NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI Global: Expanding seaweed farms pose a risk to vital marine life

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Benjamin L.H. Jones, Chief Conservation Officer, Project Seagrass & Research Affiliate, Swansea University

    Seaweeds are commonly grown from long lines of rope. This string of _Eucheuma_ seaweed in Indonesia is positioned above a seagrass meadow. Benjamin Jones/Project Seagrass, CC BY

    Seaweed farming is a rapidly expanding global industry. As a food resource, it has high nutritional value and doesn’t need fertilisers to grow. Seaweed provides valuable habitats for marine life, takes up carbon and absorbs nutrients, plus it helps protect our coastlines from erosion.

    Usually, seaweeds grow on hard, rocky surfaces. Yet, to farm seaweed, potential areas need to be easily accessible and relatively sheltered. This is where seaweed can grow with limited risk of being dislodged by waves. Seaweed farms in Asia, in countries like China and Indonesia, are responsible for more than 95% of global seaweed production. Seaweed farms, particularly those in Southeast Asia, are commonly in the very same environments where seagrass meadows thrive. Competition for resources ensues.

    Evidence shows that tropical seaweed farms, when placed in or on top of tropical seagrass meadows leads to a decline in the growth and productivity of seagrass. There is also evidence that seaweeds outcompete seagrasses in cooler waters, especially when nutrients in the water are very high.

    Despite negative interactions, such as shading, between seaweed and seagrass, some scientists now advocate for a global expansion of seaweed farming in areas where seagrass grows. This call, comes at a time when seagrass global initiatives are trying to stem seagrass loss.

    Efforts are underway to expand these habitats to their once extensive range to help fight climate change and biodiversity loss. Seagrass meadows are a crucial store of carbon, providing habitats for a wide array of animals.

    Why farm seaweed on top of seagrass?

    The reason that some scientists are advocating for farming seaweed in seagrass is that their research claims that the presence of seagrass reduces disease causing bacterial pathogens by 75%. A major win for a relatively low tech industry where seaweed disease outbreaks hinder production. These scientists are not the only ones advocating for seaweed production at scale.

    Global conservation charities, like World Wildlife Fund and The Nature Conservancy, as well as the Earthshot prize launched by Prince William all support seaweed cultivation programmes in areas likely to contain abundant seagrass.

    However, together with other scientists, we have argued in an academic response in the journal PNAS that their claim is premature. We are concerned that, without appropriate management, these seaweed programmes threaten marine biodiversity and the benefits that humans get from the ocean.

    Despite historic and globally widespread seaweed cultivation, effects on seagrass have mostly been ignored. Where studies exist, effects have been negative for seagrass, its ability to capture carbon, and the diverse animals that call it home.

    Entanglement of migratory animals, such as turtles and dugong with seaweed also needs wider consideration. This is especially the case given new legal frameworks to protect their habitat, and there is ongoing concern for these species being killed by seaweed farmers. The equity of coastal fishing grounds also comes into question, as communities that use seagrass for fishing are most likely to lose access.

    Conservation charities advocate for tropical seaweed farms for good reason. This is to improve community resilience in the face of degrading coral reefs and overfishing.

    While projects mostly have the best intentions, they often don’t consider cascading unintended consequences, nor the equity of the whole community. In reality, seaweed farm placement is effectively akin to ocean grabbing (the act of dispossession or appropriation of marine resources or spaces) with farmers winning on a “first come, first serve” basis, despite not owning the seabed.

    Sustainable standards

    If seaweed farming is to be expanded, standards for sustainability must be upheld and strengthened. In 2017, a sustainable seaweed standard was launched by the Aquaculture and Marine Stewardship Councils.

    But few tropical seaweed farms meet the criteria outlined in this standard due to known consequences that affect seagrass (rightly defined in the standard as vulnerable marine habitats) and likely negative effects on endangered species, like dugong, that frequent seagrass habitats.

    Seaweed cultivation strategies have mixed evidence for long-term success. In Tanzania, many farmers have abandoned the industry due to low monetary rewards compared to the investments they put in, and some evidence suggests that the activity reduces income and health, particularly for women. Where seaweed cultivation has been implemented to reduce fishing pressure, it has instead increased (and often just displaced) fishing activity.

    Given the rapidly increasing threats faced by tropical marine habitats despite the role they play in climate resilience, understanding trade-offs prior to large scale expansion of seaweed farming is a priority. To reduce further any negative effects, international programmes and research advocating for large-scale seaweed farms need to align more readily with the seaweed standard.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    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. Expanding seaweed farms pose a risk to vital marine life – https://theconversation.com/expanding-seaweed-farms-pose-a-risk-to-vital-marine-life-248329

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to the sinkhole in Surrey

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Scientists comment on the sinkhole that has appeared in Surrey. 

    Dr Collins, Deputy Dean, College of Engineering, Design & Physical Sciences and Reader in Geology & Geotechnical Engineering, Brunel University of London, said:

    “The term ‘sinkhole’ is often reserved for naturally formed features, though the fundamental processes and end results are similar. In this case, the cause of the visible holes appears to be the washout of soil from beneath the road as a result of a burst water mains. This burst would have pumped a large volume of water into the soil in a short period of time, overcoming its strength and turning it to a slurry which was then washed away. It isn’t clear where the soil went yet, but it is likely to have gone into the sewers, which may cause problems elsewhere.

    “One of the contributing factors is the local geology, which is sand, and the former land use which is a sand quarry that was located immediately to the west of the sinkhole. Sand can be strong when compacted as the particles are packed together, but weak when it becomes wet, and particularly if there is a lot of water under pressure.

    “The area near the sinkhole has been developed over the last few decades and some of the properties look quite new. Normally, the ground would have been investigated before any construction. This might have involved shallow trial pits or boreholes. The local geology would possibly have been seen as fairly stable and low risk, and the buildings are not large so the amount of investigation could have been limited. Geotechnical engineers looking at the site would have been primarily concerned with soil strength and drainage and, perhaps quite reasonably, are unlikely to have considered the ‘lateral blast’ effect of a burst high pressure water main.

    “What is currently unclear is why the mains pipe ruptured. One possibility is soil movement that caused the pipe to deform. Interestingly, an ‘Entrance to Subterranean Sand Pit’ is marked very close to the position of the sinkhole on the 1868-9 Ordnance Survey map and, while this has been infilled, its may have left a legacy of deeper, weaker soil. There are some clay-rich layers in the local sands that could heave and shrink over time. An alternative is that there was a structural failure in the pipe or a nearby sewer.

    “The pipe rupture does highlight the challenge that comes with having buried infrastructure as they are often buried at depths in excess of a metre. The depth is to reduce the impact of deep freeze during a very cold winter and the place the pipe below the soil most exposed to seasonal changes in moisture content. Unfortunately, this makes them hard to monitor and repairs can be difficult, including the replacement of soil in the excavated hole once the repair is complete.

    “Hopefully, in this case, the extent of the damage is limited to the areas that have already collapsed and the foundations of the adjacent properties have not been affected. Repairing the collapse hole might not be straightforward as the ground is currently saturated and will need to drain. There will need to be ground investigations to see if the hole extends further under the road and buildings. Ultimately, it may be filled with processed sand that would need to be artificially compacted or with concrete.”

    Declared interests

    No reply to our request for DOIs was received.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Presses VA Deputy Secretary Nominee on Mass Firings of VA Researchers, Holding Oracle Accountable to Get EHR Right for Veterans

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    ICYMI: Senator Murray: Trump Must Reverse Firing of VA Researchers Across the Country, Threatens to Decimate Lifesaving Work on Veterans’ Medical Care, Prosthetics, and More
    ICYMI: Murray, Colleagues Request Information on Elon Musk’s Access to VA Medical Records
    ***VIDEO of Murray’s Q&A at nomination hearing HERE**
    Washington, D.C. – Today at a Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing on Dr. Paul Lawrence’s nomination to be Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former Chair of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, questioned Dr. Lawrence—who will oversee the Electronic Health Record (EHR) system—on what he will do differently to hold Oracle accountable and get the EHR system right for veterans in Washington state. Murray also pressed him on whether he supports the decision by Trump and Musk last week to fire en masse VA researchers in the middle of research on everything from burn pit exposure to mental health, opioid addiction, and preventing veteran suicide, among much else.
    “EHR started in 2018 under President Trump and in 2020, it deployed to two Washington state VA hospitals. Instead of helping to improve our veterans’ health care, the rollout ending up being a complete disaster, and it endangered veteran patients,” Murray said at today’s hearing. “Unfortunately, the system still is not working the way that the VA doctors and nurses need—and veterans are continuing  to suffer. Last month, the VA announced that it would be moving forward with pre-deployment activities at the next four sites for this Electronic Health Record.”
    “You will oversee the EHR program—so if confirmed, I want to know what you are going to do differently to hold Oracle accountable and to make sure we get this system right for our veterans?”
    Dr. Lawrence replied that he would aim to better understand why VA did not listen to employees earlier when they raised issued with the EHR system, and that he would work with the team Secretary Collins plans to convene with “everybody involved” to figure out the best path going forward for EHR. “If confirmed, I want to work on that and figure out what the plan should be in terms of holding everybody accountable for what’s supposed to take place, right, to get the most benefits as quickly as possible to our veterans within the amount of money we have,” Dr. Lawrence said.
    “Well let me make this very clear: we have heard that answer from every VA person that’s come before this committee for a number of years now,” Murray pushed back. “Everybody’s looked at it, everybody’s considered it, everybody’s talked about it, everybody’s convened panels. It is not working. So, I need your commitment that it’s not just—convene people and take a look at, but that you are going to make changes to it and demand changes, and get those fixed. Because we have spent, literally, millions and millions of dollars—and worse, veterans are still in jeopardy in their care, and doctors and nurses and VA facilities are really frustrated.”
    “I asked you a really important question: what are you going to do differently? The answer you gave me—I understand where you’re coming from—but it is the same one I’ve heard over and over,” Murray said.
    Dr. Lawrence responded that the Secretary conveyed a “strong sense of urgency that it should be done much sooner than later,” and that, in his previous tenure at VA as Under Secretary for Benefits, he dealt with technology problems around the GI Bill, appeals modernization, and other issues, and implemented technology: “I’ve actually done this, and so that’s the difference I will bring to this. And I understand the frustration, and I pledge to work as best, as hard as I can to get this done,” said Dr. Lawrence.
    “Well I don’t want to be sitting here again, two years from now, same conversation, new person,” Murray said.
    Murray continued her questioning by pressing Dr. Lawrence on Trump and Elon Musk’s unprecedented firings of VA researchers—last week the administration abruptly refused to honor researchers’ three-year “Not to Exceed” term limits (NTEs) by rolling them over as is standard. Instead, the Trump administration immediately dismissing researchers, including at VA Puget Sound, who were in the middle of research on topics including mental health, alcohol and opioid withdrawal, cancer treatments, burn pit exposure, prosthetics, diabetic ulcers, and so much else.
    “Last week, my office’s phones were ringing off the hook—as I assume a lot of people’s were—with really panicked calls from researchers at the VA. They had been laid off with ZERO justification, ZERO warning,” Murray said.
    “And in fact, up until then, the VA had assured them that they were protected from Trump and Musk’s mass firings. VA research shouldn’t be political. And firing VA researchers who are in the middle of a process to find life-saving treatment for veterans with conditions like PTSD, or opioid addiction, or cancer from toxic exposure is really cruel and wasteful. Some veterans are literally in the middle of receiving breakthrough treatment through these clinical trials. What will happen to them and their care when their lead researcher was just fired?”
    “Were you aware of the Trump Administration’s decision to fire these VA researchers?,” Murray asked.Dr. Lawrence responded that he was “not engaged” in anything at the Department now.
    “Do you support it?,” Murray pressed.Dr. Lawrence replied: “If confirmed, I will look into this to better understand what took place—I don’t have enough information to comment on that.”
    “So you won’t commit to restoring these VA researchers’ positions so they can continue that research on PTSD, and opioid addiction, and cancer that was caused by their exposure to toxic chemicals?” Murray pressed again.
    “If confirmed, I commit to looking in to understand what happened and why,” said Dr. Lawrence. “Well, I hope that’s not like every other answer we get from people that we are hearing from that they’ll look into it and no action is taken—you’ve just promised to look into it; this is critical,” said Senator Murray.
    “I understand,” said Dr. Lawrence.
    Senator Murray was the first woman to join the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee and the first woman to chair the Committee—as the daughter of a World War II veteran, supporting veterans and their families has always been an important priority for her. Senator Murray has fought throughout her career for increased benefits for veterans, housing assistance, better access to veterans’ clinics throughout Washington state, and more accountability from the VA.
    Senator Murray has spoken out forcefully against President Trump and Elon Musk’s mass firing of VA employees across the country. Just yesterday, Murray and her colleagues sent a letter to VA Secretary Doug Collins pressing him to protect veterans, their families, and VA staff from unprecedented access to sensitive information by Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). Earlier this month, Senator Murray sounded the alarm over reports of DOGE at the VA and voted against Doug Collins’s nomination to be VA Secretary, making clear that the Trump administration’s lawlessness was putting our national security and our veterans at risk. Alongside 25 of her colleagues, Murray sent another letter earlier this month to Secretary Collins, demanding that he deny and sever Musk and DOGE’s access to any VA or other government system with information about veterans, and to delete any veterans’ information in their possession.
    Senator Murray has been conducting oversight on the flawed EHR rollout in Washington state since the Trump Administration first negotiated the contract with Cerner (later acquired by Oracle), and at every point in the process since then. Murray has consistently pushed VA on its failed implementation of EHR—conducting oversight, holding the administration accountable, and calling on VA to halt deployment of EHR until they get it right in Washington state. In March 2023, Murray introduced comprehensive legislation that would require VA to implement a series of EHR reforms to better serve veterans, medical personnel, and taxpayers. In the Fiscal Year 2024 funding bills, Senator Murray negotiated and passed as Chair of the Appropriations Committee stronger language to hold VA and Cerner accountable for the rollout of the EHR system, and in May 2024, she sent a letter urging VA to consider feedback on the system from providers and veterans in Spokane and Walla Walla and reiterating that VA must not move forward on the rollout of EHR until the myriad issues that have plagued the system in the locations where it has been launched are fixed.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Andrea Watson Named Associate Director for Innovation, Partnering, and Outreach at NREL

    Source: US National Renewable Energy Laboratory

    Andrea Watson has been selected to serve as the next associate laboratory director (ALD) for the Innovation, Partnering, and Outreach (IPO) directorate at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) after directing NREL’s Strategic Partnerships Office (SPO) for the past two years.

    Andrea Watson.

    Watson joined NREL in 2009 as a junior researcher, and in the 15 years since, she has established a reputation for fostering collaboration, teamwork, and strategic approaches to expanding NREL’s impact in renewable energy futures.

    NREL Director Martin Keller commended Watson’s selection, stating, “We are fortunate to have someone as qualified as Andrea to further the success of the IPO directorate. Andrea has demonstrated skill in securing partnerships to advance NREL technologies and programs, and the Leadership Team congratulates her on this deserved position.”

    As the inaugural director of the newly created SPO in 2022, Watson focused on broadening NREL’s network of partners and strengthening relationships across the globe, which resulted in a record $143 million in partnerships during Fiscal Year 2023. She also played a key role in launching Impact26, NREL’s strategic approach to increasing non-DOE funding. Following its rollout in December 2023, NREL successfully closed $170 million in new partnership agreements and modifications in FY 2024, exceeding its target of $153 million.

    Prior to her leadership of the SPO, Watson served as NREL’s laboratory program manager for strategy, where she developed the organization’s first strategic agenda, in addition to her roles as a group manager and researcher.

    In her new position, Watson will remain dedicated to advancing Impact26 while strengthening partnerships and expanding NREL’s outreach efforts.

    “I am incredibly grateful to have the opportunity to serve on the NREL leadership team as the IPO ALD,” Watson said. “I am so excited about the impact IPO can have through partnerships, enabling startups, and tech transfer and licensing.”

    Watson is replacing Bill Farris as associate laboratory director as he transitions to his new role as chief external development officer at NREL.

    “Andrea was a natural choice for this role,” Farris said. “Her close familiarity with lab strategy, research agendas, and NREL’s partnership portfolio, in addition to her track record of leading high-performing teams, have made her a strong asset to IPO and the lab.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: FinTech Grad Student Nick Savignano Earns Competitive International Business Fellowship

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    Graduate student Nick Savignano ’25 has always been the type of person to roll up his sleeves and help others, whether spearheading a new project at work or clearing debris after Hurricane Katrina.

    When Savignano, a graduate student in the FinTech program, heard about a program that connects postgraduate business students with small- and medium-sized enterprises in the developing world, he was immediately interested.

    He recently learned that he was accepted as a Fellow in the prestigious DHL GoTrade GBSN Fellowship Program and is waiting to learn what industry and country he will be paired with during the eight-month program, which begins in March. The Fellowship program, which is remote, will also give him the chance to engage with global experts, participate in workshops, and develop new skills and mentorship.

    “Figuring out how to address problems and challenges and coming up with unique solutions is all very exciting for me. I’m going to give it my heart and soul,’’ he said. Savignano said he is looking forward to collaborating with people from another part of the world and the opportunity to work with another fellow.

    Students from 45 Countries Competed for 61 Fellowships

    The Fellowship program is highly competitive, said Natalie Timinskas, Coordinator of Students Programs at the Global Business School Network (GBSN). This year, the organization received almost 300 applications from master’s and Ph.D. candidates from 45 countries and 88 universities. Only 61 were accepted into the cohort.

    “The caliber of candidates was exceptional, with applicants showcasing impressive passion and dedication to advancing management and entrepreneurship in emerging and developing markets,’’ she said.

    The network cannot disclose the specific enterprises, as they are still finalizing agreements, but they are working with businesses from various industries, she said. Last year’s cohort worked on projects across diverse sectors, such as food and beverage, jewelry, textiles, e-commerce, crafts, and leather goods.

    Creating, Improving and Shaking Things Up

    Savignano earned his bachelor’s degree at Loyola University in 2018, with a finance major. He spent the next five years working in the mortgage industry in Maryland.

    He chose to apply to the UConn FinTech program, at that time only the second in the nation, because he loved everything about finance, and was intrigued by new ways of receiving and processing payments. During his time at UConn, he has also worked with the entrepreneurship programs here to investigate an idea he has for creating his own company.

    Savignano said he enjoys creating, improving processes, and shaking things up.

    “The Fellowship will be an exciting resume builder and also a very unique story to share,’’ he said. “I think it will also be one of those ‘contagious’ things that many people will become interested in doing.’’

    As he looks at his career growth, Savignano said he wants to be in a position to make strategic decisions.

    “I came to UConn to learn that aspect of business, and I think I’ve been successful,’’ he said. “I’m happy to represent UConn through this and to spread the UConn name because this university has done so much for me.’’

    John Wilson, Academic Director of FinTech program, said Savignano has been a standout student.

    “We encourage all students to map their own academic journey. Nicholas has taken that encouragement to heart and taken advantage of every opportunity,’’ Wilson said. “This, along with his drive and dedication, makes him a solid selection for the Fellowship program and we are confident that he will represent UConn well.’’

    Savignano said he feels fortunate that the FinTech program created an opportunity for him to attend ITC insurance innovation conference in Las Vegas last year, where he met industry veterans, tried brand-new products, learned about challenges of the insurance industry, and engaged with top executives.’’

    Network Offers Host of Opportunities for Ambitious Students

    Arminda Kamphausen, Director of Global & Sustainability Initiatives, said the School’s recent decision to become a member of the GBSN has provided both students and faculty with international opportunities that enrich educational experiences and research resources.

    “This chance for Nick to use what he is learning in the FinTech program to work on an international team to support a small or medium enterprise is just one of many such opportunities,’’ she said.

    “GBSN also gives our students opportunities to compete in an annual case competition, organizes thematic faculty working groups, such as Business and Human Rights, and offers monthly virtual events for sharing of member institution best practices,’’ Kamphausen said. “It also convenes an annual conference for substantive discussions on how business schools can continue to provide responsible training to their students and positive impact in the world.’’

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: King Working to Protect Maine’s Coastal Ecosystem

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King
    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME), a member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, is introducing legislation to help improve conditions for kelp forest and marine life. The Help Our Kelp Act — which also has a companion bill in the House of Representatives — would invest federal resources to address ongoing crises that kelp forest ecosystems face along the Maine coastline and across the country.
    Kelp forest ecosystems in Maine and along the nation’s shores provide food and habitat for hundreds of fish and marine mammals. These aquatic regions stabilize Maine’s coasts allowing for responsible economic activities including fishing, shipping and innovations in the blue economy. Over the last 50 years, changes in climate, poor water quality and overfishing have damaged between 40-60 percent of America’s kelp forests.
    “Kelp forests are key to helping keep our waters clean — and healthy waters make for healthy people,” said Senator King. “However, climate change and human activity are having devastating consequences on our coastal ecosystems, putting at harm the iconic Maine fishery and our coastal communities. The Help Our Kelp Act is an important  investment that will help to restore these intricate, sensitive underwater habitats, and better protect Maine’s waters and way of life. I want to thank my colleagues for acknowledging the importance of our kelp forests and am encouraged that we are coming together in the House and Senate to safeguard this critical ecological and economic resource.”
    The Help Our Kelp Act would:
    Establish a new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grant program to fund conservation, restoration, and management efforts to support kelp forest ecosystems;
    Take steps to address the greatest relative regional declines, long-term ecological or socioeconomic resilience, and focal recovery areas identified by Tribal, federal, or state management plans;
    Authorize $5 million annually for FY2026 through FY2030.
    In the Senate, this legislation is led by Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) and cosponsored by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR), Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Adam Schiff (D-CA).
    Bill text can be found here and a bill summary can be found here.
    As a member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Senator King has been a longtime advocate for Maine’s wild ecosystems. For his dedication to preserving the outdoors, Senator King was awarded the inaugural National Park Foundation Hero Award. Last year, Senator King helped secure critical funding for the American Lobster Research Program—an organization that supports projects to address critical knowledge gaps about American lobster and its fishery in a dynamic and changing environment. Senator King also helped pass the Thomas R. Carper Water Resources Development Act, legislation that provides approval for the restoration of a Maine fishway to allow fish such as herring, alewives, and the endangered Atlantic salmon to migrate upstream.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. Route 11 Bridge Replacement Project Underway

    Source: US State of New York

    Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that work will soon begin on the $33.6 million project to replace the aging bridge carrying U.S. Route 11 over the Oneida River in the Town of Cicero, Onondaga County and the Town of Hastings in Oswego County. The bridge serves as a substantial north-south connection through the Hamlet of Brewerton, with an estimated 13,000 motorists traversing it daily. The surrounding area — rich in history and recreation — is well-regarded as a popular spot for boating, fishing and other water-based activities, and serves as an energetic epicenter for restaurants and small businesses. Due to its proximity to Interstate 81, Route 11 provides easy access to the City of Syracuse and the surrounding Central and Northern New York communities for residents and visitors alike.

    “New York State has demonstrated its unwavering commitment to investing in communities through the revitalization of its infrastructure,” Governor Hochul said. “The Route 11 bridge over the Oneida River in Brewerton is a pivotal connection that we must maintain, and this state-funded undertaking will ensure it remains safe and reliable now and into the future.”

    First constructed in the early 20th century, the Route 11 bridge helped to facilitate trade and travel across the Oneida River. It has undergone significant rehabilitation work over the years: most recently in 1986. Several other smaller projects over the last two decades have addressed minor repairs to the bridge.

    It is anticipated that by the fall of 2026, the new bridge will be complete, and traffic will be moved from the temporary bridge to the new bridge. Full construction on the project is anticipated to be completed in early 2027.

    New York State Department of Transportation Commissioner Marie Therese Dominguez said, “Central New York is undergoing an incredible transformation, and it is crucial that our transportation infrastructure is ready to handle this unprecedented growth. This innovative bridge design demonstrates Governor Kathy Hochul’s commitment to creating a safe and resilient transportation network, and the multi-modal features of the structure will ensure everyone has a safe way of reaching recreational attractions along the Oneida River, which help to fuel the local economy and provide new opportunities for regional growth.”

    State Senator Christopher Ryan said, “This investment in the Route 11 bridge is a testament to our commitment to strengthening Central New York’s infrastructure and ensuring safe, reliable connections for residents, businesses and visitors. By modernizing this critical crossing, we are not only improving efficiency but also supporting economic growth and enhancing access to the recreational and commercial opportunities that make this region so vibrant. I thank Governor Hochul and NYSDOT for their continued commitment to the transformation of Central New York infrastructure.”

    Assemblymember Will Barclay said, “I’m pleased to see investments being made to strengthen Central New York’s transportation infrastructure. Replacing the Route 11 Bridge is critical to ensuring it is reliable and safe for the 13,000 motorists who depend on it daily. This project will also enhance the region’s ability to support the many residents and visitors who come to the area for its boating, fishing, and recreational opportunities. This investment will serve the community for years to come, promoting both safety and economic growth.”

    Assemblymember Al Stirpe said, “Governor Hochul’s announcement today that the Route 11 bridge in Brewerton will be replaced clearly extends her commitment to invest and enhance Upstate infrastructure and communities. Replacing the Route 11 bridge, which straddles both sides of the Oneida River in the heart of Brewerton, will improve safety for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Brewerton’s recently successful NY Forward grant and today’s announcement acknowledge the importance of our historic communities and recognize the potential and future of our downtowns.”

    Projected Outcomes of the Bridge Replacement Project

    Demolition of the existing bridge is expected to begin this fall, after traffic is shifted to a temporary bridge that will accommodate alternating one-way traffic. Modernized traffic signals will be installed at the northbound and southbound approaches of the temporary bridge, with vehicle-detection sensors in place to adjust motorists’ wait time based on traffic flow, which will considerably reduce travel impacts to the public. Emergency vehicles will utilize a preemption system to clear the temporary bridge of all traffic, allowing emergency vehicles to safely cross the bridge, as needed, and without delay.

    Once traffic is shifted to the temporary one-lane bridge, construction on the first gussetless truss bridge in New York State will begin, with the new structure being erected within the same alignment and footprint as the existing bridge. The gussetless truss bridge is widely considered to be more modern and efficient. The current design makes the bridge’s steel plates, which are located beneath the roadway, more susceptible to draining salt water and debris during the harsh winter months, while the connections needed for the new design are located above the roadway, making the bridge more easily accessible for inspection and maintenance crews, which aids in the prevention of wear and tear, improving durability, and saving money.

    The state-of-the-art bridge is designed for a 75-year service life, but the gussetless details, combined with a metalized coating protection, and routine care, will likely extend its lifespan well beyond that. Construction will also include new concrete bridge piers, abutments, and a concrete deck that will be supported directly by floor beams, reducing the cost of inspections, upkeep and future replacement.

    Standard eight-foot shoulders will be installed, providing room for emergency vehicles, disabled vehicles, and snow and ice equipment. Existing drainage structures and pipes will also be replaced to prevent excess runoff, and utilities will be relocated through the girders of the new structure, eliminating the need for nearly a dozen utility poles, which will help prevent unnecessary damage, and create a more streamlined appearance.

    The addition of five-foot sidewalks on each side of the bridge adds options for multi-modal transportation and optimizes the health and safety of pedestrians and cyclists, as will decorative streetlights being installed on the approaches to the bridge, and in the truss hung from the center of the roadway, which will help increase visibility.

    About the Department of Transportation

    It is the mission of the New York State Department of Transportation to provide a safe, reliable, equitable, and resilient transportation system that connects communities, enhances quality of life, protects the environment, and supports the economic well-being of New York State.

    Lives are on the line; slow down and move over for highway workers!

    For more information, find us on Facebook, follow us on X, formerly known as Twitter, or Instagram, or visit our website. For up-to-date travel information, call 511, visit www.511NY.org or download the free 511NY mobile app.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Team conflict at work can boost creativity, but it depends on the ‘fighters’ as much as the fights

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Brad Harris, Professor of management, associate dean of MBA programs, HEC Paris Business School

    For many corporate teams, the notion of “good conflict” is merely a myth. Most often, conflict is seen as a roadblock to success–especially when it involves clashing personalities or disagreements over strategy. But what if, in certain cases, the right kind of team conflict fuels creativity? That’s the idea behind our new research, which suggests that, handled well, some team fights might just be the key to sparking fresh ideas.

    And it turns out that who is in conflict can make all the difference.

    Researchers have long explored how team conflicts affect creativity, with some arguing that the right conflict can boost creativity, and others saying that conflict erodes it. Unfortunately, the findings have been all over the place so far. A common research approach has been to lump all conflict into the same bucket, or to separate task-centered conflict and relationship-oriented conflict and then assume they affect everyone in the team equally. But as we’re learning, these approaches might be too simplistic.

    Newer research, including our own, suggests that considering the roles of individual team members, and particularly their network status in the team, can paint a much clearer picture of how conflict can affect creativity. In particular, conflicts involving “critical members”–those who play a central role in a team’s workflow–seem to be where the real action is.

    The (sometimes) bright side of conflict

    In any team, disagreements about the task at hand–such as how to distribute resources, make decisions or handle workflow – are bound to happen. These are known as “task conflicts”. And traditional research has often considered such disputes as potentially helpful, arguing that they can bring in new perspectives, spur discussion and, if managed properly, enhance team creativity. That said, data often tell a different, more complicated story. We started our research as an attempt to reconcile some of the inconclusive results.

    Using network analysis, which is a way to explore the unique interactions and relationships between individuals, in 70 new product development teams, we found that task conflicts involving critical members of a team can indeed spark creativity by pushing the team to reflect on their work. But this is only under certain conditions. Specifically, critical members’ task-related disagreements seem to have creative potential when they occur in teams that report higher levels of shared goals. These results hold even when accounting for all other task conflicts in the team.

    Here’s how it works: when a critical member – the one others depend on for essential information – engages in task conflict, teams are forced to take a step back, reassess what’s happening and consider new approaches. It pushes the team out of autopilot mode and, so long as team members are aligned with shared goals, it encourages a mindset of flexibility and fresh ideas, which are the lifeblood of creativity. Absent shared goals, we don’t really see much creative benefit from critical members’ task conflicts, which is not surprising – why do the hard work of questioning the status quo if you don’t agree on the outcome you want? As it turns out, much of what we have traditionally assumed about and measured in task conflict does not really help us understand how it is conducive to creativity; what happens with the critical members in the center of a team’s network is where the fruits of diverse thinking can emerge.

    The dark side of conflict

    On the flip side, personal spats – known as “relationship conflicts” – have a different effect. These are conflicts that aren’t really about the work itself, but rather stem from personality clashes or interpersonal issues.

    Past research has been pretty clear about the negative effects of team relationship conflict on creativity, but our work shows that when these conflicts involve critical members, the effects are even more deleterious. Namely, critical members’ interpersonal conflicts erode the team’s cohesion, i.e., the “glue” of the group, which destroys the trust and safety needed to try new, creative things.

    When critical members possess high levels of emotional intelligence, the worst of these negative effects can be mitigated. In short, emotional intelligence helps these key players handle personal tensions in a way that keeps the team together, even when conflicts pop up. So, once again, our study’s findings emphasize that the way conflict affects teamwork is largely dependent on how the people in the center of the network experience it.

    Practical takeaways

    So, what can leaders do to harness the creative potential of conflict while minimizing its downsides? Here are a few actionable steps:

    Get crystal clear on goals: By establishing common goals, leaders create an environment where task conflicts are more likely to be constructive. When team members are all pulling in the same direction, disagreements about how to get there can be resolved more productively, driving the team to reflect and adapt in creative ways.

    Coach for emotional intelligence: Because relationship conflicts involving critical members can harm cohesion, it’s essential to equip these key players with the emotional skills needed to manage personal tensions. Often, star individual contributors find themselves in the center of a team’s network because of their task-related skills, not because of their interpersonal ones. This is a dangerous recipe! Selecting for or coaching on emotional intelligence can help set critical members up to handle conflicts in ways that don’t damage team unity, preserving the group’s creative potential.

    Reconsider conflict: Recognize that not all conflicts are equally disruptive – or equally beneficial. A well-designed team structure will consider both the roles of critical members and how conflicts involving them can shape team dynamics. Leaders can look at conflict not just as a problem, but as a potential driver of creativity, depending on who is involved and how it’s handled.

    Overall, traditional research on team conflict treated task and relationship conflicts as if they affect everyone equally. This might explain why we still know relatively little about links between conflict and creativity. Thanks to advances in how we explore team data using more complex network analyses, we can see that conflict involving critical members disproportionately affects team dynamics and creativity – and start identifying ways to manage conflict in more productive ways.

    Brad Harris ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

    – ref. Team conflict at work can boost creativity, but it depends on the ‘fighters’ as much as the fights – https://theconversation.com/team-conflict-at-work-can-boost-creativity-but-it-depends-on-the-fighters-as-much-as-the-fights-247934

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study of glacier melt this century

    Source: United Kingdom – Science Media Centre

    A study published in Nature estimates global glacier melting from 2000 to 2023. 

    Prof Andrew Shepherd, Head of Department of Geography and Environmental Science, Northumbria University, said:

    “This is really important as it’s an authoritative assessment from the community working on this topic. It confirms that the pace of glacier melting is accelerating over time. Glacier melting has two main impacts; it causes sea level rise and it disrupts the water supply in rivers that are fed by meltwater. Around 2 billion people depend on meltwater from glaciers and so their retreat is a big problem for society – it’s not just that we are losing them from our landscape, they are an important part of our daily lives.

    “Even small amounts of sea level rise matter because it leads to more frequent coastal flooding. Every centimetre of sea level rise exposes another 2 million people to annual flooding somewhere on our planet.

    “Community assessments like GLAMBIE are vital as they give people confidence to make use of their findings. That includes other climate scientists, governments, and industry, plus of course anyone who is concerned about the impacts of global warming. Around 2 billion people depend on meltwater from glaciers and so their retreat is a big problem for society – it’s not just that we are losing them from our landscape, they are an important part of our daily lives.”

    Prof Martin Siegert, Professor of Geosciences and Deputy VC at the University of Exeter, said:

    “Two centimetres might not sound a lot, but this is the contribution from small glaciers – not the whole of the ice on the planet, and not from Greenland and Antarctica. Sea level has risen by 20cm since 1850; 50% from the sea being warmer and expanding, 50% (10cm) due to glacier melt. However, ice sheets are now losing mass at increasing rates (6x more than 30 years ago), and when they change, we stop talking centimetres and start talking metres. For example, the last ice age was 20,000 years ago, and between then and 10,000 years ago as we warmed out of the ice age, sea level rose by 130m, due primarily to collapse of ice sheets.

    “This research is concerning to us, because it predicts further glacier loss, which can be considered like a ‘canary in the coal mine’ for ice sheet reaction to global warming and far more sea level rise this century and beyond. The IPCC indicates 0.5-1m this century – but that is with a 66% certainty – hence 1/3 chance it could be higher under ‘strong’ warming, which unfortunately is the pathway we are on presently.”

    ‘Community estimate of global glacier mass changes from 2000 to 2023’ by The GlaMBIE Team was published in Nature at 16:15 UK time on Wednesday 19th February. 

    Declared interests

    Prof Andrew Shepherd: No conflicts to declare

    Prof Martin Siegert: No COI

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Is Nigeria in danger of a coup? What the country should do to avoid one – political analyst

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Abdul-Wasi Babatunde Moshood, Senior Lecturer Department of Political Science, Lagos State University

    African countries have had nine successful military coups since 2020. In west and central Africa, there have been at least 10 coup attempts in the same period. Those of Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Gabon and Guinea were successful. A number of social, economic and political factors have been identified as responsible for the truncation of democracy in those countries.

    In this interview, The Conversation Africa asks political scientist Abdul-Wasi Babatunde Moshood, who has recently published research on preventing military coups in Nigeria, about what drives coups, whether those factors are present in Nigeria and what steps Nigeria could take to protect its democracy.

    What are the drivers of recent coups in Africa?

    One major reason is leaders who have used the idea of democracy to advance their own economic gains. The result is corruption, which has deepened the gap between the rich and the poor.

    While liberal democracy widens opportunity in developed countries, the reverse is the case in Nigeria, due largely to corruption and lack of effective leadership.

    Also, democracy in parts of Africa, including Nigeria, has not been able to advance development and make a positive impact on the people. To ringfence democracy from military intervention, it must advance development for the people.

    Another factor is the strategic importance of Africa, which has historically attracted foreign powers. With the partitioning of Africa in Berlin in 1884, European powers created spheres of influence which have continued to haunt many African countries.

    These strategic interests have continued to infiltrate politics and cause instability on the continent.

    In my recent work, I argued that foreign influence and strategic importance make coups more likely to occur in African countries including Nigeria.

    Just like coups in the post-independence era, some recent coups in west Africa have the fingerprints of foreign powers. For instance, Russia is implicated in the 2020 and 2021 coups in Mali and the Burkina Faso coup.

    The UK, the US, China and France are all interested in Africa. Since the expulsion of France from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, the former colonial power has been seeking another regional haven in Nigeria. This has raised suspicion in some quarters.

    Also, colonialism left a legacy of division between a country’s people and their army. Recruitment dislocated the previous warriors and empowered new ones. The military under colonialism was perceived by civilians as protecting the interests of the colonial ruling elite.

    In the post-colonial period, the military is perceived as protecting the interests of the African ruling elite. This arrangement goes on until the military, having been exposed to politics, decides to seize power for itself. Oftentimes, citizens give legitimacy to this kind of coup because they have always seen the political elite as self serving. Military coups in Sudan and Mali are examples of this.

    Are these factors present in Nigeria today?

    The sociopolitical and economic conditions that led to coups in other countries in west Africa are present in Nigeria.

    Nigeria is still largely divided along lines of clans and religion. Insecurity is at high levels across the country. The removal of the petrol subsidy has caused economic problems.

    Commodity prices have skyrocketed. Food inflation reached 40.75% in 2024 – its highest level in 25 years.

    The colonial legacy in Nigeria is still evident in the north versus south divide that plagues the country’s politics. Bad leaders exploit the division for their own selfish gain by using marginalisation rhetoric.

    Nigeria is still strongly tied to the apron strings of the western powers. This explains why Nigeria’s presidential aspirants prefer to go to Chatham House, London to speak rather than talk to the people they intend to lead.

    Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu’s relationship with France is raising eyebrows in the country. The president recently signed new deals with France in the areas of renewable energy, transportation, agriculture and critical infrastructure. There are concerns because this is coming soon after nearly all former French allies in west Africa have broken ties with the European country.

    These factors often lead to increasing disaffection, which in turn can ignite a military takeover, as happened in Niger, Guinea and Gabon.

    How can a military comeback be prevented in Nigeria?

    Effective leadership would help reduce colonial legacies, improve democracy and mitigate foreign influence. This would foster confidence among dissimilar ethnic communities as policies towards inclusiveness and development of the country were implemented.

    Military professionalism would further specialise the military and give them focus. There should be less involvement of the military in politics.

    In peace time, the military can also be kept engaged as a service provider in agriculture, health and social work as done, for instance, in the US.

    Regional organisations like the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union should be proactive in condemning any derailment in democratic practices and values by political actors. They should not only react by imposing sanctions after a military takeover.

    Nigeria needs to think about developing a homegrown democracy as advocated by the late Claude Ake, the Nigerian political scientist.

    The process and method of democratisation should be affordable to all to participate. Democratic leaders must be scrutinised and their level of wealth ascertained before and after leaving office.

    Democratic institutions must be strengthened to prevent corrupt people from taking over offices. Democratic leaders in Nigeria and other African countries must seek indigenous solutions to their challenges.

    – Is Nigeria in danger of a coup? What the country should do to avoid one – political analyst
    – https://theconversation.com/is-nigeria-in-danger-of-a-coup-what-the-country-should-do-to-avoid-one-political-analyst-248281

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is Nigeria in danger of a coup? What the country should do to avoid one – political analyst

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Abdul-Wasi Babatunde Moshood, Senior Lecturer Department of Political Science, Lagos State University

    African countries have had nine successful military coups since 2020. In west and central Africa, there have been at least 10 coup attempts in the same period. Those of Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso, Gabon and Guinea were successful. A number of social, economic and political factors have been identified as responsible for the truncation of democracy in those countries.

    In this interview, The Conversation Africa asks political scientist Abdul-Wasi Babatunde Moshood, who has recently published research on preventing military coups in Nigeria, about what drives coups, whether those factors are present in Nigeria and what steps Nigeria could take to protect its democracy.

    What are the drivers of recent coups in Africa?

    One major reason is leaders who have used the idea of democracy to advance their own economic gains. The result is corruption, which has deepened the gap between the rich and the poor.

    While liberal democracy widens opportunity in developed countries, the reverse is the case in Nigeria, due largely to corruption and lack of effective leadership.

    Also, democracy in parts of Africa, including Nigeria, has not been able to advance development and make a positive impact on the people. To ringfence democracy from military intervention, it must advance development for the people.

    Another factor is the strategic importance of Africa, which has historically attracted foreign powers. With the partitioning of Africa in Berlin in 1884, European powers created spheres of influence which have continued to haunt many African countries.

    These strategic interests have continued to infiltrate politics and cause instability on the continent.

    In my recent work, I argued that foreign influence and strategic importance make coups more likely to occur in African countries including Nigeria.

    Just like coups in the post-independence era, some recent coups in west Africa have the fingerprints of foreign powers. For instance, Russia is implicated in the 2020 and 2021 coups in Mali and the Burkina Faso coup.

    The UK, the US, China and France are all interested in Africa. Since the expulsion of France from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, the former colonial power has been seeking another regional haven in Nigeria. This has raised suspicion in some quarters.

    Also, colonialism left a legacy of division between a country’s people and their army. Recruitment dislocated the previous warriors and empowered new ones. The military under colonialism was perceived by civilians as protecting the interests of the colonial ruling elite.

    In the post-colonial period, the military is perceived as protecting the interests of the African ruling elite. This arrangement goes on until the military, having been exposed to politics, decides to seize power for itself. Oftentimes, citizens give legitimacy to this kind of coup because they have always seen the political elite as self serving. Military coups in Sudan and Mali are examples of this.

    Are these factors present in Nigeria today?

    The sociopolitical and economic conditions that led to coups in other countries in west Africa are present in Nigeria.

    Nigeria is still largely divided along lines of clans and religion. Insecurity is at high levels across the country. The removal of the petrol subsidy has caused economic problems.

    Commodity prices have skyrocketed. Food inflation reached 40.75% in 2024 – its highest level in 25 years.

    The colonial legacy in Nigeria is still evident in the north versus south divide that plagues the country’s politics. Bad leaders exploit the division for their own selfish gain by using marginalisation rhetoric.

    Nigeria is still strongly tied to the apron strings of the western powers. This explains why Nigeria’s presidential aspirants prefer to go to Chatham House, London to speak rather than talk to the people they intend to lead.

    Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu’s relationship with France is raising eyebrows in the country. The president recently signed new deals with France in the areas of renewable energy, transportation, agriculture and critical infrastructure. There are concerns because this is coming soon after nearly all former French allies in west Africa have broken ties with the European country.

    These factors often lead to increasing disaffection, which in turn can ignite a military takeover, as happened in Niger, Guinea and Gabon.

    How can a military comeback be prevented in Nigeria?

    Effective leadership would help reduce colonial legacies, improve democracy and mitigate foreign influence. This would foster confidence among dissimilar ethnic communities as policies towards inclusiveness and development of the country were implemented.

    Military professionalism would further specialise the military and give them focus. There should be less involvement of the military in politics.

    In peace time, the military can also be kept engaged as a service provider in agriculture, health and social work as done, for instance, in the US.

    Regional organisations like the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union should be proactive in condemning any derailment in democratic practices and values by political actors. They should not only react by imposing sanctions after a military takeover.

    Nigeria needs to think about developing a homegrown democracy as advocated by the late Claude Ake, the Nigerian political scientist.

    The process and method of democratisation should be affordable to all to participate. Democratic leaders must be scrutinised and their level of wealth ascertained before and after leaving office.

    Democratic institutions must be strengthened to prevent corrupt people from taking over offices. Democratic leaders in Nigeria and other African countries must seek indigenous solutions to their challenges.

    Abdul-Wasi Babatunde Moshood receives funding from TETFUND Institution Based Research IBR, He is a Member of Academic Staff Union of University, Network for Democracy and Development NDD, among others. He is currently the Acting Head of Department of Political Science, Lagos State University.

    – ref. Is Nigeria in danger of a coup? What the country should do to avoid one – political analyst – https://theconversation.com/is-nigeria-in-danger-of-a-coup-what-the-country-should-do-to-avoid-one-political-analyst-248281

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The dangers of ‘Jekyll and Hyde leadership’: Why making amends after workplace abuse can hurt more than it helps

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By John Sumanth, James Farr Fellow & Associate Professor of Management, Wake Forest University

    Not the picture of leadership. LMPC via Getty Images

    A glance at the day’s headlines reveals a universal truth: Leadership matters.

    Whether uplifting and ethical or toxic and abusive, leaders profoundly shape our lives. And this is especially true on the job. Research consistently shows that leadership influences employees’ attitudes, behaviors and emotions, driving key organizational outcomes such as creativity, employee engagement, well-being and financial performance.

    Unfortunately, research also shows that supervisors abuse their employees far too often and then try to manage impressions to compensate for their bad behavior. But what happens when a leader tries to “make up” for past abuse by suddenly acting ethically? And do employees have to experience the abuse firsthand for it to hurt them?

    As professors who study management – and who’ve heard horror stories of employees working under mercurial bosses – we wanted to find answers. So we conducted a study, which was recently published in the Journal of Applied Psychology.

    Our research includes multiple samples of full-time employees in the U.S. and the United Kingdom. To begin, we surveyed 222 employees and 66 supervisors to gather insights into workplace leadership and work experiences. We focused on two contrasting leadership behaviors: ethical leadership and abusive supervision. We also conducted experiments with 400 people, presenting them with stories about managers who alternately display both ethical leadership and abusive supervision and asking them how they would respond.

    Across these studies, we found that employees who experience such oscillating leadership often end up worse off – in terms of their emotional well-being and job performance – than if they were consistently being abused. By going back and forth between abusive and ethical behaviors, leaders create greater confusion, leaving their employees emotionally exhausted.

    Instead of providing relief, acts of ethical leadership ironically serve to amplify the damage done by prior abusive behavior.

    Jekyll and Hyde leadership in practice

    As an example, consider Steve Jobs, the co-founder and chief executive officer of Apple for more than a decade until his death in 2011. While Jobs was an icon to many people, he reportedly swung between toxic and positive leadership behavior while dealing with subordinates.

    For example, when Jobs’ exacting standards weren’t met, he would reportedly storm into meetings and profanely berate the team responsible for not living up to his lofty expectations. Yet, despite these outbursts, he was also described as a leader who believed in his employees’ potential, expressing unwavering confidence in their abilities and empowering them to exceed their own expectations.

    This kind of unpredictable leadership can leave workers emotionally exhausted, wondering: “Which version of my boss will show up today? Will this kindness last, or is it just a setup for another blow?” Unsurprisingly, this isn’t good for productivity.

    Employees value stability and predictability in their leaders. A supervisor who bounces between harsh criticism and warm praise creates an emotional roller coaster for the team. When employees see a supervisor as unpredictable, they experience more stress and emotional exhaustion, which hurts their job performance and willingness to share ideas.

    Interestingly, we found that workers don’t even need to be directly targeted by an abusive supervisor to be affected; employees whose immediate supervisors get the Jekyll-and-Hyde treatment from their higher-ups suffer similar consequences.

    These negative reactions occur, in part, because employees begin to doubt that their immediate supervisors are able to effectively influence higher-level leaders. In other words, the psychological toll of Jekyll-and-Hyde leaders isn’t limited to direct encounters but can also be experienced vicariously.

    How companies can banish Mr. Hyde

    The good news is that organizations can break this cycle – and workers are likely to be less stressed and more productive when they do. Here are three steps every organization can take:

    • Train leaders to manage stress without lashing out. High-pressure environments are prevalent these days, but abusive leader behavior doesn’t have to be. Providing leaders with tools like emotional intelligence training and conflict resolution skills can help leaders navigate both personal and professional challenges more constructively.

    • Address the abusive behavior directly. When abusive actions occur, ignoring them or asking the leader to “be nicer next time” isn’t enough. Structured interventions – like one-on-one coaching, counseling or formal sanctions – are essential for generating real change. Employees need to see that the organization is living up to its stated values and ideals.

    • Foster a culture of trust and accountability. Tools like 360-degree feedback reports – which involve feedback from supervisors, peers and subordinates – can help leaders gain deeper insight into their behaviors. These can be used not just for development, but also for heightened accountability. Creating a climate of psychological safety – in which employees can report concerns without fear of retaliation – is key to rebuilding trust. So is ensuring clear, consistent responses to reports of abusive supervision.

    Great leaders understand the power of trust and setting an example. Employees want leaders they can rely on, not ones who keep them guessing. So leaders should be wary about employing ethical leadership as a quick fix for past mistakes. Rather, it’s about showing up consistently, authentically, and with integrity every single day.

    For leaders at all levels, the takeaway is simple: Consistency fosters success. Organizations that prioritize stable, ethical leadership create workplaces where employees feel valued, supported and empowered to do their best work.

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

    – ref. The dangers of ‘Jekyll and Hyde leadership’:
    Why making amends after workplace abuse can hurt more than it helps – https://theconversation.com/the-dangers-of-jekyll-and-hyde-leadership-why-making-amends-after-workplace-abuse-can-hurt-more-than-it-helps-244622

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: TCU/IAM Lorton, Va. Amtrak Auto Train Workers Picket for a Living Wage

    Source: US GOIAM Union

    More than a year after voting to organize into the Transportation Communications Union (TCU/IAM), the largest union on Amtrak, a group of Drummac employees who work on the Amtrak Auto Train Property in Lorton, Va., are holding an informational picket against Drummac management’s stall tactics during negotiations.

    “These employees work tirelessly outside, in all weather conditions, to professionally load and unload cars and motorcycles from the trains,” said TCU/IAM Organizing Director Sal Rodriguez. “They fought and won a union in 2023 – it’s well-past time for the company to get serious.”

    Amtrak contracts with a third-party company called Drummac to safely load and unload vehicles from their Auto Trains, which travel between Lorton, Va. and Sanford, Fla. The Amtrak Auto Train runs seven days a week, and is one of the highest revenue-producing routes for Amtrak nationwide.

    The demands from Drummac workers are simple: fairer wages, proper work scheduling, and improved benefits and overall working conditions. TCU/IAM has been bargaining in good faith to provide these workers with a fair contract, but negotiations have been exceedingly slow.

    “Unfortunately, Drummac’s offers have been wholly unserious thus far,” said Matt Hollis, TCU/IAM’s Lead Negotiator. “These workers are seeking things most of America has or recently got: a raise! That’s not too much to ask.”

    The informational picket aims get the word out to the public and customers to let them know how Drummac treats employees that handle their vehicles.

    The Drummac workers who load and unload these vehicles:

    • Are paid HALF the industry standard.
    • Are only being offered pennies for raises.
    • Are often forced to work unpaid time due to required flexibility for varying train schedules.
    • Can’t even afford the Auto Train they work on.
    • Haven’t had a raise in over a year.

    Support the Drummac workers on the Auto Train, and make sure they get the contract that they deserve!

    Share and Follow:

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: “The rule of six handshakes is followed in social media”

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

    Ivan Samoylenko studies graph theory and in his third year he came up with an idea that formed the basis of a scientific article with a very high citation rate in the media. In an interview with the Young Scientists of the HSE project, he spoke about the Watts-Strogatz small world model, singing in the children’s choir of the Bolshoi Theater, and choosing between science and industry.

    How I got into science

    I am a graduate of the specialized mathematics school #57 in Moscow. I attended math clubs there since high school, and in the 9th grade I transferred to a specialized math class. I got acquainted with some mathematical disciplines at a fairly serious level there. At that time, my attention was drawn to graphs – perhaps because many life questions are clearly formulated in their language. After school, I entered the mathematics department of the Higher School of Economics and am currently mainly engaged in graph theory.

    At HSE, I work in two laboratories. In the International Laboratory of Game Theory and Decision Making at HSE in St. Petersburg, I study applications of graphs to game-theoretic problems. And at the Faculty of Mathematics, we created the Scientific and Educational Laboratory of Complex Networks, Hypergraphs, and Their Applications. There, as you can tell from the name of the laboratory, I study both graphs and their generalized version — hypergraphs. And not only from the point of view of theory, but also from the point of view of the possible application of these structures to solving problems from a wide variety of areas — biology, medicine, data analysis, etc.

    What is a graph

    For clarity, a graph can be represented as a set of points (vertices) connected by lines (edges). The main feature of graph theory is that almost any system can be represented as a set of objects and some interactions between them. For example, when a journalist interviews me, this is also a graph, and a directed one at that. But in this particular example, it is not very clear why the graph is needed – it does not provide any new information about what is happening. However, if many different journalists interview different scientists, with the help of graph theory, you can compare the structural characteristics of the vertices (people) and make unobvious (at first glance) general conclusions.

    About the history of graph theory

    The father of graph theory is considered to be the mathematician Leonard Euler, who published a solution to the problem of the Königsberg bridges in 1736. He proved that it is impossible to cross all seven Königsberg bridges without crossing any of them twice and return to the starting point. Later, with the development of technology and the emergence of large data sets, graph theory increasingly occupied the minds of mathematicians and was embodied in various fields of knowledge.

    Another famous graph problem is the four-color conjecture, the assertion that any map on a plane can be correctly colored in no more than four colors. Although the problem is formulated in a language understandable even to a schoolchild and is easily illustrated with understandable pictures, it took humanity more than 100 years to solve it. And when in 1976 a solution was found (by the way, not at all simple: one of the steps of this solution is to try out almost 2000 options), an important break in the history of all mathematics occurred: this was the first theorem completely proven with the help of a computer.

    In general, major breakthroughs and milestones in the history of graph theory are inextricably linked with the development of information technology. Thus, graph theory gained particular popularity with the emergence of a clear example of a very large irregular (which cannot be fully described by a small set of rules) graph — the Internet. In general, the emergence of the Internet led to the emergence of a major branch of graph theory — the theory of complex networks.

    The two major modern works in complex network theory are papers describing the mechanisms by which complex networks emerge in the real world: the Watts-Strogatz small-world model and the Barabasi-Albert preferential attachment model. These papers have a great many citations, which is rare in mathematics. The Watts-Strogatz model is even in the top 100 most cited scientific papers of all time.

    When large amounts of data appear, it is interesting to identify structural patterns. And now there is a lot of data, you can build informative graph systems in almost any area. For example, I saw a study on how the graph of interactions of British composers of the 20th century is structured. By calculating the characteristics of this graph, for example, some centralities, you can draw a conclusion about which specific composers were structurally important for the development of British music. And from different points of view: someone as an independent actor or founder of a school, and someone as a link, allowing more successful colleagues to interact with each other.

    In general, in the language of graph theory, one can formulate models – probabilistic, game-theoretic – and prove their properties with strict mathematical theorems. So this is both an applied and fundamental area of mathematics.

    What I am proud of

    I came up with a game-theoretic model that describes why the social networks we see in the real world follow the six-handshake rule. It has been described before why there should be relatively few handshakes, but I was able to show where the magic number 6 comes from. A paper about this, based on my bachelor’s thesis, was published in Physical Review X in 2023.

    In the language of graph theory, it is easy to formulate what a social network is. The vertices are people, and the relationships between them (for example, acquaintance or friendship) are edges. In this context, the six-handshake rule can be thought of as follows: if we take two random people registered in a social network, then with a probability close to one, the path from one to the other along the “friend” edges will be no longer than six steps.

    The Watts and Strogatz paper that I mentioned proposed a random graph model in which a similar phenomenon could be observed. And I came up with a model that, on the one hand, somehow justified why this model was reasonable, and on the other hand, theoretically proved that if it so happened that we had two people in the system who were more than six handshakes apart, then such a system would not be very stable under sufficiently weak constraints.

    It was fortunate that our article came out 25 years after Watts and Strogatz’s article. And Strogatz himself wrote about our article on his social networks. He is quite a media person, so such a mention greatly promoted our article; at some point, journalists from different countries even wrote to me to get comments. As a result, according to my calculations, according to the altmetrics indicator, which is responsible for mentions in the world media and social networks, among articles where the first author has affiliation with the HSE, mine is the most mentioned.

    How I Got Published in a Top-Rated Magazine

    Getting published in high-ranking journals is a separate art (or rather, a craft). Even if you are a young genius, but do not know how to write articles, present material in a format acceptable for your domain, then you most likely will not publish anything in serious journals.

    Our article, published in the journal, consists of two parts. This is the main, “selling” part, which should be read by a completely non-technical person, and the additional part, which provides technical details and detailed evidence. As the author of the concept and idea, I wrote almost all the additional material (with detailed evidence), while a team of several leading scientists worked on the first part. First of all, Stefano Bocaletti, who was introduced to me by my supervisor in the graduate school of MIPT, Andrei Mikhailovich Raigorodsky, made a significant contribution to the release of this publication.

    He was the first person who was able to read my drafts and believed in the concept I proposed (it should be noted that in 2021, when I started writing this work, there were no good LLM chats yet, and my English was so bad that even at local competitions of the Faculty of Mathematics my work did not take prizes; then I accidentally found out that one of the reasons was the inability to read it normally).

    Then Stefano, for some time, invited his friends, also very strong network scientists, to join our team so that they could help us illuminate and explore our problem: what experiments to conduct, where to place emphasis so that the work could be published in a major interdisciplinary journal. And everything worked out: our article has a fairly good citation rate both in the media and in other scientific publications. So it’s one thing to discover a phenomenon, and quite another to successfully convey your results to the scientific community. Moreover, the criteria for an interesting publication are different for different domains. For example, I know that my fellow economists from the Game Theory Laboratory did not really like the format of my work. I have yet to master writing good economic articles.

    On the lack of time, but not ideas

    I keep a document with tasks that can be done and where minimal progress has been made. There are more than 20 of them. There is no shortage of ideas, there is a shortage of time, and sometimes there is a shortage of workers.

    With semi-applied ideas, it is often unclear in advance whether they are good or not; this can only be determined by conducting an experiment. In theory, it sometimes happens that you come up with something — and it is immediately clear that it is a good idea. Even its refutation can be informative and interesting. In the context of applied methods, everything is different: if something does not work, it is no longer so interesting. But on the other hand, if you know the result in advance, then what kind of science is it? You research, and if something works out — that’s great.

    What I dream about

    I would like young Russian scientists to have an easier life. So that they could not only survive, doing exclusively or mainly science. The presence of specialized specialists who have the opportunity to fully devote their time to research is critically important from the point of view of the development of science and technology. To explain my understanding of the problem, I would like to give an example from game theory. There is such a concept as a “rational agent”. Let’s say a young man (or woman) as a rational agent chooses where to go to work. In theory, if in science, there will be less money, but the work will be more free. If in industry, vice versa. Such a trade-off with clear alternatives: for each person, you can figuratively imagine a payoff function depending on these two factors, and each chooses one of the two paths depending on which factor is more important for the person.

