RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS | Surprise: Mitch McConnell Vows to Never Let Democrats Add a Justice to the Supreme Court Again Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=44994"><span class="small">Bess Levin, Vanity Fair</span></a>   
Friday, 18 June 2021 11:24

Levin writes: "At least the world's most shameless hack is honest?"

Sen. Mitch McConnell. (photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)
Sen. Mitch McConnell. (photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP)


Surprise: Mitch McConnell Vows to Never Let Democrats Add a Justice to the Supreme Court Again

By Bess Levin, Vanity Fair

18 June 21


At least the world’s most shameless hack is honest?

hy do people run for office? For some, it’s to make a better world for their children. For others, it’s a passion for government. For Mitch McConnell, it’s to fuck over Democrats at every possible opportunity, his neck pouch quivering with joy as he shreds small “d” democracy over and over and over again.

Obviously, one of McConnell’s favorite ways to screw not just his colleagues on the other side of the aisle but the millions of Americans who voted for them is by denying the other party the ability to add justices to the Supreme Court, based on made-up logic he literally pulls out of his ass as it suits him. In 2016, of course, he spent nearly an entire year blocking Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, claiming that presidents aren’t allowed to put someone on the court in an election year and that he had to delay the confirmation so the voters could decide. (They did, and it was in 2012 when they decided they wanted Obama to be president again.)

Fast-forward four years later, though, and with just weeks to go until the 2020 election, McConnell didn’t just ram through Amy Coney Barrett‘s confirmation, he announced he would do so basically before Ruth Bader Ginsburg‘s body was cold. The night RBG died, McConnell, the most shameless man to ever live, released a statement saying that he would move quickly to confirm Trump’s nominee, rewriting the completely arbitrary rule he invented to block Obama’s replacement for Antonin Scalia. And to lay the hackery on extra thick, he cast his absurd reversal as a fulfillment of a promise to the American people. “In the last midterm election before Justice Scalia’s death in 2016,” McConnell said, “Americans elected a Republican Senate majority because we pledged to check and balance the last days of a lame-duck president’s term. We kept our promise. Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite-party president’s Supreme Court nominee in a presidential election year. By contrast, Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. Once again, we will keep our promise.” Then he went on to clear the way for a woman who thinks there are some instances when abortion should be punishable by death to be confirmed to a lifetime appointment on the highest court in the land with the election less than 2 months away.

At this point, you could reasonably assume that with Joe Biden in power, McConnell would once again revert to his position that presidents can’t seat someone on the court within an election year. And of course, he has. But he’s also amended the policy to basically state that he’ll never let a Democratic president get a justice on the Supreme Court again so long as he’s in power, even if said president has nearly two years left on his term.

McConnell wasn’t asked about confirming a Democratic nominee in 2021 or 2022 because he is not actually the majority leader at the moment, but it’s pretty clear if he was he’d come up with—and implement—some kind of rule saying that only Republicans can add justices to court. Which is obviously insane and corrupt and shameless but hey, that’s Mitch, the guy who said last month that he is “100%” focused on blocking Biden‘s agenda, up to and including all the parts that might actually help Americans. Which would explain why many people are openly begging for Justice Stephen Breyer, 81, to retire. Asked about the situation on Sunday, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told CNN, “You know, it’s something I think about, but I would probably lean towards yes.… I would give more thought to it, but I’m inclined to say yes.” She did not add, “Because Biden needs to get a liberal on the court before that old crone from Kentucky can snatch the seat out of Democrats’ fingers,” but presumably she was thinking it.

P.S. Trump’s Justice Department spied on White House employees too

It wasn’t just his congressional nemeses and enemies in the press. Per The New York Times:

The Justice Department subpoenaed Apple for information in February 2018 about an account that belonged to Donald F. McGahn II, President Donald J. Trump’s White House counsel at the time, and barred the company from telling him about it, according to two people briefed on the matter. Apple told Mr. McGahn about the subpoena last month, said one of the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the matter. Mr. McGahn’s wife also received a similar notice from Apple, the person said.

It is not clear what FBI agents were investigating, whether Mr. McGahn was their specific focus, or whether he was swept up in a larger net because he had communicated with someone who was under scrutiny. As the top lawyer for the 2016 Trump campaign and then the White House counsel, Mr. McGahn was in contact with numerous people who may have drawn attention either as part of the Russia investigation or a later leak inquiry. Still, the disclosure that agents had collected data of a sitting White House counsel, which they kept secret for years, is extraordinary.

While we don’t know exactly what the DOJ was looking for, as the Times notes, we do know things were tense between Trump and McGahn around the time the department went after the White House counsel’s records. A month prior, per the Times, Trump had “tried to persuade Mr. McGahn to make a statement falsely denying” that he’d been asked to fire special counsel Robert Mueller, as press reports had indicated. Trump is said to have told aides that McGahn was a “liar” and a “leaker,” according to former Trump administration officials. And it seems he decided to use the power of the DOJ to go after him!

Area senator temporarily blocked from spreading bullshit medical advice

Ron Johnson knows what we’re talking about:

YouTube suspended GOP senator Ron Johnson’s account on Friday after he posted comments regarding dubious treatments for COVID-19. “We removed the video in accordance with our COVID-19 medical misinformation policies, which don’t allow content that encourages people to use hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat or prevent the virus,” a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement to CNN.... For months Johnson—who tested positive for coronavirus last fall—has spread anti-vaccine misinformation and downplayed the urgency of vaccinating all Americans against COVID-19, putting the controversial Wisconsin Republican at odds with public health guidance aimed at easing the ongoing pandemic. The two-term senator, who’s facing reelection next year, has also downplayed the seriousness of the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

YouTube doesn’t allow medical misinformation about COVID-19, including anything that recommends use of ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19, according to the company. In July of 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration revoked an emergency use authorization for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine to treat COVID-19. The agency now says hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have not been shown to be safe and effective for treating or preventing COVID-19.

Hydroxychloroquine, of course, was one of Dr. Donald Trump’s big recommendations to the public, second only to his suggestion that they shoot up household cleaner, leading the manufacturer of Lysol to issue a statement saying that “under no circumstance” should disinfectant be injected into one’s body.

In an extremely huffy statement, Johnson told CNN that YouTube has “decided there is only one medical viewpoint allowed and it is the viewpoint dictated by government agencies. YouTube’s ongoing COVID censorship proves they have accumulated too much unaccountable power. Big Tech and mainstream media believe they are smarter than medical doctors who have devoted their lives to science and use their skills to save lives.”

Marjorie Taylor Greene is sorry about that stuff she said about Jews

Just kidding, she’s sorry she’s getting backlash over it, and is hoping this stunt field trip to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum helps:

Freshman Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene paid a visit to the Holocaust museum on Monday in a bid to defuse the controversy over her comments comparing vaccine and mask requirements to Nazi Germany.... Greene’s museum visit comes as one Jewish House Democrat, Illinois rep. Brad Schneider, prepares to introduce a censure resolution condemning Greene’s latest comments on the Holocaust. Some Democrats are already privately discussing censure as a potential response to a group of Republican lawmakers pushing a censure resolution against one of their caucus members, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), for her recent remarks on Israel.

Last month Greene claimed that “any rational Jewish person” thinks mask mandates are as bad as the Holocaust. She’s also previously blamed California wildfires on Jewish space lasers.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Kill the Espionage Act, an American Abomination to Civil Liberties Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=11104"><span class="small">Charles Pierce, Esquire</span></a>   
Friday, 18 June 2021 08:29

Pierce writes: "Reality Winner is free, but the law that saw her imprisoned should be struck from the books."

Whistleblower Reality Winner. (photo: Sean Rayford/Getty)
Whistleblower Reality Winner. (photo: Sean Rayford/Getty)


Kill the Espionage Act, an American Abomination to Civil Liberties

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

18 June 21


Reality Winner is free, but the law that saw her imprisoned should be struck from the books.

his is unqualified good news from the Guardian. A towering idiocy has been corrected. And, if we’re lucky, we’ll all be more well-informed about our recent past.

[Reality] Winner was sentenced to five years in 2018, after being convicted of leaking the report. Aged 26, she was the first person charged by the Trump administration under the Espionage Act over a document leak. She pleaded guilty as part of a deal. Prosecutors said Winner, who was working for a defense contractor, Pluribus International Corporation, printed a classified document that showed how Russian military intelligence hacked at least one voting software supplier and attempted to breach more than 100 local election systems before polling day in 2016.

But, from the New York Times, of course…

Once she is released from the halfway house, she will still not be able to talk about any of the documents she reviewed while working at the National Security Agency, but she will be able to speak broadly about issues that concern her.

