Shell Quietly Ditches Failed Carbon Credit Scheme

 Shell, Europe's largest oil company, has quietly shelved the world's largest corporate plan to develop carbon offsets, after CEO Wael Sawan laid out an updated strategy for the company that included cutting costs and doubling down on profit centers (oil and gas) - which notably omitted any mention of the company's prior commitment to spend up to $100 million per year to build a 'pipeline' of carbon credits as part of the firm's promise to achieve 'net zero' emissions by 2050, Bloomberg reports.

The pullback reflects both Sawan’s renewed commitment to the oil-and-gas business that generates most of Shell’s profits, and an admission that the prior goals were simply unattainable. Over the past two years, Shell barely made a dent. It spent $95 million, less than half of its initial budget, to build or invest in a portfolio of carbon projects from Western Africa to the Brazilian Amazon to Australian farmlands. They’ve generated few if any offsets, and Shell has struggled to find projects that meet its standards for quality.

According to investigations by Bloomberg Green (how cute), many offset programs don't deliver the environmental benefits they promise. In announcing their now-shelved programs, Shell sought to solve that problem with stringent requirements, deep pockets, and engineering expertise. What they learned was something any idiot could have told you: there's no effective way to maintain a large enough offset program to make a difference.

"It’s really hard to get scale from high-quality credits," said Carbon Market Watch's Gilles Dufrasne. "The two forces," being volume and quality, "work against each other."

Shell's carbon debacle was inspired by a 2017 Nature Conservancy paper which suggested that nature-based solutions would be a cost-effective means to offset carbon.

And - surprise, the academics were wrong again...

For example, four years into a plan to partner with Forestry and Land Scotland to plant over a million trees to generate "pending issuance units" (unborn carbon credits), they've accrued less than 0.02% of their initial goal in terms of carbon sequestration.

And in Canada, Shell's efforts to secure land for credits has turned into a total disaster despite the company bragging about the endeavor on its website. The company has also failed to hit its $100 million investment target, spending only about $69 million last year, which accounts for less than 1% of its total capital expenditure.

A file photograph showing young pine trees seen from a mature pine forest.
Georgeclerk | Getty Images

Another project to restore mangrove trees in Senegal, which began in 2019 and has been operated by Belgian nonprofit WeForest, won't even start producing carbon credits until 2025. Shell has also walked away from potential goldmines like the Delta Blue Carbon Project in Pakistan which would cover an area roughly twice the size of London. While the 'fundamentals were sound,' per Bloomberg, the company had concerns over the integrity of the project's local partners, as well as the origins to the land rights.

A spokesperson for Indus Delta Capital, which runs the project, said shareholders and directors in the project have been subjected to rigorous due diligence and the process by which licenses and permissions were granted is “in line with the rules of business” prescribed by both the national and regional governments. -Bloomberg

Shell has also broken ties with a Montana grasslands project run by Vermont-based Native Energy due to disagreements over deal structures and the potential use of credits to label fossil fuels as carbon neutral.

For Native’s part, chief executive officer Jeff Bernicke said it terminated discussions with Shell because “there was not a fit between their plan and Native's goals and values.” There was also a concern that the credits would be used to label fossil-fuels as carbon-neutral. A spokesman for Shell said the company has a robust due diligence process and it does not comment on specific projects or the contractual agreements.

Shell's strategy now seems more attuned to secrecy and selective partnership. The company keeps some ventures under wraps, like its involvement in the Peruvian Amazon and an Indonesian forestry venture dubbed "Sun Bird," perhaps to ward off competition from oil industry peers who are also elbowing their way into the carbon-credit market.

Backup plan?

While Shell's expensive quagmire into carbon credits may have crashed and burned, the company has a backup plan - appease climate alarmists by simply buying 'low-quality' carbon credits to achieve its lofty goals of becoming 'carbon neutral' by 2050.

