NewzIntel.com

Category: Academic Analysis

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ken Henry urges nature law reform after decades of ‘intergenerational bastardry’

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phillipa C. McCormack, Future Making Fellow, Environment Institute, University of Adelaide

    Former Treasury Secretary Ken Henry has warned Australia’s global environmental reputation is at risk if the Albanese government fails to reform nature laws this term.

    In his speech to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Henry said reform was needed to restore nature and power the net zero economy.

    Speaking as chair of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation, Henry said with “glistening ambition”, Australia can “build an efficient, jobs-rich, globally competitive, high-productivity, low-emissions nature-rich economy”.

    The speech comes at a crucial time for nature law reform in Australia. The new Environment Minister Murray Watt has committed to prioritise reform, after the Albanese government failed to achieve substantial changes to these laws in the last parliament.

    On Wednesday, Henry condemned previous failed attempts to reform the laws. He described delays in improving environmental management as “a wilful act of intergenerational bastardry”.

    The need for fundamental reform

    The Albanese government abandoned efforts to pass important reforms in its first term.

    Environment Minister Murray Watt has committed to achieving reforms within 18 months, acknowledging “our current laws are broken”.

    In his speech on Wednesday, Henry agreed with this sentiment. He described the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act as “a misnomer, if ever there was one”.

    Henry is both a former Treasury Secretary and former chair of National Australia Bank. He also wrote Australia’s most important white paper on tax reform.

    Henry has previously said environmental law reform could be a template for other essential, difficult law reform, such as fixing Australia’s broken tax system.

    He understands Australia’s broken environmental laws. In 2022-23, he led an independent review into nature laws in New South Wales. That review found the laws were failing and would never succeed in their current form.

    At the start of his speech on Wednesday, Henry came close to tears when he acknowledged Greens Senator Sarah Hansen-Young’s support for those who look after injured and orphaned native animals.

    As a bureaucrat in Canberra, Henry also used to rescue injured animals and nurse them back to health.

    Logging and land clearing for development destroys koala habitat.
    Pexels, Pixabay, CC BY

    Big challenges ahead

    As Henry noted on Wednesday, Australia faces enormous challenges. These include the need to rapidly build more housing and triple renewable energy capacity by 2030.

    But before building suburbs, wind farms, transmission lines, mines and roads, projects need to be assessed for their potential to harm the environment.

    Henry on Wednesday called for sweeping changes, drawing on Graeme Samuel’s 2019-20 review of the EPBC Act. The changes include:

    • genuine cooperation across all levels of government, industry and the community
    • high-integrity evidence to inform decision making
    • clear, strong and enforceable standards applied nationwide
    • an independent and trusted decision-maker, in the form of a national Environment Protection Authority
    • a natural capital market, which – if well-designed – could provide a financial incentive for nature restoration and carbon storage in the form of tradable credits.

    Without the reforms, Henry said, Australia would not “retain a shred of credibility” for two global commitments: reaching net zero emissions, and halting and reversing biodiversity loss.

    The net zero commitment is at risk because existing laws are not sufficient to protect carbon sinks, such as forests. The roll out of renewable energy is also being slowed by inefficient approvals processes.

    Henry said the concept of “ecologically sustainable development”, which seeks to balance economic, social, and economic goals, needs serious rethinking. This concept has been the foundation of environment policy in Australia, including the EPBC Act, for the past 30 years.

    Henry wrote the first Intergenerational Report for the federal government in 2002. He has criticised governments for allowing environmental destruction that will leave future generations worse off.

    He has variously described Australia’s failure to steward our natural resources as an intergenerational tragedy, as intergenerational theft, and a wilful act of intergenerational bastardry – claims he repeated on Wednesday.

    Making money grow on trees

    Henry grew up on the Mid North Coast of NSW where his father, a worker in the timber industry, helped log native forests.

    Land clearing is the main threat to Australian biodiversity, and preventing native vegetation loss would also cut greenhouse gas emissions.

    The foundation Henry chairs advocates for the protection and restoration of Australia’s native forests. Henry has previously backed a plan to store carbon in native forests, which would mean trees were protected and not cut down.

    In his Press Club address, Henry lamented ongoing land clearing, poor fire management in remnant forests, and logging of habitat for endangered species such as the koala and the greater glider. He also called for nature laws that enable projects to be delivered in a way that not only protects but also restores nature. For instance, he said carbon credits could help fund the Great Koala National Park proposed for NSW.

    Logging continues in old growth native forest.
    Chris Putnam/Future Publishing via Getty Images

    What’s the Australian government doing?

    Despite Murray Watt’s stated commitment to nature law reform, there are signs the environment may again come off second-best.

    At a recent meeting with key stakeholders, including industry and environment groups, Watt said compromise was needed. He warned environmental protections must come with streamlined project approvals “to improve productivity”.

    Henry on Wednesday acknowledged faster approvals were needed, saying:

    We simply cannot afford slow, opaque, duplicative and contested environmental planning decisions based on poor information mired in administrative complexity.

    But he said faster approvals should not come at a greater cost to nature. In his words:

    with due acknowledgement of the genius of AC/DC, there is no point in building a faster highway to hell.

    Henry said the current parliament has time to put the right policy settings in place. The remedies also enjoy broad stakeholder support. “We’ve had all the reviews we need,” he said. “All of us have had our say. It is now up to parliament. Let’s just get this done.”

    Phillipa C. McCormack receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Natural Hazards Research Australia, the National Environmental Science Program, Green Adelaide and the ACT Government. She is a member of the National Environmental Law Association and affiliated with the Wildlife Crime Research Hub.

    – ref. Ken Henry urges nature law reform after decades of ‘intergenerational bastardry’ – https://theconversation.com/ken-henry-urges-nature-law-reform-after-decades-of-intergenerational-bastardry-261167

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ken Henry urges nature law reform after decades of ‘intergenerational bastardry’

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phillipa C. McCormack, Future Making Fellow, Environment Institute, University of Adelaide

    Former Treasury Secretary Ken Henry has warned Australia’s global environmental reputation is at risk if the Albanese government fails to reform nature laws this term.

    In his speech to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Henry said reform was needed to restore nature and power the net zero economy.

    Speaking as chair of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation, Henry said with “glistening ambition”, Australia can “build an efficient, jobs-rich, globally competitive, high-productivity, low-emissions nature-rich economy”.

    The speech comes at a crucial time for nature law reform in Australia. The new Environment Minister Murray Watt has committed to prioritise reform, after the Albanese government failed to achieve substantial changes to these laws in the last parliament.

    On Wednesday, Henry condemned previous failed attempts to reform the laws. He described delays in improving environmental management as “a wilful act of intergenerational bastardry”.

    The need for fundamental reform

    The Albanese government abandoned efforts to pass important reforms in its first term.

    Environment Minister Murray Watt has committed to achieving reforms within 18 months, acknowledging “our current laws are broken”.

    In his speech on Wednesday, Henry agreed with this sentiment. He described the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act as “a misnomer, if ever there was one”.

    Henry is both a former Treasury Secretary and former chair of National Australia Bank. He also wrote Australia’s most important white paper on tax reform.

    Henry has previously said environmental law reform could be a template for other essential, difficult law reform, such as fixing Australia’s broken tax system.

    He understands Australia’s broken environmental laws. In 2022-23, he led an independent review into nature laws in New South Wales. That review found the laws were failing and would never succeed in their current form.

    At the start of his speech on Wednesday, Henry came close to tears when he acknowledged Greens Senator Sarah Hansen-Young’s support for those who look after injured and orphaned native animals.

    As a bureaucrat in Canberra, Henry also used to rescue injured animals and nurse them back to health.

    Logging and land clearing for development destroys koala habitat.
    Pexels, Pixabay, CC BY

    Big challenges ahead

    As Henry noted on Wednesday, Australia faces enormous challenges. These include the need to rapidly build more housing and triple renewable energy capacity by 2030.

    But before building suburbs, wind farms, transmission lines, mines and roads, projects need to be assessed for their potential to harm the environment.

    Henry on Wednesday called for sweeping changes, drawing on Graeme Samuel’s 2019-20 review of the EPBC Act. The changes include:

    • genuine cooperation across all levels of government, industry and the community
    • high-integrity evidence to inform decision making
    • clear, strong and enforceable standards applied nationwide
    • an independent and trusted decision-maker, in the form of a national Environment Protection Authority
    • a natural capital market, which – if well-designed – could provide a financial incentive for nature restoration and carbon storage in the form of tradable credits.

    Without the reforms, Henry said, Australia would not “retain a shred of credibility” for two global commitments: reaching net zero emissions, and halting and reversing biodiversity loss.

    The net zero commitment is at risk because existing laws are not sufficient to protect carbon sinks, such as forests. The roll out of renewable energy is also being slowed by inefficient approvals processes.

    Henry said the concept of “ecologically sustainable development”, which seeks to balance economic, social, and economic goals, needs serious rethinking. This concept has been the foundation of environment policy in Australia, including the EPBC Act, for the past 30 years.

    Henry wrote the first Intergenerational Report for the federal government in 2002. He has criticised governments for allowing environmental destruction that will leave future generations worse off.

    He has variously described Australia’s failure to steward our natural resources as an intergenerational tragedy, as intergenerational theft, and a wilful act of intergenerational bastardry – claims he repeated on Wednesday.

    Making money grow on trees

    Henry grew up on the Mid North Coast of NSW where his father, a worker in the timber industry, helped log native forests.

    Land clearing is the main threat to Australian biodiversity, and preventing native vegetation loss would also cut greenhouse gas emissions.

    The foundation Henry chairs advocates for the protection and restoration of Australia’s native forests. Henry has previously backed a plan to store carbon in native forests, which would mean trees were protected and not cut down.

    In his Press Club address, Henry lamented ongoing land clearing, poor fire management in remnant forests, and logging of habitat for endangered species such as the koala and the greater glider. He also called for nature laws that enable projects to be delivered in a way that not only protects but also restores nature. For instance, he said carbon credits could help fund the Great Koala National Park proposed for NSW.

    Logging continues in old growth native forest.
    Chris Putnam/Future Publishing via Getty Images

    What’s the Australian government doing?

    Despite Murray Watt’s stated commitment to nature law reform, there are signs the environment may again come off second-best.

    At a recent meeting with key stakeholders, including industry and environment groups, Watt said compromise was needed. He warned environmental protections must come with streamlined project approvals “to improve productivity”.

    Henry on Wednesday acknowledged faster approvals were needed, saying:

    We simply cannot afford slow, opaque, duplicative and contested environmental planning decisions based on poor information mired in administrative complexity.

    But he said faster approvals should not come at a greater cost to nature. In his words:

    with due acknowledgement of the genius of AC/DC, there is no point in building a faster highway to hell.

    Henry said the current parliament has time to put the right policy settings in place. The remedies also enjoy broad stakeholder support. “We’ve had all the reviews we need,” he said. “All of us have had our say. It is now up to parliament. Let’s just get this done.”

    Phillipa C. McCormack receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Natural Hazards Research Australia, the National Environmental Science Program, Green Adelaide and the ACT Government. She is a member of the National Environmental Law Association and affiliated with the Wildlife Crime Research Hub.

    – ref. Ken Henry urges nature law reform after decades of ‘intergenerational bastardry’ – https://theconversation.com/ken-henry-urges-nature-law-reform-after-decades-of-intergenerational-bastardry-261167

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Malcolm Turnbull on Australia’s ‘dumb’ defence debate

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    The Albanese government remains in complicated territory on the international stage. It has to tread carefully with China, despite the marked warming of the bilateral relationship. It is yet to find its line and length with the unpredictable Trump administration.

    Meanwhile, with the new parliament meeting for the first time next week, the federal Opposition remains in a tough spot, still reeling from a brutal election defeat. The Liberals have an untested leader and uncertainty over what policies they will keep and which they will scrap, with their future commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 yet to be reconfirmed.

    Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull has personally navigated the highs and lows of these issues, and joins the podcast today.

    On AUKUS and national security, Turnbull says the debate has “never been dumber”.

    The fundamental problem with our debate about national security is a profound lack of patriotism, because not enough people are putting Australia first. I mean I’m not saying that our politicians should be like Donald Trump, in terms of his bravado and braggadocio – you know all that sort of stuff he goes on with – but they should be like Trump in the sense of putting Australia first.

    You know Donald Trump expects other countries to stand for themselves. Who is the foreign leader that is an ally that he respects the most? [Israel’s Prime Minister] Bibi Netanyahu. Bibi Netanyahu stands up for himself and brutally. And brutally. I mean, Netanyahu’s attitude is, if you’re in the Middle East, if you’re weak, you’re roadkill.

    On defence spending, Turnbull calls a proper review on what Australia needs, rather then spending a certain percent on defence.

    We’ve got to have a proper examination of what capabilities we need, and what capabilities we can afford. The point about submarines is, if you’re going have a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines – they’re literally the most expensive defence platforms in the world – then you’ve got to work out what else you need and then what that’s going to cost you. That will come to quite a lot more than [the current] 2% of GDP, I would estimate.

    Turnbull also warns of a “reckless” degree of “delusion” in Canberra about the risk of not getting nuclear-powered submarines from the US.

    On global affairs, Turnbull says the Albanese government has performed well in a time of uncertainty.

    It’s complicated, but they’re managing this disrupted global environment well. The directions they’re going in are correct. The need plainly is to strengthen partnerships, alliances, relations with countries other than the United States.

    […] There’s a degree of anxiety about China because we don’t share the same political values. It clearly wants to displace the United States as the hegemon in this region […] I think the government and certainly most Australians would recognise that the days of American primacy in this region are over and the outcome for us that we want to have is, as [a former Japanese prime minister] Shinzo Abe used to say, a free and open Indo-Pacific, a balance between the two powers. Indeed as [Foreign Minister] Penny Wong said, a region where no one dominates, nobody is dominated.

    On Albanese’s failure to meet yet with the US president, Turnbull says it doesn’t matter “a huge amount”.

    It is very important for the prime minister of Australia to have a good personal relationship with Donald Trump. It really is. When I was prime minister, my relationship with him got off to a very stormy start, but it was a very good one, because by standing up to his bullying, I won his respect.

    […] When he does meet with Trump, it’s got to be in a situation where he can have an extended discussion, where it’s a substantive meeting and they can really get to know each other. So I think it’s not just the timing of the meeting, but the quality of the meeting.

    On the Liberal Party, Turnbull is pessimistic about its chances of moderating its views, even with Sussan Ley, generally regarded as centrist, as leader,

    [Ley’s] problem, even if she was centrist, and even if was genuine about moving the party back to the centre, I would question whether she can do it. Because there are not many moderates left in the party room in Canberra. How many moderates are left in the branches anymore? Has there been a sort of self-sorting now? Essentially the party […] has moved off into that right wing.

    […] The leader has a lot of authority. However, there is the right wing of the party and you cannot separate it from the right-wing media. From the Murdoch media in particular, they’re joined at the hip. I mean, they’re almost the same thing. They operate in the context of the Liberal Party almost like terrorists. Or like terrorists in this sense: they don’t kill people or blow things up, but they basically are prepared to burn the joint down if they don’t get what they want. I mean, I experienced that.

