Tag: damage

Categories
Politics

Biden to Tour Hurricane Ida Harm in New Orleans

Biden to Tour Hurricane Ida Damage in New Orleans

WASHINGTON – President Biden will fly to New Orleans on Friday to view the damage caused by Hurricane Ida to demonstrate his commitment to the federal government’s storm response, even as his administration remains embroiled in other urgent matters of the coronavirus surge after his departure from Afghanistan.

In guidelines to reporters issued late Thursday evening, White House officials said Mr. Biden would investigate storm damage and meet with government officials from hurricane-hit communities, which the president on Thursday named the fifth largest hurricane in American history .

Mr Biden, speaking at the White House Thursday, said he would meet with Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards, along with mayor presidents and other local officials.

“Governor Edwards encouraged me to come and assured me that the visit will not disrupt the on-site recovery effort,” said Biden. “I wanted to be sure of that. My message to all concerned is: We are all in it together. The nation is here to help. “

Ida stormed Louisiana as a Category 4 hurricane Sunday, leaving at least 12 dead and the power grid in ruins before its remains marched up the east coast, flooding New York and much of the rest of the northeast, killing dozens more.

Despite the withdrawal of the last of the U.S. troops from Afghanistan on Monday, Mr Biden has struggled throughout the week to show his commitment to the assault effort. On Sunday when the storm hit the Gulf Coast, it stopped at the Federal Emergency Management Agency headquarters in Washington to give workers a lift.

Mr Biden said Thursday that he “will be kept informed of progress from FEMA every hour late into the night and that we will work around the clock until the region’s critical needs are fully met”.

Floods in New York

Updated

9/3/2021, 5:00 p.m. ET

Mr. Biden’s itinerary and aggressive public efforts to highlight how his administration prepared for the storm contrast sharply with President George W. Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina 16 years ago.

Bush drew harsh criticism for the federal government’s slow response to the storm that inundated parts of New Orleans and claimed the deaths of more than 1,800 people. Mr Bush was famously photographed viewing the devastation of the storm from a window on Air Force One, which became a symbol of the state’s distancing from the damage. He later said he regretted the photo and wished he had ended up in Louisiana.

“I should have landed in Baton Rouge, met with the governor and walked out and said, ‘I’m listening,'” Bush said in a 2010 interview. “And then I flew back to Washington. I didn’t do that. And pay a price for it. “

Mr Biden did not mention Mr Bush in his remarks about the hurricane this week. But he has repeatedly promoted government efforts to position electrical workers, medical teams, power generators, and other aid in front of the storm in hopes of bringing relief quickly to those affected.

“As we tackle the core elements of disaster relief, we’re also deploying new tools to expedite this recovery – things that weren’t used very often in previous hurricane responses,” Biden said Thursday. “Working with private companies that own and operate the lifeline infrastructure such as electricity and communications, we’ve used the latest technology to expedite restoration of power and cellular service.”

Mr Biden also used the storm, including the floods in the northeast on Wednesday, to raise awareness of his climate change agenda. Democrats in Congress are looking to pass a multi-trillion dollar spending bill this month that Biden said should include tax incentives for low-carbon energy use along with other measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters Thursday that the hurricane reaffirmed the president’s “commitment to adopt his Build Back Better agenda, which has a big, big focus on addressing the climate crisis.”

Categories
Politics

Mexico sues U.S. gun producers, alleging they trigger huge harm to nation

Mexico sues U.S. gun manufacturers, alleging they cause massive damage to country

Mexican soldiers guard a crime scene.

Guillermo arias | AFP | Getty Images

The Mexican government on Wednesday sued several US arms manufacturers for contributing to the illegal arms trade in Mexico.

The lawsuit was filed in US federal court in Boston. Among the defendants named in the lawsuit are Smith & Wesson, Barrett Firearms, Beretta USA, and Colt’s Manufacturing Company.

The companies did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comment.

The arms manufacturers are accused of negligent business practices that facilitate the smuggling of arms to Mexico and cause “massive damage” to the country. The lawsuit alleges that they knowingly supply the criminal arms market in Mexico. Military-style companies’ weapons often end up in the hands of drug cartels and other criminals who harm civilians and government personnel.

Mexico has reported historically high murder rates in recent years, some of which in the lawsuit are attributable to the arms trade from the United States in violation of Mexican gun laws.

“The consequences in Mexico were dire. In addition to the exponential increase in the murder rate, the behavior of the defendants has had an overall destabilizing effect on Mexican society,” the lawsuit said.

The Mexican government is demanding compensation for the financial toll and bloodshed caused by the alleged wrongful conduct of the defendants. Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said at a press conference on Wednesday that the government is targeting an estimated $ 10 billion, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

Mexico’s Secretary of State Marcelo Ebrard watches during a press conference to announce that Mexico has sued several arms manufacturers in a U.S. federal court accusing them of negligent business practices that resulted in the illegal arms trade that took place in Mexico in Mexico City, Mexico, on 4th, 2021.

Luis Cortes | Reuters

“For decades, the government and its citizens have been the victims of a deadly flood of military and other particularly lethal weapons that have passed from the United States across the border into criminal hands into Mexico,” the lawsuit said.

“This flood is not a natural phenomenon or an inevitable consequence of the gun business or US gun laws. It is the predictable result of the willful acts and business practices of the defendants, ”it said.

The compensation would cover, among other things, the cost of deaths and injuries to Mexican police and military personnel, social services for victims of gun crimes and their families, and strengthening law enforcement to prevent the gun trade, the lawsuit said.

Laws in Mexico severely restrict the sale of firearms, and the Mexican government issues fewer than 50 gun permits each year, according to the lawsuit.

But the defendants are undermining these laws, the lawsuit says. An estimated half a million weapons are smuggled into Mexico from the United States each year, and the defendants produce over 68% of them, the lawsuit said.

That means they sell more than 340,000 firearms to criminals annually, which flow across the U.S.-Mexico border, according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit states that the defendants do not regulate their gun distribution practices. They sell guns to any distributor or dealer with a US license, regardless of whether they illegally sold guns to Mexico, the lawsuit says.

The defendants are also charged with marketing their weapons in a way that attracts transnational criminal organizations such as Mexican drug cartels. Barrett Firearms, for example, markets one of its rifles as a “weapon of war,” but sells it to the general public without restrictions, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit alleges that it enabled criminals to attack the Mexican military and police, and increased extortion and kidnapping.

Ebrard on Wednesday urged U.S. arms manufacturers to end their business practices which he believes are contributing to violence and deaths in his country, Reuters reported. He said he believed the US government, not mentioned in the lawsuit, was ready to work with Mexico to curb the illegal arms trade.

Categories
Health

EU’s vaccine export controls might harm world vaccine provide

EU's vaccine export controls could damage global vaccine supply

The decision of the EU to carry out export controls for coronavirus vaccines is “extremely problematic” according to experts. They warned that if other countries followed suit, this could lead to a collapse in global supply.

“There is a real risk that the EU making this decision could set off a cascade in other countries to introduce export bans (vaccines),” said Suerie Moon, co-director of the Graduate Institute of the Global Health Center in Geneva, on Monday opposite CNBC.

“There is a real risk that the cross-border movement of vaccines will collapse, just as it did a year ago when countries including the EU blocked exports of food and even masks and other essential medical supplies. This is catastrophic internationally.”

In the worst case, she said, “The greatest risk is that this will be an example that many other countries will follow and that will lead to a collapse in the global vaccine supply.”

Export controls

The people lining up outside the Belgrade Fair to receive the China-made Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccine became a vaccination center on January 25, 2021.

ANDREJ ISAKOVIC | AFP | Getty Images

While insisting that the measure is not an “export ban”, Member States can restrict exports of block-made coronavirus vaccines if they believe the vaccine maker has failed to respect existing contracts with the EU.

It contains exceptions for a large number of countries outside the EU but within Europe, such as Albania and Serbia, a number of countries in North Africa and one of the 92 low and middle income countries that fall under the COVAX initiative.

Moon said: “The EU has certainly put in some pressure valves to allow exports to certain countries in the world, but there are still many countries that rely heavily on EU production and are seriously injured.” . “

The bloc made the announcement amid heightened concerns and ugly public disputes with vaccine manufacturers over insufficient supplies to the bloc.

Vaccine maker Pfizer announced that it would temporarily cut production of its shot, developed with German biotechnology BioNTech, as it modernized manufacturing facilities in Belgium, while AstraZeneca dealt a blow to the EU by announcing it would deliver far fewer vaccine doses than that originally expected in the first quarter, citing problems in the Dutch and Belgian plants.

The delays put pressure on the European Commission, which has already been criticized for its lack of speed in ordering and approving vaccines and introducing vaccines.

The move to introduce export controls caused a stir, especially in the UK after a week of simmering tensions over shipments of the AstraZeneca vaccine, which is also manufactured at two UK sites.

The EU had indicated that supplies were to be diverted from the UK plants to Europe, which sparked a dispute with the drug manufacturer and the UK government. It escalated to the point where the EU said it would override part of the Brexit deal to prevent EU-made vaccines from potentially entering the UK via Northern Ireland.

This decision was reversed shortly after a public outcry, including from the World Health Organization, warning of the dangers of “vaccine nationalism”. The EU assured the UK that it would receive vaccines from the block.

Pandora’s box

Simon J. Evenett, professor of international trade and economic development at the University of St. Gallen, said on Monday that the EU’s move was tantamount to opening the “Pandora’s box” and could have unforeseen consequences.

He said the restrictions could cause concern to foreign governments for a number of reasons, including the fact that the “standard for authorizing the export of Covid-19 vaccines is unclear” and that these decisions “can be arbitrary”. He also pointed out that it shouldn’t expire on March 31, 2021 as promised.

Evenett warned that the move “could spread down the supply chain for Covid-19 vaccines to include key ingredients needed to manufacture and distribute the vaccines,” and even to export restrictions on other essential goods such as food, energy and Energy could lead to other drugs.

CSL staff will be working in the laboratory on November 08, 2020 in Melbourne, Australia, where they will begin manufacturing the AstraZeneca-Oxford University’s COVID-19 vaccine.

Darrian Traynor | Getty Images

Such scenarios “would exacerbate the damage being done to both the EU public health systems and its multinationals,” he said.

“A disruption in vaccine supply chains will slow vaccine rates in the EU and elsewhere, leading to unnecessary deaths and an even slower economic recovery. If the European Commission realizes that it is going to open Pandora’s box, it may find an elegant way to pull it back of the export control regime for the Covid-19 regime, “he said.

“This would allow the EU to regain its reputation as a defender of multilateralism and the rules-based global trading system. This morning that reputation is in tatters.”