God knows, we can’t know what she knows. It was the NSA’s election, not ours. We can’t frighten the children or scare the horses or prompt a mean email from the Crackerpot Palace down in Florida. Well, here’s one thing we can do: We can get Congress to kill the Espionage Act really, most sincerely dead. It is a meat-ax abomination to civil liberties born in one of the worst periods for civil liberties in our history: the days of A. Mitchell Palmer and that prince of fools, President Woodrow Wilson, who said while pushing for the bill’s passage:

There are citizens of the United States, I blush to admit, born under other flags but welcomed under our generous naturalization laws to the full freedom and opportunity of America, who have poured the poison of disloyalty into the very arteries of our national life; who have sought to bring the authority and good name of our Government into contempt, to destroy our industries wherever they thought it effective for their vindictive purposes to strike at them, and to debase our politics to the uses of foreign intrigue.

And Mexico is not sending us their best people, either.

In October of 1917, Fightin’ Bob LaFollette, the great Progressive senator from Wisconsin whose birthday we celebrated on Monday, rose in front of a hostile Senate to inveigh in defense of free speech during wartime. It is one of the greatest defenses of free speech ever delivered by an American politician, and it was delivered by a man who had so stubbornly resisted the drive toward American involvement in World War I that people seriously called for him to be hung, shot, or at least expelled from the Senate. (It was a federal judge who called for him to be shot.) He also was the enemy of all the enabling legislation, including the Espionage Act, that makes Wilson such an indelible canker on the presidency. LaFollette, a man whose bag of fcks was pretty small to begin with, emptied them all in the faces of his war-drunk tormentors.

I have in my possession numerous affidavits establishing the fact that people are being unlawfully arrested, thrown into jail, held incommunicado for days, only to be eventually discharged without ever having been taken into court, because they have committed no crime. Private residences are being invaded, loyal citizens of undoubted integrity and probity arrested, cross-examined, and the most sacred constitutional rights guaranteed to every American citizen are being violated.

It appears to be the purpose of those conducting this campaign to throw the country into a state of terror, to coerce public opinion, to stifle criticism, and suppress discussion of the great issues involved in this war.

I think Bob LaFollette and Reality Winner might get along. I hope her life is everything she wants it to be. And I hope one day her truth will be revealed.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Trump Spied on Journalists. So Did Obama. America Needs More Press Freedom Now Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=29990"><span class="small">Trevor Timm, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Friday, 18 June 2021 08:29

Timm writes: "Before Trump, Obama's justice department did more to hurt press freedom than any administration since Nixon. Here's how we stop history repeating."

Attorney General William Barr participates in a press conference at the Department of Justice along with DOJ officials on Feb. 10, 2020, in Washington, D.C. (photo: Sarah Silbiger/Getty)
Attorney General William Barr participates in a press conference at the Department of Justice along with DOJ officials on Feb. 10, 2020, in Washington, D.C. (photo: Sarah Silbiger/Getty)


Trump Spied on Journalists. So Did Obama. America Needs More Press Freedom Now

By Trevor Timm, Guardian UK

18 June 21


Before Trump, Obama’s justice department did more to hurt press freedom than any administration since Nixon. Here’s how we stop history repeating

he US Department of Justice is under increasing fire for the still-unfolding scandals involving the secret surveillance of journalists and even members of Congress in the waning days of the Trump presidency. Some of these actions were even initially defended by the Biden administration’s Department of Justice.

In response to the growing scandal – and the scathing condemnations from the surveillance targets at the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN – the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, has vowed the DoJ will no longer use legal process to spy on journalists “doing their jobs”. The Times, the Post and CNN are set to meet with the justice department this week to seek more information on what happened and extract further promises it won’t happen again.

But mark my words: if Congress does not pass tough and binding rules that permanently tie the DoJ’s hands, it will happen again – whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican in the White House.

Promises are no longer enough. In many circles, these scandals are being portrayed as the Trump White House run amok. While some in the Trump justice department may have been motivated by political vengeance, the problem is far bigger than Donald Trump, William Barr or even the party in charge of the White House.

As the reporter Charlie Savage detailed in an excellent piece in the New York Times over the weekend, administrations in both parties have spied on journalists with increasing abandon for almost two decades, in contravention of internal DoJ regulations and against the spirit of the first amendment. Many people already forget that before Trump was known as enemy number one of press freedom, Barack Obama’s justice department did more damage to reporters’ rights than any administration since Nixon.

So yes, Garland needs to immediately put his “no more spying on reporters” vow into the DoJ’s official “media guidelines”, which govern investigations involving journalists. If he doesn’t, he or his successor could change their mind in an instant. But, why should we just “trust” Garland’s pinky promise to not investigate journalists and politicians without an ironclad law?

Leaks of confidential and classified information to journalists are vital to our democratic system, yet the DoJ often diverts huge resources to root out their sources. If you want an example, look no further than ProPublica’s recent investigation into the American tax system and how the wealthiest billionaires in the country pay little to no taxes. The series of stories sparked outrage across the country as soon as it was published. Garland leapt into action, vowing an investigation … only, he promised to investigate the leaker – not the tax dodgers.

The rise of internet communications has opened the floodgates to authorities’ ability to spy on journalists and root out whistleblowers; they can figure out exactly who journalists are talking to, where, when, and how long; and they can silence media lawyers with expansive gag orders that can leave them almost helpless to appeal. And as the pandemic has rendered in-person meetings even harder than before, people everywhere are more reliant on the communications infrastructure that can betray them at any time.

For real safeguards, Congress needs to act. Perhaps the fact that multiple members of Congress itself, including the representatives Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, have now been ensnared in the DoJ’s leak dragnet will make them more likely to move than in the past.

The irony is Representative Schiff and Representative Swalwell have of course been some of Congress’s most ardent defenders of surveillance – even during the Trump administration. They fought against surveillance reform that would put in more safeguards at the DoJ on multiple occasions. In Representative Schiff’s case, despite literally being the co-chair of the “press freedom caucus”, he inserted a provision into an intelligence bill that would even make it easier for the government to prosecute reporters who published leaked classified information.

Being the victim of unjust surveillance sometimes tends to make even the most devoted surveillance hawks soften their stance. If Garland is promising to bar the surveillance of journalists for the purpose of finding their sources, Congress can simply pass a law holding them to it. Anything else at this point is just empty rhetoric.

But there is another issue looming large over this debate, one that many seem hesitant to talk about. Garland has said so far that the DoJ won’t spy on journalists unless they are engaged in a crime. Well, the DoJ is currently attempting to make newsgathering a crime, in the form of its case against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange.

Assange is, to say the least, not popular in Washington DC and in mainstream journalism circles. However, the actions described in the indictment against him, most notably the 17 Espionage Act charges, are indistinguishable for what reporters do all the time: talk to sources, cultivate their trust, request more information, receive classified documents, and eventually publish them.

News outlets like the New York Times and Washington Post already know what a threat the case is to their reporters’ rights; they’ve said so in public. However, it’s vital that they say this to the attorney general’s face. Right now, there is little pressure on the DoJ to drop the Assange charges, despite the fact that virtually every civil liberties and human rights group in the US has protested against them.

If Garland bars surveillance of journalists “doing their jobs” but secures a conviction that makes journalists’ jobs a crime, his promises will ultimately be worse than meaningless.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Deep Sea Is Filled With Treasure, but It Comes at a Price Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=59823"><span class="small">Elizabeth Kolbert, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Friday, 18 June 2021 08:29

Kolbert writes: "We've barely explored the darkest realm of the ocean. With rare-metal mining on the rise, we're already destroying it."

'We've barely explored the darkest realm of the ocean. With rare-metal mining on the rise, we're already destroying it.' (photo: iStock)
'We've barely explored the darkest realm of the ocean. With rare-metal mining on the rise, we're already destroying it.' (photo: iStock)


The Deep Sea Is Filled With Treasure, but It Comes at a Price

By Elizabeth Kolbert, The New Yorker

18 June 21


We’ve barely explored the darkest realm of the ocean. With rare-metal mining on the rise, we’re already destroying it.

he International Seabed Authority is headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica, in a building that looks a bit like a prison and a bit like a Holiday Inn. The I.S.A., which has been described as “chronically overlooked” and is so obscure that even many Jamaicans don’t know it exists, has jurisdiction over roughly half the globe.

Under international law, countries control the waters within two hundred miles of their shores. Beyond that, the oceans and all they contain are considered “the common heritage of mankind.” This realm, which encompasses nearly a hundred million square miles of seafloor, is referred to in I.S.A.-speak simply as the Area.

Scattered across the Area are great riches. Mostly, these take the shape of lumps that resemble blackened potatoes. The lumps, known formally as polymetallic nodules, consist of layers of ore that have built up around bits of marine debris, such as ancient shark teeth. The process by which the metals accumulate is not entirely understood; however, it’s thought to be exceedingly slow. A single spud-size nugget might take some three million years to form. It has been estimated that, collectively, the nodules on the bottom of the ocean contain six times as much cobalt, three times as much nickel, and four times as much of the rare-earth metal yttrium as there is on land. They contain six thousand times as much tellurium, a metal that’s even rarer than the rare earths.