    Despite reservations, Turnbull says quotas for women are the only way to the Liberal party to where it wants to be.

    Everything else has been tried and it’s failed […] My view is that the party has got to say, well, we recognise this is contrary to grassroots tradition. But unless we do something fairly draconian and directive, then we’re not going to be able to get to the parity of men and women that we want, that we’ve said we wanted for years, and which the electorate clearly prefers.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Malcolm Turnbull on Australia’s ‘dumb’ defence debate – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-malcolm-turnbull-on-australias-dumb-defence-debate-261178

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • Bribery in South Africa: law now puts a duty on companies to act

    Source: ForeignAffairs4

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Rehana Cassim, Professor in Company Law, University of South Africa

    Bribery is one of the most common forms of corruption in South African companies and state institutions. This has a number of harmful outcomes.

    Firstly, research shows that it weakens democracy and slows down economic growth. It also creates expensive barriers for honest businesses to succeed because it distorts fair competition. If bribery is not stopped or punished it has a demoralising effect, because it erodes trust and creates a culture where ethical conduct is undermined.

    In 2024 a new law came into force in South Africa that puts a duty on companies to take proactive steps to prevent bribery. This law falls under a broader law dealing with corruption in South Africa.

    The new provisions make it a crime for companies to fail to prevent bribery by an associated person. This is a major policy shift in South African anti-corruption law, and aligns with the United Kingdom’s anti-bribery legislation.

    An associated person is anyone who performs services for the company. This can include suppliers, joint venture partners, distributors, consultants, and other professionals advising the company. It can even be other companies, like subsidiaries.

    In my research I found that South Africa took inspiration from the United Kingdom (UK) Bribery Act 2010. The law makes it a criminal offence for commercial organisations to fail to prevent bribery by associated persons.

    Despite some successes, enforcement of the UK Bribery Act has been slow and the volume of prosecutions has been low.

    Based on my research into company conduct, given the current challenges in law enforcement and the low conviction rates for crimes of corruption, the new law might not work as well as hoped.

    But with improved enforcement, it has potential to reduce bribery in South Africa.

    What’s behind the new law?

    The new addition to the law was introduced after a commission of inquiry found evidence of widespread bribery and corruption under former president Jacob Zuma.

    For example, Angelo Agrizzi, former chief operating officer of African Global Operations (Pty) Ltd (formerly known as Bosasa), testified that Bosasa won about US$129 million in government tenders by paying about US$4 million in bribes to politicians and government officials. He said that every contract in which Bosasa was involved was linked to bribery and corruption.

    The new law is designed to prevent this from happening.

    If a person associated with a member of the private sector or an incorporated state-owned entity gives, agrees or offers to give a bribe (or gratification) to another person, the company could be held liable. This applies to companies as well as individuals, partnerships, trusts and other legal entities.

    The bribe must be given by the associated person to get business for the company or to gain a business advantage for it. Importantly, a company can be found guilty even if it didn’t know about the bribe.

    What counts as a bribe?

    A bribe (or gratification) is not just money. It includes avoiding a loss or other disadvantage, releasing any obligation or liability, or giving any favour or advantage.

    The bribe does not actually have to be given. It is enough if the associated person agrees or offers to give the bribe.

    It is not clear yet if hospitality or promotional expenditures count as bribes.

    Under the UK Bribery Act a hospitality payment is not regarded as a gratification unless it is disproportionate. In my view South Africa should follow the same approach.

    For example, if paying for transport from the airport to a hotel for an on-site visit, taking clients to dinner, or giving them tickets to an event aligns with the norms for the industry, this probably will not be seen as a bribe.

    Facilitation payments is another tricky area. These are small bribes made to minor officials to get routine administrative tasks done, such as applying for visas, clearing customs or getting licences.

    The new law doesn’t say whether facilitation payments are regarded as bribes. In my view, they should be.

    What companies need to do

    Companies can avoid liability under the new law if they can prove that they had adequate procedures in place to prevent bribery by associated persons.

    But the law doesn’t explain what “adequate procedures” are. Until the South African government provides guidance on this, it is useful to look at the guidance provided under the UK Bribery Act. It recommends the following:

    • Companies should adopt procedures that are proportionate to the bribery risks they face and the nature, scale and complexity of their activities.

    So a larger company operating in a high-risk market where bribery is known to be common must do more to prevent bribery than a smaller company in a low-risk market where bribery is less common.

    • The company’s board of directors should foster a culture where bribery is never acceptable.

    • Companies should periodically assess their exposure to potential bribery risks.

    • Companies should carry out due diligence procedures on their associated persons.

    • Companies should communicate their anti-bribery polices internally and externally. They should also provide training to ensure that everyone understands their anti-bribery position.

    • Companies should monitor their procedures and improve them where necessary.

    The way forward

    The South African government should urgently publish official guidelines to help companies understand what they must do to comply with the new law.

    The principles of South Africa’s corporate governance code, the King IV Report, can also be used to help companies comply with the new law. These principles promote ethical leadership, an ethical culture, risk management, accountability and transparency.

    Guidelines are also important for small and medium enterprises. They also have a legal duty to put in place adequate procedures to prevent bribery.

    Companies that have not already put in place anti-bribery procedures should act quickly. And they should check that their corporate hospitality policies are reasonable and proportionate to their businesses.

    Companies should also evaluate their relationships with the people associated with them.

    Setting up anti-bribery procedures may have cost implications. But not having them could cost far more. Having adequate procedures in place is the only defence under the new law.

    The Conversation

    Rehana Cassim does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Bribery in South Africa: law now puts a duty on companies to act – https://theconversation.com/bribery-in-south-africa-law-now-puts-a-duty-on-companies-to-act-260148

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why is Israel bombing Syria?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

    Conflict in Syria has escalated with Israel launching bombing raids against its northern neighbour.

    It follows months of fluctuating tensions in southern Syria between the Druze minority and forces aligned with the new government in Damascus. Clashes erupted in the last few days, prompting Israeli airstrikes in defence of the Druze by targeting government bases, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    Israel Minister Amichai Chikli has called the Syrian president Ahmed al-Sharaa –

    a terrorist, a barbaric murderer who should be eliminated without delay.

    Despite the incendiary language, a ceasefire has been reached, halting the fighting – for now.

    Syrian forces have begun withdrawing heavy military equipment from the region, while Druze fighters have agreed to suspend armed resistance, allowing government troops to regain control of the main Druze city of Suwayda.

    What do the Druze want?

    The Druze are a small religious minority estimated at over one million people, primarily concentrated in the mountainous regions of Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan.

    In Syria, their population is estimated at around 700,000 (of around 23 million total Syrian population), with the majority residing in the southern As-Suwayda Governorate – or province – which serves as their traditional stronghold.

    Since the 2011 uprising against the Assad regime, the Druze have maintained a degree of autonomy, successfully defending their territory from various threats, including ISIS and other jihadist groups.

    Following Assad’s fall late last year, the Druze — along with other minority groups such as the Kurds in the east and Alawites in the west — have called for the country to be federalized.

    They advocate for a decentralised model that would grant greater autonomy to regional communities.

    However, the transitional government in Damascus is pushing for a centralised state and seeking to reassert full control over the entire Syrian territory. This fundamental disagreement has led to periodic clashes between Druze forces and government-aligned troops.

    Despite the temporary ceasefire, tensions remain high. Given the core political dispute remains unresolved, many expect renewed conflict to erupt in the near future.

    Why is Israel involved?

    The ousting of the Assad regime created a strategic opening for Israel to expand its influence in southern Syria. Israel’s involvement is driven by two primary concerns:

    1. Securing its northern border

    Israel views the power vacuum in Syria’s south as a potential threat, particularly the risk of anti-Israeli militias establishing a foothold near its northern border.

    During the recent clashes, the Israeli military declared

    The Israeli Defence Forces will not allow a military threat to exist in southern Syria and will act against it.

    Likewise, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stated he will not allow Syrian forces south of Damascus:

    We are acting to prevent the Syrian regime from harming them [the Druze] and to ensure the demilitarisation of the area adjacent to our border with Syria.

    In line with these warnings, the Israeli Air Force has conducted extensive strikes against Syrian military infrastructure, targeting bases, aircraft, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    These operations are intended to prevent any future buildup of military capacity that could be used against Israel from the Syrian side of the border.

    2. Supporting a federated Syria

    Israel is backing the two prominent allied minorities in Syria — the Kurds in the northeast and the Druze in the south — in their push for a federal governance model.

    A fragmented Syria, divided along ethnic and religious lines, is seen by some Israeli policymakers as a way to maintain Israeli domination in the region.

    This vision is part of what some Israeli officials have referred to as a “New Middle East” — one where regional stability and normalisation emerge through reshaped borders and alliances.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently echoed this strategy, stating:

    A single Syrian state with effective control and sovereignty over all its territory is unrealistic.

    For Israel, the logical path forward is autonomy for the various minorities in Syria within a federal structure.

    The United States’ role?

    According to unconfirmed reports, Washington has privately urged Israel to scale back its military strikes on Syria in order to prevent further escalation and preserve regional stability.

    The US is promoting increased support for Syria’s new regime in an effort to help it reassert control and stabilise the country.

    There are also indications the US and its allies are encouraging the Syrian government to move toward normalisation with Israel. Reports suggest Tel Aviv has held talks with the new Sharaa-led regime about the possibility of Syria joining the Abraham Accords (diplomatic agreements between Israel and several Arab states), which the regime in Damascus appears open to.

    US Special Envoy Tom Barrack has described the recent clashes as “worrisome”, calling for de-escalation and emphasising the need for

    a peaceful, inclusive outcome for all stakeholders – including the Druze, Bedouin tribes, the Syrian government, and Israeli forces.

    Given the deep-rooted political divisions, competing regional agendas, and unresolved demands from minority groups, the unrest in southern Syria is unlikely to end soon.

    Despite another temporary ceasefire, underlying tensions remain. Further clashes are not only possible but highly probable.

    Ali Mamouri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Why is Israel bombing Syria? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-israel-bombing-syria-261259

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why is Israel bombing Syria?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Mamouri, Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University

    Conflict in Syria has escalated with Israel launching bombing raids against its northern neighbour.

    It follows months of fluctuating tensions in southern Syria between the Druze minority and forces aligned with the new government in Damascus. Clashes erupted in the last few days, prompting Israeli airstrikes in defence of the Druze by targeting government bases, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    Israel Minister Amichai Chikli has called the Syrian president Ahmed al-Sharaa –

    a terrorist, a barbaric murderer who should be eliminated without delay.

    Despite the incendiary language, a ceasefire has been reached, halting the fighting – for now.

    Syrian forces have begun withdrawing heavy military equipment from the region, while Druze fighters have agreed to suspend armed resistance, allowing government troops to regain control of the main Druze city of Suwayda.

    What do the Druze want?

    The Druze are a small religious minority estimated at over one million people, primarily concentrated in the mountainous regions of Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan.

    In Syria, their population is estimated at around 700,000 (of around 23 million total Syrian population), with the majority residing in the southern As-Suwayda Governorate – or province – which serves as their traditional stronghold.

    Since the 2011 uprising against the Assad regime, the Druze have maintained a degree of autonomy, successfully defending their territory from various threats, including ISIS and other jihadist groups.

    Following Assad’s fall late last year, the Druze — along with other minority groups such as the Kurds in the east and Alawites in the west — have called for the country to be federalized.

    They advocate for a decentralised model that would grant greater autonomy to regional communities.

    However, the transitional government in Damascus is pushing for a centralised state and seeking to reassert full control over the entire Syrian territory. This fundamental disagreement has led to periodic clashes between Druze forces and government-aligned troops.

    Despite the temporary ceasefire, tensions remain high. Given the core political dispute remains unresolved, many expect renewed conflict to erupt in the near future.

    Why is Israel involved?

    The ousting of the Assad regime created a strategic opening for Israel to expand its influence in southern Syria. Israel’s involvement is driven by two primary concerns:

    1. Securing its northern border

    Israel views the power vacuum in Syria’s south as a potential threat, particularly the risk of anti-Israeli militias establishing a foothold near its northern border.

    During the recent clashes, the Israeli military declared

    The Israeli Defence Forces will not allow a military threat to exist in southern Syria and will act against it.

    Likewise, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has stated he will not allow Syrian forces south of Damascus:

    We are acting to prevent the Syrian regime from harming them [the Druze] and to ensure the demilitarisation of the area adjacent to our border with Syria.

    In line with these warnings, the Israeli Air Force has conducted extensive strikes against Syrian military infrastructure, targeting bases, aircraft, tanks, and heavy weaponry.

    These operations are intended to prevent any future buildup of military capacity that could be used against Israel from the Syrian side of the border.

    2. Supporting a federated Syria

    Israel is backing the two prominent allied minorities in Syria — the Kurds in the northeast and the Druze in the south — in their push for a federal governance model.

    A fragmented Syria, divided along ethnic and religious lines, is seen by some Israeli policymakers as a way to maintain Israeli domination in the region.

    This vision is part of what some Israeli officials have referred to as a “New Middle East” — one where regional stability and normalisation emerge through reshaped borders and alliances.

    Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar recently echoed this strategy, stating:

    A single Syrian state with effective control and sovereignty over all its territory is unrealistic.

    For Israel, the logical path forward is autonomy for the various minorities in Syria within a federal structure.

    The United States’ role?

    According to unconfirmed reports, Washington has privately urged Israel to scale back its military strikes on Syria in order to prevent further escalation and preserve regional stability.

    The US is promoting increased support for Syria’s new regime in an effort to help it reassert control and stabilise the country.

    There are also indications the US and its allies are encouraging the Syrian government to move toward normalisation with Israel. Reports suggest Tel Aviv has held talks with the new Sharaa-led regime about the possibility of Syria joining the Abraham Accords (diplomatic agreements between Israel and several Arab states), which the regime in Damascus appears open to.

    US Special Envoy Tom Barrack has described the recent clashes as “worrisome”, calling for de-escalation and emphasising the need for

    a peaceful, inclusive outcome for all stakeholders – including the Druze, Bedouin tribes, the Syrian government, and Israeli forces.

    Given the deep-rooted political divisions, competing regional agendas, and unresolved demands from minority groups, the unrest in southern Syria is unlikely to end soon.

    Despite another temporary ceasefire, underlying tensions remain. Further clashes are not only possible but highly probable.

    Ali Mamouri does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Why is Israel bombing Syria? – https://theconversation.com/why-is-israel-bombing-syria-261259

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: We travelled to Antarctica to see if a Māori lunar calendar might help track environmental change

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Winton, Senior Research Fellow in Climatology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

    Holly Winton, CC BY-SA

    Antarctica’s patterns of stark seasonal changes, with months of darkness followed by a summer of 24-hour daylight, prompted us to explore how a Māori lunar and environmental calendar (Maramataka) might apply to the continent and help us recognise changes as the climate continues to warm.

    Maramataka represent an ancient knowledge system using environmental signs (tohu) to impart knowledge about lunar and environmental connections. It traces the mauri (energy flow) between the land (whenua), the ocean (moana) and the sky and atmosphere (rangi), and how people connect to the natural world.

    Maramataka are regionally specific. For example, in Manukau, the arrival of godwits from the Arctic indicates seasonal changes that align with the migration of eels moving up the local Puhinui stream.

    During matiti muramura, the third summer phase that aligns with the summer solstice, the environment offers tohu that guide seasonal activity. The flowering of pohutukawa is a land sign (tohu o te whenua), the rising of Rehua (Antares, the brightest star in the constellation Scorpius) is an atmospheric sign (tohu o te rangi), and sea urchins (kina) are a sea sign (tohu o te moana).

    When these signs align, it signals balance in nature and the right time to gather food. But if they are out of sync (such as early flowering or small kina), it means something in the environment (te taiao) is out of balance.

    These tohu remind us how deeply land, sea and sky are connected, and why careful observation matters. When they’re out of sync, they call us to pause, observe and adapt in ways that restore natural balance and uphold the mauri of te taiao.

    Tracking a Maramataka in Antarctica

    One of the key tohu we observed in Antarctica was the mass arrival of Weddell seals outside New Zealand’s Scott Base at the height of summer.

    Guided by Maramataka authorities, we explored other local tohu using Hautuu Waka, an ancient framework of weaving and wayfinding to navigate a changing environment. Originally used for navigating vast oceans, wayfinding in this context becomes a metaphor for navigating the complexities of today’s environmental and social challenges.

    During the Antarctic summer, the Sun doesn’t set. But we documented the Moon when visible in the day sky and observed the Sun, clouds, mountains and various forms of snow and ice. This included glacial ice on the land, sea ice in the ocean and snowflakes in the sky.

    One of the seasonal tohu in Antarctica is the mass arrival of Weddell seals outside New Zealand’s Scott Base at the height of summer.
    Holly Winton, CC BY-SA

    While the tohu in Antarctica were vastly different from those observed in Aotearoa, the energy phases of the Maramataka Moon cycles aligned with traditional stories (pūrākau) describing snow and ice.

    We identified some of the 12 different forms of snow recorded by ethnographers, who described them as the “offspring of wind and rain”.

    At Scott Base, we observed feather-like snow (hukapuhi) and floating snow (hukarangaranga). Further inland on the high-elevation polar plateau, we found “unseen” snow (hukakoropuku), which is not always visible to the naked eye but felt on the skin, and dust-like snow (hukapunehunehu), akin to diamond dust. The latter phenomenon occurs when air temperatures are cold enough for water vapour to condense directly out of the atmosphere and form tiny ice crystals, which sparkle like diamonds.

    In te ao Māori, snow has a genealogy (whakapapa) that connects it to wider systems of life and knowledge. Snow is part of a continuum that begins in Ranginui (the sky father) and moves through the god (atua) of weather Tāwhirimātea, who shapes the form and movement of clouds, winds, rain and snow. Each type of snow carries its own name, qualities and behaviour, reflecting its journey through the skies and land.

    The existence of the specific terms (kupu) for different forms of snow and ice reflect generations of observation, passed down through whakapapa and oral histories (kōrero tuku iho).

    Connecting Western science and mātauranga Māori

    Our first observations of tohu in Antarctica mark the initial step towards intertwining the ancient knowledge system of mātauranga Māori with modern scientific exploration.

    The Moon cycles at Scott Base align with traditional stories describing snow and ice.
    Holly Winton, CC BY-SA

    Observing snow through traditional practices provided insights into processes that cannot be fully understood through Western science methods alone. Mātauranga Māori recognises tohu through close sensory attention and relational awareness with the landscape.

    Drawing on our field observations and past and present knowledge of environmental calendars found in mātauranga Māori and palaeo-climate data such as ice cores, we can begin to connect different knowledge systems in Antarctica.

    For example, just as the Maramataka contains information about the environment over time, so do Antarctic ice cores. Every snowflake carries a chemical signature of the environment that, day by day, builds up a record of the past. By measuring the chemistry of Antarctic ice, we gain proxy information about environmental and seasonal cycles such as temperature, winds, sea ice and marine phytoplankton.

    The middle of summer in an ice core record is marked by peak levels in chemical signals from marine phytoplankton that bloom in the Ross Sea when sea ice melts, temperatures are warmer and light and nutrients are available. This biogenic aerosol is a summer tohu identified as a key environmental time marker in the Maramataka of the onset of the breading season and surge in biological activity.

    The knowledge of Maramataka has developed over millennia. Conceptualising this for Antarctica opens a way of using Māori methods and frameworks to glean new insights about the continent and ocean. Grounded in te ao Māori understanding that everything is connected, this approach invites us to see the polar environment not as a remote but a living system of interwoven tohu, rhythms and relationships.

    Holly Winton receives funding from Royal Society Te Apārangi (Rutherford Discovery Fellowship and Marsden Fast-Start) and Victoria University of Wellington (Mātauranga Māori Research Fund). Logistics support for Antarctic fieldwork was provided by Antarctica New Zealand.

    Ayla Hoeta receives funding from Victoria University of Wellington (Mātauranga Māori Research Fund). Logistics support for Antarctic fieldwork was provided by Antarctica New Zealand.

    – ref. We travelled to Antarctica to see if a Māori lunar calendar might help track environmental change – https://theconversation.com/we-travelled-to-antarctica-to-see-if-a-maori-lunar-calendar-might-help-track-environmental-change-239583

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Right-wing political group Advance is in the headlines. What is it and what does it stand for?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Riboldi, Lecturer in Social Impact and Social Change, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney

    Advance/Facebook

    Political lobby group Advance has been back in the headlines this week. It was revealed an organisation headed by the husband of the Special Envoy for Combatting Antisemitism, Jillian Segal, donated A$50,000 to the group.

    The news prompted outcry, though Segal denied any personal involvement.

    So what is Advance and what does it do?

    What is Advance?

    Advance (originally Advance Australia) is a digital campaigning organisation. It was formed in 2018 by a group of wealthy Australians, many with connections to the Liberal Party. The idea was to be a conservative counterpoint to progressive digital campaigning group GetUp!

    At the time, political journalist Mungo McCallum described them as a “stratospherically elite clique of rich, bored men looking for a hobby.” He suggested they would have little, if any, impact.

    Today the group has more than 330,000 members.

    They also successfully led the “No” campaign in the Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum in 2023.

    McCallum’s initial dismissal of Advance appears somewhat premature.

    What does Advance want?

    Advance’s stated aim is to “take the fight to the activists and elites” to “secure Australia’s freedom, security and prosperity”. They campaign against progressive taxation, immigration, the transition to renewable energy and even Welcome to Country ceremonies.

    This positions Advance alongside other right-wing populist actors, including Donald Trump, in the modern “war on woke”. This comparison was welcomed by founding Advance director, major donor and hedge fund manager Simon Fenwick.



    Read more:
    Follow the money: the organisations that spent the most on social media during the election

    These actors, which in Australia also include the Murdoch Press, construct elitism not along class lines, but along an urban/rural divide. In its view, Advance’s billionaire funders are apparently not elites. Instead, they attempt to foster divisions between urban “elites” and regional and suburban “mainstream Australians”.

    Like the Trumpian model of “flood(ing) the zone with shit”, Advance has been accused of pursuing these aims by “unleashing a veritable fire hose of disinformation”. The hose is often aimed at progressive political candidates, climate change, immigrants or the Voice referendum.

    Who runs and funds Advance?

    Advance’s longtime Executive Director and “main man” is the somewhat enigmatic Matthew Sheahan. Their current spokesperson is Sandra Bourke, who has a background in law enforcement and national security. In 2024, Bourke claimed Advance was “the biggest grassroots movement in Australian political history”.

    While Advance is structurally independent of any political party, a variety of Liberal Party figures have been closely connected to the organisation, including former Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

    Early prominent members (and funders) of Advance included storage king Sam Kennard, far-right president of the Australian Jewish Association David Adler, and climate denier Maurice Newman.

    Founding Director Simon Fenwick has donated at least $400,000 to the organisation through his family trust since its inception.

    In 2023–24, Advance received a $500,000 donation from the Cormack Foundation, an investment fund created by the Liberal Party of Victoria.

    The organisation reported income of more than $15.5 million in the same period. It claims their average donation received from supporters is $160.

    What impact has Advance had?

    The 2023 Voice Referendum “made” Advance (and arguably Matthew Sheahan) via their management of two prominent No campaigns.

    Prior to this, Advance’s campaigning was arguably more nuisance than anything else.

    Advance’s No campaign featured significant amounts of dis- and misinformation across multiple media channels, including phone banking (cold calling voters). The campaign was characterised by contradictory micro campaigns that sowed the confusion that fed the slogan of “if you don’t know, vote No”.

    The Advance-led No campaigns also strongly embraced racism against leading First Nations voices. This included suggestions that media commentator Stan Grant had artificially darkened his skin, questioning the “blackness” of Victorian Senator Lidia Thorpe, and utilising “Jim Crow” style advertising against leading Yes campaigner Thomas Mayo.

    The Jim Crow era of American history refers to a time in the late 19th and early-mid 20th centuries where laws enforced racial segregation and discrimination.

    One of the key spokespeople for Advance’s No campaign was Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, a woman with Aboriginal and Anglo-Celtic heritage. She’s a former Advance staffer and current Liberal Party Senator and made the comments about Lidia Thorpe.

    Why is Advance important?

    Following their role in the Voice campaign, Advance have arguably “eclipsed” their inspiration and progressive rivals GetUp! as Australia’s leading digital campaigning organisation. Glen Berman, current GetUp! chair, has even admitted “there were things that GetUp! could learn” from Advance.

    Advance appeared influential over Liberal Party strategy ahead of the 2025 federal election campaign. During the campaign, it was the highest spending third party group (non-party, non-candidate) on Meta (Facebook and Instagram) advertising. This saw it emerge as the conservative third party “opposition” to the Australian union movement.

    However, following the Australian Labor Party’s landslide victory, Advance attempted to distance themselves from the Coalition’s campaign. While they claim to have been focused on “destroying” the Greens, analysis suggests Advance’s campaign was equally focused on framing Labor Prime Minister Anthony Albanese as “weak, woke and sending us broke”.

    Senior Liberal Party figures, for their part, have also “cast doubt on the effectiveness of Advance”, saying it may have cost them seats.

    Generally, scholars Marian Sawer and Kurt Sengul argue Advance, along with the Murdoch media, have engaged in the “populist mobilisation of resentment which is likely to exacerbate the kind of divisions seen in the Voice referendum” since 2018.

    Part of a worldwide trend towards right-wing populism, Advance will likely continue to be at the centre of conservative politics in Australia.

    Mark Riboldi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Right-wing political group Advance is in the headlines. What is it and what does it stand for? – https://theconversation.com/right-wing-political-group-advance-is-in-the-headlines-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-stand-for-261164

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Scientists could be accidentally damaging fossils with a method we thought was safe

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mathieu Duval, Adjunct Senior Researcher at Griffith University and La Trobe University, and Ramón y Cajal (Senior) Research Fellow, Centro Nacional de Investigación sobre la Evolución Humana (CENIEH)

    185,000-year-old human fossil jawbone from Misliya Cave, Israel. Gerhard Weber, University of Vienna, CC BY-ND

    Fossils are invaluable archives of the past. They preserve details about living things from a few thousand to hundreds of millions of years ago.

    Studying fossils can help us understand the evolution of species over time, and glimpse snapshots of past environments and climates. Fossils can also reveal the diets or migration patterns of long-gone species – including our own ancestors.

    But when living things turn to rock, discerning those details is no easy feat. One common technique for studying fossils is micro-computerised tomography or micro-CT. It’s been used to find the earliest evidence of bone cancer in humans, to study brain imprints and inner ears in early hominins, and to study the teeth of the oldest human modern remains outside Africa, among many other examples.

    However, our new study, published today in Radiocarbon, shows that despite being widely regarded as non-destructive, micro-CT may actually affect fossil preservation and erase some crucial information held inside.

    Preserving precious specimens

    Fossils are rare and fragile by nature. Scientists are constantly evaluating how to balance their impact on fossils with the need to study them.

    When palaeontologists and palaeoanthropologists (who work on human fossils) analyse fossils, they want to minimise any potential damage. We want to preserve fossils for future generations as much as possible – and technology can be a huge help here.

    Micro-CT works like the medical CT scans doctors use to peek inside the human body. However, it does so at a much smaller scale and at a greater resolution.

    This is perfect for studying small objects such as fossils. With micro-CT, scientists can take high-resolution 3D images and access the inner structure of fossils without the need to cut them open.

    These scans also allow for virtual copies of the fossils, which other scientists can then access from anywhere in the world. This significantly reduces the risk of damage, since the scanned fossils can safely remain in a museum collection, for example.

    Micro-CT is popular and routinely used. The scientific community widely regards it as “non-destructive” because it doesn’t cause any visual damage – but it could still affect the fossil.

    Jaw bone of the human fossil species Homo antecessor from Spain. Left: micro-CT scan with a cutting plane to visualise the inner structures, bone and teeth; right: 3D reconstruction based on the high-resolution micro-CT images.
    Laura Martín-Francés

    How does micro-CT imaging work?

    Micro-CT scanning uses X-rays and computer software to produce high-resolution images and reconstruct the fossil specimens in detail. Typically, palaeontologists use commercial scanners for this, but more advanced investigations may use powerful X-ray beams generated at a synchrotron.

    The X-rays go through the specimen and are captured by a detector on the other end. This allows for a very fine-grained understanding of the matter they’ve passed through – especially density, which then provides clues about the shape of the internal structures, the composition of the tissues, or any contamination.

    The scan produces a succession of 2D images from all angles. Computer software is then used to “clean up” these high-resolution images and assemble them into a 3D shape – a virtual copy of the fossil and its inner structures.

    Example of micro-CT results on a hominin fossil known as Little Foot, from southern Africa.

    But X-rays are not harmless

    X-rays are a type of ionising radiation. This means they have a high level of energy and can break electrons away from atoms (this is called ionisation).

    In living tissue, ionising radiation can damage cells and DNA, although the level of damage will depend on the duration and intensity of exposure. X-rays and CT scans used in medicine generally have a very low risk since the exposure of the human body is reduced as much as possible.

    However, despite what we know about the impact of X-rays on living cells, the potential impact of X-rays on fossils through micro-CT imaging has never been deeply investigated.

    What did our study find?

    Using standard settings on a typical micro-CT scanner, we scanned several modern and fossil bones and teeth from animals. We also measured their collagen content before and after scanning.

    Collagen is useful for many analytical purposes, such as finding out the age of the fossils using radiocarbon dating, or for stable isotope analysis – a method used to infer the diet of the extinct species, for example. The collagen content in fossils is usually much lower than in modern specimens because it slowly breaks down over time.

    After comparing our measurements with unscanned samples taken from the same specimens, we found two things.

    First, the radiocarbon age remained unchanged. In other words, micro-CT scanning doesn’t affect radiocarbon dating. That’s the good news.

    The bad news is that we did observe a significant decrease in the amount of collagen present. In other words, the micro-CT scanned samples had about 35% less collagen than the samples before scanning.

    This shows micro-CT imaging has a non-negligible impact on fossils that contain collagen traces. While this was to be expected, the impact hasn’t been experimentally confirmed before.

    It’s possible some fossil samples won’t have enough collagen left after micro-CT scanning. This would make them unsuitable for a range of analytical techniques, including radiocarbon dating.

    What now?

    In a previous study, we showed micro-CT can artificially “age” fossils later dated with a method called electron spin resonance. It’s commonly used to date fossils older than 50,000 years – beyond what the radiocarbon method can discern.

    This previous study and our new work show that micro-CT scanning may significantly and irreversibly change the fossil and the information it holds.

    Despite causing no visible damage to the fossil, we argue that in this context the technique should no longer be regarded as non-destructive.

    Micro-CT imaging is highly valuable in palaeontology and palaeoanthropology, no doubt about that. But our results suggest it should be used sparingly to minimise how much fossils are exposed to X-rays. There are guidelines scientists can use to minimise damage. Freely sharing data to avoid repeated scans of the same specimen will be helpful, too.

    Mathieu Duval receives funding from the Spanish State Research Agency (Agencia Estatal de Investigación). He is currently the recipient of a Ramón y Cajal fellowship (RYC2018-025221-I) funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by ‘‘ESF Investing in your future”. This work is also part of Spanish Grant PID2021-123092NB-C22 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033/FEDER, UE, and by ‘‘ERDF A way of making Europe”.

    Laura Martín-Francés receives funding from Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions of the EU Ninth programme (2021-2027) under the HORIZON-MSCA-2021-PF-01-Project: 101060482.

    – ref. Scientists could be accidentally damaging fossils with a method we thought was safe – https://theconversation.com/scientists-could-be-accidentally-damaging-fossils-with-a-method-we-thought-was-safe-258827

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why do some autistic people walk differently?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Rinehart, Nicole Rinehart, Professor, Clinical Psychology, Director of the Neurodevelopment Program, School of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University

    Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition that affects how people’s brains develop and function, impacting behaviour, communication and socialising. It can also involve differences in the way you move and walk – known as your “gait”.

    Having an “odd gait” is now listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a supporting diagnostic feature of autism.

    What does this look like?

    The most noticeable gait differences among autistic people are:

    • toe-walking, walking on the balls of the feet
    • in-toeing, walking with one or both feet turned inwards
    • out-toeing, walking with one or both feet turned out.

    Research has also identified more subtle differences. A study summarising 30 years of research among autistic people reports that gait is characterised by:

    • walking more slowly
    • taking wider steps
    • spending longer in the “stance” phase, when the foot leaves the ground
    • taking more time to complete each step.

    Autistic people show much more personal variability in the length and speed of their strides, as well as their walking speed.

    Gait differences also tend to occur alongside other motor differences, such as issues with balance, coordination, postural stability and handwriting. Autistic people may need support for these other motor skills.

    What causes gait differences?

    These are largely due to differences in brain development, specifically in areas known as the basal ganglia and cerebellum.

    The basal ganglia are broadly responsible for sequencing movement including through shifting posture. It ensures your gait appears effortless, smooth and automatic.

    The cerebellum then uses visual and proprioceptive information (to sense the body’s position and movement) to adjust and time movements to maintain postural stability. It ensures movement is controlled and coordinated.

    Differences occur in the cerebellum and basal ganglia.
    grayjay/Shutterstock

    Developmental differences in these brain regions relate to the way the areas look (their structure), how they work (their function and activation) and how they “speak” to other areas of the brain (their connections).

    While some researchers have suggested that autistic gait occurs due to delayed development, we now know gait differences persist across the lifespan. Some differences actually become clearer with age.

    In addition to brain-based differences, the autistic gait is also associated with factors such as the person’s broader motor, language and cognitive capabilities.

    People with more complex support needs might have more pronounced gait or motor differences, together with language and cognitive difficulties.

    Motor dysregulation might indicate sensory or cognitive overload and be a useful marker that the person might benefit from extra support or a break.

    How is it managed?

    Not all differences need to be treated. Instead, clinicians take an individualised and goals-based approach.

    Some autistic people might have subtle gait differences that are observable during testing. But if these differences don’t impact a person’s ability to participate in everyday life, they don’t require support.

    An autistic person is likely to benefit from support for gait differences if they have a functional impact on their daily life. This might include:

    • increased risk of, or frequent, falls
    • difficulty participating in the physical activities they enjoy
    • physical consequences such as tightness of the Achilles and calf muscles, or associated pain in other areas, such as the feet or back.

    Some children may also benefit from support for motor skill development. However this doesn’t have to occur in a clinic.

    Given children spend a large portion of their time at school, programs that integrate opportunities for movement throughout the school day allow autistic children to develop motor skills outside of the clinic and alongside peers. We developed the Joy of Moving Program in Australia, for example, which gets students moving in the classroom.

    Our community-based intervention studies show autistic children’s movement abilities can improve after engaging in community-based interventions, such as sports or dance.

    Community-based support models empower autistic children to have agency in how they move, rather than seeing different ways of moving as a problem to be fixed.

    Where to from here?

    While we have learnt a lot about autistic gait at a broad level, researchers and clinicians are still seeking a better understanding of why and when individual variability occurs.

    We’re also still determining how to best support individual movement styles, including among children as they develop.

    However there is growing evidence that physical activity enhances social skills and behavioural regulation in preschool children with autism.

    So it’s encouraging that states and territories are moving towards more community-based foundational supports for autistic children and their peers, as governments develop supports outside the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

    The authors thank the late Emeritus Professor John Bradshaw for his early input into this piece.

    Nicole Rinehart receives funding from: Moose Happy Kids Foundation, MECCA M-Power, the Grace & Emilio Foundation, Ferrero Australia, as part of the global Kinder Joy of moving program, Aspen Pharmacare Australia Pty Ltd, Jonathan and Simone Wenig, Adam Krongold, the Grosman Family Foundation, the Shoreline Foundation, the Victorian Department of Education, the NSW Department of Education, and the Department of Social Services – Information, Linkages and Capacity Building (ILC) Program, and has worked in partnership with the Australian Football League.

    Chloe Emonson works on projects that receive funding from: Moose Happy Kids Foundation, MECCA M-Power, the Grace & Emilio Foundation, Ferrero Australia, as part of the global Kinder Joy of moving program, Aspen Pharmacare Australia Pty Ltd, Jonathan and Simone Wenig, Adam Krongold, the Grosman Family Foundation, the Shoreline Foundation, the Victorian Department of Education, the NSW Department of Education, and the Department of Social Services – Information, Linkages and Capacity Building (ILC) Program, and has worked in partnership with the Australian Football League.

    Ebony Lindor works on projects that receive funding from: Moose Happy Kids Foundation, MECCA M-Power, the Grace & Emilio Foundation, Ferrero Australia, as part of the global Kinder Joy of moving program, Aspen Pharmacare Australia Pty Ltd, Jonathan and Simone Wenig, Adam Krongold, the Grosman Family Foundation, the Shoreline Foundation, the Victorian Department of Education, the NSW Department of Education, and the Department of Social Services – Information, Linkages and Capacity Building (ILC) Program, and has worked in partnership with the Australian Football League.

    – ref. Why do some autistic people walk differently? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-some-autistic-people-walk-differently-231685

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why it’s important young, unemployed Australians get a good job instead of just ‘any’ job

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Churchill, ARC Senior Research Fellow and Senior Lecturer in Sociology, The University of Melbourne

    Lightfield Studios/Shutterstock

    We often hear young people need to get a job – any job – but what if the problem isn’t whether they’re working or not, but the kind of job they end up in?

    New research in the Australian Journal of Social Issues shows many young people who are in roles where they’re not working to their full capacity are also in low-quality jobs.

    Drawing on more than a decade of data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey, my research examines young workers between the ages of 20 and 34 who were underemployed in one of three ways:

    • they wanted more hours (time-related underemployment)

    • they were underpaid for the work they did (wage-related underemployment)

    • they weren’t using their skills in their current job (skills-related underemployment).

    Job quality matters

    Research shows poor jobs are linked to worse mental health, psychological distress and low job satisfaction.

    In my research, I focused on three aspects of job quality – how demanding and complex the work is, how much control a worker has over their work and how secure they feel in their job. Underemployment affects all three.

    When young people are underemployed, they also report having less control over their work and feeling less secure. They found these jobs were also less demanding and complex. They were boring.

    This applied to both men and women.

    Low wages and job security

    Overall, young people earning less than they should also felt less secure in their jobs. But underpaid young women also reported significantly lower job control. So, they faced a double disadvantage.

    Gender also mattered when it came to working fewer hours than they wanted.

    While young women who were underemployed reported lower job security, men who wanted more hours didn’t feel any less secure than men with sufficient hours.

    This suggests that for young women, working fewer hours isn’t just about lost income – it’s tied to a deeper sense of job insecurity.

    These patterns applied whether or not someone was in a casual job. Young people in permanent roles could still be underemployed or in bad jobs. In other words, underemployment and poor job quality aren’t just a feature of casual or gig work.

    It can be harder for women

    While similar proportions of young men and women experienced underemployment related to time and skills, young women were more likely to experience wage-related underemployment.

    For example, casual, lower-paid work often occurred in feminised sectors such as care and hospitality. These jobs are more likely to be overlooked and undervalued, even when they require significant skill.

    These gendered patterns reflect the kinds of jobs young women are often funnelled into.

    For young women, this can compound existing disadvantages over the course of their lives, especially when they’re in roles that are consistently undervalued.

    Youth unemployment is only part of the problem

    Politicians have long pushed the idea that young people should be “earning or learning”, to avoid the scourge of unemployment. But this thinking focuses too narrowly on youth unemployment and ignores a crucial question: are these jobs any good?

    My research challenges that idea.

    Underemployment is often hidden in plain sight. Someone might be working full-time, but still be underemployed. This is true if they’re underpaid, working below their qualification level, or not getting the hours they want.

    To fix this, we need to pay greater attention to underemployment and to the quality of the jobs young people are doing. Too often, economists and policymakers are focused on the youth (un)employment rate, but that only tells half the story.

    Brendan Churchill receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. Why it’s important young, unemployed Australians get a good job instead of just ‘any’ job – https://theconversation.com/why-its-important-young-unemployed-australians-get-a-good-job-instead-of-just-any-job-260817

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How a drone delivering medicine might just save your life

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Centaine Snoswell, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland

    Flystock/Shutterstock

    Drones can deliver pizza, and maybe one day your online shopping. So why not use them to deliver urgent medicines or other emergency health-care supplies?

    Trials in Australia and internationally have shown the enormous potential for drones to work with existing health services to deliver medicine, medical equipment, pathology samples, or provide surveillance in medical emergencies.

    Some emergency services are already using drones to deliver health care. Earlier this year, NSW Fire and Rescue used a drone to deliver essential medicine to someone stranded by floodwater while they were supported by phone. Follow the journey from launch to pick-up in the video below.

    Drones have enormous potential

    Drones are appealing because they can rapidly transport medical supplies, especially without traffic delays. They can quickly access places other forms of transport cannot, including remote or difficult-to-reach areas, such as cliffs. And when drones cannot land, they can use a parachute to safely drop their delivery. This means drones can deliver essential items, such as antivenom or defibrillators, before first responders reach the scene.

    Drones can also support medical efforts by providing birds-eye-view images and scans of sites before humans are sent in. This means it’s safer for first responders, such as ambulance crew, as they have a better idea of what to expect when they arrive in-person.

    Drones help find missing persons

    An Australian trial this year involved NSW Ambulance using drones for search and rescue in remote and hard-to-reach locations.

    Specially trained paramedics piloted the drones during the two-month trial. Drones had high-intensity search lights and used thermal imaging to help find missing persons. Video and audio capabilities allowed paramedics to communicate with the person once they were found, and to monitor them and the situation.

    This trial is a great example of how drones can be used to extend the capacity of first responders.

    Trials like this can also collect data about how well the drones work for different teams and circumstances. The more data we have about how drones can support first responders and medical staff, the better we can design services that include them.

    Drones send samples to the lab

    Darling Downs Health in Queensland has also been trialling drones. These transport pathology samples and pharmaceuticals between small rural hospitals in Nanango or Wondai, and the larger regional hospital in Kingaroy.

    This means pathology samples can be flown to the laboratory as soon as they are collected, instead of waiting for a courier. Patients can therefore be diagnosed and begin treatment earlier.

    The Mater Hospital in Brisbane is setting up a similar service to provide pathology services to the Moreton Bay islands. This service aims to avoid transporting pathology samples by ferry.

    Drones for beaches, hearts, or up mountains

    Surf Life Saving Queensland is running a regular drone patrol. Drones monitor shark activity and help co-ordinate responses, such as beach closures.

    Drones have been used in New South Wales to drop flotation devices to swimmers in danger.

    Swedish researchers have trialled using drones to deliver defibrillators to people who have called an ambulance and are suspected of being in cardiac arrest. A drone could deliver a defibrillator in 92% of suspected cardiac arrests. The delivery time was quicker than an ambulance 64% of the time.

    In mountainous regions of India, drones are used to deliver medications to remote health services as part of the Medicine from the Sky program.

    But there are limitations

    Despite drones’ potential to supplement existing health and emergency services, there are limitations.

    Their battery life and weight affects flight time. For instance, the NSW Ambulance trial reported the range of drones is 7 kilometres from base. So, it may be necessary to transport the drone closer to the area of need before it’s launched. This may reduce drones’ usefulness for rural and remote areas. There are also weight limits to what they can carry.

    Some drones may be limited to flying during the day. They may not be able to fly in poor weather conditions, reducing their effectiveness during natural disasters. Temperature and humidity can spoil pathology samples and some medications, which restricts what drones can be used for.

    Existing legislation may also limit where drones can operate.

    Is this the future?

    Many promising trials show drones can effectively help support health and emergency services.

    However, many of these trials have yet to released their final evaluations. So we still need evidence of whether drones improve health outcomes and are cost-effective. This would be essential if we were to routinely use drones to support health care and emergency services beyond these trials.

    The health-care sector would also benefit by learning from companies in other sectors that use drones. This would give the health sector insights into how and when to use drones safely, and how to scale up operations cost-effectively.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How a drone delivering medicine might just save your life – https://theconversation.com/how-a-drone-delivering-medicine-might-just-save-your-life-259904

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How to approach going to the cinema like a philosopher

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alain Guillemain, PhD Candidate in Philosophy, Deakin University

    Philosophy is the study of fundamental questions about reality, knowledge, and values. One “does philosophy” when they respond to such questions in ways that engage critical thought and inquiry.

    Many of us will often respond philosophically to the world around us without even realising it. We may do this, for instance, when we reflect on various aspects of culture and the arts.

    But does going to the cinema really amount to doing philosophy? While you may have never thought about it this way, this is exactly what one famous French philosopher named Gilles Deleuze (1925–95) argued.

    Deleuze’s movement-image

    Deleuze presents a philosophical approach to cinema that treats films not merely as entertainment, but as a medium for thinking and creating philosophical concepts.

    This creation of philosophical concepts is what he and his collaborator, Felix Guattari, prize as “doing philosophy” in their 1991 book What is Philosophy?.

    For Deleuze and Guattari, the creation of concepts is not entirely mental. It is an embodied process that involves engaging the senses – which is what cinema demands of both filmmakers and viewers. To that end, filmmakers and film viewers can both be seen as special kinds of philosophers.

    Deleuze suggests cinema is not simply leisure or culture. In his 1983 book Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, he highlights how cinema is a philosophical practice made possible though “movement-images” – cinematic images which can actively shape our perception and experience of the world.

    Great film directors can create concepts through movement-images, just as great philosophers do so through language.

    Good cinema demands viewers engage using all their senses, resulting in an embodied experience.
    Kumiko Shimizu/Unsplash

    Deleuze identified three categories of movement-images: perception-images, affection-images and action-images.

    The perception-image frames the world from a particular point of view, usually to establish context for an action. For example, at the start of a scene, the camera might pan across the contents of a room before resting on the protagonist.

    The affection-image is the cinematic expression of pure emotion. Affection-images can evoke empathy, such as when we see a character’s face overcome with sadness in a close-up. These images usually sit between perception and action images.

    The action-image embodies action and reaction within a defined situation, and usually links perception and affection images. In the horror genre, this may be the “jump scare” that suddenly reveals a killer, after a long buildup of tension.

    Deleuze’s time-image

    In his 1985 book Cinema 2: The Time-Image, Deleuze extends his film philosophy from that of movement-images to include time-images.

    The time-image is one where the experience of time is prioritised over narrative. For instance, a time-image may make use of long takes, empty spaces and irrational cuts to depict time directly onscreen, rather than represent time through props.

    Through masterfully crafting movement-images and time-images, directors can (knowingly or unwittingly) create the opportunity for audiences to think about philosophical concepts and themes.

    For example, in the trailer for Get Out (2017), director Jordan Peele uses a range of movement-images and time-images to convey the concepts of racism, trauma, social isolation and social stratification.

    Multiple closeups of main character Chris Washington’s face looking alarmed produce affection-images (a type of movement-image) that engage the viewer’s emotions.

    Peele also strategically uses time-images to intensify the themes being conveyed, such as when Rose’s mother clinks the spoon on the teacup, both moving Chris back in time and freezing him in real time.

    For Deleuze, it is these embodied, affective experiences that are the fundamental conditions for thought. By allowing the film to be sensed and felt, and by transmuting these feelings into the domain of thought, the cinemagoer can become philosophically engaged.

    Repetition is another element that can bear philosophical fruits, according to Deleuze. The more one repeats a film, whether by re-watching, or repeating certain sequences, the more they allow themselves to be affected by it in different ways. This opens up different avenues for thought.

    How to engage philosophically with films

    Cinemagoers need not be familiar with Deleuze’s ideas to engage philosophically with a film. The only thing required is an openness to the film. But if you do want to consciously approach your next viewing like a philosopher, you might consider the following steps:

    1. Feel as you watch. Open yourself up and allow cinematic moments to affect you on an emotional and bodily level, even if this is unpleasant or uncomfortable.

    2. Allow for multiple interpretations. Resist the temptation to fall into black and white thinking about which characters are “good” or “bad”. Remain open to different readings of the film.

    3. Reflect on what you felt. Allow what you experienced in your body guide your thoughts afterwards. For instance, if you experienced shock, rage, or confusion, ask yourself why.

    4. Gently arrive at some conclusions based on your multiple readings of the film. Allow for perspectives that both contribute to and challenge your worldview.

    5. Consider watching the film again, and repeating the above steps. This will likely help you feel and think new things that further enhance your understanding of the film, and your worldview.

    Ruari Elkington has received funding from The Queensland Government Dept of Environment, Tourism, Science and Innovation (DETSI), Screen Queensland, The Embassy of France in Australia and Cinema Association Australasia

    Alain Guillemain does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How to approach going to the cinema like a philosopher – https://theconversation.com/how-to-approach-going-to-the-cinema-like-a-philosopher-259277

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: ForeignAffairs4

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    a woman wearing an orange jacket gestures in front of a microphone
    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    young students sitting at their desks in a classroom raise their hands
    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    The Conversation

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

  • Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: ForeignAffairs4

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis speaking into a microphone
    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    The Conversation

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Bryan Keogh, Managing Editor

    Protesters gather during a demonstration at the headquarters of the Department of Education in Washington. AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein

    The Trump administration was given the green light by the Supreme Court on July 14, 2025, to proceed with mass layoffs at the Department of Education – part of a wider plan to dismantle the agency. In doing so, the conservative majority on the bench overruled a lower court judge that had blocked the move.

    While the court didn’t explain its decision – and didn’t rule on the merits of the case – Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the three liberal justices who objected, issued a strongly worded dissent: “When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it.”

    The Conversation has been following the administration’s efforts to take apart the Department of Education since President Donald Trump won the presidential election in November. Here are a few stories from our archives that explain the executive order targeting the department, why the agency has been in the crosshairs of conservatives, and some of the impacts of carrying out the order.

    1. Hollowing out education

    Trump has promised to eliminate the Department of Education since at least September 2023. What started out as a campaign promise eventually became the executive order he issued on March 20, 2025, released shortly after the administration announced plans to lay off about 1,300 of the 4,000 employees in the department.

    “Although the president has broad executive authority, there are many things he cannot order by himself,” wrote Joshua Cowen, a professor of education policy at Michigan State University. “And one of those is the dismantling of a Cabinet agency created by law. But he seems determined to hollow the agency out.”

    And that’s what the Supreme Court says he can do while the case plays out in lower courts. Ultimately, Trump’s order creates a lot of “legal and policy uncertainty around funding for children in local schools and communities.”



    Read more:
    Mass layoffs at Education Department signal Trump’s plan to gut the agency

    Secretary of Education Linda McMahon is responsible for carrying out Trump’s executive order.
    AP Photo/Rod Lamkey Jr.

    2. What the education secretary normally does

    The person directed to actually carry our the president’s order is the education secretary, Linda McMahon. She has called dismantling the department its “final mission.”

    But the secretary – and the department – have many other missions, such as managing students loans and administering Title I funding to help schools serving low-income students obtain an equitable education regardless of their socioeconomic status.

    “Every child in the United States is required to attend school in some capacity, and what happens at the federal level can have real-world impacts on students ranging from preschool to grad school,” wrote Dustin Hornbeck, a scholar of educational policy at the University of Memphis.

    In his article, Hornbeck explored the key duties of the education secretary and the role of the federal government in education, which he argued will continue even if the Education Department is abolished.



    Read more:
    US secretary of education helps set national priorities in a system primarily funded and guided by local governments

    3. Why MAGA targeted the department

    So why did Trump decide getting rid of the Education Department was a top priority and worth the legal risks?

    Fighting what he perceived as “wokeness” was likely one reason, wrote Alex Hinton, an anthropologist who has been studying U.S. political culture at Rutgers University − Newark.

    “First and foremost, Trump and his supporters believe that liberals are ruining public education by instituting what they call a ‘radical woke agenda’ that they say prioritizes identity politics and politically correct groupthink at the expense of the free speech of those, like many conservatives, who have different views,” he explains.

    Trump’s battle against DEI – or diversity, equity and inclusion – is of course a big part of that, but so too are what he and his supporters call “radical” race and gender policies.

    Hinton goes on to describe three other reasons – including supposed “Marxist indoctrination” and school choice – he argues that the MAGA faithful want to eliminate the Department of Education.



    Read more:
    Trump orders a plan to close Education Department – an anthropologist who studies MAGA explains 4 reasons why Trump and his supporters want to eliminate it

    4. It didn’t begin with Trump

    But conservative efforts to gut the department didn’t begin with Trump or MAGA. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, which created the Project 2025 blueprint for remaking the federal government, has been trying to limit or end its role in education since at least 1981 – just two years after the Department of Education was created.

    “In its 1981 mandate, the Heritage Foundation struck now-familiar themes,” including closing the Department of Education and ending funding for disadvantaged students, wrote Fred L. Pincus, a sociology professor focused on diversity and social inequality at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. “And the Heritage Foundation called for ending federal support for programs it claimed were designed to ‘turn elementary- and secondary-school classrooms into vehicles for liberal-left social and political change.’”

    The conservative think tank struck similar themes in its Project 2025 playbook, though it went even further in calling out “leftist indoctrination” and “gender ideology extremism,” Pincus noted.



    Read more:
    Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Education Department was inspired by the Heritage Foundation’s decades-long disapproval of the agency

    Changes at the Department of Education will have a big impact on students across the country.
    skynesher/E+ via Getty Images

    5. Impact on most vulnerable students

    After all the already planned layoffs go into effect, the Department of Education will have roughly half the staff it started the year with. That will have a significant impact on its ability to carry out its many tasks, such as managing federal loans for college and tracking student achievement.

    The department also enforces civil rights for schools and universities, and that office has been hit especially hard by the job cuts, wrote education professors Erica Frankenberg of Penn State and Maithreyi Gopalan of the University of Oregon.

    “The Office for Civil Rights has played an important role in facilitating equitable education for all students,” they wrote. “The full effects of these changes on the most vulnerable public school students will likely be felt for many years.”



    Read more:
    Big cuts at the Education Department’s civil rights office will affect vulnerable students for years to come

    This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.

    – ref. Trump free to begin gutting Department of Education after Supreme Court ‘shadow’ ruling − 5 essential reads – https://theconversation.com/trump-free-to-begin-gutting-department-of-education-after-supreme-court-shadow-ruling-5-essential-reads-261218

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Control fire and ferals in Australia’s tropical savannas to bring the small mammals back

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alyson Stobo-Wilson, Research Adjunct in Conservation Ecology, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University

    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    In remote central Arnhem Land, finding a northern brushtail possum is encouraging for the local Indigenous rangers. Though once common, such small native mammals are now rare. Many are threatened with extinction.

    Over the past 30 years, small mammals have been disappearing from Australia’s tropical savannas. This landscape is among the nation’s most remote and seemingly untouched. But it is no longer safe from feral animals, overgrazing livestock, poor fire management and other threats.

    Despite growing awareness of the problem, a lack of consensus on the most effective management actions has hindered efforts to reverse these losses. Our new research sought to overcome this hurdle and finally reach consensus on the best way forward.

    We achieved this by working with experts from various land management groups and research institutes, including Traditional Owners and Indigenous rangers within the region.

    Building on 15 years of targeted research

    In 2010, the scale and severity of mammal declines in northern Australia became clear. Research in Kakadu National Park found the number of native mammal species at survey sites had halved, and the number of individual animals dropped by more than two-thirds.

    This prompted a major review of the causes, and more research.

    Advances in technology played a crucial role in efforts to gather further evidence. Motion-activated cameras known as camera traps enabled monitoring over vast areas.

    Extensive surveys using camera traps provided data on the distribution and abundance of small mammals and feral cats. Meanwhile, collar-mounted GPS units and video cameras provided new information about feral cat behaviour.

    Feral cat caught on a camera-trap in Arnhem Land.
    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    What we did and what we found

    Our new research concerns the higher-rainfall tropical savannas of the Northern Territory and Western Australia. This area covers 950,000 square kilometres from the Kimberley in the west to the Gulf of Carpentaria in the east.

    First we reviewed the literature on the topic of small mammal declines in the region. We found more than 100 relevant studies had been published since 2010.

    From these research papers, we identified 11 plausible threats to small mammals. Then we asked 19 experts to score and rank each threat according to severity and scale, and whether the threat could be effectively mitigated.

    We found the most severe and widespread threat to small mammals was feral cats. But broad-scale cat control is not very effective.

    Ranked second was the habitat destruction caused by livestock (buffalo, horses, donkeys and cattle) and by inappropriate patterns of fire.

    Actions aimed at reducing feral livestock numbers and improving fire regimes would increase vital resources such as food and shelter. Such actions can also make it harder for cats to prey on small mammals.

    Feral cattle graze in the savanna woodland of the northern Kimberley.
    Ian Radford

    Future threats and research priorities

    Habitat loss from land clearing for urban, agricultural or industrial development currently affects only a small proportion of northwestern Australia. But proposed expansions — particularly for cotton and other intensive agriculture — are concerning. These developments overlap with high-rainfall areas in the Top End, where small mammal communities are still relatively intact.

    Our expert group also expressed deep concern and uncertainty about the future as the climate changes. Rising temperatures and more intense rainfall events are expected to increase the frequency, extent and severity of fires. However, managing feral livestock and improving fire regimes can make the ecosystem more resilient to change.

    Developing more effective tools to directly control feral cats remains a top research priority. It’s estimated cats kill around 452 million native mammals a year in Australia. About a third of these deaths occur in the tropical savannas. So while improved land management will alleviate some pressure, certain species will remain highly vulnerable unless cats can be better managed.

    Water buffalo were introduced to northern Australia in the early-1800s, becoming widespread by the mid-1800s.
    Alyson Stobo-Wilson

    Support Indigenous leadership on Country

    Globally, Indigenous stewardship is closely linked to improved biodiversity outcomes.

    In Australia, the historic disruption of Indigenous customary responsibilities — especially fire management — has contributed to the loss of small mammals.

    Fortunately, Indigenous ranger programs and Indigenous Protected Areas have expanded in recent years. Increasingly widespread recognition and application of Indigenous knowledge has deepened and broadened our understanding of mammal declines.

    In northern Australia, Indigenous ranger groups are global leaders in fire management. They monitor and manage some of the most remote and inaccessible parts of the continent. The land management actions needed to conserve our small mammals rely in large part on the continued support and funding of these groups.

    Unfortunately, these programs are under threat. The NT government recently cut A$12 million from its Indigenous ranger funding program.

    While the federal government has committed funding to expand ranger programs nationally, ranger groups say the investment falls short of what’s needed. Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation chief executive officer Dominic Nicholls told us:

    Given the scale at which Indigenous ranger groups operate – and the critical role they play in protecting Australia’s biodiversity and leading innovation in the carbon industry – the level of allocated funding is insufficient to meet the basic delivery costs of these programs.

    A clear path forward

    Our research shows reducing feral livestock numbers and improving fire regimes in northern Australia currently offers the greatest benefit to small mammal populations — especially in the absence of effective cat controls.

    But success will depend on sustained, long-term support for Indigenous rangers, who carry out much of this work. Investing in these programs is not just essential for conserving biodiversity — it also supports cultural connection, community wellbeing and climate resilience.

    The authors gratefully acknowledge the Traditional Knowledge offered by participants from Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation and Warddeken Land Management Limited as part of this research.

    This research was funded by CSIRO. The research benefited from the involvement of researchers and land managers from CSIRO, Charles Darwin University, Warddeken Land Management Limited, Australian National University, Mimal Land Management Aboriginal Corporation, Australian Wildlife Conservancy, the WA and NT governments, Kangaroo Island Landscape Board, Ground Up: Planning and Ecology Support, Dunkeld Pastoral Co Pty Ltd and Desert Support Services.

    John Woinarski has previously received funding from the Australian government’s National Environment Science Program. He is affiliated with Charles Darwin University, a member of the Biodiversity Council and a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy.

    – ref. Control fire and ferals in Australia’s tropical savannas to bring the small mammals back – https://theconversation.com/control-fire-and-ferals-in-australias-tropical-savannas-to-bring-the-small-mammals-back-260813

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: How safe are the chemicals in sunscreen? A pharmacology expert explains

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Musgrave, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacology, University of Adelaide

    aquaArts studio/Getty

    Last week, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) released its safety review of seven active ingredients commonly used in sunscreens.

    It found five were low-risk and appropriate for use in sunscreens at their current concentrations.

    However, the TGA recommended tighter restrictions on two ingredients – homosalate and oxybenzone – to reduce how much can be used in a product. This is based on uncertainty about their potential effects on the endocrine system, which creates and releases hormones.

    This news, together with recent reports some products may have inflated their claims of SPF coverage, might make Australians worried about whether their sunscreen products are working – and safe.

    But it’s not time to abandon sunscreens. In Australia, all sunscreens must pass a strict approval process before going on the market. The TGA tests the safety and efficacy of all ingredients, and this recent review is part of the TGA’s continuing commitment to safety.

    The greatest threat sunscreen poses to Australians’ health is not using it.

    Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer worldwide, and approximately 95% of melanoma cases in Australia are linked to ultraviolet (UV) exposure.

    Still, it’s understandable people want to know what’s in their products, and any changes that might affect them. So let’s take a closer look at the safety review and what it found.

    What are the active ingredients in sunscreen?

    There are two main types of sunscreen: physical and chemical. This is based on the different active ingredients they use.

    An active ingredient is a chemical component in a product that has an effect on the body – basically, what makes the product “work”.

    In sunscreens, this is the compound that absorbs UV rays from the Sun. The other ingredients – for example, those that give the sunscreen its smell or help the skin absorb it – are “inactive”.

    Physical sunscreens typically use minerals, such as titanium dioxide and zinc oxide, that can absorb the Sun’s rays but also reflect some of them.

    Chemical sunscreens use a variety of chemical ingredients to absorb or scatter UV light, both long wave (UVA) or short wave (UVB).

    The seven active ingredients in this review are in chemical sunscreens.

    Why did the TGA do the review?

    Our current limits for the concentrations of these chemicals in sunscreen are generally consistent with other regulatory agencies, such as the European Union and the US Food and Drug Administration.

    However, safety is an evolving subject. The TGA periodically reexamines the safety of all therapeutic goods.

    Last year, the TGA revised its method of estimating sunscreen exposure to more closely model how skin is exposed to sunscreens over time.

    This model considers how much sunscreen someone typically applies, how much skin they cover (whole body versus face and hands, or just face) and how it’s absorbed through the skin.

    Given this new model – along with changes in the EU and US approaches to sunscreen regulation – the TGA selected seven common sunscreen ingredients to investigate in depth.

    Determining what’s safe

    When evaluating whether chemicals are safe for human use, testing will often consider studies in animals – especially when there is no or limited data on humans. These animal tests are done by the manufacturers, not the TGA.

    To take into account any unforeseen sensitivity humans may have to these chemicals, a “margin of safety” is built in. This is typically a concentration 50–100 times lower than the dose at which no negative effect was seen in animals.

    The sunscreen review used a margin of safety 100 times lower than this dose as the safety threshold.

    For most of the seven investigated sunscreen chemicals, the TGA found the margin of safety was above 100.

    This means they’re considered safe and low-risk for long-term use.

    However, two ingredients, homosalate and oxybenzone, were found to be below 100. This was based on the highest estimated sunscreen exposure, applied to the body at the maximum permitted concentration: 15% for homosalate, 10% for oxybenzone.

    At lower concentrations, other uses – such as just the hands and face – could be considered low-risk for both ingredients.

    What are the health concerns?

    Homosalate and oxybenzone have low acute oral toxicity – meaning you would need to swallow a lot of it to experience toxic effects, nearly half a kilogram of these chemicals – and don’t cause irritation to eyes or skin.

    There is inconclusive evidence about oxybenzone potentially causing cancer in rats and mice – but only at concentrations to which humans will never be exposed via sunscreens.

    The key issue is whether the two ingredients affect the endocrine system.

    While effects have been seen at high concentrations in animal studies, it is not clear whether these translate to humans exposed to sunscreen levels.

    No effect has been seen in clinical studies on fertility, hormones, weight gain and, in pregnant women, fetal development.

    The TGA is being very cautious here, using a very wide margin of safety under worst-case scenarios.

    What are the recommendations?

    The TGA recommends the allowed concentration of homosalate and oxybenzone be reduced.

    But exactly how much it will be lowered is complicated, depending on whether the product is intended for adults or children, specifically for face, or the whole body, and so on.

    However, some sunscreens would need to be reformulated or warning labels placed on particular formulations. The exact changes will be decided after public consultation. Submissions close on August 12.

    What about benzophenone?

    There is also some evidence benzophenone – a chemical produced when sunscreen that contains octocrylene degrades – may cause cancer at high concentrations.

    This is based on studies in which mice and rats were fed benzophenone well above the concentration in sunscreens.

    Octocrylene degrades slowly over time to benzophenone. Heat makes it degrade faster, especially at temperatures above 40°C.

    The TGA has recommended restricting benzophenone to 0.0383% in sunscreens to ensure it remains safe during the product’s shelf life.

    The Cancer Council advises storing sunscreens below 30°C.

    The bottom line

    The proposed restrictions are very conservative, based on worst-case scenarios.

    But even in worst-case scenarios, the margin of safety for these ingredients is still below the level at which any negative effect was seen in animals.

    The threat of cancer from sun exposure is far more serious than any potential negative effect from sunscreens.

    If you do wish to avoid these chemicals before new limits are imposed, several sunscreens are available that provide high levels of protection with little or no homosalate and oxybenzone. For more information, consult product labels.

    Ian Musgrave has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council to study adverse reactions to herbal medicines and has previously been funded by the Australian Research Council to study potential natural product treatments for Alzheimer’s disease. He is currently a member of one of the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s statutory councils.

    – ref. How safe are the chemicals in sunscreen? A pharmacology expert explains – https://theconversation.com/how-safe-are-the-chemicals-in-sunscreen-a-pharmacology-expert-explains-260802

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Australia’s census is getting a stress test – keeping it going is good for everyone

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Allen, Demographer, POLIS Centre for Social Policy Research, Australian National University

    GoldPanter/Shutterstock

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics will roll out a large-scale census test next month.

    About 60,000 households will take part across the country to stress test the bureau’s collection processes and IT systems, ahead of next year’s full scale census. The survey questions change little, if at all, between the dry run and the census proper.

    The population count will offer Australians an opportunity to reflect on who we are and the stories we share.

    It comes at a time when traditional censuses are coming under threat worldwide.

    Dying days of census

    Census plays a significant part of the story of humanity. Jesus was born in a stable because a census ordered by Caesar Augusta had brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem.

    They have changed down the centuries. But some things remain the same: the data collected is crucial for taxation, political representation and socio-economic indicators.

    But national head counts are costly and cause enormous headaches for governments.

    Vintage census television ad.

    In other countries, censuses are being killed off, replaced with information compiled by other means, such as administrative government data and population surveys. Think of the overseas versions of Medicare, Centrelink and the Tax Office.

    National statistical offices in the United Kingdom and New Zealand have both flagged the end of traditional censuses

    The UK Office of National Statistics had been preparing for census replacement since 2011, only backtracking after a public backlash.

    Devastating under-enumeration of Maori New Zealanders in 2013 and 2018 meant administrative data was needed to supplement the 2023 NZ census. National data agency, Stats NZ, has now called it quits on traditional census altogether.

    Funding cuts in Canada saw dual short- and long-form questionnaires which resulted in the partial collection of crucial socio-economic data akin to a sample survey. Statistics Canada now uses administrative and survey data to help meet its official statistics program.

    Do we still need the census?

    Replacing the census was floated a decade ago when dwindling government funding saw the Australian Bureau of Statistics struggling to “keep the lights on”.

    Worried after 2016’s “censusfail”, the agency sought to ensure legislatively required data could be achieved even in the absence of a census. The bureau collected population and housing data using experimental administrative data, proving a national census isn’t necessarily needed for population estimates.

    Costs associated with running a five-yearly head count and the decline in the social licence to collect such data are routinely used as justifications for replacing the census. Why conduct a wartime-like undertaking when you don’t have to?

    The threat to the traditional census comes as no surprise to data scientists. Data is now ubiquitous, covering nearly every aspect of our lives – loyalty rewards, public transport cards and even frequent flyer points.

    But there’s so much heavy lifting only a census can do and it’s crucial to helping Australia understand its diverse population.

    More than just numbers

    Data helps contextualise our lives.

    Data made me feel less alone as a young person. I could see I wasn’t the only person doing it tough. Poverty wasn’t my fault, rather a wider structural problem politicians and policymakers failed to understand.

    Being missed by the 1996 census as a homeless teen drives me to ensure Australia’s national census snapshot reflects the needs of the country.

    Data holds powerful truths and has the capability to heal through information. Who we are, how and where we live, our commonalities and differences, and what might come next.

    The Australian Bureau of Statistics is finding increasingly creative ways to communicate and bring Australians along for the ride.

    Its outreach through social media makes data more accessible and fun.

    The paraphernalia promoting previous censuses make it clear how much the agency is invested in ensuring complete coverage of all people. A significant departure from the stuffy practices of national statistical offices overseas.

    Small solar powered census-at-school calculators have been given to pupils to help increase awareness among linguistically diverse communities. This is recognition children complete the census questionnaire in some families.

    Desks of cards gifted to homeless people sleeping rough attests to the bureau’s dedication to ensuring all people are counted, no matter where or how they live

    Behind The News’s take on the census.

    More inclusive family photograph

    But it hasn’t always been plain sailing for the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

    Last year’s unprecedented government interference in the independent conduct of the bureau resulted in proposed questions on sexuality and gender diversity being dumped from the 2026 census.

    Scheduled testing was cancelled and related printed materials were likely pulped.

    A public outcry forced a government back down with the sorry saga clearly demonstrating a myriad of critical data cannot be collected by other means.

    The upcoming census family photograph will be more inclusive – Australians will have the opportunity to have their gender identity and sexual orientation reflected in the tally.

    Family ancestry information will be broadened, and the questionnaire itself will better reflect Australian households overall.

    The alternative to a census is a private, behind-closed-doors collation of personal information by government.

    The good news is Australia’s census is alive and well and keeping up with the times.

    Liz Allen worked as a graduate at the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 2006. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council for work examining grandparenting in Australia. Liz is a member of the National Foundation of Australian Women Social Policy Committee.

    – ref. Australia’s census is getting a stress test – keeping it going is good for everyone – https://theconversation.com/australias-census-is-getting-a-stress-test-keeping-it-going-is-good-for-everyone-261077

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Schlakman, Senior Program Director, The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights, Florida State University

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leads a tour of the new Alligator Alcatraz immigration detention facility for President Donald Trump and U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Andrew Cabellero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    The state of Florida has opened a migrant detention center in the Everglades. Its official name is Alligator Alcatraz, a reference to the former maximum security federal penitentiary in San Francisco Bay.

    While touring Alligator Alcatraz on July 1, 2025, President Donald Trump said, “This facility will house some of the menacing migrants, some of the most vicious people on the planet.” But new reporting from the Miami Herald/Tampa Bay Times reveals that of more than 700 detainees, only a third have criminal convictions.

    To find out more about the state of Florida’s involvement in immigration enforcement and who can be detained at Alligator Alcatraz, The Conversation spoke with Mark Schlakman. Schlakman is a lawyer and senior program director for The Florida State University Center for the Advancement of Human Rights. He also served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles, working as a liaison of sorts with the federal government during the mid-1990s when tens of thousands of Haitians and Cubans fled their island nations on makeshift boats, hoping to reach safe haven in Florida.

    U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has characterized the migrants being detained in facilities like Alligator Alcatraz as “murderers and rapists and traffickers and drug dealers.” Do we know if the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz have been convicted of these sorts of crimes?

    The Times/Herald published a list of 747 current detainees as of Sunday, July 13, 2025. Their reporters found that about a third of the detainees have criminal convictions, including attempted murder, illegal reentry to the U.S., which is a federal crime, and traffic violations. Apparently hundreds more have charges pending, though neither the federal nor state government have made public what those charges are.

    There are also more than 250 detainees with no criminal history, just immigration violations.

    Is it a crime for someone to be in the U.S. without legal status? In other words, is an immigration violation a crime?

    No, not necessarily. It’s well established as a matter of law that physical presence in the U.S. without proper authorization is a civil violation, not a criminal offense.

    However, if the federal government previously deported someone, they can be subject to federal criminal prosecution if they attempt to return without permission. That appears to be the case with some of the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz.

    What usually happens if a noncitizen commits a crime in the U.S.?

    Normally, if a foreign national is accused of committing a crime, they are prosecuted in a state court just like anyone else. If found guilty and sentenced to incarceration, they complete their sentence in a state prison. Once they’ve served their time, state officials can hand them over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. They are subject to deportation, but a federal immigration judge can hear any grounds for relief.

    DHS has clarified that it “has not implemented, authorized, directed or funded” Alligator Alcatraz, but rather the state of Florida is providing startup funds and running this facility. What is Florida’s interest in this? Are these mostly migrants who have been scooped up by ICE in Florida?

    It’s still unclear where most of these detainees were apprehended. But based on a list of six detainees released by Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office, it is clear that at least some were apprehended outside of Florida, and others simply may have been transferred to Alligator Alcatraz from federal custody elsewhere.

    This calls to mind the time in 2022 when Gov. Ron DeSantis flew approximately 50 migrants from Texas to Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts at Florida taxpayer expense. Those migrants also had no discernible presence in Florida.

    To establish Alligator Alcatraz, DeSantis leveraged an immigration emergency declaration, which has been ongoing since Jan. 6, 2023. A state of emergency allows a governor to exercise extraordinary executive authority. This is how he avoided requirements such as environmental impact analysis in the Everglades and concerns expressed by tribal governance surrounding that area.

    For now, the governor’s declaration remains unchallenged by the Florida Legislature. Environmental advocates have filed a lawsuit over Alligator Alcatraz, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a federal judge temporarily barring Florida from enforcing its new immigration laws, which DeSantis had championed. But no court has yet intervened to contest this prolonged state of emergency.

    This presents a stark contrast to Gov. Lawton Chiles’ declaration of an immigration emergency during the mid-1990s. At that time, tens of thousands of Cubans and Haitians attempted to reach Florida shores in virtually anything that would float. Chiles’ actions as governor were informed by his experience as a U.S. senator during the Mariel boatlift in 1980, when 125,000 Cubans made landfall in Florida over the course of just six months.

    Chiles sued the Clinton administration for failing to adequately enforce U.S. immigration law. But Chiles also entered into unprecedented agreements with the federal government, such as the 1996 Florida Immigration Initiative with U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. His intent was to protect Florida taxpayers while enhancing federal enforcement capacity, without dehumanizing people fleeing desperate circumstances.

    During my tenure on Chiles’ staff, the governor generally opposed state legislation involving immigration. In the U.S.’s federalist system of government, immigration falls under the purview of the federal government, not the states. Chiles’ primary concern was that Floridians wouldn’t be saddled with what ought to be federal costs and responsibilities.

    Chiles was open to state and local officials supporting federal immigration enforcement. But he was mindful this required finesse to avoid undermining community policing, public health priorities and the economic health of key Florida businesses and industries. To this day, the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s position reflects Chiles’ concerns about such cooperation with the federal government.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis outlines his plans for Alligator Alcatraz to the media on July 1, 2025.
    Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Now, in 2025, DeSantis has taken a decidedly different tack by using Florida taxpayer dollars to establish Alligator Alcatraz. The state of Florida has fronted the US$450 million to pay for this facility. DeSantis reportedly intends to seek reimbursement from FEMA’s Shelter and Services Program. Ultimately, congressional action may be necessary to obtain reimbursement. Florida is essentially lending the federal government half a billion dollars and providing other assistance to help support the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda.

    Florida is also establishing another migrant detention facility at Camp Blanding Joint Training Center near Jacksonville. A third apparently is being contemplated for the Panhandle.

    ICE claims that the ultimate decision of whom to detain at these facilities belongs to the state of Florida, through the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Members of Congress who visited Alligator Alcatraz earlier this week have disputed ICE’s claim that Florida is in charge.

    You advised Florida Division of Emergency Management leadership directly for several years during the administrations of Gov. Charlie Crist and Gov. Rick Scott. Does running a detention facility like Alligator Alcatraz fall within its typical mission?

    The division is tasked with preparing for and responding to both natural and human-caused disasters. In Florida, that generally means hurricanes. While the division may engage to facilitate shelter, I don’t recall any policies or procedures contemplating anything even remotely similar to Alligator Alcatraz.

    DeSantis could conceivably argue that this is consistent with a 287(g) agreement authorizing state and local support for federal immigration enforcement. But such agreements typically require federal supervision of state and local activities, not the other way around.

    Mark Schlakman served as special counsel to Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles and as a consultant to Emilio Gonzalez at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during his tenure as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director during the George W. Bush administration.

    – ref. Florida is fronting the $450M cost of Alligator Alcatraz – a legal scholar explains what we still don’t know about the detainees – https://theconversation.com/florida-is-fronting-the-450m-cost-of-alligator-alcatraz-a-legal-scholar-explains-what-we-still-dont-know-about-the-detainees-260665

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claire Dale, Research Fellow, the Pensions and Intergenerational Equity (PIE) research hub, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    MonthiraYodtiwong/Getty Images

    Changes to KiwiSaver, global economic uncertainty and predictions house prices could drop by as much as 20% by 2030 all mean retirement is looking very different to how it once did.

    A retirement strategy based on the equity held in a house is no longer as reliable as it has been in the past. Home ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand fell from 75% in 1991 to 60% in 2023 and is projected to fall to 48% in 2048.

    The average age of a first-home buyer has also risen to 36, meaning an increasing number of New Zealanders (13%) are paying off their mortgages after they reach retirement age.

    The number of retirees renting is also on the rise. By 2048, 40% of them will rent, placing pressure on New Zealand’s housing stock.

    KiwiSaver is unlikely to replace the traditional housing nest egg. New Zealanders have, on average, NZ$37,079 in their KiwiSaver accounts, with thousands of people reaching close to retirement age with less than $10,000 saved.

    Investing at the price peak

    The prospect of retirement looks bleakest for those currently aged between 35 and 49 years old. A recent report from credit agency Centrix found this group was struggling the most financially.

    A big part of the problem is that house prices skyrocketed just as they became first-time home buyers. The average asking price for residential property rose by 60.3% over the past decade, from $556,931 at the beginning of 2015 to $892,579 at the end of 2024.

    While incomes have also increased, they have not matched housing prices. In 2000, houses cost about five times the median household income. But by 2025, the median price had risen to 7.5 times the median household income.

    Those who bought their first home around the peak in 2021 are likely to be hit hardest by the forecast drop in house values. According to data insight firm Cotality (formerly Corelogic), nominal prices are expected to pass their 2021 peak by mid-2029. But when adjusted for inflation, prices in mid-2030 would be a fifth below the peak.

    Working into retirement

    Older New Zealanders are also facing significant housing pressures.

    According to a 2022 report from Treasury, over half of superannuitants still paying off mortgages spent more than 80% of their superannuation income on housing costs. Those who are mortgage-free are spending less than 20% of their super on housing.

    Between 2019 and 2024, the percentage of overdue mortgages for the 50+ age groups ranged between 2% and 2.5%, compared to a range of 1% to 1.5% for all mortgages.

    People between the age of 55 and 64 are likely to have purchased their homes in the late 1990s and early 2000s, so are less likely to be hurt by the 2021 peak and subsequent trough.

    Despite this apparent advantage, only 38% of people between 55 and 64 are mortgage free.

    KiwiSaver issues

    The possibility of using accumulated KiwiSaver funds to clear a mortgage is also diminishing. As a result of the 2025 Budget changes to KiwiSaver, employee and employer contributions will rise from April 2026 to 3.5% and from April 2028 to 4%, offsetting the reduced annual government contribution.

    The end of employer contributions matters particularly to the 24% of those aged over 65 years who are still in the workforce. A rule change in 2021 means employers are not required to make contributions or to deduct employee contributions, unless the employee continues to make KiwiSaver contributions.

    But current global crises are affecting KiwiSaver returns. Uncertain and volatile markets, especially for actively managed funds, mean fund managers reallocate money to try to minimise losses. Not all their bets pay off.

    By 2030, Stats NZ projects that approximately 265,000 people aged 65 and over will be in the workforce.

    The Office for Seniors notes that although older workers have challenges finding and staying in paid work, a third of the workforce is aged over 50 and 50% of people aged 60 to 69 are employed.

    Importantly, as the Retirement Commission research found, a third of people over 65 were not working by choice. An increasing number, who neither own their home nor have significant retirement savings, have to continue working past 65 because they need the money to eat and pay the bills.

    As New Zealand’s population ages, and more seniors have to work to pay for the essentials, it’s clear retirement is going to look different. Betting on the value of a house to fund life after 65 is less certain than it used to be. More than ever, New Zealanders need to consider how they will live well in their later years.

    Claire Dale does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. As house prices drop, will the retirement nest egg still be such a safe bet? – https://theconversation.com/as-house-prices-drop-will-the-retirement-nest-egg-still-be-such-a-safe-bet-259380

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: How to give children the freedom to play all across the city – not just in playgrounds

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael Martin, Lecturer in Urban Design and Planning, University of Sheffield

    Co-created play space with children and the community, Via Val Lagarina Milan. Milan municipality

    Children play everywhere. Yet their right to play – protected by a UN convention – is constantly challenged by adults.

    Play is crucial to support children’s holistic development in cognitive, emotional, physical and social skills. Likewise, we know children’s environments significantly influence their health and wellbeing, for better or worse.

    But across cities, young people are let down by a built environment that fails to appropriately consider their needs.

    Places where children commonly used to play, such as streets and local neighbourhoods, have been transformed into car-only spaces where traffic and parking take priority. Likewise, city spaces frequently “design out” children by prohibiting skateboarding, ball games and other kinds of play.

    Over time, urban planning has confined children’s opportunities for play to dedicated playground spaces only.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    However, children don’t have equal access to these formal play spaces. In the largest study of playgrounds in England, my colleagues and I found substantial inequalities in access to play. Children in the most deprived areas needed to travel further to their nearest playground.

    In new research, I’ve explored four international examples of how children and play can be promoted in less likely urban spaces. My findings show how play can be promoted in cities to support children’s right to play anywhere – but also that there is widespread hostility to children’s right to use urban spaces for play.

    Power of play

    In Sydney, a pedal park installation with temporary jumps, ramps and a pump track was set up in different car parks for the duration of the winter. In Paris, a play street was created in central Paris by closing road traffic on Friday afternoons in autumn and spring.

    In Belfast, temporary play equipment and playful street furniture was set up in the Cathedral Gardens public space.

    Cathedral Gardens pop-up play space in Belfast meaningfully encourages children to use the city.
    Park Hood Ltd.

    In Milan, a community-led design involved children in creating a colourful grid, planters, growing beds and games in a school car park, which went on to inspire a new municipal programme of temporary school streets and piazzas.

    These play spaces allowed children to play freely, play with objects, play pretend, play games with rules, and play physically – the core pillars of play. What’s more, they enabled children to develop new connections with their community by appropriating urban spaces to promote relaxation and fun. This was vital following the trauma of the global pandemic – all the projects were active during COVID-19 outside of lockdown.

    Intergenerational encounters at the weekly play street in the 3rd District of Paris.
    Rue’golotte

    These short-term projects invited children to enjoy urban life in new ways. In fact, they bolstered civic access for people of all generations. In Sydney, the closure of the car park fostered a new sense of community. Caregivers, grandparents and residents were able to connect with each other in a whole different setting.

    Children in Sydney play freely in a ‘pop-up pedal park’ created in a public car park.
    Randwick City Council

    Politics of play

    But despite the positives, over time, the projects faced protest and tension. In Milan, fears from residents emerged on play being used as a tool to displace poorer communities. This was in response to the area having long been earmarked for regeneration. In Sydney, Paris and Belfast, people actively targeted and sabotaged the informal play spaces.

    In Sydney, to park their cars, older citizens successfully lobbied local councillors to reduce the total amount of space for play, from the entire car park to one aisle of parking. In Paris, local businesses were exasperated by the presence of children. Collectively they threatened project initiators and staged a protest, claiming that “play streets kill local shops”. In Belfast, the pop-up play space was set on fire, multiple times. By summer 2022, much of the park had been destroyed.

    Destruction and criminal damage of the Cathedral Gardens play space in Belfast.
    Author

    The outcomes demonstrate the politics that children, and their play, were exposed to. Because of a range of aggressive behaviour from adults, children’s use of streets and public spaces were consistently restricted. A common statement from dissenters was “children can go elsewhere”. The reality is they can’t.

    In tracking informal play projects through the pandemic and subsequent years, two additional factors hampered their longer-term success. For the council projects in Sydney and Belfast, council officers hoped to direct more resources to urban play, but the lack of a specific local policy to support play was a significant constraint. By comparison, the community projects in Paris and Milan placed an unsustainable pressure on volunteers to ensure prolonged success.

    Lessons from previous crises highlight how tensions and conflict can affect innovative uses of space, often diluting their progressive purpose. Ultimately, children’s play in recovery from the pandemic experienced a similar fate.

    This is worrying because Unicef research has shown children’s wellbeing has continued to suffer after COVID-19.

    Places that allow for children’s play can create dynamic neighbourhoods, intergenerational encounters, and meaningful participation in urban spaces – if only we let it happen.

    Michael Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How to give children the freedom to play all across the city – not just in playgrounds – https://theconversation.com/how-to-give-children-the-freedom-to-play-all-across-the-city-not-just-in-playgrounds-260444

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Why many Americans still think Darwin was wrong, yet the British don’t

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Edward White, PhD Candidate in Psychology, Kingston University

    One hundred years after a Tennessee teacher named John Scopes started a legal battle over what the state’s schools can teach children, Americans are still divided over evolution.

    Scopes was charged with violating Tennessee law by teaching evolution, in a highly publicised July 1925 trial that led to national debate over evolution and education. The trial tested whether a law introduced that year really could punish teachers over evolution lessons. It could and did: Scopes was fined US$100 (£74).

    But here’s the weird part: while Americans remain deeply divided about whether humans evolved from earlier species, our British predecessors largely settled this question decades before the Scopes trial.

    John Scopes one month before the Tennessee v. John T. Scopes Trial.
    Smithsonian Institution/ Watson Davis

    According to thinktank Pew Research Center data from 2020, only 64% of Americans accept that “humans and other living things have evolved over time”. Meanwhile, 73% of Brits are fine with the idea that they share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. That nine-percentage-point gap might not sound like much, but it represents millions of people who think Darwin was peddling fake news.

    From 1985 to 2010, Americans were in what researchers call a statistical dead heat between acceptance and rejection of evolution — which is academic speak for people couldn’t decide if we were descended from apes or Adam and Eve.

    Here’s where things get psychologically fascinating. Research into misinformation and cognitive biases suggests that fundamentalism operates on a principle known as motivated reasoning. This means selectively interpreting evidence to reach predetermined conclusions. And a 2018 review of social and computer science research also found that fake news seems to spread because it confirms what people already want to believe.

    Evolution denial may work the same way. Religious fundamentalism is what researchers call “the strongest predictor” for rejection of evolution. A 2019 study of 900 participants found that belief in fake news headlines was associated with delusionality, dogmatism, religious fundamentalism and reduced analytic thinking.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    High personal religiosity, as seen in the US, reinforced by communities of like-minded believers, can create resistance to evolutionary science. This pattern is pronounced among Southern Baptists — the largest Protestant denomination in the US — where 61% believe the Bible is the literal word of God, compared to 31% of Americans overall. The persistence of this conflict is fuelled by organised creationist movements that reinforce religious scepticism.

    Brain imaging studies
    show that people with fundamentalist beliefs seem to have reduced activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex — the brain region responsible for cognitive flexibility and analytical thinking. When this area is damaged or less active, people become more prone to accepting claims without sufficient evidence and show increased resistance to changing their beliefs when presented with contradictory information. Studies of brain-injured patients show damage to prefrontal networks that normally help us question information may lead to increased fundamentalist beliefs and reduced scepticism.

    Fundamentalist psychology helps explain the US position in international evolution acceptance surveys. In a 2006 study, of over 33,00 people from 34 countries from 34 countries, only Turkey ranked lower than the US, with about 27% accepting evolution compared to America’s 40% at the time. Among the developed nations surveyed, the US consistently ranks near the bottom — a pattern that persists in more recent international comparisons.

    Where did humans come from? Teaching children about evolution can be controversial, depending on where they live.
    vovan/Shutterstuck

    Research shows that political polarisation on evolution has historically been much stronger in the US than in Europe or Japan, where the issue rarely becomes a campaign talking point. In the US, anti-evolution bills are still being introduced in state legislatures.

    In the UK, belief in evolution became accepted among respectable clergymen around 1896, according to church historian Owen Chadwick’s analysis of Victorian christianity. But why did British religious institutions embrace science while American ones declared war?

    The answer lies in different approaches to intellectual challenges. British Anglicanism has a centuries-old tradition of seeking a “via media” — a middle way between extremes — that allowed church leaders to accommodate new ideas without abandoning core beliefs. Historian Peter documented how British religious leaders actively worked to reconcile science and religion, developing theological frameworks that embraced scientific discoveries as revealing God’s methods rather than contradicting divine authority.

    Anglican bishops and scholars tended to treat evolution as God’s method of creation rather than a threat to faith itself. The Church of England’s hierarchical structure meant that when educated clergy accepted evolution, the institutional framework often followed suit. A 2024 paper argued that many UK church leaders still view science and religion as complementary rather than conflicting.

    A different approach

    The British experience proves it’s possible to reconcile science and faith. But changing American minds requires understanding that evolution acceptance isn’t really about biology — it’s about identity, belonging, and the fundamental question of who gets to define truth. People don’t reject evolution because they’ve carefully studied the evidence. They reject it because it threatens their identity. This creates a context where education alone can’t overcome deeply held convictions.

    Misinformation intervention research suggests that inoculation strategies, such as highlighting the scientific consensus on climate change, work better than debunking individual articles. But evolution education needs to be sensitive. Consensus messaging helps, but only when it doesn’t threaten people’s core identities. For example, framing evolution as a function of “how” life develops, rather than “why it exists, allows for people to maintain religious belief while accepting the scientific evidence for natural selection.

    People’s views can change. A review published in 2024, analysed data which followed the same Gen X people in the US over 33 years. It found that, as they grew up, people developed more acceptance of evolution, though typically because of factors such as education and obtaining university degrees. But people who were taught at a private school seem less likely to become more accepting of evolution as they aged.

    As we face new waves of scientific misinformation, the century since the Scopes trial teaches us that evidence alone won’t necessarily change people’s minds. Understanding the psychology of belief might be our best hope for evolving past our own cognitive limitations.

    Edward White is affiliated with Kingston University.

    – ref. Why many Americans still think Darwin was wrong, yet the British don’t – https://theconversation.com/why-many-americans-still-think-darwin-was-wrong-yet-the-british-dont-260709

    MIL OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Consolation, community, national identity: what is lost when pubs close – and how they can be saved

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Thurnell-Read, Reader in Sociology, Loughborough University

    William Perugini/Shutterstock

    Recent figures from the British Beer and Pub Association show that pubs will close at the rate of one a day in the UK during 2025. This is just the latest chapter in a familiar story – more than a quarter of British pubs have closed since 2000.

    The cost of running a pub has risen dramatically. The ingredients used to brew beer all cost more, as do the business rates, rents, duties, utilities and wages required to operate a welcoming venue in which to serve it. Some publicans have reported utility bills doubling in a matter of months.

    Many pubs occupy prime locations and high-value buildings, which, coupled with larger floor space, mean business rates can be high relative to turnover and profit.

    Meanwhile, food offerings which had provided many pubs with a profitable alternative to a drinks-only model have also been hit by rapid increases in costs. Supermarkets and delivery platforms now provide food and drink directly to consumers at prices few licenced venues can compete with. Even pubs that are economically viable are often more profitable converted into residential or retail space.

    These economic challenges accompany wider cultural trends, such as the continued prevalence of home working, changes in drinking habits and competition from alternative forms of in person and online leisure.

    We’ve researched pub closures in England and Wales to learn what the loss of pubs means for the communities who drink and gather in them.

    When pubs closed temporarily during COVID-19 lockdowns, many people realised that what they missed about pubs was not alcohol but the social contact pubs provided. Pubs have a clear social value. They offer a space for people to meet and interact and have been shown to help tackling loneliness and social isolation.

    Our research participants relayed stories of pub closure in relation to their own lives and communities:

    I’ve been consoled in there, I’ve consoled friends in there. We’ve chopped up family issues, work issues. We’ve drunk for the sake of drinking in there.

    Pubs help people feel connected to a local place. When they close, they can become sites of mourning, a painful reminder of change and decline. One resident of a former colliery village in Nottinghamshire said of the pub she had once worked in – now derelict, fire damaged and vandalised as it awaits redevelopment – that despite her wish that it had remained open it was now better to “knock it down” to “put us out of our misery”.

    For many, pubs are a sort of bellwether for wider anxiety about social and generational change. The loss of pubs speaks to where “we” might be heading as a nation or as a community. Our recent analysis of how the British press has reported on pub closures since 2000 shows that a sense of national identity under threat is a recurring theme.

    Both local and national newspapers have made repeated use of the word “our” in this context, warning readers of the grave threat to “our pubs” and “our heritage”, often invoking an idyllic image of rural life. However, much of this coverage has also praised the pub as a great leveller, as a place where people come together as a community to socialise despite their differences.

    Can pubs be saved?

    The Campaign for Real Ale, the leading consumer group for beer drinkers and pub goers, suggests changing planning and licensing laws to protect pubs at local and national levels, and more support and publicity for pubs to cater to changing markets.

    Others have more directly lobbied for duty cuts that give pubs a fighting chance against supermarkets benefiting from economies of scale, VAT exemptions and convenience.

    A hot meal served in a pub incurs a standard 20% rate of VAT, while a supermarket ready meal to be heated at home does not. The rationale for a tax cut to support pubs would rest on the social benefits they offer to communities, in contrast to supermarket-bought alcohol typically consumed at home.

    A boarded-up pub in Bristol.
    Thomas Turnell-Read

    The Localism Act 2011 gave communities the right to bid to take pubs into community ownership, designating them as assets of community value. Yet while there are some terrific examples of community-owned pubs becoming both thriving businesses and a revived focal point for communities, residents in poorer areas lack the resources to sustain viable campaigns.

    In one village in our study, a pub listed as a going concern at £500,000 in fact sold as a development plot for over £660,000. A viability study suggested that an investment of £225,000, plus working capital of at least £20,000, would be needed to reopen the pub. The residents we spoke to all conceded that a purchase was far beyond the modest resources of the local community.

    While the loss of so many pubs is shocking, it obscures the fact that when other licensed venues, such as bars, restaurants and licensed cafes are factored in, the downward trend is flattened – and even reversed in some areas. This suggests a long-term diversification of the sector – the pub is no longer the only option when going out for a drink.

    This may also reflect a feeling that other hospitality venues better cater to different people and groups who may feel less at home in traditional pubs. Some interviewees told us that they felt craft brewery taprooms were more welcoming and family friendly. Others found cafe-bars to have a more appealing mix of coffee, food and both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks.

    There’s a long history of pubs adapting to serve new needs and markets. Pub is the Hub, for example, has supported rural pubs to incorporate everything from village shops and libraries to pizza ovens and IT skills hubs. There have been promising experiments with fitting pubs for co-working and meeting space. And micropubs can continue to offer the benefits of a convivial social space, in a back-to-basics approach that reduces the costs of running bigger venues. Pubs can and must evolve.

    Thomas Thurnell-Read receives funding from The Leverhulme Trust.

    Robert Deakin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Consolation, community, national identity: what is lost when pubs close – and how they can be saved – https://theconversation.com/consolation-community-national-identity-what-is-lost-when-pubs-close-and-how-they-can-be-saved-260774

    MIL OSI –

  • Taurine could power your energy drink – and maybe cancer cells too. Here’s what you need to know

    Source: ForeignAffairs4

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gulshanara (Rumy) Begum, Senior Lecturer in Nutrition & Exercise Science, University of Westminster

    shutterstock New Africa/Shutterstock

    Energy drinks are big business. Marketed as quick fixes for fatigue and performance dips, energy drinks are especially popular among young people, athletes, sports enthusiasts, and so-called “weekend warriors” – people who pack their workouts into the weekend instead of exercising regularly. Gamers are now a major target too.

    But as the market grows, so do concerns about what’s actually in these drinks – and what these ingredients might be doing to our bodies.

    Many energy drinks contain some combination of three familiar stimulants: caffeine, found naturally in coffee, tea and cacao; guarana, an Amazonian plant rich in caffeine; and taurine, a naturally occurring amino acid found in scallops, mussels, turkey and chicken.

    Taurine, in particular, has drawn both hype and hope. It is credited with performance-enhancing properties and potential health benefits. But new research is raising important questions about how it behaves in the body – and when it might do more harm than good.

    In May 2025, a study published in Nature sparked headlines and unease in equal measure. It found that taurine may fuel the progression of leukaemia, a group of blood cancers that begin in the bone marrow.

    The study showed that while healthy bone marrow cells naturally produce taurine, leukaemia cells cannot. But they can absorb taurine from their surroundings and use it as a fuel source to grow and multiply. Research on mice and in human leukaemia cell samples demonstrated that taurine in the tumour microenvironment – the area around a tumour that includes blood vessels, immune cells and structural support – accelerated the progression of leukaemia.

    Crucially, when researchers blocked taurine uptake by leukaemia cells (using genetic techniques), cancer progression slowed significantly. The authors suggest taurine supplements could potentially worsen outcomes in people with leukaemia and propose that developing targeted ways to block taurine uptake by cancer cells might offer a new treatment strategy.

    Taurine: friend or foe?

    Taurine is one of the most abundant free amino acids in the human body, found in especially high concentrations in the heart, muscles and brain. In healthy people, it’s mainly obtained through diet, but the body can also synthesise taurine from the amino acids methionine and cysteine, provided it has enough vitamin B6, which is found in foods such as salmon, tuna, chicken, bananas and milk.

    Most people consuming a typical western diet take in 40mg–400mg of taurine a day from food alone. This figure refers only to taurine that is directly ingested, not including the additional amount the body can synthesise internally, which may vary depending on age, diet and health.

    Fresh scallops and half a lemon
    Scallops contain high levels of taurine.
    barmalini/Shutterstock

    Taurine is listed on the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) generally recognised as safe (GRAS) database, and according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), it’s safe to consume up to six grams per day. By comparison, a serving of Red Bull or Monster contains around one gram – comfortably below that threshold.

    Despite recent concerns about a possible link to blood cancer progression, taurine isn’t inherently harmful. In fact, some people may benefit from supplementation, especially those receiving long-term parenteral nutrition, where nutrients are delivered directly into the bloodstream because the gut isn’t working properly. People with chronic liver, kidney or heart failure may also have trouble producing or holding on to enough taurine, making supplementation helpful in specific clinical settings.

    Ironically, some research suggests taurine may actually help reduce the side effects of chemotherapy in leukaemia patients – even as emerging studies raise concerns that it could also fuel the disease. This contradiction underscores how much context matters: the effects of taurine depend not just on dosage and delivery, but also on the patient’s underlying condition. What helps in one context, could harm in another.

    But here’s the catch: taking taurine as a supplement for particular health reasons is very different from consuming large quantities through energy drinks, which often combine taurine with high levels of caffeine and sugar. This combination can put strain on the heart, interfere with sleep and increase the risk of side effects, particularly for people with underlying health conditions or those taking other stimulants.

    The latest research raises important questions about whether taurine-heavy products could be harmful in some cases, especially for people with, or at risk of, blood cancers.

    So, should you worry?

    According to the current evidence, if you’re a healthy adult who occasionally sips an energy drink, there’s little cause for alarm. But moderation is key. Consuming multiple high-taurine drinks daily or taking taurine supplements (without prior professional consultation), on top of a taurine-rich diet might not be wise, especially if future research confirms links between taurine and cancer progression.

    Until more is known, the safest approach would be to enjoy your energy boosts by consuming a nutritious diet rather than consuming energy drinks. If you have any underlying health conditions – or a family history of cancer – it’s always best to consult a healthcare professional before diving into taurine supplementation or consumption of energy drinks.

    The Conversation

    Gulshanara (Rumy) Begum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Taurine could power your energy drink – and maybe cancer cells too. Here’s what you need to know – https://theconversation.com/taurine-could-power-your-energy-drink-and-maybe-cancer-cells-too-heres-what-you-need-to-know-256957

  • What Trump’s decision to send more weapons to Ukraine will mean for the war

    Source: ForeignAffairs4

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Hastings Dunn, Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham

    At face value, Donald Trump’s announcement about his plans on Russia and Ukraine look like a major policy change. Speaking from the Oval Office on July 14, where he had been meeting with Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, the US president said he would send “top-of-the-line-weapons” to help Kyiv and – unless a ceasefire deal is agreed inside a 50-day time limit – the US would impose secondary sanctions on any countries dealing with Russia.

    But while this represents a significant departure from Trump’s previous approach, it’s more of a step back towards the policy approach of his predecessor Joe Biden than the U-turn that some commentators are claiming.

    For months Russia has stepped up its bombardment of Ukraine, buoyed by the fact that neither the US Congress nor the White House has authorised any new military aid to Kyiv. Moscow would have been aware of this lack of US action and its missile and drone attacks against Ukraine have aimed to run down the stocks of air defence missiles supplied by Biden while paying lip service to the idea of peace negotiations.

    For Trump the penny appears finally to have dropped as to what was happening. His frustration and disappointment in Putin is what has finally led to him calling this out. According to Trump, Putin “fooled a lot of people – Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden – he didn’t fool me. At a certain point talk doesn’t talk, it’s got to be action”.

    The decision to send new supplies of defensive – and potentially even longer-range offensive missiles – to Ukraine (even if the Europeans pay for them) is an important signal to Russia. But so too is the threat of tariffs of 100% on countries, such as India and China, that sustain the Russian economy by buying its oil and gas at knockdown prices.

    The US senate, led by Lindsay Graham, the influential Republican senator for South Carolina, has been itching to pass these secondary sanctions for months. Now that the Trump administration appears to have adopted this plan it is a significant policy instrument to pile the pressure on Russia.

    The change in Trump’s approach may also mean that the $US8 billion (£6 billion) of frozen Russian assets in the US (and US$223 billion in Europe) could be released to aid Ukraine, which would provide a ready means to pay for the US arms transfers.

    Limits to US support

    What has not changed, however, is the goal of Trump’s policy towards the war in Ukraine. While the Biden administration called out the illegality of Putin’s unprovoked aggression and called for the restoration of Ukrainian sovereignty, Trump is merely calling for a ceasefire.

    Trump may say he is “disappointed” with Putin, but he has not labelled him as the aggressor. In fact at one point he was blaming Ukraine for the invasion. And, significantly, he has not demanded that Russia give up the 20% of Ukraine that it currently illegally occupies.

    ISW map showing the state of the war in Ukraine, July 14
    As at July 14, Russian troops occupy about 20% of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.
    Institute for the Study of War

    The US president is also silent on what the US would commit to in terms of security and stability for Ukraine after the fighting stops. This is a much bigger question than Ukraine’s Nato membership. America’s European allies in Nato regard some sort of stability force on Ukrainian territory as necessary to deter any future Russian aggression.

    Whether or not US troops would be involved (and all the signs are that they would not), some sort of US security “back-stop” or guarantee is still seen in Europe as key to its success – as would be US logistical and intelligence support for its operation.

    But why the 50-day delay?

    Another aspect of the change in Trump’s policy is the long lead time that Russia has been given to come to the table. A lot of Ukrainian civilians are likely to die during this period if the intense bombardment continues. On the battlefield, 50 days would give the Russians an extended window during a renewed summer offensive to make further territorial gains inside the occupied provinces.

    So Trump’s proposals have to be viewed through the prism of his propensity to set deadlines that are then pushed back multiple times – as with the on-again, off-again tariffs, which have given Trump the nickname Taco (“Trump always chickens out”) on Wall Street.

    Russian senator, Konstantin Kosachev, was certainly taking this view when he told the BBC after Trump’s announcement that, “if this is all Trump had to say about Ukraine today, then so far it’s been much ado about nothing”.

    This sentiment was shared by the Russian stock market which rose 2.7% in the aftermath of Trump’s announcement. Analysts had expected much worse, so the long delay in the prospect of anything actually happening was clearly seen as a long way off and potentially subject to change or cancellation. Trump is seen by many as both inconsistent in his threats and unpredictable as to where policy will eventually settle.

    The fact that Trump told BBC Washington correspondent Gary O’Donoghue that while he was “disappointed” with Putin, he was “not done with him” – and his clear reluctance to act quickly and decisively in sanctioning Russia – should be seen as an important counterpart to the apparent policy shift.

    Like so many things with the 47th US president, it’s important not to react to the media appearances or the headlines they provoke, without also paying attention to the policy actions of his administration.

    The Conversation

    David Hastings Dunn has previously received funding from the ESRC, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Open Democracy Foundation and has previously been both a NATO and a Fulbright Fellow.

    – ref. What Trump’s decision to send more weapons to Ukraine will mean for the war – https://theconversation.com/what-trumps-decision-to-send-more-weapons-to-ukraine-will-mean-for-the-war-261192