

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Kieran Suckling (520) 275-5960
In response to a scandal created by Center for
Biological Diversity
research demonstrating that the Minerals Management Service (MMS)
approved 19
new drilling plans after
the
explosion of BP's Deepwater Horizon-all with exemptions from
environmental review-Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar announced on May
6, 2010, a moratorium on the issuance of final permits for "any new
offshore drilling activity."
Since then, the Department of Interior, and
President Obama himself,
has repeatedly changed the definition of the increasingly controversial
moratorium
as ongoing Center research has shown that the agency was still issuing
new
drilling permits. The moratorium description has become steadily
narrower as
the Interior Department changes it to exclude whatever drilling permits
MMS issues
on any given day.
As currently defined, the moratorium is so
narrow it allows continued
issuance of the exact drilling permit type that BP was operating under
when the
Deepwater Horizon exploded.
Daniel J. Rohlf, a law professor
at Lewis
& Clark Law School, told the New
York
Times last week that he was losing confidence that Salazar
was
capable of instituting needed offshore drilling reforms since "(t)he
moratorium does not even cover the dangerous drilling that caused the
problem
in the first place."
"Under pressure from the oil
industry
and an agency he seems incapable of controlling, Secretary Salazar has
watered
down the drilling moratorium to a point where it is virtually
meaningless,"
said Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological
Diversity.
"He seems more interested in
political
damage control than ensuring the Gulf of Mexico is protected from
another oil
industry explosion," said Suckling. "Salazar's so-called
moratoriums and reforms are little more than rhetorical dispersants
designed to
breakup and hide the political scandal threatening to wash up on his
shore."
Yesterday, Interior spokespeople
revealed
why the "moratorium" has changed so often and caused so much
confusion: it does not exist in writing. In keeping with the lax
environmental
oversight he allowed to rein at MMS, Secretary Salazar never
communicated his
moratorium to the agency in writing.
New York University Government
Professor,
Paul Light, told NPR yesterday that a verbal moratorium is "so
ridiculous
that it defies understanding. It could not be more important to
enforce this moratorium and make absolutely clear to the oil industry
what is
and is not permissible. And yet you have the execution of a critical
order that
appears to have been basically done through the most casual way possible
under
federal law."
Secretary Salazar himself became
the victim
of his confused, shifting sands moratorium when he falsely told Congress
that
it stopped all new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Interior spokes
people told
NPR that "the Secretary misspoke at the hearing."
Background
Salazar's 5-6-10
press release announcing the moratorium says:
"In a media availability after the meeting,
Secretary Salazar
announced that, as a result of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and
spill, beginning
April 20 - the date of the explosion - no applications for drilling
permits will go forward for any new offshore drilling activity
until the Department
of the Interior completes the safety review process that President Obama
requested. In accordance with the President's request, the Department
will
deliver its report to the President by May 28, 2010. The only exceptions
to the
new rule regarding permit approvals are the two relief w ells that are
being
drilled in response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."
His 5-7-10
press release says the same thing:
"Offshore Drilling Permit Applications Halted
Secretary Salazar announced that, as a result
of the Deepwater Horizon
explosion and spill, beginning April 20-the date of the
explosion-no applications for drilling permits will go forward for any new offshore
drilling activity
until the Department of the Interior completes the safety review process
that
President Obama requested. In accordance with the President's request,
the Department will deliver its report to the President by May 28. The
only
exceptions to the new rule regarding permit approvals are the two relief
wells
that are being drilled in response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster."
When confronted with the fact that MMS has
issued 17 new drilling
permits since April 20th, Interior spokespeople inexplicably
denied
that the moratorium applied to "any new offshore drilling activity,"
saying that it actually only applied to drilling of new wells. This allows the majority
of MMS
drilling permits, including the kind used by the Deepwater Horizon, to
proceed
unabated.
Salazar subsequently told Congress (and Carol
Browner told the media)
that no new wells had been drilled since April 20th.
Confronted with
the fact that new wells have been drilled since April 20th,
Interior
spokespeople said the Secretary was mistaken and that the moratorium
only
applies to new permits.
While the permit moratorium at least halts a
minimal number of
projects, Salazar has placed no moratorium at all on the approval of
drilling
plans without environmental review even though the president himself has
declared on May 14th: "It seems as if permits were too often
issued based on little more than assurances of safety from the oil
companies.