    However, this model is relevant only if the economic difference is not too big. In practice (this is not only our problem, but in Russia it is felt especially acutely) the gap is colossal. In some situations it is more reasonable and simpler to go to work in a corporation, and in your free time to get together with friends and discuss science, and some people do just that.

    Another important issue is time constraints. Many scientific projects/grants/programs are very heavy and unwieldy from a bureaucratic point of view. The project setup activities may begin when a student, say, has just entered a master’s program, and the launch — when he or she is already finishing the last pages of his or her diploma.

    In such conditions, a young scientist will have to look for part-time work/other jobs, be in a state of constant uncertainty, which leads to constant stress. So many, even among those who are really interested in a scientific career, cannot cope and simply leave science. If we attract young scientists and administrative personnel (in my understanding, a scientist should not be busy writing papers, he should be engaged in science, if he does not have additional paid administrative duties) on more market-based terms, it seems to me that much more interesting and breakthrough work could be done.

    If I hadn’t become a mathematician

    The simplest answer is that I would go into IT, because that’s how I make money. But, in principle, I could become anyone, mathematics is not about theorems, but rather about a way of thinking. I don’t know who I could become. I could even do music, I even sang in the children’s choir of the Bolshoi Theater. Many opera productions have parts where children sing, and opera houses have children’s choirs.

    So that there is no feeling that I am Luciano Pavarotti, I should clarify that it is easier for boys to get into the Bolshoi Choir. The Bolshoi Children’s Choir consisted (at least when I was there) mainly of girls, and any boy there is a great success; there are fewer of them in music in general, and in early adolescence many leave because of voice failure. We had a situation when three people stopped taking part in performances at once. Because when two boys almost six feet tall and a third, also quite a large fellow with the nickname Horse stand next to a soloist shorter than them by a head and a half and have to portray small children, a noticeable dissonance arises.

    What I was interested in at school

    I was interested in history. I was even closer to the final stage of the All-Russian in history than in mathematics. I also played a lot of “What? Where? When?” and continued to do so as a student, although a little less actively. Now, unfortunately, I have almost no time for this: I have to work in industry, do science, and I also have a social and organizational load in the laboratories where I work.

    Who would I like to meet?

    With John Conway. I have a close relationship with his attitude to mathematics: he saw it in various everyday things, and although he became famous mainly for the game “Life”, he was in fact an amazingly versatile scientist with a large number of important works in various areas of mathematics. I was very upset when I read the news of his death at the very beginning of the covid pandemic. It would also be interesting to talk to mathematicians from the golden age of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics – for example, Andrey Kolmogorov, the author of the axiomatics of probability theory.

    What are my hobbies besides science?

    I am a curious person and try to get acquainted with different things, to find out what is happening in the world. Sometimes I watch history channels, sometimes I can watch something about football or a strange documentary. In general, almost any information is interesting to me. But all this is irregular. I work systematically, slept – good, did not sleep – well, what to do.

    Advice to young scientists

    Think carefully about choosing your future track. I can also wish you patience and strength, mental and physical – you will definitely need it.

    Favorite place in Moscow

    I really like Moscow as a whole. I’ve been to different cities and I can’t say that even one of them is close to Moscow in terms of comfort (I have a certain sense of being a Muscovite, of course). If I have to name a specific place, I can simply say that I love the Moscow metro – it’s very practical (and at the old stations, it’s also aesthetically pleasing).

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Climate change is threatening Lake Ontario — lessons from the Little Ice Age show us why we need to adapt

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daniel Macfarlane, Associate Professor of Environment and Sustainability, Western Michigan University

    Humans have always had a close connection with Lake Ontario. For centuries, this Great Lake has been a backbone of the region’s economy — relied upon for trade, food and industry. But a warming climate could dramatically change this relationship.

    This wouldn’t be the first time climate change has affected how humans use this Great Lake, as I show in my new book The Lives of Lake Ontario: An Environmental History. During the Little Ice Age, which spanned roughly the 14th to 19th centuries, Indigenous and settler societies had to adapt to the cooling Lake Ontario environment.

    As we again face a changing climate, the way our predecessors adapted during the Little Ice Age teaches us why it’s necessary we change how we use and interact with Lake Ontario today.

    The Little Ice Age

    Prior to the onset of the Little Ice Age, the Lake Ontario region was occupied exclusively by different Indigenous Peoples — including the Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabeg. These groups regularly came to Lake Ontario to hunt, harvest and trade. They were highly attuned to local climate conditions, adapting their agricultural strategies accordingly.

    But the Little Ice Age altered the climate in the region — with average temperatures about 1-2°C lower than normal. I argue in my book that the impact this period’s climate had on the environment and those living in the region helped change the course of empires in North America — both Indigenous and Euro-American.

    This cooler climate led to seasonal unpredictability. This forced the region’s various occupants to adjust their resource and food acquisition strategies. A higher frequency of summer droughts could mean failed crops — while extremely heavy snows made it harder to hunt. These factors may have contributed to the severe decline of Indigenous populations in the region.

    The origins of the fur trade — which dramatically reorganized society and altered political power in the Great Lakes region — are also at least partly attributable to the Little Ice Age. The cooler climate drove the desire for fur in Europe while also affecting the pelt thickness of North American animals.

    The climate during the Little Ice Age also influenced various military campaigns due to its effects on the region’s weather and the lake’s conditions.

    During the War of 1812, for instance, two American warships sank in a sudden summer squall north of Port Dalhousie. A lack of appreciation for the lake’s capriciousness could mean disaster — while those commanders who respected the local environment had the upper hand.

    Agriculture

    But alongside the challenges this cooling climate created, it also provided new opportunities.

    As I contend in my book, climate changes during the period encouraged the diversification of agriculture and food production — such as the cultivation of wheat strains hardy enough to survive cooler conditions. Settlers also believed the mass conversion of forests and wetlands to fields could modify the climate, making it warmer. The influx of settlers reliant on these new types of agriculture fundamentally shaped the emerging political and economic systems around Lake Ontario.

    Heavier ice cover on Lake Ontario actually made winter transportation easier in some ways.

    Temperatures during the Little Ice Age frequently caused a thick freeze in the lake’s nearshore waters. This enabled alternative forms of wintertime travel which were generally cheaper, more flexible, and more dependable than travelling by boat. Skates, sleighs and iceboats were developed for both economic and recreational needs.

    As the Little Ice Age began releasing its grip during the 19th century, Euro-Americans moved to the Lake Ontario basin in larger numbers. This climatic shift proved integral to settler expansion.

    Ice on Lake Ontario enabled cheaper forms of travel.
    (William Armstrong, Public domain/Wikimedia Commons)

    Resilient yet fragile

    The Toronto region could not have become Canada’s economic and cultural capital without the resources of Lake Ontario.

    But all this economic and political growth has come at a tremendous cost. Lake Ontario is now imperilled because of the way we’ve come to rely on it.

    In the 19th century, we cut down forests, dammed and polluted tributaries, dug canals and obliterated fish species in the region.

    In the 20th century, our impacts only expanded: overwhelming pollution, invasive species, urban sprawl, larger canals and hydroelectric dams. These human costs have led to nutrient overloads in the water from wastewater and farming runoff, impoverished biodiversity, fluctuating water levels, toxic chemicals and plastics in the lake.

    This ongoing degradation — coupled with climate change exacerbating ecological challenges and creating new ones — is further undercutting Lake Ontario’s ability to cope with our many abuses.

    A hotter lake could alter the entire food web, which could have ripple effects on local species, energy flows and biodiversity.

    The changing climate is also causing extreme fluctuations in lake levels. Recent record-high levels eroded shorelines — affecting houses and infrastructure while threatening septic systems, nuclear power stations and fuel refineries.

    Resilience

    We’re lucky that Lake Ontario is remarkably resilient. But the lake is being pushed to the brink. We have a small window to both adapt to the already changing climate and prevent it from changing further.

    Of course, the Little Ice Age involved the climate getting cooler, while today it’s getting warmer — with humanity being the primary driver for this changing climate. In the face of climate change, we too can adapt how we use and interact with the lake — just as was done in the Little Ice Age.

    But our response nowadays needs to be as much about stopping old practices as starting new ones. We need to cease contributing to global warming and other negative impacts on Lake Ontario through our unsustainable industry, flawed economic systems and overconsumption, massive pollution and reliance on fossil fuels.

    Daniel Macfarlane 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. Climate change is threatening Lake Ontario — lessons from the Little Ice Age show us why we need to adapt – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-threatening-lake-ontario-lessons-from-the-little-ice-age-show-us-why-we-need-to-adapt-246292

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Electronic muscle stimulators are supposed to boost blood flow to your legs – here’s what the evidence says

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By John Houghton, Clinical Lecturer in Vascular Surgery, University of Leicester

    vebboy/Shutterstock

    Google “improve leg circulation” and you may see sponsored ads for electronic muscle stimulators that claim to boost blood flow to your feet. But is there any evidence they work?

    Peripheral artery disease is a surprisingly common condition affecting more than one in ten people aged over 65 in the UK. Caused by narrowings and blockages in the arteries of the legs, it can lead to intermittent claudication – calf pain while walking – what the Dutch call “window-shopping legs”.

    Leg pain during walking significantly affects the everyday life of those with peripheral artery disease. It limits their ability to take part in social activities, daily tasks such as shopping and it may even impact on a person’s employment. Unsurprisingly, those with shorter pain-free walking distances report worse quality of life and major impacts on their mental wellbeing.

    Peripheral artery disease is not a benign condition. Five years from diagnosis, four in ten people will have died and another one in ten will have had a major leg amputation.

    So, the aims of treatment for peripheral artery disease are to reduce both the risk of heart attacks – the biggest cause of death – and progression to the end-stage of the disease where amputation is necessary unless surgery is performed to restore blood flow. The most important elements to optimal medical treatment are blood-thinning medications such as aspirin, cholesterol-lowering medications such as statins, and stopping smoking.

    For those with pain when walking the treatment with one of the biggest effects on walking distance and quality of life is, well… walking. The best results are seen in those who take part in a supervised exercise programme which has consistently been shown to be more cost effective than surgery for claudication. In fact, one large randomised trial demonstrated similar results from supervised exercise to stenting a blocked artery in improving walking distance and quality of life.

    Unfortunately supervised exercise therapy is only available to about half of UK peripheral artery disease patients despite it being recommended by Nice.

    What about electrical muscle stimulation?

    These devices work by using electronic impulses to cause the muscles of the calf to repeatedly contract. Usually this is by indirect stimulation through the feet using an electronic footplate, somewhat resembling a foot spa – although no water needed is used. These devices appear to be safe and well tolerated, with no adverse events reported.

    Studies have demonstrated they do indeed increase arterial blood flow in the calf, both in healthy people and in those with peripheral artery disease. However, these increases in blood flow are present only while using the device.

    A 2023 trial of 200 patients with peripheral artery disease assessed the effect of electrical muscle stimulation on walking distance. The study recruited half of the participants from centres with supervised exercise programmes and half from those without. All patients received optimal medical therapy.

    The researchers randomly allocated half of the participants to receive electrical muscle stimulation. These patients were given the device and told to use it for 30 minutes at least once a day for three months.

    After three months there was no difference in the maximum walking distance between those that did and did not receive electrical muscle stimulation.

    However, there was an improvement in walking distance in those that received electrical muscle stimulation in addition to supervised exercise therapy compared to those that received supervised exercise alone.

    Additionally, patients who received electrical muscle stimulation reported lower pain scores and better scores for the health domain in quality of life questionnaires – although they recorded no overall quality of life benefit. This demonstrates that while there may be benefit of the device on symptoms, it may only be small or experienced by a limited proportion of patients.

    Transcutaneous nerve stimulation (Tens) has also been used in people with peripheral artery disease. This uses weaker electrical impulses to stimulate nerve fibres and block the transmission of pain signals.

    A review of published studies highlighted that Tens may have some benefit in improving walking distance. The included studies were relatively small though and not all were randomised trials. This means the findings may not be just due to the effect of Tens or applicable to a wider group of patients.

    While these electrical stimulation devices show some promise, it is not clear if they are cost effective nor are they currently recommended in guidelines for treating peripheral artery disease.

    Certainly, some people with peripheral artery disease do report benefit from using these devices. But they should only be used in addition to the cornerstones of peripheral artery disease treatment: medication, stopping smoking and walking as much as possible.

    John Houghton receives funding from the George Davies Charitable Trust and the National Institute for Health and Care Research. He is the trainee representative for the Vascular Surgery Specialist Advisory Committee and is a member of the UK Labour Party.

    – ref. Electronic muscle stimulators are supposed to boost blood flow to your legs – here’s what the evidence says – https://theconversation.com/electronic-muscle-stimulators-are-supposed-to-boost-blood-flow-to-your-legs-heres-what-the-evidence-says-248340

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – DEVE delegation to Tanzania on 24-26 February 2025 – Committee on Development

    Source: European Parliament

    7 Committee on Development MEPs, led by chair Barry Andrews, will travel to Tanzania to gather first-hand information on Global Gateway initiatives and other development cooperation projects on the ground and to assess their impact on the local economy and population.

    MEPs will focus on the impact of EU investment in the country, both in sector-specific projects and the wider impact of the EU’s flagship Global Gateway initiative. Over the course of the three-day mission, MEPs will visit projects focusing on water and sanitation, economic development and port infrastructure, gender equality, education, and sustainable fishing practices. The MEPs will meet with government ministers and representatives of EU diplomatic missions, UN agencies, development banks, private sector, and national development agencies. They will also talk with their counterparts in the Tanzanian parliament as well as local civil society representatives to discuss, among other issues, sustainable development, inter-parliamentary cooperation and human rights.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: WTW and Cornell University partner to predict drought and prepare for water scarcity

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LONDON, Feb. 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company, announced today a new scientific partnership with Cornell University to quantify the risks of severe and sustained drought worldwide. This collaboration will provide an in-depth view of global exposure to drought risks and the potential effects of water shortages on business operations.

    Around two-thirds of the global population live in places that encounter water stress for at least part of the year. When water supplies are further diminished by drought, many communities experience reduced agricultural yield, energy production, and slower economic growth. The adverse effects of drought are more serious in low-income and middle-income countries and are particularly disruptive to agriculture-dominated areas of the developing world.

    Climate change has already increased drought risks in many regions, but unfortunately even the latest generation of climate models still underestimate the potential severity, duration, and correlation of future droughts. Under this new initiative, WTW and Cornell University will collaborate to identify geographical ‘hotspots’ for climate-amplified drought, produce more accurate estimates of drought risk, and create new tools and datasets to anticipate single and multi-year drought. At Cornell, the research is supported by the Atkinson Center for Sustainability and led by Prof. Toby Ault, a leading global expert in future drought under climate change.

    Scott St. George, Head of Weather & Climate Research for the WTW Research Network, said, “Water is essential to all industries, so no one can afford to have drought take them by surprise. We know climate change has already supercharged droughts in some places — witness the ongoing drought in the American Southwest, now in its third decade. Prof. Ault and his team at Cornell will provide us with a clear view of the real risk of drought and water scarcity. Those insights are absolutely critical for our clients’ operations and planning in water-dependent sectors such as food and beverage, energy producers, and waterborne transport.”

    “We’re excited to work with WTW to translate cutting-edge climate science into actionable insights for the insurance industry,” said Prof. Toby Ault, Associate Professor in the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University. “Our research has shown that traditional climate models often underestimate the risk of severe, prolonged droughts, particularly in regions already facing water stress. By combining our expertise in drought modeling with WTW’s industry knowledge, we can better prepare for the complex drought risks of the future.”

    About Cornell University
    Cornell University is an Ivy League and statutory land-grant research university located in Ithaca, New York. Founded in 1865, Cornell is consistently ranked among the world’s leading academic institutions, with strengths in atmospheric sciences, engineering, and environmental research. The university’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences is internationally recognized for its leadership work in climate science, drought research, and applied climatology.

    About WTW

    At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

    Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at wtwco.com.

    Media Contacts

    Sarah Booker
    Sarah.Booker@wtwco.com
    +44 20 3124 7671

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study looking at genetic and lifestyle factors, and premature death, ageing and age-related diseases

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    A paper published in Nature Medicine looks at the contribution of genetic and lifestyle factors to risk of premature death, ageing, and age-related diseases. 

    Prof Felicity Gavins, Professor of Pharmacology at Brunel University of London, and Royal Society Wolfson Fellow, said:

    “This is an exciting study.  The fact that most of the risk factors identified are modifiable highlights an enormous opportunity for prevention.  By addressing social inequalities, promoting healthy behaviours and reducing harmful exposures, we can really make a meaningful difference in reducing age-related diseases and premature mortality.

    “However, some caution is needed.  This is an observational study, so further research is needed to confirm causal relationships, especially before any long-term policy changes are made.  Furthermore, targeted interventions will be essential to translating these findings into real-world impact.”

    Dr Stephen Burgess, Group Leader at the MRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, said:

    “This is a large and detailed investigation into the predictors of major causes of mortality in a UK-based population.  It provides further demonstration supporting previous research that, in the majority of cases, our genes do not determine our future.  There are exceptions, including rare conditions that are caused by a single genetic variation.  But for the majority of conditions that Western people die from, disease risk is more strongly attributable to modifiable risk factors and our wider environment, as shaped by our upbringing and choices.  Genetics can load the dice, but it is up to us how we play our hand.

    “A limitation of the work is that it does not highlight particular risk factors, nor can it make specific causal claims about what would happen if we changed our risk factors and environment.”

    Prof Frances Flinter, Emeritus Professor of Clinical Genetics, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust; and Member of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, said:

    “This is a very impressive, thorough and detailed analysis of a vast amount of genetic and non-genetic data from the UK Biobank.  The authors compare the relative contributions to ageing and premature mortality of genetic susceptibility markers (polygenic risk scores) and environmental factors, which they refer to as the ‘exposome’ (including alcohol, diet, smoking, housing, type of heating, weight in childhood etc).

    “Overall, polygenic risk scores (PRS) for twenty-two major diseases explained less than 2% of additional variation in mortality, whereas the exposome explained 17%.  In particular, the exposome explained a greater proportion of the variation than polygenic risk scores for the incidence of disease of the lung, heart and liver, whereas polygenic risk scores explained a greater proportion of the variation than the exposome for dementia and breast, prostate and colorectal cancers.

    “The risk of premature mortality was lower in Black, Asian and ethnicities other than white, even after adjustment for socio-demographic deprivation factors, which is currently unexplained.

    “With so much focus on genetic determinism these days, it is good to be reminded of the significance of environmental contributions to health, particularly as the risk factors are known and many can be modified.”

    Prof Ilaria Bellantuono, Professor in Musculoskeletal Ageing; and Co-Director of The Healthy Lifespan Institute, University of Sheffield, said:

    “This important study comprehensively confirms what smaller studies have suggested: multiple socioeconomic and environmental factors significantly influence the risk of developing age-related diseases.  More critically, it highlights that health is shaped by multiple interacting factors.  This has important policy implications, meaning that policies targeting only one or two of these factors will have limited impact on extending healthspan.  The findings support the need for an integrated, multi-faceted approach to prevention and to identify the most influential domains for intervention (smoking, socioeconomic status and deprivation, physical activity, sleep and mental and physical wellness including tiredness, as well as early life exposures including height and body size at 10 years and maternal smoking around birth).

    “The study is rigorously conducted and transparently acknowledges its limitations, which are inevitable in research of this nature.”

    Dr Julian Mutz, King’s Prize Research Fellow at the Social, Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry Centre, King’s College London, said:

    “The study by Argentieri, van Duijn, and colleagues sought to tease apart the relative contributions of environmental exposures (termed the “exposome”) and genetic risk on biological ageing and premature mortality.

    “The authors analysed data from the UK Biobank, a unique resource with a wealth of information on sociodemographic characteristics, health records, genetics and biomarker data from half a million UK residents.

    “They employed a complex analytical design to identify environmental exposures that were independently associated with biological ageing (defined using a proteomic ageing clock that they developed in a previous high-profile study) and mortality, while minimising the risk of reverse causation, confounding and correlation between exposures.  The approach is elegant, though certain assumptions warrant caution.  For example, the finding that many exposures independently associated with mortality (e.g., diet or mental health) were not associated with the proteomic ageing clock (or had an association in the opposite direction) does not necessarily mean that these exposures do not impact ageing biology.

    “Key findings from the study were that a higher income, Asian or Black ethnic background, higher levels of physical activity and living with a partner were associated with lower mortality risk and a protein-predicted age younger than chronological age.  Smoking, living in council housing (reflecting socio-economic status) and the frequency of feeling tired were associated with higher mortality risk and a protein-predicted age older than chronological age.

    “Each of the 25 independent exposures that the authors identified was associated with incident diseases and ageing biomarkers.

    “To investigate the relative contribution of the environmental exposures compared to genetics, the authors calculated polygenic scores for 22 diseases.  Polygenic scores aggregate the small effects of many common genetic variants to estimate an individual’s predisposition to specific traits or diseases.  However, there are several caveats to this approach: first, polygenic scores only capture part of the genetic risk; and second, many environmental exposures also have a genetic component.  The broad headline of the press release that “environmental factors affect health and ageing more than our genes” should be viewed in light of these limitations.

    “One of the most interesting findings from this study is the comparison of the contributions of chronological age and sex (both non-modifiable risk factors), environmental exposures and polygenic scores across several disease endpoints.  For example, for certain diseases (e.g., dementia), genetics appears to be more important.

    “A key implication of the study is that there is a broad range of modifiable risk factors that could be targeted to reduce the risk of premature mortality and age-related disease.  How successful this will be remains to be seen.  We already know much about the health-promoting effects of lifestyle interventions, such as physical activity and smoking cessation, but a significant intention–behaviour gap remains.

    “The authors have, for the most part, carefully highlighted that the observed associations may not be causal.”

    Prof Kevin McConway, Emeritus Professor of Applied Statistics, Open University, said:

    “This new study involves a large dataset, using data from almost half a million participants in the UK Biobank, data on 164 different environmental exposures (using ‘exposure’ in the broad epidemiologists’ sense, from smoking and intake of various foods, to how plump they were at age 10, to their ethnicity) and (for some of them) genetic and blood measures too.  It’s big data, and the researchers use some big-data methods.

    “The aim was to quantify the contributions of environmental exposures and genetics to aging and premature mortality, taking into account many aspects of people’s environment rather than concentrating on a few risk factors determined in advance.

    “The results are interesting, and I think they do support the researchers’ view that we can learn more by looking at many environmental exposures together rather than trying to pick them off one (or a few) at a time.  However, there are some important limitations (as the researchers make clear).

    “It would be easy to dismiss this new research by saying that all they have really found is that, if you want to be healthy in old age, you need to give up smoking, do some exercise and not be poor, and we already knew that.  But that’s not (in my view) the important finding at all.  The important finding is that you get more by looking at more aspects of the environment, if you have enough good data to do that – but that needs careful statistical analysis, including aspects that this study could not do itself.  However I think there are good reasons not to pay too much attention to the exact numerical results in the paper, for reasons I’ll come to.

    “This is an observational study – the UK Biobank researchers did not choose how the participants acted, but only observed and recorded what they said and did.  Like all observational studies, the findings are about correlations and associations, not about cause and effect.  The statistical methods used by the researchers can’t determine whether the associations between exposures and ill health and mortality, that they observed, are there because the exposures cause the ill health and mortality.  They might, or they might not.

    “The way the researchers filtered out exposures that might have showed up as associated with ill health only because they were correlated with other exposures, or because the exposure was actually caused by ill health (reverse causation, as it’s called), does to some extent make it a bit more likely that the associations they mainly report on are ones of cause and effect – but they certainly can’t confirm that they are cause and effect.  The researchers say, in their conclusion, that their results indicate that interventions based on environmental exposures are possibly (my emphasis) the best starting point for improving age-related health, but they add that “future causal modelling [that is, research that specifically looks at cause and effect, which uses different methodology] will be needed to study specific exposures of interest.”

    “In view of these issues about cause, it’s unfortunate that the press release uses a lot of language that implies the associations are indeed reflecting cause and effect.  They talk about the impact of environmental factors on mortality and aging.  If something isn’t causing the ill health, ‘impact’ is the wrong word – if you change a factor that is correlated with ill health but doesn’t cause it, you won’t change the level of ill health.

    “And when the release says that environmental factors explained 17% of the variation in risk of death, compared to less than 2% for genetic predisposition, this is presenting a misleading picture of what is reported in the research paper.  The paper talks about additional mortality variation (in addition to the variation explained by age and biological sex, which are the most important factors, unsurprisingly, along with smoking).  And in this context, statisticians are using ‘variation explained’ to mean something statistically technical that has nothing direct to do with cause and effect, even though it sounds as if it does.

    “There are other important limitations.  The UK Biobank population isn’t typical of the general UK population.  And the exposures were all measured at only one time point, when people first entered the UK Biobank study.  Therefore, even though the UK Biobank is a major study that goes on through time, these findings can’t, for instance, look at the impact on ill health if someone gives up smoking, or becomes wealthier, or changes what they eat.  The researchers emphasise the importance of studying what leads to ill health across the life course, not just at one or a few time points, but like most studies using UK Biobank data, they could not actually do that in this study, beyond looking at some things that participants said about their childhood when they entered the study.

    “There is no implication that the 25 independent environmental factors that were identified in this research are the most important environmental factors, or the only important ones.  The filtering process that removed factors that might have been correlated to strongly with other factors, or might have been liable to reverse causation, may have removed some that were in fact important to health.  (I’m not saying that they should not have been removed, in the light of the overall aims of this study – just that removing them could have led to something being missed.)

    “And obviously the researchers could only take into account environmental exposures that were recorded in the UK Biobank data, and that’s not everything.  The early life exposures, mentioned in the press release and the paper as being important, were actually recorded alongside all the others when people entered the study, so based on what they recalled, and not actually followed up over time.

    “Ideally in a study like that using a big and complicated data set, researchers would model the data statistically using just part of the data set, and then check with the rest of the data set whether the findings hold and are not just a statistical fluke.  These researchers did that, splitting the data on English UK Biobank participants into two and checking the results from one half on the other half, and then checking several aspects of the statistical modelling by validating the results on data from UK Biobank participants in Scotland and Wales.  That’s good, but not ideal, because the Scottish and Welsh participants are likely to be too similar to the English participants to give an independent enough validation.

    “It’s interesting that the research paper says that they sought to validate the findings using a different study based in Rotterdam, which would have been much better than the Scottish and Welsh UK Biobank data.  But they could not do that because the Rotterdam study did not have enough recorded environmental exposures that matched those in the UK Biobank.  They point out that this is likely to be a more widespread problem, because there’s no standard way across different studies of this kind to choose which exposures to record, or how to define them.

    “I have to say that I personally wouldn’t pay too much attention to any of the exact figures on associations that are given in the paper.  That’s partly because of the limitations I’ve mentioned (and the researchers give more limitations in the paper).  But it’s mainly because the data set is big and complicated, and the statistical methods used involved many stages and are complicated.  The researchers had to make a long series of choices on which data to analyse and how to analyse it.  Another team of researchers would not have made the same choices in each case.  That doesn’t mean that this team is wrong and another team would be right – just that there often isn’t a clear best choice to be made.  And other choices would have led to different findings, in terms of the detailed numbers at least.

    “Statisticians sometimes refer to the series of choices of how to analyse a data set, not entirely seriously, as ‘researcher degrees of freedom’.  This study has a lot of researcher degrees of freedom.  The researchers did check out some of their choices by carrying out sensitivity analyses, but that doesn’t get near to dealing with every choice they had to make.  If time and money were no object, it would be very interesting to see what a different research team made of the same data – but in the real world, that’s not going to happen.

    “One final point about the press release.  It says that 23 of the 25 independent environmental factors, identified in the research as contributing to the association between environmental exposure and ill health, ‘are modifiable’.  The research paper says only that they are potentially modifiable.  This sounds like a nit-pick, and maybe it is – but look at the factors (in Figure 2d in the paper, which shows the 25 along with age and biological sex).  Smoking is modifiable, even if it can be hard for individuals to make that modification.  But for some of the others it’s not easy to see what the modification might be.  How do you modify things so that you are living with a partner, if you currently aren’t?  (Living with a partner is associated with better health.)  How do you modify how often you feel fed up, or how often you feel unenthusiastic?  These potential modifications could maybe be done, but saying they are ‘modifiable’ is too much of a simplification.  And it’s certainly important to understand that modifying some of them would be possible only by changes in society – it’s not just a question of individuals choosing what to do.  (It also bears repeating that this study, because of the issues about cause and effect, can’t actually tell us with any certainty whether modifying these facts would actually change health anyway.)”

    Dr Divyangana Rakesh, Lecturer and Researcher in the Department of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, said:

    “This study makes clear just how much our environment shapes aging and mortality, and it is not surprising that environmental risk often outweighs genetic risk.  The authors used a rigorous approach to show that while genetics play a role in specific diseases, our environment – from socioeconomic status to lifestyle factors – shapes overall health trajectories in powerful ways.  We see this in developmental research as well, where environmental factors, including socioeconomic status and deprivation, play a crucial role in shaping children’s outcomes.  Findings like these reinforce the urgent need to address environmental determinants of health if we want to support healthy development and aging for everyone.”

    Prof Joyce Harper, Head of the Reproductive Science and Society Group, UCL Institute for Women’s Health, UCL, said:

    “This extensive study systematically examined environmental factors linked to aging using data from the UK Biobank.  The researchers conducted an exposome-wide analysis of all-cause mortality in a cohort of 492,567 individuals and investigated how these exposures influenced a proteomic age clock.  Their findings identified 25 independent environmental factors associated with both mortality risk and proteomic aging.

    “It is so great to see this brilliant study from Oxford Population Health.  In today’s society, so many are trying to get a quick fix to improve health and longevity, but this study and others are showing the importance of our lifestyle and environment on healthy aging.  It is the first study to show how the combined effect of individual exposures affects us through the life course.  I hope people are listening.”

    ‘Integrating the environmental and genetic architectures of aging and mortality’ by M. Austin Argentieri et al. was published in Nature Medicine at 10.00am UK time on Wednesday 19 February 2025.

    DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03483-9

    Declared interests

    Prof Felicity Gavins: “No conflicts.”

    Prof Frances Flinter: “No CoI.”

    Prof Ilaria Bellantuono: “I am funded by the Michael J Fox Foundation, Dunhill Medical Trust.  I co-lead UkAgeNet (https://ukagenet.co.uk/ ) and I am co-director of the Healthy Lifespan Institute.”

    Dr Julian Mutz: “I report no conflicts.”

    Prof Kevin McConway: “Previously a Trustee of the SMC and a member of its Advisory Committee.”

    Dr Divyangana Rakesh: “I have no conflicts of interest to declare.”

    Prof Joyce Harper: “No conflicts. I am writing a book on health and happiness over 50 but I do not think that conflicts.”

    For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Spam and phishing in 2024

    Source: Securelist – Kaspersky

    Headline: Spam and phishing in 2024

    The year in figures

    • 27% of all emails sent worldwide and 48.57% of all emails sent in the Russian web segment were spam
    • 18% of all spam emails were sent from Russia
    • Kaspersky Mail Anti-Virus blocked 125,521,794 malicious email attachments
    • Our Anti-Phishing system thwarted 893,216,170 attempts to follow phishing links
    • Chat Protection in Kaspersky mobile solutions prevented more than 60,000 redirects via phishing links from Telegram

    Phishing and scams in 2024

    Phishing for travelers

    In 2024, cybercriminals targeted travel enthusiasts using fake hotel and airline booking websites. In one simple scheme, a fraudulent site asked users to enter their login credentials to complete their booking — these credentials ended up in criminal hands. Sometimes, the fake login form appeared under multiple brand names at once (for example, both Booking and Airbnb).

    Another scheme involved a more sophisticated fake site, where users could even select the purpose of their trip (business or leisure). To complete the booking, the scammers requested bank card details, claiming that a certain sum would be temporarily blocked on the account to verify the card’s authenticity. Legitimate booking services regularly request payment details, so the victim may not suspect anything in this case. To rush users into entering their data carelessly, on the phishing page, the scammers displayed warnings about dwindling accommodation availability and an imminent payment deadline for the booking. If the victim entered their data, the funds were not frozen but went straight into the criminals’ pockets.

    Cyberthreats in the travel sector affected not only tourists but also employees of travel agencies. By gaining access to a corporate account, criminals could conduct financial transactions on behalf of employees and gain access to large customer databases.

    Fake accommodation sites often sent messages to property owners, telling them to log in to “manage their property.” This scheme targeted people renting out their homes through online booking platforms.

    Other scam pages featured surveys, offering respondents gifts or prize draws for participating. In this case, victims risked both their credentials and their money. Such fake giveaways are a classic scam tactic. They are often timed to coincide with a significant date for the travel industry or a specific company. For example, the screenshot below shows an offer to take part in a giveaway of airline tickets to celebrate Ryanair’s birthday.

    After completing the survey, users may be asked to share the offer with a certain number of contacts, and then pay a small fee to receive the expensive gift. Of course, these prizes are non-existent.

    Trapped in social networks

    To steal credentials for social media and messenger accounts, scammers used another classic technique: asking users to verify themselves. In one scheme, the victim was redirected to a website that completely replicated WhatsApp’s design. The user entered their phone number and login code, handing their credentials straight over to the cybercriminals.

    Beyond verification scams, fraudsters also lured victims with attractive offers. For example, in the screenshot below, the victim is promised free Instagram followers.

    Some cybercriminals also used the promise of adult content to lure victims into entering their credentials in a fake authorization form.

    Other scammers took advantage of Facebook and Instagram being owned by the same company. On a fraudulent page, they claimed to offer a service that allowed users to find Instagram profiles by entering their Facebook login and password.

    Some scams offered users a surprise “gift” — a free Telegram Premium subscription. To enable the messenger’s premium features, the victim only had to enter their phone number and a one-time code on a fraudulent website.

    Some fake social media and messenger pages were designed not to steal login credentials but to install malware on victims’ devices. Taking advantage of the popularity of Facebook Lite for Android, scammers offered users a “more advanced official version”, claiming it had extra features missing in the original app. However, instead of an upgraded app, users downloaded malware onto their devices.

    Similarly, installing a supposedly free Telegram client with an activated Premium subscription often led to downloading malware.

    Social media business services were increasingly used as a pretext for credential theft, as they play a key role in developing and promoting businesses and are directly linked to financial operations. Cybercriminals tricked Telegram channel owners into logging in to a phishing platform imitating the official Telegram Ads tool, thereby stealing their Telegram credentials. To make the scam more convincing, the attackers detailed how Telegram advertising works and promised millions of ad views per month.

    TikTok users have also been targeted. TikTok Shop allows sellers to list curated products—items featured in videos—for potential buyers to find and purchase. Scammers created fake TikTok Shop pages to steal seller credentials, potentially leading to both reputational and financial damage.

    In another case, fraudsters informed Facebook fan page owners of unusual activity in their accounts. Potential victims were prompted to check their profile by entering their login credentials into a phishing form.

    Cryptocurrency: don’t mistake scams for real deals

    One of last year’s most sensational stories was the cryptocurrency game Hamster Kombat. This clicker game, simulating the creation of a crypto exchange in a gamified format, quickly attracted a massive audience. Players eagerly awaited the moment when the in-game coins could be exchanged for real virtual currency. But while the official listing was delayed, the fraudulent schemes wasted no time.

    Fraudsters claimed to offer cash-out services for in-game coins by converting them into rubles. To withdraw money, criminals claimed, users just had to log in through a fake Telegram page.

    The growing anticipation for the new cryptocurrency’s market launch was frequently exploited by cybercriminals to steal seed phrases from crypto wallets. Scammers announced an early token sale, requiring users to log in through a fake page to participate. Of course, there was no mention of such promotions on official resources.

    The popularity of Hamster Kombat was also abused in scam schemes. For example, users were offered access to a crypto wallet supposedly containing a significant sum in virtual coins. To claim it, the unsuspecting victims had to share information about the “opportunity” with a certain number of contacts in messaging apps. Having made their potential victim an accomplice in spreading false information, the scammers demanded a small commission for the withdrawal and disappeared with the stolen money.

    A more elaborate scam also aimed to trick users into paying a “commission”, but with a slightly different approach. First, visitors to the page were asked to register to learn about some new activity related to Hamster Kombat.

    Once registered, they were suddenly informed of having won a large amount of the HMSTR cryptocurrency supposedly as part of an experiment conducted on the platform. Exploiting uncertainty around the token’s listing, scammers urged victims to bypass the official trading launch and exchange their in-game currency for Bitcoin immediately.

    To make it more convincing, the page displayed an exchange rate at which the “prize” would be converted.

    However, after clicking the “Exchange coins” button, users were prompted to pay a commission for the service.

    Everyone who paid this fee lost their money and received no Bitcoin.

    Phishing attacks also targeted TON wallet users. In this case, scammers lured victims with promises of bonuses, requiring them to link their crypto wallets on fraudulent websites.

    TON cryptocurrency was also used as bait in scam schemes. In a classic scenario, users were promised a quick way to earn digital currency. Fraudsters advertised a cloud mining service that allegedly generated high profits without any effort. After registering, unsuspecting users could monitor their “earnings” but had to pay a commission in cryptocurrency to withdraw funds.

    Another “profitable” crypto scam resembled a Ponzi scheme: victims were required to recruit at least five new participants into the program—without receiving any money, of course. The scam site mimicked an online earning platform.

    Visitors were instructed to install Telegram and use an unofficial bot to activate a crypto wallet where profits would supposedly be deposited.

    According to the instructions, users then had to buy Toncoin and register in the program through a referral link from another participant. The scam worked by enticing people to make a small investment in the hopes of making big profits—the victims used their own funds to purchase the cryptocurrency for registration. But as with any pyramid scheme, only those at the top profited, while everyone else was left with nothing but empty dreams.

    All or nothing: multipurpose phishing

    Victims of phishing frequently included bank clients and users of government service portals. In such schemes, users first received a notification that they needed to update their account credentials. Cybercriminals used various communication channels to contact their victims: email, text messages, and chats in messaging apps. The victims were then led to fake sites where they were asked to provide their personal data. First, they entered their personal login credentials on the organization’s website.

    Next, they were prompted to provide their email account credentials. The scammers also attempted to collect identity document details and other data, including the bank card PIN code.

    Additionally, these phishing forms requested answers to security questions commonly used for additional verification in banking transactions.

    This way, the cybercriminals gained full access to the victim’s account. Even the PIN code could be useful for the scammers in gaining access to the account. Security questions served as an extra safeguard for fraudsters in case the bank’s security service detected suspicious activity.

    False idols

    Phishing schemes also exploited the images of real people. For example, users browsing YouTube could stumble upon ad videos of celebrities announcing giveaways for their fans. Clicking the link in such a video led users to a page containing a post supposedly from the celebrity’s social media account, explaining how to claim the prize. However, when attempting to collect the “winnings”, visitors were asked to pay a small commission—insignificant compared to the value of the “gift.” Needless to say, those who paid the fee lost their money. The prize never existed, and the video was nothing more than a deepfake.

    Spam in 2024

    Scams

    Token giveaway scam

    Throughout the year, we frequently encountered emails announcing fake cryptocurrency airdrops, allegedly from teams of well-known crypto projects. The recipients, referred to as the platform’s “most valuable users,” were invited to participate in an “exclusive” event as a thank you for their loyalty and exceptional engagement.

    New users unfamiliar with cryptocurrency were lured in with a unique opportunity to take part in the token giveaway and win a large sum—all they had to do was register on the platform, which was, of course, fake.

    Scammers in 2024 closely monitored cryptocurrency market news. For example, in the spring, ahead of Notcoin’s upcoming listing, scam messages appeared featuring countdown timers, urging potential victims to participate in an airdrop allegedly arranged just for them.

    Scam emails also targeted users of the cryptocurrency game Hamster Kombat, popular among Russian-speakers. Players eagerly awaited the HMSTR token listing, which was repeatedly postponed—a delay that scammers were quick to exploit. In the fall of 2024, they began sending emails pretending to be from the Hamster Kombat team, promising generous cash prizes if victims clicked a link to a fake game site.

    Similar offers were distributed via a fraudulent website mimicking a major cryptocurrency exchange. In both cases, to claim the coveted tokens, victims had to link their cryptocurrency wallets.

    “Nigerian” scam

    In 2024, the Nigerian scam remained popular among spammers. Furthermore, fraudsters used both time-tested and trending themes to deceive victims. Cybercriminals employed various tricks and manipulations to engage with email recipients, with the ultimate goal of extracting money.

    Most often, users were lured into classic schemes: fraudsters posed as terminally ill wealthy individuals seeking a worthy heir, lottery winners eager to share their prize, or investors offering opportunities in a promising business. Sometimes, to evade suspicion, scammers “rescued” their victims from other fraudsters and offered to compensate them for any financial losses. For example, in the summer of 2024, we came across an interesting case where an alleged victim of crypto fraud suggested that fellow sufferers contact a group of noble hackers for help recovering lost cryptocurrency.

    Some scam offers were quite unexpected, as they didn’t promise vast riches, and, therefore, might not attract such a wide audience. In mid-to-late 2024, we saw scam emails claiming to be looking for new owners for pianos due to relocation or the previous owner’s passing.

    We also encountered even more creative scam narratives. For example, an email allegedly sent from a secret society of Illuminati promising to share their wealth, power and fame if the recipients agree to join their grand brotherhood.

    Other “Nigerian” scam emails capitalized on current news events. Thus, the most talked-about event of 2024, the US presidential election, significantly influenced the types of scams we saw. For example, one scam email claimed that the recipients were incredibly lucky to be eligible to receive millions of dollars from Donald Trump’s foundation.

    Scam in the Russian segment

    Last year, the Russian segment of the internet was not spared from mass scam mailings. We frequently encountered schemes mimicking investment projects of major banks, promising users easy earnings and bonuses. Fraudsters also sent out emails with promotional offers from home appliance and electronics stores. Customers were informed of huge discounts on sales that were supposedly about to end.

    The links in such emails led to fraudulent websites that looked identical to legitimate online stores but stood out with extremely low prices. After paying for their desired items, customers lost their money, as orders were never actually placed.

    Beyond electronics, scammers also offered other discounted products. In one such campaign, users received an email advertising a sneaker store selling popular models at affordable prices.

    Judging by the technical headers of the emails, both the sneaker store and electronics store promotions were sent by the same fraudsters.

    Additionally, we came across emails offering recipients to apply for debit or credit cards under favorable conditions. Unlike the electronics and shoe sale scams, these messages were legitimate referral programs from major banks, which enterprising spammers tried to monetize. Technically, such emails are not scams, as their links lead to real banking websites, and recipients do not face any risks. However, senders profit from registrations via the referral program. Nevertheless, we do not recommend clicking links from unknown senders, as seemingly harmless emails from a referral platform could be phishing or scam messages.

    Password-protected archives

    In 2024, there was an increase in emails distributing password-protected archives containing malicious content. Sometimes, these files were included not as attachments but via download links, which also required a password. Presumably, this was the attackers’ attempt to bypass email security filters. Typically, the archive password was mentioned in the email text, and sometimes in the attachment’s filename. Notably, fraudsters often disguised malicious archives or links as files with other extensions, such as PDF, XLS, or DOC.

    Since April 2024, we have been recording similar distributions of files with the double extension .PDF.RAR, targeting employees of Russian companies in the government, financial, manufacturing, and energy sectors.

    We assume that these messages were sent from compromised email accounts of the recipients’ business partners. Some emails contained real correspondence, to which attackers replied with an email containing the malware. All the emails we examined in this campaign were unique. The attackers likely crafted messages to closely mimic the style of the compromised business partner.

    Similar messages containing malicious files were also found in other languages. However, unlike campaigns targeting Russian-speaking users, these had more general themes—attachments were disguised as invoices, commercial offers, supply orders, tender schedules, court notices, and other documents.

    Pre-trial claims and lawsuits

    Last year, attackers frequently threatened legal action to convince victims to click dangerous links or open malicious attachments. These messages primarily targeted Russian companies but were also observed in other languages. Typically, fraudsters posed as business partners, demanding debt repayment; otherwise, they “would be forced to take the matter to arbitration court.” In one such campaign, pre-trial claims in attachments were .DOC files containing VBA scripts. These scripts established connections with command servers and downloaded, saved, and executed malicious files on the victim’s device. Kaspersky’s products detect this payload with the verdict HEUR:Trojan-Downloader.MSOffice.Sload.gen.

    In some cases, cybercriminals gave no reason for their legal threats but instead attempted to shock victims with an already “filed” lawsuit to pressure them into opening the attachment. Of course, it contained malware.

    Emails with malicious SVG files

    According to our observations, the past year saw a rise in the distribution of malicious SVG files. Disguised as harmless images, these files contained scripts that downloaded and installed additional malware on the victim’s device. (Our solutions detect these scripts as Trojan.Script.Agent.sy and Trojan.Script.Agent.qe.) The emails we encountered were written in Spanish and posed as fake legal case notifications and court summons. The text included a password for opening the attached file.

    Threats to businesses

    Fake deals

    A special category of emails that users complained about in 2024 was requests for quotation from suspicious senders. These emails were sent either from free email addresses or recently created domains. Attackers signed the emails with the names of large companies, included links to their websites, and sometimes even used official company logos. These emails followed a uniform template: the “buyers” briefly introduced themselves, expressed interest in the recipient’s products, and requested a catalog or price list. Interestingly, the fraudsters did not seem to care about the type of goods involved.

    If the recipient responded, events could unfold in two ways. In some cases, after receiving a reply to the initial seemingly legitimate request, the fraudsters sent malicious attachments or links in the next email.

    In another scenario, the “buyers” engaged in further correspondence with their “potential partner”—the victim—discussing details and insisting on their conditions, including post-payment and requiring the seller to cover customs duties. This meant that the supplier bore all the risks of delivery and could lose their goods without receiving any payment.

    Facebook

    In the spring of 2024, we discovered an interesting phishing email scheme that leveraged legitimate Facebook notifications. The service sent entirely legitimate emails to users mentioned in threatening posts. The attackers used compromised Facebook accounts, renamed to “24 Hours Left To Request Review. See Why,” and changed the profile picture to an icon featuring an orange exclamation mark.

    Then, the fraudsters created posts on these pages tagging the business accounts of potential victims. The tagged users received notifications from the alarmingly-named pages.

    These posts contained more details than the emails: victims were warned about an impending account ban due to a complaint from another user. To dispute the ban for violating service terms, the recipient of the “notification” was required to follow a phishing link from the post—leading to a fake site with Meta logos that requested Facebook login credentials.

    We also found phishing emails containing legitimate Facebook links in October 2024, but this time without using the platform’s infrastructure. These emails contained notifications of lawsuits for copyright infringement and the removal of unlawful posts from the recipient’s profile. The target was warned that their personal and business pages would be blocked within 24 hours, pressuring them to take hasty and careless action.

    However, they were immediately offered the chance to appeal by contacting the “Appeal Support Center.” The link in the email led to a phishing site disguised as Meta’s support service, where the victim was also asked to enter their profile password. To make the phishing link more convincing, a legitimate mechanism for redirecting users to external Facebook resources was used.

    At the end of 2024, we noticed an email campaign targeting companies promoting their business pages on Facebook. These emails mimicked official Meta for Business notifications and threatened to block the user’s account and business page for violating the platform’s rules and community policies.

    To dispute these accusations, the fraudsters urged the profile owners to click a link to contact “Facebook support” in a legitimate messenger. However, in reality, the victim was communicating with the owner of a fan page called “Content Moderation Center,” imitating an official support service employee. The scam could have been identified by the “Fan Page” label in the chat, though it was easy to miss.

    News agenda

    In 2024, scammers continued to exploit news agenda in spam campaigns.

    During the UEFA Euro 2024 football championship in Germany, emails began to appear offering merchandise with UEFA EURO 2024 logos.

    After Pavel Durov’s arrest in Paris, we noticed English-language messages calling for donations to supposedly fund his legal defense.

    In the fall of last year, a scam campaign began circulating, offering not-yet-released MacBook Pro M4 devices at low prices or even for free. The links in these emails led to fake websites imitating major marketplaces.

    Before Black Friday, we recorded a surge in spam offering exclusive discounts. The links in these messages lured victims to sites disguised as marketplaces, electronics stores, and financial institutions.

    B2B spam campaigns

    Online promotion services

    One of the most common categories of spam email in 2024, complained of frequently by our corporate clients, was commercial offers for online promotion. Users were offered services such as creating or redesigning websites, setting up SEO tools, and purchasing databases with potential client contacts and other information. Other advertised services included guest post placement with backlinks to the client’s site, writing positive reviews, removing negative reviews, and creating personalized email campaigns. While these messages are not malicious or fraudulent, they are mass-distributed and unsolicited, causing inconvenience to users. The popularity of this type of spam is likely driven by the development of digital marketing tools and the search for new clients for small- and medium-sized businesses amid growing online competition.

    Buying likes and followers on social media

    We also frequently encountered business offers for the online promotion of company accounts on social media. Spammers sell fake likes and followers. They often pose as employees of real social media marketing firms, claiming to be industry leaders. At the end of their emails, the spammers included a link to a marketing platform and payment options for their services. One such campaign, which we observed throughout the past year and is still active, stood out due to the variety of languages used in the emails and the diversity of domain names. With these tactics, the spammers aimed to reach a global audience.

    AI in B2B emails

    The growing popularity of neural networks has led companies to actively integrate AI into their business processes. We assume that clients of such organizations, in turn, are drawn to service offers that incorporate neural networks. As a natural consequence of this trend, AI-driven solutions began appearing in spam campaigns advertising online marketing services.

    Spammers emphasized using AI, particularly ChatGPT, to perform various business tasks. We identified the following themes in these emails:

    • Attracting website traffic
    • Creating advanced lead generation strategies
    • Developing unique approaches tailored to a brand’s identity
    • Producing and publishing content
    • Launching personalized multi-channel marketing campaigns
    • Creating custom videos for YouTube channels

    Other topics also appeared in spam emails, but they all shared the same goal—enhancing business processes and attracting potential clients.

    Another particularly popular category of spam related to neural networks was advertising online events. Last year, we encountered numerous examples of emails promoting webinars about the promising capabilities and practical applications of AI in business operations.

    Targeted phishing in 2024

    In 2024, two main trends were observed in targeted phishing:

    1. Notifications on behalf of a company’s HR department. Employees were asked to fill out or sign a document, such as a vacation schedule, accessible via a link in an email. Sometimes, instead of routine requests, attackers resorted to more extravagant tactics—such as inviting employees to check if they were on a list of staff to be dismissed.

    Phishing email from HR

    In all these cases, the common factor was that clicking the link led the employee to a phishing login page instead of the actual corporate portal. Most often, attackers targeted Microsoft accounts, though some phishing forms mimicked internal corporate resources.

    Fake login form

    1. Emails from a seller to a buyer, or vice versa. One common scheme involved a buyer or seller asking the victim to review an offer or respond to questions about product delivery and required specifications. These emails contained attached documents that actually concealed phishing links.

    Example of a phishing email from a seller

    When attempting to open the attachment, the user was redirected to a phishing page. As in the previous case, these fake forms harvested Microsoft credentials and corporate account logins.

    Fake password entry form

    Statistics: phishing

    The number of phishing attacks in 2024 increased compared to the previous year. Kaspersky solutions blocked 893,216,170 attempts to follow phishing links—26% more than in 2023.

    Number of Anti-Phishing triggerings, 2024 (download)

    Map of phishing attacks

    Users from Peru (19.06%) encountered phishing most often. Greece (18.21%) ranked second, followed by Vietnam (17.53%) and Madagascar (17.17%). They are closely followed by Ecuador (16.90%), Lesotho (16.87%) and Somalia (16.70%). The final places in the TOP 10 are occupied by Brunei (16.55%), Tunisia (16.51%) and Kenya (16.38%).

    Country/territory Share of attacked users*
    Peru 19.06
    Greece 18.21
    Vietnam 17.53
    Madagascar 17.17
    Ecuador 16.90
    Lesotho 16.87
    Somalia 16.70
    Brunei 16.55
    Tunisia 16.51
    Kenya 16.38

    * Share of users who encountered phishing out of the total number of Kaspersky users in the country/territory, 2024

    Top-level domains

    The most common domain zone hosting phishing sites remains the COM zone (29.78%)—its popularity has increased one and a half times compared to 2023. In second place is the XYZ domain (7.10%), which ranked fifth last year, followed by TOP (6.97%), which retained its position in the top ten. Next, with a slight margin from each other, are the ONLINE (4.25%) and SITE (3.87%) domain zones, where phishing sites were less actively hosted last year. The Russian RU domain (2.23%) and the global NET domain (2.02%) are in sixth and seventh place, respectively. Following them are CLICK (1.41%) and INFO (1.35%)—the year before, these zones were not frequently used. Closing the top ten is another national domain: UK, with a share of 1.33%.

    Most frequent top-level domains for phishing pages, 2024 (download)

    Organizations targeted by phishing attacks

    The rating of organizations targeted by phishers is based on the detections of the deterministic component in the Anti-Phishing system on user computers. The component detects all pages with phishing content that the user has tried to open by following a link in an email message or on the web, as long as links to these pages are present in the Kaspersky database.

    In 2024, the highest number of attempts to access phishing links blocked by Kaspersky solutions was associated with pages imitating various web services (15.75%), surpassing global internet portals (13.88%), which held the top position in 2023. The third and fourth positions in last year’s top ten also swapped places: banks moved ahead (12.86%), overtaking online stores at 11.52%. Attackers were also interested in social media (8.35%) and messengers (7.98%): attacks targeting them strengthened their positions in the ranking. For websites imitating delivery services, we observed a decline in phishing activity (6.55%), while the share of payment systems remained unchanged at 5.82%. Also included in the list of the most frequently targeted organizations were online games (5.31%) and blogs (3.75%).

    Distribution of organizations targeted by phishers, by category, 2024 (download)

    Statistics: spam

    Share of spam in email traffic

    In 2024, spam emails accounted for 47.27% of the total global email traffic, an increase of 1.27 p.p. compared to the previous year. The lowest spam levels were recorded in October and November, with average shares dropping to 45.33% and 45.20%, respectively. In December, we observed a seemingly slight upward trend in junk emails, resulting in the fourth quarter of the year being the calmest. Spam activity peaked in the summer, with the highest number of emails recorded in June (49.52%) and July (49.27%).

    Share of spam in global email traffic, 2024 (download)

    In the Russian internet segment, the average spam share exceeded the global figure, reaching 48.57%, which is 1.98 p.p. higher than in 2023. As in the rest of the world, spammers were least active at the end of the year: in the fourth quarter, 45.14% of emails were spam. However, unlike global trends, in Runet, we recorded four months during which the spam share exceeded half of all traffic: March (51.01%), June (51.53%), July (51.02%), and September (51.25%). These figures identified the third quarter as the most active, with a share of 50.46%. December was the calmest month, and interestingly, despite spam levels being generally high or the same in Russia, the number of spam emails in December was lower than the global figure: 44.56%.

    Share of spam in Runet email traffic, 2024 (download)

    Countries and territories where spam originated

    We continue to observe an increase in the share of spam sent from Russia—from 31.45% to 36.18%. The United States and mainland China, which held second and third place last year, swapped positions, with China’s share increasing by 6 p.p. (17.11%) and the US share decreasing by 3 p.p. (8.40%). Kazakhstan, which entered the top twenty for the first time last year, rose from eighth to fourth place (3.82%), pushing Japan (2.93%) down, and causing Germany, previously in fifth place, to drop one position with a share of 2.10%. India’s share slightly decreased, but the country moved up two positions from last year to seventh place. Conversely, the amount of spam sent from Hong Kong more than doubled (1.75%), allowing this territory to take eighth place in the top twenty. Next come Brazil (1.44%) and the Netherlands (1.25%), whose shares continued to decline.

    TOP 20 countries and territories where spam originated in 2024 (download)

    Malicious email attachments

    In 2024, Kaspersky solutions detected 125,521,794 attempts to open malicious email attachments, ten million fewer than the previous year. Interestingly, one of the peaks in email antivirus detections occurred in April—in contrast to 2023, when this month had the lowest malicious activity. In January and December, we observed a relative decrease in detections, while increases were noted in spring and autumn.

    Number of email antivirus detections, 2024 (download)

    The most common malicious email attachments were Agensla stealers (6.51%), which ranked second last year. Next were Badun Trojans (4.51%), which spread in archives disguised as electronic documents. The Makoob family moved from eighth to third place (3.96%), displacing the Noon spyware (3.62%), which collects browser passwords and keystrokes. The malicious Badur PDFs, the most common attachments in 2023, dropped to fifth place with a 3.48% share, followed by phishing HTML forms from the Hoax.HTML.Phish family (2.93%). Next in line were Strab spyware Trojans (2.85%), capable of tracking keystrokes, taking screenshots, and performing other typical spyware actions. Rounding out the top ten were SAgent VBS scripts (2.75%), which were not as actively used last year, the Taskun family (2.75%), which maintained its previous share, and PDF documents containing phishing links, Hoax.PDF.Phish (2.11%).

    TOP 10 malware families distributed as email attachments, 2024 (download)

    The list of the most widespread malware reflects trends similar to the distribution of families, with a few exceptions: the Hoax.HTML.Phish variant of malicious HTML forms dropped two positions (2.20%), and instead of a specific Strab Trojan sample, the top ten included the ISO image Trojan.Win32.ISO.gen, distributed via email (1.39%).

    TOP 10 malicious programs distributed as email attachments, 2024 (download)

    Countries and territories targeted by malicious mailings

    In 2024, users in Russia continued to face malicious email attachments more frequently than other countries, although the share of email antivirus detections in this country decreased compared to last year, to 11.37%. China ranked second (10.96%), re-entering the top twenty after several years. Next came Spain (8.32%), Mexico (5.73%), and Turkey (5.05%), which dropped one position each with a slight decline in malicious attachments. Switzerland (4.82%) took sixth place, appearing in the ranking for the first time. Following them were Vietnam (3.68%), whose share declined, and the UAE (3.24%), which strengthened its position in the ranking. Also among frequent targets of malicious spam were users from Malaysia (2.99%) and Italy (2.54%).

    TOP 20 countries and territories targeted by malicious mailings, 2024 (download)

    Conclusion

    Political and economic crises will continue to provide new pretexts for fraudulent schemes. In some cases presented in the 2024 report, we can observe the “greed” of cybercriminals: the use of two different company brands on the same page; a credible fake of a resource aimed not at stealing credentials but at stealing money; comprehensive questionnaires that can lead not only to loss of access to funds but also to identity theft. Such multi-layered threats may become a new trend in phishing and scam attacks.

    We continue to observe major news events being exploited in spam campaigns that promise easy earnings and discounted goods or services. The growing user interest in artificial intelligence tools is actively being leveraged by spammers to attract an audience, and this trend will undoubtedly continue.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI: Terranet AB – Year-end report 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Significant events during the fourth quarter 

    Agreement with an actor in the mining industry
    Terranet entered into a partnership agreement with a vehicle actor in the mining industry. The collaboration is part of the company’s strategy to enable the expansion of the technology into new application areas and strengthen BlincVision’s commercial potential.

    Product development plan for 2025
    Terranet presented an updated product development plan focusing on further developing the BlincVision prototype into an MVP (Minimum Viable Product). With an MVP that customers can test in their own vehicles, the path toward volume production can begin.

    TO8 exercised at 88 percent
    The company raised approximately SEK 17.2 million before issuance costs through the exercise of series TO8B warrants. The strong outcome reflects shareholders’ confidence in the company and its future development.

    Significant events after the end of the period

    New CEO appointed
    Terranet’s board has appointed Lars Lindell as the new CEO. Lars has over 30 years of international experience leading technology companies in the automotive and telecom industries. He will assume the role starting March 10, 2025. Until then, CFO Dan Wahrenberg will serve as interim CEO.

    Financial overview

      Oct – Dec
    2024    		 Oct – Dec 2023 Jan – Dec 2024 Jan – Dec 2023
    Revenue (TSEK) 1 205 283 834
    Operating result (TSEK) -9,555 -9,219 -35,808 -35,926
    Financial items (TSEK) -482 -33.608 -3,292 -37,190
    Earnings per share (SEK) -0,01 -0,06 -0,04 -0,15
    Closing cash (TSEK) 18,541 29 006 18,541 29 006

    Comment from the CEO

    ” With new partnerships and progress in product development, we are laying the foundation for 2025.”

    The fourth quarter has brought several important advancements for Terranet. BlincVision was integrated into a partner’s vehicle and tested in a new environment. We initiated a collaboration with a player in the mining industry and secured funding for continued development. At the same time, we are preparing for 2025 with a new CEO and expanded resources within product development.

    BlincVision expands its application area
    In December, we took a step beyond the traditional automotive industry by entering into a collaboration agreement with a player in the mining industry. This partnership highlights BlincVision’s flexibility and its potential to create value across multiple sectors. By broadening the use of our technology, we strengthen our strategy and open up new opportunities for the future.

    Progress in development and innovation
    Over the past year, BlincVision has progressed from concept to prototype, successfully tested both in a lab environment and in moving vehicles. The autonomous braking at AstaZero marked a significant milestone, confirming the potential of our technology in real-world traffic scenarios. During the fourth quarter, BlincVision was integrated into a partner’s vehicle via MobilityXlab. Testing in new environments is evaluating the system’s robustness and adaptability. This collaboration provides valuable insights that help us meet our partner’s requirements and move closer to commercial application.

    Beyond the MobilityXlab partnership, Terranet remains actively involved in research projects aimed at enhancing traffic safety. Through the VERDAS and VERDAS2 projects, we collaborate with several leading players in the automotive industry.

    The communicated product development plan for 2025 sets clear milestones moving forward. The goal is to refine BlincVision into an MVP focusing on core functions. An MVP enables deeper customer dialogues on volume production. To accelerate progress, additional resources are being allocated to development.

    Strong participation in T08
    During the fourth quarter, subscription warrants of series T08 were exercised at a rate of 88 percent, adding SEK 17.2 million to the company before issuance costs. We thank our shareholders for your trust and for recognizing BlincVision’s potential to set a new standard for faster and more reliable driver assistance systems.

    New CEO
    In October, Magnus Andersson announced his resignation as CEO, and he left the company in early 2025. We thank Magnus for his dedication and leadership, which has taken the company from research and development to a prototype and partnership agreements. The board has appointed Lars Lindell as the new CEO. With over 30 years of international experience leading fast-growing tech companies, he will assume the role starting March 10, 2025. We look forward to welcoming Lars and starting the next chapter of Terranet’s development.

    Dan Wahrenberg
    Acting CEO
    Lund February 19, 2025

    This information is such that Terranet AB is required to make public in accordance with the EU’s Market Abuse Regulation (MAR). The information was made public by the Company’s contact person below on 19 February 2025, at 08.30 CET.

    For more information, please contact:
    Dan Wahrenberg, acting CEO
    E-mail: dan.wahrenberg@terranet.se

    About Terranet AB (publ) 
    Terranet’s goal is to save lives in urban traffic. The company develops innovative technical solutions for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Autonomous Vehicles (AV). Terranet’s anti-collision system BlincVision laser scans and detects road objects up to ten times faster than any other ADAS technology available today.
    The company is headquartered in Lund, with offices in Gothenburg and Stuttgart. Since 2017, Terranet has been listed on Nasdaq First North Premier Growth Market (Nasdaq: TERRNT-B).

    Follow our journey at: https://terranet.se/
    Terranet financial reports:  https://terranet.se/en/reports/

    Certified Adviser to Terranet is Mangold Fondkommission AB, 08-503 015 50, ca@mangold.se.

    Attachments

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell Votes NO On Advancing Lutnick for Commerce Secretary; Slams His Enthusiasm for Inflationary Tariffs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

    02.18.25

    Cantwell Votes NO On Advancing Lutnick for Commerce Secretary; Slams His Enthusiasm for Inflationary Tariffs

    In speech on Senate floor, Cantwell says Trump’s pick to lead the Dept. of Commerce will rubber-stamp tariffs, slow domestic chip manufacturing, and hang NOAA out to dry; Cantwell also stresses: “Now is not the time to cut FAA staffing”

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, voted against confirming Howard Lutnick, President Donald Trump’s nominee to serve as Secretary of the Department of Commerce.

    In a speech delivered on the Senate floor, Sen. Cantwell urged her colleagues to follow suit.

    The next Secretary of Commerce will have to deal with a wide-ranging, growing list of issues, from trade and exports […], expanding broadband, weather forecasting, patent issues, export controls on A.I., and figuring out some of the most thorny issues related to how we move our country forward, generally, in commerce. So it’s fair to say that if the Commerce Secretary doesn’t get it right, the American people and our American economy pay the price. Unfortunately, I believe that Howard Lutnick, the President’s nominee, isn’t the right person for this job at this point in time,” Sen. Cantwell said.

    The Senate ultimately confirmed Lutnick 51-45.

    Earlier this month, Sen. Cantwell also voted against advancing Lutnick out of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and to the full Senate for consideration. At the time, she expressed her concerns with Lutnick’s support for President Trump’s proposed tariffs. She also pointed to Lutnick’s failure to commit to fully allocating the funds approved by Congress under the Cantwell-led CHIPS & Science Act, as well as his waffling on whether he’d protect NOAA – including NOAA’s crucial missions and functions, and the workforce delivering those services to the American people. Sen. Cantwell had previously questioned Lutnick on these topics in a committee hearing the week prior – video of that hearing is HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell on FAA and Aviation Safety:

    “I would just say this: now is not the time to cut FAA staffing,” Sen. Cantwell said on the Senate floor today. “It is critically clear to me that we need these air traffic controllers, and so we have to make these investments. We should be working together, right now, on aviation. The most important thing? Let’s work together for the benefit of the flying public to come up with the best solutions that we can implement in aviation safety. Taking a broad brush and just cutting people out of the FAA — when oftentimes they’re the people that are helping you get that safety — is not what we should be doing right now.”

    During her tenure as chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Sen. Cantwell sounded the alarm about the staffing shortage of air traffic controllers, need for more FAA safety inspectors, a series of aviation incidents and near-misses on and around runways, and the midair blowout of a door plug in January 2024. Last year, the Committee’s Aviation Subcommittee also highlighted FAA’s shortage of at least 800 airway transportation systems specialists – commonly known as technicians –  during a December 2024 hearing on “Air Traffic Control Systems, Personnel, and Safety”. Dave Spero, president of the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists (PASS), the union representing FAA technicians, testified about the importance of closing the shortage and boosting this segment of the FAA workforce in order to keep FAA’s air traffic control systems and equipment safely running.

    She led the passage of the FAA Reauthorization Act, signed into law in May 2024, which boosts controller staffing, ensuring a five-year commitment to maximum hiring and training to close the current staffing gap. The law requires upgraded safety technologies – giving controllers better visibility into runway traffic – to be installed at every large and medium airport nationwide. The law also includes stricter safety standards for aircraft operators and plane manufacturers, as well as provisions to put more FAA safety inspectors on factory floors.

    On Feb. 6, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter to Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy calling on him to ensure that Elon Musk stays out of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), citing Musk’s clear conflicts of interest.

    Sen. Cantwell on Tariffs:

    “In my conversations with Mr. Lutnick and before his Commerce Committee hearing, he made it very clear that he intends to be very enthusiastic about the President’s plans for tariffs,” Sen. Cantwell said today. “My constituents want to see inflation come down, and they want us to lower costs, not increase them. Now that President Trump is teasing out even more tariffs in the coming days on autos, pharmaceuticals,  and semiconductors, it’s going to drive up costs for consumers […] We can’t afford inflation. We want prices to come down. Whether that’s on housing, or whether that’s on pharmaceuticals, or whether that’s on food prices, we know that tariffs can increase prices.”

    Earlier this month, Sen. Cantwell delivered a major speech on the Senate floor arguing that the president’s arbitrary tariffs would threaten domestic job creation and economic growth in an Information Age. She outlined a strategy focused on building coalitions, growing exports, and establishing principles to support innovation in the Information Age – video of that speech is HERE.

    In Washington state, two out of every five jobs are tied to trade and trade-related industries.  Combined, the state imported $1.21 billion worth of steel and aluminum last year – and the major industries and employers in Washington that rely on steel and aluminum include aerospace, shipbuilding, utilities, and electronics. When President Trump imposed steel tariffs in 2018, our trading partners immediately responded by imposing tariffs of their own on Washington products, especially agriculture, including cherries, apples, pears, and potatoes. Nationally, across all industries, the steel and aluminum tariffs resulted in a decrease in production worth about $3.4 billion per year, according to an ITC report.  More information on how President Trump’s proposed tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada, and China would affect consumers and businesses in the State of Washington can be found HERE.

    Sen. Cantwell has remained a steadfast supporter of free trade to grow the economy in the State of Washington and nationwide. Sen. Cantwell was the leading voice in negotiations to end India’s 20% retaliatory tariff on American apples, which was imposed in response to tariffs on steel and aluminum and devastated Washington state’s apple exports. India had once been the second-largest export market for American apples, but after President Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum in his first term, India imposed retaliatory tariffs in response and U.S. apple exports plummeted. The impact on Washington apple growers was severe: Apple exports from the state dropped from $120 million in 2017 to less than $1 million by 2023.  In September 2023, following several years of Sen. Cantwell’s advocacy, India ended its retaliatory tariffs on apples and pulse crops which was welcome news to the state’s more than 1,400 apple growers and the 68,000-plus workers they support.

    Sen. Cantwell on Semiconductor Manufacturing:

    “We learned during the chips crisis that even the cost of a used car went up $2,000. That’s because chips were at a shortage — car industries, trucking industries couldn’t even get enough chips to make and ship cars, and then the consequence was even used cars went up $2,000. So we don’t want to recreate that again,” Sen. Cantwell said today. “We want a Commerce Secretary who is going to fight for the CHIPS & Science investment that’s already been made in the electronic manufacturing process in the United States and keep the semiconductor industry right here. But unfortunately, Mr. Lutnick, before the Committee, would not commit to standing by the commitments of the term sheets the Department of Commerce has already signed.”

    Sen. Cantwell was the main architect and key negotiator of the CHIPS & Science Act. In her position as Commerce chair, she was instrumental in securing the science R&D funding authorizations in the 11th hour of negotiations. A key component of the legislation is the Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program that was authored by Sen. Cantwell to strengthen U.S. economic and national security with investments in regions across the country. Earlier this month, the American Aerospace Materials Manufacturing Center (AAMMC) in Spokane was awarded $48 million from the program to establish the first-of-its-kind testbed facility in the United States focused on developing advanced thermoplastic materials – new types of lightweight, heat-moldable, and recyclable materials that can replace metal in aircraft parts. The AAMMC will serve as the nation’s hub for creating and testing these innovative materials that are essential for more rapidly building fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly aircraft. 

    Sen. Cantwell on NOAA:

    “When asked for the record, ‘Should NOAA be dismantled, as called for in Project 2025?’, Mr. Lutnick would only say he’ll figure it out once he’s confirmed,” Sen. Cantwell said today. “We needed a bigger commitment to NOAA. NOAA already supplies a big, important aspect of what we deal with, with weather forecasting, tracking extreme weather, hurricanes, wildfires, managing our fisheries, operating ships that conduct important charting for national security. Mr. Lutnick gave very tepid support for NOAA.”

    Project 2025 calls for NOAA to be “dismantled and many of its functions eliminated,” calling it part of the “climate change alarm industry.” NOAA provides critical services to the Nation including weather forecasts, extreme storm tracking and monitoring, tools to enable communities to adapt to sea level rise and climate change, supporting fisheries management, and conserving marine mammals and other protected species.

    Sen. Cantwell is a champion of NOAA and helped secure $3.3 billion in NOAA investments in the Inflation Reduction Act to help communities prepare for and adapt to climate change, boost science needed to understand changing weather and climate patterns, and invest in advanced computer technologies that are critical for extreme weather prediction and emergency response. Her Fire Ready Nation Act, bipartisan legislation to strengthen NOAA’s ability to help forecast, prevent, and fight wildfires, passed the Commerce committee unanimously earlier this month and now heads to the full Senate for consideration.

    Video of Sen. Cantwell’s speech on the Senate floor today is available HERE, and transcript HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: ‘A peaceful, prosperous, democratic Pacific’

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Good Evening
     
    Let us begin by acknowledging Professor David Capie and the PIPSA team for convening this important conference over the next few days. Whenever the Pacific Islands region comes together, we have a precious opportunity to share perspectives and learn from each other. That is especially true in our region, where distances between us are large. 
     
    We acknowledge, too, members of the Diplomatic Corps, Parliamentary colleagues, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.
     
    New Zealand’s place in the world
    New Zealand, as a country, has a myriad of influences. We have enduringly strong connections – for reasons of history, migration and foreign policy alignment – to our traditional partners of Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. 
     
    First and foremost, among these is Australia, New Zealand’s one formal ally, and our closest and most likeminded partner. We cooperate extremely closely with Australia, in the Pacific and around the world. 
     
    We are increasingly integrated socially, economically and strategically into Asia, with large and increasing Asian communities here in New Zealand and ever closer diplomatic relationships in South, South East, and North East Asia.
     
    At the same time, the starting point for understanding how New Zealand views the Pacific is the following, very simple statement: New Zealand is a Pacific Island country, linked by geography, history, culture, politics, demography and indeed DNA. 
     
    Fully 1.3 million New Zealanders, or about one-in-four of us are in full or part Polynesian, Melanesian or Micronesian, with either Māori heritage or relatives or ancestors from other Pacific islands. 
     
    Auckland is home to more Polynesians than any other city. Around the same number of Samoans and Tongans live in New Zealand as do in Samoa and Tonga. Vastly more Cook Islanders, Niueans and Tokelauans live in New Zealand than back in their homelands.
     
    The original discovery and settlement of the Pacific Islands, including New Zealand, is one of the most remarkable stories of exploration in human history. The late New Zealand historian Michael King compared it to space exploration as both were voyages into the unknown. 
     
    But Pacific navigation is arguably even more remarkable because the canoes that set out from the Asian landmass knew not where they would land, nor when, nor indeed if they would find any new territory. 
     
    But find land they did, as they forged new identities and societies on atolls and islands that today stand as a testament to their imagination, endurance and the resilience to overcome formidable challenges of distance, geography, demography, and resource scarcity. 
     
    Last year, we had the enormous privilege of visiting almost all of those island nations spread across our vast Blue Continent. So, this evening we’d like to share some reflections about the Pacific, within the context of New Zealand’s Foreign Policy Reset. 
     
    We note, too, your conference theme, which raises the question of whether the Pacific Islands are a zone of peace or ocean of discontent. In 1520, the great Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan named this massive body of water the Pacific, due to its calmness – Pacific meaning peaceful. Ironically, it didn’t end that way for him, or some of his crew, so your conference theme holds both historical justification and appeal.
     
    An active, engaged Pacific policy
    When we again took on the role of New Zealand Foreign Minister in November 2023, we were determined to put the Pacific at the forefront of an energetic, engaged and active New Zealand foreign policy once more. This lay behind our decision to undertake the most ambitious, intensive year of Pacific diplomacy in New Zealand history. 
     
    Never before has a New Zealand political leader tried to spend time in all 18 member countries of the Pacific Islands Forum in a single year. But try we did: meeting the many diverse peoples scattered across this vast, beautiful blue continent. 
     
    As often as we were able, we took Parliamentary colleagues from across the spectrum of New Zealand’s political parties to reinforce that our friendship is bipartisan, enduring and long-term. 
     
    The purpose of all these discussions was to take the pulse of the region. As a democratic country operating in a democratic region, New Zealand is driven in our Pacific policy by three foundational questions focused on our region’s people: 

    Is what New Zealand is doing in the region reflective of what the people of the Pacific Islands want and need? 
    Are we effectively supporting the prosperity and security of Pacific Island peoples?; and 
    Are we undertaking and explaining this work in a way which maintains New Zealanders’ support for our objectives in the region? 

     
    When describing our observations of last year’s travel, an obvious starting point is the unimaginable vastness of our region. It is a massive ocean, covering over 30 percent of the Earth’s surface.
     
    While in the Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau, we learned of the logistical difficulties they faced in getting to last year’s Pacific Islands Forum in Tonga. We decided on the spot to offer the use of one of our 757 aircraft to take Micronesian leaders to and from Nuku’alofa. We have also announced, over the past year, significant investment in digital connectivity in the Pacific, alongside such partners as the Australia, Taiwan, United States and Japan. 
     
    Connecting all members of the Pacific family is vital given the huge, isolating physical distances between us. But because we believe that all Pacific voices are important and that talanoa – coming together for dialogue – must be regular and meaningful, we were happy to facilitate their coming together in Nuku’alofa. 
     
    Why? Because Pacific regionalism sits at the core of our Pacific approach, with the Pacific Islands Forum at its centre. We are a region with challenging issues that can polarise us, such as deep seabed mining and how best to manage strategic competition. The Forum plays a critical role in helping us to form a cohesive approach, resolve differences, bolster regional development and security, and use our collective voice to hold bigger countries to account.
     
    The Blue Continent’s challenges
    We have also reflected on how the Blue Pacific Continent and its peoples face a multitude of challenges. Our region is faced with the sharpest strategic competition it has confronted since World War 2 ended almost eighty years ago. As we face external pushes into our region to coerce, cajole and constrain, we must stand together as a region – always remembering that we are strongest when we act collectively to confront security and strategic challenges. 
     
    Climate change is a great threat facing the Pacific and we are at the global forefront of disaster risk exposure. Our ambition is that all Pacific peoples remain resilient to the impacts of climate change and other disasters and that New Zealand can support building resilience in practical ways. 
     
    Fisheries are vital to the economies, livelihoods, food security, and social and cultural wellbeing of many Pacific Island countries and is a crucial source of government revenue. But they face several complex interrelated and transboundary issues, such as illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and the management of migratory fish species. 
     
    After years of volatility, the long-term growth trajectory risks settling well below pre-COVID averages for Pacific Island countries. Increasing investment, building fiscal and climate resilience, and improving the access to finance and greater regional connectivity will be key to improving long-run growth prospects in the Pacific.  
     
    Answering to the people
    One truism that runs through our three stints as Foreign Minister is this: there are no votes in it. Struggling New Zealand taxpayers and their families find it difficult to understand why their government is handing out multi-million-dollar aid grants overseas.
     
    Foreign policy practitioners and academics may focus intently on our obligations to New Zealand’s development partners and the way we conduct our relations with them. But the bottom line is that we are accountable first and foremost to the New Zealand taxpayer. 
    During our three tenures as Foreign Minister, we have demonstrated a staunch commitment to a well-resourced New Zealand development programme with a predominant focus on the Pacific. 
     
    Few New Zealand Governments have gone to the wire to significantly lift the size of our international development programme as a proportion of New Zealand’s Gross National Income. One was Norman Kirk’s Government in the 1970s. Two others were during my two previous terms as Foreign Minister. 
     
    In short, we have been determined to use all of our influence and all of our negotiating power to get the best possible New Zealand development programme for the Pacific. 
     
    And while times are very tough here at home right now, we will continue to advocate with our Cabinet colleagues and the New Zealand people for the importance of an active Pacific policy and a properly-resourced international agenda – whether in defence, foreign policy, or development. That’s what is right for New Zealand and it’s what is in the best interests of the Pacific.
     
    We will never apologise for directly connecting New Zealand’s security and prosperity to the security and prosperity of the region and world around us. 
    The Coalition Government’s Foreign Policy Reset established a new strategic direction for New Zealand, including for our international development programme, with an emphasis on sustaining our deep focus on the Pacific. 
     
    As part of ensuring our accountability to the New Zealand taxpayer, last year the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade undertook a review of our development programme to gauge alignment with government priorities and assess its overall impact and efficiency. A report on the review’s findings is being released today.
     
    The review found that while our development is generally aligned with Government priorities, some reshaping and streamlining is required. In short, we will achieve more impact by doing fewer, bigger, projects better. This work is already under way.
     
    Our predominant focus remains on the Pacific, where we will be working with partners including the United States, Australia, Japan and in Europe to more intensively leverage greater support for the region. We will maintain the high tempo of political engagement across the Pacific to ensure alignment between our programme and New Zealand and partner priorities. And we will work more strategically with Pacific Governments to strengthen their systems, so they can better deliver the services their people need.
     
    Greater development funding is being devoted to South East Asia to meet our ambition for closer relations overall with this important region. We have also increased humanitarian funding in response to the scale of need regionally and globally. And we have reduced multilateral funding, to focus on those partners who make the most concrete impact.
     
    We see this work of reshaping our development programme as part of meeting our obligation to the New Zealand taxpayers whose continuing support underpins its social licence.
     
    Friendship, challenges and dialogue
    Over the decades, our Pacific-oriented foreign policy has been defined as much by our actions as our words. We are there in times of need, whether in response to natural disasters, helping with budget support during fiscal emergencies, spurring economic development, or helping to resolve conflicts. 
     
    Our 2018 Pacific Reset emphasised that exhibiting friendship in all our engagements was the cornerstone of our Pacific foreign policy orientation. What does friendship in that context mean? 
     
    It means we are honest, empathetic, trustful and respectful through frequent engagement. And it means having frank and open conversations with our Pacific counterparts.
     
    Over the past year, we have consistently stressed that we see all states as equal, whatever their size. We are guided by the mutual respect and trust that has grown over time between New Zealand and other Pacific Island countries. A second theme that has run through all our public engagements is just how important diplomacy is in our troubled world. 
     
    New Zealand has faced two isolated challenges in the past twelve months in our relations with the Pacific. In these two very different cases, our accountability to our taxpayers and our fidelity to promoting the interests of Pacific peoples throughout the region require that we explain openly what has taken place. 
     
    Of the 18 Pacific Islands Forum member countries, the only one we did not spend time in during the past year was Kiribati. That was not for a lack of trying. 
     
    For more than a year we respected Kiribati’s preference to avoid outside engagement. But with over $100 million of development assistance committed to Kiribati over the past three years, we had to review the status of existing projects and understand Kiribati’s ongoing development needs. After all, we all have to negotiate with our Ministers of Finance. 
     
    This requirement was urgent given our own budget cycle and the need to make decisions about how future development spending is allocated in Micronesian countries and across the region for the next three years. 
     
    So, we were pleased when a visit to Kiribati was finally scheduled for January 2025. We began organising our cross-party Parliamentary group to visit Tarawa. Then, with about a week to go, we were told President Maamau, who is also my counterpart as Kiribati’s Foreign Affairs Minister, would no longer meet with our delegation. 
    We made public our regret and concern, as well as our consequent decision to review our development programme to Kiribati. We are accountable to the worker in Kaitaia, the builder in Gore, and the farmer in the Waikato for the spending of taxpayer money, and we felt it important to express our concerns openly and transparently. 
     
    At the same time, we have a long-standing relationship with the Kiribati people, which has overcome previous challenges. We will weather this one too. 
     
    We have made clear that we are still working towards meaningful dialogue with Kiribati’s President and Foreign Minister, whether in Kiribati, New Zealand or elsewhere in the region. We are taking positive steps towards that goal in coming weeks. 
     
    The second isolated challenge we have faced has been developments in our relationship with the Cook Islands Government. Unlike the people of Samoa, the people of the Cook Islands have never opted for their country to be fully independent from New Zealand – though they are of course always free to choose to do so. 
     
    Rather, they have opted since 1965 to be in free association with New Zealand. This means that New Zealand is bound constitutionally to the Cook Islands by sharing the King of New Zealand as a head of state, a common, single citizenship and passport, as well as by shared values and interests. 
     
    Over the past 60 years, New Zealand has taken very seriously its obligations and commitments to the Cook Islands people. Every year we deliver for the Cook Islands people in areas as broad as health and education, economic development, defence and security, good governance, resources and environment, and culture and heritage.
     
    The Cook Islands, in exercising self-government, is supported by New Zealand funding and provision of expertise. As long as the Cook Islands remain tied to New Zealand constitutionally, we have an expectation that the Government of the Cook Islands will not seek benefits only available to fully independent states – such as separate passports and citizenship, or membership of the United Nations or the Commonwealth – or pursue policies that are significantly at variance with New Zealand’s interests. 
     
    We also have an expectation that New Zealand will be fully and meaningfully consulted on all major international actions that the Cook Islands contemplates that affect our interests.
     
    These are not unreasonable expectations. And they are not new. For example, our Prime Ministers, Norman Kirk in 1973, David Lange in 1986 and Helen Clark in 2001 all expressed these expectations formally. 
     
    To use but one example: in 2001, Helen Clark stated that Cook Islanders retained New Zealand citizenship “on the basis that there will continue to be a mutually acceptable standard of values in Cook Islands’ laws and policies”. She again repeated our longstanding position that if full independence from New Zealand was what the Cook Islands people wanted, then they were free to opt for it at any time.
     
    These have been well-established and previously settled understandings between us, although there have been periodic attempts by Cook Islands Prime Ministers to test the boundaries of this constitutional pact. 
     
    But our free association relationship in its current form has endured because the overwhelming majority of Cook Islands people have wanted to maintain their New Zealand citizenship and passport and the rights it affords them to the same opportunities and privileges as all other New Zealanders, including in health and education. The wishes of the Cook Islands people are paramount here.
     
    Our explicit advice to Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and his officials since he first raised the issue with us in July 2024 was that if he proceeded with trying to implement a separate Cook Islands citizenship and passport system then the people of the Cook Islands would risk losing their New Zealand citizenship and passport – an outcome we know is opposed by the vast majority of Cook Islanders.
     
    There is also the matter of the Cook Islands Government’s decision to enter into a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) and a number of other agreements with China last week without any meaningful consultation with New Zealand or its own people over either the architecture or details of those deals. 
     
    New Zealand and the Cook Islands people remain, as of this evening, in the dark over all but one the agreements signed by China and the Cooks last week. 
     
    Given this lack of consultation, the New Zealand Government, once it has seen the text of all of the agreements that were signed, will need to undertake its own careful analysis of how they impact our vital national interests. Only then will we be able to fully gauge the deals’ impact on the relationship between New Zealand and the Cook Islands. 
     
    While the connection between the people of the Cook Islands and New Zealand remains resolutely strong, we currently face challenges in the government-to-government relationship. 
     
    But this state of affairs – disagreements and debates between the leaders of New Zealand and the Cook Islands – has been a periodic feature of our 60 years of free association. We have always found a way through, guided by the wisdom and wishes of the Cook Islands people. 
     
    As then US President Franklin Roosevelt said in 1945, “We shall strive for perfection. We shall not achieve it immediately – but we still shall strive. We may make mistakes – but they must never be mistakes which result from faintness of heart or abandonment of moral principle”.
     
    During 2025, as we celebrate 60 years of free association, we are going to need to reset the government-to-government relationship. We will also need to find a way, as we did in 1973 and 2001, to formally re-state the mutual responsibilities and obligations that we have for one another and the overall parameters and constraints of the free association model.
     
    Resetting and formally re-stating the parameters of the relationship is not a small task. But it is one which we are confident we can meet – powered by the history of goodwill and common bonds between New Zealand and the Cook Islands people.
     
    Another issue on which the region has devoted significant attention over the past year has been New Caledonia – which is, geographically, New Zealand’s closest neighbour. Uncertainty and discord there is obviously something that prompts concern and discussion right around our region. 
     
    From the moment of the unrest onwards, New Zealand has been very clear that everyone – no matter their view on New Caledonia’s political status – should agree that violence is not the answer. 
     
    The focus must be on dialogue – and finding a new pathway forward on the important issues facing New Caledonia. We had the benefit – working closely with authorities in Paris and Nouméa – to have had a productive visit to New Caledonia in December. 
     
    We went there to listen and to learn, and to engage with a very wide range of New Caledonians of all backgrounds. Hearing New Caledonians voice their hopes and dreams for economic development led us to the view that there may be lessons from New Zealand’s own experiences that might be of value. 
     
    We hope lessons from New Zealand’s own economic development as a multi-ethnic Pacific Island country can be shared with New Caledonians, who might be able to adapt them to their unique context.
     
    Conclusions
    When we reflect on the past year, it is impossible not to be optimistic about this region’s future. As we travelled to places as diverse as Suva, Pohnpei, Alofi, Port Vila, Nauru and Apia, we were struck also by a profound commonality. 
     
    Pacific Islanders scattered around our vast, beautiful region all want a brighter, more prosperous and more secure future for their children and for future generations. 
     
    As a founding member of the Pacific Islands Forum, and as a Pacific and Polynesian country itself, New Zealand has always been at the forefront of efforts to bring about that future. 
     
    Over the past year, we have done our very best to deliver, through words and actions, on New Zealand’s commitment to contribute to a brighter future for all Pacific peoples. This very important work – involving discussion, debate and, yes, sometimes disagreement – will continue.
     
    The Pacific Islands region is a profoundly democratic one. People from every village, town or city in every Pacific Island country have a direct say in how their affairs are run. Just this year, people in six Pacific Islands Forum countries – Australia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia, Tonga and Vanuatu – are heading to the polls to cast ballots which will help determine the future direction of their countries. 
     
    And so it is Pacific peoples’ hopes and aspirations which must drive political leaders and policy makers. Our policies must be responsive and accountable to the perspectives of those we represent. 
     
    And no matter the future we face, or the challenges we encounter, we will always be members of the same Pacific family. We inhabit the most vast and breathtaking ocean continent in the world. And as family, we will always find a way forward, together, towards the secure and prosperous future that our people deserve.
     
    Thank you. Kia kaha. Go well. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Interview of President Trump and Elon Musk by Sean Hannity, “The Sean Hannity Show”

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>Roosevelt Room

    11:48 A.M. EST

         Q    Mr. President, great to see you again.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.

         Q    How are you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you. 

         Q    Elon Musk.

         MR. MUSK:  Hi.

         Q    Great to see you. 

         MR. MUSK:  Thanks.  Thanks for having me.

         Q    I’ve been reading a lot about you.  I’ve got to start with this.  So, he’s working for free with DOGE.  He’s — he’s kind of put a lot of his life on hold, and you sued Twitter a number of years ago.  You just made him pay you $10 million?

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  That’s right.

         Q    That’s — that’s right.  (Laughs.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I sued — I sued from long before he had it. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.  (Inaudible.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  And, I mean, they really did a number on me, you know.  And I sued, and they had to pay.  You know, they paid $10 million settlement.

         Q    You’re okay with that?
        
         MR. MUSK:  I mean, I left it up to the lawyers and, you know, the team running Twitter.  So, I said, “You guys do what you think is the right — makes sense.”

         Q    I think it’s funny.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I think —

         Q    Because —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a very low — I was looking to get much more money than that.
        
         Q    So, you gave him a discount w- — in the lawsuit?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He got — oh, he got a big discount.  I don’t think he even knows about it.

         Q    He’s become one of your — if you read and believe the media — he’s become one of your best friends.  He’s working for free for you.  He’s —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I love the president.  I just want to be clear about that.  

         Q    You don’t care about that? 

         MR. MUSK:  I — no, I love the pr- — I —

         Q    You love the president? 

         MR. MUSK:  I think — I think President Trump is a good man, and — and he’s, you know — I — I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the way he said that.  You know, there’s something nice about.  (Laughter.)

         MR. MUSK:  No, it is.  I, you know —

         THE PRESIDENT:  It is.

         MR. MUSK:  Because, I mean, the president has been so — so unfairly attacked in the media.  It’s truly outrageous.  And I’ve sp- — at this point, spent a lot of time with the president, and not once have I seen him do something that was mean or cruel or — or wrong.  Not once. 

         Q    You know, I’ve known him for 30 years.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And I’ve never seen anybody take as much as he’s taken.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And we’ve discussed this.  And I’m like, “How do you deal with it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  Did have a choice?  (Laughs.)  I didn’t have a choice.

         Q    Well, you would say that to me.  I’m like, “What — what am I going to do?  Worry about it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing I can say.

         Q    And, you know — and then culminating in two assassination attempts, which resulted in your endorsement. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I was going to do it anyway, but that was —

         Q    That was it?

         MR. MUSK:  — a precipitating event, yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That speeded it up a little bit?

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.

         Q    The day of the assassination? 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nice.  I didn’t know that. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it just — it sped it up, but I was going to do it anyway.

         Q    Mr. President, with your indulgence, I’m convinced that people only know a little bit about Elon.  I don’t think they know everything about Elon, because as I studied for and prepared for this interview, I learned a lot about you that I didn’t know.  I think people will think about Tesla.  Democrats are demonizing you and — and trying to make the country hate you. 

         I just want people to understand you a little bit better, and the person that you’ve gotten to know and have now put a lot of trust in. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

         Q    And, you know, just — let’s go over a little bit of your bio, starting —

         MR. MUSK:  Ah, okay.

         Q    — with PayPal and how you became involved in Tesla and SpaceX and Neuralink —

         MR. MUSK:  This — this could take a while.

         Q    — and all these —

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, you know, I — I think the way you think of me is, like, I’m a technologist and I try to make technologies that improve the world and make life better.

         Q    You can show them your shirt.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, and that’s why, like, my t-shirt says “tech support” — (laughter) — because I’m here to provide the president with — with technology support. 

         And now, that — that may seem, like, well, is that a silly thing?  But actually, it’s a very important thing, because the president will make these executive orders, which are very sensible and good for the country, but then they don’t get implemented, you know?

         So, if you take the — for example, all the funding for the migrant hotels, the president issued an executive order: Hey, we need to stop taking taxpayer money and — and paying for luxury hotels for illegal immigrants —

         Q    It’s crazy.

         MR. MUSK:  — which makes no sense.  Like, obviously, people do not want their tax dollars going to — to fund high-end hotels for — for illegals.  And yet, they were still doing that, even as late as last week. 

         And so, you know, we went in there, and we were like, “This is in violation of the presidential executive order.  It needs to stop.” 

         So — so, what we’re — what we’re doing here is — is — one of the biggest functions of the DOGE team is just making sure that the presidential executive orders are actually carried out.  And this is — I just want to point out, this is a very important thing, because the president is the elected representative of the people, so he’s representing the will of the people.  And if the bureaucracy is fighting the will of the people and preventing the pres- — the president from implementing what the people want, then what we live in is a bureaucracy and not a democracy.

         Q    Yeah.  You — you’re both aware — you have to be keenly aware that the media and — and the punditry class — not that — you know, I think you’ve proven they have no power anymore, because they threw everything they had at you, and they didn’t win.  And that was, you know, the New York Times, Washington Post, three networks, every late-night comedy show, two cable channels — they — they just threw — they threw everything — lawfare, weaponization. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

         Q    And now I see they want you two to start — they want a divorce.  They want you two to start hating each other.  And they try — “Oh, President Elon Musk,” for example.  You do know that they’re doing that to you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, I see it all the time.  They tried it, then they stopped.  That wasn’t — they have many different things of hatred. 

         Actually, Elon called me.  He said, “You know they’re trying to drive us apart.”  I said, “Absolutely.” 

         You know, they said, “We have breaking news: Donald Trump has ceded control of the presidency to Elon Musk.  President Musk will be attending a Cabinet meeting tonight at 8 o’clock.”  (Laughter.)  And I say — it’s just so obvious.  They’re so bad at it. 

         I used to think they were good at it.  They’re actually bad at it, because if they were good at it, I’d never be president because I — I think nobody in history has ever gotten more bad publicity than me. 

         I could do the greatest things; I get 98 percent bad publicity.  I could do — outside of you and a few of your very good friends.  It’s, like, the craziest thing. 

         But you know what I have learned, Elon?  The people are smart.  They get it. 

         MR. MUSK.  Yeah.  They do, actually.  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They get it.  They really see what’s happening. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And at the end of this interview, I — what I would like is, I — I want people to know the relationship and know more about you. 

         What is the relationship, Mr. President?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I respect him.  I’ve always respected him.  I never knew that he was right on certain things, and I’m usually pretty good at this stuff.  He did Starlink.  He did things that were so advanced and nobody knew what the hell they were. 

         I can tell you, in North Carolina, they had no communication.  They were wiped out.  Those people were — you know, they had rivers in between — land that never saw water, all of a sudden, there was a river and a vicious — like, rapids.  People were dying all over.  They had no communication. 

         They said, “Do you know Elon Musk?”   And they didn’t really know I knew him.  I said, “Yeah.”  They said, “Could you get Starlink?”  It’s, like, the first time I ever heard of it.  I said, “What’s Starlink?”  “A communication system that’s unbelievable.” 

         Q    I have it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And he — yeah.  And he said — I called him, and I said, “Listen, they really need it.”  And he got, like, thousands of units of this communication, and it saved a lot of lives.  He got it immediately.  And you can’t get it.  I mean, you have to wait a long time to get it.  But he got it to him immediately. 

         And I said, “That’s pretty amazing.”  And I didn’t even know he had it. 

         We watch the rocket ships, and we watch Tesla.

         I think, you know, something that had an effect on me was when I saw the rocket ship come back and get grabbed like you grab a beautiful little baby.  You grab your baby.  It just —

         MR. MUSK:  Just hug the rocket. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’d never seen —

         MR. MUSK:  Everyone — right.  Everyone needs (inaudible) —

         Q    You hug the rocket.  You hug the rocket.

         MR. MUSK:  — (inaudible) rockets. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  No, but — and he said, “You know, you can’t really have a rocket program if you’re going to dump a billion dollars into the ocean every time you fly.  You have to save it.”  And he saved it.  First time —

         Q    That’s ever been done.
        
         THE PRESIDENT:  — I’ve ever seen that done.  Now nobody else can do it. 

         If you look at the U.S., Russia, or China, they can’t do it, and they won’t be able to do it for a long time.  He has the technology.  So, you learn — I wanted somebody really smart to work with me, in terms of the country — a very important aspect.  Because, I mean, he doesn’t talk about it.  He’s actually a very good businessman.  And when he talks about the executive orders — and this is probably true for all presidents: You write an executive order and you think it’s done, you send it out; it doesn’t get done.  It doesn’t get implemented.  They don’t implement it. 

         They — maybe they’re from the last administration — and they are, in some cases.  You try and get them out as fast as you can.  But I could — as soon as he said that, I said, “You know, that’s interesting.”  You write a beautiful executive — and you sign it and you assume it’s going to be done, but it’s not.  What he does is he takes it, and with his hundred geniuses — he’s got some very brilliant young people working for him that dress much worse than him, actually —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, the do.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — they dress in just t-shirts.  (Laughter.)  You wouldn’t know they have 180 IQ.

         Q    Wait.  Wait.  So, what — he’s — he’s your tech support?

         MR. MUSK:  I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  He is —

         MR. MUSK:  I actually virtually am tech support.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s much more than that.

         MR. MUSK:  I actually am tech support, though.  But that’s —

         THE PRESIDENT:  But he gets it done.  He’s a leader.  He really is a — he gets it done.  You get a lot of tech people, and you have people, they’re good with tech, but they — he gets it done. 

         You know, I said, in real estate, you had guys that would draw beautiful renderings of a building, and they’d draw the rendering, it would be great, and you’d say, “Great.  When are you starting?”  But they were never able to get it built.  They couldn’t get the finances.  They couldn’t get the approvals.  It would never get done.  And then you have other guys that are able to get it done.  You know, they could just get it done. 

         I was in real estate.  Same thing in this.  He gets it done. 

         So, when he said that — he said, “You know, when you sign these executive orders, a lot of them don’t get done, and maybe the most important ones,” and he would take that executive order that I’d signed, and he would have those people go to whatever agency it was — “When are you doing it?  Get it done.  Get it done.”  And some guy that maybe didn’t want to do it, all of a sudden, he’s signing — he just doesn’t want to bothered.

         Q    Does — do a lot of those executive orders have to be codified into law to — do you need the Republican Congress to follow up?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, and they will.  A lot of them will be.  Yeah.

         Q    They will?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Look, in the meantime, we have four years.  The beauty is, we have four years.  That’s why I like doing it right at the beginning.  Because an executive order is great.  I mean, the one problem — it’s both good and bad, because when they did all these executive orders, I’ve canceled most of them.  They were terrible.  I mean, we were going to go radical left, communist, okay?  It was crazy.  Their —

         MR. MUSK:  Really crazy.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — executive orders were so bad, if they ever got them codified, you’d never be able to break them.  So, the damage that Biden has done to this country — and it’s not even Biden; it’s the people that circled him in the Oval Office, okay? — but the damage they did to this country, in terms of, let’s say, open borders — you know, there’s so many things, but open borders, where millions of people poured into our country, and hundreds of thousands of those people are criminals.  They’re murderers.  They’re drug dealers.  They’re gang members.  They’re people from prisons from all over the world. 

         And we have a great guy, Tom Homan, and he is doing so incredibly.  You saw the numbers.  They’re down like 96 percent.

         Q    Ninety-five percent.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He is a phenomenal guy.  And Kristi Noem is doing an unbelievable job.  And he wanted her.  He said, “She’s so tough.”  And I said, “I don’t think of her as that way.  You know, she’s very nice.”  He said, “No, she’s so tough.”  And she is.  I see her with the horses.  She’s riding the horse.  Let’s — (laughter) — she’s great. 

         But the team we have is — is really unbelievable. 

         But those executive orders, I sign them, and now they get passed on to him and his group and other people, and they’re all getting done.  We’re getting them done.

         Q    Let me go back a little bit to your background, because —

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    — it’s beyond impressive.  You were the chief engineer, for example — you were an early believer in Tesla.  You became the CEO and — and then the chief engineer, which was phenomenal.  SpaceX, same thing, which is unbelievable. 

         I mean, you were the first company — private company to send astronauts successfully into — into space, first private company to send astronauts into orbit. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    That’s — that’s pretty deep. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s going to go into orbit soon.

         Q    Okay.

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, he’s going to go to Mars.  He’s going to fly on his —

         Q    Starlink.

         MR. MUSK:  At some point, yeah.

         Q    As in (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  But they say — they always ask me, like, “Do you want to die on Mars?”  And I say, “Well, yes, but not on impact.”  (Laughter.)

         Q    Star- — Starlink is in 100 countries. 

         This is going to be hard.  I feel like I’m interviewing two brothers here.

         MR. MUSK:  You go ahead. 

         Q    Starshield, which could be used for national defense. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it is already being used for national defense. 

         Q    Then you have a — what is it called?  Optimus, a part of Tesla.

         MR. MUSK:  They’re a robot, yeah.

         Q    A robotic arm.  Then you have an AI arm.  And then you have something that really fascinated me, and it’s called Neuralink. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You might help the blind to see and people with spinal cord injuries that they — that they can recover, where in the past — how close is that to becoming a success?

         MR. MUSK:  At Neuralink we’re — we’ve ha- — we’ve implanted Neuralink in three patients so far, who are quadriplegics, and it allows them to directly control their phone and computer just using their mind, just by thinking.  It’s like — so, we call this product Telepathy, so you control your computer and phone just by thinking, and it’s possible to actually control the computer and phone faster than someone who has working hands.

         Then the next step would be to add a second Neuralink implant past the point where these — the neurons are damaged, so that somebody can walk again and so the pe- — they can have full-body functionality restored.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you like Bobby, right?

         MR. MUSK:  I like Bobby, actually.  Yeah.  I — I supported Bobby Kennedy.  I think he — you know, he’s unfairly maligned as someone who is anti-science.  But I think he — he isn’t.  He just wants to question the science, which is the essence of the science — the scientific method, fundamentally, is about always questioning the science. 

         Q    Well, they didn’t tell us the truth about COVID.

         MR. MUSK:  Correct.

         Q    That’s for sure. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    And we learned a lot with the Twitter files.  And that just, then, raises a question.  You’re the richest man in the world.  You may not like that part. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    You’re pretty competitive.

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, it’s neither here nor there.

         Q    I’ve known you a long time.

         MR. MUSK:  I don’t think it matters.

         Q    But —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s why I became president.

         Q    — he’s on your team.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Well, that’s true.  He can’t top that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s good.  You know, I wanted to find somebody smarter than him.  I searched all over.  I just couldn’t do it.  I couldn’t.  I couldn’t.
        
         Q    You really tried hard.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I couldn’t find anyone smarter, right?  So, we had to — we had to, for the country.

         Q    But this is the thing —

         THE PRESIDENT:  So, we settled on — we settled on this guy.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, thanks for having me.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         Q    So —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m just trying to be useful here.

         Q    But this is the interesting — but this is where we are as a so- — a society.  And I — I hate to do this to you, but I’m going to do it anyway.  You’re doing all of these things.  At DOGE, nobody at DOGE gets paid a penny, correct?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, actually, some people are federal employees, so they do. 

         Q    Oh, okay.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  They’re (inaudible).  But it’s fair to say that the software engineers at DOGE could be earning millions of dollars a year and instead of earning a small fraction of that as federal employees.

         Q    Okay.  So, just —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And they’re very committed people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So — you’re — you’re committed to helping the blind see, people with spinal cord injuries recover. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You’re committed to getting to Mars.  You’re committed to rescue — you’re going to help rescue, next month, two astronauts that I think were abandoned.  They — they dispute that in an interview.

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are you — when are you getting them?

         MR. MUSK:  At the — at the president’s request, we — or instruction, we are accelerating the return of the astronauts, which was postponed, kind of, to a ridiculous degree.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They got left in space. 

         Q    They’ve been there.  They were supposed to be there eight days.  They’re there almost 300.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Biden. 

         MR. MUSK:  They were put —

         Q    Yeah.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they were left up there for political reasons, which is not good. 

         Q    Okay, it’s not good.  Now, if I had the weight and pressure of doing that successfully on my shoulders, I think I’d be, you know — but you — when we spoke before we did this interview, you were very confident.  You think this will be a successful mission. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we don’t want to be complacent, but we have brought astronauts back from the space station many times before, and always with success.  So, as long as we’re not complacent —

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are they — when are you going to launch?

         MR. MUSK:  I think it’s about — about four weeks to

    bring them back. 

         Q    About four weeks? 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  We’re being extremely cautious.

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You now have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Well, thanks to you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They didn’t have the go-ahead with Biden. 

         Q    What’s that?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He was going to leave him in space.  I think he was going to leave them in space.

         Q    Well, it’s like the (inaudible) —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He considered it a —

         Q    — growing up, lost in space. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, he didn’t want the publicity.  Can you believe it?

         Q    Unbelievable.  And so —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — I want to echo something that the president said and then ask an overarching question.  So, people in — get hit with Hurricane Helene, they have no communication with the outside world.  You come to the rescue.  You donated that, I believe?

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

         Q    You donated to the people of —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He saved a lot of lives.  In North Carolina, he saved a lot of lives. 

         Q    And California, after the wildfires?

         THE PRESIDENT:  California.  But, I mean, in North Carolina, where they were really in trouble, they had no communication, people were dying.

         Q    Nothing.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They were dying of starvation.  He saved a lot of lives in North Carolina.

         Q    Okay.  Now you’re going to rescue astronauts.  And now — again, you do — you do all of this — I would think liberals would love the fact that you have the biggest electric vehicle company in the world. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I used to be adored by the left, you know.

         Q    Not anymore.

         MR. MUSK:  Le- — less so these days.

         Q    He killed that, huh?

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, less —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I really (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, this — this whole sort of, like, you know — it was — they call it, like, “Trump derangement syndrome.”  And I didn’t — you know, you don’t realize how real this is until, like, it’s — you can’t reason with people. 

         So, like, I was at a friend’s birthday party in L.A., just a birthday dinner, and it was, like, a nice, quiet dinner, and everything was — everyone was behaving normally.  And then I happened to mention — this was before the election, like a month or two before — I happened to mention the president’s name, and it was like they got shot with a dart in the jugular that contained, like, the methamphetamine and rabies.  Okay?  (Laughter.)

         And they’re like, “Whyy?”  And I’m, like, “What is wrong — like, guys, like” — you just can’t have, like, a normal conversation.  And it’s like — it’s like they become completely irrational. 

         Q    He — he has no idea, if you’re friends with him —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — you pay a price.  You know, it’s like, I walk into a restaurant in New York, and it’s like half the room gets daggers and they want to —

         MR. MUSK:  The eye-daggers — eye-daggers level is insane.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, there was, like — I had, like, some — some invitation because — so, I got invited to, like, so- — basically, a big, sort of, damn — damn event like that was — but I’d received the invitation, like, the beginning of last year and then — and I still attended, even after I’d endorsed President Trump, and I didn’t realize how profoundly that would affect, you know, how I was received.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, I walk into the room and I’m getting just the dirty looks from — from everyone.  Like, if looks could kill, I would have been dead several times over.

         Q    But that was not — (laughter) — before Trump

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Before Trump: “BC” —

         MR. MUSK:  — ashes on the floor.  (Laughs.)

         Q    — or “BT.”  Before Trump, that never happened.  Right?

         MR. MUSK:  No.

         Q    No.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I just — doesn’t seem strange?  Like, what — what is up with this total, like, madness?

         Q    You’re smarter than me.  Can you — I actually think that there’s a level of irrationality.  It’s almost like a trigger and —

         MR. MUSK:  It totally triggers. 

         Q    And it’s like — look, I — I’ve been on TV — this is my 29th year.  I’ve been on radio 35 years.  I will — I’ve gone hard in the paint to — for candidates that lost.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And guess what?  I get over it.

         MR. MUSK.  Sure.  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    And I just keep doing my show, and I just — you know, I come back to fight another day.

         So, here’s the big — then this is the million dollar or billion dollar — I’m among billionaires — question.  So, you have all this going on and you stop, in a way — you’re still doing it — and you partner with him.  And this is what you get for it from the Democrats.  You get “nobody voted for Elon.”  Well, nobody voted for any of your Cabinet nominees.  Okay?  “People are dying because of DOGE cuts.”  I’ll give you a chance to respond to all that.  “What DOGE is doing is illegal.”  “Elon Musk is” — more street vernacular for a male body part.  “It’s a constitutional crisis.”

         MR. MUSK:  How c- — why — why are they reacting like this?

         Q    Well, first of all, do you give a flying rip?  Number one.  And —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I guess we must be — if we’re the target, we’re doing something right.  You know, if — like, they wouldn’t be complaining so much if they — we weren’t doing something useful, I think. 

         What — all we’re really trying to do here is restore the will of the people through the president.  And — and what we’re finding is there’s an unelected bureaucracy.  Speaking of unelected, there’s a — there’s a vast federal bureaucracy that is implacably opposed to the — the president and the Cabinet. 

         And you look at, say, D.C. voting.  It’s 92 percent Kamala.  Okay, so we’re in 92 percent Kamala.  That’s a lot. 

         Q    Yeah.  They don’t like me here either. 

         MR. MUSK:  I think about that number a lot.  I’m like, 92 percent.  That’s, basically, almost everyone.  And so — but if — but how can you — if — if the will of the president is not implemented, and the president is representative of the people, that means the will of the people is not being implemented, and that means we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a bureaucracy. 

         And so, I think what we’re seeing here is the — sort of, the thrashing of the bureaucracy as we try to restore democracy and the will of the people.

         Q    You —

         MR. MUSK:  Is this making sense?  I mean — sorry.

         Q    Y- — no, of course it does.  I mean, to me, if you look at our framers and our founders — and you’ve really become a student of history, Mr. President, and we’ve ta- — we’ve had conversations both on air and off air — and if we talk about constitutional order or transformational change, nobody can argue that what’s happening here is going at the speed of light. 

         But however, what were the principles of our framers and our founders?  They wanted limited government, greater freedom for the people — and we’ll get to the specific cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse.  That — that is your goal, is it not?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And my goal was to get great people.  And when you look at what this man has done, I mean, it was something — I knew him a little bit through the White House. Originally, I’d see him around a little bit.  I didn’t know him before that, and I respected what he did.  And he fought hard.  You know, he was a — he was maybe questioned for a while.  He was having some difficulties.  It was not easy doing what he did. 

         I mean, how many people have started a car company and made it really successful and made a better car where it’s, you know, beating these big companies that that’s all they do is cars?  I mean, it’s really amazing the things that he’s done.

         But I didn’t know it as much then as now.  I mean, the fruits have sort of taken hold.

         But I wanted great people, and he’s a great person.  He’s an amazing person.  He’s also a caring person.  You know, he uses the word “care.” 

         So, they sign a contract in a government agency, and it has three months.  And the guy leaves that signed the contract, and nobody else is there, and they pay the contract for 10 years.

         So, the guy is getting checks for years and years and years, and he’s telling his family, obviously — maybe it was crooked, maybe he paid to get the contract, or maybe he paid that they didn’t terminate him.  But, you know, we have contracts that go forever, and they’ve been going for years, and they’re supposed to end in three months or five months or two years or something, and they go forever.  So, the guy is either crooked — you know, where he knew this was going to happen — or he’s crooked because he’s getting payments that he knows he shouldn’t be getting.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  But they’re finding things like that.  They’re finding things far worse than that.  And they’re finding billions — and it will be hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of fraud.  I say waste and abuse, but fraud, waste, and abuse.  And he’s doing an amazing job.

         And he attracts a young, very smart type of person.  I call them high-IQ individuals, and they are.  They’re very high Q and — high IQ.  And when they go in to see the people and talk to these people — you know, the people think they’re going to pull it over.  They don’t.  These guys are smart, and they love the country.  You know, there’s a certain something. 

         But he uses the word “care.”  So, people have to care.  Like, when I bought Air Force One —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — I negotiated the price.  It was $5.7 billion, and I got it — I got them down $1.7 billion.  Now they’re not building the plane fast enough.  I mean, they’re actually in default — Boeing.  They’re supposed to —

         Q    When is it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They’ve been building this thing forever.  I don’t know —

         Q    This is the new Air Force One?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — what’s going on.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  We don’t build the way we used to build.  You know, we used to build like a ship a day, and now to build a ship is, like, a big deal, and we’re going to get this country back on track.  We could do it, but so many things — it takes so long to get things built and get things done. 

         And a lot of it could be something we’ve been discussing.  The regulators go in and they make it impossible to build.  They make it very difficult to build anything, whether it’s a ship, a plane, or a building or anything.  And some of them do it because they want to show how important they are.  Some of them do it maybe because they think they’re right.  They use the environment to stop progress and to stop things.  It’s always the environment.  “It’s an environmental problem.”  It’s not an environmental problem at all.  But they do a lot of things. 

         And, by the way, speaking of that, Lee Zeldin is going to be fantastic in the position.  So important.  He could take 10 years to approve or disapprove something, or he could do it in a month.  You know, just as good.

         Q    Sure. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think you’re going to see some fantastic — a fantastic job done by him.  He’s a tremendous guy. 

         Q    Newt — you echoed something when I had just met you, and it was very similar to what Newt has been saying, that we’re — he brought this country to the dance.  This is the opportunity to be transformational, and to have, I would argue, a — the most consequential presidency if we — if we’d really dig down and do something that had never been done before, and that is get rid of this bureaucracy.  And I’m going —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — to get to specifics.  You say the same thing.  It’s not done yet. 

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    And what did you mean by that?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean the — w- — winning the election is really the opportunity to fix the system.  It is not fixing the system itself.  So, it’s an opportunity to fix the system and to restore the power of democracy. 

         And, you know, people — like, it’s funny how — how often it — you — when these attacks occur, the thing that they’re accusing the administration of is what they are guilty of.  They’re saying that things are — are being done are unconstitutional, but what they are doing is unconstitutional.  They are guilty of the crime of which they accuse us.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s always the first thing they do.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  “He’s in violation of the Constitution.”  They don’t even know what they’re talking — well, they know.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s absurd. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s just a con job.  It’s a big con job.  And they’re so bad for the country, so dangerous and so bad.

         And the media is so bad.  When I watch MSNBC, which I don’t watch much, but you have to watch the enemy on occasion, the level of arrogance and — and cheating and — they’re just horrible people.  These are horrible people.

         Q    They lie. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  These are horrible people. 

         Q    They tell conspiracy theories.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They lie, and they start up with the Constitution.  They couldn’t care less about the Constitution.

         CNN, likewise.  I mean, I watched them asking questions with, you know, the hatred with the — why — I said, “What are you asking the question with such anger?  You’re asking me a normal question.”  But you see the bias.  The bias is so incredible.  Those two are bad.

         PBS is bad.  AP is bad.  CBS is terrible. 

         I mean, CBS now — they changed an answer in Kamala.  They asked her some questions.  She answered them like, you know, a low-IQ person.  The opposite of him — the absolute opposite.  But she gave a horrible answer.  They took the entire answer out, and they put another answer that she gave 20 minutes later into the — in- — as the answer.  

         Q    It was part of her word salad. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard of that be- — I thought I heard of it all.

         MR. MUSK:  Right. 

         Q    That wh- — “60 Minutes” once — one — wanted to do an interview with me, and I said, “Live to tape.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly. 

         Q    They said, “No.”  And I said, “No” —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — “No deal.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  They can- —

         Q    Like, this interview will —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard — you know, I’ve seen where they take a sentence off or something and they’ll do — but they —

         Q    Sometimes you cut for time o- — 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  They took the entire — this long, terrible statement that she made and put another. 

         Nobody’s ever seen what’s happening.  And, you know, the people that do all this complaining, they’re very dishonest people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         Q    Yeah.  I — I’m going to, just for the sake of saving time —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    — because I could spend — and I’ve done this on radio and TV, I — I can spend an hour finding the outrageous amounts of money being spent abroad, like USAID.

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    And I do want to mention a couple, but I’m going to —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — scroll it and —

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, I guess, at a high level, I think it’s what the president mentioned earlier, which is that in order to save taxpayer money, it comes down to two things: competence and caring.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right. 

         MR. MUSK:  — and when — when president was shown the outrageous bill for the new Air Force One and — and then negotiated it down, if he had — if the president had not applied competence and caring, the price would have been 50 percent higher — literally, 50 percent higher.  The president cared.  The president was competent.  The price was not 50 percent higher as the result. 

         And so, when you add more competence and caring, you get a better deal for the American people. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  But we could take — we were talking about this yesterday.  I could take — give me thousands of bills — any — I could pick any one of them, and I could —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — take all thousand.  And let’s say it’s a bill for $5,000 — just $5,000, and it’s done by some bureaucrat.  And if he would say, “I’ll give you three.  I don’t want to pay you five.  It’s too high.  I’ll give you three.”  But they don’t do that.  If a guy sends in a bill for $5,000, they pay $5,000.  They expect to be cut.  Everybody expects to be cut.  When you send in a bill, you expect to be cut.  They send in the bill higher, for the most part.  This is true with lawyers, legal fees.  When they send in legal fees, you — I can cut — I wish I had the time, I would save so — but I could cut these bills in half — much better than half. 

         But you offer people a much lower number because you know they — they actually put fat — I’m not even saying it’s — it’s like a way of business.  They put more on because they expect to be negotiated.  When you send in a bill to the government, there’s nobody to negotiate. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You send it a bill for $10,000, and they send you a check back for $10,000.  If you would call them and said, “We’ll give you five.”  “No, no, no.  I need more than five.”  “We’ll give you a five.”  “I’m not going to pay any more than five.”  “Make it six.”  “No, I’m not going to make it six.”  And you’ll settle for $5,500.  You’ve just cut the bill almost in half, and it took, like, two minutes.  When did that stop?  But —

         Q    (Inaudible) the art of the deal?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — that’s caring.  No, it’s not even the art of the deal.  It’s caring.  He uses the word —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s competence and caring.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s caring. 

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s a certain competence, but I think it’s more caring. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — if you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  Actually, if you add either ingredient — either competence or caring — you’ll — you’ll get a better outcome.  But it stands to reason —

         Q    Right.  People don’t want to do this (inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK: — that’s the reason that if you don’t have competency and you don’t have caring, you’re going to get a terrible deal.  And the problem is that the American taxpayer has been — been getting a terrible deal, because — look at the last administration.  Can you — can anyone — can any reasonable person say that last administration was either competent or caring?

         Q    But they lied to us and said that Joe didn’t have a cognitive decline.

         MR. MUSK:  They fully lied. 

         Q    They said the borders were closed.  They said that the borders were secure.  They said that —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    You know, they said Obamacare would save —

         MR. MUSK:  They flat out lied. 

         Q    They flat out lied — 

         MR. MUSK:  It was insane.

         Q    — on many occasions. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    I tell my audience all the time: Don’t trust government. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So, the — I want — as I scroll this information, and it’s — it’s — I’ll scroll a lot more than I’ll mention to both of you, and this is the cost savings.  I want you — I want people at home to understand this part: The average American makes $66,000 a year. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    Okay?  We have $37 trillion in national debt. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    Now, all the money I’m about to mention and what we’re going to scroll on our screen — and all of this is going to foreign countries.  It is not being spent here in America —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — for better schools, law and order. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — I think the average taxpaying American should be mad as hell because their tax money is being poorly spent.

         Q    I’m mad.  It’s stealing from —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s a — it’s an outrage —

         Q    — our kids and grandkids.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, and the — and people —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of fraud, Sean.  A lot of fraud.

         Q    Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of kickbacks. 

         They’re sending money out.  They’re not that stupid.  These people aren’t that stupid.  They’re sending for transgender — something having to do with the opera, and they’re sending out $7 million —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Literally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — $7 million.  (Inaudible) —

         Q    You just stole my next line.  I can’t believe that. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s incredible. 

         Q    I was going to mention that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, but it’s incredible: $7 million.

         Now, you know they — they’re not so stupid.  They’re sending all this money.  They expect to get a lot of it back.  And that’s what happens.

         Q    Okay.  So, let’s go through it.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they’re — a bunch of —

         Q    So, for the average person at home —

         MR. MUSK:  — this stuff is round-tripping.  To the president’s point, they’ll — they’ll make it sound like it’s going to help some people in a foreign country, but then they — then they get kickbacks. 

         Q    All right.  Let me go to the ne- — to the fir- —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — to the second question first.  I want to know, because people like Joni Ernst, and — and House —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, Joni — Joni Ernst has been —

         Q    They tried to get —

         MR. MUSK:  — has tried for a long time, and she’s actually got a lot of good data.  Senator Ernst has been really helpful, actually.

         Q    Okay, but they — they actually hide what the real purpose of the spending is. 

         MR. MUSK:  That’s true.

         Q    In other words, they — and — and h- — this is a question: How did you decipher?  It will say, “Humanitarian blah, blah, blah in Serbia or Afghanistan.”  We’ve been giving money to China for crying out loud, which I think is nuts.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we’re giving money to the Taliban.

         Q    Money to the Taliban?

         MR. MUSK:  Like a lot.

         Q    All right.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  I’m like, for what?

         Q    But they —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I want to see pictures of what they did.

         Q    But they try to obscure it, and — and — but then you got to the bottom line, which is what I’m now scrolling on the screen —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — and that is: $20 million on a Sesame Street show in Iraq; $56 million to boost tourism in Tunisia and Egypt; $40 million to build schools in Jordan; $11 million to tell the Vietnamese to stop burning trash; $45 million for DEI scholarships in Burma; $520 million for consultant-driven ESG investments in Africa; DEI programs in Serbia; the president’s favorite — I’m sure you — you love that taxpayer money was spent on a DEI musical in Ireland or a chan- — transgender opera in Colombia or a —

         MR. MUSK:  If I could, like, it sounds like —

         Q    — transgender comic book in Peru. 

         MR. MUSK:  It sounds like — it sounds like how can these things be real?  But this is actually what was done. 

         Q    Okay.  The — I —

         MR. MUSK:  It — it sounds like a comedy sketch or something.  It’s like —

         Q    I have 20 pages of this.

         MR. MUSK:  Right.  It’s not — the list is a mile long.

         THE PRESIDENT:  The one thing you didn’t mention, the media.  The media is getting millions of dollars. 

        MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Now, they say Politico, which is a radical left —

         Q    Subscriptions. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  — you know, garbage magazine or — or program.  I guess they have magazine and they have some — some media of all types.  $8 million. 

         I hear the New York Times got a lot.  I hear they get subscriptions — where they have subscriptions but maybe the paper is not sent.  I have no idea if that’s true or not, but it’s — they call it subscriptions.  Lots of subscri- — to different media, not just the Times — maybe the Times, and maybe not the Times.

         Q    A million dollars in subscriptions is a lot.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well — but — but millions of dollars going to media that’s radical-left, crooked, dishonest media.

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, Reuters — this is actually really wild: Reuters got like — something like $10 million for something that was literally titled “mass disinformation campaign.” 

         Q    Well —

         MR. MUSK:  That was on the purchase order.  Well, I — I

    thought that was a little bold.  (Laughs.) 

         Q    I will tell you what was bold is when you released —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m like —

         Q    — the Twitter files.

         MR. MUSK:  — shouldn’t you at least try to call it something else?  (Laughs.)

         Q    The Twitter files — how they targeted him; how Twitter, at the time, worked closely with the FBI, the CIA; and, even before the release of Hunter’s very real laptop, they were feeding them disinformation.  That —

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    — you found all that out. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I think —

         Q    That’s called transparency, right?

         THE PRESIDENT:  The FBI has to be rehabbed.  The FBI —

         MR. MUSK:   Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  What’s happened with the FBI and the DOJ is just — their — their stock has gone way down.  I mean, their reputation is shot.

         Q    And intelligence.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think Pam is going to do great.  I think Kash is going to do great.  I think they have to do great or we have a problem. 

         But when you look at what they did, the raid of Mar-a-Lago — the raid of Mar-a-Lago — you look at what they did, their reputation is shot.

         Q    It is. 

         What — you were going to say, Elon?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, no, I was going to say that I think probably a — like, a lot of people still —

         Q    How — how did you find (inaudible)?

         MR. MUSK:  — still believe, like, the Russia hoax, even though you’ve done a lot to combat that.  The — you know, the — the Steele dossier was an incre- — a massive scam that was concocted by Hillary Clinton and her — her campaign.

         Q    She bought and paid it — for it —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — Russian disinformation. 

         MR. MUSK:  There was — it was — the — people still think the — the Russia hoax is real.  Like a lot of people s- — because they never — they never heard the counterpoint.  I mean — I mean, a bunch of people should be in prison for that.  That was a — that was outrageous election interference, creating a fake Russia hoax. 

         Q    How much — if you had to put a number on it, how much do you think you’ve identified waste, fraud, abuse, corruption at this point?  And again, we’ve been — we’re going to be scrolling this throughout the program. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, the — the overall goal is to try to get a trillion dollars out of the deficit.  And if we — if we — if the deficit is not brought under control, America will go bankrupt.  This is a very important thing for people to understand.  A country is no different from an individual, in that if an individual overspends, an individual can go bankrupt, and so can a country. 

         And — and the out- — the massive waste, fraud, and abuse that has been going on, which is leading to a $2-trillion-a-year deficit, that — that’s what the president was handed on Jan. 20th, a $2 trillion deficit.  It’s insane. 

         Q    For this fiscal year?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Two trill- — yeah.  We inherited it.

         MR. MUSK:  Two —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And inflation is back.  I’m only here for two and a half weeks. 

         Q    That was January —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Inflating is back —

         Q    — you were there for a week. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, think of it, inflation is back.  And they said, “Oh, Trump infla-” — I had nothing to do with it.  These people have — have run the country.  They spent money like nobody has ever spent.  They were — they were given $9 trillion to throw out the window — $9 trillion, and they spent it on the Green New Scam, I call it.  It’s the greatest scam in the history of the country.  One of them.  We have a lot of them, I guess.  But one of them.

         Q    Well —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Dollar-wise, probably —

         Q    — and DEI —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it is.

         Q    — and wokeism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    — and transgenderism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, that’s all part of it.  Yeah.

         Q    — and LGBTQ+.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And, by the way, not in America — other countries, not here. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  You know, the amazing thing is when you see, like, the teaching of DEI: $9 million.  How do you spend $9 million to teach no matter what it is?

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could teach physics. 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  Totally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could go to MIT for a lot less.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s (inaudible) expensive.  (Laughs.)  Expensive.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, the teaching —

         MR. MUSK:  Expensive BS.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — of DEI.

         Q    Well, I think it would be better spent on —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s a kickback.  It’s got to be a kickback.  Nobody is that — nobody could do that.  Nobody is —

         Q    Well, it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody is giving — to assess the dialog of an audience coming out of a theater: $4 million.

         Q    How much do you believe, Elon, you’ve identified in — in waste, fraud, abuse, corruption now?  And how much —

         MR. MUSK:  Well —

         Q    — do you anticipate you will?

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.  Well, the — I — I think —

    THE PRESIDENT:  One percent.

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, because it’s so massive.  It’s — this is —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — huge money.  Huge money.  Look —

    Q    So, what we’ve found now is one percent?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, we’ve j- — we’ve just gotten started here.

    THE PRESIDENT:  As good as they are, they’re not going to find some contract that was crooked — you know, crooked as hell.  And, I mean, there’s going to be so much that isn’t found.  But what is found — I think he’s going to find a trillion dollars.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I think so. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But I think it’s a very small percentage compared to what it is.  I mean, he could tell you about treasuries; he could tell you about a woman that worked for Biden that became a very wealthy woman while she was working for him.  Right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Yeah, I know who you’re talking about.

    MR. MUSK:  I mean, there are some strange situations where people — where, you know, someone’s working for the government earning $200,000 a year, and then, suddenly, they’re worth tens of millions of dollars within a few years.  Where’d the money come?

    Q    How’d they earn it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    They have a private company on the side? 

    MR. MUSK:  We’re just curious.  Like, can you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  While they were working.

    MR. MUSK:  Can you show us — because, like, in order to be worth tens of millions of dollars, you’d have to start a company, or you’ve got to get some kind — the compensation has got to come from somewhere.  So, how does a civil servant with — earning $200,000 a year suddenly, within a span of a few years, be worth tens of millions dollars?

    Q    W- —

    MR. MUSK:  So, I just want to connect the dots here. 

    Q    All right, s- —

    MR. MUSK:  Maybe there’s a legitimate explanation, but I don’t think so.  (Laughter.)

    Q    So, you know, and this gets to kind of the heart of where I am.  I — I looked at your work, and I look at this amount of money, and I get angry.  And I don’t get v- — I’m not an angry person. 

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    I don’t get angry.  I get a- — I get annoyed sometimes, but I don’t get angry. 

    And I did live paycheck to bay- — paycheck a part of my life.  And I think of, you know, the working men and women in this country that the — 56 percent of which cannot afford a $1,000 emergency after four years of Harris and Biden.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    Okay?  That is serious, you know, financial trouble.  Or they’re putting bare necessities on credit cards. 

    And I’m looking at this and I’m thinking, well, how much — when we — when all is said and done, we could have written a check or cut the taxes or fixed our schools —

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

    Q    — or deported these illegals that we keep finding, known terrorists, cartel members, gang members. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And — and we’re not doing it.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, the saddest thing is they don’t talk about the individual lines.  I could go on your show right now,  I could get a list that I have on the beautiful Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, and it’s got 40 points, and all they are is the heading of what this money is. 

    You don’t have to go deep into it, and you see it’s, you know, all different things and it’s so ridiculous. 

    I mean, normally, when you look for fraud, you’re looking for one thing out of a hundred.  Here, out of a hundred, 95 are going to be bad.  I mean, they’re — and they’re so obvious just by the heading.

    But they never mention that.  They only mention, “This is a violation of our Constitution.  This is a” — the word they give, you know, it’s like a sound bite — “constitutional crisis.”  It’s a new thing, “constitution-” —  But they never mention about where the money is going. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And when people hear that — I had a very smart man, John Kennedy — he’s actually a very smart man.  He said, “Sir, you should just go on television and just read the name of the topic that you’re giving all the money — just the topic that you’re giving this money to, and don’t say anything more,” and he’s right.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I’ll do it at some point, you know, when — 

    But they never talk about where the money is going.  They just talk about, “It’s a constitutional crisis.” 

    It’s so sad.  And honestly, I think they’re bad people.  I used to give them the benefit of the doubt, but you almost think they hate the country.  I think they hate the country.  They’re sick people. 

    Q    Remember, what they can’t — what they couldn’t accomplish at the ballot box, what they can’t accomplish legislatively, now they’re using the courts.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    And they c- — they’re trying to bury you in lawsuits.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  You know the good news, though?  They’ve lost their confidence.  They’re not the same people. 

    Q    I think you’re right.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re — they’re not the same people. 

    This election was brutal for them.  We won every swing state.  We won by millions and millions of votes.  We won everything.  We — all 50 states went up — all 50.  It’s never happened.

    Q    Popular vote. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Every one.  All 50 states went up. 

    They’ve lost their confidence.  I see it.  And they’re — they’re just swirling and twirling.  They don’t know what the hell is happening.  They’re much different.  They’re just as mean, but they’re not getting to the point.

    Q    Why do you invite them into the Oval Office nearly every day?

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the media — you’re talking about the media.

    Q    Yeah, your friends in the media.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The media — no, they’re — you know, the anger that — they ask questions so angry — a question — a normal question.  I give them an answer.  They — but they — I say, “Why are you so angry when you ask a question?”  Just a standard question.  And, I don’t know, there’s something —

    Q    They haven’t had a- — they haven’t been allowed in that office for the last four years, and here you’re giving them access. 

    Let me go to an area that I think is key, and — and you talked about this in recent interviews, and that is: We don’t need a Department of Education.  Okay.  And what some people are trying to do is stoke fears that, “Oh, my gosh, my kid is not going to get the money for education.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

    Q    Or “grandma’s Social Security and Medicare.”  This was a big promise of yours on the campaign trail.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  Yeah.

    Q    So, I really want to give you both an opportunity to assure the American people you will keep — that money will be allocated for students, but with higher standards.  For example, I would assume associated with monies given or vouchers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) so much and — and then Elon goes.  But, look, Social Security won’t be touched — 

    Q    Won’t be touched.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — other than if there’s fraud or something — we’re going to find it; it’s going to be strengthened — but won’t be touched.  Medicare, Medicaid, none of that stuff is going to be touched.  It’s just — 

    Q    Nothing.  I want you to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) don’t have to.

    Now, if there are illegal migrants in the system, we’re going to get them out of the system, and all of that fraud.  But it’s not going to be touched.

    School — I want to bring school back to the states, so that Iowa, Indiana — all these places — Idaho, New Hampshire — there’s so many places, the states.  I figure 35 really run well. 

    And right now, it’s Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, China — China, can you imagine? — has top — top schools.  We’re last. 

    So, they have a list of 40 countries.  We’re number 40.  Usually we’re 38, 39, but last time, we were number 40.  And what I say is you’ve got to give it back. 

    So, it doesn’t work. 

    I’ll tell you what we’re number one in: cost per pupil.  We spend more money than any other country by far — it’s not even close — per pupil.  Okay?  So, we know it doesn’t work. 

    So, we spend the most and we have the worst — right? — the worst result.  When we give that — when we give that back to Indiana, when we give that b- — back to Iowa and back to a lot of the states that run well — they run well, a lot of them — 35, 37, 38 — now, you’re going to have 10 laggards, but you’re going to have 5 real laggards, but that’s going to be okay. 

    Take New York — you give it to Westchester County, you give it to Suffolk County, you give it to Upstate New York, and you give it to Manhattan — but you give it to four or five subsections.  Same thing in California.  Los Angeles is going to be a problem, but you’re going to give it to places that run well.  We can change education

    Now, school choice is important, but that will get care — taken care of automatically. 

    We want to bring education back to the states.  You will spend half the number.  And I’m not even doing this —

    Q    So, you’re leaning more towards grants not vouchers, like to parents?

    THE PRESIDENT:  I’m not even — I’m not even doing this to save, but you will save.  It will cost you much less money.  You get a much better education. 

    If you go to some of these states, you’ll be the equivalent of Norway, Sweden, Denmark — places that really have a good school system.  You’ll have — those places will be the equivalent, and your overall numbers will get so much better. 

    Q    Do you want standards associated with the money?

    THE PRESIDENT:  The only thing I want to do from — from Washington, D.C., is make sure they’re teaching English, reading, writing —

    Q    Math and science.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and arithmetic.  Okay?

    Q    Science?  Science might help.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Okay.  A little science.  You know —

    Q    Computers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — you’re not going to have much of a problem with that, but that’s it. 

    Do you know, we have half the buildings — I mean, you look at Department of Education —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s empty.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Look at the real estate and the —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — the level.  For what?  To — to — I mean, for — what do they do?

    We have really bad educa- — the teachers — I love teachers.  I respect teachers.  And, by the way, there’s no reason why teachers can’t form a union.  They can do whatever they want to do, if it’s back in the states.  So, we’re not looking to hurt the teacher — I’m — I’m going to help the teachers.  I think the teachers should be incentivized, because a good teacher is like a good scientist, is like a great doctor.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s a valuable commodity. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I think they should be incentivized. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I’m totally for the teachers.

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    Q    I interview a guy a lot on radio.  He’s from Wichita, Kansas.  And he started —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    — as a medical doctor.  Started Atlas.MD, and he’s now — he’s rolled it out nationwide.  Concierge care, $50 a month, 24-hour access to a doctor. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    You know, they use a lot of telemedicine now as part of it — very innovative.  He negotiates directly with pharmaceutical companies.  People — if they have high blood pressure, they walk out with their medicine.  They have high cholesterol, they walk out with their medicine.  And they pay pennies on the dollar.

    You mentioned —

    THE PRESIDENT:  By the way, forms of that could be done.

    Q    Forms of that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Forms of that could be done.

    Q    Innovation. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  We got hurt when we didn’t get the vote on Obamacare.  I made Obamacare — I had a choice: I could let it rot and win a point, or I could do the best you could do with it.  And that’s what I did.  We did a great job with it, and we made it sort of work, but it’s lousy.  We could do so much better. 

    And when you say — you go to certain areas, they — they have doctors round the clock.  They have great medical care for a fraction of what we’re paying right now. 

    There are things we could do. 

    But, look, just overall, this man has been so valuable.  I hate to see the way they go after him.  They go after him.  It’s so unfair.  He doesn’t need this.  He wants to do this. 

    First of all, this is bigger than anything he’s ever done.  He’s done great companies and all, but this is much — you know, this is trillion — everything’s trillions, right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  The numbers are crazy.

    Q    To go back to my original point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He can save —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    But let me — give him his $10 million back.

    MR. MUSK:  Well — well — I — no.  So, people ask me, like, “What’s — what’s the — what’s the — what’s, like, the — what’s your biggest surprise in — in D.C.?”  And I’m like, “The sheer scale.”

    Q    It’s massive.  So, you love the challenge?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’ll never do anything bigger.

    MR. MUSK:  To the president’s point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing you can say, “He’ll

    never do anything” —

         MR. MUSK:  But, I mean, you do something slightly better, and you save billions of dollars for the American taxpayer — just slightly better.  Slightly.  (Laughs.)

         Q    When you say “tech support” —

         MR. MUSK:  You go one percent better, and it’s, like, you know, tens of billions of dollars saved to the American taxpayer. 

    Now, if I may address the point that you — the question you asked earlier, which is, you know, how do we assure people that —

    Q    They want to know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, how do we assure people that we’re going to do the right thing, that their — that their Social Security benefits will be there, that their — the medical care will be good and s- — and — in fact, how do we make it — ensure that there’s better medical care in the future?  How do we improve their benefits?  How do we make sure that their Social Security check goes further than it did in the past and not — it doesn’t get weakened by inflation?

    So, the — if we — if we address the — the massive deficit spending, the sort of — the — the waste in the government, then — then we can actually address inflation. 

    So, provided the economy grows faster than the money supply, which means you stop the government overspending and the waste, and the output of real useful goods and services exceeds the increase in the money supply, you have no inflation.

    Q    Yeah.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and you also drop the — the interest payments that people pay, because if the government keeps —

    Q    Way too high.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  The — the reason the interest payments are so high is because the — the national debt keeps increasing.  So, the — the government is competing for — to sell debt with — for — with — with the private citizens.  This drives up the interest rate. 

    So, if you have a — if you have a — if you cut back on the deficit, you actually have an amazing situation for people, because you get r- — you get rid of inflation and you drop the interest rates.  And that means people’s mortgage payments go down, their credit card payments go down, their car payments go down, their student loans go down.  Everything — their — their life becomes more affordable and they’re standard of living improves.

    Q    How quickly?  Because I think people are suffering now.  We’re still living under the Biden-Harris economy. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But, Sean, you have states right now —

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You have some states that operate that way.  They operate as well as any corporation.  They really operate well.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Florida.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They have surpluses.  They ha- — they don’t —

    MR. MUSK:  Texas is — has a surplus, for example.

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When they — when they look at New York and — and California and some of these places that should have an advantage — I mean, there’s a big advantage — or Pritzker does such a bad job in Illinois; it’s horrible how bad he is — and they don’t have that advantage. 

    You know, New York has stock exchange and a lot of things.  And California has the weather and the beautiful water and all the thing- —

    MR. MUSK:  California has — has great weather.  The most expensive weather on Earth.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  (Laughter.)  But — but —

    Q    I like Florida.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  But some states operate the way he’s talking about.

    Q    Efficiently.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When you go into some of these states, you’re going to find very little.  You’re going to find almost nothing.  They really operate well — big surpluses, low taxes.  And —

    Q    You know, my taxes went up the first time you were president, because you took away the SALT deduction —

    THE PRESIDENT:  I — well, I did.

    Q    — which, by the way, I thought was the right decision.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was the right decision — in fact, Reagan tried to do it — because it rewards badly run states.

    But at the same time, it’s a tough — it was — it’s tough for the states.  I mean, it really is tough for the states. 

    The sad part is it rewards really badly run states. 

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And Reagan tried to do it.  He was unable to do it.  I got it done. 

    Q    You got it done, and —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And now we’re going to give some back.

         Q    A little bit.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because you know what?  We’ve got to help them.

    Q    It’s only a little.

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ve got to help.

    Q    Because otherwi- — we’re encouraging people to elect high taxes, spen- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody had any idea it would be that devastating.  I did the right thing.  I got something that Reagan couldn’t do.  I got it done, where everybody is — are the same.  But you know what?  We’ve got to help them out.

    Q    Reagan had the Grace Commission, some of the best business minds in the country.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    And they came up with recommendations.  Congress adopted none of them, and none of them were implemented. 

    I’ve got to ask this question, because the media is obsessed about it: What — what if there is a conflict?  In other words, because you do business — it was funny, when it came out the other day, that there was going to be, I think, $400 million — billio- — I don’t know if it was millions or billions — a lot of money on Teslas that Joe Biden’s administration w- — did with Tesla, and —

    MR. MUSK:  I’m not familiar with that.

    Q    You’re not even familiar with it?  But —

    MR. MUSK:  I — I don’t think — are you talking about, like, the Inflation Reduction Act stuff or —

    Q    It was some — it was a purchase order of Tesla vehicles. 

    MR. MUSK:  Oh.  Oh, that was — that was incorrect.  There was s- — like, there’s some sort of — the media claim that there was, like, $400 million worth of Cybertrucks —

    Q    That was it.

    MR. MUSK:  — being bought by the DOD.

    Q    And that he gave it to you.

    MR. MUSK:  No — well, first of all, that was —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, actually, it was —

    MR. MUSK:  Th- — it was fa- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was Biden.

    Q    It was Biden.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know Biden wouldn’t give him much.

    MR. MUSK:  But — but it wasn’t even — it was fake news, six weeks to Sunday.  Tesla is not getting $400 million for Cybertrucks.  And the — and the — and this alleged —

    Q    That’s what it was, Cybertrucks.

    MR. MUSK:  This — yeah.  This alleged award occurred in December, before the president took office.  So, it’s — it’s fake on multiple levels.  There i- — Tesla isn’t getting $400 million.  And even if it — even if it was, which it isn’t, it was awarded during the Biden administration. 

    Q    Okay, but you’re — you — you —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s total fake news. 

    Q    There — there is —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s fake on, like — it’s like multiple leverals —

    Q    There is some integration —

    MR. MUSK:  — multiple layers of fake.

    Q    So, you’re — you’re tasked now — and I pray to God this is successful.  I really do.  I wish you Godspeed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    You know, “Godspeed, John Glenn.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s going to be, by the way.  I really believe it’s going to be.

    Q    But — but there —

    MR. MUSK:  Oh, yeah.

    Q    But there are legitimate areas —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because the country is going to do well beside this. 

    This is cutting.  We’re only talking about cutting. 

    We’re also going to make a lot of money.  We’re g- — we’re taking in so much money.

    Q    But what about his business?  What if — if there is —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Then we won’t let him do it.

    Q    — a contract he would otherwise get?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’re not going to let him do it.  He — if —

    Q    You’re not going to let him do it?

    THE PRESIDENT:  If he’s got a conflict — I mean, look — he —

    Q    Y- — now y- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s in certain areas — I mean, I see this morning — I didn’t — I didn’t know, but I said, “Do the right thing” — where they’re cutting way back on the electric vehicle subsidies.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re cutting back.

    Q    You’re losing —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not only cutting back —

    Q    It hurts you.

    MR. MUSK:  Correct.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Now, I will tell you —

    Q    You don’t care? 

    MR. MUSK:  Well —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s probably not that happy with it, but that would have been one thing he would have come to me and said, “Listen, you got to do me a favor.  This is crazy.”  (Laughter.)  But this was in the tax bill.  They’re cutting back on the subsidies. 

    I didn’t — I wasn’t involved in it.  I said, “Do what’s right, and you get” — and they’re coming up with the tax, but it’s just preliminary. 

         But I mean, if he were involved, wouldn’t you think he’d probably do that?  Now, maybe he does better if you cut back on the subsidies.  Who knows.  Because he figures — he does think differently.  He thinks he has a better product, and as long as he has a level playing field, he doesn’t care what you do —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — which he’s very — he’s told me that.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I haven’t asked the president for anything ever.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

    Q    And if it comes up, how — how will you handle it?  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  He won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I’ll — I’ll re- — I’ll recuse myself if it is a conflict.

    THE PRESIDENT:  If there’s a conflict, he won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, I wouldn’t want that, and he won’t want it.

    MR. MUSK:  Right.  And — and also, I’m getting a — sort of a daily proctology exam here.  You know, it’s not like I’ll be getting away from something in the dead of night. 

    Q    Welcome to D.C.  If you want a friend, get a dog. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I do have a dog, but I also have friends.  (Laughter.)  My dog loves me, poor little creature. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  You know the truth was —

    MR. MUSK:  I need to bring him to D.C.

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s — I know every businessman.  I know the — the good ones, the bad ones, the smart ones, the lucky ones.  I know them all.  This guy is a ver- — he’s a brilliant guy.  He’s a great guy.  He’s got tremendous imagination and scientific imagin- — far beyond — you know, you keep talking about a technologist and all, but you’re much more than a technologist.  You are that.  But he’s also a good person.  He’s a very good person, and he wants to see the country do well. 

    And I know a lot of great businesspeople, really great business people, but, you know, they’re not really, in some cases, very good people.  And I know people that would try and take advantage of the situation. 

    This guy is somebody that really cares for the country, and I saw that very early on.  I saw it, really, a long time ago when I got to know him.  He’s a very different kind of a character. 

    That’s why — you know who loves him: young people that are very smart and that love the country.  He’s got, like, a tremendous following, because that’s what he’s — he’s a good person.

    And he doesn’t need this.  He didn’t need this, and he’s doing this to help the country.  If I didn’t win this election, this country was — I don’t think it could have made it.  I don’t — I mean, we’re allowing criminals — millions of criminals into our country, where everything is transgender, it’s men playing in women’s sports. 

    I mean, none of this stuff — you could go — I could give you a hundred things.  It’s almost like they’re trying to destroy the fabric of — of the country, of the world, because the world was following us.  Now the world is following us out of this pit. 

    We’ve done a lot.  I’ll tell you what, in three weeks, we’ve done more — I think we’ve done more — in — in terms of meaningful, not just dollars — than maybe any president ever.  And a lot of people are saying that.

    Q    Shock — it’s been shock and awe. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, if we can keep it going at this level, this country is going to be at a level that it’s never seen before. 

    Q    You know one of the things you did that I really thought was pretty clever and smart and fair, and that was reciprocal tariffs. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, reciprocal. 

    Q    Ta- — I didn’t know India charged so much.  I didn’t know the European Union to charge them. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    Q    I didn’t know Canada was charging us.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Everybody.  Everybody.  Everybody but us.

    Q    Brazil, why?

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I was doing it — you know, I charged China tariffs.  I took in hundreds of billions of dollars, and I was doing that.  But when we got — we had the greatest economy in history.  But then we got hit with COVID, and we had to solve that problem, because I was doing it — and now I said, I want to come back and do the recipri- — because every country in the world almost — we have a deficit with almost every country — not every one, but just about, pretty close.

    And — but every country in the world takes advantage of us, and they do it with tariffs.  They makes — make it — it’s impossible for him to sell a car, practically, in, as an example, India.  I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I think —

    MR. MUSK:  The tariffs are like 100 percent import duty. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  The tariffs are so high —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — they don’t want to — now, if he built the factory in India, that’s okay, but that’s unfair to us.  It’s very unfair. 

    And I said, “You know what we do?”  I told Prime Minister Modi yesterday — he was here.  I said, “Here’s what you do.  We’re going to do — be very fair with you.”  They charge the highest tariffs in the world, just about.

    Q    36 percent?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, much — much higher.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s 100 percent on — auto imports are 100 percent.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, that’s peanuts.  So, much higher.  And — and others too.  I said, “Here’s what we’re going to do: reciprocal.  Whatever you charge, I’m charging.”  He goes, “No, no, I don’t like that.”  “No, no, whatever you charge, I’m going to charge.”  I’m doing that with every country. 

    MR. MUSK:  It seems fair.

    Q    Don’t you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  It does.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s like fair is fair.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody can argue with me.  You know, the media can’t argue — I said — they said, “Tariffs — you’re going to charge tariffs?”  You know, if I said, like, 25 percent they’d say, “Oh, that’s terrible.”  I don’t say that anymore —

    Q    Can I — (inaudible) —

    THE PRESIDENT:  — because I say, “Whatever they charge, we’ll charge.”  And you know what? 

         Q    They stop.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They — then they say, “Oh, that sounds fair.”

    MR. MUSK:  All the president is saying is that —

         Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  — it needs to be at a level playing field and — and fair and square.

    Q    Yeah.  And how does — how —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And we’re going to make a lot of money and a lot of businesses are going to come pouring in.

    MR. MUSK:  How can you argue with a fair and square situation?

    Q    Don’t — don’t you think most of them will look at the — the — for example, without America, China’s economy will tank.  They need our business. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  They do.  Everybody needs us. 

    Q    Everybody needs it. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know what?

    Q    Do- — don’t you think they’ll stop?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We only have so long left where we’re in this position.  We’re the bank, and the bank is getting smaller and smaller and smaller.  We — we’re the bank.  We got to do this now.  We can’t wait another 10 years and have a shell of a country left, because that’s what was going to happen.

    Q    Mr. President —

    THE PRESIDENT:  This country — if I didn’t win this election and have people like this man right here that really do care, because that’s the other word — if you don’t care, you could be the smartest guy in the world, it’s not going to matter.  But if we didn’t win this election, I’m telling you, we would not have had a country for very long.

    Q    How quickly —

    MR. MUSK:  May I say —

    Q    — do you balance the budget and — and when do we start paying down that debt?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, potentially, very quickly, between what he’s doing and with income coming in from tariffs and other things.  I mean, I hope we can — I don’t want to give a date, because then these people are going to say, “Oh, well, he didn’t make the date.”  But I think we can do it very quickly. 

    We would have never done it if this didn’t happen.  Never.  It would have never been — it would only get worse and worse, and ultimately, it would have exploded. 

    This country was headed down a very bad track.  And the whole DEI thing, that was — that was a trap.  That was a sick trap.

    Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, you know, we’ve destroyed that.  That’s gone.  That’s pretty much gone. 

    Q    I agree. 

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    We’re not — we’re not funding it. 

    MR. MUSK:  If — I really want to — I really want to emphasize to people that — this is a very important point — if we don’t solve the deficit, there won’t be money for medical care.  There won’t be money —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    MR. MUSK:  — for Social Security.  We either solve the deficit or all we’ll be doing is paying debt.

    Q    Nobody — 

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s got to be solved, or there’s no medical care, there’s no Social Security, there’s no nothing.  That’s got to be solved.  It’s not optional.  America will go bankrupt if this is not done.  That’s why I’m here. 

    Q    The president’s —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Europe takes advantage of us.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and I’d like to also just send a message — like, because, as the president said, like, this — there’s a lot of rich people out there.  They should be caring more about the country because — the reason they should be caring about — more about country is: America falls, what do you think is going to happen to your business?  What do — what do you think — do you think you’re be going to be okay if — if the ship of America sinks?  Of course not. 

    Like, what — what I’m doing here, what the president is doing is it’s just long-term thinking.  The ship of America must be strong.  The ship of America cannot sink.  If it sinks, we all sink with it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, you’re a —

    Q    This is what — this is what drives you? 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    This is important.  It says “tech support.”  So, you’re not trying to be president, as the media suggests.  You are really here because your heart and your passion is this.  And the president described you as being — this is the biggest thing you ever done.  Now you trying to bring sight to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  There could be nothing bigger.  There’s nothing —

    Q    You’re sending ships up to Mars — you know, spaceships up in the sky all the time —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts.

    Q    — and saving astronauts.  That’s pretty big. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts compared to what we’re talking about.

    Q    It’s peanuts?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    Do you agree with that?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, it’s esse- — it’s essential that America be healthy, that America’s economy be strong.  And — and if that — if — basically, like, my concern is like, if — if — America is the central pillar holding up Western civilization.  That pillar must be strong.  If that pillar falls, the whole roof comes crashing down.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to hide.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships going up.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to run.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nothing.  There’s nothing left. 

    Q    Why — why, if this is your goal, your motivation, you’re losing money in the process, you’re offeri- — you do all these nice things for people for free; you’re trying to solve, you know, blindness; you’re going to rescue astronauts; you help the people in North Carolina, California; you’re cutting money that was sent abroad that’s not helping the American people, then why the rage —

    MR. MUSK:  Actually, I think it was like —

         Q    But why this rage?

         MR. MUSK:  — it was not helping the American people and hurting people overseas, to be clear.

    Q    Why this rage against you now?  First, they hated him.  Now they hate both of you. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I think we’re seeing an antibody reaction from — from those who are receiving the — the wasteful and fraudulent money. 

    Q    They’re being exposed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    Nobody wants to be exposed when you’re corrupt. 

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll tell you a lesson I learned at PayPal.  You know who complained the loudest — the quickest and the loudest and with the most amount of righteous indignation?  The fraudsters.  That’s who complained first, loudest, and — and they would generally have this immense overreaction.  That’s how we knew there were the fraudsters.  That’s how we knew.  There’s a tell.

    Q    What di- — I’ve never — I’ve never met you before today.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And it’s nice to meet you, by the way.  Thank — thank you for doing this. 

    You guys are really friends.  I could s- — you guys — I could see you kicking up your shoes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, he doesn’t do this kind of thing.  And the way I figured that you’d get to know him is if I did it with him.  I said, “Come on, let’s do it together.”  He doesn’t do this. 

    I think he’s smarter not doing it, overall.  Because, you know, I mean, he’s done very well without doing it.  But he doesn’t feel it’s really worthwhile.  He wants the product to speak for itself, or whatever he does speak for itself.  But he views it as — you know, does it matter? 

    And I’m doing this with you today because I wanted to have people understand him.  And I think it’s very important — I disagree with him.  I think it’s very important that they do understand him. 

    He doesn’t need this.  He doesn’t need it.  Now, I happen to think it’s made him very popular.  I think it — he’s more popular now because there are so many people — you know, you’re talking about the radical left — they have the lowest ratings.  MSNBC is dying.  CNN is dying.  They’re all dying.  The New York Times is doing lousy.  The Washington Post is doing horribly.  They’re all doing badly because people don’t buy it anymore. 

    But I think it was important that he do this one interview.  You’ve been a very fair guy.  I think you were the right guy to do it.  If we could get some radical left guy — and he’d do just as well, frankly, because it’s all about common sense.

    Q    They would attack him —

    THE PRESIDENT:  But this — Sean —

    Q    — as being unconstitutional, not — a fascist. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  — to me this was a — it was important for people to understand, he’s doing a big job.  He’s doing a very thankless job.  He’s doing a thankless job, but he’s helping us to save our country. 

    Our country was in serious trouble, and I had to get the best guy, somebody with credibility, because if he were just a regular, good — very good, solid businessman, he wouldn’t have the credibility.  He’s got the best credibility for this. 

    And people also know he’s an honest guy.  He’s an honest guy.  He’s just a very, very smart guy who’s done amazing things.  And this will be the biggest thing he’s ever done, because, you know, his companies are all great.  But if this country goes bad — I guess where he is a little selfish is this.  He knows one thing and probably doesn’t think — but if his — if this country goes bad, his stuff is not going to be worth very much, I can tell you.

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I’d say, if the — if the ship of America sinks, we’re all go- — going down with it.  You know, this idea that people can escape to New Zealand or some other place is false.  If the central pillar of Western civilization that is America falls, the whole roof comes crashing down and there is no escape. 

    Q    It’s amazing, since you’ve been elected, to watch Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia — I — I was shocked at the statements that Vladimir Putin made about you.  I — I was shocked at the hostage release.  I was shocked that Venezuela had done it — had done it.  Zelenskyy wants a deal.  Putin wants a deal. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  All good statements.

    Q    King Abdullah was interested.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You mean by that all good statements.  Look, they respect the president of this country.  They respect — they did not respect the last president.  They laughed at him, and they laughed at our country, and he’s done great damage to our country. 

    Q    Have foreign leaders told you what they thought of Biden?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, they have, but I’d rather not say.  They — they have.  It’s not — it — look —

    Q    It’s the obvious. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He was not George Washington, let’s put it that way. 

    MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not the greatest. 

    Q    Sorry, if that’s (inaudible).

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s done a tremendous disservice. 

    Q    Will you be here —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, by the way, the Democrats have done a great disservice, and they ought to get their act together and use a little judgment, and they ought to work with us on straightening out this mess that — 

    Q    Who?  John Fetterman?

    THE PRESIDENT:  — a lot of people have —

    Q    Maybe?  Who — what Democrat is not radicalized? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Actually, you mention John.

    Q    John Fetterman. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s become the best voice in the Democrat party.  You know, I had lunch with him, and I thought he was terrific, but he’s a much different man than he was before he had this difficulty.  He used to be radical left, and I think he became much smarter, actually.  He’s really — he’s really a voice of reason. 

    But the Democrats have to get together.  They have to get their act together, because the stuff they — they talk about makes no sense.  It makes — none whatsoever.  And they must know it.  They must know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, like, the country has spoken very clearly and rejected the core tenets of the Demo- — Democratic Party.  The country voted t- — fo- — I mean, the country made the — America has made its vote clear.  The president won the popular vote decisively.  The Republicans won the House.  Repub- — Republicans won the Senate.  What more do you need?

    The Democratic Party needs to take a hard look in the mirror and — and change their ways. 

    Q    I think they went from shock, denial, into the depression stage of grief, and now they’re in the rage stage, where I anticipate they’ll stay for four years, and if they get the chance, they’ll want to impeach him 10 times.  Do you anticipate you’ll be here in four years?  My last question.

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll be as helpful as long as I can be helpful.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s a good question.  I mean, I was thinking about that just now.  I said, “I wonder how long he’s going to be doing it.”  You can’t get somebody like this.  He cares, and he’s brilliant, and he’s got energy. 

    You need energy, also, in addition to those other things.

    You know, I have a lot of guys that are very smart, but they have no energy.  They want to sleep all day long.  You need a lot of energy.  He’s got a lot of energy.  He’s doing a great job. 

    If there’s any conflict, he — he will stop it.  But if he didn’t, I’d stop it.  I’d see if there’s a conflict.  I mean, we’re talking about big stuff.

    But he’s under a pretty big microscope. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, seriously.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, everybody is watching him.  If there’s a conflict, you’re going to be reading about it within about two minutes after the conflict.

    MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  There — there’s — the possibility of me getting away with something is 0 percent — 0.0.  I — I’m scrutinized to a ridiculous degree. 

    And — and the other thing is that we — you know, what — what’s — you know what’s better than saying “trust — trust me” is just full transparency.  So, what we’re doing with — with the DOGE — DOGE dot — just go to DOGE.gov.  You can see every single action that’s being taken. 

    And now –and I want to be clear, we are going to make some mistakes.  We’re not going to be perfect.  Nobody bats a thousand.  But we’re going to fix the mistakes very quickly.  That’s what matters: not that you don’t make mistakes, but that you fix the mistakes very fast. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you’re going to ask the other side, when they talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis,” you got to a- — what are they paying for?  Where are those tax — because when you read off the list of things, it’s a big con job.  See, when they talk Constitution —

    MR. MUSK:  Totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a total con job.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They never talk — and I watch some of the shows —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s specifics — they avoid specifics.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, when you start talking about how did — how come they spent money on transgender here and transgender there —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and all the stuff in some country that nobody ever heard of, they don’t want to talk about it.  They just talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis.” 

    Q    It shocks the conscious.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The money is being squandered purposely — tremendous theft, tremendous kickbacks, everything — and we’re straightening it out.  And thank goodness.  I look up, and I say, “Thank you,” because I think if it went on for four more years, it would not be salvageable.  You wouldn’t be able —

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You wouldn’t be able to save it. 

    Q    You believe, too, that when you were in Butler, came within a millimeter being assassinated —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    The day you endorsed him, that was that day.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    But you had been planning on it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Pretty — I think everybody will never forget that iconic blood on your face.  “Fight, fight, fight.”  I actually was afra- — watching it and thought you might drop again.  You know, I didn’t know if it had hit you.  You can sometimes get up and then the blood starts to accumulate.  It was scary — pretty scary. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, th- — this is how you know someone’s true character, because everyone can say they’re brave, but the president was actually shot.  Okay?  Courage under fire.  “Fight, fight, fight,” blood streaming down the face.  That’s true courage.  You can’t fake that. 

    Q    Yeah.  Thank you both. 

         Mr. President, thank you, sir. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much. 

    Q    Appreciate it.  Elon, thank you for your time.  Really nice to meet you. 

                                  END                    1:01 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: ‘Ne Zha 2’ box office success ignites merchandise craze

    Source: China State Council Information Office 3

    “30 million achieved!” reads an announcement by FunCrazy, a creative toy brand, in its official Xiaohongshu post on February 16. The post, featuring an image of a Ne Zha collectible figure, marks a record-breaking milestone in less than a month: the co-branded crowdfunding campaign for the official movie “Ne Zha 2” merchandise surpasses 30 million yuan.

    Toys featuring Nezha, the main character from “Ne Zha 2,” are pictured at the workshop of a toy manufacturer in Xiangtan, central China’s Hunan Province, Feb. 8, 2025. (Xinhua/Chen Sihan)

    As the global earnings of “Ne Zha 2”, including pre-sales, hit a historic 12.319 billion yuan (about 1.72 billion U.S. dollars), its influence extends beyond the cinema to the shelves of both collectors and fans, marking a new chapter in the booming market for movie-related merchandise.

    Another example of Ne Zha’s IP value is evident in the collectible blind box series co-produced by Pop Mart and creators of the movie. Sales of the blind box series surpassed 10 million yuan within just eight days of the launch, while the first batch of products quickly sold out.

    In response to huge market demand, the brand has initiated pre-sales for subsequent batches of the blind box series, with shipping dates pushed back to late June. Pop Mart’s physical stores nationwide have largely sold out of them as well.

    However, for some eager fans, waiting for the pre-sale is simply not an option. On Goofish, a second-hand trading platform, the price of some in-stock blind boxes has already increased by more than three times.

    “I bought the full series of eight blind boxes as a birthday gift for myself. They’re so cute, and they even recreated the scene where Ne Zha and Ao Bing join forces to fight the villain,” shared by a movie fan on her Xiaohongshu post.

    The iconic scene from the movie added extra popularity to the merchandise. Many fans recreated the moment when the two protagonists, Ne Zha and Ao Bing, hold hands to battle the thunder in collectible figures and shared them on social media, boosting its viral spread.

    The massive success of Ne Zha’s merchandise sales highlights the growing economic impact of IPs. Beyond box office earnings, purchasing merchandise offers fans a tangible connection to the characters and stories, amplifying the value of an IP in today’s entertainment industry.

    Consumer demand for spiritual and cultural values is rising, with a shift from functional attributes to emotional and spiritual significance. Consequently, diverse IP derivatives have become key catalysts for driving market enthusiasm, said Jiang Duo, associate professor of the Communication University of China.

    “Ne Zha 2” is not the first cultural product to benefit from the spillover effect of the IP economy. In 2023, the Chinese sci-fi blockbuster “The Wandering Earth II” raked in a whopping box office revenue. A movie-related crowdfunding project was launched for merchandise.

    The project garnered over 433,000 orders and raised more than 100 million yuan, far exceeding the original goal of 100,000 yuan.

    Movie IPs are transitioning from being solely driven by box office revenue to exploring multiple sources of value, injecting more vitality into the cultural market. More and more Chinese companies are focusing on IP development and the cultural and creative industry. Their products are becoming much more sophisticated, and the expansion of offline channels plays a crucial role in supporting the development of the IP economy, said Jiang.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Chinese police bust over 14,000 maritime crimes in 2024

    Source: China State Council Information Office 2

    Chinese police cracked over 14,000 maritime crimes in 2024, as part of ongoing efforts to strengthen security along the country’s coastline, the Ministry of Public Security reported on Tuesday.
    These efforts focused on illegal fishing, smuggling, human trafficking, and other maritime offenses, with more than 20,000 security risks resolved.
    In a special operation against illegal fishing between May and October, police teamed up with fisheries and coast guard units to investigate 474 cases and seize over 1,700 tonnes of illegal catch.
    The police also assessed maritime infrastructure such as ports and shorelines, identifying over 6,100 safety hazards and issuing 1,700 corrective notices to address potential risks.
    In 2024, more than 16,000 officers participated in 401 search-and-rescue operations, saving 1,229 people and rescuing 80 vessels, the ministry’s data show. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Kennedy champions bill to stop bureaucrats from crushing America’s chemical industry

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator John Kennedy (Louisiana)

    WASHINGTON – Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) today introduced the No Industrial Restrictions In Secret (No IRIS) Act to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from using data from the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) to make rules that punish America’s chemical manufacturing industry. 

    “For four years, the Biden administration weaponized the EPA’s IRIS program against America’s chemical industry. My bill would prevent this kind of abuse from happening again and safeguard American businesses from government overreach,” said Kennedy.

    The No IRIS Act would prohibit the federal government from using the IRIS to inform its rulemakings unless Congress explicitly authorizes the program.

    Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) is leading the companion legislation in the House of Representatives.

    “Unelected bureaucrats have often disrupted the work of Wisconsin’s chemical manufacturers and inhibited the success of the industry through the abuse of the EPA’s IRIS program. Instead of grounding regulatory decisions in sound science, IRIS has demonstrated a poor track record by issuing assessments that conflict with the industry’s best available scientific expertise and methodologies. The No IRIS Act will protect American jobs, promote innovation, and hold the EPA accountable for acting against the best interest of the industry and our economy,” said Grothman.

    “American success relies on American chemistry. Computer chips, national defense, modern healthcare, housing, infrastructure, agriculture, and energy are all made possible by America’s chemical industry. Unfortunately, the EPA’s IRIS program puts many critical chemistries in jeopardy. The IRIS program has a troubling history of being out of step with the best available science and methods, lacking transparency, and being unresponsive to peer review and stakeholder recommendations. It’s time for Congress and EPA to take action and put sound science at the forefront of regulatory decision-making, and we applaud Senator Kennedy and Congressman Grothman for their leadership on this important issue,” said Chris Jahn, President and CEO of the American Chemistry Council.

    Background: 

    • The EPA established the IRIS program in 1985 to gather data on how chemicals impact human health. The EPA designed the system to spot health hazards—not make policy.
    • The IRIS program is not currently authorized in statute. As a result, unelected bureaucrats have abused the system to hurt chemical makers in Louisiana and across the country with virtually zero Congressional oversight.
    • President Joe Biden’s EPA used unscientific methods in the IRIS to justify rules that hurt businesses and cost Americans their jobs. 
    • As of 2023, Louisiana was the second-largest chemical-producing state in the country, with its chemical industry paying $3.49 billion in wages.

    The full bill text is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: An Updated Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) for Species Climate Adaptation Planning

    Source: US Geological Survey

    An Updated Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) for Species Climate Adaptation Planning

    NatureServe recently released CCVI 4.0, the latest version of the Climate Change Vulnerability Index for terrestrial and freshwater species. Developed in collaboration with multiple CASCs, the update integrates a decade of new science and features a new web-based platform. 

    A new version of NatureServe’s Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) is now available online, offering practitioners and policymakers an improved cost-effective way to evaluate species vulnerability to climate change. The newest update was developed in collaboration with multiple USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers and incorporated direct input from partners, including many state fish and wildlife agencies who use the CCVI to inform State Wildlife Action Plans. The CCVI tool can be used in many ways, including to identify at-risk species and areas home to a high number of at-risk species, to determine which climatic factors are significant for a species, and to help researchers identify species that have been insufficiently studied. 

    The CCVI determines species vulnerability using three key factors: Climate exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Climate exposure refers to the magnitude and rate of climate change a species experiences, sensitivity evaluates how strongly those changes affect it, and adaptive capacity describes the species’ ability to adjust to changing conditions. The last major update to the CCVI was made in 2015, but much has changed since then. The updated CCVI 4.0 now incorporates a decade of new scientific insights on how climate change impacts terrestrial and freshwater species and provides a new web-based platform to improve data sharing and collaboration. It also includes updated climate exposure data, a new vulnerability comparison across two future emissions scenarios, and a refined adaptive capacity framework created by researchers from the Northwest CASC.  

    Looking ahead, researchers from NatureServe and the USGS CASC network plan to keep refining the CCVI 4.0 by testing additional climate variables and including scenario-planning features. These improvements will help natural resource managers navigate uncertain futures in conservation planning and decision-making. 

    Access CCVI 4.0 on the NatureServe website 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Rapid City Man Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison for Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    RAPID CITY – United States Attorney Alison J. Ramsdell announced today that U.S. District Judge Karen E. Schreier has sentenced a Rapid City, South Dakota, man convicted of Possession with Intent to Distribute a Controlled Substance.

    Cruz Mario Lara Larios, age 38, was sentenced on February 14, 2025, to 10 years in federal prison, five years of supervised release, and a special assessment to the Federal Crime Victims Fund in the amount of $100.

    Lara Larios was indicted by a federal grand jury in March 2024. He pleaded guilty on November 22, 2024.

    On March 17, 2024, Lara Larios was the driver and sole occupant of a vehicle on Interstate 90 near Spearfish, South Dakota. Law enforcement conducted a traffic stop on Lara Larios’ vehicle for speeding. During the traffic stop officers located nearly 24 pounds of methamphetamine hidden in the vehicle, which Lara Larios had been transporting from Washington to South Dakota with the intention of distributing some or all of the methamphetamine.

    This case was investigated by the South Dakota Highway Patrol and the Unified Narcotics Enforcement Team (UNET).  UNET is comprised of law enforcement from the Pennington County Sheriff’s Office, the Rapid City Police Department, South Dakota Division of Criminal Investigation, the South Dakota Highway Patrol and the South Dakota National Guard. Assistant U.S. Attorney Benjamin Patterson prosecuted the case.

    Lara Larios was immediately remanded to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service following the sentencing. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: NASA Sets Launch Coverage for Missions Studying Cosmic Origins, Sun

    Source: NASA

    NASA will provide live coverage of prelaunch and launch activities for SPHEREx (Spectro-Photometer for the History of the Universe, Epoch of Reionization and Ices Explorer), the agency’s newest space telescope. This will lift off with another NASA mission, Polarimeter to Unify the Corona and Heliosphere, or PUNCH, which will study the Sun’s solar wind.
    The launch window opens at 10:09 p.m. EST (7:09 p.m. PST) Thursday, Feb. 27, for the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket that will lift off from Space Launch Complex 4 East at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California. Watch coverage on NASA+. Learn how to watch NASA content through a variety of platforms, including social media.
    The SPHEREx mission will improve our understanding of how the universe evolved and search for key ingredients for life in our galaxy.
    The four small spacecraft that comprise PUNCH will observe the Sun’s corona as it transitions into solar wind.
    The deadline for media accreditation for in-person coverage of this launch has passed. NASA’s media credentialing policy is available online. For questions about media accreditation, please email: ksc-media-accreditat@mail.nasa.gov.
    NASA’s mission coverage is as follows (all times Eastern and subject to change based on real-time operations):
    Tuesday, Feb. 25
    2 p.m. – SPHEREx and PUNCH Science Overview News Conference

    Shawn Domagal-Goldman, acting director, Astrophysics Division, NASA Headquarters
    Joe Westlake, director, Heliophysics Division, NASA Headquarters
    Nicholeen Viall, PUNCH Mission Scientist, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
    Rachel Akeson, SPHEREx science data center lead, Caltech/IPAC
    Phil Korngut, SPHEREx instrument scientist, Caltech

    The news conference will stream on NASA+. Media may ask questions in person or via phone. Limited auditorium space will be available for in-person participation. For the dial-in number and passcode, media should contact the NASA Kennedy newsroom no later than one hour before the start of the event at ksc-newsroom@mail.nasa.gov.
    Wednesday, Feb. 26
    3:30 p.m. – SPHEREx and PUNCH Prelaunch News Conference

    Mark Clampin, acting deputy associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters
    David Cheney, PUNCH program executive, NASA Headquarters
    James Fanson, SPHEREx project manager, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory
    Denton Gibson, launch director, NASA’s Launch Services Program
    Julianna Scheiman, director, NASA Science Missions, SpaceX
    U.S. Air Force 1st Lt. Ina Park, 30th Operations Support Squadron launch weather officer

    Coverage of the prelaunch news conference will stream live on NASA+.
    Media may ask questions in person and via phone. Limited auditorium space will be available for in-person participation. For the dial-in number and passcode, media should contact the Kennedy newsroom no later than one hour before the start of the event at ksc-newsroom@mail.nasa.gov.
    Thursday, Feb. 27
    12 p.m. – SPHEREx and PUNCH Launch Preview will stream live on NASA+.
    9:15 p.m. – Launch coverage begins on NASA+.
    10:09 p.m. – Launch window opens.
    Audio Only Coverage
    Audio only of the launch coverage will be carried on the NASA “V” circuits, which may be accessed by dialing 321-867-1220, or -1240. On launch day, “mission audio,” countdown activities without NASA+ media launch commentary, will be carried on 321-867-7135.
    NASA Website Launch Coverage
    Launch day coverage of the mission will be available on the agency’s website. Coverage will include links to live streaming and blog updates beginning no earlier than 9:15 p.m., Feb. 27, as the countdown milestones occur. On-demand streaming video and photos of the launch will be available shortly after liftoff.
    For questions about countdown coverage, contact the Kennedy newsroom at 321-867-2468. Follow countdown coverage on the SPHEREx blog.
    Attend the Launch Virtually
    Members of the public can register to attend this launch virtually. NASA’s virtual guest program for this mission also includes curated launch resources, notifications about related opportunities or changes, and a stamp for the NASA virtual guest passport following launch.
    Watch, Engage on Social Media
    You can also stay connected by following and tagging these accounts:
    X: @NASA, @NASAJPL, @NASAUnivese, @NASASun, @NASAKennedy, @NASA_LSP
    Facebook: NASA, NASAJPL, NASA Universe, NASASunScience, NASA’s Launch Services Program
    Instagram: @NASA, @NASAKennedy, @NASAJPL, @NASAUnivese
    For more information about these missions, visit:

    SPHEREx

    PUNCH

    -end-
    Alise Fisher – SPHERExHeadquarters, Washington202-617-4977alise.m.fisher@nasa.gov
    Sarah Frazier – PUNCHGoddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.202-853-7191sarah.frazier@nasa.gov
    Laura AguiarKennedy Space Center, Florida321-593-6245laura.aquiar@nasa.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –