow of the monarchy in 1893.

The campaign reminds Hawaiians that they were nearly wiped out by disease in the 1800s and that the kingdom’s rulers at the time pushed people to get vaccinated against smallpox.

About 20 Hawaiian leaders stood in rows 6 feet (1.8 meters) apart Thursday at a statue of Queen Liliʻuokalani, the kingdom’s last monarch, imploring people to wear masks and get vaccinated to ensure the survival of the Indigenous people of Hawaii.

“Not only was I afraid of the needles and just putting it off, putting it off, but I didn’t have enough information about the vaccine and that distrust was just very real,” said Perreira-Keawekane.



In this photo provided by Kuulei Perreira-Keawekane, she is seen in a selfie from her hospital bed on July 19, 2021, in Hilo, Hawaii. She tested positive for COVID-19, adding to the crisis that Hawaii is experiencing as hospitals are overflowing with a record number of patients, vaccinations are stagnating and Native Hawaiians suffering a disproportionate share of the suffering. (Kuulei Perreira-Keawekane via AP)


She now plans to get vaccinated. Still, she doesn’t consider herself pro-vaccine, or anti-vaccine.

“Having to choose one or the other is the root of trauma for native people,” she said. “You can shout data at the top of your lungs, but if it has nothing to do with people we know, it’s not real.”

Overall, 62.1% of Hawaii is fully vaccinated. But Hawaiians have among the lowest rates; estimates show it’s at about 40%.

Native Hawaiians make up about 21% of the state’s population, and from the start of the pandemic until July 10, 2021, they accounted for 21% of cases as well. But from July 11, 2021, to Aug. 16, 2021, that figured increased to 28%, according to state data.

Honolulu Emergency Services Department Director Jim Ireland said that on a recent morning, there were four COVID-19 patient 911 calls in a row for Nanakuli, a community that’s home to many Native Hawaiians. He noted that vaccination rates are lower on the west side of Oahu.

The thought behind the campaign focusing on increasing Hawaiian vaccination rates is that messages to the public so far haven’t been adequate, said Nāʻālehu Anthony, director of COVID Pau, a collaborative of businesses and nonprofit organizations delivering public health messages during the pandemic.

“We’re telling people to get the vaccine ’til we’re blue in the face,” Anthony said. “But that’s not necessarily all of the story as to why it’s important to get a vaccine. And part of that is the relationship to who’s asking you to do it.”

At a Monday news conference, Gov. David Ige, who is not Hawaiian, acknowledged he’s not the ideal messenger: “We do know that sometimes my making statements are not the most motivational for many others.”

Earlier in the pandemic, Native Hawaiians had among the lowest rates of infection and embraced safety measures such as trading honi, a traditional forehead-to-forehead greeting, for elbow bumps or shakas from a distance.

That changed around May during the time of year when people celebrate graduations and weddings.

The irony is not lost on some that a popular reason for Hawaii family parties today originated during a time when Hawaiians would hold big celebrations for a baby’s first birthday, which was a real feat in the face of measles until a vaccine was available.

“I do think that it’s sad and kind of a little bit ironic that luau, in a lot of cases, have become places where people get sick,” said state Sen. Jarrett Keohokalole.

Andria Tupola, a Hawaiian city councilwoman who represents west Oahu, said one way government leaders are out of touch with her constituents is not respecting people who want to make their own decisions.

She recently disclosed that she wasn’t vaccinated because she had tested positive while visiting Utah, but felt healthy enough to go running every day. She has also been instrumental in organizing vaccination clinics.

The backlash she faced over her vaccination status isn’t helping convince people in her community to get vaccinated, she said.

“If you have to crucify me and make an example out of me in front of my community … if you think somehow that’s going to make people want to do it, it’s like that’s the opposite because people trust others and they respect others in our community,” she said.

Keaweʻaimoku Kaholokula, chair of the Department of Native Hawaiian Health at the University of Hawaii’s medical school, said he didn’t expect some Hawaiians to shun the vaccine. “It’s very American, which is ironic — very individualistic — to behave this way,” he said.

“I think our people need to remember that a part of our culture is protecting each other over our own self-interest,” he said.

Keoni Payton, a clothing designer on the Big Island, is not vaccinated, but supports those who choose to get vaccinated. “I’m pro-choice on what you put in your body and body autonomy,” he said.

The messages about how kingdom rulers mandated the smallpox vaccine in the 1850s don’t resonate with him.

“As Hawaiians, we haven’t been treated fairly with the U.S. government,” he said. “They stole our land and now they’re stealing our bodies.”

___

AP reporters Audrey McAvoy and Caleb Jones contributed to this report.
Embattled 'We Build the Wall' group admits they can't pay lawyer after raising millions: report

Tom Boggioni
August 27, 2021

Fox News screenshot/wall construction screenshot via "We Build the Wall" YouTube Video

According to a report from Fox News 8, the people behind the crowdsourced "We Build the Wall" group who claim on their website that they have pledges for $25 million to build part of Donald Trump's ill-fated border wall along the Texas border are now pleading poverty and claiming they can't pay their attorneys.

The group, whose advisory board includes former Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Kris Kobach, as well as wealthy Blackwater founder Eric Prince, has reportedly been stiffing their legal representation, leading McAllen, Texas lawyer David Oliveira to request withdrawing as one of their attorneys.

According to the report, "We Build the Wall" general counsel Kobach made the admission during a Zoom call on Thursday.

"The essence of it is that We Build The Wall has very limited funds right now to bring the ledger up to balance or close to balance," Kobach told U.S. District Judge Randy Crane with regard to Oliveria representing them in a case filed by the " ... North American Butterfly Association against We Build The Wall and other organizations that built 3.5 miles of border wall on private land along the banks of the Rio Grande south of Mission, Texas, adjacent to the National Butterfly Center," Fox8 is reporting.

According to "We Build the Wall" website, their goal had been to build 100 miles of the wall by using private funds while claiming they have an even 500,000 donors.

With the judge granting Oliveria's request and telling Kobach he needs to find new lawyers, the former Trump adviser told the judge, "It might be expensive and few of us have the assets right now to cover a retainer. So we are willing to let counsel step aside but we would like a fairly generous bit of time to find local counsel and also perhaps have a picture of what it involves," only to have Judge Crane admonish him by stating, "This case just keeps getting delayed and delayed; 90 days seems like a long time."

"Finding a lawyer I don't think is a big problem. I think finding a lawyer who is willing to risk not getting paid is probably the issue here."

The latest legal challenge for the group comes on the heels of founder Brian Kolfage, of Miramar Beach, Florida, facing the possibility of 20 years in prison if convicted on two counts of filing a false tax return and one count of wire fraud related to the electronic filing of his 2019 state tax return, as well as an investigation alleging fraud and money laundering-related offenses by New York investigators.

You can watch a video promoting the group's efforts -- accompanied by Muse's "Uprising," which contains the chorus "We will be victorious" -- below:

Brian Kolfage We Build The Wall VICTORYyoutu.be


MSNBC's Mehdi Hasan throws Mike Pompeo's words back in his face in brutal split-screen about Taliban dealings

Brad Reed
August 26, 2021

Mike Pompeo

MSNBC's Medhi Hasan on Thursday threw former Trump Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's own words back in his face after he claimed that he always believed the Taliban were evil and untrustworthy.

In a split-screen video posted on the Twitter account of Hasan's show, Pompeo starts out by saying the he knew the Taliban were "butchers" when he negotiated with them on behalf of former President Donald Trump.

"I knew exactly who I was sitting across the table from," Pompeo said. "These are evil people."

However, the video then played a clip of Pompeo during his tenure as America's top diplomat praising the Taliban after conducting successful negotiations with them.

"We have seen the senior Taliban leadership working diligently to reduce violence," he said. "We still have confidence that the Taliban leadership is working to deliver."

Another clip shows Pompeo saying that the Taliban signed a document saying they would "break their relationship" with al-Qaeda and that "they would work alongside of us."

Watch the video below.





DIVERSITY
Harvard University elects atheist as head chaplain

Agence France-Presse
August 27, 2021

Harvard's Widener Library, pictured in 2007. (Photo: Joseph Williams/Flickr/cc)

America's prestigious Harvard University, founded by Puritan settlers almost 400 years ago, has a new chief chaplain -- and he doesn't believe in God

Greg Epstein, 44, took up the role this week, becoming the first atheist elected president of Harvard's organization of chaplains.

"I'm obliged and honored," he wrote on Twitter.


Epstein has been Harvard's humanist chaplain since 2005 and is the author of the bestselling book "Good Without God: What a Billion Nonreligious People Do Believe."

He will lead a group of more than 40 chaplains who represent some twenty different religions and beliefs including Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism.

His appointment comes as young people in the United States increasingly identify as spiritual but without a religious affiliation.

"There is a rising group of people who no longer identify with any religious tradition but still experience a real need for conversation and support around what it means to be a good human and live an ethical life," Epstein told The New York Times.

"We don't look to a god for answers. We are each other's answers," he added.

Epstein did not immediately respond to request for comment from AFP.

A 2019 Pew Research Center study found that the United States remains a predominantly Christian country, with 43 percent identifying as Protestant and 20 percent as Catholic.

But more than a quarter of those surveyed (26 per cent) described their religious identity as atheist, agnostic or "nothing in particular," up from 17 percent in 2009.

Epstein, born into a Jewish family in New York, has also been the humanist chaplain at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), another major university in the Boston area, since 2018.

Harvard, founded in 1636 to train the Protestant clergy, is the oldest institution of higher education in the United States.
LEAVING AFTER BEING MIA
Florida Surgeon General leaving Ron DeSantis’ administration amid coronavirus surge: report
Bob Brigham
August 26, 2021

Screengrab.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis will be battling the coronavirus pandemic without the aid of his current surgeon general.

"Surgeon General Scott Rivkees, the state's top medical official, is exiting Gov. Ron DeSantis' administration in September," Florida Politics reported and WFLA-TV confirmed. "Rivkees, whose time in government has been marked by his absence from public view throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, will exit the administration when his contract expires Sept. 20. The news comes as Florida continues trudging through the pandemic with peak cases and hospitalizations on account of the delta variant,."


Following the news breaking, DeSantis Press Secretary Christina Pushaw issued a statement.

"We thank Dr. Rivkees for his meaningful work during the most challenging pandemic of our lifetime. We appreciate his service to the people of Florida and wish him the best in his future endeavors," the administration said.

Ana Ceballos, a state government reporter for the Miami Herald, remembered one of the last times Dr. Rivkees was seen with DeSantis.




Florida Surgeon General leaving Ron DeSantis’ administration amid coronavirus surgeyoutu.be

"Floridians will be keeping their distance and wearing face masks for up to a year until a COVID-19 vaccine exists, Florida Surgeon General Scott Rivkees said Monday before being whisked away by the governor's spokeswoman," the Tampa Bay Times reported in April of 2020. "The surgeon general's comments appear to conflict with what Gov. Ron DeSantis and his political ally, President Donald Trump, have said about returning to pre-coronavirus life."



What are the Prospects For Peace: an Interview With Noam Chomsky

  AUGUST 27, 2021
Facebook

Events are unfolding at a quickening pace. Facing an alarming escalation in tensions around the world, we are looking to our most respected and renowned thought leaders for an honest assessment of both U.S. foreign and military policy to offer their most current thoughts and insights. We know they have some ideas for improving the prospects for peace.

Noam Chomsky needs no introduction. He has devoted his whole life to calling out the abuses of power and the excesses of U.S. empire. At 92, he still is actively engaged in the national conversation. We are of course honored that he took the time to talk to us and share his views.

The questions here are not philosophical or abstract. They focus on the realities of the international power struggle unfolding in real time. They directly address the role of the U.S. in the escalating tensions and its capacity to reduce them. We also probe the role of everyday citizens in affecting the relationship the U.S. now has and will have with the rest of the world community.

Here is what Noam Chomsky had to say.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has recently put the hands of the doomsday clock to 100 seconds before midnight. Midnight means all out war, probably nuclear holocaust. This is the closest it has every been. Do you agree with this dire assessment?

A fair assessment, unfortunately.The BAS analysts cited three major increasing threats: nuclear war, environmental destruction, and what some have called an “infodemic,” the sharp decline in rational discourse — the only hope for addressing the existential crises.

Every year that Trump was in office, the minute hand moved closer to midnight.  Two year ago the analysts abandoned minutes and turned to seconds.  Trump steadily escalated all three threats.  It’s worth reflecting on how close the world came to indescribable catastrophe last November.  Another 4 years of Trump’s race to the abyss might have had incalculable consequences.  His worshippers of course don’t see it this way, but, remarkably, the same is true of segments of the left.  In fact, liberal litanies of his abuses also largely skirt his major crimes. Worth consideration when we recognize that he or some clone might soon regain the levers of power.  Also worth consideration are the warnings by thousands of scientists that we are approaching irreversible tipping points in environmental destruction.  We can read all about it in Aljazeera.

The U.S. always portrays itself as the greatest force on the planet for peace, justice, human rights, racial equality, etc. Polls tell us that most other nations actually regard the U.S. as the greatest threat to stability. What in your view is the truth here?

Even during the Obama years international polls showed that world opinion regarded the US as the greatest threat to world peace, no other country even close. Americans were protected from the news, though one could learn about it from foreign media and dissident sources.  Sometimes illustrations are reported.  Thus there has been some mention of the recent UN vote condemning the savage Cuba sanctions, virtually a blockade: 180-2 (US-Israel).  The NY Times dismissed it as a chance for critics of the US to blow off steam.  That’s quite normal.  When there are reports of how the world is out of step, the usual framework is curiosity about the psychic maladies that lead to such pathological failure to recognize our nobility.

There’s nothing new about that stance.  It’s typical of imperial cultures.  Even such an outstanding figure as John Stuart Mill wondered about the world’s failure to comprehend that Britain was an angelic power, sacrificing itself for the benefit of the world – at a moment when Britain was carrying out some of its most horrifying crimes, as he knew very well.

Here’s a chicken-or-egg question: The U.S. accuses both Russia and China of rapidly expanding their military capabilities, claiming its own posturing and increase in weaponry is a response to its hostile adversaries, Russia and China. Both Russia and China claim they are merely responding to intimidation and military threats posed by the U.S. What’s your view? Do Russia and China have imperial ambitions or are they just trying to defend themselves against what they see as an increasingly aggressive U.S. military?

Some background facts may be useful. According to the major international monitor, SIPRI, “The growth in total [military] spending in 2020 was largely influenced by expenditure patterns in the United States and China. The USA increased its military spending for the third straight year to reach $778 billion in 2020,” as compared with China’s increase to $252 billion (far less per capita of course).  In fourth place, below India, is Russia: $61.7 billion.

The US is alone in facing no credible security threats, apart from alleged threats at the borders of adversaries, who are ringed with US nuclear-armed missiles in some of the 800 US military bases around the world (China has one, Djibouti).  There have been international efforts to prevent militarization of outer space, a major threat to survival.  They have been initiated primarily by China and Russia, blocked for many years by Washington.

The number of spy missions, nuclear-armed bomber flights, and war games near Russia’s borders have vastly increased over the past year. Same with China. Is all of this just business-as-usual geopolitical posturing? Or does it represent a dangerous escalation and a new ominous direction in U.S. strategic positioning? What is the justification for what Russia and China see as provocations and aggressiveness, if not actual preparation for a war?

It’s extremely dangerous.Strategic planning has been redesigned to focus on war with China and Russia.  Provocative actions have been taken on their borders, already bristling with US offensive weapons.  China is violating international law in the South China Sea – though the US, the only maritime power not to have ratified the UN Law of the Sea, is not in a strong position to object.  The right response to China’s violations is not a dangerous show of force but diplomacy and negotiations, led by the regional states most directly involved.  The major threat is over Taiwan.  Again thoughtful diplomacy, not provocative actions, can avert would could be disastrous.

In a democracy, at least in theory citizens have a say in all matters of public policy. Yet, in the end none of the recent military campaigns and undeclared wars seem to achieve much popular favor or support. What is and what should be the role of everyday citizens in determining the foreign policy and military priorities of the country? Or are such matters better left to the “experts”?

According to the Constitution, Article I, Congress has the sole right to declare war.But that provision has long been dispatched to the ashcan, along with other inconvenient provisions of the document that we are taught to revere.

In a functioning democracy, citizens should have the primary role in affairs of state.  Not here.   And they should be informed citizens.  Not here.  World War I is a classic example.  In 1916, Wilson won on a platform of “peace without victory.” He then launched an impressive propaganda campaign to inflame a pacifist population with bitter hatred of all things German, fortified with fabrications about Hun atrocities concocted by the British “Ministry of Information”; Orwellism was alive and well long before Orwell.  It was highly successful.  It wasn’t the first such occasion, nor the last.  State propaganda remains highly effective, everywhere we turn, reinforced by the loyal media and intellectual class.

A striking example, with considerable import, was just released a few hours before I sat down to write: “more Americans think Iran possesses nuclear weapons than think Israel does. While Israel has been known to possess nuclear weapons for decades (without officially acknowledging it) and Iran is not known to have ever possessed any, the American public perception presumes a different reality: 60.5%, including 70.6% of Republicans and 52.6% of Democrats, say Iran possesses nuclear weapons — compared to 51.7% who say Israel does, including 51.7% of Republicans and 51.9% of Democrats.”.

The achievements of unremitting propaganda can be quite stunning.

Again, the media help in a variety of ways.  To take one highly relevant case, the NY Times editors recently joined virtually the entire world, including Iran, in calling for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East.  That would end the alleged threat of Iranian nuclear weapons and radically reduce severe and very dangerous regional tensions.  One small matter was omitted in the editors’ proposal: Israel, the one regional power with nuclear weapons, in fact a formidable supply.  Also omitted was why this critically important proposal is not implemented: the US blocks it, to ensure that Israel’s massive armaments will not be inspected. In fact, the US government refuses to recognize officially that Israel has nuclear weapons, though it is not in doubt.  If it were to do so, US law might become applicable, arguably banning all aid to Israel.

Best for the rabble not to know that their lives are being threatened in order to protect Israel’s malfeasance and US participation in it.

Related to that, the citizenry and most of Congress are kept in the dark with respect to special missions, proxy funding, CIA operations, and swaths of unknown unknowns constituting psyops, cyber ops, and regime change ops, all done in our name as U.S. citizens. The funds to support this sprawling “dark world” of sabotage and terror being inflicted on the rest of the planet, is also a secret.  Now there’s pervasive spying on U.S. citizens right here at home.  What place does any of this have in “the land of the free”? Does this mean government of the people, by the people, for the people is just a sham?

If we let it be a scam.In the opening passage of one of the first major modern works of political science, a wise man – David Hume – pointed out that “power is in the hands of the governed.” If they choose to exercise it.  And if they go on to take the reins of government into their own hands in a “cooperative commonwealth,” the aspiration of American workers and farmers in the late 19th century.  Crushed by state-business violence.

We are grateful to Noam Chomsky for his thought-provoking views. The interview was arranged by John Rachel, Director of the Peace Dividend Project. This initiative embraces a powerful, unprecedented, end-to-end strategy for challenging the tyranny of neocon warmongers in Washington DC, ending the endless wars, and reversing the self-destructive foreign policy and military paradigm which now poisons U.S. relations with the rest of the world. Professor Chomsky has also agreed to be interviewed for the full-length Peace Dividend documentary film, a devastating indictment of the corruption and fraud built into our excessive military budgets and imperial overreach. This movie will inform, unite and empower everyday citizens to have a voice in determining the future they want for themselves and their children.  

Why Noam Chomsky has some optimism about American journalism

Alex Henderson, AlterNet
August 27, 2021

Noam Chomsky talks to teleSUR's Abby Martin
 (Screenshot/teleSUR English YouTube)

Over the years, author Noam Chomsky has often criticized the mainstream media from the left — and done so forcefully. Chomsky's 1988 book "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media," written with colleague Edward S. Herman, not only disagreed with the right-wing claim that the mainstream media have a liberal bias — Chomsky and Herman argued that the mainstream media went easy on U.S. politicians, encouraging the status quo. But in an interview with The Nation this month, the 92-year-old Chomsky says he is pleasantly surprised by some of the reporting he is seeing these days — even in some of the mainstream publications he slammed in the past.

Victor Pickard, writing in The Nation, explains, "For anyone critical of the media and politics…. Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing Consent' was essential reading. The book's 'propaganda model' provided a useful framework for understanding how typical news coverage filters out some types of evidence while emphasizing others, ultimately privileging dominant narratives. One key lesson from this analysis was clear: To change the world, we must first change our media."

Pickard notes that during his interview with Chomsky, he wanted to see what the veteran author thought of media reporting in 2021 compared to when he wrote "Manufacturing Consent" with Herman in 1988. Chomsky, Pickard observes, is "still leveling sharp critique and astute analysis" at 92.

Chomsky told Pickard, "Ed (Herman) and I updated the book to consider the rise of the internet, but we basically concluded that nothing much had changed. The sources of information are still the same. If you want to know what's happening in Karachi, you can't find reliable information on Facebook or Instagram other than what's being filtered from mainstream media. So, the first thing I do in the morning is read The New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and so on. That's where the information is coming from."

Chomsky noted that "the internet's main effect is to narrow the range of information that most people access by driving them into social media bubbles," although "the propaganda model is basically the same" as when he wrote "Manufacturing Consent" 33 years ago.

But despite his ongoing complaints about the "propaganda model," Chomsky likes some of what he's seeing. For example, Chomsky — who was born in Philadelphia on December 7, 1928 when Calvin Coolidge was still president — praised the New York Times' 1619 Project as a "real breakthrough," telling Pickard that such reporting in a "mainstream newspaper" would have been "inconceivable" during the 1960s.

Nonetheless, one of the most important points that Chomsky made during their interview was how far to the right the overall political conversation in the U.S. continues to be. Chomsky noted that what is considered "liberal" in U.S. media and U.S. academia would be considered "centrist" in other countries. And Pickard pointed out that contrary to claims on the right, U.S. academia is far from "overrun with raging leftists."

"The academic world is basically centrist," Chomsky told Pickard. "It's called liberal, which would mean by international standards, more or less centrist. It might be aligned with the Democratic Party, but it's not even social democratic. If you try to break out of it by being more radical, you face difficulties."