The first attempts to harvest this submerged wealth were undertaken nearly fifty years ago. In the summer of 1974, a drillship purportedly belonging to Howard Hughes—the Hughes Glomar Explorer—anchored north of Midway Atoll, ostensibly to bring up nodules from the depths. In fact, the ship was operated by the C.I.A., which was trying to raise a sunken Soviet submarine. But then, in a curious twist, a real company called Ocean Minerals leased the Glomar to collect nodules from the seabed west of Baja California. The president of the company likened the exercise to “standing on the top of the Empire State Building, trying to pick up small stones on the sidewalk using a long straw, at night.”

After the Glomar expeditions, interest in seabed mining waned. It’s now waxing again. As one recent report put it, “The Pacific Ocean is the scene of a new wild west.” Thirty companies have received permits from the I.S.A. to explore the Area. Most are looking to slurp up the nodules; others are hoping to excavate stretches of the ocean floor that are rich in cobalt and copper. Permits to begin commercial mining could be issued within a few years.

Proponents of deep-sea mining argue that the sooner it starts the better. Manufacturing wind turbines, electric vehicles, solar panels, and batteries for energy storage requires resources, often scarce ones. (Tellurium is a key component in thin-film solar panels.) “The reality is that the clean-energy transition is not possible without taking billions of tons of metal from the planet,” Gerard Barron, the chairman of the Metals Company, one of the businesses that holds permits from the I.S.A., observed a few months ago. Seafloor nodules, he said, “offer a way to dramatically reduce” the environmental impact of extracting these tons.

But seabed mining poses environmental hazards of its own. The more scientists learn about the depths, the more extraordinary the discoveries. The ocean floor is populated by creatures that thrive under conditions that seem impossibly extreme. There is, for example, a ghostly pale deep-sea octopus that lays its eggs only on the stalks of nodule-dwelling sponges. Remove the nodules in order to melt them down and it will, presumably, take millions of years for new ones to form.

Edith Widder is a marine biologist, a MacArthur Fellow, and the author of “Below the Edge of Darkness: A Memoir of Exploring Light and Life in the Deep Sea” (Random House). Widder is an expert on bioluminescence, a topic that she became interested in after nearly going blind. In 1970, when she was a freshman in college, she had to have surgery for a broken back. The surgery went fine, but afterward she started hemorrhaging. Her heart stopped beating, and she was resuscitated. This happened again, and then a third time. Blood leaked into both of her eyes, blocking her retinas. “My visual world was swirling darkness with occasional glimpses of meaningless light,” she recalls. Eventually, she regained her vision, but she no longer took sight for granted.

“We believe we see the world as it is,” she writes. “We don’t. We see the world as we need to see it to make our existence possible.”

The same goes for fish. Only the top layers of the oceans are illuminated. The “sunlight zone” extends down about seven hundred feet, the “twilight zone” down another twenty-six hundred feet. Below that—in the “midnight zone,” the “abyssal zone,” and the “hadal zone”—there’s only blackness, and the light created by life itself. In this vast darkness, so many species have mastered the art of bioluminescence that Widder estimates they constitute a “majority of the creatures on the planet.” The first time she descended into the deep in an armored diving suit called a Wasp, she was overwhelmed by the display. “This was a light extravaganza unlike anything I could have imagined,” she writes. “Afterwards, when asked to describe what I had seen, I blurted, ‘It’s like the Fourth of July down there!’ ”

Bioluminescent creatures produce light via chemical reaction. They synthesize luciferins, compounds that, in the presence of certain enzymes, known as luciferases, oxidize and give off photons. The trick is useful enough that bioluminescence has evolved independently some fifty times. Eyes, too, have evolved independently about fifty times, in creatures as diverse as flies, flatworms, and frogs. But, Widder points out, “there is one remarkable distinction.” All animals’ eyes employ the same basic strategy to convert light to sensation, using proteins called opsins. In the case of bioluminescence, different groups of organisms produce very different luciferins, meaning that each has invented its own way to shine.

The most obvious reason to flash a light in the dark is to find food. Some animals, like the stoplight loosejaw, a fish with photon-emitting organs under each eye, use bioluminescence to seek out prey. Others, like the humpback blackdevil, hope to attract victims with their displays; the blackdevil sports a shiny lure that dangles off its forehead like a crystal from a chandelier.

Bioluminescence also serves less straightforward functions. It can be used to entice mates and to startle enemies. The giant red mysid, a hamster-size crustacean, spews streams of blue sparkles from nozzles near its mouth; these, it’s believed, distract would-be attackers. Some animals smear their pursuers with bioluminescent slime—the marks make them targets for other predators—and some use bioluminescence as camouflage. This last strategy is known as counterillumination, and it’s used in the twilight zone, where many creatures have upward-looking eyes that scan for the silhouettes of prey. The prey can adjust their glow to blend in with the light filtering down from above.

Since it’s so hard for humans to get to the deep sea—and, once there, to record what they’re seeing—Widder has spent much of her career trying to figure out ways to study bioluminescence remotely. She’s developed special deep-sea cameras that rely on red light, which marine creatures mostly can’t detect. Much of “Below the Edge of Darkness” is occupied with the travails of getting these cameras placed, a project that involves journeys so nauseating that Widder describes cycling through the five stages of seasickness. In the fourth, she explains, “you’re afraid you’re going to die,” and in the last “you’re afraid you’re not.”

The experience that she really wants to convey, though, is not queasiness but wonder. The creatures of the deep have been putting on the world’s greatest light show for tens of millions of years. Widder thinks that if people could witness this spectacle—or even just be made aware of it—they’d pay a lot more attention to life at the bottom of the seas and the many hazards that threaten it. These include but are not limited to global warming, ocean acidification, overfishing, agricultural runoff, oil spills, invasive species, bottom trawling, plastic waste, and seabed mining.

“We seem to be in a Catch-22 scenario where we haven’t explored the deep ocean because we don’t appreciate what a remarkable, mysterious, and wondrous place it is, and we don’t know what an astonishing place it is because we haven’t explored it,” she argues. Meanwhile, she writes, “we are managing to destroy the ocean before we even know what’s in it.”

All marine photosynthesis takes place in the sunlight zone. Beneath that, food is in such short supply that the occasional dead whale that falls to the ocean floor represents a major source of nutrients. Nevertheless, even in the farthest recesses of the oceans, life finds a way.

The Mariana snailfish, as its name suggests, occupies the Mariana Trench—the ocean’s deepest depression—in the western Pacific. It’s a few inches long and looks like a large, pale-pink tadpole. The Mariana snailfish has been found more than twenty-six thousand feet below sea level, where the pressure is eight hundred times greater than at the surface. To survive under such conditions, the snailfish has come up with various ingenious adaptations: its skull is not completely closed, its bones are unusually rubbery, and it produces special chemicals to prevent its proteins from denaturing under stress. The creature can barely see and instead relies on fluid-filled chambers along its jaws, which detect the movements of small crustaceans known as amphipods. Amphipods, for their part, have been collected from the very bottom of the Mariana Trench, almost thirty-six thousand feet down, where the pressure is so great that the animals’ shells, in theory at least, should dissolve. A team of Japanese scientists recently reported that one deep-dwelling amphipod, Hirondellea gigas, protects its shell by coating it in an aluminum-based gel, produced from metal that it extracts from seafloor mud.

Some of the seas’ most extraordinary animals live around hydrothermal vents—the oceanic equivalents of hot springs. Through cracks in the seafloor, water comes in contact with the earth’s magma; the process leaves it superheated and loaded with dissolved minerals. (At some vents, the water reaches a temperature of more than seven hundred degrees.) As the water rises and cools, the minerals precipitate out to form crenellated, castlelike structures. Hydrothermal vents had been theorized about for many years but remained unseen until 1977, when a team of geologists and geochemists travelling on a research vessel called the Knorr located one about two hundred and fifty miles northeast of the Galápagos. A pair of scientists went down to take a look at it in a submersible named Alvin.

“Isn’t the deep ocean supposed to be like a desert?” one of them asked over Alvin’s phone link.

“Yes,” came the answer from the Knorr.

“Well, there’s all these animals down here.”

As Helen Scales, a British marine biologist, explains in her new book, “The Brilliant Abyss: Exploring the Majestic Hidden Life of the Deep Ocean, and the Looming Threat That Imperils It” (Grove Atlantic), “these animals” turned out to be fundamentally different from other creatures. At the bottom of the vents’ food chains are microbes that have come up with their own novel survival strategy. Instead of using photosynthesis, which harnesses the energy of photons, they rely on chemosynthesis, which uses the energy stored in chemical bonds. Since the late nineteen-seventies, Scales reports, researchers have catalogued hundreds of strange species living around vents; they include creatures so puzzling that it’s hard to find a limb for them on the tree of life.

Yeti crabs, first observed in 2005 on a vent system along the Pacific-Antarctic Ridge, south of Easter Island, look like hairy white lobsters. Their “hairs” are actually extensions of their shells, and along them live colonies of chemosynthetic bacteria, which the crabs scrape up and consume. Yeti crabs were found to be so evolutionarily distinctive that taxonomists had to create not just a new genus but a whole new family for them.

Xenoturbella profunda is a creature that looks like a discarded tube sock. First collected from a vent system in the Gulf of California in 2015, it has no intestines or central nervous system, and scientists aren’t even sure what phylum it belongs to. Chrysomallon squamiferum, commonly referred to as the scaly-foot snail, is a mollusk that’s been found at vents in the Indian Ocean, at a depth of ten thousand feet. It’s the only animal known to build its shell with iron, and around its foot it sports a fringe of iron plates that looks a bit like a flamenco skirt. The snail carries around chemosynthesizing microbes in a special pouch in its throat. In 2019, Chrysomallon squamiferum became the first vent-dwelling creature to be included on the Red List of Threatened Species, maintained by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The rationale for the listing is that the species has been found at only three sites, and two of these are being explored for mining. Its living space, the I.U.C.N. has observed, is thus apt to be “severely reduced or destroyed.”

Scales, like Widder, worries that the bottom of the ocean will be wrecked before many of the most marvellous creatures living there are even identified. “The frontier story has always been one of destruction and loss,” she writes. “It is naïve to assume that the process would play out any differently in the deep.” Indeed, she argues, the depths are particularly ill-suited to disturbance because, owing to a scarcity of food, creatures tend to grow and reproduce extremely slowly. “Vital habitat is created by corals and sponges that live for millennia,” she writes.

If deep-sea mining proceeds, it’s likely that one of the first countries to pursue it will be Nauru, a tiny nation that, as it happens, was itself almost destroyed by mining.

About the size of Block Island, Nauru sits in the South Pacific, about sixteen hundred miles northeast of Papua New Guinea. For thousands of years, the island’s largest visitors were birds, which used it, in the words of one journalist, as a “glorified rest stop.” Polynesians and Micronesians arrived on the island sometime around 1000 B.C. They seem to have lived harmoniously—even idyllically—until gun-toting Europeans showed up, in the early nineteenth century. At the start of the twentieth century, a New Zealander named Albert Ellis realized that the ancient bird droppings that coated the island were a rich source of phosphate, an important fertilizer. During the next six decades, more than thirty-five million tons of phosphate were dug out of Nauru and shipped off to farms in Europe and Australia. The process stripped much of the island bare, leaving nothing but jagged pillars of limestone sticking out of the ground. A National Geographic photographer who visited Nauru mid-destruction wrote, “A worked-out phosphate field is a dismal, ghastly tract.”

In 1968, Nauru became its own country. The phosphate business was still booming, and, on paper, the island’s ten thousand residents became some of the richest people in the world. The new nation used its sovereign wealth to invest in, among other things, cruise ships, airplanes, overseas office buildings, and a London musical based on the life of Leonardo da Vinci. The musical flopped, as did most of the other ventures. Nauruans “have a long history of being taken to the cleaners by crooks” is how Helen Hughes, an Australian economist, put it. In 2001, in return for various fees and payments, Nauru’s government allowed Australia to set up a detention center for refugees on the island. The center soon became infamous for its grim conditions.

Today, with the phosphate mostly mined out and the refugees mostly resettled, Nauru is betting on nodules. To engage in deep-sea exploration and mining, a company must be sponsored by a country that’s party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. (The U.S. is one of the few nations that has not ratified the Law of the Sea treaty, because of conservative opposition in the Senate.) Nauru has teamed up with the Metals Company, which is based in Canada, to explore a region of the Pacific known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, west of Mexico. “We are proud that Pacific nations have been leaders in the deep-sea minerals industry,” a statement co-authored by Nauru’s representative to the International Seabed Authority recently declared. The deal, it’s estimated, could eventually bring the country more than a hundred million dollars a year. Alternatively, the arrangement could prove even more disastrous than the da Vinci musical. At one point, Nauru officials expressed concern to the I.S.A. that, if a sponsoring nation were held liable for damages arising from a mining operation, it could “face losing more than it actually has.”

The I.S.A., for its part, has been assigned the task not just of issuing the permits for seabed mining but also of drafting the regulations to govern the practice. These regulations have yet to be finalized, so it’s unclear how stringent they will be. (The final rules are supposed to be in place before commercial mining commences, though the Metals Company has threatened to try to start without them.) Many marine scientists argue that because deep-sea ecosystems are so fragile—and operations that are miles below the surface so difficult to monitor—the only safe way to proceed is not to. Scales makes this point, but acknowledges that the I.S.A. is unlikely to be swayed. She quotes Daniel Jones, a researcher at the British National Oceanography Centre, who says, “Even if we found unicorns living on the seafloor, I don’t think that would necessarily stop mining.” Meanwhile, assuming that mining does go forward, it’s been suggested that faux nodules could be manufactured and dropped by ship into the deep ocean, to replace those being refashioned into batteries. The perfect vessel for this task would have been the Glomar; unfortunately, a few years ago it was sold for scrap.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Stacey Abrams Says She Supports Joe Manchin's Voting Rights Compromise Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49967"><span class="small">Christopher Wilson, Yahoo! News</span></a>   
Thursday, 17 June 2021 12:55

Wilson writes: "Activist and former Georgia gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams said she 'absolutely' could support Sen. Joe Manchin's, D-W.Va., compromise proposal on voting rights."

Stacey Abrams in Atlanta, Nov. 3, 2020. (photo: Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
Stacey Abrams in Atlanta, Nov. 3, 2020. (photo: Melina Mara/The Washington Post)


Stacey Abrams Says She Supports Joe Manchin's Voting Rights Compromise

By Christopher Wilson, Yahoo! News

17 June 21

 

ctivist and former Georgia gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams said she “absolutely” could support Sen. Joe Manchin’s, D-W.Va., compromise proposal on voting rights.

“What Sen. Manchin is putting forward are some basic building blocks that we need to ensure that democracy is accessible no matter your geography,” the Georgia Democrat said Thursday during an interview with CNN, “and those provisions that he’s setting forth are strong ones that will create a level playing field, will create standards that do not vary from state to state and I think will ensure that every American has improved access to vote despite the onslaught of state legislation seeking to restrict access to the right to vote.”

Manchin’s office circulated a three-page memo outlining his voting rights proposal after writing earlier this month that he didn’t support the For the People Act, a sweeping piece of legislation on voting, elections and campaign finance that passed the House in March. The West Virginian said he thinks a voting rights bill passed along party lines would “destroy the already weakening binds of our democracy.”

Key provisions in Manchin’s proposal include mandating an early voting period and eliminating partisan gerrymandering in an attempt to get fair legislative maps, in addition to making Election Day a federal holiday and increasing access to absentee balloting. However, Manchin’s proposal also backed a couple of provisions typically opposed by Democrats, including increased voter ID requirements and allowing local election officials to purge voting rolls.

When asked about the voter ID provision, Abrams said, “That’s one of the fallacies of Republican talking points that have been deeply disturbing. No one has ever objected to having to prove who you are to vote. It’s been part of our nation’s history since the inception of voting. What has been problematic is the kind of restrictive IDs we’ve seen pop up,” pointing to states that make it more difficult for Native Americans and students to vote.

Abrams has become one of the nation’s leading advocates for increased voting rights following a contentious loss to Republican Brian Kemp in the 2018 gubernatorial race. Her group Fair Fight Action is credited with helping to swing Georgia in the 2020 election, where it went for a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time since 1992 and elected two Democrats to the U.S. Senate a few months later.

The Peach State was also one of the earliest to enact new voting restrictions, with Kemp’s decision to sign the package into law in March drawing blowback, including the loss of Major League Baseball’s All-Star game. A number of GOP-controlled states across the country have pushed laws that reduce voting hours and make it more difficult to vote by mail, amid other restrictions. A report last week also warned that some state legislatures are looking to make it easier to change election results.

For a voting rights bill to pass the Senate, it would require at least 10 Republican votes or for all 50 Democratic senators to vote to lower the legislative filibuster and allow a bill to advance with fewer than 60 votes. Manchin has said he won’t vote to remove the filibuster, but there’s hope among liberals that if he continues to see Republicans refuse to budge on his attempts at bipartisanship, he will at least consider changes to the filibuster if not its complete elimination.

“I’ve been sharing everything that I support and things I can support and vote with and things that I think is in the bill that doesn’t need to be in the bill, that doesn’t really interact with what we’re doing in West Virginia,” Manchin told reporters on Wednesday. “We’ll have to see what changes are made.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is among the many Democrats skeptical that Manchin will be able to reach a bipartisan deal on substantive voter projections, noting that GOP state legislatures tend to pass their voting bills along party-line votes.

“The idea that this can have some kind of bipartisan solution befuddles me, because every action taken in the legislatures is done just with Republican state senators, Republican assembly members, with no Democratic participation or input,” Schumer said Wednesday.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Next > End >>

Page 80 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN