NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI: Online Payday Loans for Bad Credit 2025: Wizzay Unveils 1 Hour Payday Loans with No Credit Check from a Trusted Bad Credit Lender

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    New York City, June 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —

    Wizzay, a trusted bad credit lender, has unveiled a fast, stress-free solution for U.S. consumers seeking 1 hour payday loans no credit check guaranteed approval, even if they’ve been denied by traditional banks. As more Americans turn to emergency lending for everyday needs, Wizzay delivers a 100% online, secure, and completely free platform that requires no paperwork or credit inquiry.

    By leveraging a network of high-rated direct lenders and a smart matching platform, Wizzay streamlines access to 1 hour payday loans online no credit check guaranteed approval, with many borrowers receiving funds in less than 60 minutes after approval. Whether you’re facing an urgent car repair, medical bill, or overdue rent, the platform connects you to same day payday loans online that emphasize speed, convenience, and accessibility.

    Official Apply Link to Platform: Wizzay Loans

    Bridging Financial Gaps with Same-Day Payday Loans and No Credit Checks

    As inflation and rising costs continue to strain household budgets, millions of Americans are just one unexpected expense away from financial hardship. Unfortunately, traditional banks often impose hard credit checks, complicated paperwork, and loan minimums that exclude those in need. Wizzay’s same-day payday loan provides a fast alternative, with a simple five-minute application, optional no credit check, and quick approval based on income and banking history.

    What Makes the Same-Day Loan Stand Out?

    • Lightning-Fast Funding: Most borrowers receive funds within a few hours.
    • Optional No Credit Check: No FICO score is needed for eligible applicants.
    • Seamless Online Process: Mobile-friendly form requiring only essential info.
    • Upfront Cost Clarity: Full disclosure of fees and repayment terms before commitment.
    • Flexible Repayment Options: Convert short-term payday loans into installment loans to avoid costly rollovers.

    Inclusive Lending from a Bad Credit Lender

    Wizzay is committed to helping borrowers with low or poor credit access the funds they need without barriers. By evaluating income and bank activity instead of focusing solely on credit history, Wizzay makes its payday loan more accessible to those with financial setbacks. As a trusted bad credit lender, Wizzay also ensures full transparency—so users avoid surprise charges or predatory terms.

    Need more than $255? Wizzay also facilitates personal loans for bad credit with guaranteed approval up to $1,000, expanding access to safe, manageable financing options and helping borrowers avoid high-interest traps.

    << Secure Emergency Funds Instantly – No Credit Check Needed >>

    A Commitment to Responsible Lending

    Fast loans should also be fair. Wizzay provides clear terms, useful tools, and support for smart borrowing decisions:

    • Itemized Fee Breakdowns: Complete visibility into loan costs.
    • Budgeting Tools: Built-in calculators and resources for repayment planning.
    • Income-Focused Approval: Decisioning based on real-time banking activity, not just credit scores.
    • Advanced Encryption: Industry-standard data protection for your personal and financial information.

    “Transparency is fundamental to our approach,” a Wizzay spokesperson said. “We want borrowers to feel confident and informed—not rushed—when applying for a payday loan with no credit check.”

    Beyond $255: Guaranteed Loan Options for Bad Credit

    Wizzay’s lending network extends beyond small-dollar loans. It also offers access to guaranteed personal loans for bad credit, with individual borrowing limits. These loans feature flexible repayment terms, no hard credit checks, and straightforward eligibility—delivering long-term value to borrowers who may not qualify elsewhere.

    About Wizzay

    Wizzay is a digital lending platform that matches borrowers with a vetted network of third-party lenders offering payday and personal loan services. Although Wizzay is not a direct lender, it provides fast, secure loan matching for amounts from $100 to $5,000. Applications are completed entirely online in just minutes, with funding as soon as the next business day. The platform supports users with poor or limited credit histories and uses bank-level encryption to protect all data.

    Contact Information

    Company: Customer Acquisition LLC
    Email: support@wizzay.com
    Address: Springates Building, Lower Government Road, Charlestown, Saint Kitts and Nevis

    Disclaimer: Wizzay is not a lender and does not make credit decisions. Loan approval, rates, and terms are determined by third-party lenders based on applicant eligibility. Borrowers are encouraged to check all loan terms carefully and only borrow amounts they can afford to repay. Same-day funding is dependent on bank processing times and may vary by applicant.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Aguilar: It is completely unacceptable that Congress has not been briefed on Iran attack

    Source: US House of Representatives – Democratic Caucus

    The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI – June 24, 2025

    WASHINGTON, DC — Today, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, Whip Katherine Clark, Vice Chair Ted Lieu and Democratic Caucus National Security Task Force Co-Chairs Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander and Derek Tran held a press conference on the Trump Administration’s chaotic foreign policy putting American troops in harm’s way. 

    CHAIRMAN AGUILAR: Good afternoon. Members today were supposed to receive a classified briefing from the Trump Administration, but clearly the chaos and the confusion coming out of the White House made that impossible. It is completely unacceptable that Congress has not been briefed on this in a timely fashion. We need evidence, we need details and we need to know them now. There are a number of outstanding questions, including whether this attack achieved the Administration’s stated goals. Launching an attack without Congressional authorization is wrong—launching a potentially unsuccessful attack without Congressional authorization would be an administration-defining failure. And this is a defining week for the Trump presidency. He has asked Republicans to put the unpopular One Big Ugly Bill on his desk by July 4th so that he can celebrate Independence Day by throwing 16 million people off of their health insurance to pay for billionaire tax breaks that explode the deficit by over $3 trillion.  And now he’s putting American troops in harm’s way in the Middle East, after promising that he’d restore peace. The American people want a steady hand at the wheel and to fight back. 

    I’m proud to launch the House Democratic Caucus National Security Task Force, co-chaired by Representatives Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander and Derek Tran. And we want to thank Co-chair Mikie Sherrill, who can’t be with us here today. The members leading this task force will draw on their patriotism, expertise and commitment to service by providing the leadership that Donald Trump and the Rubberstamp Republicans lack the courage and moral clarity to deliver. Vice Chair Ted Lieu.

    VICE CHAIR LIEU: Thank you, Chairman Aguilar. Please to be joined today by veterans Jason Crow, Maggie Goodlander and Derek Tran. Like Chairman Aguilar said, it is completely unacceptable that the Administration is unwilling to brief the House of Representatives on the strikes in Iran. It has been a longstanding bipartisan goal of both Democratic and Republican Administrations to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The Iranian regime is a theocratic autocratic regime. If they had nuclear weapons, they could launch them at U.S. bases, U.S. military interests and at Israel. And we have to make sure this regime never acquires a nuclear weapon. At the same time, I believe the Constitution means what it says: Only Congress has the power to declare war. I probably stated at the time that Obama needed Congressional authorization to strike Syria. I believe Trump needs Congressional authorization to strike Iran. My view of the Constitution does not change based on what party the President happens to belong to. 

    Now, there’s some other news that happened today, including that consumer sentiment declined again, and what we know is that the economic policies of Donald Trump and the Republicans are harming Americans. The American people know it. Inflation has increased. Grocery prices have increased. People are having difficulty making ends meet, and now we have this huge, Big Ugly Bill that’s going to cut health care for millions and millions of Americans, in service of tax breaks for billionaires. We asked the Republican Senate and House Republicans to vote no. And with that, it is my honor and pleasure to introduce Representative Jason Crow, who served our country in combat prior to joining Congress.

    REP. CROW: Thank you, Chairman Aguilar, Vice Chairman Lieu and my fellow Co-chairs of the House Democratic National Security Task Force, Derek Tran and Maggie Goodlander. I’m Jason Crow from Colorado. And even though I’m a Member of Congress now, I view this issue, like many national security issues, more through my eyes as a former Army Ranger and paratrooper and combat veteran, than just as a Member of Congress. I deployed three times to Iraq and Afghanistan in my early and mid-20s. And I know the true costs of war. I know what happens when unaccountable elites in comfortable, air-conditioned offices in Washington pound their chests, saber-rattle and then send somebody else to go off and do the tough work. Because the people that I grew up with, working-class kids from around the country, from the middle of the country, from small towns that people in Washington don’t pay attention to that have to go out and carry out that tough talk. So I take it pretty personally when an elite like Donald Trump makes a cavalier decision without thought, without engagement with Congress, to potentially pull us into another long-term, endless conflict in the Middle East. But don’t get us wrong, there is no appetite in America for the United States to be pulled into another decades-long conflict in the Middle East. So, there’s a lot of talk about Congress and why Congress should be involved. A lot of discussion about the Constitution, a lot of discussion about war powers, and I just want to talk about why that should matter to Americans. Of course, the Constitution matters. And of course, obeying the rule of law matters. 

    But let’s drill down into that for just one moment. We spent 20 years and $3 trillion and over 6,000 American troop lives fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, that should have ended much, much sooner and been far less costly than they were. How did that happen? Well, it happened in large part because there was just one vote the entirety of those wars, one vote and one formal debate in Congress. And then out of sight, out of mind. Congress is an essential part of this. That is what the Framers of the Constitution envisioned. That the people closest to the American people have to go home every weekend and stand in high school auditoriums, in gyms and Rotary Clubs and Friday night fish frys across America, and be held accountable and say why we should spend taxpayer dollars to send our men and women to someplace around the world into conflict. Why we should do that. And to be accountable for it in real time. That’s why the involvement of Congress matters. Because nobody will ever tell me that things would have been different in Iraq and Afghanistan had we actually had that debate, had we actually pushed that accountability. We know, we know it would have been. So, Congress needs to step up. I know House Democrats are ready to step up. We’re already leading to reinsert ourselves into matters of war and peace. It’s time for the Republicans to step up too and say enough is enough. We have an independent Constitutional obligation to support our military, to support our troops and to discharge our obligations under the Constitution, regardless of what Donald Trump says. We are not asking them to storm the beaches of Normandy or to give their lives for this country; we are asking them to step up and fulfill their constitutional obligations. And with that, it is my pleasure to introduce the intrepid Whip of the House Democrats, Katherine Clark of Massachusetts.

    WHIP CLARK: Thank you so much Congressman Crow and thank you for your service to our country, both your military service and your service. And to all of you. And thank you to our Chairman and Vice Chairman for pulling this together. Our message today is clear: the Constitution is not a document of convenience. It is there to guarantee that there is accountability, because it is the people’s voice of this country. It is American families who are feeling every day that it is hard to get ahead. Who need to be informed of when this country is going to have military strikes and go to war. And that is where representative government comes in. That is the design. That as members of Congress, we are here representing our districts and the voice of the American people. So when we have a President and an Administration and now a Republican Party in Congress that has decided the American people are not entitled to know anything. It is a trust us, we are doing what we’re doing. You are just here to pay the taxes while we debate these things internally, without your representatives involved. That is an outrage and an insult to families at home. Who, at this time, where 60% of American families are feeling they can’t provide the basics, while we are debating a GOP bill that wants to take away health care from 16 million Americans, that wants to take away food programs, and strip funding from veterans benefits. The audacity of them coming forward and saying, on top of all that, we feel that you are not entitled to the basic information around our national security and such profound decisions about whether to go to war or not. This is far beyond a briefing and what day it will be held. It is the fact that we have been demanding information on behalf of American families, of American veterans, of those who are in active duty and their families who deserve answers on what our country is committing as far as foreign action and why. Thank you. 

    CHAIRMAN AGUILAR: Thanks. Co-Chair Maggie Goodlander.

    REP. GOODLANDER: Thank you so much. I’m really grateful to our leadership and to my colleagues who are part of this task force, which I’m really proud to be part of. I represent the “Live Free or Die” State of New Hampshire here in Congress, and we’ve got freedom-loving patriots right here on this podium who believe deeply in our mission and our role. And what I’d say is, I’m about to turn it over to Derek Tran, who, like my dad, joined the military at age 18. My dad, Ted, always said he got his education in the United States Navy—and so did I. I really did. I served 11 years as an intelligence officer in the Navy Reserve. I learned in the Navy and saw firsthand that the United States of America has brutal and determined enemies all across the world, including in Iran. I saw firsthand how our patriotic service members, when they take an oath to this document, I bring my Constitution with me everywhere I go in this job, because it’s a useful document to have these days for questions big and small. When they take an oath to this, they mean it. I also learned in the Navy firsthand why our Framers were really smart to give Congress a central role in American national security and in matters of war and peace, because there are no more consequential decisions than can be made. What we see today is an Administration that is completely ignoring the role of Congress in matters of war and peace, and it’s having real consequences. It’s been said. We just came back. I was pounding the pavement all across New Hampshire. I heard from the families of service members who were asking basic questions, questions that this Administration should be answering to the American people, about why we went ahead and conducted a military strike without Congressional authorization? What the impact of that strike was, what damage it did to Iran’s nuclear program and their nuclear industrial base, and what is the plan now? This is why Congress has got a role in questions of war and peace, and why this administration is going to have to answer to us. I’m really proud to be in this effort alongside all of you, and delighted to turn it over to my colleague, and Army veteran. I’ll allow it. Go Navy! Derek Tran.

    REP. TRAN: Thank you so much, Rep. Goodlander. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for coming and thank you especially to my colleagues with whom I am so proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder. I joined the Army Reserves when I was 18 years old. I walked into that recruitment office because I was committed to giving back to the country that has given me so much. My parents fled a communist dictatorship and came to the United States seeking the freedom and democracy that defined the core of our national values. I brought that background with me to Congress, and I’m so proud to lend my voice as a leader of the House Democratic Caucus on the National Security Task Force. Just this week, we learned in terrifying detail just how important our voices are at this critical moment. Iran and its proxies pose a serious threat to our nation, and American people are looking for measured, steady leadership to protect our national security. They’re not seeing it from President Trump. They’re not seeing it from Congressional Republicans, who refuse to hold this President accountable. I am proud to stand with my colleagues today to urge a stronger, more stable approach to our national security. We are committed to keeping our service members safe. We are committed to protecting U.S. global leadership and we don’t want our country dragged into another reckless war. It is critical that we exhaust all diplomatic options to de-escalate this conflict, because we do not want more of our soldiers put in harm’s way. The United States has been the sole global superpower for decades, not only because of our military might, but because of our values, our adherence to the Constitution and our respect to the rule of law. We’re here today because we refuse to stand by, while the legacy, this legacy, is under threat. Thank you so much and I’m going to turn it back to our Chairman for questions.

    Video of the full press conference and Q&A can be viewed here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why queer-themed shows evoke a bittersweet nostalgia for missed childhood moments

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rena Bivens, Associate Professor of Communication and Media Studies, Carleton University

    A scene from Heartstopper — Charlie (played by Joe Locke), left, is a gay teen boy who falls in love with classmate Nick (played by Kit Connor), right.

    Imagine suddenly longing for a past you’ve only seen in a show filmed before you were born. Or, reverse that: Imagine wishing you could re-do your childhood while watching a brand new show like Heartstopper, set in the present day.

    Heartstopper is a Netflix hit series, jam-packed with queer and trans teens finding love, accented by cute cartoon leaves fluttering across the screen.

    Sounds adorable? Yes, but if you came out later in life, grew up in an unsupportive environment or never had a teen romance, the anemoia you feel may be intense.

    If you’ve yet to hear the word anemoia, forgive yourself. Anemoia was only recently defined by The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows as “nostalgia for a time you never experienced.” The growing obsession with what’s known as Y2K core — fashion, music and culture inspired by the 90s and early 2000s — by Gen Z is an example of this kind of intergenerational envy.

    Unlike other forms of nostalgia, neuroscientist Felipe De Brigard tells us that anemoia “doesn’t need real memories.” De Brigard explores the darker side of these complex feelings. He says propaganda can misinform people about the past to elicit a longing for a time that may never have existed.

    According to De Brigard, given the right material, we can create simulations of possible scenarios in our minds. We might imagine a different present or an alternative past.

    Imagining what could have been

    While watching Heartstopper’s love story unfold in our living rooms, we feel happy for the fictional characters, but anger, grief and a dash of betrayal can creep in as well.

    For many Heartstopper viewers, the series blends into memories from our real life. Watching queer and trans teens portrayed as ordinary people can feel like a breath of fresh air, especially if these scenes are inconsistent with our own adolescence. According to media studies professor Frederik Dhaenens, Heartstopper also uses cute esthetics that amplify these positive depictions while “soften[ing] the blow of negative experiences” faced by the characters.

    The season 3 cast of Heartstopper.
    (Netflix)

    Memories from our past start to flood through our minds as we watch. We may find ourselves wishing for the queer childhood we never had. If only I was born later, we might think. Viewers may imagine how their lives could have unfolded differently, if only they had better media representation or were surrounded by more liberal perspectives.

    Enter queer anemoia: nostalgia for a do-over of an earlier stage of your life in a different time or place. While commonly expressed by queer and trans folks over 40, anyone who harbours some grief over their coming-out process or the lack of acceptance they had growing up may find themselves riding this emotional rollercoaster.

    A moment of recognition

    Queer anemoia is a moment of recognition. It is the contrast between our imagined teen love and — for many, but of course not all — the real past — lonely and isolated.

    The sight of a thriving trans teen like Heartstopper’s Elle could elicit strong feelings for a viewer who transitioned later in life and missed their own girlhood.

    Maybe the word trans wasn’t even accessible to help them make sense of their identity.

    Thinking about the past is not unusual for queer and trans folks. With some sarcasm, you could call it a hobby. Hey, want to hang out tonight and subject our adolescence and coming-out stories “to the judgment of hindsight?” Media push this exercise further by helping us visualize what could have been.

    ‘I Kissed a Girl’

    Another show described similarly to Heartstopper is the reality TV show I Kissed A Girl. The Guardian described it as “a celebratory, joyful love letter to queerness” and “the sweetest, most touching” show.

    A scene from ‘I Kissed A Girl’ reunion show.
    I Kissed A Girl

    Among a surplus of straight couples in reality TV, I Kissed A Girl is one of only a handful of shows with queer cast members. But perhaps this is shifting. Sociologist Róisín Ryan-Flood and queer historian Amy Tooth Murphy argue that we are undergoing “one of the most dramatic transformations of gender and sexuality in social life in recent decades.”

    By portraying lesbians as ordinary people with ordinary desires, I Kissed A Girl contributes to this transformation. Some viewers’ might find their own ideas about what is possible, desirable and even aspirational beginning to change.

    Media can model these possibilities for us, which contributes to our identity formation. Feminist and queer theorists agree, arguing that our gender and sexual identities are collectively created, not self-made.

    For example, gender studies professor Amira Lundy-Harris explains how when we encounter others in media — novels, film, television — they can help us recognize something about ourselves.

    Therefore these mediated identities — these characters on TV — are not just ours. We co-create our identities with a variety of different forms of media, including social media and memoirs. We also do this with other people, including our families and friends. The cultural and political moment we are living in is also part of this collaborative identity-making process.

    Late bloomers may feel more anemoia

    Queer anemoia is a politically useful feeling. When we compare different cultural moments we may also recognize that we did not learn about our identity in isolation from the rest of the world. Feminist philosopher Sue Campbell has said our feelings require others to help us interpret and make sense of them. Through their characters and stories, media offer us an interpretive context for our feelings to emerge.

    Some late bloomers — especially those left feeling confused or surprised by their sexual or gender identities — may blame themselves for going along with a mainstream, heteronormative or cisnormative cultural script without stopping to ask themselves who they really are. It may be hard, at first, to see that our identities are co-created.

    A recently released film, Am I Ok? portrays a late bloomer, Lucy, who is 32 when she finally realizes she’s a lesbian. She’s frustrated and disappointed in herself as she tells her best friend, “I should have figured this out by now.”

    Unfortunately, the film does not explore other reasons for her predicament — like compulsory heterosexuality — that are no fault of her own.

    Dakota Johnson stars in a film about discovering your sexuality later in life.
    (Rotten Tomatoes)

    Naming the ‘nostalgia’

    British education professor Catherine Lee, who previously taught secondary school under the homophobic Section 28, wrote in The Conversation about how she was filled with regret as she watched the queer teachers in Heartstopper give their students the supportive environment she never could.

    Even Heartstopper director Andy Newbery felt queer anemoia before working on the third season. He said:

    “I’ve heard it many, many times since, especially from people sort of my age really, about how they wish they’d had a show like this when they were growing up.”

    Naming queer anemoia gives us language for these complex, bittersweet feelings. In today’s political climate, cute portrayals of queer and trans love may not continue to grace our screens, but taking our feelings seriously and asking what they tell us about the role of media in our lives must never stop.

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

    – ref. Why queer-themed shows evoke a bittersweet nostalgia for missed childhood moments – https://theconversation.com/why-queer-themed-shows-evoke-a-bittersweet-nostalgia-for-missed-childhood-moments-259341

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump administration aims to slash funds that preserve the nation’s rich architectural and cultural history

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michael R. Allen, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, West Virginia University

    The iconic ‘Walking Man’ Hawkes sign in Westbrook, Maine, was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2019. Ben McCanna/Portland Portland Press Herald via Getty Images

    President Donald Trump’s proposed fiscal year 2026 discretionary budget is called a “skinny budget” because it’s short on line-by-line details.

    But historic preservation efforts in the U.S. did get a mention – and they might as well be skinned to the bone.

    Trump has proposed to slash funding for the federal Historic Preservation Fund to only $11 million, which is $158 million less than the fund’s previous reauthorization in 2024. The presidential discretionary budget, however, always heads to Congress for appropriation. And Congress always makes changes.

    That said, the Trump administration hasn’t even released the $188 million that Congress appropriated for the fund for the 2025 fiscal year, essentially impounding the funding stream that Congress created in 1976 for historic preservation activities across the nation.

    I’m a scholar of historic preservation who’s worked to secure historic designations for buildings and entire neighborhoods. I’ve worked on projects that range from making distressed neighborhoods in St. Louis eligible for historic tax credits to surveying Cold War-era hangars and buildings on seven U.S. Air Force bases.

    I’ve seen the ways in which the Historic Preservation Fund helps local communities maintain and rehabilitate their rich architectural history, sparing it from deterioration, the wrecking ball or the pressures of the private market.

    A rare, deficit-neutral funding model

    Most Americans probably don’t realize that the task of historic preservation largely falls to individual states and Native American tribes.

    The National Historic Preservation Act that President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law in 1966 requires states and tribes to handle everything from identifying potential historic sites to reviewing the impact of interstate highway projects on archaeological sites and historic buildings. States and tribes are also responsible for reviewing nominations of sites in the National Register of Historic Places, the nation’s official list of properties deemed worthy of preservation.

    However, many states and tribes didn’t have the capacity to adequately tackle the mandates of the 1966 act. So the Historic Preservation Fund was formed a decade later to alleviate these costs by funneling federal resources into these efforts.

    The fund is actually the product of a conservative, limited-government approach.

    Created during Gerald Ford’s administration, it has a revenue-neutral model, meaning that no tax dollars pay for the program. Instead, it’s funded by private lease royalties from the Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas reserves.

    Most of these reserves are located in federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coast of Alaska. Private companies that receive a permit to extract from them must agree to a lease with the federal government. Royalties from their oil and gas sales accrue in federally controlled accounts under the terms of these leases. The Office of Natural Resources Revenue then directs 1.5% of the total royalties to the Historic Preservation Fund.

    Congress must continually reauthorize the amount of funding reserved for the Historic Preservation Fund, or it goes unfunded.

    Boston’s Fenway Park was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 2012, making it eligible for preservation grants and federal tax incentives.
    Winslow Townson/Getty Images

    Despite bipartisan support, the fund has been threatened in the past. President Ronald Reagan attempted to do exactly what Trump is doing now by making no request for funding at all in his 1983 budget. Yet the fund has nonetheless been reauthorized six times since its inception, with terms ranging from five to 10 years.

    The program is a crucial source of funding, particularly in small towns and rural America, where privately raised cultural heritage funds are harder to come by. It provides grants for the preservation of buildings and geographical areas that hold historical, cultural or spiritual significance in underrepresented communities. And it’s even involved in projects tied to the nation’s 250th birthday in 2026, such as the rehabilitation of the home in New Jersey where George Washington was stationed during the winter of 1778-79 and the restoration of Rhode Island’s Old State House.

    Filling financial gaps

    I’ve witnessed the fund’s impact firsthand in small communities across the nation.

    Edwardsville, Illinois, a suburb of St. Louis, is home to the Leclaire Historic District. In the 1970s, it was added to the National Register of Historic Places. The national designation recognized the historic significance of the district, protecting it against any adverse impacts from federal infrastructure funding. It also made tax credits available to the town. Edwardsville then designated LeClaire a local historic district so that it could legally protect the indelible architectural features of its homes, from original decorative details to the layouts of front porches.

    Despite the designation, however, there was no clear inventory of the hundreds of houses in the district. A few paid staffers and a volunteer citizen commission not only had to review proposed renovations and demolitions, but they also had to figure out which buildings even contributed to LeClaire’s significance and which ones did not – and thus did not need to be tied up in red tape.

    The Allen House is one of approximately 415 single-family homes in the Leclaire neighborhood in Edwardsville, Ill.
    Friends of Leclaire

    Edwardsville was able to secure a grant through the Illinois State Historic Preservation Office thanks to a funding match enabled by money disbursed to Illinois via the Historic Preservation Fund.

    In 2013, my team created an updated inventory of the historic district, making it easier for the local commission to determine which houses should be reviewed carefully and which ones don’t need to be reviewed at all.

    Oil money better than no money

    The historic preservation field, not surprisingly, has come out strongly against Trump’s proposal to defund the Historic Preservation Fund.

    Nonetheless, there have been debates within the field over the fund’s dependence on the fossil fuel industry, which was the trade-off that preservationists made decades ago when they crafted the funding model.

    In the 1970s, amid the national energy crisis, conservation of existing buildings was seen as a worthy ecological goal, since demolition and new construction required fossil fuels. To preservationists, diverting federal carbon royalties seemed like a power play.

    But with the effects of climate change becoming impossible to ignore, some preservationists are starting to more openly critique both the ethics and the wisdom of tapping into a pool of money created through the profits of the oil and gas industry. I’ve recently wondered myself if continued depletion of fossil fuels means that preservationists won’t be able to count on the Historic Preservation Fund as a long-term source of funding.

    That said, you’d be hard-pressed to find a preservationist who thinks that destroying the Historic Preservation Fund would be a good first step in shaping a more visionary policy.

    For now, Trump’s administration has only sown chaos in the field of historic preservation. Already, Ohio has laid off one-third of the staffers in its State Historic Preservation Office due to the impoundment of federal funds. More state preservation offices may follow suit. The National Council of State Historic Preservation Officers predicts that states soon could be unable to perform their federally mandated duties.

    Unfortunately, many people advocating for places important to their towns and neighborhoods may end up learning the hard way just what the Historic Preservation Fund does.

    Michael R. Allen is a member of the Advisor Leadership Team of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

    – ref. Trump administration aims to slash funds that preserve the nation’s rich architectural and cultural history – https://theconversation.com/trump-administration-aims-to-slash-funds-that-preserve-the-nations-rich-architectural-and-cultural-history-258889

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Checking in on New England fisheries 25 Years after ‘The Perfect Storm’ hit movie theaters

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Stephanie Otts, Director of National Sea Grant Law Center, University of Mississippi

    Filming ‘The Perfect Storm’ in Gloucester Harbor, Mass.
     The Salem News Historic Photograph Collection, Salem State University Archives and Special Collections, CC BY

    Twenty-five years ago, “The Perfect Storm” roared into movie theaters. The disaster flick, starring George Clooney and Mark Wahlberg, was a riveting, fictionalized account of commercial swordfishing in New England and a crew who went down in a violent storm.

    The anniversary of the film’s release, on June 30, 2000, provides an opportunity to reflect on the real-life changes to New England’s commercial fishing industry.

    Fishing was once more open to all

    In the true story behind the movie, six men lost their lives in late October 1991 when the commercial swordfishing vessel Andrea Gail disappeared in a fierce storm in the North Atlantic as it was headed home to Gloucester, Massachusetts.

    At the time, and until very recently, almost all commercial fisheries were open access, meaning there were no restrictions on who could fish.

    There were permit requirements and regulations about where, when and how you could fish, but anyone with the means to purchase a boat and associated permits, gear, bait and fuel could enter the fishery. Eight regional councils established under a 1976 federal law to manage fisheries around the U.S. determined how many fish could be harvested prior to the start of each fishing season.

    Fishing has been an integral part of coastal New England culture since its towns were established. In this 1899 photo, a New England community weighs and packs mackerel.
    Charles Stevenson/Freshwater and Marine Image Bank

    Fishing started when the season opened and continued until the catch limit was reached. In some fisheries, this resulted in a “race to the fish” or a “derby,” where vessels competed aggressively to harvest the available catch in short amounts of time. The limit could be reached in a single day, as happened in the Pacific halibut fishery in the late 1980s.

    By the 1990s, however, open access systems were coming under increased criticism from economists as concerns about overfishing rose.

    The fish catch peaked in New England in 1987 and would remain far above what the fish population could sustain for two more decades. Years of overfishing led to the collapse of fish stocks, including North Atlantic cod in 1992 and Pacific sardine in 2015.

    As populations declined, managers responded by cutting catch limits to allow more fish to survive and reproduce. Fishing seasons were shortened, as it took less time for the fleets to harvest the allowed catch. It became increasingly hard for fishermen to catch enough fish to earn a living.

    Saving fisheries changed the industry

    In the early 2000s, as these economic and environmental challenges grew, fisheries managers started limiting access. Instead of allowing anyone to fish, only vessels or individuals meeting certain eligibility requirements would have the right to fish.

    The most common method of limiting access in the U.S. is through limited entry permits, initially awarded to individuals or vessels based on previous participation or success in the fishery. Another approach is to assign individual harvest quotas or “catch shares” to permit holders, limiting how much each boat can bring in.

    In 2007, Congress amended the 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to promote the use of limited access programs in U.S. fisheries.

    Ships in the fleet out of New Bedford, Mass.
    Henry Zbyszynski/Flickr, CC BY

    Today, limited access is common, and there are positive signs that the management change is helping achieve the law’s environmental goal of preventing overfishing. Since 2000, the populations of 50 major fishing stocks have been rebuilt, meaning they have recovered to a level that can once again support fishing.

    I’ve been following the changes as a lawyer focused on ocean and coastal issues, and I see much work still to be done.

    Forty fish stocks are currently being managed under rebuilding plans that limit catch to allow the stock to grow, including Atlantic cod, which has struggled to recover due to a complex combination of factors, including climatic changes.

    The lingering effect on communities today

    While many fish stocks have recovered, the effort came at an economic cost to many individual fishermen. The limited-access Northeast groundfish fishery, which includes Atlantic cod, haddock and flounder, shed nearly 800 crew positions between 2007 and 2015.

    The loss of jobs and revenue from fishing impacts individual family income and relationships, strains other businesses in fishing communities, and affects those communities’ overall identity and resilience, as illustrated by a recent economic snapshot of the Alaska seafood industry.

    When original limited-access permit holders leave the business – for economic, personal or other reasons – their permits are either terminated or sold to other eligible permit holders, leading to fewer active vessels in the fleet. As a result, the number of vessels fishing for groundfish has declined from 719 in 2007 to 194 in 2023, meaning fewer jobs.

    A fisherman unloads a portion of his catch for the day of 300 pounds of groundfish, including flounder, in January 2006 in Gloucester, Mass.
    AP Photo/Lisa Poole

    Because of their scarcity, limited-access permits can cost upward of US$500,000, which is often beyond the financial means of a small businesses or a young person seeking to enter the industry. The high prices may also lead retiring fishermen to sell their permits, as opposed to passing them along with the vessels to the next generation.

    These economic forces have significantly altered the fishing industry, leading to more corporate and investor ownership, rather than the family-owned operations that were more common in the Andrea Gail’s time.

    Similar to the experience of small family farms, fishing captains and crews are being pushed into corporate arrangements that reduce their autonomy and revenues.

    Consolidation can threaten the future of entire fleets, as New Bedford, Massachusetts, saw when Blue Harvest Fisheries, backed by a private equity firm, bought up vessels and other assets and then declared bankruptcy a few years later, leaving a smaller fleet and some local business and fishermen unpaid for their work. A company with local connections bought eight vessels from Blue Harvest along with 48 state and federal permits the company held.

    New challenges and unchanging risks

    While there are signs of recovery for New England’s fisheries, challenges continue.

    Warming water temperatures have shifted the distribution of some species, affecting where and when fish are harvested. For example, lobsters have moved north toward Canada. When vessels need to travel farther to find fish, that increases fuel and supply costs and time away from home.

    Fisheries managers will need to continue to adapt to keep New England’s fisheries healthy and productive.

    One thing that, unfortunately, hasn’t changed is the dangerous nature of the occupation. Between 2000 and 2019, 414 fishermen died in 245 disasters.

    Stephanie Otts receives funding from the NOAA National Sea Grant College Program through the U.S. Department of Commerce. Previous support for fisheries management legal research provided by The Nature Conservancy.

    – ref. Checking in on New England fisheries 25 Years after ‘The Perfect Storm’ hit movie theaters – https://theconversation.com/checking-in-on-new-england-fisheries-25-years-after-the-perfect-storm-hit-movie-theaters-255076

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How high-latitude peat and forest fires could shape the future of Earth’s climate

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Apostolos Voulgarakis, AXA Chair in Wildfires and Climate Director, Laboratory of Atmospheric Environment & Climate Change, Technical University of Crete

    Understanding how wildfires influence our planet’s climate is a daunting challenge. Although fire occurs nearly everywhere on Earth and has always been present, it is still one of the least understood components of the Earth system. Recently, unprecedented fire activity has been observed in boreal (northern) and Arctic regions, which has drawn the scientific community’s attention to areas whose role in the future of our planet remains a mystery. Climate change likely has a major role in this alarming trend. However, high-latitude wildfires are not just a symptom of climate change; they are an accelerating force that could shape the future of our climate in ways that we are currently incapable of predicting.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    The rising threat of northern fires

    As global temperatures rise, wildfires are advancing further north and reaching into the Arctic. Canada, Alaska, Siberia, Scandinavia and even Greenland, all in northern high-latitude regions, have recently experienced some of the most intense and prolonged wildfire seasons on record. With climate change occurring more rapidly in these areas, the future of northern fires appears even grimmer.

    Apart from typical forest fires that consume surface vegetation, many high-latitude fires burn through peat, the dense, carbon-rich layers of partially decayed organic material. Despite covering only 3% of the terrestrial surface, peatlands are one of the world’s most important carbon storage environments, containing around 25% of the carbon existing in the Earth’s soils.

    Climate warming, which is even faster at high northern latitudes due to polar amplification – the phenomenon of greater climate change near the poles compared to the rest of the hemisphere or globe – is increasing the vulnerability of these ecosystems to fire, with potentially severe implications for the global climate. When peatlands ignite, they release massive amounts of “fossil carbon” that have been locked away for centuries or even millennia. The largest and most persistent fires on Earth, peat fires can smoulder for extended periods, are difficult to extinguish and can continue burning underground throughout the winter, only to reignite on the surface in spring. They have recently been described as “zombie” fires.

    Warmer and drier conditions driven by climate change, apart from making boreal forests more flammable, are expected to intensify and increase the frequency of peat fires, potentially transforming peatlands from carbon sinks into net sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Such a shift could trigger a feedback loop, meaning that a warming climate will cause more carbon emissions, which in turn will accelerate climate change.

    Air pollution and weather patterns

    Wildfires release large quantities of smoke particles (aerosols) into the atmosphere, contributing significantly to both local and widespread air quality degradation. These particles are harmful to human health and can cause serious respiratory and cardiovascular problems, while prolonged exposure may lead to smoke-induced stress, hospitalizations and increased mortality. Wildfires can also cause mental health strains associated with evacuations, loss of homes, livelihoods and lives.



    À lire aussi :
    Wildfire smoke can harm your brain, not just your lungs

    Beyond their long-term effects on climate, wildfire emissions can also influence weather patterns in more short-term ways via their impacts on atmospheric pollution levels. Smoke particles interact with sunlight and cloud formation processes, subsequently affecting temperatures, wind patterns and rainfall.

    For example, our recent study on the large-scale atmospheric impacts of the 2023 Canadian wildfires, which we presented at the European Geosciences Union general assembly this spring, demonstrated that wildfire aerosols led to a surface air temperature decrease that expanded to the entire northern hemisphere. The cooling was particularly pronounced over Canada (up to -5.5°C in August), where the emissions were located, but was also significant over remote areas such as Eastern Europe and even Siberia (up to around -2.5°C in July). The average hemispheric temperature anomaly we calculated (close to -1°C) highlights the potential for large regional emissions from wildfires to perturb weather conditions for weeks across a whole hemisphere, with profound implications for forecasting. Unreliable weather forecasts can disrupt daily activities and pose risks to public safety, especially during extreme events such as heatwaves or storms. They also have serious consequences for industries such as farming, fishing and transport, where planning depends heavily on accurate, timely predictions.

    Peat fires and the climate puzzle

    While incorporating peatland fire feedbacks into Earth System Models (ESMs) is essential for accurate climate projections, most existing models lack a representation of peat fires. Understanding the smouldering behaviour of organic soils when they burn, their ignition probability, and how these processes can be represented at a global scale is of utmost importance. Recent research efforts are focusing on bridging this knowledge gap. For example, at the Technical University of Crete, we are collaborating with the Hazelab research group at Imperial College London and the Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires, Environment and Society to perform field research and cutting-edge experiments) on peat smouldering, with the aim of shedding light on the complex mechanisms of peat fires.

    Integrating these lab results into ESMs will enable game-changing fire emission modelling, which holds potential for groundbreaking outcomes when it comes to our skill level for predicting the future of the Earth’s climate. By quantifying how the present-day atmosphere is influenced by fire emissions from boreal forests and peatlands, we can enhance the quality of projections of global temperature rise. This integration will also sharpen forecasts of regional climate impacts driven by fire-related aerosols, such as changes in rainfall patterns or accelerated Arctic ice melt.

    Tackling the challenge of northern fires

    Undoubtedly, we have entered an era of more frequent megafires – wildfires of extreme size, intensity, duration or impacts – with catastrophic consequences. Recent megafire events at boreal and Arctic regions unveil the dramatic change in wildfire patterns in northern high latitudes, which is a matter that demands urgent attention and action.

    As the planet continues to warm, high-latitude fires are expected to help shape the future of our planet. Massive wildfire events, such as those in Canada in 2023, not only burned millions of hectares but also forced hundreds of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. Unprecedented amounts of smoke blanketed parts of North America in hazardous air, prompting school closures and health warnings, and obliging citizens to remain indoors for days. Events like this reflect a growing trend. They underscore why advancing research to better understand and predict the dynamics of northern peat and forest fires, and to mitigate their climate impacts, is not only a scientific imperative but also a moral responsibility.

    Created in 2007 to help accelerate and share scientific knowledge on key societal issues, the Axa Research Fund has supported nearly 700 projects around the world conducted by researchers in 38 countries. To learn more, visit the website of the Axa Research Fund or follow @AXAResearchFund on X.

    Dimitra Tarasi has received funding from the AXA Chair in Wildfires and Climate, the Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires, Environment and Society and the A.G. Leventis Foundation Educational Grants.

    Apostolos Voulgarakis 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. How high-latitude peat and forest fires could shape the future of Earth’s climate – https://theconversation.com/how-high-latitude-peat-and-forest-fires-could-shape-the-future-of-earths-climate-258721

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How high-latitude peat and forest fires could shape the future of Earth’s climate

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Apostolos Voulgarakis, AXA Chair in Wildfires and Climate Director, Laboratory of Atmospheric Environment & Climate Change, Technical University of Crete

    Understanding how wildfires influence our planet’s climate is a daunting challenge. Although fire occurs nearly everywhere on Earth and has always been present, it is still one of the least understood components of the Earth system. Recently, unprecedented fire activity has been observed in boreal (northern) and Arctic regions, which has drawn the scientific community’s attention to areas whose role in the future of our planet remains a mystery. Climate change likely has a major role in this alarming trend. However, high-latitude wildfires are not just a symptom of climate change; they are an accelerating force that could shape the future of our climate in ways that we are currently incapable of predicting.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    The rising threat of northern fires

    As global temperatures rise, wildfires are advancing further north and reaching into the Arctic. Canada, Alaska, Siberia, Scandinavia and even Greenland, all in northern high-latitude regions, have recently experienced some of the most intense and prolonged wildfire seasons on record. With climate change occurring more rapidly in these areas, the future of northern fires appears even grimmer.

    Apart from typical forest fires that consume surface vegetation, many high-latitude fires burn through peat, the dense, carbon-rich layers of partially decayed organic material. Despite covering only 3% of the terrestrial surface, peatlands are one of the world’s most important carbon storage environments, containing around 25% of the carbon existing in the Earth’s soils.

    Climate warming, which is even faster at high northern latitudes due to polar amplification – the phenomenon of greater climate change near the poles compared to the rest of the hemisphere or globe – is increasing the vulnerability of these ecosystems to fire, with potentially severe implications for the global climate. When peatlands ignite, they release massive amounts of “fossil carbon” that have been locked away for centuries or even millennia. The largest and most persistent fires on Earth, peat fires can smoulder for extended periods, are difficult to extinguish and can continue burning underground throughout the winter, only to reignite on the surface in spring. They have recently been described as “zombie” fires.

    Warmer and drier conditions driven by climate change, apart from making boreal forests more flammable, are expected to intensify and increase the frequency of peat fires, potentially transforming peatlands from carbon sinks into net sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Such a shift could trigger a feedback loop, meaning that a warming climate will cause more carbon emissions, which in turn will accelerate climate change.

    Air pollution and weather patterns

    Wildfires release large quantities of smoke particles (aerosols) into the atmosphere, contributing significantly to both local and widespread air quality degradation. These particles are harmful to human health and can cause serious respiratory and cardiovascular problems, while prolonged exposure may lead to smoke-induced stress, hospitalizations and increased mortality. Wildfires can also cause mental health strains associated with evacuations, loss of homes, livelihoods and lives.



    À lire aussi :
    Wildfire smoke can harm your brain, not just your lungs

    Beyond their long-term effects on climate, wildfire emissions can also influence weather patterns in more short-term ways via their impacts on atmospheric pollution levels. Smoke particles interact with sunlight and cloud formation processes, subsequently affecting temperatures, wind patterns and rainfall.

    For example, our recent study on the large-scale atmospheric impacts of the 2023 Canadian wildfires, which we presented at the European Geosciences Union general assembly this spring, demonstrated that wildfire aerosols led to a surface air temperature decrease that expanded to the entire northern hemisphere. The cooling was particularly pronounced over Canada (up to -5.5°C in August), where the emissions were located, but was also significant over remote areas such as Eastern Europe and even Siberia (up to around -2.5°C in July). The average hemispheric temperature anomaly we calculated (close to -1°C) highlights the potential for large regional emissions from wildfires to perturb weather conditions for weeks across a whole hemisphere, with profound implications for forecasting. Unreliable weather forecasts can disrupt daily activities and pose risks to public safety, especially during extreme events such as heatwaves or storms. They also have serious consequences for industries such as farming, fishing and transport, where planning depends heavily on accurate, timely predictions.

    Peat fires and the climate puzzle

    While incorporating peatland fire feedbacks into Earth System Models (ESMs) is essential for accurate climate projections, most existing models lack a representation of peat fires. Understanding the smouldering behaviour of organic soils when they burn, their ignition probability, and how these processes can be represented at a global scale is of utmost importance. Recent research efforts are focusing on bridging this knowledge gap. For example, at the Technical University of Crete, we are collaborating with the Hazelab research group at Imperial College London and the Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires, Environment and Society to perform field research and cutting-edge experiments) on peat smouldering, with the aim of shedding light on the complex mechanisms of peat fires.

    Integrating these lab results into ESMs will enable game-changing fire emission modelling, which holds potential for groundbreaking outcomes when it comes to our skill level for predicting the future of the Earth’s climate. By quantifying how the present-day atmosphere is influenced by fire emissions from boreal forests and peatlands, we can enhance the quality of projections of global temperature rise. This integration will also sharpen forecasts of regional climate impacts driven by fire-related aerosols, such as changes in rainfall patterns or accelerated Arctic ice melt.

    Tackling the challenge of northern fires

    Undoubtedly, we have entered an era of more frequent megafires – wildfires of extreme size, intensity, duration or impacts – with catastrophic consequences. Recent megafire events at boreal and Arctic regions unveil the dramatic change in wildfire patterns in northern high latitudes, which is a matter that demands urgent attention and action.

    As the planet continues to warm, high-latitude fires are expected to help shape the future of our planet. Massive wildfire events, such as those in Canada in 2023, not only burned millions of hectares but also forced hundreds of thousands of people to evacuate their homes. Unprecedented amounts of smoke blanketed parts of North America in hazardous air, prompting school closures and health warnings, and obliging citizens to remain indoors for days. Events like this reflect a growing trend. They underscore why advancing research to better understand and predict the dynamics of northern peat and forest fires, and to mitigate their climate impacts, is not only a scientific imperative but also a moral responsibility.

    Created in 2007 to help accelerate and share scientific knowledge on key societal issues, the Axa Research Fund has supported nearly 700 projects around the world conducted by researchers in 38 countries. To learn more, visit the website of the Axa Research Fund or follow @AXAResearchFund on X.

    Dimitra Tarasi has received funding from the AXA Chair in Wildfires and Climate, the Leverhulme Centre for Wildfires, Environment and Society and the A.G. Leventis Foundation Educational Grants.

    Apostolos Voulgarakis 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. How high-latitude peat and forest fires could shape the future of Earth’s climate – https://theconversation.com/how-high-latitude-peat-and-forest-fires-could-shape-the-future-of-earths-climate-258721

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • June 25, 1975, Lest We Forget

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Fifty years ago, on this day, the Constitution of India was put in abeyance. The political leadership, trusted to usher a new social and economic future for the citizens, conflicted with the judiciary, and the Emergency was announced.

    Fundamental rights were taken away overnight. Political opposition was put behind bars. Young voices were chased away into oblivion, and the frightened citizens of India were left to reminisce about the ugly days of British rule, for such were the dictatorial and draconian measures of the government.

    The Emergency was a setback for a young republic, rediscovering its civilisational place in a rapidly transforming world.

    Even when the Indian citizens languished for basic necessities, they always had their fundamental rights; the right to express their opinions, the right to question their governments, the right to demand better facilities, the right to practice their religion, the right to access information via press, and the right to be critical of the government. With one proclamation, all those rights were discarded, leaving millions of citizens in a limbo.

    For the people, the period was plagued with uncertainty. Many leaders, who were indefinitely jailed, were refused trial. Some have confessed that they were not even allowed to meet their family members. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh once narrated how he could not meet his mother in her final days, because he was jailed. The press, unable to function on principle, printed blank pages as a mark of protest.

    The Emergency of 1975 is the story of India’s democratic character being strangled. Within this larger story, there were millions of stories, unheard, unacknowledged, and unfortunately forgotten.

    Even when people had nothing, they had their rights, and they snatched away at the whims and fancies of one party. In a world oscillating between communism and democracy of the west, India, under the political leadership of 1975, was forced to choose a path that would usher an irreversible stain on our history.

