Friday, May 28, 2021

YOU DO NOT QUIT something that you believe in....this a lie!.."Black Lives Matter co-founder quits role amid controversy over $3m property portfolio"

 how many of you gave her your hard earned money so she could buy her THREE MILLION DOLLAR homes etc?

 

 

Black Lives Matter co-founder quits role amid controversy over $3m property portfolio




Verity Bowman



Patrisse Cullors poses for a photo - Amy Harris /Invision/AP
Patrisse Cullors poses for a photo - Amy Harris /Invision/AP

A Black Lives Matter co-founder has resigned from her role as executive director amid controversy over her $3m property portfolio.

Patrisse Cullors, who founded the racial justice movement in 2013, is a self-described “Marxist” but faced criticism after it was reported last month that she owns four properties, including a $1.4m house in Malibu and a ranch in Georgia.

The 37-year-old says she was the victim of “right-wing attacks that tried to discredit my character,” and that her resignation had long been planned because she has a new book and television deal.

"I've created the infrastructure and the support, and the necessary bones and foundation, so that I can leave," she said.

"It feels like the time is right.

“I don’t operate off of what the right thinks about me,” she added as she denied that finances had any relation to her resignation.

Black Lives Matter supporters and others march across the Brooklyn Bridge to honor George Floyd on the one year anniversary of his death on May 25, 2021 - Spencer Platt /Getty Images North America 
Black Lives Matter supporters and others march across the Brooklyn Bridge to honor George Floyd on the one year anniversary of his death on May 25, 2021 - Spencer Platt /Getty Images North America

BLM said she had "received a total of $120,000 since the organisation's inception” following the 2013 acquittal of George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida.

This was for duties such as serving as spokesperson and engaging in political education work.

Claims that she had misused donations to purchase property were strongly denied and last month she told the Black News Channel that suggestions of financial impropriety against her were "categorically untrue and incredibly dangerous".

But she faced criticism from BLM organisers over the way she has spent her money.

“If you go around calling yourself a socialist, you have to ask how much of her own personal money is going to charitable causes,” Hawk Newsome, a Black Lives Matter organiser, told The New York Post.

"It's really sad because it makes people doubt the validity of the movement."

BLM collected $90 million in donations last year, as the movement hit the global spotlight following the murder of George Floyd by police officer Derek Chauvin, in Minneapolis.

The foundation spent a third of that sum in 2020 on operating expenses, grants to black-led organisations and other charitable giving.

But concerns have been raised as to how much of the funding was spent on racial justice programmes.

Activists called for more transparency and said more should be given to the black communities directly impacted by police brutality.

“That is the most tragic aspect,” said the Rev T Sheri Dickerson, the president of an Oklahoma City BLM chapter and a representative of the BLM10, a national group of organisers that has publicly criticised the foundation over funding and transparency.

“I know some of [the families] are feeling exploited, their pain exploited, and that’s not something that I ever want to be affiliated with.”

Ms Cullors and the foundation said that they support families without disclosing finances or making public announcements.

In 2018, Ms Cullors’ book "When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir” became a New York Times bestseller.

She will release a second book, "An Abolitionists Handbook”, in October and has a multi-year deal with Warner Bros to produce original content centred on black stories.

The first of her TV projects will debut in July, she said.

"I think I will probably be less visible, because I won't be at the helm of one of the largest, most controversial organisations right now in the history of our movement," Ms Cullors said.

"I'm aware that I'm a leader, and I don't shy away from that. But no movement is one leader."

As she departs, the foundation is bringing aboard two new interim senior executives to help steer it in the immediate future: Monifa Bandele, a longtime BLM organiser and founder of the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement in New York City, and Makani Themba, an early backer of the BLM movement and chief strategist at Higher Ground Change Strategies in Jackson, Mississippi.

"I think both of them come with not only a wealth of movement experience, but also a wealth of executive experience," Ms Cullors said.





  •  

    Moderna and Pfizer are already developing COVID-19 vaccine boosters. Do we need a third shot?

     

     

     

    Moderna and Pfizer are already developing COVID-19 vaccine boosters. Do we need a third shot?

    Vaccine makers say immunity to the virus can begin to wane after six or eight months. But more clinical data is needed, experts say

    Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine vials are seen at a mobile vaccination clinic in Los Angeles.

    AFP via Getty Images

    It looks like Americans may need to roll up their sleeves for a COVID-19 booster shot, though vaccine makers and federal officials are still trying to detect how long immunity to the virus lasts. 

    In the latest race to the regulatory finish line, Pfizer Inc. PFE, 0.30% is testing its experimental COVID-19 booster shot in combination with its 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in older adults, while Moderna Inc. MRNA, 3.16% told investors this month that a mid-stage clinical trial showed its investigational booster can help protect against the serious B.1.351 and P.1. variants.

    Moderna and Pfizer both developed two-dose, mRNA vaccines with similar rates of real-world effectiveness.

    The COVID-19 vaccines developed by these companies, as well as the Johnson & Johnson JNJ, 0.44% shot — the third vaccine to be authorized in the U.S. — are all considered very effective, especially when it comes to preventing hospitalization and death, but it’s still unknown how long they can protect people against the virus.

    See also: Booster dose of COVID vaccines to be given to U.K. volunteers in new trial

    “We do not have data on when to expect waning immunity leading to breakthrough infections,” Dr. Stephen Hoge, Moderna’s president, told investors, according to a FactSet transcript of a May 6 earnings call. “But we do know that there is a raging pandemic, that reinfections will happen at some point, and the best way to ensure that we do not have renewed outbreaks in well-vaccinated countries is to boost and maintain the highest possible levels of neutralizing antibodies.”

    Moderna and Pfizer have recently said immunity can start to wane between six to eight months after getting the second shot of their vaccines. Dr. Peter Marks, a Food and Drug Administration official, estimates that vaccine-induced immunity is around one year, according to public remarks reported by CNBC

    “I would project that it’s actually going to be longer than that,” Dr. Mark Mulligan, director of NYU Langone Health’s Vaccine Center, said in a May 3 interview. “It might be a year or even more. But in all likelihood, for boosting of the magnitude of the antibody levels and other immune responses, boosters will be needed.”

    If SARS-CoV-2 becomes an endemic virus, as some medical experts have predicted, boosters are one way to keep people protected and also address gaps in immunity caused by powerful variants like B.1.351, first detected in South Africa, and the P.1 first identified in Brazil that are thought to lessen the effectiveness of these vaccines.

    However, at this point, it’s all speculation. There is no medical consensus about whether booster shots are necessary to ensure continued protection against this virus or even what the durability of immunity to this virus is. 

    “There’s absolutely no evidence that we need a booster shot of anything,” Dr. Carlos del Rio, an infectious-disease physician and executive associate dean of the Emory University School of Medicine, said April 28. “The most important thing to do is to get vaccinated right now. Whether you’re going to need a booster shot, we’ll worry about that later.”

    The case for-or-against booster shots 

    The only data about the length of vaccine-induced immunity, which likely takes into account antibody titer levels and T-cell response, is limited at this time.

    “We do not know precisely when we will need to boost,” Dr. Anthony Fauci, President Joe Biden’s chief medical advisor, said Tuesday during a White House briefing.

    One study found that the Pfizer vaccine, which was developed with BioNTech SE BNTX, 3.00%, has a 91.3% efficacy rate among clinical-trial participants six months after they got the second dose. Other research indicates that people who are enrolled in the Phase 1 clinical study for Moderna’s vaccine still had antibodies six months after getting the second shot. 

    “It’s likely that it’s not just a single booster but that this would be a repeated event over the next several years,” Mulligan said. “If we achieve broad enough vaccination to shut down virus transmission and have the pandemic die out, great. But we’re so far [from] that right now.”

    About 39% of people in the U.S. are fully vaccinated, as of Tuesday, according to the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, though vaccination rates in the U.S. have been slowing for weeks.

    Other experts disagree with the push for boosters, citing a lack of data. 

    Cornell University virologist John Moore recently told Axios “it’s not proven that we need boosters yet. Whereas it’s appropriate to plan for boosters, you’ve got to look at whether there’s a corporate agenda behind this.”

    Del Rio instead predicts a future in which the U.S. will have the virus under control, and Americans may need a COVID-19 booster to travel to certain countries, much like how a yellow fever vaccine or booster is recommended or required for travel to certain Central and South American and African countries.

    “I suspect that if there’s a variant in India, and you decide to travel to India, you will be told, as part of your travel, you’re going to have to take this,” he said. 

    Are boosters another billion-dollar opportunity for vaccine makers?

    COVID-19 vaccines are already a booming business for drug makers, and boosters are part of the corporate strategy going forward. (Moderna executives mentioned their booster shot dozens of times on their most recent earnings call.)

    Pfizer and BioNTech expect their vaccine to generate $26 billion in revenue this year, while Moderna just reported its first-ever billion-dollar sales quarter.

    While the U.S. government has not announced any purchases of COVID-19 booster shots, other countries have. Australia, Israel, and Switzerland have already inked deals with these drug makers to buy millions of booster doses for 2022.

    Pfizer anticipates it will get data for its booster candidate in July, with plans to file for authorization that same month and then get a regulatory okay in the U.S. sometime in 2021.

    The company is developing two types of shots: one functions like a third dose of its currently available vaccine, aiming to boost immunity among participants from its Phase 1 clinical trial in the U.S., and the other uses a modified mRNA sequence. It announced the booster/pneumococcal conjugate vaccine study this week. 

    Moderna is testing three types of boosters:

    • A booster that acts like a third dose to its original two-dose vaccine.
    • A booster that specifically aims to address the B.1.351 and P.1 variants. (Both of these variants are of particular concern to Moderna and Pfizer because the companies ran their pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials at a time before those variants had been identified as concerning.)
    • A booster that is made up of a 50/50 mix of its original vaccine and the booster targeting the B.1.351 variant.

    What about other vaccine makers?

    J&J has not yet shared any longer-term data about its vaccine’s immune response, though executives have noted that the company plans to assess whether there is a need to develop a booster.

    However, some Wall Street analysts have said it’s easier to develop boosters for mRNA and protein-based vaccines than adenovirus-based vaccines like the J&J shot. (Novavax Inc. NVAX, -2.03% is an example of a company developing a protein-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate.)

    Sanofi SNY, 0.96%, which has previously reported some delays moving its COVID-19 vaccine through development, recently hinted to investors that its still-investigational single-dose COVID-19 shot may have more value as a booster. The vaccine candidate is expected to move into Phase 3 clinical trials, and it will also be tested in a booster-specific study.

    That said, boosters and vaccination in general doesn’t need to be a one-size-fits-all model for every single person.

    The U.S. could test out a different approach for booster shots that evaluates an individual’s antibody levels to assess whether or not they need a booster shot at all, said Dr. Michael Mina, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. This is because immunity shows up differently in different people, based on factors like age and overall health.

    “It would be super easy to set up, and it could be voluntary,” Mina said. “Do you want a booster? Do you want to see if you need a booster? To get there, we would really want to start building correlates of protection, meaning: what is the antibody level that we feel good as a physician or as a public health agency saying, if you’re at this level, you’re probably still protected.”

     

    US soldiers 'revealed locations of nuclear weapons in Europe by posting details on online flashcards,' report claims

     

     

    US soldiers 'revealed locations of nuclear weapons in Europe by posting details on online flashcards,' report claims

    Jamie Johnson
    A Dutch F16 at the Volkel Air Base - JEROEN JUMELET/AFP/Getty Images
    A Dutch F16 at the Volkel Air Base - JEROEN JUMELET/AFP/Getty Images

    American soldiers have mistakenly revealed the exact locations of US nuclear weapons in Europe by uploading details as part of revision exercises that were publicly available to view, a report claims.

    An investigation by Bellingcat alleges that soldiers attempting to learn intricate security protocols uploaded a multitude of sensitive information to the internet, including not only the bases at which the weapons are held, but in which exact vaults they are stored.

    The US Air Force has launched an investigation into "the suitability of information shared via study flashcards."

    Questions and answers were written on flashcards, which have now disappeared, and appeared to show the positions of cameras, the frequency of patrols around the vaults, secret duress words that signal when a guard is being threatened and the unique identifiers that a restricted area badge needs to have, Bellingcat said.

    The cards had been uploaded as long ago as 2013 on websites including Cram, Quizlet and Chegg, and accessed as recently as April this year. Some of those sites have the visibility of the cards set to be viewed by anyone by default.

    The presence of US nuclear weapons in Europe acted as a deterrent to the Soviet Union during the Cold War and also meant European countries would not need to develop their own.

    Various leaked documents have indicated that they use six sites across the continent.

    In 2019, a document, written for the Defence and Security Committee of the Nato Parliamentary Assembly, made passing reference to the roughly 150 US nuclear weapons being stored in Europe.

    “These bombs are stored at six US and European bases - Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Büchel in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi-Torre in Italy, Volkel in The Netherlands, and Incirlik in Turkey,” one line read, according to the Belgian newspaper De Morgen.

    The Bellingcat report features screenshots of flashcards indicating that soldiers are taught what to shout to an intruder in the local language.

    One card relating to the 701st Munitions Maintenance Squadron shows a phrase to make someone surrender weapons in Flemish, indicating that the security details in it apply to Kleine Brogel air base, Belgium.

    The most revealing information, however, pertained to a “vault status” flashcard that appeared to note which shelters at Volkel contain nuclear weapons.

    Five were listed as “hot” and six as “cold.”

    To further corroborate their story, Bellingcat unearthed a photograph on Facebook posted by someone associated with 703rd MUNSS.

    It is a large group photo showing more than 50 individuals wearing US military uniforms posing beside a Dutch army vehicle and in front of a nuclear warhead.

    Using geolocating technology and a leaked map of the site, it appears that the soldiers are standing in front of vault 532 - which on the flashcard, is listed as “cold.”

    Dr Jeffrey Lewis, Director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies said it would be highly unlikely for active service members to pose with a live bomb.

    Dr Lewis said that the flashcard information about the vault being “cold” is likely to be correct.

    The information disclosure is a “flagrant breach” of security practices, he told Bellingcat.

    “This is yet one more warning that these weapons are not secure.”

    The Dutch ministry of Defence told Bellingcat: “This photo should not have been taken, let alone published.”

    Hans Kristenssen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said: “There are so many fingerprints that give away where the nuclear weapons are that it serves no military or safety purpose to try to keep it secret. Safety is accomplished by effective security, not secrecy.”

    But some of the details which soldiers were trying to learn included how to authenticate security badges.

    In one screenshot, a flashcard detailed that ‘VOLKEL’ should be spelt without the first L and that ‘MUNSS’ should be missing an S.

    Another card allegedly details where the emblems and flags should appear on the security pass.

    A US Air Force Spokesperson told the Telegraph: “The Department of the Air Force is investigating the suitability of information shared via study flashcards."

     

    Thursday, May 27, 2021

    Monday, May 24, 2021

    'You Can Feel the Tension': A Windfall for Minority Farmers Divides Rural America

     

     (here we go...."Treat us equally" is no longer coming out the mouths...now it"s I think i'm superior to you and I DEMAND money,school,pay off my home, pay off my farm)


     

    'You Can Feel the Tension': A Windfall for Minority Farmers Divides Rural America




    Jack Healy
    ·9 min read



    Shade Lewis feeds his cattle on his farm in La Grange, Mo., May 21, 2021. (Neeta Satam/The New York Times)
    Shade Lewis feeds his cattle on his farm in La Grange, Mo., May 21, 2021. (Neeta Satam/The New York Times)

    LaGRANGE, Mo. — Shade Lewis had just come in from feeding his cows one sunny spring afternoon when he opened a letter that could change his life: The government was offering to pay off his $200,000 farm loan, part of a new debt relief program created by Democrats to help farmers who have endured generations of racial discrimination.

    It was a windfall for a 29-year-old who has spent the past decade scratching out a living as the only Black farmer in his corner of northeastern Missouri, where signposts quoting Genesis line the soybean fields and traffic signals warn drivers to go slow because it is planting season.

    But the $4 billion fund has angered conservative white farmers who say they are being unfairly excluded because of their race. And it has plunged Lewis and other farmers of color into a new culture war over race, money and power in U.S. farming.

    - ADVERTISEMENT -

    Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

    “You can feel the tension,” Lewis said. “We’ve caught a lot of heat from the conservative Caucasian farmers.”

    The debt relief is redress set aside for what the government calls “socially disadvantaged farmers” — Black, Hispanic, Indigenous and other nonwhite workers who have endured a long history of discrimination, from violence and land theft in the Jim Crow South to banks and federal farm offices that refused them loans or government benefits that went to white farmers.

    The program is part of a broader effort by the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress to confront how racial injustice has shaped U.S. farming, which is overwhelmingly white. Black farm advocacy groups say that nearly all the land, profit and subsidies go to the biggest, most powerful farm operations, leaving Black farmers with little. But in large portions of rural America, the payments threaten to further anger white conservative farmers.

    The plans have drawn thousands of enraged comments on farm forums and are being fought by banks worried about losing interest income. And some rural residents have rallied around a new slogan, cribbed from the conservative response to the Black Lives Matter movement: All Farmers Matter.

    Lewis is part of a new generation of Black farmers venturing back into urban plots and small rural farms, driven by a desire to nourish their communities with healthy food and create wealth rooted in the land.

    Growing up in LaGrange, a city of 950 along the Mississippi River, Lewis would scoot a toy John Deere tractor through his mother’s apartment and pretend he was farming the carpet. He joined 4-H, farming and business groups in high school. He started farming at 19, with a few cows and dreams of ending the day with his own dirt on the soles of his boots.

    “I worried about him,” said his father, Kevin Lewis. “I watch him and shake my head and say, 'Is it worth it?'”

    It can be a tough, lonely life. In 1920, African Americans owned some 14% of the farms in the United States. But after a century of racial violence, foreclosures, migration into cities and farm consolidation, there are fewer than 49,000 left, representing 1.4% of American farmers. Most are concentrated in the Southeast and Texas.

    These days, Black farmers have forged online networks that function as their own digital homemade farm bureaus. They celebrate first turnip harvests, ask whether fertilizer made from fish can revive wilting plants and commiserate about navigating government programs and the isolation of being the only Black farmers in their counties.

    “You don’t have a network. You don’t have an infrastructure. There’s nothing,” said Sandy Thompson, who started an online directory of Black farmers in 2019 after abandoning a three-year quest to convert a 5-acre plot outside San Antonio into a vegetable farm.

    Thompson spent $20,000 on equipment only to have her mower get stuck in the sandy soil. She called university extension offices, a vital source of guidance for farmers, but said she never got any help.

    “We are not competitive with white farmers,” she said. “We need any help we can get.”

    Nonwhite farmers, who make up about 5% of farmers, say they struggle disproportionately to get loans and government grants. They received less than 1% of the billions of dollars in subsidies that flowed into farm country last year under former President Donald Trump to compensate farmers hurt by the coronavirus pandemic and the trade war with China.

    Lewis said he spent years struggling financially and searching for credit as he built his cattle herd from a few cows on rented ground to about 200 cows and calves on more than 100 acres of his own land. At first, he said, farm agents did not return his calls. Banks scoffed at his plans. Some days, he could not afford to gas up the red pickup truck that would stall out as he went to fix fences and spread manure in his alfalfa fields. Like many farmers, he works a second job, on power transmission lines.

    Getting his government loan paid off now could change everything. He said he could pay down other loans on his livestock, expand the patchwork of fields he owns to compete against established farmers, and get financing to build a home so he and his wife can escape their one-bedroom apartment.

    “It’ll open up a whole lot of doors,” he said. “Maybe these local banks that didn’t have time for minorities will open up to us.”

    But several of his white neighbors in Lewis County, where 77% of voters supported Trump in November, see it differently.

    Now, raw conversations about discrimination in farming are unfolding at farmers markets and on rural social media channels where race is often an uncomfortable subject.

    “It’s a bunch of crap,” said Jeffrey Lay, who grows corn and soybeans on 2,000 acres and is president of the county farm bureau. “They talk about they want to get rid of discrimination. But they’re not even thinking about the fact that they’re discriminating against us.”

