theintercept--2020-05-29--Hidden Video and Whistleblower Reveal Gruesome Mass-Extermination Method for Iowa Pigs Amid Pandemic

Iowa Select Farms , has been using a cruel and excruciating method to kill thousands of pigs that have become commercially worthless due to the coronavirus pandemic .
As is true for so much of what the agricultural industry does , the company ’ s gruesome extermination of sentient animals that are emotionally complex and intelligent has been conducted entirely out of public view .
But The Intercept , as the result of an investigation by animal rights group Direct Action Everywhere , or DxE , has obtained video footage of the procedure and the resulting carnage that occurred at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in mid-May .
Additionally , a whistleblower employed by Iowa Select has provided extensive details to The Intercept about the extraordinary methods now being employed to kill pigs — agonizingly and over the course of many hours — in increasingly large numbers .
What prompted both the DxE investigation and the whistleblower to come forward is Iowa Select ’ s recent adoption of the mass-extermination method known as “ ventilation shutdown , ” or VSD .
Under this method , pigs at the company ’ s rural Grundy County facility are being “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s jargon , by sealing off all airways to their barns and inserting steam into them , intensifying the heat and humidity inside and leaving them to die overnight .
Most pigs — though not all — die after hours of suffering from a combination of being suffocated and roasted to death .
The recordings obtained by The Intercept include audio of the piercing cries of pigs as they succumb .
The recordings also show that some pigs manage to survive the ordeal — but , on the morning after , Iowa Select @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to survey the mound of pig corpses for any lingering signs of life , and then use their bolt guns to extinguish any survivors .
The whistleblower told The Intercept that when Iowa Select began using the ventilation shutdown method in late April , it first experimented on a smaller group of hogs by just shutting off the airways into their barn and turning up the heat .
Other employees told similar stories to DxE investigators .
After those experiments failed — the oxygen-deprived pigs survived over the course of many hours , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failure to increase the heat to fatal levels — Iowa Select decided to begin injecting steam into the barns , to accelerate the accumulation of heat and humidity .
That steam is visible in the video provided to The Intercept and is the culmination , at least thus far , of several attempts to perfect VSD .
The whistleblower explained the process : They shut the pit pans off , shut the ventilation fans off , and heat up the building .
That ’ s what the plan is .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first used on test cull sows : those were first given the VSD treatment .
The first day they shut off all the fans and turned the heat up and the hottest they could get the building was 120 degrees .
After four to five hours , none of the animals were dead .
There was an attempt to induce steam into the building , along with the heat and the ventilation shutdown , and that is how they ultimately perfected their VSD operation .
Every time they ’ ve been euthanizing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test in a sense .
Piglets were killed off in a barn with gas generators .
The profit model of the agricultural industry depends , of course , on raising animals in ways that cause suffering for years and then ultimately killing them to convert them into meat .
Though food lines are growing around the United States , the coronavirus pandemic has prompted factory farms to exterminate animals en masse because of the erosion of their commercial supply chains .
Numerous slaughterhouses have been forced to close due to Covid-19 outbreaks among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has only increased the amount of “ excess ” animals the industry regards as worthless and disposable .
Rather than caring for these animals until pre-pandemic demand returns , or converting them into discounted or donated food for millions of people who have suddenly become unemployed and food insecure by caring for the animals until slaughterhouse capacity can accommodate them , many companies , including Iowa Select , have evidently made decisions driven exclusively by a goal to maximize profits .
In sum , they are slaughtering these now “ worthless ” animals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , using extermination methods that cause sustained suffering and agony , to avoid the costs of keeping them alive .
During the pandemic , mass slaughter has become commonplace at factory farms , even though many of these farms are not where large-scale killing is meant to occur .
In normal times , the animals would be transported to slaughterhouses and killed there in ways that , at least in theory , minimize the cruelty by accelerating the death process .
But mass killings that radically deviate from the normal slaughterhouse process are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected to increase .
“ At least two million animals have already reportedly been culled on farm , and that number is expected to rise , ” The Guardian reported on April 29 .
Officials in Iowa “ have warned that producers could be forced to kill 700,000 pigs a week due to meat plant slowdowns or closures.
” This mass extermination requires the use of life-extinguishing procedures which , prior to the pandemic , were not typically employed by this industry .
And those procedures are anything but quick , painless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produced by The Intercept demonstrates : The decision to kill healthy animals in unusually large numbers has led many factory farms to resort to methods that are novel and gruesome .
The quickest and most merciful way to induce death for so many animals at once — shooting them in the head one by one — would be too emotionally traumatizing even for factory farm employees who are accustomed to raising animals in order to bring them to slaughter .
Even when standard industrial methods of slaughter are used , factory farm work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health harms for workers .
But the method of ventilation shutdown now being used at Iowa Select causes pigs to endure great anguish over many hours on their way to death .
On the hidden audio recorders placed in the barn as part of DxE ’ s investigation , sustained screams of distress and agony are audible as the heat fills the building while the air supply is shut down .
The deployment of armed workers to shoot any pigs who are clinging to life in the morning is designed to ensure 100 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pigs in the barn is so great that standard methods to confirm death , such as pulse-checking , are not performed , making it quite possible that some pigs survived the ventilator shutdown , were not killed by bolt guns , and are therefore buried alive or crushed by the bulldozers that haul away the corpses .
Iowa Select has not responded to numerous questions submitted by The Intercept .
But upon discovering that investigators from DxE had obtained video footage from inside one of its barns showing the suffering of pigs during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preempt this reporting by admitting its use of VSD in an article published last week by a pork industry newsletter .
“ The thought of euthanizing entire herds is devastating , ” a company spokesperson told the newsletter .
“ Sadly , Iowa Select has been forced to make this heartbreaking decision for some of its herd.
” To another industry outlet , the company “ announced in a statement that they have been forced to euthanize some of its herd , ” emphasizing not the pain endured by the animals that were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executives : “ ‘ It ’ s been hard on us to come to those decisions , ’ says Pete Thomas , DVM at Iowa Select Farms.
” The video obtained during DxE ’ s investigation and provided to The Intercept viscerally conveys the inhumane cruelty of this extermination method .
The video cameras placed inside the barn , along with audio recorders , were activated shortly after DxE investigators learned that a ventilation shutdown was scheduled for a particular night in mid-May .
Those video and audio devices recorded the start of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sealing off of all airways , and continued all night as the pigs suffered and died .
The devices continued recording through to the next morning , when Iowa Select employees entered the barn , finished the extermination process by shooting the pigs who managed to survive and then removed the corpses using bulldozers .
The audio recorders document the noises of anguish emitted by the pigs during the procedure , as well as the sound of guns finishing off survivors .
It also records discussions by Iowa Select Farms about what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discovery that hidden cameras had captured everything that was done .
In an interview with The Intercept , the whistleblowing employee of Iowa Select , who originally wanted to speak on the record but changed their mind due to fear of reprisals from the industry that dominates their state , described the abuses that prompted them to reach out to DxE even prior to the pandemic .
The whistleblower recounted how their pre-Covid-19 anguish escalated significantly over the last several months , and how they were pushed over the limits of their conscience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employer ’ s use of ventilation shutdowns .
Prior to the outbreak of the coronavirus , the whistleblower decided to covertly communicate with DxE investigators after reading a study published by the group on the inhumane and often illegal confinement of factory farm pigs in which they linger for years with no adequate space even to turn around .
The conditions in which the Iowa Select pigs were kept — with nowhere near enough room to be considered humane by the whistleblower — was increasingly weighing on their conscience .
The whistleblower explained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase ” in pig production over 2019 led to the already cramped space for pigs becoming even smaller .
Despite being around farms for decades , the whistleblower could hardly bear to see what was happening .
“ It ’ s immoral , hard to see every single day , ” they said .
Months ago , the whistleblower even began conducting research into regulatory requirements , after observing that the pigs were being stored in ways that appeared to them to be “ double what is permitted ” by applicable standards .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have little interest in taking action .