In the words of Adam Matthews, chief responsible investment officer at the Church of England Pensions Board, "They're no longer aligned with trying to navigate the transition in the same way that we had previously perceived."

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/shell-quietly-ditches-failed-carbon-credit-scheme

Conflicting Evidence Of mRNA Tech Ups Concerns About Rush For Use In New Vax Development

 by Megan Redshaw via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. government and pharmaceutical companies are investing a substantial amount to develop new mRNA vaccines for infectious diseases and cancer, fueling a lucrative mRNA platform valued at $136.2 billion.

A newly established White House program announced on Aug. 23 that it is granting a total of $25 million over three years to Emory University, Yale School of Medicine, and the University of Georgia to develop personalized therapeutic vaccines against cancers and emerging infections, similar to how COVID-19 mRNA vaccines target SARS-CoV-2. They aim to use mRNA—an essential element in COVID-19 vaccines developed to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infections—to program a unique class of immune cells called dendritic cells to initiate a desired immunological response.

Pharmaceutical companies such as Moderna, BioNTech, and CureVac are conducting clinical trials using mRNA-based vaccines with advanced melanoma, ovarian, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers. The National Institutes of Health is partnering with BioNTech to develop a personalized vaccine for pancreatic cancers. In addition to COVID-19 and cancer, other mRNA-based vaccines in development target influenza, genital herpes, respiratory viruses, and shingles.

Although mRNA platforms are appealing because they reduce costs and shorten the vaccine development timeline, evidence and experience suggest the mRNA technology used for novel COVID-19 vaccines is associated with various harms and neither prevents COVID-19 nor its transmission.

Evidence Challenging Vaccine ‘Safe and Effective’ Narrative

The unprecedented rates of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination overshadow the benefits, according to researchers from Australia who say the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, whether from the virus or created from genetic code in mRNA and adenovectorDNA vaccines, is toxic and causes a wide array of diseases.

In their recently published paper published in Biomedicines titled, “‘Spikeopathy’: COVID-19 Spike Protein Is Pathogenic, from Both Virus and Vaccine mRNA,” the researchers explored peer-reviewed data countering the “safe and effective” narrative attached to new technologies used to develop mRNA and adenovectorDNA vaccines at “warp speed” to end the pandemic.

Spike protein pathogenicity, termed “spikeopathy,” describes the ability of the spike protein to cause disease, and the researchers say it can affect many organ systems.

Researchers noted the following key problem areas:

• Spike protein toxicity (spikeopathy) from both the virus and when produced by gene codes in people vaccinated with COVID-19 vaccines.
• Inflammatory properties in specific lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used to transport mRNA.
• Long-lasting action caused by N1-methyl pseudouridine in the synthetic mRNA—also referred to as modRNA.
• Widespread distribution of mRNA and DNA codes via the LNP and viral vector carrier matrices, respectively.
• Human cells produce a foreign protein that can cause autoimmunity.

Now that vaccines utilizing mRNA technology have been available and widely distributed for several years, data show these vaccines produce foreign antigens in human tissues and increase the risk of autoimmune, neurological, cardiovascular, inflammatory disorders, and cancers, especially when the vaccine ingredients do not remain localized at the injection site. An antigen is any substance that stimulates an immune response. If the immune system encounters an antigen that is not found on the body’s own cells, it will launch an attack against that antigen.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data show the design of the mRNA and adenovectorDNA COVID-19 vaccines allow uncontrolled biodistribution, durability, and persistent bioavailability of the spike protein inside the body after vaccination. Pharmacokinetics is the study of how the body interacts with administered substances for the entire duration of exposure. Pharmacodynamics assesses the drug’s effect on the body more closely.

This may explain the unprecedented number of adverse events that appear to be associated with the spike protein produced by the gene-based technologies employed by Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Johnson & Johnson, as well as the viral vector DNA technology used by other countries, researchers said.

mRNA Vaccines Are Gene Therapy and May Cause Harm

Gene-based COVID-19 vaccines are therapeutic products that actually fit within the FDA’s definition of gene therapy because they cause the cells of the vaccinated person to produce antigens for transmembrane expression that invokes an immune response. By design, these novel vaccine platforms risk tissue damage secondary to autoimmune responses raised against cells expressing foreign spike antigens, researchers said.

The FDA was aware of the pathogenicity of spike proteins before releasing COVID-19 vaccines to the public. In an October 2022 meeting with its vaccine advisors, the FDA presented a highly accurate list of potential adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccines, including neurological, cardiovascular, and autoimmune “possible adverse events.”

React19, an organization that provides financial, emotional, and physical support to those experiencing long-term injuries from COVID-19 vaccines, provided a list of over 3,400 published papers and case reports of injuries affecting more than 20 organ systems. More than 432 peer-reviewed papers relate to papers and case reports of myocarditis, cardiomyopathy, myocardial infarction, hypertension, aortic dissection, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), tachycardia, and conduction disturbance—a problem with the electrical system that controls the heart’s rate and rhythm.

The most common group of adverse events reported following COVID-19 vaccination to both pharmacovigilance databases and Pfizer involve neurological disorders. According to the paper, neurological symptoms and cognitive decline with accelerated neurodegenerative disease are features of acute COVID-19 vaccine injuries and, to some extent, long COVID syndrome. Research suggests (pdf) LNPs transporting the mRNA to make spike proteins can cross the blood-brain barrier and cause neurotoxic effects.

Lipid Nanoparticles Are Toxic and Pro-Inflammatory

It’s not just the spike protein that can cause disease. LNPs that serve as the delivery method are also toxic and pro-inflammatory.

Research from 2018 showed even small amounts of nanoparticles taken up by the lungs can lead to cytotoxic effects. Ingested nanoparticles have been shown to affect lymph nodes, the liver, and the spleen, while when injected as a drug carrier, they can pass any barrier and translocate to the brain, ovaries, and testes, mainly after phagocytosis by macrophages, which help distribute them across the body. The effects on the reproductive system suggest lipid nanoparticles can be cytotoxic and damage DNA.

According to the authors, two components in the mRNA lipid nanoparticle complexes, ALC-0315 and ALC-0159, are concerning, as they have never been used in a medicinal product and are not registered in either the European Pharmacopoeia or in the European C&L Inventory database. A question posed to the European Parliament in December 2021 pointed out that the manufacturer of the nanoparticles specifies the nanoparticles are for research only and not for human use. The European Commission responded that the excipient in Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine “has been demonstrated to be appropriate … in compliance with the relevant EMA scientific guidelines and standards.”

Still, this could explain the root cause of numerous post-vaccination adverse events, researchers said.

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/conflicting-evidence-mrna-technology-raises-serious-concerns-about-rush-use-new-vaccine

FBI Data On Active Shootings Is Misleading: John Lott Jr.

 Americans are constantly debating policing and gun control. But to discuss these issues, we have to depend on government crime data. Unfortunately, politics has infected the data handling of agencies such as the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control.

Last year, the CDC became the center of controversy when it removed its estimates of defensive gun uses from its website at the request of gun control organizations. For nearly a decade the CDC cited a 2013 National Academies of Sciences report showing that the annual number of people using guns to stop crime ranged from about 64,000 to 3 million. The CDC website listed the upper figure at 2.5 million.

Mark Bryant, who runs the Gun Violence Archive, wrote to CDC officials after a meeting last year that the 2.5 million number “has been used so often to stop [gun control] legislation.” The CDC’s estimates were subsequently taken down and now lists no numbers.

The FBI is also susceptible to political pressure. Up until January of 2021, I worked in the U.S. Department of Justice as the senior advisor for research and statistics, and part of my job was to evaluate the FBI’s active shooting reports. I showed the bureau that many cases were missing and that others had been misidentified. Yet, the FBI continues to report that armed citizens stopped only 14 of the 302 active shooter incidents that it identified for the period 2014-2022. The correct rate is almost eight times higher. And if we limit the discussion to places where permit holders were allowed to carry, the rate is eleven times higher.

The FBI defines active shooter incidents as those in which an individual actively kills or attempts to kill people in a populated, public area. But it does not include shootings that are deemed related to other criminal activity, such as robbery or fighting over drug turf. Active shootings may involve just one shot being fired at just one target, even if the target isn’t hit. 

To compile its list, the FBI hired academics at the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University. Police departments don’t collect data, so the researchers had to find news stories about these incidents.

It isn’t surprising that people will miss cases or occasionally misidentify them when using news stories, but the FBI was unwilling to fix its errors when I pointed them out. My organization, the Crime Prevention Research Center, has found many more missed cases and is keeping an updated list. Back in 2015, I published a list of missed cases in a criminology publication.

Unfortunately, the news media unquestioningly reports the FBI numbers. After 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken used his legally-carried concealed handgun to stop what would have been a mass public shooting, an Associated Press headline noted: “Rare in US for an active shooter to be stopped by bystander.” A Washington Post headline proclaimed: “Rampage in Indiana a rare instance of armed civilian ending mass shooting.”

The CPRC’s numbers tell a different story: Out of 440 active shooter incidents from 2014 to 2022, an armed citizen stopped 157. We also found that the FBI had misidentified five cases, usually because the person who stopped the attack was incorrectly identified as a security guard.

We found these cases on a budget of just a few thousand dollars. Though we found that armed citizens had stopped eight times as many cases as the FBI claims, I make no assertion that we unearthed all of these stories. It is quite possible that the news media itself never covers many such incidents.

While the FBI claims that just 4.6% of active shootings were stopped by law-abiding citizens carrying guns, the percentage that I found was 35.7%. I am more confident that we have identified a higher share of recent cases, and our figure for 2022 was even higher – 41.3%.

The FBI doesn’t differentiate between law-abiding citizens stopping attacks where guns are banned and where they are allowed, but you can’t expect law-abiding citizens to stop attacks where it is illegal to carry guns. In places where law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry firearms, the percentage of active shootings that were stopped is 51%. For 2022, that figure is a remarkable 63.5%.

In order to follow the FBI’s definition, we excluded 27 cases because a law-abiding person with a gun stopped the attacker before he was able to get off a shot.

In an email I received in 2015, a bureau official acknowledged that “the FBI did not come across this incident during its research in 2015, but it does meet the FBI’s active-shooter definition.” The official noted they will miss active-shooter cases because the reports “are limited in scope.” Yet, the FBI database never added the incident.

When the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler reached out to the FBI for comments on our earlier work up through 2021, they emailed: “We have no additional information to provide other than what is provided within the active shooter reports on our website.”

However, a researcher at Texas State University did respond to two of the cases we had identified in our earlier work. He argued that one case involving a shooting at a dentist office was excluded because it involved a domestic dispute and another at a strip club because it was a “retaliation murder.” We list 14 examples where the FBI list includes shooting resulting from domestic disputes and three others where a shooting started after someone was denied entry to a lounge or bar. So why the double standard? Domestic disputes and “retaliation murders” are only included when they don’t involve permit holders stopping the attacks.

The FBI data on active shootings is missing so many defensive gun uses that it’s hard to believe it isn’t intentional. Errors can happen, but the failure to fix past reports shows a troubling disregard for the truth. The reality is that armed, law-abiding citizens are unsung guardian angels.

John R. Lott Jr. is a contributor to RealClearInvestigations, focusing on voting and gun rights. His articles have appeared in publications such as the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, New York Post, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune. Lott is an economist who has held research and/or teaching positions at the University of Chicago, Yale University, Stanford, UCLA, Wharton, and Rice.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fbi-data-active-shootings-misleading-john-lott-jr

Biden trip to storm-damaged Florida to take place without DeSantis meeting

 U.S. President Joe Biden will travel to Florida on Saturday to survey damage from this week's Hurricane Idalia, but a visit with the state's Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, is not scheduled, despite the president's assertion that they would meet.

Biden, a Democrat who is running for re-election next year, told reporters at the White House on Friday that he would see DeSantis, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination to challenge Biden in 2024, during the trip.

DeSantis's spokesman Jeremy Redfern said that was not the case.

"We don’t have any plans for the Governor to meet with the President tomorrow," Redfern said in an email. "In these rural communities, and so soon after impact, the security preparations alone that would go into setting up such a meeting would shut down ongoing recovery efforts."

The White House said Biden and his wife, Jill, would meet with members of the community affected by the storm.

"Their visit to Florida has been planned in close coordination with FEMA as well as state and local leaders to ensure there is no impact on response operations," White House spokesperson Emilie Simons said in a statement.

The White House said Biden informed DeSantis on Thursday before visiting the Federal Emergency Management Agency in Washington that he would be coming to Florida, and the governor did not express concerns at the time.

The back-and-forth suggests politics could be creeping into the storm response.

Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who is also running for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, drew criticism for his praise of President Barack Obama in 2012 when the Democrat visited his state in the aftermath of superstorm Sandy.

Biden said earlier this week that politics had not affected his conversations with DeSantis.

"I think he trusts my judgment and my desire to help. And I trust him to be able to suggest that he’s -- this is not about politics. This is about taking care of the people of his state," Biden told reporters on Wednesday. The two men have spoken regularly this week.

Biden has asked for billions of dollars in additional emergency funding following a string of severe weather events.

He plans to visit Florida before flying to his home state of Delaware for the weekend. The president regularly visits states that have been affected by natural disasters.

https://news.yahoo.com/biden-says-hell-meet-desantis-220941162.html

Fired Professor Wins Key Victory In Free Speech Case Over Mask, Vaccine Policy

 A professor who was fired from the University of Southern Maine for challenging COVID-19 mandates has won a critical courtroom victory, after a district judge ruled that her First Amendment lawsuit against the institution can proceed.

Patricia Griffin, who says she was fired for asking valid questions about mask and vaccination policies on campus during the COVID-19 pandemic, was granted the narrow win after the university filed a motion to dismiss the case in part. US District Judge Jon Levy ruled that while Griffin's First Amendment claim can proceed, other charges were dismissed.

On Aug. 18, 2021, the University of Maine announced a mandatory mask policy. Six days later, Griffin took part in a luncheon meeting via Zoom, where the speaker was Glenn Cummings, president of the university. Griffin says Cummings wasn't wearing a mask at the time.

Later that day she sent an email to the Dean of the College of Management and Human Service, claiming that she had been following "science, data, and evidence" related to the pandemic. Griffin said in the email that she was "searching for anything that will support wearing a mask while indoors as well as vaccinating an entire school population as the optimal method for stopping the transmission of the virus. The reality is that my research has found no evidence to support these measures."

She attached a document to her email summarizing the results of her research, which did not find "any overwhelming support for the wearing of masks nor the mandating of vaccines, especially since the overall survival rate is 99.7 percent if infected with Covid. And finally, from a legal perspective, asking for my vaccination status is a violation of HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)."

She then met with the Dean in another Zoom meeting, in which she says she never refused to wear a mask, or violate university policy.

Then, her fall semester classes were canceled. In a subsequent disciplinary conference, she was allegedly told that she wouldn't be allowed to teach her courses 100% online unless she resigned an accepted a part-time position.

On Sept. 8, 2021, she received a letter from Cummings notifying her that she had been suspended, and the university had moved to terminate her. She says the letter falsely stated that she refused to comply with university policy and wouldn't wear a mask.

She was formally terminated on Sept. 22.

For those who enjoy deep legal dives Jonathan Turley opines further:

We now have a positive ruling for free speech out of the District of Maine where Chief Judge Jon Levy has ruled in favor of a professor terminated by the University of Southern Maine for questioning mask and vaccination policies.