    Even in a county that is 94% white, Lay said the federal government’s renewed focus on helping farmers of color made him feel like he was losing ground, a sign to him of the country’s demographic shifts.

    “I can’t afford to go buy that 5,000-acre piece of ground,” he said. “Shade Lewis, he’d qualify to get it. And that’s fine. That doesn’t bother me. But I can’t.”

    Lewis senses the tensions when he swings into the gas station to get a Mountain Dew before feeding his cows in the morning and when he scans comments on Facebook or the news on RFD-TV, a kind of CNN for rural America. Conversations with white farmers around LaGrange become strained when they veer from corn prices to the challenges of being a Black farmer in a white industry.

    “You can sit here and talk about race and things you’ve been through,” Lewis said. “They don’t understand. They’ll never understand.”

    Many farmers of color have welcomed the debt relief, which was tucked into the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief act, as well as even more ambitious measures proposed by Democrats to grant plots of up to 160 acres to Black farmers.

    The Agriculture Department has a long-standing series of programs to serve socially disadvantaged farmers and estimates that nearly 16,000 will have loans paid off that were made or backed by the government. The agency has sent thousands of letters to eligible farmers and expects that money could start flowing by early June.

    But rural residents upset with the repayments call them reverse racism.

    White conservative farmers and ranchers from Florida, Texas and the Midwest quickly sued to block the program, arguing that the promised money amounts to illegal discrimination. America First Legal, a group run by former Trump aide Stephen Miller, is backing the Texas lawsuit, whose plaintiff is the state’s agriculture commissioner.

    “It’s anti-white,” said Jon Stevens, one of five Midwestern farmers who filed a lawsuit through the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative legal group. “Since when does Agriculture get into this kind of race politics?”

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack defended the debt-repayment program at a White House briefing this month, saying that earlier coronavirus relief had gone disproportionately to white farmers. He also said the government had never addressed the cumulative effects of years of racial discrimination against farmers.

    “We know for a fact that socially disadvantaged producers were discriminated against by the United States Department of Agriculture,” he said. “There is a very legitimate reason for doing what we’re doing.”

    The use of race in federal programs has been a subject of litigation for decades, with a narrow majority of the Supreme Court deciding in 1995 that it is permissible only if the programs are “narrowly tailored” to accomplish a “compelling governmental interest.” The courts have generally held that institutions have a compelling interest in remedying their own past discrimination.

    Still, the lawsuits have sowed concern and anger through networks of Black farmers. Some have spent decades fighting unsuccessfully to get their share of legal settlements over past discrimination by the Agriculture Department. Now they are worried that the money set aside for debt repayment could get delayed for years in legal challenges.

    “We’re getting the short end,” said John Wesley Boyd Jr., a Virginia bean and grain farmer who is also founder of the National Black Farmers Association. “Anytime in the United States if there’s money for Blacks, those groups speak up and say how unfair it is. But it’s not unfair when they’re spitting on you, when they’re calling you racial epithets, when they’re tearing up your application.”

    Lewis said he tries to look beyond issues of race and has a white wife, white in-laws and white family on his mother’s side. But ignoring race can be impossible in a small town like LaGrange, he said. He hunts, fishes, holds conservative views and curses by saying “son of a buck.” He has voted Republican in past elections, but unlike most of his neighbors, he voted for President Joe Biden.

    One recent afternoon, a friend, Brad Klauser, who runs his family’s large cattle and grain farm, swung by Lewis’ barn to catch up. As they talked bills, rising fuel costs and sky-high land prices, the conversation turned to the debt relief that only one of them was eligible to receive.

    “Everybody should have the same option,” said Klauser, who is white, leaning on the flatbed of Lewis’ pickup. “Do you think you’re disadvantaged?”

    “There’s definitely disadvantages,” Lewis replied, saying that officials scoffed when he first tried to get a federal farm loan. “They didn’t take me serious.”

    After Klauser headed home, Lewis thought about how the two friends were both trying to reap a profit from the land. “Everyone should have a chance at farming,” he said.

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

    © 2021 The New York Times Company