Indeed , the agricultural industry has long used its economic dominance to influence both political parties and the legislative process to enact laws and regulations with little purpose other than to maximize their profit margins and conceal from the public the realities of how they operate .
The industry succeeded even to the point of inducing the enactment of now-notorious and constitutionally invalidated “ ag-gag ” laws , designed to punish various forms of transparency intended to show the public the realities of what takes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ documentary produced by The Intercept last year revealed pervasive abuses in Iowa ’ s meat industry and how those abuses are protected and enabled by industry-dominated politicians who receive substantial donations and dutifully subject themselves to industry lobbyist control .
The whistleblower ’ s growing concerns about the ethics of this industry “ quickly evolved ” as the coronavirus pandemic began seriously affecting factory farms .
The pandemic caused “ massive backups , ” the whistleblower said .
As market gluts and slaughterhouse shutdowns increased , the whistleblower began to suspect that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being planned by the company : Pigs , in the whistleblower ’ s words , “ are now being killed for no reason.
” This realization of imminent mass extermination using methods that cause death slowly and painfully elevated the crisis of conscience to an entirely new level .
“ The weight of that was pretty heavy , to be honest , ” the whistleblower said .
Over the course of the last several months , the whistleblower began seeing Iowa Select implement new protocols and schedules for the transportation of pigs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing from other facility employees about plans for ventilation shutdown .
That was when the whistleblower concluded that the reality of killing healthy pigs en masse was coming “ very much sooner rather than later.
” The Iowa Select Farms whistleblower is far from being a coastal animal rights activist or vegan fanatic ideologically opposed to all animal agriculture .
The source is virtually the opposite of that industry-peddled caricature : someone who has been around farming , including industrial agriculture , for their entire life .
They are someone fully accustomed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food , often under repressive and inhumane conditions .
And yet , even with all of that mental conditioning and cultural immersion , the whistleblower was reaching the breaking point for what their conscience could withstand even before the Covid-19 pandemic .
Once the pandemic ushered in all-new moral atrocities , they could no longer morally justify staying silent and complicit about an industry that has long provided them and much of their community with employment .
Rather than becoming inured to these abuses as the result of daily exposure , the whistleblower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While this “ is an industry I ’ ve grown up around , ” the whistleblower said , “ I wasn ’ t becoming numb to it .
It was affecting me more and more every day : feeling the compassion and empathy for these animals that we were working with every day , then beginning to question ” the ethics and morality of industrial practices .
As The Intercept has often documented , pigs are social animals at least as intelligent and emotionally complex as dogs , who experience the full range @ @ @ @ @ @ @ playfulness , love , connection , pain , loss , suffering , and grief .
But at least prior to the coronavirus pandemic , even with all the immense suffering factory farm animals endure — bred by industrial agriculture to live in extreme deprivation , which often includes being confined for years in cages so small they can never even turn around , living in festering disease , and being genetically modified to be more profitable to the point that their own distorted bodies cause constant pain — the method of slaughter that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though not always ) free of sustained , enduring pain and agony .
But the pandemic , while having no effect on the inherent moral value of these sentient beings , has stripped them of their commercial worth .
And that has resulted in the industry using extermination methods outside of the standard processes , producing new ethical and moral horrors in an industry that was already suffused with them .
Iowa Select Farms brands itself as an ethical , animal-friendly company , and its website repeatedly emphasizes the company ’ s ethical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ functions , according to the site , “ with homegrown Iowa values .
We believe in doing the right thing every day , operating with character and integrity and being stewards of our resources.
” The company proclaims that it “ believe [ s ] by taking care of our animals , people , environment and communities we will achieve our mission of producing pork , responsibly.
” The motto that adorns the front page of its website is “ Producing Pork Responsibly ” and features bucolic images and videos touting the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ animals alike , including one page headlined , “ A True Passion for Animals Runs Deep.
” But the company is a money-making machine .
The nation ’ s fourth-largest pork producer , selling more than 5 million hogs each year principally to Tyson Foods and the Brazilian firm JBS , it has been privately owned by Jeff and Deb Hanson since its 1992 founding .
Upon learning of imminent exposure of its extermination methods due to its discovery of hidden cameras , the company is trying to spin the story in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the company spoke with dutifully painted the DxE investigators as the villains — its headline was “ Animal Activists Attack Iowa Select Farms ” — while downplaying or even justifying the extermination method used .
The company ’ s spokesperson repeated its us-as-the-real-victims narrative to a different industry newsletter : “ The thought of euthanizing entire herds is devastating .
Sadly , Iowa Select has been forced to make this heartbreaking decision for some of its herd.
” When forced to admit their mass extermination program , the factory farm industry insists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” — to create the impression that their animals are being gently put to sleep in socially familiar and ethically acceptable ways .
This term , by design , evokes the way an elderly family dog suffering from a painful and incurable disease is treated when brought to the neighborhood veterinarian ’ s office and administered a chemical that quickly and painlessly brings about unconsciousness in order to relieve the animal of suffering , all for the good of the beloved family pet .
This euphemism similarly triggers humanitarian sentiments by invoking the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obtain the assistance of doctors to enable humane and painless forms of suicide when they are suffering from incurable , degenerative diseases .
But in the context of ventilation shutdown , that term radically distorts the mortifying reality of what is being done at these factory farms — both because of the extreme , sustained suffering experienced by the animals subjected to it and because “ euthanasia ” implies the merciful killing of hopelessly sick and suffering living beings .
But the pigs that are being mass exterminated are not sick at all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not health but commercial value .
To defend its ventilation shutdown methods , Iowa Select claims , in the words of one of the industry newsletters , that “ veterinarians and production well-being professionals are overseeing the process to ensure accordance with the American Association of Swine Veterinarians and American Veterinary Medical Association.
” But that claim is questionable in several respects .
The veterinarians used by this industry may be dependent upon the very factory farms whose corporate conduct they are charged with “ overseeing ” and could thus be incentivized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way one would not rely on scientists working for the fossil fuel industry as a primary authority for assessing the environmental soundness of Exxon Mobil ’ s conduct .
The Iowa-based American Association of Swine Veterinarians receives ample financial support from corporations with involvement in the industrial agriculture .
The AASV did not respond to inquiries from The Intercept about its relationship to the pork industry or to its role in Iowa Select ’ s use of ventilation shutdown .
On May 19 — the same day Iowa Select discovered that DxE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shutdown in one of its barns — the AASV board of directors published a statement on Covid-19 and swine producers that said : “ If depopulation must be considered , veterinarians should reference the American Veterinary Medical Association ’ s Guidelines for the Depopulation of Animals.
” That manual describes the proper ethical protocols for numerous “ depopulation ” methods , dividing them into “ Preferred ” methods and ones that are only “ Permitted in Constrained Circumstances.
” Ventilation shutdown is classified by those guidelines not as preferred but as “ permitted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s May 19 statement proclaimed that with regard to depopulation procedures , “ priority should be given to those methods classified as ‘ Preferred ’ but the circumstances surrounding the Covid-19 processing disruption may require the use of methods classified as ‘ Permitted in Constrained Circumstances . '
” In effect , the AASV , at exactly the time Iowa Select discovered that its mass extermination of pigs had been recorded by animal rights investigators , publicly decreed that ventilation shutdown could be justified given the exigencies of the coronavirus pandemic .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Intercept and the testimonial from the Iowa Select whistleblower reveal that , contrary to Iowa Select ’ s claims , not everything is being done in compliance with the “ depopulation ” guidelines codified by the American Veterinary Medical Association ’ s Guidelines for the Depopulation of Animals , the manual which AASV suggests should be used for extermination programs justified in the name of Covid-19 .
That manual provides that “ depopulation methods , ” when carried out in the optimal manner , should “ result in rapid loss of consciousness and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Avoiding suffering for the animals is a primary metric to determine a method ’ s ethical propriety .
According to the manual : “ Physical methods must be skillfully executed to ensure a quick and humane death because failure to do so can cause significant stress , distress , and pain.