Judge Levy’s decision in Griffin v. University of Maine System is balanced and fair. He does not offer a full-throated endorsement of the claim by Professor Patricia Griffin, but rules that she has a right to a trial on the free speech claim.

Here are the basic facts.

On August 18, 2021, the Chancellor of the University of Maine System announced a mandatory mask policy.  On August 24, University President Glenn Cummings held a a luncheon meeting via Zoom. Notably, Cummings was not wearing a mask. After the meeting, Griffin sent an email to the Dean of the College of Management and Human Service that read in part:

“I first want to say how much I love teaching at [the University of Southern Maine] as well as working with such a great faculty. It really has been the highlight of my career and I owe a lot to you for sticking with me. The reason for this email is because I have been following the science, data, and evidence regarding SARS-CoV-2 and searching for anything that will support wearing a mask while indoors as well as vaccinating an entire school population as the optimal method for stopping the transmission of the virus. The reality is that my research has found no evidence to support these measures. I wanted to share the information I gathered and relied upon when making my decision regarding these mandates before the start of classes next Monday to see that my decisions are science, evidence, and data based. However, I do not want to cause any issues, especially for you, if I come to campus on Monday morning to teach my one face to face class so I wanted to give you enough time.”

Griffin attached a letter addressed to the Dean on her own research and objections to the policies. She concluded:

“In conclusion, I have followed the science, data, and evidence and cannot find any overwhelming support for the wearing of masks nor the mandating of vaccines, especially since the overall survival rate is 99.7% if infected with Covid. And finally, from a legal perspective, asking for my vaccination status is a violation of HIPAA.

My expectation is the University of Southern Maine will appreciate a faculty member who embraces critical thinking and applies both inductive and deductive reasoning rather than emotions when making decisions. I am teaching three courses this fall, two online and one face to face. I welcome any evidence you can provide to the contrary of what I have found which will convince me that my conclusions about the efficacy of wearing a mask and vaccinating an entire population are wrong.”

What followed quickly went from bad to worse for Griffin, who met with the Dean and again asked for the data supporting the University’s Policy and vaccination requirement.  While universities attacked academics who questioned these policies as opposed to “the science,” they largely refused to share the basis for the policies.

Despite the firing or sanctioning of academics who questioned pandemic policies, many have recently admitted that the efficacy of masks (particularly the common surgical masks) were radically overstated and unsupported. Moreover, studies have shown that critics were right in claiming that natural immunities from prior bouts with Covid offered as good or better protection than the vaccine. Nevertheless, the media participated in the demonization of these experts who were disciplined at universities and denied key positions in their fields.

In this case, Griffin alleged that immediately following the Zoom meeting, her fall semester courses were removed from the fall class list. She still did not back down and continued to ask for the data. She alleged that school officials then told her that she would not be allowed to teach courses 100% online unless she resigned and accepted a part-time position. On September 8, 2021, Cummings sent a letter to Griffin suspending her and informing her that the University would be moving to terminate her employment. Griffin alleges that the letter falsely asserted that she had refused to comply with the policies and included other false assertions.

The issue for the court was whether Griffin was speaking as a public employee or as a citizen.

“The “threshold inquiry” to determine whether a public employee engaged in protected speech is “whether [the employee] spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern.” O’Connell v. Marrero-Recio, 724 F.3d 117, 123 (1st Cir. 2013). If the answer is no, the employee has no First Amendment retaliation claim. If the answer is yes, then the possibility of a First Amendment claim arises. Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 418 (2006). “In order to survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff need not conclusively establish that her speech was made as a citizen; ‘it is sufficient that the complaint alleges facts that plausibly set forth citizen speech.’” Cannell v. Corizon, LLC, No. 1:14-cv-405-NT, 2015 WL 8664209, at *8 (D. Me. Dec. 11, 2015) (quoting Decotiis v. Whittemore, 635 F.3d 22, 34-35 (1st Cir. 2011)).”

The court found that there were factors under the relevant tests that cut both ways on whether Griffin was speaking as an employee or a citizen. However, given the governing standard for review, JudgeLevy read this evidence in her favor and the right to a trial on free speech claims (though he curtailed other aspects of her complaint):

Here, Griffin has pleaded sufficient facts to make it more than merely possible that once fully developed, the facts will support the conclusion that although Griffin’s speech related to her official duties as a public employee, the subject matter of her speech pertained to a matter of great public concern and was outside the scope of her duties as a professor of marketing. Whether the same conclusion may be true after the parties have completed discovery is another matter for another day. “[I]t is entirely possible that additional facts might show” that Griffin is not entitled to the relief that she seeks, but “absent factual development, dismissal is unwarranted” at this stage….

Putting aside the merits for trial, what should be clear is that, if the underlying facts are proven, the university acted in an abusive and capricious manner. Faced with a dissenting faculty member, the school opted to seek her termination rather than defend its policies or allow a dialogue on these measures.

As a public university, the Maine legislature should take note of this case and the need to reinforce free speech protections in the system. The level of intolerance for opposing views alleged in this complaint is chilling. If these facts are proven, there were grounds for termination but it was not the termination of Professor Griffin.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fired-professor-wins-key-victory-free-speech-case-over-mask-vaccine-policy

Busing Illegal Immigrants To Blue America Is Working

 by Jarrett Stepman via The Epoch Times,

Republican border-state strategy to send illegal immigrants to Democrat-run cities and states is paying off.

On Thursday, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul sent a letter to President Joe Biden begging for federal aid. Importantly, she finally acknowledged where the problem is coming from.

“This is a financial burden the city and state are shouldering on behalf of the federal government,” Hochul, a fellow Democrat, said of the illegal immigrants pouring into New York.

“I cannot ask New Yorkers to pay for what is fundamentally a federal responsibility,” the governor wrote. “And I urge the federal government to take prompt and significant action today to meet its obligation to New York State.”

In a press conference following release of the letter, Hochul further complained about illegal immigrants released into the country by the Biden administration.

What happened to all are welcome, no exceptions?

This is an interesting pivot from the New York governor. Until now, Democrat politicians mostly have been unwilling to criticize the White House in any way on the border security issue, or even suggest that the Biden administration is where the problem originates.

If you want to know the reason for the sudden pivot, a new poll sheds light. The Siena College poll released Tuesday shows that New Yorkers are deeply discontented about the surge of illegal immigrants in their state and mostly blame Democrat leaders.

“New Yorkers—including huge majorities of Democrats, Republicans, independents, upstaters and downstaters—overwhelmingly say that the recent influx of migrants to New York is a serious problem for the state,” Siena College pollster Steven Greenberg said.

Now, this may seem meaningless in the sense that New York is unlikely to become a red state any time soon. But keep in mind that the crime issue didn’t just swing seats from Democrat to Republican in the 2022 midterm elections, it likely also gave the GOP overall control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Discontent over lawless Democrat policies is much worse now, and New York voters are heaping the blame on Hochul, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, and, most of all, Biden.

Open borders and the idea that all immigration—whether legal or illegal—is a positive good is a matter of faith for Democrat Party activists. That’s less likely to be true with rank-and-file voters and independents.

“There is no question in my mind that the politics of this is a disaster to Democrats,” said Howard Wolfson, a former deputy and political adviser to former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, in an interview with The New York Times.

“This issue alone has the potential to cost Democrats the House, because it is such a huge issue in New York City and the coverage of it is clearly heard and seen by voters in all of these swing districts in the suburbs,” Wolfson said.

He described the issue as a “ticking time bomb” for Democrats.

I’d say the bomb already has gone off.

Since Biden entered the White House in January 2021, a historic stream of illegal immigrants has poured across the U.S. southern border. This has had catastrophic consequences for many swamped communities in Texas and Arizona especially. They’ve shouldered the burden of the border crisis for years, so it’s a little rich for New York to be throwing a pity party.

It obviously would be better if the federal government was doing its job and enforcing our laws, but until that time there’s little border states can do to “fix” the situation. All they can do is mitigate the damage.

The Biden administration has done all it can to make sure that the border remains nice and open, er, “secure.”

The administration’s actions have made it clear that Biden and his top officials want to flood the country with illegal immigrants.

And that’s where border-state busing comes in.

Instead of carrying the entire burden of the Biden-led border disaster, Republican governors such as Greg Abbott in Texas, Ron DeSantis in Florida, and Doug Ducey in Arizona decided to ship illegal immigrants to places such as Chicago, New York, the District of Columbia, and, most amusingly, Martha’s Vineyard.

This is hardly ideal. But if the federal government is going to foist open borders on the country, why not at least force the people who voted for this nonsense to pay more of the price for it?

Of course, Democrats in those destinations pointed fingers at the Republican governors for their newfound troubles, and some left-wing political commentators tried to say that shipping illegal immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard—a posh, liberal vacation destination—was akin to Nazism.

Biden’s trusty allies in the legacy media have done all they can to “contextualize” the immigration issue to protect the president from criticism.

However, much like with the crime surge, it’s hard to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people forever when they literally see the consequences of bad policies in their neighborhoods.

Thanks to Biden, the bill for once low-cost, sanctuary-city virtue signaling has come due.

I suggest that if Democrat politicians want federal aid to care for illegal immigrants, they should demand that the White House work to restore the policies of the previous administration and actually attempt to get control of the border. The excuses have run out, the border crisis has become a national crisis, and blame for this mess falls on the “big guy” in the Oval Office.

Democrats’ demands for more money should be met with a resounding “no” until the actual problem is fixed at its source.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/busing-illegal-immigrants-blue-america-working

NYPD To Send Drones Over Backyard Barbecues This Weekend

 Want to throw a barbecue in NYC this weekend? The NYPD's got you covered - with drones.

According to AP, the city plans to pilot the unmanned aircraft in response to complains about large gatherings over labor day weekend - including private events.

"If a caller states there’s a large crowd, a large party in a backyard, we’re going to be utilizing our assets to go up and go check on the party," said assistant NYPD Commissioner, Kaz Daughtry.

Privacy advocates, and anyone who's not down with bullshit police surveillance, naturally flipped their lid at the announcement.

"It’s a troubling announcement and it flies in the face of the POST Act," said privacy and technology strategist Daniel Schwarz of the NY Civil Liberties Union, referring to a 2020 city law that requires the NYPD to let people know about their surveillance tactics. "Deploying drones in this way is a sci-fi inspired scenario."

The move was announced during a security briefing focused on J’ouvert, an annual Caribbean festival marking the end of slavery that brings thousands of revelers and a heavy police presence to the streets of Brooklyn. Daughtry said the drones would respond to “non-priority and priority calls” beyond the parade route.

Like many cities, New York is increasingly relying on drones for policing purposes. Data maintained by the city shows the police department has used drones for public safety or emergency purposes 124 times this year, up from just four times in all of 2022. They were spotted in the skies after a parking garage collapse earlier this year and when a giveaway event devolved into teenage mayhem. -AP

Mayor Eric Adams, no surprise, wants the NYPD to embrace the "endless" potential of drones, citing Israel's use of them after visiting last week. 

Privacy advocates say that regulations aren't sufficient to deploy mass drone surveillance, and opens the door to spying that would be illegal if conducted by a human cop.

"One of the biggest concerns with the rush to roll out new forms of aerial surveillance is how few protections we have against seeing these cameras aimed at our backyards or even our bedrooms," said Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP).

According to the report, approximately 1,400 police departments nationwide are using drones in some form, according to the ACLU.

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/nyc-police-send-drones-over-backyard-barbecues-weekend