That cannot and will not happen anymore...We're also closing the
loophole that has allowed some oil companies to bypass some critical
environmental
reviews..."
MMS to this day is approving drilling plans
without environmental
review. Many are for ultradeep water drilling which is much more
dangerous than
the Deepwater Horizon.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252"We want this case to help stop these killings from taking place again," said the American lawyer representing the family.
Family members of a Colombian fisherman killed in one of the Trump administration's illegal strikes on boats in the Caribbean is preparing to take legal action over what they describe as the murder of their loved one.
The New York Times reported Thursday that the family of Alejandro Carranza "has hired an American lawyer, who said he was preparing a legal claim."
The lawyer, Dan Kovalik, told the Times that the impending case is important both because "the family deserves compensation for the loss" of Alejandro and, more broadly to stop the Trump administration from killing people with impunity.
"We want this case to help stop these killings from taking place again," Kovalik said. "This is murder, and it is destroying rule of law."
The description of Carranza's killing as murder aligns with the views of United Nations experts and human rights advocates who have characterized the Trump administration's bombings in international waters as extrajudicial killings. To date, the administration has carried out at least 19 strikes on vessels in international waters, killing an estimated 75-80 people in total.
"I never thought I would lose my father in this way," said Cheila Carranza, Alejandro's 14-year-old daughter.
Trump has claimed, without providing any evidence, that the targeted vessels were smuggling drugs to the US. Though his body has yet to be found, Carranza is believed to have been killed in an attack in the Caribbean on September 15, part of the Trump administration's broader military campaign and buildup in the region that has sparked fears of a direct US war with Venezuela and other nations.
The attack infuriated Colombia President Gustavo Petro, who suspended intelligence cooperation with the US in response and accused the Trump administration of trampling international law.
"If intelligence communications only serve to kill fishermen with missiles, it is not only irrational, but a crime against humanity, insofar as the murder of civilians is systematic," Petro wrote in a lengthy social media post earlier this week.
"Colombia respects international law and defends it because it is the only wall we have as a human civilization against the barbarism that threatens to take over all of humanity," he added.
"Everyone deserves to be treated with dignity," said Congresswoman Alma Adams, warning of "what we have seen Border Patrol and ICE agents do in places like Chicago and Los Angeles."
Elected officials in North Carolina are letting it be known they do not want to see federal immigration raids in their communities like those suffered by other states in recent months.
As CBS News reported Friday morning that after two months of terrorizing Chicago, US Border Patrol Commander-at-Large Gregory Bovino left for Charlotte, officials came together in his apparent destination to speak out against the looming assault on immigrants there.
"We're all gathered here from many branches of government, from obviously our state Legislature, our school board, our County Commission, our City Council members, because we do not want ICE here," said state House Rep. Aisha Dew (D-107), referring to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
"We do not need to have Border Patrol. As I've already said, I'm not quite sure what border we're patrolling here," she continued. Stressing that the surrounding US states pose no threat to North Carolina, Dew added that "this is a safe city. Our crime rates have gone down since the previous year. This is just another something out of the playbook."
The press conference—which also included leaders of local organizations—came after various reports this week cited unnamed US officials who said President Donald Trump has set his sights on Charlotte.
Amid mounting reports of the forthcoming operation, Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry L. McFadden said in a Thursday statement that he was contacted a day earlier "by two separate federal officials confirming that US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel will be arriving in the Charlotte area as early as this Saturday or the beginning of next week."
"At this time, specific details regarding the federal operation have not been disclosed and the Mecklenburg County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) has not been requested to assist with or participate in any enforcement actions," the statement highlighted.
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department similarly said in a Friday statement that CMPD "has no authority to enforce federal immigration laws" and "does not participate in ICE operations, nor are we involved in the planning of these federal activities."
ICE and CBP are both part of the US Department of Homeland Security. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin has declined to provide any details about possible action in Charlotte, telling multiple outlets: "Every day, DHS enforces the laws of the nation across the country. We do not discuss future or potential operations."
As the Associated Press noted Thursday:
Trump has defended sending the military and immigration agents into Democratic-run cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and even the nation's capital, saying the unprecedented operations are needed to fight crime and carry out his mass deportation agenda.
Charlotte is another such Democratic stronghold. A statement of solidarity from several local and state officials estimated the city is home to more than 150,000 foreign-born people. The city's population is about 40% white, 33% Black, 16% Hispanic, and 7% Asian.
While a spokesperson for North Carolina Congressman Tim Moore, a Republican whose district includes parts of Mecklenburg County, expressed support for DHS in a statement to the Charlotte Observer, Democratic Congresswoman Alma Adams, who represents the targeted city, sounded the alarm about the department's reported plans.
"I am extremely concerned about the deployment of US Border Patrol and ICE agents to Charlotte," Adams said in a Thursday statement. "Charlotte's immigrant community is a proud part of the Queen City, and I will not stand by and watch my constituents be intimidated or harassed."
"Everyone deserves to be treated with dignity, and what we have seen Border Patrol and ICE agents do in places like Chicago and Los Angeles—using excessive force in their operations and tear gassing peaceful protestors—threatens the well-being of the communities they enter," she continued. "Those tactics and values have no place in the city of Charlotte or Mecklenburg County."
After the sheriff's Thursday announcement, Charlotte's Democratic mayor, Vi Lyles, also shared a statement on social media: "We still don't know any details on where they may be operating and to what extent. I understand this news will create uncertainty and anxiety for many people in our community. Everyone in our community deserves to feel secure, and I am committed to doing all that I can to inform our community, help make sure everyone feels safe, and understands their rights."
"It is also important that people understand CMPD is not involved in federal immigration activities, so people who need local law enforcement services should feel secure calling 911," she added. "There continues to be rumors about enforcement activities and I would ask that everyone refrain from sharing unverified information. Doing so creates more fear and uncertainty when we need to be standing together. We will continue to work with local and state partners to do what we can to ensure the safety of our community."
"The barriers to performing sophisticated cyberattacks have dropped substantially—and we predict that they’ll continue to do so," said AI company Anthropic.
A Democratic senator on Thursday sounded the alarm on the dangers of unregulated artificial intelligence after AI company Anthropic revealed it had thwarted what it described as "the first documented case of a large-scale cyberattack executed without substantial human intervention."
According to Anthropic, it is highly likely that the attack was carried out by a Chinese state-sponsored group, and it targeted "large tech companies, financial institutions, chemical manufacturing companies, and government agencies."
After a lengthy technical explanation describing how the attack occurred and how it was ultimately thwarted, Anthropic then discussed the security implications for AI that can execute mass cyberattacks with minimal direction from humans.
"The barriers to performing sophisticated cyberattacks have dropped substantially—and we predict that they’ll continue to do so," the firm said. "With the correct setup, threat actors can now use agentic AI systems for extended periods to do the work of entire teams of experienced hackers."
Anthropic went on to say that hackers could now use AI to carry tasks such as "analyzing target systems, producing exploit code, and scanning vast datasets of stolen information more efficiently than any human operator," which could open the door to "less experienced and resourced groups" carrying out some of the most sophisticated attack operations.
The company concluded by warning that "the techniques described above will doubtless be used by many more attackers—which makes industry threat sharing, improved detection methods, and stronger safety controls all the more critical."
This cybersecurity strategy wasn't sufficient for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said government intervention would be needed to mitigate the potential harms caused by AI.
"Guys wake the f up," he wrote in a social media post. "This is going to destroy us—sooner than we think—if we don’t make AI regulation a national priority tomorrow."
Democratic California state Sen. Scott Wiener noted that many big tech firms have continuously fought against government oversight into AI despite threats that are growing stronger by the day.
"For two years, we advanced legislation to require large AI labs to evaluate their models for catastrophic risk or at least disclose their safety practices," he explained. "We got it done, but industry (not Anthropic) continues to push for federal ban on state AI rules, with no federal substitute."
Some researchers who spoke with Ars Technica, however, expressed skepticism that the AI-driven hack was really as sophisticated as Anthropic had claimed simply because they believe current AI technology is not yet good enough to execute that caliber of operation.
Dan Tentler, executive founder of Phobos Group, told the publication that the efficiency with which the hackers purportedly got the AI to carry out their commands was wildly different than what he has experienced using the technology.
"I continue to refuse to believe that attackers are somehow able to get these models to jump through hoops that nobody else can," he said. "Why do the models give these attackers what they want 90% of the time but the rest of us have to deal with ass-kissing, stonewalling, and acid trips?"