” The manual states that the most efficient way to avoid pain and suffering is sudden death , entailing the direct , trained application of violent force to each animal targeted for extermination : “ Physical methods that destroy or render nonfunctional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( eg , gunshot , captive bolt , cerebral induction of epileptiform activity in the brain [ eg , electric stunning ] , blunt force cranial trauma , and maceration ) produce instantaneous unconsciousness.
” The manual explicitly emphasizes that the more employees are required to administer direct violence — necessary for sudden death — the greater the risk to them of emotional and mental health injury : “ Physical methods usually require a more direct association of the operator with the animals , which can be offensive to , and upsetting for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can extend far beyond the facility employees themselves .
As the manual explains : “ Those making the decision to depopulate must be mindful of the emotional impact of the procedure on owners of the animals , laboratory technicians , conservation managers , emergency response personnel , veterinarians , and the community at large.
” While the manual approves of the use of ventilation shutdown for mass killing in certain limited circumstances — only when other , more merciful and ethical procedures are unavailable — the description makes clear how horrifying it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even when done in accordance with the most rigid protocols , because the animals do not die instantly but over time from a combination of suffocation and heat .
Worse , 100 percent mortality for the animals subjected to it is difficult to achieve : Circumstances that have resulted in VSD of modern swine facilities have resulted in the complete or partial depopulation of pigs housed in affected facilities .
When ventilation systems fail , “ pigs may suffer distress or death by what is commonly called ‘ suffocation ’ implying lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realistic terms , death may result from any combination of excessive temperature , CO2 , or toxic gases from slurry or manure below the barn… .
Ventilation shutdown involves closing up the house , shutting inlets , and turning off the fans .
Body heat from the herd raises the temperature in the house until animals die from hyperthermia .
Numerous variables may make the time to death of 100 % of animals in the barn subject to a range of times .
The age and size of the barn ; the insulation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; the ability to adequately seal fans , louvres , doors , and windows ; and the number and size of animals in the barn can make achieving temperature goals problematic… .
In the United Kingdom , a case study involving swine that experienced a ventilation failure event showed that 100 % mortality was not achieved within that particular barn design , even after 16 hours .
The manual states without qualification that “ failure to achieve 100 % mortality in depopulation is unacceptable.
” Yet , beyond other apparent deviations from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including a failure to introduce enough heat into the barn to kill most or all of the oxygen-deprived pigs — Iowa Select ’ s process , as demonstrated by both the video at the barn and the whistleblower ’ s revelations , has at least on some occasions not achieved 100 percent mortality , a failure the manual classifies as “ unacceptable.
” When this source first spoke to The Intercept , they indicated that they wanted to speak on the record about what they had been seeing and why they found it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their name and face on these denunciations .
Ultimately , however , the whistleblower decided that they could not subject themself and their family to the almost-certain extreme repercussions of denouncing an industry of unparalleled power in their state , as well as risking their employment in the middle of a job-killing pandemic .
“ Coming forward would cause a lot of pain and anguish with friends and family , ” the whistleblower said .
“ This industry encompasses everything that is home .
Everything around is here based off this very industry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s seeing friends , friends ’ parents and kids , all seeing you as the bad guy .
This industry has done a very good job with its PR campaign : No matter what , before anything is said , you ’ re going to be the bad guy.
” Iowa Select ’ s success in immediately shifting blame away from itself and onto the DxE investigators who were about to expose their cruel and inhumane practices — doing so literally on the same day the company discovered that its ventilation shutdown horror @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illustrates how well-grounded the whistleblower ’ s fears are .

This article and accompanying video include graphic images some readers may find disturbing.
Still: DxE investigation
Iowa’s largest pork producer, Iowa Select Farms, has been using a cruel and excruciating method to kill thousands of pigs that have become commercially worthless due to the coronavirus pandemic. As is true for so much of what the agricultural industry does, the company’s gruesome extermination of sentient animals that are emotionally complex and intelligent has been conducted entirely out of public view.
But The Intercept, as the result of an investigation by animal rights group Direct Action Everywhere, or DxE, has obtained video footage of the procedure and the resulting carnage that occurred at one of the company’s facilities in mid-May. Additionally, a whistleblower employed by Iowa Select has provided extensive details to The Intercept about the extraordinary methods now being employed to kill pigs — agonizingly and over the course of many hours — in increasingly large numbers.
What prompted both the DxE investigation and the whistleblower to come forward is Iowa Select’s recent adoption of the mass-extermination method known as “ventilation shutdown,” or VSD. Under this method, pigs at the company’s rural Grundy County facility are being “depopulated,” using the industry’s jargon, by sealing off all airways to their barns and inserting steam into them, intensifying the heat and humidity inside and leaving them to die overnight. Most pigs — though not all — die after hours of suffering from a combination of being suffocated and roasted to death. The recordings obtained by The Intercept include audio of the piercing cries of pigs as they succumb. The recordings also show that some pigs manage to survive the ordeal — but, on the morning after, Iowa Select dispatches armed workers to enter the barn to survey the mound of pig corpses for any lingering signs of life, and then use their bolt guns to extinguish any survivors.
The whistleblower told The Intercept that when Iowa Select began using the ventilation shutdown method in late April, it first experimented on a smaller group of hogs by just shutting off the airways into their barn and turning up the heat. Other employees told similar stories to DxE investigators. After those experiments failed — the oxygen-deprived pigs survived over the course of many hours, the whistleblower said, due to a failure to increase the heat to fatal levels — Iowa Select decided to begin injecting steam into the barns, to accelerate the accumulation of heat and humidity. That steam is visible in the video provided to The Intercept and is the culmination, at least thus far, of several attempts to perfect VSD. The whistleblower explained the process:
They shut the pit pans off, shut the ventilation fans off, and heat up the building. That’s what the plan is. It’s horrific as it is. It was first used on test cull sows: those were first given the VSD treatment. The first day they shut off all the fans and turned the heat up and the hottest they could get the building was 120 degrees. After four to five hours, none of the animals were dead. There was an attempt to induce steam into the building, along with the heat and the ventilation shutdown, and that is how they ultimately perfected their VSD operation. Every time they’ve been euthanizing the animals, it’s been a test in a sense. Piglets were killed off in a barn with gas generators.
The profit model of the agricultural industry depends, of course, on raising animals in ways that cause suffering for years and then ultimately killing them to convert them into meat. Though food lines are growing around the United States, the coronavirus pandemic has prompted factory farms to exterminate animals en masse because of the erosion of their commercial supply chains. Numerous slaughterhouses have been forced to close due to Covid-19 outbreaks among their insufficiently protected employees, and this has only increased the amount of “excess” animals the industry regards as worthless and disposable.
Rather than caring for these animals until pre-pandemic demand returns, or converting them into discounted or donated food for millions of people who have suddenly become unemployed and food insecure by caring for the animals until slaughterhouse capacity can accommodate them, many companies, including Iowa Select, have evidently made decisions driven exclusively by a goal to maximize profits. In sum, they are slaughtering these now “worthless” animals in vast numbers as fast as possible, using extermination methods that cause sustained suffering and agony, to avoid the costs of keeping them alive.
During the pandemic, mass slaughter has become commonplace at factory farms, even though many of these farms are not where large-scale killing is meant to occur. In normal times, the animals would be transported to slaughterhouses and killed there in ways that, at least in theory, minimize the cruelty by accelerating the death process. But mass killings that radically deviate from the normal slaughterhouse process are now rampant in this industry and are expected to increase. “At least two million animals have already reportedly been culled on farm, and that number is expected to rise,” The Guardian reported on April 29. Officials in Iowa “have warned that producers could be forced to kill 700,000 pigs a week due to meat plant slowdowns or closures.”
This mass extermination requires the use of life-extinguishing procedures which, prior to the pandemic, were not typically employed by this industry. And those procedures are anything but quick, painless, or humane, as this four-minute video produced by The Intercept demonstrates:
The Horrors of Ventilation Shutdown
The decision to kill healthy animals in unusually large numbers has led many factory farms to resort to methods that are novel and gruesome. The quickest and most merciful way to induce death for so many animals at once — shooting them in the head one by one — would be too emotionally traumatizing even for factory farm employees who are accustomed to raising animals in order to bring them to slaughter. Even when standard industrial methods of slaughter are used, factory farm work has been demonstrated to entail serious mental health harms for workers.
But the method of ventilation shutdown now being used at Iowa Select causes pigs to endure great anguish over many hours on their way to death. On the hidden audio recorders placed in the barn as part of DxE’s investigation, sustained screams of distress and agony are audible as the heat fills the building while the air supply is shut down. The deployment of armed workers to shoot any pigs who are clinging to life in the morning is designed to ensure 100 percent mortality. But the number of pigs in the barn is so great that standard methods to confirm death, such as pulse-checking, are not performed, making it quite possible that some pigs survived the ventilator shutdown, were not killed by bolt guns, and are therefore buried alive or crushed by the bulldozers that haul away the corpses.
An Iowa Select Farms worker on May 19, 2020, carrying a gun in a barn after ventilation shutdown has been used to kill “excess” pigs. Still: DxE investigation
Iowa Select has not responded to numerous questions submitted by The Intercept. But upon discovering that investigators from DxE had obtained video footage from inside one of its barns showing the suffering of pigs during this process, the company tried to preempt this reporting by admitting its use of VSD in an article published last week by a pork industry newsletter. “The thought of euthanizing entire herds is devastating,” a company spokesperson told the newsletter. “Sadly, Iowa Select has been forced to make this heartbreaking decision for some of its herd.”
To another industry outlet, the company “announced in a statement that they have been forced to euthanize some of its herd,” emphasizing not the pain endured by the animals that were exterminated, but the suffering of company executives: “‘It’s been hard on us to come to those decisions,’ says Pete Thomas, DVM at Iowa Select Farms.”
The video obtained during DxE’s investigation and provided to The Intercept viscerally conveys the inhumane cruelty of this extermination method. The video cameras placed inside the barn, along with audio recorders, were activated shortly after DxE investigators learned that a ventilation shutdown was scheduled for a particular night in mid-May.
Those video and audio devices recorded the start of the killing process, beginning with the sealing off of all airways, and continued all night as the pigs suffered and died. The devices continued recording through to the next morning, when Iowa Select employees entered the barn, finished the extermination process by shooting the pigs who managed to survive and then removed the corpses using bulldozers. The audio recorders document the noises of anguish emitted by the pigs during the procedure, as well as the sound of guns finishing off survivors. It also records discussions by Iowa Select Farms about what they were doing, followed by their eventual discovery that hidden cameras had captured everything that was done.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
In an interview with The Intercept, the whistleblowing employee of Iowa Select, who originally wanted to speak on the record but changed their mind due to fear of reprisals from the industry that dominates their state, described the abuses that prompted them to reach out to DxE even prior to the pandemic. The whistleblower recounted how their pre-Covid-19 anguish escalated significantly over the last several months, and how they were pushed over the limits of their conscience by witnessing the unparalleled horrors of their employer’s use of ventilation shutdowns.
Prior to the outbreak of the coronavirus, the whistleblower decided to covertly communicate with DxE investigators after reading a study published by the group on the inhumane and often illegal confinement of factory farm pigs in which they linger for years with no adequate space even to turn around. The conditions in which the Iowa Select pigs were kept — with nowhere near enough room to be considered humane by the whistleblower — was increasingly weighing on their conscience. The whistleblower explained to The Intercept that a “massive increase” in pig production over 2019 led to the already cramped space for pigs becoming even smaller. Despite being around farms for decades, the whistleblower could hardly bear to see what was happening. “It’s immoral, hard to see every single day,” they said.
Months ago, the whistleblower even began conducting research into regulatory requirements, after observing that the pigs were being stored in ways that appeared to them to be “double what is permitted” by applicable standards. But they quickly determined that the state would have little interest in taking action.
Indeed, the agricultural industry has long used its economic dominance to influence both political parties and the legislative process to enact laws and regulations with little purpose other than to maximize their profit margins and conceal from the public the realities of how they operate. The industry succeeded even to the point of inducing the enactment of now-notorious and constitutionally invalidated “ag-gag” laws, designed to punish various forms of transparency intended to show the public the realities of what takes place inside industrial farms. A short documentary produced by The Intercept last year revealed pervasive abuses in Iowa’s meat industry and how those abuses are protected and enabled by industry-dominated politicians who receive substantial donations and dutifully subject themselves to industry lobbyist control.
The whistleblower’s growing concerns about the ethics of this industry “quickly evolved” as the coronavirus pandemic began seriously affecting factory farms. The pandemic caused “massive backups,” the whistleblower said. As market gluts and slaughterhouse shutdowns increased, the whistleblower began to suspect that “massive kill-offs of healthy pigs” were being planned by the company: Pigs, in the whistleblower’s words, “are now being killed for no reason.”
This realization of imminent mass extermination using methods that cause death slowly and painfully elevated the crisis of conscience to an entirely new level. “The weight of that was pretty heavy, to be honest,” the whistleblower said. Over the course of the last several months, the whistleblower began seeing Iowa Select implement new protocols and schedules for the transportation of pigs, reviewing documents describing new procedures, and hearing from other facility employees about plans for ventilation shutdown. That was when the whistleblower concluded that the reality of killing healthy pigs en masse was coming “very much sooner rather than later.”
The Iowa Select Farms whistleblower is far from being a coastal animal rights activist or vegan fanatic ideologically opposed to all animal agriculture. The source is virtually the opposite of that industry-peddled caricature: someone who has been around farming, including industrial agriculture, for their entire life. They are someone fully accustomed to the raising and slaughtering of animals for food, often under repressive and inhumane conditions. And yet, even with all of that mental conditioning and cultural immersion, the whistleblower was reaching the breaking point for what their conscience could withstand even before the Covid-19 pandemic. Once the pandemic ushered in all-new moral atrocities, they could no longer morally justify staying silent and complicit about an industry that has long provided them and much of their community with employment.
Rather than becoming inured to these abuses as the result of daily exposure, the whistleblower was becoming increasingly sickened by them. While this “is an industry I’ve grown up around,” the whistleblower said, “I wasn’t becoming numb to it. It was affecting me more and more every day: feeling the compassion and empathy for these animals that we were working with every day, then beginning to question” the ethics and morality of industrial practices.
As The Intercept has often documented, pigs are social animals at least as intelligent and emotionally complex as dogs, who experience the full range of emotions from life: joy, playfulness, love, connection, pain, loss, suffering, and grief. But at least prior to the coronavirus pandemic, even with all the immense suffering factory farm animals endure — bred by industrial agriculture to live in extreme deprivation, which often includes being confined for years in cages so small they can never even turn around, living in festering disease, and being genetically modified to be more profitable to the point that their own distorted bodies cause constant pain — the method of slaughter that finally ends their suffering is typically (though not always) free of sustained, enduring pain and agony.
But the pandemic, while having no effect on the inherent moral value of these sentient beings, has stripped them of their commercial worth. And that has resulted in the industry using extermination methods outside of the standard processes, producing new ethical and moral horrors in an industry that was already suffused with them.
Branding Versus Reality
Iowa Select Farms brands itself as an ethical, animal-friendly company, and its website repeatedly emphasizes the company’s ethical concern for its animals. The company functions, according to the site, “with homegrown Iowa values. We believe in doing the right thing every day, operating with character and integrity and being stewards of our resources.”
The company proclaims that it “believe[s] by taking care of our animals, people, environment and communities we will achieve our mission of producing pork, responsibly.” The motto that adorns the front page of its website is “Producing Pork Responsibly” and features bucolic images and videos touting the company’s compassion to its employees and animals alike, including one page headlined, “A True Passion for Animals Runs Deep.”
But the company is a money-making machine. The nation’s fourth-largest pork producer, selling more than 5 million hogs each year principally to Tyson Foods and the Brazilian firm JBS, it has been privately owned by Jeff and Deb Hanson since its 1992 founding.
Upon learning of imminent exposure of its extermination methods due to its discovery of hidden cameras, the company is trying to spin the story in its favor. One of the industry newsletters that the company spoke with dutifully painted the DxE investigators as the villains — its headline was “Animal Activists Attack Iowa Select Farms” — while downplaying or even justifying the extermination method used. The company’s spokesperson repeated its us-as-the-real-victims narrative to a different industry newsletter: “The thought of euthanizing entire herds is devastating. Sadly, Iowa Select has been forced to make this heartbreaking decision for some of its herd.”
When forced to admit their mass extermination program, the factory farm industry insists on a pleasant-sounding euphemism — “euthanizing” — to create the impression that their animals are being gently put to sleep in socially familiar and ethically acceptable ways. This term, by design, evokes the way an elderly family dog suffering from a painful and incurable disease is treated when brought to the neighborhood veterinarian’s office and administered a chemical that quickly and painlessly brings about unconsciousness in order to relieve the animal of suffering, all for the good of the beloved family pet. This euphemism similarly triggers humanitarian sentiments by invoking the increasingly accepted right of humans to legally obtain the assistance of doctors to enable humane and painless forms of suicide when they are suffering from incurable, degenerative diseases.
But in the context of ventilation shutdown, that term radically distorts the mortifying reality of what is being done at these factory farms — both because of the extreme, sustained suffering experienced by the animals subjected to it and because “euthanasia” implies the merciful killing of hopelessly sick and suffering living beings. But the pigs that are being mass exterminated are not sick at all but perfectly well; what they lack is not health but commercial value.
Share Your Coronavirus Story Click here to learn about contacting a reporter securely, or email us at coronavirus@theintercept.com
To defend its ventilation shutdown methods, Iowa Select claims, in the words of one of the industry newsletters, that “veterinarians and production well-being professionals are overseeing the process to ensure accordance with the American Association of Swine Veterinarians and American Veterinary Medical Association.” But that claim is questionable in several respects.
The veterinarians used by this industry may be dependent upon the very factory farms whose corporate conduct they are charged with “overseeing” and could thus be incentivized to sanction those practices, similar to the way one would not rely on scientists working for the fossil fuel industry as a primary authority for assessing the environmental soundness of Exxon Mobil’s conduct. The Iowa-based American Association of Swine Veterinarians receives ample financial support from corporations with involvement in the industrial agriculture. The AASV did not respond to inquiries from The Intercept about its relationship to the pork industry or to its role in Iowa Select’s use of ventilation shutdown.
On May 19 — the same day Iowa Select discovered that DxE investigators had obtained video footage of ventilation shutdown in one of its barns — the AASV board of directors published a statement on Covid-19 and swine producers that said: “If depopulation must be considered, veterinarians should reference the American Veterinary Medical Association’s Guidelines for the Depopulation of Animals.” That manual describes the proper ethical protocols for numerous “depopulation” methods, dividing them into “Preferred” methods and ones that are only “Permitted in Constrained Circumstances.”
Ventilation shutdown is classified by those guidelines not as preferred but as “permitted in constrained circumstances.” The AASV’s May 19 statement proclaimed that with regard to depopulation procedures, “priority should be given to those methods classified as ‘Preferred’ but the circumstances surrounding the Covid-19 processing disruption may require the use of methods classified as ‘Permitted in Constrained Circumstances.'” In effect, the AASV, at exactly the time Iowa Select discovered that its mass extermination of pigs had been recorded by animal rights investigators, publicly decreed that ventilation shutdown could be justified given the exigencies of the coronavirus pandemic.
Still: DxE investigation
But both the video footage obtained by The Intercept and the testimonial from the Iowa Select whistleblower reveal that, contrary to Iowa Select’s claims, not everything is being done in compliance with the “depopulation” guidelines codified by the American Veterinary Medical Association’s Guidelines for the Depopulation of Animals, the manual which AASV suggests should be used for extermination programs justified in the name of Covid-19.
That manual provides that “depopulation methods,” when carried out in the optimal manner, should “result in rapid loss of consciousness and the associated loss of brain function.” Avoiding suffering for the animals is a primary metric to determine a method’s ethical propriety. According to the manual: “Physical methods must be skillfully executed to ensure a quick and humane death because failure to do so can cause significant stress, distress, and pain.”
The manual states that the most efficient way to avoid pain and suffering is sudden death, entailing the direct, trained application of violent force to each animal targeted for extermination: “Physical methods that destroy or render nonfunctional the brain regions responsible for cortical integration (eg, gunshot, captive bolt, cerebral induction of epileptiform activity in the brain [eg, electric stunning], blunt force cranial trauma, and maceration) produce instantaneous unconsciousness.”
The manual explicitly emphasizes that the more employees are required to administer direct violence — necessary for sudden death — the greater the risk to them of emotional and mental health injury: “Physical methods usually require a more direct association of the operator with the animals, which can be offensive to, and upsetting for, the operator.” That emotional injury can extend far beyond the facility employees themselves. As the manual explains: “Those making the decision to depopulate must be mindful of the emotional impact of the procedure on owners of the animals, laboratory technicians, conservation managers, emergency response personnel, veterinarians, and the community at large.”
While the manual approves of the use of ventilation shutdown for mass killing in certain limited circumstances — only when other, more merciful and ethical procedures are unavailable — the description makes clear how horrifying it is, and how much suffering it entails, even when done in accordance with the most rigid protocols, because the animals do not die instantly but over time from a combination of suffocation and heat. Worse, 100 percent mortality for the animals subjected to it is difficult to achieve:
Circumstances that have resulted in VSD of modern swine facilities have resulted in the complete or partial depopulation of pigs housed in affected facilities. When ventilation systems fail, “pigs may suffer distress or death by what is commonly called ‘suffocation’ implying lack of oxygen or excessive CO2.” In realistic terms, death may result from any combination of excessive temperature, CO2, or toxic gases from slurry or manure below the barn…. Ventilation shutdown involves closing up the house, shutting inlets, and turning off the fans. Body heat from the herd raises the temperature in the house until animals die from hyperthermia. Numerous variables may make the time to death of 100% of animals in the barn subject to a range of times. The age and size of the barn; the insulation of the barn; the ventilation system; the ability to adequately seal fans, louvres, doors, and windows; and the number and size of animals in the barn can make achieving temperature goals problematic…. In the United Kingdom, a case study involving swine that experienced a ventilation failure event showed that 100% mortality was not achieved within that particular barn design, even after 16 hours.
The manual states without qualification that “failure to achieve 100% mortality in depopulation is unacceptable.” Yet, beyond other apparent deviations from the manual on at least some occasions — including a failure to introduce enough heat into the barn to kill most or all of the oxygen-deprived pigs — Iowa Select’s process, as demonstrated by both the video at the barn and the whistleblower’s revelations, has at least on some occasions not achieved 100 percent mortality, a failure the manual classifies as “unacceptable.”
When this source first spoke to The Intercept, they indicated that they wanted to speak on the record about what they had been seeing and why they found it so unconscionable. They wanted to put their name and face on these denunciations. Ultimately, however, the whistleblower decided that they could not subject themself and their family to the almost-certain extreme repercussions of denouncing an industry of unparalleled power in their state, as well as risking their employment in the middle of a job-killing pandemic.
“Coming forward would cause a lot of pain and anguish with friends and family,” the whistleblower said. “This industry encompasses everything that is home. Everything around is here based off this very industry, and with that, it’s seeing friends, friends’ parents and kids, all seeing you as the bad guy. This industry has done a very good job with its PR campaign: No matter what, before anything is said, you’re going to be the bad guy.”
Iowa Select’s success in immediately shifting blame away from itself and onto the DxE investigators who were about to expose their cruel and inhumane practices — doing so literally on the same day the company discovered that its ventilation shutdown horror show had been recorded on video — illustrates how well-grounded the whistleblower’s fears are.