    A democracy flourishes because of people’s trust in the institutions. From the election commission to the judiciary, these are the pieces in the larger puzzle that come together for the country to function perfectly. The Emergency diluted the criticality of these institutions. Elections were delayed. The judgement of the Allahabad High Court was set aside. When mass sterilisations were carried out in the name of population control, people did not have an institution to turn to.

    Many defenders of the Emergency proclaim that the Emergency was announced to curb possible anarchy, but in hindsight, it ushered in an era of silent anarchy within the country.

    Fifty years later, the fourth largest economy of the world must not forget the lessons from the Emergency. When a political entity loses control and conviction, it turns to the institutions, even while in opposition. Some leaders blame the election commission when the results do not go in their favour. Some pin the blame on the judiciary, and if all else fails, the media is made the scapegoat. Such political entities must be discarded.

    Our democracy’s strength is derived from its institutions, for these empower our citizens as well. Today, a citizen, even if in disagreement with the government, can walk upto the Supreme Court if their fundamental rights are violated. Today, a citizen, irrespective of their place in the socio-economic pyramid, can voice their criticism against the government. Despite the election results, the political opposition continues to flourish in our country. This is what democracy is all about- a voice for all.

    The Emergency serves as a lesson in political governance as well. Leadership must not be used to trample upon people’s rights, but to uplift those who need it the most. A leader should be able to elevate everyone’s socio-economic status, be it through financial inclusion, better infrastructure, or more economic opportunities.

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who was a young RSS worker during the Emergency, has taken all the right lessons from the Emergency. In his policy pursuits, he has empowered the people through an array of welfare programmes. Not letting dissent or disagreement come in the way of welfare, the Prime Minister has ensured everyone moves along the path of welfare. Dissent can be an exception, but delivery has been made a routine exercise.

    Fifty years, lest we forget the horrors of the Emergency and the people who made the brave sacrifice. Many stories and people are forgotten, and their stories never surfaced, but they all were equal stakeholders in the cause of the country. They all were equally suffering under the tyranny of a government that violated its constitutional obligations and duties.

    (Tushar Gupta is a Delhi-based journalist and a political commentator)

  • MIL-OSI USA: FEMA Authorizes Funds to Fight Himalaya Road Fire in Alaska

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: FEMA Authorizes Funds to Fight Himalaya Road Fire in Alaska

    FEMA Authorizes Funds to Fight Himalaya Road Fire in Alaska

    BOTHELL, Wash

     –  The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) authorized the use of federal funds to help with firefighting costs for the Himalaya Road Fire burning in the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

     The state of Alaska’s request for a declaration under FEMA’s Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) program was approved by FEMA Region 10 Deputy Acting Administrator Anthony J

    Morea on Monday, June 23, 2025, at 8:19 p

    m

    PT

    He determined that the Himalaya Road Fire threatened to cause such destruction as would constitute a major disaster

     This is the second FMAG declaration in 2025 to help fight Alaska wildfires

     At the time of the state’s request, the wildfire threatened homes in and around the communities of Himalaya, Haystack, Hayes Creek, and Fox

     The fire also threatened powerlines, cell towers, watersheds, fishing streams, spawning sites, wildlife, cultural resources, and part of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline

     FMAGs make funding available to pay up to 75 percent of a state’s eligible firefighting costs for fires that threaten to become major disasters

    Eligible items can include expenses for field camps, equipment use, materials, supplies and mobilization and demobilization activities attributed to fighting the fire

    These grants do not provide assistance to individual home or business owners and do not cover other infrastructure damage caused by the fire

      
    amy

    ashbridge
    Tue, 06/24/2025 – 20:46

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Office of the Governor – News Release – Governor Green Amends Intent-to-Veto List

    Source: US State of Hawaii

    Office of the Governor – News Release – Governor Green Amends Intent-to-Veto List

    Posted on Jun 24, 2025 in Latest Department News, Newsroom, Office of the Governor Press Releases

    STATE OF HAWAIʻI
    KA MOKU ʻĀINA O HAWAIʻI
     
    JOSH GREEN, M.D.
    GOVERNOR
    KE KIAʻĀINA
     

    GOVERNOR GREEN AMENDS INTENT-TO-VETO LIST 
     

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    June 24, 2025

    HONOLULU – Governor Josh Green, M.D., today added SB 935, Relating to Government, to the 2025 Intent-to-Veto list transmitted to Legislative leadership by the statutorily required June 24 deadline. SB 935 is one of the more complex pieces of legislation to emerge from the 2025 session. By including this bill on the list, it allows the Governor to have the time to make an informed and well-researched decision. The addition of the bill brings the number of bills on the Intent-to-Veto list to 20, as compared to the record number of bills Governor Green has signed from the past session.

    Again, Governor Green is not required to veto every bill indicated on the Intent-to-Veto list, but cannot veto a bill that is not included. The release of this list provides additional time to continue ongoing discussions with key stakeholders concerning implementation and impact. Due to the record-setting number of bills enrolled to the governor this legislative session, potential changes to the state’s federal funding and reduced revenue projections from the Council on Revenues, additional time to analyze bills will ensure each bill is given the nuanced, thoughtful consideration it deserves. Governor Green has until July 9 to issue final vetoes. All other bills will become law by July 9.

    “Let me be clear: of the 320 bills passed by the Legislature this session, 20 are on our Intent-to-Veto list,” said Governor Green. “Our team has completed a review of every measure and the overwhelming majority of legislation will become law. Each bill on today’s list is based on thorough legal and fiscal analysis, and as always, was guided by what will best serve the people of Hawai‘i, protect our resources and strengthen our future.”

    To date, Governor Green has signed more than 200 bills into law benefiting the people and ‘āina of Hawai‘i, with core themes including environmental stewardship, educational access and success, as well as public safety. These represent key focus areas so far; additional bills awaiting signature will build upon this foundation to address state priorities. The remaining bills are on track to become law by July 9.

    Over 300 bills were reviewed by state departments and agencies, the Attorney General and the Governor in the last month. The Governor has until July 9 to issue final vetoes from the list, to sign them into law, or to allow them to become law without his signature.

    The following bills are being considered for vetoes, line-item vetoes, or reductions. Note that line-item vetoes only apply to fiscal bills.

    Fiscal Bills:

    HB126: RELATING TO PROPERTY FORFEITURE

    Bill Description: Increases transparency and accountability surrounding property forfeiture. Clarifies which property is subject to forfeiture. Amends the authorized disposition of forfeited property and the proceeds thereof. Requires the Attorney General to adopt rules necessary to carry out the purpose of the Hawaiʻi Omnibus Criminal Forfeiture Act. Repeals language that requires the Hawaiʻi Omnibus Criminal Forfeiture Act to be construed liberally.

    Veto Rationale: Asset forfeiture serves as a powerful deterrent against and punishment for criminal activity. The one-year deadline to return seized property for which the owner has not been charged with a covered offense, significantly weakens the efficacy of this dual deterrent and punishment. Many covered offenses, including felonies, often involve complex investigations that extend beyond a year, rendering this bill’s one-year deadline for law enforcement to file charges unrealistic. Seized property can serve as critical evidence in investigations, and its return before an investigation’s completion would severely hamper the investigation as well as the administration of justice at large.

    HB300: RELATING TO THE STATE BUDGET

    Bill Description: Appropriates funds for the operating and capital improvement budget of the Executive Branch for fiscal years 2025-2026 and 2026-2027.

    Veto Rationale: Potential shifts in federal funding, coupled with recent projections from the Hawaiʻi Council on Revenues, require the state to reevaluate its budget to ensure essential services and priorities remain supported. Specific line-item reductions based on program feasibility, stability, and sustainability will help the state enter the fiscal year with a balanced budget and sound financial plan.

    HB302: RELATING TO CANNABIS
    Bill Description: Part I: Authorizes DOH to inspect qualifying patient medical records held by the physician, advanced practice registered nurse, or hospice provider who issued a written certification for the qualifying patient. Amends and adds definitions for purposes of the medical use of cannabis law. Clarifies the conditions of use for the medical use of cannabis. For purposes of issuing written certifications, authorizes the establishment of a provider-patient relationship via telehealth and limits the maximum amount of fees that can be assessed by providers. Authorizes the sale of hemp products and accessories for the medical use of cannabis at retail dispensing locations, except in waiting rooms. Clarifies transportation requirements for certain inter-dispensary sales of cannabis and manufactured cannabis products. Part II: Establishes criminal penalties for the unlicensed operation of a medical cannabis dispensary. Part III: Authorizes expenditures from the Medical Cannabis Registry and Regulation Special Fund to fund programs for the mitigation and abatement of nuisances related to illegal cannabis and hemp products and medical cannabis dispensaries and appropriates funds from the Special Fund to the AG’s Drug Nuisance Abatement Unit for these purposes, including establishing positions. Part IV: Beginning 1/1/2028, prohibits the cultivation of cannabis without a cannabis cultivator license issued by DOH.

    Veto Rationale: This administration remains committed to Hawai‘i’s existing medical cannabis program and supports efforts to expand access to medical cannabis for any medical condition. Although this bill’s authorization of medical cannabis certifications via telehealth expands access to medical cannabis, provisions authorizing the inspection of patients’ medical records without warrant constitute a grave violation of privacy. Given that the federal government classifies cannabis as a Schedule I substance, patients’ reasonable fears of repercussions based upon information gained from inspection of their personal medical records may deter patients from participating in the medical cannabis program.

    HB496: RELATING TO MĀMAKI TEA

    Bill Description: Prohibits the use of certain words and misleading Hawaiian imagery, place names, and motifs on the label of a consumer package that contains or includes tea or dried leaves from the plant Pipturus albidus, unless 100% of the tea or dried leaves were cultivated, harvested, and dried in the state. Appropriates funds for a Measurement Standards Inspector position.

    Veto Rationale: While the intent of this measure is to ensure consumer protection and reliable Made in Hawai‘i labeling, the bill imposes overly strict labeling requirements that could harm small businesses and māmaki producers who responsibly blend leaves from multiple sources. Prohibiting the labeling of products composed of less than 100% māmaki tea as “māmaki” ignores the economic contributions of and impacts to producers who mix or process māmaki with other herbs, undermining producers who support local māmaki farmers while meeting broader demand.

    HB796: RELATING TO TAX CREDITS

    Bill Description: Requires that income tax credits existing on 12/31/2025 or established or renewed after 12/31/2025 include a five-year sunset or an annual one-third reduction, beginning with the sixth year of the credit.

    Veto Rationale: This bill would have a significant long-term impact on income tax credits across a variety of industries, including film and television, research, and renewable energy. These tax credits are critical to supporting economic development and diversification, particularly within growing and emerging sectors. Categorically sunsetting income tax credits will not only disincentivize future investors from doing business in Hawai‘i, but will destabilize existing businesses that currently rely upon these tax credits.

    HB1369: RELATING TO TAXATION

    Bill Description: Amends and repeals certain exemptions under the general excise tax and use tax laws.

    Veto Rationale: The amendments to the general excise tax and use tax contained in this bill would impact sugarcane producers, commercial fishing vessels and securities exchanges. Removing the specific tax exemptions afforded to these entities would provide little financial benefit to the state while harming, in particular, sugarcane producers.

    SB583: RELATING TO NAMING RIGHTS

    Bill Description: Allows the naming rights of the Stadium Facility and Convention Center Facility to be leased to any public or private entity. Requires any revenues derived from advertising or marketing in or on the Stadium Facility or Convention Center Facility to be deposited into the appropriate special fund of the facility. Authorizes the display of the name of any entity that leased the naming rights to a stadium operated by the Stadium Authority on the exterior of the stadium.

    Veto Rationale: Pursuant to section 14, article III, of the Hawai‘i State Constitution, each bill may only contain one subject, which must pertain to the bill’s title. The exemption of concessions in the stadium facility and Convention Center from typical concession procurement procedures may violate section 14, article III, of the Hawai‘i State Constitution since the exemption appears to fall outside the titular scope of the bill, naming rights.

    SB589: RELATING TO RENEWABLE ENERGY

    Bill Description: Requires the Public Utilities Commission to establish an installation goal for customer-sited distributed energy resources in the state. Requires the Public Utilities Commission to establish tariffs to achieve the installation goal and for grid services programs, microgrids and community-based renewable energy. Ensures that certain levels of compensation are provided for solar and energy storage exports from customer-sited distributed energy resources as part of grid service programs and requires the Public Utilities Commission to establish grid service compensation values. Clarifies when a person who constructs, maintains, or operates a new microgrid is not considered a public utility. Authorizes wheeling of renewable energy and requires the Public Utilities Commission to establish policies and procedures to implement wheeling and microgrid service tariffs.

    Veto Rationale: Maintaining Hawai‘i’s leadership in clean energy through established goals and initiatives remains a priority. The Public Utilities Commission has already opened or plans to open proceedings relating to microgrid services tariffs and customer-sited distributed energy resources and grid services. The mandates contained in this bill therefore risk duplication and delay of already existing efforts.

    Non-Fiscal Bills:

    HB235: RELATING TO TRAFFIC SAFETY

    Bill Description: Requires the Department of Transportation, after the City and County of Honolulu educates the public and adjusts any systems, to expand the use of photo red light imaging detector systems and automated speed enforcement systems to locations on the North Shore of O‘ahu.

    Veto Rationale: The Department of Transportation has developed specific criteria for the selection of communities within which to implement traffic safety systems. This criteria incorporates data-driven crash, citation and traffic volume metrics, which ensure communities are chosen based on need and potential for greatest impact. Ignoring this criteria in favor of legislatively mandated location selection threatens the integrity of the photo red light imaging detector system and automated speed enforcement system programs.

    HB800: RELATING TO GOVERNMENT

    Bill Description: Provides for the transfer of certain parcels in the Liliha Civic Center area and Iwilei Fire Station area from various state agencies to the City and County of Honolulu. Provides for the transfer of the parcel of land upon which Ali‘i Tower is sited from the City and County of Honolulu to the Department of Land and Natural Resources. Exempts the lands transferred to the Department of Land and Natural Resources from the definition of public lands for purposes of Chapter 171, HRS.

    Veto Rationale: The land transfers provided in the bill would negatively impact the City and County of Honolulu, which relies upon Ali‘i Tower’s land lease revenues and office spaces. Additionally, the state would face indeterminate additional costs, as Ali‘i Tower’s age likely necessitates capital improvements and ongoing maintenance. Although the intent of this bill is to reduce the state’s reliance on private commercial office space, no analysis exists identifying the amount of office space the acquisition of Aliʻi Tower would provide the state.

    HB958: RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION

    Bill Description: Establishes safe riding behaviors for electric bicycles. Prohibits the operation of high-speed electric devices in certain locations. Establishes labeling and signage requirements for electric bicycles. Prohibits the operation of a moped or electric motorcycle in certain locations. Amends the definition of “bicycle” for purposes of county vehicular taxes. Defines “electric bicycle” in place of “low-speed electric bicycle.” Defines “electric micro-mobility device” and requires the same regulations as electric foot scooters to apply to electric micro-mobility devices. Prohibits a person under the age of 16 from operating a class 3 electric bicycle. Authorizes a person under the age of 14 to operate class 2 electric bicycles under supervision. Prohibits a person from riding a class 3 electric bicycle on a sidewalk. Authorizes a person to ride a class 1 or class 2 electric bicycle on a sidewalk under certain circumstances. Prohibits a person from operating a bicycle or electric foot scooter under the age of 18 without a helmet. Repeals the requirement that moped drivers use bicycle lanes and substitutes the term “motor-driven cycle” with the term “motor scooter.”

    Veto Rationale: While mopeds and motorcycles are exempt from the prohibition established within this bill, on “high-speed electric devices” driving on public roadways, electric cars are not exempt. Such a prohibition would likely violate the Commerce Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution and conflict with the administration’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

    HB1296: RELATING TO THE MAJOR DISASTER FUND

    Bill Description: Establishes timely notice and reporting requirements to the Legislature by the Governor regarding the transfer of appropriations to the Major Disaster Fund. Effective 7/1/2025. Sunsets 7/1/2026.

    Veto Rationale: The administration is committed to the transparent, efficient management of state funds. During times of emergency, flexibility and the quick release of funds is necessary to respond to rapidly changing situations. This bill disrupts the delicate balance between reporting requirements facilitating government transparency and fiscal flexibility undergirding efficient response and recovery efforts. Placing additional administrative oversight over funds expended for emergencies jeopardizes public safety.

    SB15: RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION

    Bill Description: Amends the definition of “historic property” to require that the property is over 50 years old and meets the criteria for inclusion in the Hawaiʻi Register of Historic Places. Excludes proposed projects on existing residential property and proposed projects that are in nominally sensitive areas from the State’s Historic Preservation Program review, under certain circumstances.

    Veto Rationale: Exempting proposed projects on any existing residential property from historic preservation review fails to consider properties that have never undergone such a review and may contain historically significant artifacts or iwi kūpuna. This categorical exclusion increases the risk for desecration of iwi kūpuna and historical resources. Although Governor Green supports amending the historic preservation review process to facilitate housing production, a more nuanced approach to protecting iwi kūpuna is needed, such as that advanced in SB 1263.

    SB31: RELATING TO PROPERTY

    Bill Description: Authorizes a person who discovers a recorded discriminatory restrictive covenant to take certain actions, without liability, to invalidate the covenant. Defines discriminatory restrictive covenant.

    Veto Rationale: By enabling any person, including those without any interest in the specified real property, to record a statement that a real property’s title includes a discriminatory restrictive covenant, this bill provides a statutorily authorized mechanism for the circulation of disinformation. This disinformation has the potential to negatively affect the marketability of a property. Because the person who recorded the statement claiming a discriminatory restrictive covenant exists is waived of any liability, no recourse is available to those who suffer financial loss due to inaccurate claims concerning their property’s title.

    SB38: RELATING TO HOUSING

    Bill Description: Requires the Hawaiʻi Housing Finance and Development Corporation to provide counties with an opportunity to comment on certain housing development projects. Prohibits the legislative body of a county from imposing stricter conditions than the Hawaiʻi Housing Finance and Development Corporation, stricter area median income requirements, or a reduction in fee waivers to housing development proposals that would increase the cost of the project.

    Veto Rationale: County councils have expressed concerns that this bill hampers their ability to work with developers to modify housing projects to reflect the specific needs of their communities. While the administration supports measures intended to facilitate the production of affordable housing, further dialogue with the counties on this measure’s implementation is required.

    SB66: RELATING TO HOUSING

    Bill Description: Establishes procedures and requirements for single-family and multifamily housing project applicants to apply for an expedited permit, including requirements for completeness of expedited permit applications, duties of licensed professionals and the counties during construction, and applications for owner-builder exemptions. Takes effect 7/1/2026. Sunsets 6/30/2031.

    Veto Rationale: By allowing any qualified professional to determine a project’s impact on historical resources, this bill permits a project proponent to evaluate and determine the impact of its own projects on historical resources. This is a conflict of interest that allows for self-serving determinations, undermines the authority and purpose of regulatory agencies’ independent evaluations, and increases risk to iwi kūpuna.

    SB104: RELATING TO CORRECTIONS

    Bill Description: Beginning 7/1/2026, restricts the use of restrictive housing in state-operated and state-contracted correctional facilities, with certain specified exceptions. Establishes a restrictive housing legislative working group to develop and recommend more comprehensive laws, policies and procedures regarding restrictive housing for members of vulnerable populations by 1/8/2027. Requires the Hawaiʻi Correctional System Oversight Commission to review restrictive housing placements on an annual basis. Authorizes the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, by 12/1/2027, to implement policies and procedures recommended by the restrictive housing working group related to committed persons. Requires interim and final reports to the Legislature and Hawaiʻi Correctional System Oversight Commission.

    Veto Rationale: The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has policies in place governing the use of restrictive housing. These policies and procedures comply with National Institute of Corrections and American Correctional Association standards. Rather than improve the health and safety of those in the department’s care, the implementation of certain requirements proposed in this bill will jeopardize the safety, security and good governance of the department’s facility, negatively impacting inmates. In lieu of this measure and to address stakeholders’ concerns, the department is working with the Hawaiʻi Correctional Systems Oversight Commission to amend its policies and procedures.

    SB447: RELATING TO A DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH PILOT PROGRAM

    Bill Description: Establishes a Hiring Pilot Program within the Department of Health, which includes an amended hiring procedure for delegated position classifications, certain flexibilities regarding minimum qualifications for positions having a salary range at or below SR-10, the ability to directly hire certain individuals into a civil service position if certain conditions are met, and the authority to make certain temporary appointments at the merited civil service pay scale without step limitation. Applies to recruitments initiated before 7/1/2028. Requires annual reports to the Legislature. Sunsets 7/1/2028.

    Veto Rationale: The governor strongly supports efforts to streamline the state’s hiring process to address our workforce vacancies, especially those in our state’s public health sector. However, this bill conflicts with state civil service law, undermining the state’s merit-based civil service system. Disparities in hiring, classification and compensation throughout the state are expected to occur should this bill become law.

    SB1102: RELATING TO THE AIRCRAFT RESCUE FIRE FIGHTING UNIT

    Bill Description: Specifies the appointment processes and terms for the Fire Chief of the Hawaiʻi State Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting Unit of the Airports Division of the Department of Transportation.

    Veto Rationale: The appointment process proposed in the bill is inconsistent with the selection process for other department leadership positions. Further, due to the need to obtain legislative approval for the appointment of the Fire Chief, following the appointment process contained in this bill may delay the appointment of this critical leadership position, impacting airport operations, safety and readiness.

    # # #

    Media Contacts:  
    Erika Engle
    Press Secretary
    Office of the Governor, State of Hawai‘i
    Office: 808-586-0120
    Email: [email protected] 

    Makana McClellan
    Director of Communications
    Office of the Governor, State of Hawaiʻi
    Cell: 808-265-0083
    Email: [email protected]

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Truck crash on Sturt Highway at Kingsford

    Source: New South Wales – News

    Emergency services are at the scene of a truck crash on the Sturt Highway, Kingsford.

    Two trucks collided about 6.45pm on Wednesday 25 June on the Sturt Highway, near Argent Road, Kingsford, just north-east of Gawler in the Barossa Valley.

    Fortunately, there are no reports of serious injuries at this time.

    The crash is affecting northbound traffic on the Sturt Highway.

    Motorists are advised to take an alternate route if possible.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study suggesting adjuvants in certain vaccines may be one reason for their association with a reduction in dementia risk

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    A study published in NPJ Vaccines looks at adjuvants in vaccines and their association with a lower risk of dementia. 

    Dr Julia Dudley, Head of Research at Alzheimer’s Research UK, said:

    “Dementia is not an inevitable part of ageing. Identifying ways to reduce dementia risk is a priority for research, and vaccination offers an intriguing area of exploration. There have been an increasing number of studies suggesting a link between people who receive certain vaccinations, like the Shingrix vaccine, and a decreased risk of dementia. This study offers a potentially different perspective on what might be linked to this finding.

    “In this latest large US-based observational study, researchers are proposing that it might be the adjuvant that is providing a protective effect, rather than the disease the vaccine is seeking to protect against. This study looked at dementia diagnoses in people who had received vaccines with the AS01 adjuvant and those who had a flu vaccine, which doesn’t contain this component.

    “An adjuvant is a substance in the vaccine used to create a boosted immune response, designed to give more effective protection upon exposure to the virus.AS01 is in the shingles vaccine Shingrix, and Arexvy, the vaccine to protect against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

    “They found people who had Shingrix, Arexvy or both of these vaccines were less likely to get a dementia diagnosis within 18 months. They found no difference between the Shingrix or Arexvy in terms of reducing dementia risk.

    “One of the strengths of the study is that it adjusted for factors that could influence risk, such as underlying health conditions and some lifestyle and environmental factors. However, as the study is observational and examined past health data, the researchers cannot conclude how the Shingrix and Arexvy vaccines may protect against dementia. We also cannot rule out that the link between vaccine and dementia risk is due to other factors not captured in this study, such as social and lifestyle factors.

    “One of the limitations highlighted by the authors was around people not having a dementia diagnosis when they could be living with the condition, which could skew the findings. We do not know if the adjuvant is reducing the risk of dementia or delaying its onset. The follow-up period was only 18 months, so more research is needed to determine the potential long-term effects of the vaccines.

    “As we understand more about the biological mechanisms behind any protective effects seen with vaccines, we may be able to investigate new treatment approaches.”

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

    “This is an interesting, worthwhile and statistically competent piece of work, but a lot more research needs to be done to make good sense of its possible implications for health care. In fact it’s a good example of how scientific and medical knowledge has to be built up through a series of studies, not just a single piece of work.

    “Previous research has provided pretty convincing evidence that vaccination against shingles, in older people, can reduce dementia risk. A recent study (published 2024), by the same research team responsible for the new study, found that the reduction in dementia risk is greater in people who had the shingles vaccine now in most widespread use, including in the UK (it’s called Shingrix), than with the previous vaccine (Zostavax).

    “However, that study could not provide direct evidence on the reason for the risk difference between the two shingles vaccines. One possibility is that having shingles might increase dementia risk, and that the new vaccine provides better protection against shingles than the old one did, so reducing dementia risk. Another is that there’s some component in the new vaccine that reduces dementia risk. Or it could be some combination of these possibilities.

    “The new Shingrix vaccine differs from the old Zostavax vaccine in several ways, but one difference is Shingrix vaccine contain a substance called AS01, while Zostavax does not. Some previous research has indicated that it’s possible that AS01 somehow provides in itself a reduction in dementia risk. AS01 is not the ingredient of the vaccine that directly incites the immune system to develop immunity against shingles. Instead it is an adjuvant – a substance that is intended to help the immune system to respond to the vaccination. 

    “AS01 is also used as an adjuvant in another vaccination offered to older people; the vaccination against the respiratory virus infection RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), which is now recommended for people in the UK aged 75-79.  One of the vaccines in use against RSV also contains AS01. (There’s another available vaccine that does not contain it.) So the research team responsible for the new study used data from a large set of American electronic health records, to compare dementia risk over a period of 18 months after vaccination for older people who had had various different vaccinations containing AS01 (just the RSV vaccine, just the shingles vaccine, or both). These people were compared with older people who had had a flu vaccine, not containing AS01.

    “The researchers found that those who had had either of the two AS01-containing vaccines (against RSV or shingles) had a lower risk of being diagnosed with dementia in the 18 months after vaccination than those who had had the flu vaccine. This pattern of lower risk showed up in people who had had just one of the AS01 vaccines, or both, though there were some relatively small (and statistically uncertain) differences in the average size of the risk reduction, compared to the flu vaccine, for different groups.

    “What’s still not known from this study is exactly why these risk differences occur. The researchers mention that, in some way, they could occur because having either RSV or shingles might in itself increase dementia risk, so that having a vaccine that makes it less likely to have one or both of those diseases might reduce dementia risk. Or it could be because of some protective effect of the AS01 adjuvant, which is in these vaccines but not in the flu vaccine. (Or some combination of these possible effects.)

    “The researchers give some arguments why they feel AS01 itself is likely to play a protective role against dementia. I don’t have expertise in virology so can’t comment directly on those arguments. But it’s at least a possibility, from all the existing evidence, that AS01 could have a protective effect. This study also doesn’t provide direct evidence on how AS01 might work to reduce dementia risk, but the researchers give some suggestions based on other studies as to what could be happening. Again I can’t comment on those.

    “It’s because of this inevitable lack of knowledge about exactly how AS01 might be involved in reducing dementia risk that the researchers are asking for more studies, some of them using other research methods, to find out more. I agree with this recommendation, because in my view the results of this study provide a clear justification for looking further. But we’re not yet anywhere near the stage of using the results of the new study to change clinical practice. Also, the new study can’t make the timescale of risk reduction very clear, because the follow-up period to look for dementia diagnoses was relatively short at 18 months.

    “This was an observational study – the people weren’t assigned at random to receive a particular pattern of vaccinations, but just did what they would have done anyway in consultation with health professionals. In any observational study, there can be issues about what is causing what. The basic problem is that people who receive different vaccinations will also differ in terms of many other factors – age, sex, what diseases they have previously had or still have, and many more. Some of these factors may be potential confounders, as they are called – that is, there’s a possibility that they are the cause of differences in dementia risk, and not the actual vaccinations at all. 

    “The researchers did a very thorough job of allowing for potential confounders, by doing something called propensity score matching. This involves setting up a statistical model that predicts people’s chances of having a dementia outcome, regardless of what vaccines they had had, and then matching people who (for example) had had the RSV vaccine but not the shingles vaccine with people who had had the flu vaccine. In this research the statistical model for the matching involves a very wide range of potential confounders. Then direct comparisons are based on these matched pairs of people. That means one can get a lot closer to comparing like with like groups, who don’t differ (on average) in terms of potential confounding factors.

    “The process can’t entirely avoid the possibility that there are confounding factors that couldn’t be dealt with in this way, and that’s why the research paper says clearly that unmeasured confounding can’t be entirely ruled out. So there has to remain doubt about whether the risk differences are caused by the different vaccines. This is in addition to the inevitable doubts about which aspects of the vaccines (AS01 or something else as well) might be causes of the risk differences – if indeed it’s the vaccines that do turn out to cause the differences. These are yet more reasons why this research is nowhere near being the last word.”

     

    Prof Sir Andrew Pollard FMedSci, Ashall Professor of Paediatric Infection and Immunity and Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, University of Oxford, said:

    “There are now a number of studies which have shown an association between shingles vaccination in older adults and a reduced rate of dementia in the vaccinated population. The fact that two different vaccine platforms (both live attenuated shingles vaccines and the adjuvanted shingles subcomponent vaccine) saw similar associations supported the idea that the mechanism was as a result of vaccine-prevention of reactivation of the usually dormant shingles virus in the brain. Another virus from the same family, herpes simplex virus (the cold sore virus) has also been associated with dementia raising the possibility that both of these viruses (shingles and herpes simplex) could cause infection, possibly silently and recurrently, in the brain that led eventually to dementia. Unfortunately, there is no licensed vaccine for herpes simplex at this time. However, this latest study published in npj vaccines shows that another vaccine, against the completely unrelated respiratory virus, RSV, is also associated with a reduced rate of dementia. The authors argue that this is because of a non-specific effect of these vaccines on the immune system which generates an environment in our bodies which is somehow protective against dementia, though further studies are needed to confirm this. Such a mechanism could account for the effects driven by both shingles and RSV vaccines. The various studies of the impact of vaccination on dementia are all observational studies which could have a risk of bias, as it can be challenging to adequately control for differences between those who seek vaccination and those who don’t, but the consistent finding across multiple studies makes the observation more convincing. It is premature to be too certain about the mechanism by which vaccines might reduce dementia risk, but these observations provide further incentive for those eligible to turn up for their scheduled vaccination visits to prevent the unpleasant and potentially serious and life-threatening infections for which they were designed, but with the added possible benefit of a longer dementia-free life-span. What’s not to like?”

    ‘Lower risk of dementia with AS01- adjuvanted vaccination against shingles and respiratory syncytial virus infections’ by Maxime Taquet et al. was published in npj vaccines at 10:00 UK time Wednesday June 25th 2025. 

    DOI: 10.1038/s41541-025-01172-3

    Declared interests

    Prof Kevin McConway: No conflicts.

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

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • Flamengo happy to progress after 1-1 draw with LA FC

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Misfiring Flamengo were held to a 1-1 draw by Los Angeles FC in their final group match at the Club World Cup on Tuesday but the Brazilian side still go into the knockout stage with some momentum after another strong performance.

    Denis Bouanga put the MLS club ahead in the 84th minute but substitute Wallace Yan responded two minutes later to ensure Flamengo would progress unbeaten to their last-16 tie against Bayern Munich in Miami on Sunday.

    With top spot in Group D already assured, Flamengo coach Filipe Luis made seven changes to his starting side but there was no change to the style that already earned the Rio de Janeiro club wins over Chelsea and Esperance.

    With a little more accuracy in front of goal, they would have comfortably beaten an LA FC side who were already condemned to a group stage exit after losing their first two games without scoring a goal.

    “We had a great group stage,” Felipe Luis told reporters. “We achieved our objective early so we’ve been able to bench players with yellow cards and give minutes to players that hadn’t played yet.

    “We had rhythm and we had chances to score. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen. We are very happy, no injuries and a great group stage, and now we’re thinking about Bayern and nothing but Bayern.”

    Bouanga had ploughed a lonely furrow as the lone striker all evening but pounced when his chance came from Tom Tillman’s quickly taken free kick, slotting the ball between the legs of Agustin Rossi for his team’s first goal of the tournament.

    The Flamengo fans were silenced but Jorginho, who had come on as a substitute only minutes before Bouanga’s goal, found Yan with an incisive pass and the 20-year-old skipped into the box through four defenders and slid the ball past Hugo Lloris.

    The woodwork played more of a role than either goalkeeper in the first half with Flamengo’s Danilo, Giorgian de Arrascaeta and Pedro all hitting the frame of the goal along with LA FC’s Marky Delgado.

    Flamengo continued to dominate possession with their calm passing game in the second half and it looked only a matter of time before the breakthrough came.

    Lloris, however, pulled off a world-class save to deny Everton, Pedro sent the ball over the bar with an acrobatic bicycle kick, and de Arrascaeta hit the woodwork for the second time with a rasping shot that came down off the bar.

    (Reuters)

  • ‘Want to ignite curiosity among children,’ says IAF Shubhanshu Shukla as Ax-4 gets ready to take wings

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Group Captain Shubhanshu Shukla, who will pilot the Axiom Mission 4 (Ax-4), is one of the four astronauts selected for ISRO’s ambitious Gaganyaan mission.

    Born on October 10, 1985, in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, Shukla was commissioned into the fighter stream of the Indian Air Force (IAF) in June 2006. A highly accomplished combat leader and seasoned test pilot, he has amassed over 2,000 hours of flight experience across a wide range of aircraft, including the Su-30 MKI, MiG-21, MiG-29, Jaguar, Hawk, Dornier, and An-32.

    In 2019, Shukla began intensive training at the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre in Star City, Moscow—a rigorous, year-long preparation that set the course for his spaceflight journey. On February 27, 2024, Prime Minister Narendra Modi officially introduced Shukla as one of the astronauts undergoing advanced training for Gaganyaan, India’s maiden human spaceflight mission, scheduled for launch in 2025.

    Now, Group Captain Shukla is gearing up to pilot the historic Ax-4 mission to the International Space Station (ISS), marking a major milestone in India’s human spaceflight journey.

    “I found out I was going probably a week before we arrived at Axiom. I was extremely excited—this was a real opportunity to actually fly to space. You don’t even know how to respond to something like that,” Shukla shared in a YouTube video posted by the Ax-4 mission team.

    The Ax-4 crew will be led by Mission Commander Peggy Whitson, a former NASA astronaut and current Director of Human Spaceflight at Axiom Space. She praised Shukla’s capabilities:

    “For me, having him as my pilot in the Dragon capsule is great. He already has that operational savvy—he’s just wicked smart when it comes to spacecraft technologies,” Whitson remarked.

    Shukla will pilot a three-member crew that includes Whitson, Slawosz Uznanski-Wisniewski from Poland, and Tibor Kapu from Hungary, both serving as mission specialists.

    “The team I’m flying with on this mission is fantastic. I truly feel I have exceptional crewmates. While I’ll fly with them just this once, these are people who will remain my friends for life,” said Shukla.

    Group Captain Shukla’s participation in Ax-4 is poised to inspire a new generation, just as Wing Commander Rakesh Sharma did in 1984 when he became the first Indian in space.

    “It has been an amazing journey. These are the kind of moments that make you realize you’re part of something far greater than yourself. I feel incredibly fortunate to be part of this mission. My sincere endeavour is to inspire a generation back home in India. If my story can ignite curiosity or change even one life, that alone would make this mission a success for me,” Shukla said.

    As Ax-4 lifts off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, it will not only mark a new chapter for commercial spaceflight but also a defining moment in India’s journey into human space exploration.

    (With inputs from ANI)

     

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Doorstop – University of New South Wales

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: G’ day, everybody. It’s great to be here at the University of New South Wales, my old university that I went to last century, to talk about the things that we’re doing to build a better and a fairer education system this century. 

    There are big things happening in education. Today the Prime Minister has released numbers that show that our cheaper child care laws are delivering thousands of dollars in savings for the average family. The data he’s released today shows that for an average family with a child in child care three days a week, they’ve saved about $7,000 dollars over the last two years. That’s $7,000 dollars less that they’ve had to spend on child care than they otherwise would because of the reforms that we put in place a couple of years ago. 

    In school education, we’re driving big reform as well. We’re fixing the funding of our public schools with the biggest new investment in public education by an Australian Government ever, something like $16.5 billion extra that we’re investing in public schools over the next decade. And later this week, on Friday, I’ll convene the first meeting of Education Ministers since the election. One of the things that will be on the agenda for us to discuss is the implementation of that agreement, the next steps in making sure that this funding is linked to reform, and that that reform drives the sort of outcomes that we all want. Fundamentally, more young people finishing high school and then going on to TAFE or going on to university. 

    Which brings me to the big reforms that are happening in higher education. Next week, paid prac will start for the first time. That’s financial support from the Commonwealth Government to help teaching students, nursing students, midwifery students and social work students while they do practical part of their degree. A bit of financial support to help them while they’re doing their practical training. It’s never happened before. It’s one of the recommendations that came out of the Universities Accord, which is a blueprint for how we reform our higher education system over the next decade and beyond. 

    And today, some more good news. Today, some data has been released by my department that shows that the number of Aussie students starting a university degree are bouncing back big time. The data that we’ve released today shows that when you take out the two years of COVID, which are a bit of an anomaly because people went to university during that period of time at record numbers, when you take out those two years of COVID, the number of Australian students starting an undergraduate or a postgraduate degree this year looks set to be the highest on record. And that’s a good thing. We want more people to finish school. We want more people to be able to go to TAFE or go to university, get the skills that they need. We want more Aussies to get more skills and to be able to get the careers of their dreams. 

    And the young people that I’ve had a chance to speak to today are just a couple of examples of people who are building the life of their dreams through the work that they’re doing here at my old university, the University of New South Wales, studying everything from medicine to law to chemistry to software engineering. I forgot one other – economics and maths. All fortunate recipients of the Gateway Program here at the University of New South Wales, which is helping a lot of young people from underrepresented groups to get a crack at going to university. This program, in a nutshell, is everything that I’m about, making sure that more kids, like the kid that I was growing up in Western Sydney, get a crack at going to university and build the career of their dreams. So, to tell their story rather than mine, can I ask Sam to tell us a little bit about yourself, what you’re doing and why the Gateway Program is so important for you?

    SAM: Brilliant. Thank you, Jason. So, yeah, I came from a country town called Goulburn, so near Canberra. And I think the thing is that most people in Goulburn don’t typically leave Goulburn. And although I love Goulburn, I did want to move on and so I fell in love with UNSW. I remember one day in September; I made the two hour trip on the train all the way up to the Open Day and I knew as soon as I got here that that’s exactly what I wanted to do. And so, I just needed to figure out actually how to get here. And that was through the Gateway Program. So, then I made my way up to UNSW after HSC and I’m now doing a Bachelor of Advanced Science majoring in chemistry. I absolutely love it. It’s the best decision I could have made for myself. And I think I can thank my high school teachers, but also the lecturers here at the university for that, because it’s been just such a great experience. And even more so, I now get to give back to the Gateway Program, which helped me get here with my fellow ambassadors, as I am now also a Gateway Ambassador. I get to go to schools; I get to talk to kids and just show them exactly what university education can be like.

    CLARE: Thanks mate, reminds me, I’ve got to buy myself a new hoodie. Over to you.

    JOURNALIST: You mentioned the record number that we’re seeing apart from COVID and there’s been a particular boost in teaching and nursing. Do you think that could be partially attributed to the placements coming into effect next week?

    CLARE: I think it’s part of it. Over the course of the last few years, a couple of things have happened, particularly to encourage more people to want to be a school teacher. There’s been big pay rises announced for new teachers here in New South Wales, but also in South Australia, in WA and the Northern Territory. There’s been a lot of work to try and reduce the unnecessary workload or burden that we place on school teachers to give them more time to teach. We ran a campaign a little over a year ago called ‘Be that Teacher’, which was really about sending a message to the whole country about how important our school teachers are. This is the most important job in the world. One of the great things I got out of our conversation a little while ago is that all of the young people I spoke to today, whether they’re thinking about becoming a lawyer or a doctor or a software engineer or an economist, are also thinking about becoming a teacher. And how they could do that either someday here at university or in the classroom of our schools. 

    The scholarships that we’re rolling out, $40,000 dollar scholarships to encourage people to become a school teacher, are working. I think that’s a big part of it, but paid prac is important as well. The other thing that’s worth pointing out in these numbers is that we’re seeing a boost in the number of people doing an undergraduate degree, but also a big boost in the number of people doing a postgraduate degree. Two things there; I think that shows that more and more people are thinking about coming back to university to get more skills, to reskill or to upskill. And we’re going to see more of that in the years ahead. But also, when it comes to school teaching in particular, this year we expect to see a jump of about 15 per cent in the number of people doing the masters degree, the course that people do after they’ve done another degree in another area of expertise, to become a school teacher. And that’s a really good thing because we want people to burst out of school and go to uni and want to become a school teacher. But we also want young people like this who might have had another career to think, “okay, now I’m going to do the masters degree and I’m going to become a school teacher as well.” And the data out today shows us that’s happening.

    JOURNALIST: Minister, what has the response of your electorate been over the conflict in the Middle East?

    CLARE: Over the course of almost two years now, the conflict in the Middle East, in particular the death and the destruction in Gaza, has been horrific for my community. The dead bodies that we see on our television every night for my community aren’t just numbers, aren’t just anonymous people, often their family or their friends. And that’s why this is so personal. My community, the whole country, I think the whole world wants to see an end to the violence, to the suffering, to the catastrophe that’s happening in Gaza. They want to see an end to all of the violence happening in the Middle East. And that’s why we hold our breath, and we hold our hopes that the ceasefire holds between Israel and Iran as well.

    JOURNALIST: On the university rankings as well, the QS rankings that came out UNSW is still in the top 20 and remained relatively stable, but we did see quite a few universities going backwards. I guess, is that a concern for the Government? And particularly suggestions that it could be related to debate over international student loan policies?

    CLARE: My position on this has been consistent. The mark of a great university isn’t just a ranking, isn’t just a number, it’s about students. It’s about the work that the universities do to produce young people like this. In truth, you’ve produced yourself. There’s a reason that you’re here and it sits within yourself. But it’s great universities that help you to get here. It’s gateway programs like the program here at my old university, the University of New South Wales, which is making a difference in people’s lives. 

    There was an article written a couple of weeks ago about the focus that I have placed in my first term as Education Minister on students. And that is true whether it’s the Student Ombudsman, whether it’s the fee-free courses to help young people that aren’t ready for university to be ready for university, whether it’s these paid prac payments or anything else. Yes, I’ve been deadly focused, directly focused, on helping students to get to university, but not just get here to succeed when they get here. And the data shows us that a lot of young people, particularly young people from underrepresented groups from poor backgrounds, from the regions from the outer suburbs, are more likely not to finish a degree than other people. And so, the next step in the reform program, big structural change, is around fixing the funding of our universities, you’ll see that roll out next year, including demand-driven funding for equity students and a real needs-based funding approach to universities a la the Gonski model. We’re finishing and fixing the funding of our public schools. A similar model we want to roll out to our universities so that we’re funding students based on need and making sure that more young people who start a degree finish a degree.

    JOURNALIST: And that includes the Jobs-ready Graduate Scheme?

    CLARE: That’ll be one of the things that we’re going to ask the new ATEC to look at. And the interim version of the ATEC led by Mary O’ Kane, will kick off next Tuesday.

    JOURNALIST: I just have one more as well about Albanese last week said he’s ruled out renewing the religious discrimination law, that obviously there was a big review commission to that. Is that a position that you maintain as well? And do you expect there’ll be any reforms to the independent private sector in the next term?

    CLARE: What the Prime Minister has said repeatedly here is that reform here requires bipartisanship. And that was more important in the last term than ever before, given the conflicts overseas and the propensity for a debate around religious freedom or religious discrimination to aggravate the tensions that already exist in our community because of the catastrophe happening overseas. And I still think it holds that reform here requires bipartisanship. We’ve got a new Opposition Leader. I do hold out hope that Sussan Ley, unlike Peter Dutton, will reach across the aisle and try to work with us on more things. Thanks.
     

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Drone footage captured orcas crafting tools out of kelp – and using them for grooming

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Vanessa Pirotta, Postdoctoral Researcher and Wildlife Scientist, Macquarie University

    Sara Jenkins/500px/Getty

    The more we learn about orcas, the more remarkable they are. These giant dolphins are the ocean’s true apex predator, preying on great white sharks and other lesser predators.

    They’re very intelligent and highly social. Their clans are matrilineal, centred around a older matriarch who teaches her clan her own vocalisations. Not only this, but the species is one of only six known to experience menopause, pointing to the social importance of older females after their reproductive years. Different orca groups have fashion trends, such as one pod who returned to wearing salmon as a hat, decades after it went out of vogue.

    But for all their intelligence, one thing has been less clear. Can orcas actually make tools, as humans, chimps and other primates do? In research out today by United States and British researchers, we have an answer: yes.

    Using drones, researchers watched as resident pods in the Salish Sea broke off the ends of bull kelp stalks and rolled them between their bodies. This, the researchers say, is likely to be a grooming practice – the first tool-assisted grooming seen in marine animals.

    This video shows whales using kelp tools in what appears to be social grooming behaviour. Credit: Center for Whale Research.

    Self kelp: why would orcas make tools?

    Tool use and tool making have been well documented in land-based species. But it’s less common among marine species. This could be partly due to the challenge of observing them.

    This field of research expands what we know these animals are capable of. Not only are orcas spending time making kelp into a grooming tool, but they’re doing it socially – two orcas have to work together to rub the kelp against their bodies.

    To make the tool, the orcas use their teeth to grab a stalk of kelp by its “stipe” – the long, narrow part near the seaweed’s holdfast, where it tethers to the rock. They use their teeth, motion of their body and the drag of the kelp to break off a piece of this narrow stipe.

    Next, they approach a social partner, flip the length of the kelp onto their rostrum (their snout-like projection) and press their head and the kelp against their partner’s flank. The two orcas use their fins and flukes to trap the kelp while rolling it between their bodies. During this contact, the orcas would roll and twist their bodies – often in an exaggerated S-shaped posture. A similar posture has been seen among orcas in other groups, who adopt it when rubbing themselves on sand or pebbles.

    Why do it? The researchers suggest this practise may be social skin-maintenance. Bottlenose dolphin mothers are known to remove dead skin from their calves using flippers, while tool-assisted grooming of a partner has been seen in primates, but infrequently and usually in captivity.

    Orcas across different social groups, ages and genders were seen doing this. But they were more likely to groom close relatives or those of similar age. There was some evidence suggesting whales with skin conditions were more likely to do the kelp-based grooming.

    Humpback whales are known to wear kelp in a practice known as “kelping”. But this study covers a different behaviour, which the authors dub “allokelping” (kelping others).

    A surprise from well-studied pods

    Interestingly, this new discovery comes from some of the most well-studied and famous orcas in the world – a group known as the southern resident killer whales. If you were a child of the 90s, you would have seen them in the opening scene of Free Willy, the movie which set me on my path to study cetaceans.

