
Army choosing ‘to protect its bureaucratic a**' rather than providing collision avoidance report, Sen. Ted Cruz says
The Army has not yet provided Congress with records showing when they used a collision avoidance technology that was turned off during January's midair collision that killed 67 people, Sen. Ted Cruz, chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, said during a hearing Wednesday.
'If another Black Hawk helicopter strikes another passenger jet and murders 67 people because the Army refused to change its policy of turning off ADS-B Out and rather than act proactively to protect people's lives - the Army chose to protect its bureaucratic a** - those deaths will be on the Army's hands,' Cruz said.
The military was given broad leeway by the Federal Aviation Administration to operate its aircraft with Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast technology switched off to protect mission security.
Cruz said since a hearing on the NTSB's preliminary report last week, the Army has not provided an August 9, 2024, memo titled 'ADS-B Out Off Operations in the National Airspace.' Civilian and military aircraft use the technology, which broadcasts an aircraft's location, altitude and other key factors while monitoring other aircraft around it. The Army often turns ADS-B off when flying around Washington, DC – including when in the airspace around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.
'It begs the question, 'What doesn't the Army want Congress or the American people to know about why it was flying partially blind to other aircraft and air traffic controllers near DCA,'' Cruz said. 'If the Army continues to stonewall, they will face a subpoena from this committee.'
Brig. Gen. Matthew Braman testified during a Senate hearing last week that the status of the operation and functionality of the ADS-B Out system in the helicopter involved in the mid-air collision was still under investigation, but the crew was approved to operate with it off, in accordance with Army policy.
Senators and investigators say the technology could have aided in avoiding the January collision, as it provides air traffic controllers frequent updates on the position of an aircraft, refreshing once every second rather than every four to six seconds through radar.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump-Musk feud: Are electric vehicles and Tesla at the heart of the breakup?
The President of the United States of America and one of the world's most influential billionaires are at odds after months of collaboration. The confrontation escalated Thursday with Elon Musk saying Trump would have lost the election without him in a post on X. President Donald Trump in turn referred to his former senior advisor as "the man who lost his mind" in a Friday morning ABC News phone interview. Republican Trump allies are now also speaking out against Musk. Musk's breakup with the administration has been public and is well-documented, with Trump and the Tesla CEO trading calculated jabs like pro boxers. The underlying reason behind the sudden intense feud is a serious cause of concern for some American car buyers. "Clean Coal" has been a popular buzzword for not one but two presidential campaigns for Donald Trump. So, Elon Musk's initial choice to stand beside a global warming skeptic as the CEO of a clean energy and automotive company was puzzling to say the least. At first, Musk's involvement with the administration was seen by many as mutually beneficial, since the CEO could potentially reap the benefits of government contracts for Tesla and SpaceX. The general public quickly soured to the idea of the eccentric CEO playing a key role in the administration. By April 8, Tesla stock had nosedived 41.50% from its January 2 share price. Tesla dealers have been attacked and vandalized while other Americans have staged peaceful protests against Musk's involvement in government and role at the Department of Government Efficiency. So, why would a guy who once wore a "Trump Was Right About Everything" hat suddenly publicly oppose his new bill? The short answer is, the two don't see eye to eye on the automotive industry's most controversial powertrain option. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill could decimate Tesla. President Donald Trump's stance and actions against EV adoption in America includes: Supporting the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which suggests phasing out a federal EV tax credit that would benefit thousands of Tesla buyers Claiming former President Joe Biden's EV mandate "would kill 40% of the auto industry's jobs", according to Ordering the shut down of many federal electric vehicle chargers and pausing massive federal EV fleet purchases, according to Elon Musk (and Tesla's) stance and actions for EV adoption in America: Elon Musk bio says "Tesla's mission has been to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy" Musk claimed "the world does need electric cars" during a 60 Minutes interview and factory tour, asserting that Tesla has a crucial role in the future of EVs Tesla has collaborated with Ford, GM, Stellantis, Rivian, Volkswagen, Honda, Acura, Hyundai, Kia, Toyota and more to provide Tesla Supercharger access to EVs, making them easier to charge for American drivers Tesla stock recently plummeted in response to the feud between Trump and Musk. The President has also threatened Musk's government contracts amidst the dispute. The bill appears to be the focal point of the rift, but the two clearly have different ideas on what America's future should be. President Donald Trump and Elon Musk may have been able to join forces over their mutual stances on certain conservative points and a hatred of bureaucracy, but their White House tag team was short-lived. The One, Big, Beautiful Bill directly undermines some of the actions Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency have taken since the two united. Trump is 78 years old and expresses a desire to bring America back to a golden age of manufacturing before globalism outsourced American jobs and created a reliance on foreign trade. He also speaks about returning the country to an age where mining and drilling for fossil fuel production were prioritized over environmental concerns. Musk, on the other hand, is a 53-year-old futurist who strives to make humans a multi-planetary species and has made a fortune from innovation and technological disruption. At a glance, the issue seems to be about the One, Big, Beautiful Bill attacking Tesla's bottom line but the two polarizing figures are fundamentally different in terms of future aspirations. Based on Trump's falling out with several former members of the first Trump administration and Musk's known adversarial nature in the private sector, this could be the end for, arguably, the most fascinating duo of 2025. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Donald Trump vs Elon Musk: Could Tesla, EVs be at the art of the feud?

Miami Herald
35 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Florida attorney general loses appeal to overturn order blocking immigration law
A judicial appeals panel has upheld a temporary injunction blocking the enforcement of a new state law criminalizing undocumented immigrants when they arrive in Florida — notching another victory for immigration advocates in a case that has drawn Florida's attorney general into conflict with a Miami federal judge. The Friday afternoon ruling by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta keeps in place a lower court order temporarily preventing police and prosecutors from making arrests and pursuing charges under Florida's SB-4, signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis in February. The law makes it a crime for immigrants to enter the state of Florida if they have been deported or denied entry into the country, or eluded immigration officers when coming into the United States. 'This is a difficult case, and this order does not finally resolve the issues,' states the order, issued by judges Jill Pryor, Kevin Newsom and Embry Kidd. The unsuccessful appeal at the heart of Friday's ruling was brought by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who sought to stay the temporary injunction. Uthmeier has argued that District Court Judge Kathleen Williams overstepped in April when, responding to a lawsuit brought by several undocumented Florida residents who said the law was unconstitutional, she blocked the enforcement of the law. Williams initially issued a restraining order preventing the enforcement of SB-4, and then ordered a broader temporary injunction after learning that state police had continued to make arrests — including an American citizen. Uthmeier's attorneys argued that while Williams' order had bound them from enforcing the law, it didn't apply to 'independent' law enforcement agencies like the Florida Highway Patrol. The attorney general was so adamant in his position that, days later, he wrote a letter to law enforcement agencies telling them he didn't think Williams' order was legitimate — leading the judge to initiate contempt proceedings. In their Friday ruling, the judges waded into the legal skirmish, writing that Uthmeier 'may well be right that the district court's order is impermissibly broad. But that does not warrant what seems to have been at least a veiled threat not to obey it.' A spokesman for Uthmeier's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The American Civil Liberties Union, whose attorneys have worked on the case, celebrated the ruling as a significant victory, not just in Florida but around the country as red states move to implement strict immigration laws. 'This ruling is not just a legal victory — it's a resounding rejection of cruelty masquerading as policy,' said Bacardi Jackson, executive director of the ACLU of Florida. The case, brought by the Florida Immigrant Coalition, the Farmworker Association of Florida, will continue on before Judge Williams, who has yet to issue her ruling on whether Uthmeier will be held in contempt of court.


Hamilton Spectator
36 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Panama's president appeals to a higher power as nearly 2 months of protests roil nation
PANAMA CITY (AP) — Panama's José Raúl Mulino appealed to a higher power on Friday, calling in an archbishop and a rabbi to deliver a message to striking banana workers after nearly two months of social protest that have roiled the country. Mulino has said he won't reverse controversial changes to Panama's social security system, courts have deemed the strike illegal and top banana Chiquita Brands fired nearly 5,000 striking workers last month in Panama's western Bocas del Toro province. But nothing has stopped the protests. So at his weekly news briefing Friday, Mulino said he had met with Archbishop José Domingo Ulloa and one of Panama's leading Jewish figures, Rabbi Gustavo Kraselnik, to enlist them as intermediaries. He gave Ulloa a personal letter to bring to Francisco Smith, leader of the striking banana workers' union. In the letter, Mulino said, he committed to send proposed legislation to the Congress that would be favorable for the country's banana sector, above all its workers. But he conditioned the proposal on former workers lifting their protest. There was precedent for the maneuver. In 2022, Ulloa brokered a dialogue that eased protests over the high cost of fuel and food. In 2018, Ulloa mediated a dispute between parts of the government. Smith, secretary general of the Banana Industry Workers Union, had said earlier Friday before Mulino's announcement that he was open to dialogue. Union leaders planned to travel to the capital Monday to meet with the president of the National Assembly and present a list of demands. He insisted, however, that changes be made to the social security reform. Smith, who has led the protest in western Bocas del Toro province, has said the social security reform passed in March threatens the special privileges laid out for banana workers in another law, covering things like subsidies and labor protections. The impact has been acute. Chiquita Brands said last month they had lost at least $75 million before announcing a temporary halt to their operations in Panama. Demonstrations have not been limited to the banana workers , to Bocas del Toro or even to the social security changes. At various times teachers, construction workers and students have protested as well. Authorities have said they'll withhold the pay of 15,000 treachers for their strike. On Thursday, border police clashed with protesters who had blocked a highway in eastern Darien province, leaving injured on both sides. In addition to the social security changes, demonstrators have protested a security agreement giving U.S. troops access to some Panamanian facilities and efforts to reopen a massive copper mine. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .