Biden Administration Erased Afghan Weapons Reports From Federal Websites

Biden Administration Erased Afghan Weapons Reports From Federal Websites

By Adam Andrzejewski of Forbes.com

The War in Afghanistan has always been a black box, but the Biden administration just made matters worse.

According to an admission obtained from the State Department, Biden officials recently directed federal agencies to scrub their websites of official reports detailing the $82.9 billion in military equipment and training provided to the Afghan security forces since 2001.

The scrubbed audits and reports included detailed accounting of what the U.S. had provided to Afghan forces, down to the number of night vision devices, hand grenades, Black Hawk helicopters, and armored vehicles.

Reports further quantified 208 aircraft and helicopters; 75,000 war vehicles – including 22 Humvees, 50,000 tactical vehicles and nearly 1,000 mine resistant vehicles; and 600,000 weapons – including 350,000 M4 and M16 rifles, 60,000 machine guns, and 25,000 grenade launchers.

The State Department admitted to removing the reports but justified the move as a way to protect Afghan allies. According to a spokesperson:

“The safety of our Afghan contacts is of utmost importance to us. The State Department advised other federal agencies of to [sic] review their web properties for content that highlights cooperation/participation between an Afghan citizen and the USG or a USG partner and remove from public view if it poses a security risk.”

It’s worth noting that the Biden administration already put these partners at risk when officials provided lists of Afghan nationals to the Taliban in a misguided attempt to clear them for evacuation. The Taliban, a known terrorist organization with a history of murdering Afghan citizens working alongside U.S. forces, should never have been trusted with those names.

In addition, many of the removed audit reports merely quantified military equipment without identifying personnel. Here are two important examples:

  1. Government Accountability Office (GAO): OpenTheBooks.com reposted an audit of U.S. provided military gear in Afghanistan (August 2017) after it was removed from its official location.
  2. Special Inspector General For Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR): OpenTheBooks.com reposted an audit of $174 million in lost ScanEagle drones (July 2020) after the report was removed from its official location.

U.S. taxpayers paid for these audits and the U.S.-provided equipment, and citizens should be able to follow the money and hold the Biden administration accountable.

A GAO spokesperson also confirmed in a request for comment its receipt of the directive: “the State Department requested we temporarily remove and review reports on Afghanistan to protect recipients of US assistance that may be identified through our reports and thus subject to retribution.”

One deleted GAO report was four years old and quantified U.S.-provided gear into Afghanistan between 2003 and 2016. It was delivered to the House Armed Services Committee on August 10, 2017. The report was pulled down only hours after we, and other news outlets like Sinclair Broadcast Group, highlighted the report’s existence.

A spokesperson for SIGAR also admitted via a request for comment that the agency pulled reports offline.

“In recent days, some SIGAR reports have been temporarily removed from the agency’s public website due to ongoing security concerns in accordance with guidance received from the U.S. Department of State. This is in line with actions taken by other U.S. federal agencies and is out of an abundance of caution.”

Again, to reiterate, these reports do not include recipient information, and the Taliban already likely controls the war chest in question.

This directive doesn’t seem to be designed to protect our Afghan allies—or, if it is, it’s been poorly executed. One U.S. entity that we will not name has failed to remove a report detailing the Afghan forces by rank. That report, one could argue, could be used as a tally sheet for retribution, but it’s still publicly available.

Here’s another example. One federal report did not include personnel info, but it did include the face of an Afghan pilot sitting in a U.S. Black Hawk helicopter. When we highlighted the report, we flagged the photo to an agency spokesman and chose not to post a link to protect the pilot’s safety. The report has remained online, but since we contacted the spokesman, the photo has been removed.

If the Trump administration started vanishing government reports and justifying their actions with weak, obviously political excuses, can anyone with a straight face say it wouldn’t lead the nightly news?

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 12:35

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3gSeUH3 Tyler Durden

California’s Recall Is a Revolt Against Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Progressive Agenda


YT_SS

Gov. Gavin Newsom is in trouble, and he knows it.

“California and the values we profess would be judged in a different light if this was a successful recall,” Newsom, who’s facing a recall vote on September 14, told the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee in a taped interview. “I think it would have profound consequences.”

Newsom’s concerns are well-founded, according to recent polls, most of which currently are projecting a narrow victory for Newsom.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the state has mailed every eligible California voter a ballot with two questions on it: “Shall Gavin Newsom be recalled from the office of governor,” and which of 46 candidates should replace him if that were to happen? If the recall succeeds, whichever candidate receives the plurality of votes will replace Newsom until the next governor’s race in 2022.

(Reason extended interview requests to all of the leading candidates in the race. Larry Elder, Kevin Faulconer, and Kevin Kiley agreed to be interviewed. The others declined or didn’t respond to our requests.)

Newsom and his Democratic allies have portrayed the election as a right-wing plot to take over California’s government, pointing to substantial funding from the California GOP and Mike Huckabee’s political action committee and running ads connecting some of the pro-recall activists to QAnon and the Trump supporters who sieged the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

But what’s actually animating likely recall voters are issues like rising homelessness, high housing and energy costs, fear of rising crime, and pandemic policies that have little basis in science, like closing beaches, banning outdoor dining, and keeping in-person public schools shut longer than any other state.

The recall should be just as big of a wake-up call to the Democratic political establishment as the fact that California recently lost a congressional seat for the first time in its history.

Early in the pandemic, Newsom was second only to former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the adoration he received from celebrities and the media for his COVID response.

“I don’t know if you know this, but everyone loves you,” Ellen DeGeneres told Newsom during an April 2020 interview.

Newsom touted California as a global beacon and a model of progressive governance that he claimed would change American politics forever.

“Absolutely we see [the pandemic] as an opportunity to reshape how we do business and how we govern,” Newsom told a reporter at an April 2020 press conference.

But as “flattening the curve” morphed into indefinite lockdowns, and California’s number of positive cases surged during winter 2020 regardless, Newsom acted as if, for him, rules that were paralyzing the state’s restaurant and nightlife scene didn’t apply, dining indoors with lobbyists at an expensive restaurant called the French Laundry.

The petition to recall surpassed the required 1.5 million signature mark in February 2021 and officially made the ballot in July.

“If Gavin Newsom were in my corporation, I would have fired him a long time ago. He has failed our state in a lot of different ways,” says Orrin Heatlie, the retired Yolo County sergeant who started the recall petition six months before COVID hit. For Heatlie, illegal immigration was a motivating factor.

“[Newsom’s] open-border policy, giving our tax money to illegal immigrants for housing, food, and clothing, when our own citizens are on the street, our own veterans are homeless on the street,” says Heatlie. 

Newsom, in turn, has pointed to Heatlie’s key role as further evidence that the recall effort is a plot by right-wing extremists and often highlights in particular comments that Heatlie posted to Facebook that called for microchipping illegal immigrants.

Heatlie told Reason that the comments were “hyperbole” and “not the right thing to put out there” and cites the more than 1.7 million verified signatures collected as evidence that conservatives like him aren’t the only ones who support a recall vote.  Forty-nine percent of independents and—of particular concern to California Democrats—half of Hispanic voters support the recall, according to an August CBS/YouGov poll.

Newsom maintains that the recall is an anti-democratic maneuver. One group is suing to preemptively declare the outcome unconstitutional if Newsom loses to a candidate that gets fewer votes than he did in the general election.

California’s recall procedure dates to 1911, and it was championed by Progressive Era reformers who wanted to check the power of special interests like the Southern Pacific Railroad. Fifty-five California governors have faced recall petitions to date, and this is the second time that an effort to recall the governor has made the ballot. The first time was in 2003 when Arnold Schwarzenegger replaced Gray Davis.

“This has been in the California constitution for 110 years. The people that are now complaining had a lot of time to change the constitution,” says talk radio host Larry Elder, a self-identified libertarian running as a Republican.

With his high name recognition and popularity among conservatives, Elder immediately became the frontrunner upon entering the race.

Elder, despite never worked in government, says his years of analyzing California politics on the radio have prepared him for the job.

“My opponent, Gavin Newsom, has had plenty of political experience. He was a two-term elected mayor of San Francisco. He had eight years as lieutenant governor to plan what he was going to do as governor…There was a gentleman who came out of Hollywood who was not a talk show host, who has not spent 27 years talking about these issues. His name was Ronald Reagan. He became a pretty decent two-term governor and a pretty decent two-term president,” says Elder.

Elder says his top priorities as governor would be reducing the cost of housing—second highest in the nation—by rescinding California’s lengthy environmental review process, ending the state’s rolling blackouts by halting the closure of the state’s last nuclear facility and reauthorizing gas and oil drilling, ending worsening droughts by investing in desalination technology, increasing police funding to combat crime, and more school choice—an issue that he says is particularly dear to his heart because of his experience growing up in South Central Los Angeles.

“I attended an inner-city school called Crenshaw High School—that was a school that was featured in the movie Boyz n the Hood,says Elder.

“Only 2 percent of kids from Crenshaw High School are math proficient. Now the polls showed a majority of black and brown parents living in the inner-city want school choice. They want the ability to say, I don’t want to send my kid to a school where only 2 percent of kids are math proficient…The teachers union, the most powerful union in this state, are the largest funder of my opponent’s campaign and is adamantly opposed to choice.”

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is actually the largest donor to the campaign to keep Newsom in office, with a $3 million contribution. But Elder is right that the California Teachers Association is a major backer of Newsom, with a $1.8 million donation.

Over his career spanning decades, Elder has given his opponents plenty of fodder, such as his assertion in an article published in 2000 that “women know less than men about political issues.”

Elder has also been criticized for his view that the minimum wage should be abolished because it cuts off opportunities for low-skilled workers.

A Los Angeles Times column labeled Elder the “black face of white supremacy” for this stance, as well as for his promise to repeal mask and vaccine mandates and for his rejection of critical race theory.

And Newsom, who didn’t respond to Reason‘s multiple interview requests, says that Elder would be an anti-science “disaster” for California and has called him a climate change denier.

“What I am is a climate change alarmist denier,” says Elder. “I don’t believe when AOC [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] says that our planet is going to be destroyed in 10 years or 12 years…I also believe that [forcibly transitioning] the economy from a fossil-based one to a renewables-based one does not appreciate tradeoffs.”

While Elder leads the polls among Republican challengers, San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer is the only candidate with executive governing experience, which helped him earn the grudging endorsement of the Los Angeles Times. The paper suggested on its editorial page that voters  “hold” their noses “and select Kevin Faulconer” after saying the entire recall election would be “comical if the stakes weren’t so high.”

Faulconer touts his record on homelessness, which declined in San Diego after he spent $6.5 million on a temporary shelter that had been earmarked for permanent housing. He also strictly enforced anti-camping laws.

“We took dramatic action in San Diego. I did not allow encampments on the sidewalk,” says Faulconer. “People are going to die in our sidewalks, and we’re better than that.”

Faulconer’s critics say his tactics were inhumane, and that the decline in the city’s unsheltered homeless may partially be an accounting anomaly because during his tenure the count stopped, including of people living in RVs. But Faulconer points out that numbers declined countywide under his tenure and tents disappeared from the sidewalks.

“I took strong, strong action. And in fact, before COVID struck, we had 13 different cities from all across the country that came to look at the tough changes that we made in San Diego. Why? Because those changes worked,” says Faulconer.

Like all of the leading GOP candidates, Faulconer uses tough-on-crime rhetoric and has accused Newsom of being overly sympathetic to the movement to defund the police. In June 2020, Newsom told an audience that he supports “reimagining” the role of police officers and shifting more responsibility onto social workers in dealing with the mentally ill, and he’s been an advocate of statewide resentencing measures and reduction of penalties for certain criminal offenses. But this July he told journalists “don’t ever confuse me with the defund police movement.”

 

Newsom told journalists in late July not to ever “confuse” him with politicians who want to defund the police.

Polling shows that rising crime is a top concern among voters.  Homicides and gun crimes did spike in LA and San Francisco in 2020, though overall crime rates were fairly steady in the state at large.

Other leading GOP contenders are businessman John Cox and reality star Caitlyn Jenner, who didn’t respond to our email requests.

The highest-polling Democrat in the race is the 29-year-old real estate investor and YouTuber Kevin Paffrath, who’s running as a liberal centrist.

And then there’s Kevin Kiley, a state legislator and the only candidate currently holding elected office. He wrote a book making the case for recalling Newsom that focuses on allegations of corruption, incompetence, and disregard for the rule of law.

“I’ve been fighting in every way I can against Gavin Newson’s one-man rule,” says Kiley.

Kiley sued the governor for using his emergency powers to change California voting law and circumventing the state legislature, though lost on appeal.

Newsom had issued 58 executive orders over the course of the pandemic at that time, drawing pushback even from some fellow Democrats.

Kiley says Newsom exploited the pandemic to amplify his own power and boost his national political profile while ignoring the science of how COVID actually spreads.

“He’s taken California’s long-term decline and brought it to this total free fall. And so I think that by throwing him out in a popular citizens’ movement, it’s a chance to actually turn the page on this whole era of corruption and failure,” says Kiley.

There’s one point Newsom and his challengers agree on—if he’s recalled on September 14, it’ll mean dramatic changes are coming, not only to America’s largest state, but also to the whole nation.

“Newsom has said that there are profound national implications, and I would have to agree with him on that,” says Kiley. “I think that the recall can send a very clear warning to the rest of the nation: that California is not a model for the nation.”

Produced by Zach Weissmueller; camera by Dillon Mortenson; graphics by Calvin Tran

Photos: JOHN WALKER/TNS/Newscom; Kyodo/Newscom; Sam Hodgson/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Li Jianguo / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Alex Edelman—CNP/CNP / Polaris/Newscom; Lawrence Jackson/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Orin Louis/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Lev Radin/Sipa USA/Newscom; Ren E C. Byer/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Terry Pierson/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Image of Sport/Newscom; Ryan Grothe / MEGA / Newscom/RGSAN2/Newscom; Daniel Kim/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Ana Ramirez/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Frank Worth/ZUMA Press/Newscom; ANA VENEGAS/KRT/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMA Press/Newscom; Ron Adar/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Daniel Kim/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; David Brooks/ZUMA Press/Newscom; John Gastaldo/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Sandy Huffaker/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Nelvin C. Cepeda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Jill Connelly/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom;  K.C. Alfred/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; DAI SUGANO/KRT/Newscom; NADER KHOURI/KRT/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom;  Sarah Silbiger / Pool via CNP / SplashNews/Newscom; Prentice C. James/Cal Sport Media/Newscom; Lindsey Nicholson/Education Images/Universal Images Group/Newscom; BILL GREENBLATT/UPI/Newscom; Danita Delimont Photography/Newscom; Ringo Chiu/ZUMA Press/Newscom; POOL/REUTERS/Newscom; MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS/Newscom; Álex Segura/EFE/Newscom; Kevin Sullivan/ZUMA Press/Newscom; MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS/Newscom.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3gPImgw
via IFTTT

No, Police Officers Aren’t Resigning in Droves


arrest_1161x653

In an attempt to push back at the anger over violent police conduct and efforts to reform policing in America, we’ve been warned that all this outrage is damaging police morale, causing officers to quit and recruiting to plunge, possibly contributing to 2020’s spike in homicides and gun violence.

A survey released in July by the nonprofit Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) found what they called a “widespread staffing crisis,” declaring a dramatic 45 percent increase in retirements between 2019 and 2020 and an 18 percent increase in resignations.

This report when it was released drove a lot of fretful reporting that the “political climate”—demands for police defunding and restrictions on police behavior—was pushing cops out the door. The survey actually presents it as a more complex matter. Some of the quotes from the departments they’ve surveyed suggest that officers were retiring as soon as they could because they didn’t want to deal with the policing conflicts, but other quotes indicated other reasons and one mentioned “pandemic fatigue.” Some departments insisted that everything was fine, while others indicated that the problem was not with who they were losing, but with difficulty recruiting new officers.

A lot of people quit, retired, or lost their jobs during the pandemic. So this doesn’t really tell us much about increases in police resignations and retirements compared to other fields; we don’t have enough evidence to indicate that it’s a morale issue connected to demands for policing reform.

Once we actually do put the losses in the context of all other industries, the reality becomes clear: We actually have not seen a massive decline in the number of police compared to drops in employment in other fields. Over at The Marshall Project, reporters looked at the actual numbers coming out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In reality, police employment has been fairly stable, losing less than 1 percent—4,000 jobs—during 2020.

The losses actually followed several years of expanded police job growth, essentially returning it back to numbers from just a couple of years ago.

The Marshall Project also notes that the defunding of the police that we keep hearing about is not really happening. The Biden administration is allowing cities to use the $350 billion in COVID relief funding to hire more officers. Peter Moskos, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told The Marshall Project that many of the officers who retired were likely to retire in the next couple of years anyway; police departments’ generous pension programs discourage officers from just up and quitting, but it does explain why—as America has become a stressful place to be a cop in the last two years—police officers who have reached retirement age might not want to bother padding the payout instead of taking the money and heading for the door.

There are somewhere around 700,000 law enforcement officers in the United States at all levels. A loss of 4,000 officers in local departments is actually only a slight deviation from what is standard, but when you represent changes in small numbers as percentages, they sometimes seem like much bigger problems than they actually are.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3BvqOyf
via IFTTT

California’s Recall Is a Revolt Against Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Progressive Agenda


YT_SS

Gov. Gavin Newsom is in trouble, and he knows it.

“California and the values we profess would be judged in a different light if this was a successful recall,” Newsom, who’s facing a recall vote on September 14, told the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee in a taped interview. “I think it would have profound consequences.”

Newsom’s concerns are well-founded, according to recent polls, most of which currently are projecting a narrow victory for Newsom.

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the state has mailed every eligible California voter a ballot with two questions on it: “Shall Gavin Newsom be recalled from the office of governor,” and which of 46 candidates should replace him if that were to happen? If the recall succeeds, whichever candidate receives the plurality of votes will replace Newsom until the next governor’s race in 2022.

(Reason extended interview requests to all of the leading candidates in the race. Larry Elder, Kevin Faulconer, and Kevin Kiley agreed to be interviewed. The others declined or didn’t respond to our requests.)

Newsom and his Democratic allies have portrayed the election as a right-wing plot to take over California’s government, pointing to substantial funding from the California GOP and Mike Huckabee’s political action committee and running ads connecting some of the pro-recall activists to QAnon and the Trump supporters who sieged the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

But what’s actually animating likely recall voters are issues like rising homelessness, high housing and energy costs, fear of rising crime, and pandemic policies that have little basis in science, like closing beaches, banning outdoor dining, and keeping in-person public schools shut longer than any other state.

The recall should be just as big of a wake-up call to the Democratic political establishment due to the fact that California recently lost a congressional seat for the first time in its history.

Early in the pandemic, Newsom was second only to former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the adoration he received from celebrities and the media for his COVID response.

“I don’t know if you know this, but everyone loves you,” Ellen DeGeneres told Newsom during an April 2020 interview.

Newsom touted California as a global beacon and a model of progressive governance that he claimed would change American politics forever.

“Absolutely we see [the pandemic] as an opportunity to reshape how we do business and how we govern,” Newsom told a reporter at an April 2020 press conference.

But as “flattening the curve” morphed into indefinite lockdowns, and California’s number of positive cases surged during winter 2020 regardless, Newsom acted as if, for him, rules that were paralyzing the state’s restaurant and nightlife scene didn’t apply, dining indoors with lobbyists at an expensive restaurant called the French Laundry.

The petition to recall surpassed the required 1.5 million signature mark in February 2021 and officially made the ballot in July.

“If Gavin Newsom were in my corporation, I would have fired him a long time ago. He has failed our state in a lot of different ways,” says Orrin Heatlie, the retired Yolo County sergeant who started the recall petition six months before COVID hit. For Heatlie, illegal immigration was a motivating factor.

“[Newsom’s] open-border policy, giving our tax money to illegal immigrants for housing, food, and clothing, when our own citizens are on the street, our own veterans are homeless on the street,” says Heatlie. 

Newsom, in turn, has pointed to Heatlie’s key role as further evidence that the recall effort is a plot by right-wing extremists and often highlights in particular comments that Heatlie posted to Facebook that called for microchipping illegal immigrants.

Heatlie told Reason that the comments were “hyperbole” and “not the right thing to put out there” and cites the more than 1.7 million verified signatures collected as evidence that conservatives like him aren’t the only ones who support a recall vote.  Forty-nine percent of independents and—of particular concern to California Democrats—half of Hispanic voters support the recall, according to an August CBS/YouGov poll.

Newsom maintains that the recall is an anti-democratic maneuver. One group is suing to preemptively declare the outcome unconstitutional if Newsom loses to a candidate that gets fewer votes than he did in the general election.

California’s recall procedure dates to 1911, and it was championed by Progressive Era reformers who wanted to check the power of special interests like the Southern Pacific Railroad. Fifty-five California governors have faced recall petitions to date, and this is the second time that an effort to recall the governor has made the ballot. The first time was in 2003 when Arnold Schwarzenegger replaced Gray Davis.

“This has been in the California constitution for 110 years. The people that are now complaining had a lot of time to change the constitution,” says talk radio host Larry Elder, a self-identified libertarian running as a Republican.

With his high name recognition and popularity among conservatives, Elder immediately became the frontrunner upon entering the race.

Elder, despite never worked in government, says his years of analyzing California politics on the radio have prepared him for the job.

“My opponent, Gavin Newsom, has had plenty of political experience. He was a two-term elected mayor of San Francisco. He had eight years as lieutenant governor to plan what he was going to do as governor…There was a gentleman who came out of Hollywood who was not a talk show host, who has not spent 27 years talking about these issues. His name was Ronald Reagan. He became a pretty decent two-term governor and a pretty decent two-term president,” says Elder.

Elder says his top priorities as governor would be reducing the cost of housing—second highest in the nation—by rescinding California’s lengthy environmental review process, ending the state’s rolling blackouts by halting the closure of the state’s last nuclear facility and reauthorizing gas and oil drilling, ending worsening droughts by investing in desalination technology, increasing police funding to combat crime, and more school choice—an issue that he says is particularly dear to his heart because of his experience growing up in South Central Los Angeles.

“I attended an inner-city school called Crenshaw High School—that was a school that was featured in the movie Boyz n the Hood,says Elder.

“Only 2 percent of kids from Crenshaw High School are math proficient. Now the polls showed a majority of black and brown parents living in the inner-city want school choice. They want the ability to say, I don’t want to send my kid to a school where only 2 percent of kids are math proficient…The teachers union, the most powerful union in this state, are the largest funder of my opponent’s campaign and is adamantly opposed to choice.”

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is actually the largest donor to the campaign to keep Newsom in office, with a $3 million contribution. But Elder is right that the California Teachers Association is a major backer of Newsom, with a $1.8 million donation.

Over his career spanning decades, Elder has given his opponents plenty of fodder, such as his assertion in an article published in 2000 that “women know less than men about political issues.”

Elder has also been criticized for his view that the minimum wage should be abolished because it cuts off opportunities for low-skilled workers.

A Los Angeles Times column labeled Elder the “black face of white supremacy” for this stance, as well as for his promise to repeal mask and vaccine mandates and for his rejection of critical race theory.

And Newsom, who didn’t respond to Reason‘s multiple interview requests, says that Elder would be an anti-science “disaster” for California and has called him a climate change denier.

“What I am is a climate change alarmist denier,” says Elder. “I don’t believe when AOC [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] says that our planet is going to be destroyed in 10 years or 12 years…I also believe that [forcibly transitioning] the economy from a fossil-based one to a renewables-based one does not appreciate tradeoffs.”

While Elder leads the polls among Republican challengers, San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer is the only candidate with executive governing experience, which helped him earn the grudging endorsement of the Los Angeles Times. The paper suggested on its editorial page that voters  “hold” their noses “and select Kevin Faulconer” after saying the entire recall election would be “comical if the stakes weren’t so high.”

Faulconer touts his record on homelessness, which declined in San Diego after he spent $6.5 million on a temporary shelter that had been earmarked for permanent housing. He also strictly enforced anti-camping laws.

“We took dramatic action in San Diego. I did not allow encampments on the sidewalk,” says Faulconer. “People are going to die in our sidewalks, and we’re better than that.”

Faulconer’s critics say his tactics were inhumane, and that the decline in the city’s unsheltered homeless may partially be an accounting anomaly because during his tenure the count stopped, including of people living in RVs. But Faulconer points out that numbers declined countywide under his tenure and tents disappeared from the sidewalks.

“I took strong, strong action. And in fact, before COVID struck, we had 13 different cities from all across the country that came to look at the tough changes that we made in San Diego. Why? Because those changes worked,” says Faulconer.

Like all of the leading GOP candidates, Faulconer uses tough-on-crime rhetoric and has accused Newsom of being overly sympathetic to the movement to defund the police. In June 2020, Newsom told an audience that he supports “reimagining” the role of police officers and shifting more responsibility onto social workers in dealing with the mentally ill, and he’s been an advocate of statewide resentencing measures and reduction of penalties for certain criminal offenses. But this July he told journalists “don’t ever confuse me with the defund police movement.”

 

Newsom told journalists in late July not to ever “confuse” him with politicians who want to defund the police.

Polling shows that rising crime is a top concern among voters.  Homicides and gun crimes did spike in LA and San Francisco in 2020, though overall crime rates were fairly steady in the state at large.

Other leading GOP contenders are businessman John Cox and reality star Caitlyn Jenner, who didn’t respond to our email requests.

The highest-polling Democrat in the race is the 29-year-old real estate investor and YouTuber Kevin Paffrath, who’s running as a liberal centrist.

And then there’s Kevin Kiley, a state legislator and the only candidate currently holding elected office. He wrote a book making the case for recalling Newsom that focuses on allegations of corruption, incompetence, and disregard for the rule of law.

“I’ve been fighting in every way I can against Gavin Newson’s one-man rule,” says Kiley.

Kiley sued the governor for using his emergency powers to change California voting law and circumventing the state legislature, though lost on appeal.

Newsom had issued 58 executive orders over the course of the pandemic at that time, drawing pushback even from some fellow Democrats.

Kiley says Newsom exploited the pandemic to amplify his own power and boost his national political profile while ignoring the science of how COVID actually spreads.

“He’s taken California’s long-term decline and brought it to this total free fall. And so I think that by throwing him out in a popular citizens’ movement, it’s a chance to actually turn the page on this whole era of corruption and failure,” says Kiley.

There’s one point Newsom and his challengers agree on—if he’s recalled on September 14, it’ll mean dramatic changes are coming, not only to America’s largest state, but also to the whole nation.

“Newsom has said that there are profound national implications, and I would have to agree with him on that,” says Kiley. “I think that the recall can send a very clear warning to the rest of the nation: that California is not a model for the nation.”

Produced by Zach Weissmueller; camera by Dillon Mortenson; graphics by Calvin Tran

Photos: JOHN WALKER/TNS/Newscom; Kyodo/Newscom; Sam Hodgson/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Li Jianguo / Xinhua News Agency/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Alex Edelman—CNP/CNP / Polaris/Newscom; Lawrence Jackson/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Orin Louis/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Lev Radin/Sipa USA/Newscom; Ren E C. Byer/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Terry Pierson/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Image of Sport/Newscom; Ryan Grothe / MEGA / Newscom/RGSAN2/Newscom; Daniel Kim/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Ana Ramirez/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Frank Worth/ZUMA Press/Newscom; ANA VENEGAS/KRT/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMA Press/Newscom; Ron Adar/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Daniel Kim/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; David Brooks/ZUMA Press/Newscom; John Gastaldo/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Sandy Huffaker/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Nelvin C. Cepeda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Jill Connelly/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom;  K.C. Alfred/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Paul Kitagaki Jr./ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; DAI SUGANO/KRT/Newscom; NADER KHOURI/KRT/Newscom; Watchara Phomicinda/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom;  Sarah Silbiger / Pool via CNP / SplashNews/Newscom; Prentice C. James/Cal Sport Media/Newscom; Lindsey Nicholson/Education Images/Universal Images Group/Newscom; BILL GREENBLATT/UPI/Newscom; Danita Delimont Photography/Newscom; Ringo Chiu/ZUMA Press/Newscom; POOL/REUTERS/Newscom; MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS/Newscom; Álex Segura/EFE/Newscom; Kevin Sullivan/ZUMA Press/Newscom; MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS/Newscom.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3gPImgw
via IFTTT

Oregon Woman Crashes Tesla, Is Arrested For DUI, After Trying To Use Autopilot To Drive Home

Oregon Woman Crashes Tesla, Is Arrested For DUI, After Trying To Use Autopilot To Drive Home

Just days after we pointed out the story of a Tesla slamming into (yet another) police car on the side of the road in Orlando, and just weeks after the NHTSA announced a formal investigation into Tesla’s Autopilot, stories about the gross misuse of the car’s “feature” continue to pour in.

The latest chapter in the “Autopilot” saga comes from Oregon, where a 63 year old woman now faces charges of driving under the influence of intoxicants after trying to have her Tesla drive her home last week, according to the Sacramento Bee

Oregon State Police were not amused, writing “DUII is a DUII even if you think your Tesla can drive you home” on their Facebook page, regarding the incident. 

The post continued: “Troopers responded to a two-vehicle non-injury crash that occurred in a parking lot near McLoughlin Blvd and Roethe Road in Milwaukie. The driver tried to initiate the car’s autopilot to take her home but ended up crashing into another car.”

The post said that the “driver showed signs of impairment” and was subsequently arrested and “lodged in Clackamas County Jail”.

There were no injuries as a result of the incident, but the driver faces DUII charges related to alcohol.

The NHTSA recently said it had opened a formal investigation into the company’s Autopilot feature. It said it is opening a probe into Tesla’s Model X, S, and 3 for model years 2014-2021. The broad range of models and model years means that this could be the broad investigation that Tesla skeptics have been requesting for years. 

Even Tesla founder Elon Musk doubts Tesla’s “Full Self Driving” Beta version 9.2, calling it “actually not great” in a casual conversation on Twitter.

We hope the NHTSA adds this incident to the growing list of wonderful examples of how brilliantly Tesla’s Autopilot feature works during its real-life beta testing that other unaware drivers on the road are also being subjected to. 

But we’re sure that, like countless other examples of misuse, this incident will wind up swept under the rug and ignored by regulators. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 12:10

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3kM5w8H Tyler Durden

No, Police Officers Aren’t Resigning in Droves


arrest_1161x653

In an attempt to push back at the anger over violent police conduct and efforts to reform policing in America, we’ve been warned that all this outrage is damaging police morale, causing officers to quit and recruiting to plunge, possibly contributing to 2020’s spike in homicides and gun violence.

A survey released in July by the nonprofit Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) found what they called a “widespread staffing crisis,” declaring a dramatic 45 percent increase in retirements between 2019 and 2020 and an 18 percent increase in resignations.

This report when it was released drove a lot of fretful reporting that the “political climate”—demands for police defunding and restrictions on police behavior—was pushing cops out the door. The survey actually presents it as a more complex matter. Some of the quotes from the departments they’ve surveyed suggest that officers were retiring as soon as they could because they didn’t want to deal with the policing conflicts, but other quotes indicated other reasons and one mentioned “pandemic fatigue.” Some departments insisted that everything was fine, while others indicated that the problem was not with who they were losing, but with difficulty recruiting new officers.

A lot of people quit, retired, or lost their jobs during the pandemic. So this doesn’t really tell us much about increases in police resignations and retirements compared to other fields; we don’t have enough evidence to indicate that it’s a morale issue connected to demands for policing reform.

Once we actually do put the losses in the context of all other industries, the reality becomes clear: We actually have not seen a massive decline in the number of police compared to drops in employment in other fields. Over at The Marshall Project, reporters looked at the actual numbers coming out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In reality, police employment has been fairly stable, losing less than 1 percent—4,000 jobs—during 2020.

The losses actually followed several years of expanded police job growth, essentially returning it back to numbers from just a couple of years ago.

The Marshall Project also notes that the defunding of the police that we keep hearing about is not really happening. The Biden administration is allowing cities to use the $350 billion in COVID relief funding to hire more officers. Peter Moskos, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told The Marshall Project that many of the officers who retired were likely to retire in the next couple of years anyway; police departments’ generous pension programs discourage officers from just up and quitting, but it does explain why—as America has become a stressful place to be a cop in the last two years—police officers who have reached retirement age might not want to bother padding the payout instead of taking the money and heading for the door.

There are somewhere around 700,000 law enforcement officers in the United States at all levels. A loss of 4,000 officers in local departments is actually only a slight deviation from what is standard, but when you represent changes in small numbers as percentages, they sometimes seem like much bigger problems than they actually are.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3BvqOyf
via IFTTT

Enough Is Enough: The Narrative Around “Returning To Normal” And Herd Immunity Has Been Brazenly Inconsistent

Enough Is Enough: The Narrative Around “Returning To Normal” And Herd Immunity Has Been Brazenly Inconsistent

(Submitted by Quoth the Raven at QTR’s “Fringe Finance” blog. Help fight media censorship and groupthink here: http://quoththeraven.substack.com)

Sometimes, you just have to let the facts do the talking. That’s my plan for this piece, which – not unlike my “Question the Answers” podcast I did about the changing narrative regarding the lab leak theory – will rely solely on what we were told versus what has actually transpired regarding the vaccines and herd immunity. 

This isn’t an anti-vaccine post, but rather a question the narrative you are given at all times post that will show just what we were led to believe about herd immunity and vaccines during 2020 and at the beginning of 2021, versus what we are being told now.

And I’ll even extend another olive branch before pointing out some discrepancies: let’s leave the political jabs (pun intended) behind for this piece. This means the ridiculous shift in narrative from Democrats like Kamala Harris and Andrew Cuomo who said they wouldn’t take a vaccine being pushed by the Trump administration, before doing a full 180 with Joe Biden in office and doing nothing but pleading with Americans to get vaccinated, is also off-limits.

The perpetually changing narrative and moving of the goalposts when it comes to when the country is going to have its rights back (you know, the same rights assured by the Constitution, as inconvenient as that is for politicians and many useful far-left automatons) and will return to normal shouldn’t be surprising to those who have been paying attention since the beginning of the pandemic. The powers that be have done nothing but flail and change the narrative about almost everything about Covid.

Here’s what that changing narrative looks like when “experts” have to say something because they’re constantly making TV appearances and returning to the “normal life” that we had just 18 months ago becomes a carrot on a string held in front of the American public.

Most important, when considering this timeline, just look at some of the brazen inconsistencies in message and key points.

Dr. Anthony Fauci in September 2020: It’s Not Going To Be An Overnight Event Where You Have A Vaccine And Then All Of A Sudden Everything Is Okay

Fauci seemed to level with people heading into the end of 2020, stating about one year ago to the day that getting everyone vaccinated is “not going to be an overnight event, where you have a vaccine and then all of a sudden everything is okay.”

Fauci would later use the vaccines as a carrot on a string to encourage a return to normal, as I will show, many times.

Fauci in December 2020: 75% To 85% Of The U.S. Vaccinated Means Life Could Be Back To Normal By Summer Or Fall 2021

Shortly after these debates, the “authority” Dr. Fauci told us life could wind up back to normal by summer or mid-fall 2021. CNBC reported in December 2020:

“So if we can get the overwhelming proportion of the population vaccinated by let’s say the end of the second, the beginning of the third quarter – by the time we get into mid-fall of 2021, we can be approaching some level of normality.”

Fauci also told us that getting between 75% and 85% of the population inoculated would “prevent further spread of the virus”:

To get back to normal, however, Fauci said between 75% and 85% of the population will need to to get inoculated against Covid-19. That would create an “umbrella” of immunity to prevent further spread of the virus, Fauci said.

As of right now, according to the Mayo Clinic, 61.6% of the U.S. has had at least one dose.

In December 2020, Newsweek published an article says that the U.S. may approach “some level of normality” by summer 2021 if “most” Americans get vaccinated.

Fauci says COVID vaccine may make life more normal by next summer

We’re now in September 2021; do things feel “normal” yet?

December 2020: Referencing Fauci, Dr. Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH, Says Scientists Play A “Dangerous Game” When They Move The Goal Posts On Science To Promote Policy Goals

The op-ed appeared in Medpage Today, where Prasad is openly critical of Fauci “moving the goalposts”:

As a former National Institutes of Health fellow, I have a profound reverence for Anthony Fauci, MD, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a towering figure in American medicine. Fauci’s contribution to biomedicine cannot be questioned. At the same time, recent statements by Fauci raise a thorny and important question for scientists, doctors, and public health experts: Is it acceptable to distort the truth to get people to do what you want them to do?

As I stated at the outset, I have profound respect for Fauci for his career of service, and like many, I am a fan of his clear public speaking. Yet, these two events force us to ask whether fact manipulation is acceptable.

I believe it cannot be. The public will not trust us, and should not trust us. People will put our statements through a reverse translator to try to deduce what we truly think, and it gives an unjustified power to scientists that belongs in the hands of people.

Fauci in January 2021: I Believe In 2021 We Will See This Behind Us

Fox News reported on January 1 that Dr. Fauci said that a return to normal was going to be a “summer, beginning of the fall” event for 2021.

“We can do both, we can keep the country open and we can abide by the public health measures,” Fauci told MSNBC. “That together with a vaccine, I believe in 2021 we will see this behind us. … It’s not going to happen in the first few months. If we do it correctly, hopefully, as we get into the end of the summer, the beginning of the fall of 2021, we can start to approach some degree of normality.”

Fauci In February 2021: Tells AMA Most Covid Mutations Don’t Have Any “Functional Relevance”

The AMA wrote in February 2021:

SARS-CoV-2 continually mutates, with most of these mutations not having any “functional relevance,” Dr. Fauci said. “But every once in a while, a combination of mutations occur that create what’s called a ‘variant’ or a ‘new lineage,’ which does have functional consequences.”

Fauci has now said this summer that all bets are essentially off thanks to the Delta variant and that its like we have a “new pandemic”.

Fauci In April 2021: Moves Herd Immunity Guidelines From 60%-70% to Up To 85% Because “The Country Is Finally Ready” To Hear What He Really Thinks

The NY Times reported:

In the pandemic’s early days, Dr. Fauci tended to cite the same 60 to 70 percent estimate that most experts did. About a month ago, he began saying “70, 75 percent” in television interviews. And last week, in an interview with CNBC News, he said “75, 80, 85 percent” and “75 to 80-plus percent.”

In a telephone interview the next day, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he had slowly but deliberately been moving the goal posts. He is doing so, he said, partly based on new science, and partly on his gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks.

Fauci In May 2021: We Can Get “Close” To Normal By May 2022, Says When Population Is Vaccinated “The Virus Doesn’t Really Have Any Place To Go”

Fauci made the comments talking on ABC around Mother’s Day 2021.

Fauci says we can get “close” to normal next Mother’s Day but there are “some conditions to that” (everyone has to get vaccinated)

May 2021: New York Times Says Herd Immunity Is Now “Unlikely” In The US And That The Virus Won’t Make Its “Long-Promised Exit”

Despite Fauci’s comments that the virus would have no place to go, the idea of herd immunity was tossed aside in May of 2021 by “experts” cited by the New York Times:

Early in the pandemic, when vaccines for the coronavirus were still just a glimmer on the horizon, the term “herd immunity” came to signify the endgame: the point when enough Americans would be protected from the virus so we could be rid of the pathogen and reclaim our lives.

Now, more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity threshold is not attainable — at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever.

Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much smaller numbers.

Fauci In June 2021: We’ll Know We Have Herd Immunity Because Infections Will “Almost Disappear”

According to CNBC, Fauci said in June 2021:

Since the start of the pandemic, many people have anticipated “herd immunity” against Covid as an elusive finish line. The catch is, no one even knows for certain what the threshold of herd immunity for Covid-19 is, Dr. Anthony Fauci, White House chief medical advisor, told YouTube’s Dr. Mike Varshavski during an interview published June 6.

So how will we know if and when we’re there?

“When you get that level of protection that turns out to be the threshold of herd immunity, you’ll know it, because you’ll see the infections almost disappear.”

And so, despite the NY Times assertion, Fauci now has us waiting for Covid to “disappear”. Does he think that’s really going to happen now? Did he think it then?

Fauci in August 2021: Herd Immunity Can Happen “Really Easily” If We Get Everyone Vaccinated

Who is wrong, The New York Times “experts” who said herd immunity is “unlikely” or Dr. Fauci? Because Fauci’s comments in August stand at stark odds with the NY Times.

Despite the constantly changing narrative on herd immunity, Forbes reported in 2021:

Fauci told MSNBC’s “The Mehdi Hassan Show” that herd immunity—the concept that a community can be protected against a virus when there is a high enough level of overall immunity—could be achieved “really easily if we get everyone vaccinated.”

“The only way you can get to herd immunity without them is the unfortunate situation where they all wind up getting infected,” said the White House’s chief medical advisor, explaining: “Then you have a combination of infected individuals who have some degree of protection together with vaccinated individuals.”

The same article immediately contradicts Fauci thanks to the Delta variant:

Top U.S. officials, including Fauci, previously estimated the herd immunity threshold to be about 60 to 70 percent of the population, deeming that goal reachable once vaccines were available. However, the emergence and subsequent dominance of the delta variant, as well as new research on vaccines, have caused many experts to doubt whether herd immunity is possible at all. Leading epidemiologist Sir Andrew Pollard, the head of the Oxford Vaccine Group, told British lawmakers earlier this month that achieving herd immunity with Covid-19 vaccines when the highly infectious delta variant is spreading is “not a possibility.” 

Fauci in August 2021: It “Isn’t Clear” How Many People Need To Get Vaccinated For A Return To Normal

710 WOR reported in late August 2021, however, that now Fauci doesn’t seem to know exactly how many people need to get vaccinated to return life back to normal:

Dr. Fauci said it isn’t clear what proportion of the population needs to be vaccinated in order to reach a level of protection to maintain a return to normalcy, so the best way to do so would be to have as many individuals vaccinated as possible.

Fauci In August 2021: Things Could Be Back To Normal By Spring 2022, But It’s “Almost Like A New Pandemic Now”

Now, Fauci is saying that things could be “back to normal” by Spring 2022 despite telling the Guardian it’s “almost like a new pandemic now”

The US could have the Covid pandemic under control and achieve a return to “normality” by next spring, Dr Anthony Fauci said, if the “overwhelming majority” of the population is vaccinated.

More than 400,000 people have been vaccinated in the US each day in August, with 171.1 million now fully protected.

“We hope we’ll be there” by spring, Fauci said, adding: “But there’s no guarantee because it’s up to us.”

Delta came along,” he said, “and it’s almost like we have a new pandemic now. Everything we thought we knew about Covid-19 has to be revised. I think we’re in a world of trouble for at least the next couple of months, but exactly what the shape of that trouble looks like, I can’t tell you.”

Fauci in August 2021: “I’m Certain” For the Need For A Third Vaccine Dose

Fauci made the revelation on “Meet The Press” on August 30, 2021 when Chuck Todd said we are experiencing a “pandemic of the unvaccinated”, as though breakthrough infections aren’t being documented globally:

This leads us to the obvious question: if it is now like a brand new pandemic all over again, and we have come full circle back to square one since the beginning of 2020, and we now need even more vaccine doses, when is this whole mess going to end?

It’s not looking like ever. In fact, the San Francisco Chronicle just pointed out worrying information about breakthrough infections, reporting that mutations are now starting to become more resistant to antibodies:

UCSF study has worrying findings about breakthrough infections: A study of nearly 1,400 Bay Area residents who had COVID-19 between February and June found that people with breakthrough cases were more likely to be infected with a variant that contains mutations more resistant to neutralizing antibodies elicited by the vaccine.

How many more variants are going to pop up that are going to spur endless campaigns and obsessions about getting vaccinated?

How long are we going to sit idly by and ignore people like Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, who claims that the vaccines are creating the new variants instead of stopping them? From Zerohedge:

In a new blog post published yesterday, Vanden Bossche continued to raise questions about our mass vaccination program to fight Covid.

In a summary of his findings, he writes: “As of the early days of the mass vaccination campaigns, at least a few experts have been warning against the catastrophic impact such a program could have on global and individual health. Mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic is prone to promoting selection and adaptation of immune escape variants that are featured by increasing infectiousness and resistance to spike protein (S)-directed antibodies (Abs), thereby diminishing protection in vaccinees and threatening the unvaccinated.

“This already explains why the WHO’s mass vaccination program is not only unable to generate herd immunity (HI) but even leads to substantial erosion of the population’s immune protective capacity,” he continues. “As the ongoing universal mass vaccination program will soon promote dominant propagation of highly infectious, neutralization escape mutants (i.e., so-called ‘S Ab-resistant variants’), naturally acquired, or vaccinal neutralizing Abs, will, indeed, no longer offer any protection to immunized individuals whereas high infectious pressure will continue to suppress the innate immune defense system of the nonvaccinated.”

And how long are we going to label facts as “misleading” because they’re inconvenient to the mainstream’s narrative?

After all, isn’t that was Alex Berenson was just banned from Twitter for

You can read the rest at my Substack newsletter, “FRINGE FINANCE” available by clicking here.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 11:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3zAt46J Tyler Durden

Taliban Holds Huge Victory Parade Showing Off US Military Hardware

Taliban Holds Huge Victory Parade Showing Off US Military Hardware

The day after a defiant Joe Biden deemed his Afghanistan exit a “success” – the Taliban did a little celebrating of their own, holding a ‘victory’ parade in the streets of Kabul featuring the Taliban army’s new ‘toys’. 

“The Taliban Wednesday paraded some of the military hardware they captured during their takeover of Afghanistan,” AFP wrote in confirming the spectacle that mocked the whole US debacle of a twenty year occupation that ended in handing over billions of dollars in military equipment.

The parade even included a helicopter flying over a long line of Humvees decked out with the white and black Taliban flags.

An AFP journalist observed that “a long line of green Humvees and armored fighting vehicles drove in single file along a highway outside Kandahar — the spiritual birthplace of the militant movement — many with white-and-black Taliban flags attached to aerials…”.

And more: 

At least one Black Hawk helicopter has been seen flying over Kandahar in recent days, suggesting someone from the former Afghan army was at the controls as the Taliban lack pilots.

Starting weeks ago as Taliban militants began capturing base after base and easily steamrolled major cities across the country with little resistance, it became clear they were putting their newly acquired expensive American and NATO equipment to use, given they began taking cities in the south while riding in on Humvees and armored battle vehicles.

They’ve also positively invited journalists to document their treasure, losing no moment to show the cameras what the Americans left behind, in a constant insult to injury message to Washington and the West. 

During his speech on Tuesday, President Biden hailed the US exit and evacuation efforts an “extraordinary success”. He said, “No nation has ever done anything like it in all of history; only the United States had the capacity and the will and ability to do it.” In a deeply ironic, twisted, and tragic sense… this statement is true, just not at all in the way the president thinks.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 11:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3BxFgWE Tyler Durden

Insurers Pullback On Satellite Policies Due To Space Junk Crisis

Insurers Pullback On Satellite Policies Due To Space Junk Crisis

A significant challenge faced by companies operating in space is the ability to find an insurance policy written on their assets in low Earth (LEO) orbit thanks to all the space junk. Over the past several several decades, the sheer number of active LEO satellites has skyrocketed – in no small part due to Elon Musk’s SpaceX. 

At present, more than 8,000 satellites are orbiting the skies above us – of which approximately 42% are inactive. There are also millions of pieces of space junk that threaten active LEO satellites. 

According to Reuters, the risk for a collision has risen dramatically in the last several years, causing insurers that offer satellite coverage to pull back on policy writing or entirely discontinue products. 

“This is a real issue for insurance,” said Richard Parker, co-founder of Assure Space, a unit of AmTrust Financial.

Assure Space wound down their LEO spacecraft insurance last year for fear of collision. They’ve written a few policies but exclude collision damage. 

“It may start to get difficult to get that type of coverage in the near future as more insurers realize that this is a significant risk that we can’t even get our arms around,” Parker said. 

The number of active satellites has jumped 68% from a year ago and more than 200% from 2016. Much of the increased activity involves SpaceX’s constellation of more than 1,700 satellites to provide people with superfast space internet in rural communities. 

SpaceX Satellite Constellation

Other big-tech firms are launching LEO satellites that hover above Earth. This week, rumors via AppleInsider said the new iPhone 13 might use satellite connectivity

Thousands of new satellites, thousands of inactive satellites, and millions of pieces of space junk are jamming up LEO where a collision is inevitable. This dilemma underlines LEO could one day become uninsurable unless the mess is cleaned up. 

Space Junk

LEO satellites typically have a $500,000 to $1 million worth of coverage, far below larger satellites operating in geostationary orbit (GEO), where rates are $200 million to $300 million. 

“The concentrations of debris and increasing numbers of satellites being deployed are increasing the potential for collision,” said Charles Wetton, underwriting manager for space policies at insurer Global Aerospace.

Until the LEO space mess is fixed, insurers will continue to pull or limit writing policies on satellites for fear of collisions, which means companies will likely bear more financial responsibility.

To fix the mess, the European Space Agency signed a debris-removal contract with Swiss startup ClearSpacer. 

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 10:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3jAAfX4 Tyler Durden

Oil Pops After Greater Than Expected Crude Inventory Draw

Oil Pops After Greater Than Expected Crude Inventory Draw

Oil prices staged a modest bounce following yesterday’s sharp drop, following the latest DOE Crude Inventory data, which showed a bigger than expected Crude and Distillate draw offset by a larger than expected Gasoline build while Cushing also increased.

DOE:

  • Crude -7.17MM, Exp. -2.5MM
  • Gasoline +1.29MM, -1.6MM
  • Distillates -1.732MM, -550K
  • Cushing +836K
  • Production 11.5MM, +100kb/d

The 7.2MM draw was substantially greater than the data disclosed yesterday by API:

  • Crude -4.045MM
  • Gasoline +2.711MM
  • Distillate -1.961MM
  • Cushing +2.128MM

Visually:

More importantly, US crude production remains controlled for now even as rig counts and prices rise.

WTI popped modestly on the bigger than expected draw only to reverse most of the gain.

It is worth noting that anyone looking for the impact of Hurricane Ida – which came on shore on Saturday – in the data will have to wait until next week’s DOE report, which will capture any resulting dislocations.

The latest data comes as the OPEC+ virtual meeting is taking place in the background, although it does not appear there will be any major surprises there: as Bloomberg notes, the JMMC has recommended sticking to the supply-hike plan which means another 400K b/d in output will soon be added to the total amid hopes that the current Delta variant slowdown fades away soon enough.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 09/01/2021 – 10:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/3t6MUo0 Tyler Durden