Even opting for anonymity to reveal these industry secrets, as the source well knows, is a risky proposition in an extremely well-funded and powerful industry with a demonstrated intent and ability to punish anyone who shines a light on what they do. Along with the DxE investigators who work in a legal regime where the criminals are deemed to be not those who impose systemic cruelty on animals but those who expose it, the whistleblower here is aware of the risks they have taken by coming forward, but told The Intercept that the mandates of conscience compelled the decision to do so.
Watch the new episode of SYSTEM UPDATE about this article, including interviews with the lead DxE investigator and the Iowa Select Farms whistleblower, on The Intercept’s YouTube channel at 7:00 p.m. ET.


theintercept--2020-05-29--Racist History Behind Trump's Threat to Shoot Minneapolis Protesters Spurs Twitter to Act

threat to have protesters in Minneapolis shot by the military , issued in a tweet early Friday morning , prompted Twitter to restrict access to the president ’ s message , ruling that it violated the social network ’ s policy against “ glorifying violence.
” In the tweet , posted just before 1 a.m. Eastern Time , Trump first wrote that “ THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd , ” the black man whose killing on Monday by a Minneapolis police officer who knelt on his throat as he gasped for air has prompted protests and rage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soldiers open fire unless local authorities in Minneapolis regain control , adding , “ when the looting starts , the shooting starts.
” The tweet was soon covered by an initial warning message , which said the president ’ s comments violated the platform ’ s rules , but had not been removed because “ it may be in the public ’ s interest ” to be able to read them .
As Twitter noted in its explanation of why it had added “ a public interest notice ” to the tweet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ older Americans who might remember where they first heard it .
The words were spoken in 1967 by Walter Headley , a racist Miami police chief , who told reporters that his officers would open fire if looting broke out in the city ’ s predominantly black neighborhoods .
According to a contemporary news report , from December 28 , 1967 , when Headley announced that he was declaring war on “ young hoodlums , from 15 to 21 , who have taken advantage of the civil rights campaign , ” he added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being accused of police brutality.
” The goal of his crackdown on Miami ’ s black community , Headley said , was to unleash “ an epidemic of law and order.
” Headley repeated the looting and shooting threat the following year when protests in the Liberty City neighborhood devolved into riots during that summer ’ s Republican National Convention in Miami , which nominated Richard Nixon for the presidency .
As NPR reports , the pro-segregation presidential candidate George Wallace also used the looting and shooting phrase on the campaign trail in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summer were prompted , in part , by anger over Headley ’ s “ stop and frisk ” policy targeting black citizens and his preference for “ shotguns and dogs ” in the policing of a community demanding civil rights .
As Jonathan Myerson Katz noted , the protests turned violent when a white man drove through a black rally in a car with a “ Wallace for President ” bumper sticker on the evening of Aug. 7 , 1968 .
The police opened fire with tear gas and bullets .
Three people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black reporter for The Washington Post , Hollie West , was arrested in Liberty City by officers who refused to acknowledge his press credentials .
Trump ’ s reference to Headley and/or Wallace was unlikely to have been accidental .
In 2016 , Trump told a New York Times reporter that his own acceptance speech was inspired by Nixon ’ s in 1968 .
“ I think what Nixon understood is that when the world is falling apart , people want a strong leader whose highest priority is protecting America first , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad , really bad .
And it ’ s really bad now .
Americans feel like it ’ s chaos again.
” “ This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line , its connection to violence , and the risk it could inspire similar actions today , ” the company said in a thread explaining its decision .
“ We ’ ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts , but have kept the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance.
” In line with Twitter ’ s policy on tweets that it would have removed from the platform but for the public interest exception , the company added that “ engagements with the Tweet will be limited .
People will be able to Retweet with Comment , but will not be able to Like , Reply or Retweet it.
” The mayor of Minneapolis , Jacob Frey , was asked to respond to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier one calling him “ very weak , ” at a news conference early on Friday .
Frey shook his head in disbelief as the tweets were read to him .
“ Well , let me say this , ” Frey responded .
“ Weakness is refusing to take responsibility for your own actions .
Weakness is pointing your finger at somebody else during a time of crisis .
Donald Trump knows nothing about the strength of Minneapolis .
We are strong as hell .
Is this a difficult time period ?
Yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we ’ re going to get through this.
” Later on Friday , after the police officer seen on video killing Floyd , Derek Chauvin , was arrested and charged with third-degree murder and manslaughter , the mayor described that “ as an essential first step ” in a tweet of his own .
“ His goal is to polarize , to destabilize local government and inflame racist urges , ” she added .
“ And we can not , absolutely not , let him prevail .
And I will code what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
It ’ s two words , it begins with ‘ F ’ and it ends with ‘ you.
’ I will not remain silent while this man cynically tries to turn this incredibly painful moment into one for his own political gain.
” Twitter ’ s decision to draw a line for Trump came just hours after he issued an executive order threatening to make it easier for users to file lawsuits against the company for perceived political bias .
The order was a transparent act of retaliation against the company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tweet in which Trump made a range of false claims about plans for California to make it easier for registered voters to vote by mail during the ongoing pandemic .
Jameel Jaffer , the executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University , told Adweek that the executive order itself violated the First Amendment because it was an act of government retaliation .
“ The order was born unconstitutional because it was issued in retaliation for Twitter ’ s fact-checking of President Trump ’ s tweets , ” Jaffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter ’ s right to respond to the president ’ s speech , including by attaching warnings to tweets that glorify violence , ” Jaffer said in a statement sent to The Intercept .
“ Fundamentally this dispute is about whether Twitter has the right to disagree with , criticize , and respond to the president .
Obviously , it does .
It is remarkable and truly chilling that the president and his advisers seem to believe otherwise.
” Jaffer ’ s colleague Katie Fallow , a senior attorney at the First Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeared to have been added to the order without much review , “ make the retaliatory motive even clearer.
” “ Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias , ” one part of the order reads .
“ As has been reported , Twitter seems never to have placed such a label on another politician ’ s tweet.
” What ’ s odd , as Fallow notes , is that the order references “ another politician ” without saying that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here is Trump , although that is quite clear from the context .
Another less than subtle hint is that the order throws in a gratuitous attack on the company ’ s failure to label tweets by Rep. Adam Schiff , who led the impeachment of Trump , in which he supposedly “ mislead his followers by peddling the long-disproved Russian Collusion Hoax , and Twitter did not flag those tweets.
” Updated : Friday , May 29 , 12:45 p.m. PDT This article was updated with a new headline and more details @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to report the arrest of the police officer who killed George Floyd , as well as new comments from the mayors off Minneapolis and Chicago , and President Donald Trump ’ s failure to take any questions during a White House news conference .

Donald Trump’s bloodthirsty threat to have protesters in Minneapolis shot by the military, issued in a tweet early Friday morning, prompted Twitter to restrict access to the president’s message, ruling that it violated the social network’s policy against “glorifying violence.”
In the tweet, posted just before 1 a.m. Eastern Time, Trump first wrote that “THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd,” the black man whose killing on Monday by a Minneapolis police officer who knelt on his throat as he gasped for air has prompted protests and rage. The president then threatened to have soldiers open fire unless local authorities in Minneapolis regain control, adding, “when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”
The tweet was soon covered by an initial warning message, which said the president’s comments violated the platform’s rules, but had not been removed because “it may be in the public’s interest” to be able to read them.
Readers who clicked past that screen were able to read the inflammatory tweet, but with the warning message above it.
As Twitter noted in its explanation of why it had added “a public interest notice” to the tweet, that last phrase was even uglier to older Americans who might remember where they first heard it. The words were spoken in 1967 by Walter Headley, a racist Miami police chief, who told reporters that his officers would open fire if looting broke out in the city’s predominantly black neighborhoods.
According to a contemporary news report, from December 28, 1967, when Headley announced that he was declaring war on “young hoodlums, from 15 to 21, who have taken advantage of the civil rights campaign,” he added, “we don’t mind being accused of police brutality.” The goal of his crackdown on Miami’s black community, Headley said, was to unleash “an epidemic of law and order.”
Headley repeated the looting and shooting threat the following year when protests in the Liberty City neighborhood devolved into riots during that summer’s Republican National Convention in Miami, which nominated Richard Nixon for the presidency.
As NPR reports, the pro-segregation presidential candidate George Wallace also used the looting and shooting phrase on the campaign trail in 1968.
The protests in Miami that summer were prompted, in part, by anger over Headley’s “stop and frisk” policy targeting black citizens and his preference for “shotguns and dogs” in the policing of a community demanding civil rights.
As Jonathan Myerson Katz noted, the protests turned violent when a white man drove through a black rally in a car with a “Wallace for President” bumper sticker on the evening of Aug. 7, 1968. The police opened fire with tear gas and bullets. Three people were killed by the police and a black reporter for The Washington Post, Hollie West, was arrested in Liberty City by officers who refused to acknowledge his press credentials.
Trump’s reference to Headley and/or Wallace was unlikely to have been accidental. In 2016, Trump told a New York Times reporter that his own acceptance speech was inspired by Nixon’s in 1968. “I think what Nixon understood is that when the world is falling apart, people want a strong leader whose highest priority is protecting America first,” Trump said. “The 60s were bad, really bad. And it’s really bad now. Americans feel like it’s chaos again.”
“This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today,” the company said in a thread explaining its decision. “We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance.”
In line with Twitter’s policy on tweets that it would have removed from the platform but for the public interest exception, the company added that “engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
The mayor of Minneapolis, Jacob Frey, was asked to respond to the president’s tweet, and an earlier one calling him “very weak,” at a news conference early on Friday.
Frey shook his head in disbelief as the tweets were read to him.
Mayor Frey responds to the President’s tweets: Weakness is refusing to take responsibility for your own actions. Weakness is pointing your finger at somebody else during a time of crisis. Donald Trump knows nothing about the strength of Minneapolis. We are strong as hell.. pic.twitter.com/BtMyjrA6on — Acyn (@Acyn) May 29, 2020
“Well, let me say this,” Frey responded. “Weakness is refusing to take responsibility for your own actions. Weakness is pointing your finger at somebody else during a time of crisis. Donald Trump knows nothing about the strength of Minneapolis. We are strong as hell. Is this a difficult time period? Yes. But you better be damn sure that we’re going to get through this.”
Later on Friday, after the police officer seen on video killing Floyd, Derek Chauvin, was arrested and charged with third-degree murder and manslaughter, the mayor described that “as an essential first step” in a tweet of his own.
The man who killed George Floyd has been charged with murder. This an essential first step on a much longer road toward justice and healing our city. — Mayor Jacob Frey (@MayorFrey) May 29, 2020
Trump, who had been expected to address the killing of Floyd, and his own provocative taunt, at a White House news conference, instead confined his remarks to inflaming tensions with China, by changing the terms of the U.S. relationship to Hong Kong and declaring a full withdrawal from the World Health Organization, before departing without taking a single question.
The President escapes his own press conference to evade questions on Minneapolis pic.twitter.com/e7jKzlvlTL — Acyn (@Acyn) May 29, 2020
His administration did, however, devote some time to trying to dodge the Twitter restriction, by using the White House Twitter feed to quote the president’s inflammatory rhetoric. That White House tweet was soon restricted too, with the same warning label.
Anger over Trump’s rhetoric spread widely on Friday. Chicago’s Mayor Lori Lightfoot called Trump’s comment “profoundly dangerous.”
Lori Lightfoot not holding back on Trump! pic.twitter.com/rNOVT8D42N — ???????? ?? ? (@_MarcusD3_) May 29, 2020
“His goal is to polarize, to destabilize local government and inflame racist urges,” she added. “And we cannot, absolutely not, let him prevail. And I will code what I really want to say to Donald Trump. It’s two words, it begins with ‘F’ and it ends with ‘you.’ I will not remain silent while this man cynically tries to turn this incredibly painful moment into one for his own political gain.”
Twitter’s decision to draw a line for Trump came just hours after he issued an executive order threatening to make it easier for users to file lawsuits against the company for perceived political bias. The order was a transparent act of retaliation against the company for having appended a fact-checking note to a tweet in which Trump made a range of false claims about plans for California to make it easier for registered voters to vote by mail during the ongoing pandemic.
Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, told Adweek that the executive order itself violated the First Amendment because it was an act of government retaliation. “The order was born unconstitutional because it was issued in retaliation for Twitter’s fact-checking of President Trump’s tweets,” Jaffer said.
“The First Amendment protects Twitter’s right to respond to the president’s speech, including by attaching warnings to tweets that glorify violence,” Jaffer said in a statement sent to The Intercept. “Fundamentally this dispute is about whether Twitter has the right to disagree with, criticize, and respond to the president. Obviously, it does. It is remarkable and truly chilling that the president and his advisers seem to believe otherwise.”
Jaffer’s colleague Katie Fallow, a senior attorney at the First Amendment Institute, noted that unusual language that appeared to have been added to the order without much review, “make the retaliatory motive even clearer.”
Exhibit one million in 1st Amendment claim of government retaliation. https://t.co/tYq8cfFhXS — Katie Fallow (@KatieFallow) May 28, 2020
“Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias,” one part of the order reads. “As has been reported, Twitter seems never to have placed such a label on another politician’s tweet.”
What’s odd, as Fallow notes, is that the order references “another politician” without saying that the first politician it is concerned with here is Trump, although that is quite clear from the context. Another less than subtle hint is that the order throws in a gratuitous attack on the company’s failure to label tweets by Rep. Adam Schiff, who led the impeachment of Trump, in which he supposedly “mislead his followers by peddling the long-disproved Russian Collusion Hoax, and Twitter did not flag those tweets.”
Updated: Friday, May 29, 12:45 p.m. PDT
This article was updated with a new headline and more details about the events on 1968, and to report the arrest of the police officer who killed George Floyd, as well as new comments from the mayors off Minneapolis and Chicago, and President Donald Trump’s failure to take any questions during a White House news conference.


theintercept--2020-05-30--USAID Faces Mounting Pressure to Remove Latest Trump Appointee With History of Islamophobic Remarks

the Trump administration made an ironic choice to fill the post of religious freedom adviser at the U.S. Agency for International Development : a man who has stated publicly that he considers Muslims to be followers of a “ barbaric cult ” and posted articles on social media endorsing the Chinese government ’ s crackdown on their Uighur Muslim minority .
The appointee to the USAID position is Mark Kevin Lloyd , a little-known former tea party activist , the Washington Post reported earlier this week .
As a private citizen , Lloyd had not exactly been shy about sharing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from his social media and past public commentary include allegations that former President Barack Obama was a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and that Muslims in general were dangerous extremists who needed to be suppressed .
It ’ s not clear , however , what in Lloyd ’ s background qualifies him as an authority on religious freedom .
While his appointment to a role supposedly involving defending religious freedom worldwide may be particularly cynical , Lloyd is far from being the first open Islamophobe to be handed power by the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being the most senior one .
Before he became known in the media “ the worst secretary of state ever , ” Mike Pompeo was close ally to some of the most extreme anti-Muslim activists in the United States and had falsely claimed that American Muslims were silent about condemning terrorism .
The Trump-appointed acting director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services , Ken Cuccinelli , had also come under fire for praising commentary about Muslims by Brigitte Gabriel , well known as one of America ’ s most prominent anti-Muslim activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former national security adviser John Bolton , and many others who have been part of the administration have held similar views and helped to make them policy under Trump .
American Muslim civil rights activists say that these policy appointments are part of a deliberate strategy of handing people with extreme anti-Muslim beliefs the levers of government power .
Rather than an oversight , judging by the Trump administration ’ s hiring record to date , Lloyd ’ s flagrant anti-Muslim commentary may have helped recommend him for his new role .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of vetting or about the administration not doing a good job researching candidates , ” said Wa ’ el Alzayat , a former State Department official and head of Emgage , an American-Muslim advocacy organization .
“ They are picking people who fit a certain profile and who hold certain beliefs and views.
” Lloyd ’ s appointment , Alzayat has been circulating a letter among other civil rights organizations and addressed to USAID Acting Director John Barsa , calling on him to remove Lloyd from the position .
The letter notes that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article celebrating the Chinese government ’ s persecution of Uighur Muslims , calling it “ particularly abhorrent behavior for someone with a primary responsibility of protecting religious freedoms in our country and world.
” The Trump administration may have to strike a balance between its antipathy to China and its antipathy toward Muslims , in general .
As part of the escalating war of words between the two powers , the U.S. has been highlighting Chinese abuses of its Uighur Muslim minority — millions of whom are alleged to have been interned in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government .
This week the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution sanctioning officials involved in the suppression of Uighur Muslims .
More such measures are likely as the rivalry between the two countries intensifies .
Having someone like Lloyd in charge of highlighting Chinese abuses of religious freedom might open the U.S. up to charges of hypocrisy .
And , while nothing in the U.S. compares with what is happening in Xinjiang right now , there is still much to be alarmed about .
Under the Trump administration , the notorious “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promised as a candidate in 2015 has remained in place after being upheld under judicial challenge .
Many of the fiercest opponents of Muslims in American life have found a warm welcome in the White House .
Trump himself regularly uses his platform as the most powerful elected official on Earth to promote derogatory anti-Muslim conspiracies and make dark insinuations about American Muslim politicians .
In many ways , it is a depressing culmination of trends that have been building in U.S. politics for years — even while Muslims appear to be experiencing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ culture .
In a statement about Lloyd ’ s appointment , Madihha Ahussain , special counsel for the civil rights group Muslim Advocates , called for USAID to reverse his hiring while highlighting the consistent trend of anti-Muslim policymaking by the Trump administration .
“ Especially during a global pandemic , it is a cruel joke for USAID , an agency tasked with overseeing foreign aid and development efforts , to name an anti-Muslim bigot as a religious freedom adviser , ” Ahussain said in a press release .
“ As we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued employment of anti-Muslim activists like Stephen Miller and Ken Cuccinelli and even President Trump ’ s own attacks on Muslim elected officials , it is clear that anti-Muslim bigotry has a home in the Trump administration .
”

This week, the Trump administration made an ironic choice to fill the post of religious freedom adviser at the U.S. Agency for International Development: a man who has stated publicly that he considers Muslims to be followers of a “barbaric cult” and posted articles on social media endorsing the Chinese government’s crackdown on their Uighur Muslim minority. The appointee to the USAID position is Mark Kevin Lloyd, a little-known former tea party activist, the Washington Post reported earlier this week.
As a private citizen, Lloyd had not exactly been shy about sharing his views. Some of the highlights from his social media and past public commentary include allegations that former President Barack Obama was a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood and that Muslims in general were dangerous extremists who needed to be suppressed. It’s not clear, however, what in Lloyd’s background qualifies him as an authority on religious freedom.
“They are picking people who fit a certain profile and who hold certain beliefs and views.”
While his appointment to a role supposedly involving defending religious freedom worldwide may be particularly cynical, Lloyd is far from being the first open Islamophobe to be handed power by the Trump administration. He’s also far from being the most senior one.
Before he became known in the media “the worst secretary of state ever,” Mike Pompeo was close ally to some of the most extreme anti-Muslim activists in the United States and had falsely claimed that American Muslims were silent about condemning terrorism. The Trump-appointed acting director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ken Cuccinelli, had also come under fire for praising commentary about Muslims by Brigitte Gabriel, well known as one of America’s most prominent anti-Muslim activists. White House adviser Stephen Miller, former national security adviser John Bolton, and many others who have been part of the administration have held similar views and helped to make them policy under Trump.
American Muslim civil rights activists say that these policy appointments are part of a deliberate strategy of handing people with extreme anti-Muslim beliefs the levers of government power. Rather than an oversight, judging by the Trump administration’s hiring record to date, Lloyd’s flagrant anti-Muslim commentary may have helped recommend him for his new role.
“This isn’t simply about failures of vetting or about the administration not doing a good job researching candidates,” said Wa’el Alzayat, a former State Department official and head of Emgage, an American-Muslim advocacy organization. “They are picking people who fit a certain profile and who hold certain beliefs and views.”
In response to Lloyd’s appointment, Alzayat has been circulating a letter among other civil rights organizations and addressed to USAID Acting Director John Barsa, calling on him to remove Lloyd from the position. The letter notes that Lloyd had shared on social media an article celebrating the Chinese government’s persecution of Uighur Muslims, calling it “particularly abhorrent behavior for someone with a primary responsibility of protecting religious freedoms in our country and world.”
The Trump administration may have to strike a balance between its antipathy to China and its antipathy toward Muslims, in general. As part of the escalating war of words between the two powers, the U.S. has been highlighting Chinese abuses of its Uighur Muslim minority — millions of whom are alleged to have been interned in concentration camps by the Chinese Community Party-led government. This week the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a resolution sanctioning officials involved in the suppression of Uighur Muslims. More such measures are likely as the rivalry between the two countries intensifies.
Having someone like Lloyd in charge of highlighting Chinese abuses of religious freedom might open the U.S. up to charges of hypocrisy. And, while nothing in the U.S. compares with what is happening in Xinjiang right now, there is still much to be alarmed about.
“It is clear that anti-Muslim bigotry has a home in the Trump administration.”
Under the Trump administration, the notorious “Muslim ban” policy that Trump first promised as a candidate in 2015 has remained in place after being upheld under judicial challenge. Many of the fiercest opponents of Muslims in American life have found a warm welcome in the White House. Trump himself regularly uses his platform as the most powerful elected official on Earth to promote derogatory anti-Muslim conspiracies and make dark insinuations about American Muslim politicians. In many ways, it is a depressing culmination of trends that have been building in U.S. politics for years — even while Muslims appear to be experiencing something of a renaissance in American popular culture.
In a statement about Lloyd’s appointment, Madihha Ahussain, special counsel for the civil rights group Muslim Advocates, called for USAID to reverse his hiring while highlighting the consistent trend of anti-Muslim policymaking by the Trump administration.
“Especially during a global pandemic, it is a cruel joke for USAID, an agency tasked with overseeing foreign aid and development efforts, to name an anti-Muslim bigot as a religious freedom adviser,” Ahussain said in a press release. “As we have seen through the Muslim Ban, the continued employment of anti-Muslim activists like Stephen Miller and Ken Cuccinelli and even President Trump’s own attacks on Muslim elected officials, it is clear that anti-Muslim bigotry has a home in the Trump administration.”


theintercept--2020-05-30--Jair Bolsonaro Let Coronavirus Ravage Brazil. A Favela Is Taking Matters Into Its Own Hands.

Wait !
Before you go on about your day , ask yourself : How likely is it that the story @ @ @ @ @ been produced by a different news outlet if The Intercept hadn ’ t done it @ @ @ @ @ of media would look like without The Intercept .
Who would hold party elites accountable @ @ @ @ @ to have ?
How many covert wars , miscarriages of justice , and dystopian technologies @ @ @ @ @ reporters weren ’ t on the beat ?
The kind of reporting we do is @ @ @ @ @ it is not easy , cheap , or profitable .
The Intercept is an independent @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t have ads , so we depend on our members — 35,000 and @ @ @ @ @ hold the powerful to account .
Joining is simple and doesn ’ t need to @ @ @ @ @ can become a sustaining member for as little as $ 3 or $ 5 a @ @ @ @ @ all it takes to support the journalism you rely on .

U.S. Official Hints at Possible Plea Deal for Julian Assange
The U.S. ambassador to Australia said there could be a “resolution” to the Justice Department’s pursuit of Assange.