The World Community for Racial Justice

blog

Watch: Black Texas Man’s Grandmother Stands Between Him and Gun-Wielding Police Officers…All Because He Reportedly Ran a Stop Sign

Here’s a question: Are black people ever allowed to be afraid? White people and police officers have been able to rely on the words, “I feared for my life” to justify shooting unarmed people. At the very least, black people should be afforded that justification for not immediately cooperating with authorities. In Midland, Texas, a video capturing the arrest of a black man by gun-wielding police officers for failing to stop at a stop sign as his grandmother steps in poses that same question

NewsWest 9 reports that a video shared online shows 21-year-old Tye Anders being confronted by police officers who had their guns drawn on him as he laid on the ground. Anders can be heard frantically expressing to officers that he’s afraid that they are going to shoot him, and several witnesses, including family members, can be heard expressing the same concern. Later, in the video, Anders’ 90-year-old grandmother walks towards Anders and then falls on top of him as officers move to handcuff him. All of this apparently started over Anders running a stop sign.

According to the Midland Police Department, officers attempted to pull Anders over after he drove through the stop sign. Instead of pulling over immediately, Anders continued driving until he got to his grandmother’s residence, at which point the officers, with their guns drawn, ordered Anderson to exit his car, which they said he initially refused to do.

Upon exiting the vehicle, officers advised the subject to walk towards them to be detained, the subject then stopped and laid on the ground,” MPD said. Anders was arrested for evading police and has since been released from jail on bond.

A few questions immediately come to mind: Is “evading” really an accurate description for someone who simply waited to get around family before he stopped? Does the fact that he immediately laid down on the ground instead of walking towards gun-wielding officers as instructed not indicate that he was terrified? Why did all these cops need to be on the scene with their guns out for someone who just ran a stop sign?

Civil rights attorney Justin Moore was hired to represent Anders and he tells a different story altogether.

“We believe and maintain that this was a stop based on racial profiling and there was no traffic violation,” Moore said in a phone interview

Moore also wrote in a statement: “Racial profiling and pretext stops have been at pandemic levels in this country for generations. This incident falls within this age-old trend of following black men and arresting them for fabricated reasons.” Moore said that Anders was hit in the face multiple times by an officer after he was already handcuffed and in the back of a squad car.

In a press conference on Tuesday, Moore denied that Anders attempted to evade police and said he pulled over once he got somewhere he felt safe

You can view footage of the incident below.


https://www.theroot.com/ajax/inset/iframe?id=youtube-video-2UZw-8TfG4I&start=0

blog

China deception fuels fears of biological weapons ethnic ‘experiments’ – Washington Times

China deception fuels fears of biological weapons ethnic ‘experiments’

Chinese government deception regarding the coronavirus outbreak is raising new fears about Beijing’s biological weapons activities, including population-specific research on germ weapons capable of attacking ethnic groups, according to current and former U.S. officials.

A senior Trump administration official told The Washington Times that China is known to be engaged in a covert program that includes development of biological weapons capable of attacking ethnic groups with pathogens.

“We are looking at potential biological experiments on ethnic minorities,” the official said on the condition of anonymity.

Details about the activities were obtained from sources with direct knowledge of the Chinese programs and are contained in intelligence reports that may be declassified for public release in the future.

The official said China’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak has heightened concerns about its secret biological weapons work. Beijing hid early indicators of how infectious the coronavirus was and delayed warning the world.

“We continue to have concerns with China’s BWC compliance as well as their international obligations,” the official said, referring to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, an international treaty that prohibits the development and production of biological agents. “If we’ve learned nothing else through this COVID episode, it’s that China cannot be trusted to do the right thing.”

China signed the BWC treaty in 1984, and more than 100 other countries have joined. Article 5 requires signatories to “consult one another and to cooperate in solving any problems” related to biological threats.

Since the coronavirus outbreak began in December, China has refused to allow international investigators to examine research work on bat-origin coronaviruses conducted at two Wuhan laboratories.

A spokesman for the Chinese mission to the United Nations did not return emails or telephone calls seeking comment.

National security officials focused on international biological weapons security protocols have been concerned about Bejing’s activities for years.

Sources who spoke with The Times pointed to China’s contribution to a U.N. guide to biological security in 2011 that detailed Beijing’s own concerns relating to rapid technological advancements to create population-specific biological weapons and other exotic pathogens capable of attacking ethnic groups.

China did not say in the document that it had its own active program to develop such capabilities, but U.S. intelligence officials and some foreign affairs experts said Beijing did and continues to have such a program.

Some said the language Chinese officials used in the 2011 U.N. guide, which Beijing did not make public at the time, offered a window into their government research activities.

In the document, titled “Preventing Biological Threats: What You Can Do,” Chinese officials laid out their unease that scientific breakthroughs to “combat disease and improve health” could be unleashed as effective weapons. Chinese officials also cited “targeted drug-delivery technology making it easier to spread pathogens,” as well as “population-specific genetic markers” and the “creation of man-made pathogens.”

The U.N. guidebook was a compilation of information from 12 nations participating in the 2011 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, known as the BWC. An addendum, “New scientific and technological developments relevant to the Convention,” includes background information on nations’ submissions.

Several participants revealed ongoing research that could have either offensive or defense biological weapons applications.

The United States disclosed work on advances in manipulating genetic material and microorganisms, awareness-raising communication, confidence-building and scientific conduct, export controls and improvements in biosafety.

One current and two former officials said the prospect that China could develop ethnic-related biological weapons is chilling.

Paula DeSutter, a former assistant secretary of state for verification, compliance and implementation, said China, in the 2011 document, was “admitting to pursuing these activities, which is not surprising since each is clearly indicative of an intent to employ biological weapons, in some cases against specific populations.”

“One has to tremble at the notion that Wuhan may have been an experiment to test all of these items they were working on as far back as 2011,” Ms. DeSutter told The Times.

The notion appears to be bolstered by recent Chinese military writings.

Retired Chinese Gen. Zhang Shibo wrote in his 2017 book, “New Highland of War,” that biotechnology advances were increasing the likelihood of offensive bioweapons, including the danger of “specific ethnic genetic attacks.”

That same year, the Chinese military-run National Defense University’s annual Science of Military Strategy report for the first time included a section on biology as a domain of warfare. The document said germ conflict could include “specific ethnic genetic attacks.”

U.S. officials outlined their concerns about China’s biological weapons programs in a recent executive summary of the State Department’s annual arms control compliance report.

“During the reporting period, the People’s Republic of China (China) engaged in biological activities with potential dual-use applications, some of which raise concerns regarding its compliance with Article I of the BWC,” the report said.

Article 1 states that signatories to the BWC agree never to develop, produce or stockpile biological or toxin weapons, or to build weapons or equipment to deliver the arms.

The State Department’s 2020 compliance report, as well as reports produced by the department in 2005 and 2010, assessed that China maintained “some elements of an offensive [biological weapons] capability” in violation of the BWC.

The 2020 report also said China’s own confidence-building measure reports failed to document Beijing’s past offensive biological weapons program or its remaining stockpiles of those weapons.

A former senior Trump administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity expressed particular concern over the prospect that China has been conducting population-specific and other research with applications for biological weapons.

The concerns began receiving attention in the State Department’s annual arms compliance report in 2019. Before that, the State Department and the intelligence community largely played down such concerns, the former official said.

Although China’s 2011 submission to the U.N. guidebook does not provide clear evidence that Beijing is trying to develop ethnic cleansing biological weapons, the former official said the Chinese military writings emphasizing biological warfare as a new domain raises serious concerns.

“This is dual-use research, which is why it does raise the specter of China having an offensive capability,” the former official said. “What the Chinese are unable to say is that [population-specific genetic research] has a peaceful application.”

China did not make public its formal submission to the 2011 U.N. guidebook regarding Beijing’s BWC-related research.

However, He Yafei, who was China’s ambassador to the U.N. office in Geneva, wrote at the time that closely monitoring bioscience and technology developments was needed to maintain the effectiveness of the BWC.

“China supports efforts to enhance the monitoring and assessment of the impacts of the advancement of biotechnology under the framework of the convention, with a view to preventing the hostile use of biotechnology and making it better serve the mankind,” Mr. He wrote.

China has said it is working on synthetic biology, which experts believe could be used to edit gene sequences to create viruses weaponized to infect a specific person.

A U.S. submission to a 2016 review conference on biological security said the threat of biological and toxin weapons is neither abstract nor theoretical.

“Scientific advances and the increasingly widespread availability of key materials, equipment and knowledge put such weapons within reach of more actors — whether state or non-state — than ever before,” the submission said.

“Biological weapons have been used in the past to horrific effect, and there is clear evidence that terrorist groups, individuals, and states continue to pursue these abhorrent weapons.”

Beijing is engaged in mass repression of several minorities, including Uighurs and other Muslims in western China. An estimated 1 million are being held in concentration camps, which Chinese officials call reeducation centers.

China also has targeted Tibetans for repression. The Chinese military has annexed the southwestern region, and many Tibetans remain loyal to the Buddhist leader Dalai Lama and are seeking independence.

The information about China’s 2011 BWC submission was contained in a report posted on the Geneva-based BWC information support unit website.

It was funded by the British and Canadian governments and reflects the findings of experts who met on the sidelines of the review conference in Geneva in January 2011.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/14/china-deception-fuels-fears-biological-weapons-eth/

blog

How Some Rich Americans Are Getting Stimulus ‘Checks’ Averaging $1.7 Million

A $1.7 million stimulus check?

www.forbes.com

While wealthy Americans are not eligible for the comparatively measly $1,200 stimulus checks that are now being disbursed to many Americans, they are on pace to do even better. 43,000 taxpayers, who earn more than $1 million annually, are each set to receive a $1.7 million windfall, on average, thanks to a provision buried in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.

You may or may not be surprised that some of the language conveniently inserted into the $2.2 trillion bill skews heavily in favor of the wealthy. The provision doling out literally millions of dollars is aimed at a limitation that was created in 2017 when Republicans overhauled the tax code. It “temporarily suspends a limitation on how much owners of businesses formed as “pass-through” entities can deduct against their non-business income, such as capital gains, to reduce their tax liability,” according to The Washington Post.

Rich and famous couple taking a selfie for social media while embracing each other in front of a private airplane parked on a tarmac

The Joint Commission on Taxation report, requested by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Llloyd Doggett, concluded that suspending the “pass through” limitation would cost the government over $90 billion in 2020 alone. Critics have argued that the benefits disproportionately accrue to wealthy individuals, including hedge fund investors and real-estate business owners, and the JCT confirms this.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas

“For those earning $1 million annually, a tax break buried in the recent coronavirus relief legislation is so generous that its total cost is more than total new funding for all hospitals in America and more than the total provided to all state and local governments,” said Doggett. “Someone wrongly seized on this health emergency to reward ultrarich beneficiaries, likely including the Trump family, with a tax loophole not available to middle class families. This net operating loss loophole is a loser that should be repealed.” 

The analysis by the JCT showed how skewed the tax provision benefits the wealthy. It found that, “82 percent of the benefits of the policy go to about 43,000 taxpayers who earn more than $1 million annually.”

Breakdown of who benefits from changes inserted into the CARES Act

If you take the report’s calculations at face value, that means that, on average, each of the eligible taxpayers would get a windfall of ~$1.7 million!

Methodology showing average 2020 benefit for the 43,000 taxpayers who earn more than $1 million annually

This number represents an average (mean) and clearly not all of those earning “only” $1 million will receive a $1.7 million tax cut; however, just as some may receive less than the $1.7 million, some may benefit much more. The numbers may be closer to the truth because of additional language that applies the policy retroactively “so losses in 2018 and 2019 can be ‘carried back’ against the past five years.”

needed relief across all sectors of the US economy. However, it is troubling to see wealthy individuals receive extravagant benefits when millions of Americans, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet or coping with food insecurity, will receive so little.

Further Coronavirus-Related Reading:

Repeal The $1.6 Million Stimulus ‘Check’ Loophole For Rich Americans? Futile Proposal Unveiled

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaharziv/2020/04/14/why-are-rich-americans-getting-17-million-stimulus-checks/

blog

Corona-Viruses causes two diseasesSARS and MERS, are two diseases also caused by Corona-Viruses

2003 emergence of the severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus (SARS-CoV) demonstrated that CoVs are also capable of causing outbreaks of severe infections in humans. A second severe CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), emerged in 2012 in Saudi Arabia. More recently, a novel coronavirus was identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019

SARS-Corona-Viruses

The only recognized SARS-CoV outbreak began in China in 2002 and spread internationally, most notably to Toronto, Canada. From November 2002 to July 2003, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported 8,437 SARS cases and 813 deaths.6 Like other coronaviruses, SARS-CoV is transmitted from person to person through respiratory droplets and close contact.

The incubation period is 4 days (range 1 to 13 days). The main symptoms of SARS are fever, headache, and discomfort. The case fatality risk is approximately 10%.

MERS-Corona-Viruses

MERS-CoV was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. To date, there have been more than 2,400 cases, mostly in the Middle East.7 Individual cases and small clusters continue to be reported in that region. Travel-related MERS cases have also been reported in South Korea, where it caused a significant hospital-based outbreak in 2015, and in the United States, where 2 very mild cases were diagnosed. MERS-CoV is transmitted from person to person via respiratory droplets and close contact.

The incubation period is 5 days (range 2 to 15 days). The main symptoms of MERS are fever, chills, generalized myalgia, cough, shortness of breath, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. The case fatality risk is approximately 35%.

Cui J, Li F, Shi ZL. Origin and evolution of pathogenic coronaviruses. Nat Rev Microbiol 2019;17(3):181-192.
Holmes EC, Rambaut A. Viral evolution and the emergence of SARS coronavirus. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2004;359(1447):1059-1065.
Zaki AM, van Boheemen S, Bestebroer TM, Osterhaus AD, Fouchier RA. Isolation of a novel coronavirus from a man with pneumonia in Saudi Arabia. N Engl J Med 2012;367(19):1814-1820.

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/publications/coronaviruses