    These orcas consist of three pods known as J, K and L pods. Each live in the Salish Sea in the Pacific Northwest on the border of Canada and the US.

    Researchers fly drones over these resident pods most days and have access to almost 50 years of observations. But this is the first time the tool-making behaviour has been seen.

    Unfortunately, these pods are critically endangered. They’re threatened by sound pollution from shipping, polluted water, vessel strike and loss of their main food source – Chinook salmon.

    A pod of killer whales off Vancouver, Canada.
    Vanessa Pirotta, CC BY-NC-ND

    Orcas are smart

    In one sense, the findings are not a surprise, given the intelligence of these animals.

    In the Antarctic, orcas catch seals by making waves to wash them off ice floes. Before European colonisation, orcas and First Nations groups near Eden hunted whales together.

    They can mimic human speech, while different groups have their own dialects. These animals are awe-inspiring – and sometimes baffling, as when a pod began biting or attacking boats off the Iberian peninsula.

    While orcas are often called “killer whales”, they’re not whales. They’re the biggest species of dolphin, growing up to nine metres long. They’re found across all the world’s oceans.

    Within the species, there’s a surprising amount of diversity. Scientists group orcas into different ecotypes – populations adapted to local conditions. Different orca groups can differ substantially, from size to prey to habits. For instance, transient orcas cover huge distances seeking larger prey, while resident orcas stick close to areas with lots of fish.

    Not just a fluke

    Because orcas differ so much, we don’t know whether other pods have discovered or taught these behaviours.

    But what this research does point to is that tool making may be more common among marine mammals than we expected. No hands – no problem.

    Vanessa Pirotta 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. Drone footage captured orcas crafting tools out of kelp – and using them for grooming – https://theconversation.com/drone-footage-captured-orcas-crafting-tools-out-of-kelp-and-using-them-for-grooming-259372

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ibn Battuta, a 14th-century judge and ambassador, travelled further than Marco Polo. The Rihla records his adventures

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ismail Albayrak, Professor of Islam and Catholic Muslim Relations, Australian Catholic University

    In our guides to the classics, experts explain key literary works.

    Ibn Battuta, was born in Tangier, Morocco, on February 24, 1304. From a statement in his celebrated travel book the Rihla (“legal affairs are my ancestral profession,”) he evidently came from an intellectually distinguished family.

    According to the Rihla (travelogue), Ibn Battuta embarked on his travels from Tangier at the age of 22 with the intention of performing the Hajj (the sacred pilgrimage to Mecca) in 1325. Although he returned to Fez (his adopted home-town) around the end of 1349, he continued to visit various regions, including Granada and Sudan, in subsequent years.

    Over the course of his almost 30 years of travel, Ibn Battuta covered an astonishing distance of approximately 73,000 miles (117,000 kilometres), visiting a region that today encompasses more than 50 countries. His journeys covered much of the medieval Islamic world and beyond, excluding Northern Europe.

    In 1355, he returned to Morocco for the last time and remained there for the rest of his life. Upon his return he dictated his experiences, observations and anecdotes to the Andalusian scholar Ibn Juzayy, with a compilation of his travels completed in 1355 or 1356.

    The work, formally titled A Gift to Researchers on the Curiosities of Cities and the Marvels of Journeys, is more commonly referred to as Rihlat Ibn Battuta or simply Rihla.

    A painting of Ibn Battuta (on right) in Egypt by Leon Benett.
    Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    More than a travelogue or geographical record, this book provides rich insights into 14th-century social and political life, capturing cultural diversity across nations. Ibn Battuta details local lifestyles, linguistic traits, beliefs, clothing, cuisines, holidays, artistic traditions and gender relations, as well as commercial activities and currencies.

    His observations also include geographical features such as mountains, rivers and agricultural products. Notably, the work highlights his encounters with over 60 sultans and more than 2,000 prominent figures, making it a valuable historical resource.

    The travels

    His travels began after a dream. According to Ibn Battuta, one night, while in Fuwwa, a town near Alexandria in Egypt, he dreamed of flying on a massive bird across various lands, landing in a dark, greenish country.

    To test the local sheikh’s mystical knowledge, he decided if the sheikh knew of his dream, he was truly extraordinary. The next morning, after leading the dawn prayer, he saw the sheikh bid farewell to visitors. Later, the sheikh astonishingly revealed knowledge of Ibn Battuta’s dream and prophesied his pilgrimage through Yemen, Iraq, Turkey and India.

    At the time, the Middle East was under the rule of the Mamluk sultanate, Anatolia was divided among principalities and the Mongol Ilkhanate state controlled Iran, Central Asia, and the Indian subcontinent.

    Ibn Battuta initially travelled through North Africa, Egypt, Palestine and Syria, completing his first Hajj in 1326.

    He then visited Iraq and Iran, returning to Mecca. In 1328, he explored East Africa, reaching Mogadishu, Mombasa, Sudan and Kilwa (modern Tanzania), as well as Yemen, Oman and Anatolia, where he documented cities like Alanya, Konya, Erzurum, Nicaea and Bursa.

    His descriptions are vivid. Describing the city of Dimyat, on the bank of the Nile, he says:

    Many of the houses have steps leading down to the Nile. Banana trees are especially abundant there, and their fruit is carried to Cairo in boats. Its sheep and goats are allowed to pasture at liberty day and night, and for this reason the saying goes of Dimyat, ‘Its wall is a sweetmeat and its dogs are sheep’. No one who enters the city may afterwards leave it except by the governor’s seal […]

    Farmland on the banks of the Nile river today.
    Alice-D/shutterstock

    When it comes to Anatolia (in modern-day Turkey), he declares:

    This country, known as the Land of Rum, is the most beautiful in the world. While Allah Almighty has distributed beauty to other lands separately, He has gathered them all here. The most beautiful and well-dressed people live in this land, and the most delicious food is prepared here […] From the moment we arrived, our neighbors — both men and women — showed great concern for our wellbeing. Here, women do not shy away from men; when we departed, they bid us farewell as if we were family, expressing their sadness through tears.

    A judge and husband

    In 1332, Ibn Battutua met the Byzantine Emperor Andronikos III Palaiologos.
    Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    Since Ibn Battuta dictated his work, it’s difficult to assess the extent of the scribe’s influence in recording his narratives. Despite being an educated man, he occasionally narrates like a commoner and sometimes exceeds the bounds of polite language. At times, he provides excessive detail, giving the impression he may be quoting from sources beyond his own observations.

    Nevertheless, the Rihla stands out for its engaging style and captivating anecdotes, drawing readers in.

    Ibn Battuta later journeyed through Crimea, Central Asia, Khwarezm (a large oasis region in the territories of present-day Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan), Bukhara (a city in Uzbekistan), and the Hindu Kush Mountains. In 1332, he met Byzantine Emperor Andronikos III Palaiologos and travelled to Istanbul with the caravan of Uzbek Khan’s third wife. He mentions a caravan that even has a market:

    Whenever the caravan halted, food was cooked in great brass cauldrons, called dasts, and supplied from them to the poorer pilgrims and those who had no provisions. […] This caravan contained also animated bazaars and great supplies of luxuries and all kinds of food and fruit. They used to march during the night and light torches in front of the file of camels and litters, so that you saw the countryside gleaming with light and the darkness turned into radiant day.

    Ibn Battuta arrived in Delhi in 1333, where he served as a judge under Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq for seven years. He married or was married to local women in many of the places he stayed. Among his wives were ordinary people as well as the daughters of the administrative class.

    Miniature painting in Mughal style depicting the court of Muhammad bin Tughluq.
    Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    The Sultan’s generosity, intelligence and unconventional ruling style both impressed and surprised Ibn Battuta. However, Muhammad bin Tughluq was known for making excessively harsh and abrupt decisions at times, which led Ibn Battuta to approach him with caution. Nevertheless, with the Sultan’s support, he remained in India for a long time and was eventually chosen as an ambassador to China in 1341.

    In 1345 his mission was disrupted when his ship capsized off the coast of Calcutta (then known as Sadqawan) in the Indian Ocean. Though he survived, he lost most of his possessions.

    After the incident, he remained in India for a while before continuing his journey by other means. During this period, he travelled through India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. He served as a judge in the latter for one and a half years. In 1345, he journeyed to China via Bengal, Burma and Sumatra, reaching the city of Guangzhou but limiting his exploration to the southern coast.

    He was among the first Arab travellers to record Islam’s spread in the Malay Archipelago, noting interactions between Muslims and Hindu-Buddhist communities. Visiting Java and Sumatra, he praised Sultan Malik al-Zahir of Sumatra as a generous, pious and scholarly ruler and highlighted his rare practice of walking to Friday prayers.

    On his return, Ibn Battuta explored regions such as Iran, Iraq, North Africa, Spain and the Kingdom of Mali, documenting the vast Islamic world.

    Back in his homeland, Ibn Battuta served as a judge in several locations. He died around 1368-9 while serving as a judge in Morocco and was buried in his birthplace, Tangier.

    Historic copy of selected parts of the Travel Report by Ibn Battuta, 1836 CE, Cairo.
    Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    The status of women

    Ibn Battuta’s travels revealed intriguing insights into the status of women across regions. In inner West Africa, he observed matriarchal practices where lineage and inheritance were determined by the mother’s family.

    Among Turks, women rode horses like raiders, traded actively and did not veil their faces.

    In the Maldives, husbands leaving the region had to abandon their wives. He noted that Muslim women there, including the ruling woman, did not cover their heads. Despite attempting to enforce the hijab as a judge, he failed.

    He offers fascinating insights into food cultures. In Siberia, sled dogs were fed before humans. He described 15-day wedding feasts in India.

    He tried local produce such as mango in the Indian subcontinent, which he compared to an apple, and sun-dried, sliced fish in Oman.

    Religious practices

    Ibn Battuta’s accounts of the Hajj (pilgrimage) rituals he performed six times provide a unique perspective. He references a fatwa by Ibn Taymiyyah, prominent Islamic scholar and theologian known for his opposition to theological innovations and critiques of Sufism and philosophy, advising against shortening prayers for those travelling to Medina.

    Ibn Battuta’s accounts, particularly regarding the Iranian region, offer important perspectives into religious sects during a period when Iran started shifting from Sunnism to Shiism. He describes societies with diverse demographics, including Persians, Azeris, Kurds, Arabs and Baluchis. His observations on religious practices are especially significant.

    Inclined toward Sufism, Ibn Battuta often dressed like a dervish during his travels. He offers a compelling view of Islamic mysticism. He considered regions like Damascus as places of abundance and Anatolia as a land of compassion, interpreting them with a spiritual perspective.

    His accounts of Sufi education, dervish lodges, zawiyas (similar to monasteries), and tombs, along with the special invocations of Sufi masters, are important historical records. He also observed and documented unique practices, such as the followers of the Persian Sufi saint Sheikh Qutb al-Din Haydar wearing iron rings on their hands, necks, ears, and even private parts to avoid sexual intercourse.

    While Ibn Battuta primarily visited Muslim lands, he also travelled to non-Muslim territories, offering key understandings into different religious cultures, for instance interactions between Crimean Muslims and Christian Armenians in the Golden Horde region.

    He also documented churches, icons and monasteries, such as the tomb of the Virgin Mary in Jerusalem. His observation of Muslims openly reciting the call to prayer (adhan) in China is significant.

    Other anecdotes include the division of the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus into a mosque and Christian church. Most importantly, his encounters with Hindus and Buddhists in the Indian subcontinent and Malay Islands provide rich historical context.

    Umayyad Mosque, Damascus.
    eyetravelphotos/shutterstock

    His accounts of death rituals reveal diverse practices. In Sinop (a city in Turkey), 40 days of mourning were declared for a ruler’s mother, while in Iran, a funeral resembled a wedding celebration. He observed similarities in cremation practices between India and China and described a chilling custom in some regions where slaves and concubines were buried alive with the deceased.

    Ibn Battuta’s Rihla, widely translated into Eastern and Western languages, has drawn some criticism for containing depictions that sometimes diverge from historical continuity or borrow from other works. Ibn Battuta himself admitted to using earlier travel books as references.

    Despite limited recognition in older sources, the Rihla gained prominence in the West in the 19th century. His legacy remains vibrant today. Morocco declared 1996–1997 the “Year of Ibn Battuta,” and established a museum in Tangier to honour him. In Dubai, a mall is named after him.

    Notably, Ibn Battuta travelled to more destinations than Marco Polo and shared a broader range of humane anecdotes, showcasing the depth and diversity of his experiences.

    Ismail Albayrak 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. Ibn Battuta, a 14th-century judge and ambassador, travelled further than Marco Polo. The Rihla records his adventures – https://theconversation.com/ibn-battuta-a-14th-century-judge-and-ambassador-travelled-further-than-marco-polo-the-rihla-records-his-adventures-246148

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: It’s time to face an uncomfortable truth: maybe our pampered pets would be better off without us

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Nancy Cushing, Associate Professor, School of Humanities and Social Science, University of Newcastle

    ROSLAN RAHMAN/AFP via Getty Images

    Pet-keeping is often promoted for the benefits it brings humans. A close association with another animal can provide us with a sense of purpose and a daily dose of joy. It can aid our health, make us more conscientious and even help us form relationships with other humans.

    But the situation is perhaps not as rosy for the animal itself. Domesticated animals often live longer than their free-living counterparts, but the quality of those lives can be compromised. Pets can be fed processed foods that can lead to obesity. Many are denied a sexual life and experience of parenthood. Exercise can be limited, isolation is common and boredom must be endured.

    In the worst cases, pets suffer due to selective breeding practices, physical abuse and unethical commercial breeding.

    Is this the best life for the species we feel closest to? This question was raised for me when I heard the story of Valerie, the dachshund recaptured in April this year after almost 18 months living on her own on South Australia’s Karta Pintingga/Kangaroo Island.

    Is being a pet the best life for the species we feel closest to?
    Oleksandr Rupeta/NurPhoto via Getty Images

    Valerie: the story that captivated a nation

    Valerie, a miniature dachshund, escaped into the bush during a camping trip on Kangaroo Island in November 2023. After several days of searching, her bereft humans returned to their home in New South Wales. They assumed the tiny dog, who had lived her life as a “little princess”, was gone forever.

    Fast-forward a year, and sightings were reported on the island of a small dog wearing a pink collar. Word spread and volunteers renewed the search. A wildlife rescue group designed a purpose-built trap, fitting it out with items from Valerie’s former home.

    After several weeks, a remotely controlled gate clattered shut behind Valerie and she was caught.

    Cue great celebrations. The searchers were triumphant and the family was delighted. Social media lit up. It was a canine reenactment of one of settler Australia’s enduring narratives: the lost child rescued from the hostile bush.

    A dog’s-eye view

    But imagine if Valerie’s story was told from a more dog-centred perspective. Valerie found herself alone in a strange place and took the opportunity to run away. She embarked on a new life in which she was responsible for herself and could exercise the intelligence inherited from her boar-hunting ancestors.

    No longer required to be a good girl, Valerie applied her own judgement – that notorious dachshund “stubbornness” – to evade predators, fill her stomach and pass her days.

    Some commentators assumed Valerie must have been fed by anonymous benefactors – reflecting a widely held view that pets have limited abilities.

    Veterinary experts, however, said her diet likely consisted of small birds, mammals and reptiles she killed herself – as well as roadkill, other carrion and faeces.

    Valerie was clearly good at life on the lam. Unlike the human competitors in the series Alone Australia, she did not waste away when left in an island wilderness. Instead, she gained 1.8 kg of muscle – and was so stocky she no longer fit the old harness her humans brought to collect her. She had literally outgrown her former bonds.

    Valerie could have sought shelter with the island’s humans at any time, but chose not to. She had to be actively trapped. Once returned to her humans, she needed time to reacclimatise to life as a pet.

    Not all missing pets thrive in the wild. But all this raises the question of whether Valerie’s rescue would be better understood as a forced return from a full life of freedom, to a diminished existence in captivity?

    A long history of pets thriving in the wild

    Other examples exist which suggest an animal’s best life can take place outside the constraints of being a pet.

    Exotic parrots have fled lives in cages to form urban flocks. In the United States, 25 species initially imported as pets have set up self-sustaining, free-living populations across 23 states.

    Or take the red-eared slider turtle, which is native to parts of the US and Mexico. It’s illegal to keep the turtles as pets in Australia, but some of those smuggled in have later been released into urban wetlands where they have established large and widespread populations.

    Cats are perhaps the most notorious example of escaped pets thriving on their own in Australia. They numbers in the millions, in habitats from cities to the Simpson Desert to the Snowy Mountains, showing how little they need human assistance.

    One mark of their success is their prodigious size. At up to 7kg, free-living cats can be more than twice the weight of the average domestic cat.

    Around the world, exotic former companion mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, amphibians and insects have all established populations large enough to pose problems for other species.

    Rethinking animals as pets

    Of course, I am not advocating that pets be released to the wild, creating new problems. But I do believe current pet-keeping practices are due for reconsideration.

    A dramatic solution would be to take the animal out of the pet relationship. Social robots that look like seals and teddy bears are already available to welcome you home, mirror your emotions and offer up cuddles without the cost to other animals.

    A less radical option is to rethink the idea of animals as “pets” and instead see them as equals.

    Some people already enjoy these unforced bonds. Magpies, for example, are known to have strong allegiances with each other and are sometimes willing to extend those connections to humans in multi-species friendships.

    As for Valerie, she did make “her little happy sounds” when reunited with her humans. But she might look back with nostalgia to her 529 days of freedom on Kangaroo Island.

    Nancy Cushing receives funding from the State Library of New South Wales as the Coral Thomas Fellow. She is a member of the executive committee of the Australian Historical Association.

    – ref. It’s time to face an uncomfortable truth: maybe our pampered pets would be better off without us – https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-face-an-uncomfortable-truth-maybe-our-pampered-pets-would-be-better-off-without-us-256903

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: At Dobbs Spotlight Forum, Senator Murray, Senate Democrats Highlight Trump & Republicans’ Backdoor Abortion Ban & Efforts to Rip Away Reproductive Health Care Nationwide

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    ***WATCH: Video of full forum***

    ***WATCH and READ: Senator Murray’s opening remarks***

    Washington, D.C. — Today—on the three-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning the constitutional right to abortion—U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Tina Smith (D-MN) hosted a spotlight forum titled Under Attack: Republicans’ Escalating War on Reproductive Freedom. At the forum, Senate Democrats heard from four panelists who have suffered the consequences of the Dobbs decision and subsequent Republican abortion bans firsthand and warned about how President Trump and Republicans are only escalating their attacks on women’s health care and working to make abortion impossible to access anywhere—a backdoor nationwide abortion ban.  

    The senators’ spotlight forum comes as President Trump has taken direct aim at reproductive health care in his first few months in office, including by: pardoning anti-abortion extremists found guilty of assaulting and injuring abortion clinic staff and announcing that his Department of Justice will largely no longer enforce the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act; attacking mifepristone based on anti-abortion junk science; laying the groundwork to make “fetal personhood” the law of the land—which would ban abortion in every state and curtail pregnant women’s rights; rescinding CMS guidance reaffirming that the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals to provide life-saving care to pregnant women suffering medical emergencies, which might include abortion care in certain situations; repealing two Executive Orders that sought to protect and expand access to reproductive health care in the aftermath of Dobbs; reinstating the Global Gag Rule that targets reproductive health care around the world; scrubbing government websites of vital information about reproductive health care; and appointing notorious anti-abortion extremists for influential roles in his administration, including Pam Bondi as Attorney General, Russell Vought as OMB Director, and John Sauer as Solicitor General—among much else.

    Additionally, right now Republicans in Congress are pushing through a budget reconciliation bill that would make abortion care impossible to access nearly everywhere by defunding Planned Parenthood—putting 200 health centers across the country at risk of closure, 90 percent of which are in states where abortion is legal—and by effectively banning ACA marketplace health plans from covering abortion care. Overall, Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act would kick 16 million people off their health insurance through massive cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and overwhelmingly impact women, who comprise most adults covered by Medicaid. Medicaid is the primary source of coverage and the largest single payer for pregnant women’s health care nationwide, covering between one-third and one-half of births in every state across the country.

    “Already, we have seen with painful clarity, how—on a daily basis—Republican abortion bans are putting women’s lives in danger, forcing providers to close their doors, decimating access to maternal health care, and forcing women to remain pregnant—no matter their circumstances. But Dobbs was never the end of this fight for Republicans, whose goal has always been a national abortion ban. And since Republicans know they don’t have the votes right now to pass a national abortion ban outright, they are slowly, but surely, advancing a backdoor nationwide abortion ban, and chipping away at access to reproductive health care piece-by-piece—even in states where abortion is protected. Republicans are hoping no one will notice these attacks—as if people don’t care when their rights are stripped away. As if it’s easy to miss the moment your health care decisions are out of your control,” said Senator Patty Murray. “As hard as Republicans might try, the damage they are causing is undeniable. But that doesn’t mean we give up. Women’s lives are at stake—Democrats are not going to stop pushing back—not ever. We will keep pushing for legislation to protect women and health care providers from Republican prosecution, to help people access and afford the reproductive health care they need, to protect women’s private health data, to protect the Right to Contraception and the Right to IVF, and to restore the right to abortion nationwide—nothing less.”

    “When I was ten weeks pregnant, doctors informed me that my baby had acrania, a rare condition that was fatal for my baby, and dangerous for me. Naturally, I was heartbroken and scared, but I trusted that I would receive the necessary medical treatment so that my family and I could begin healing. Unfortunately, I was wrong. Just a few weeks before I received my diagnosis, the Supreme Court issued their decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade and eliminating the legal right to abortion. The fallout from the decision was fast, with states across the country starting to enforce cruel and dangerous abortion bans,” said Nancy Davis of Louisiana, Founder and Executive Director of the Nancy Davis Foundation. “My home state of Louisiana has some of the strictest abortion laws in the country, and even though I needed to terminate my pregnancy to protect my own health and safety, I was told I could not receive care at the hospital in Baton Rouge. Instead of being able to process the diagnosis and grieve the loss of my pregnancy at home with my family, I had to scramble to find a way out of Louisiana to access abortion care. I found myself in a situation I never thought I would be in, forced to travel nearly 1,500 miles to get the care I needed and deserved. I experienced not only a denial of necessary medical care, but a denial of compassion, and my right to make my own decision about my own health. I felt dehumanized and stripped of my most fundamental rights. I knew what I needed to do to protect my health, and my doctors agreed, but local lawmakers who will never know me or understand my situation had the final say. The system failed me, and I am just as outraged today as I was then.”

    “I was raised in St. Louis and I love living in Missouri. But, it is challenging to fulfill your job as a physician when you cannot practice medicine as you were trained to do or teach medical students about abortion in the community and state where you live…It is infuriating and irresponsible that because of abortion bans, OBs can teach our students all aspects of medical care—except abortion. When you go to the doctor, you want your doctor to be trained. Anti-abortion politicians and groups have claimed that abortion rights have been left up to the state. That is simply not true. Last fall, Missouri voters approved a constitutional amendment ensuring the right to an abortion, but — despite the will of the voters — politicians and state officials are still interfering with patients’ rights. At every turn, when we finally make progress towards abortion access in Missouri, they move the goalposts on us. The only way to describe our experience over the last several months is whiplash,” said Dr. Margaret Baum, M.D., FACOG, Chief Medical Officer of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers in Missouri. “I have seen first-hand that these draconian laws force patients to make impossible choices when Medicaid cannot cover their care. People delay care because they’re afraid that they are not going to have the coverage for the services we know that they need. Patients are forced to decide if they can pay out of pocket to get lab tests. They are forced to decide between the procedures they need. They are forced to sometimes forego services altogether. It is critical for lawmakers to understand that the decisions they make are affecting patients every. Single. Day. And now, once again, they want to bring this chaos and confusion to the national level. I’m here to tell you today that the Senate bill proposing to ‘defund’ Planned Parenthood would be devastating. It could force nearly 200 Planned Parenthood health centers to close and is a trojan horse for a nationwide abortion ban.”

    “Back before the FACE Act protections, our clinic doors were routinely blockaded one day a month by a mob of 300 to 400 anti-abortion extremists. Those days were unpredictable and scary. If we tried to get through them and into the clinic, extremists pinched or pricked us with sharp objects. By the end of the day, our patients were all traumatized and uncared for – and our bodies were black and blue. We can’t go back to those days…I proudly advocated for this Act when it was being debated in the 1990s – I am outraged and heartbroken we have to do this again. The law works at protecting rights, including speech rights, something I witness daily. As soon as the Act took effect, the extreme blockades stopped. Yes, we still had protesters exercising their First Amendment Rights, but now they knew they couldn’t be violent, and they could not invade the clinics or block staff and patients from entering. FACE has helped preserve the dignity and safety of the patients we serve, and the professionals who care for them,” said Renee Chelian, Founder and CEO of Michigan-based Northland Family Planning Centers. “But then in 2017, when President Trump first took office extremists were emboldened to resume their violent attacks, despite FACE, knowing they had a friend in the White House. Twice they invaded our clinics, harassed patients and staff and refused to leave after trespass warnings were given. Even after law enforcement arrived, they refused to leave, went limp and had to be carried out one at a time. But the most appalling and dangerous episode occurred toward the end of Trump’s first term, in August of 2020. A group blockaded our doors preventing staff and patients from entering the clinic including those arriving for birth control appointments and three women scheduled for abortions after receiving a fatal fetal diagnosis…Within days of returning to the White House, sure enough, President Trump pardoned the violent offenders who attacked our clinic and others serving time for violence against clinics in other states, as well as those convicted for their actions here on January 6th. We were all abandoned by our government with that swipe of a pen. The FACE Act has been our only lever preventing clinic violence and holding anti-abortion criminals accountable. The FACE Act simply can’t be undone and it is up to lawmakers like you to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

    “Right now, the Trump administration is taking unprecedented action to roll back abortion rights,” said Mini Timmaraju, President and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All. “The majority of Americans do not support right-wing, hate-fueled ideology. Eight in ten Americans want legal abortion. That’s not just a majority—that’s a consensus. But because of the daily churn of chaos from the White House, most Americans don’t know that Republicans are attacking abortion. Our new focus group research shows that when Americans know these attacks are happening, they feel disgusted and betrayed. That means if we’re louder about this issue, we can win. Senator Murray and many of the champions in this room have long been the conscience of the Senate, and it’s time for all Senate Democrats to join them. We need to do everything we can to loudly push back against this administration’s attacks on our bodies, lives, and futures. We are living through remarkably dangerous times, and this is the moment to act. Our rights are not safe under this administration, and that includes abortion rights. In order to protect the safety, health, and dignity of all Americans, we need you to keep fighting. The majority of Americans are on our side, and together, we will protect reproductive freedom and restore abortion rights for all.”

    “Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans paved the path to overturn Roe v. Wade and stripped away a woman’s right to choose, but that wasn’t enough for them,” said Senator Tammy Baldwin. “Now, they are putting the puzzle pieces together to finally get what they have long wanted: a national abortion ban. Wisconsinites have said time and again that they want the freedom to control their bodies and futures, without politicians or the government butting in – and that is exactly what I’m fighting for. We are going to keep shining a light on Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans’ cruel efforts to further chip away at women’s right to get the health care they want and deserve – including abortion care.”

    “Since Trump’s Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, we’ve seen a new form of hell at every turn,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren. “Now, Republicans in Congress are on track to pass a bill that amounts to a backdoor ban on abortion – even in states where it’s protected. Republicans’ bill to cut Medicaid and defund Planned Parenthood is a one-two punch to women across the country, and we are not going to let them get away with it.”

    “Three years after the Supreme Court ruled in the Dobbs decision, it’s become difficult and dangerous for women to access basic reproductive care, and Trump and Republicans in Congress are continuing to chip away at access and stoke the danger. I worked at Planned Parenthood, and I know all too well that receiving credible death threats is a fact of life for so many people who work in reproductive health care,” said Senator Tina Smith. “We’re seeing an uptick in threats against abortion providers and patients, meanwhile President Trump is actively pardoning anti-abortion extremists found guilty of harassment and violence. That’s why we are spotlighting the voices of leaders working on the frontlines of providing reproductive health care in the face of these threats at this important moment.”

    “The deadly Dobbs decision will go down in history as one of the worst, most harmful, most regressive decisions in modern history, said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. “As bad as the Dobbs decision was and as catastrophic as the impacts have already been, Republicans are doubling down on their crusade against access to reproductive healthcare in their big, ugly reconciliation bill. Democrats are going to fight like hell to strip these cruel provisions from the Republican bill, and to protect and restore reproductive freedom for all.”

    “This issue is about more than health care; it is about women’s rights, individual rights, and human rights. It is about the right to make your own health care decisions,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal. “Three years after Dobbs, American women don’t have that right. Today, thanks to Republican lawmakers and conservative courts, a woman in America might walk into an ER and faint, bleeding, and be refused treatment. That woman might die. But we aren’t giving up, and we will never stop fighting for reproductive justice, abortion access, and the simple, foundational right to choose your own health care.”

    “The Guttmacher Institute said 155,000 people traveled for an abortion in 2024,” said Senator Maria Cantwell. “We are forcing them to go get care in some other state, miles and miles away. Why? Because of this archaic decision.  Now, we have two problems. We have people coming to our state who want this care, but now we could have fewer Medicaid dollars to even provide the care.”

    “With all the chaos and damage this administration has caused, the anniversary of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade reminds us that we can’t lose sight of the fact that anti-choice politicians at all levels of our government are working nonstop to roll back women’s access to reproductive care,” said Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. “Between devastating cuts to Medicaid in Republicans’ reconciliation bill to top officials in this administration calling the safety of the abortion pill into question, Republicans across our country are taking steps to claw back women’s rights. My Democratic colleagues and I will never stop sounding the alarm about this and working to restore women’s access to basic health care.”

    “Three years ago, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority abandoned the long-standing constitutional protections recognized in Roe v. Wade—rejecting nearly 50 years of progress and dragging gender equality and women’s rights half a century backward,” said Senator Dick Durbin. “What has happened in the wake of Dobbs was as predictable as it is devastating—and today we heard how devastating the last three years have been for women seeking critical health care in Republican-led states. While I cannot sugarcoat the state of women’s rights following Dobbs, I want to make one thing crystal clear: this fight is far from over. I thank my colleagues, Senators Murray, Baldwin, Smith, and Warren, for hosting such an important forum and keeping up the fight.”

    “I was proud to join my colleagues today to hear directly from those who have suffered due to the deadly Dobbs decision and under Republicans’ anti-choice agenda,” said Senator Mazie Hirono. “Three years after the fall of Roe, Republicans continue to escalate their assault on reproductive freedom, while women across the country experience the devastating impacts of this infringement on their fundamental rights. Dobbs caused chaos and confusion, putting millions of Americans’ lives at risk, but I will not stop doing everything in my power to restore access to abortion and family planning services nationwide and protect reproductive health care providers and their patients.”

    “Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade three years ago, women have been at the mercy of a patchwork of laws. Over 40 percent of women of reproductive age now live under extreme and dangerous bans, women are being turned away from emergency rooms, and doctors are threatened with prosecution for just doing their jobs. This cannot be a country where our daughters have fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers. That is why we must pass the Women’s Health Protection Act and put the protections of Roe v. Wade into law,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar.

    “In the three years since the Trump-packed Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Republican-led states have passed waves of harmful laws stripping Americans of the freedom to make their own health care decisions. Despite the life-threatening consequences of these actions, the Trump Administration is escalating its attacks on access to reproductive health care across the country—including in states where it’s protected. The stories we heard today underscored the urgent need to protect reproductive care as a matter of federal law,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen.

    Today, Senator Murray also joined Senators Tammy Baldwin and Richard Blumenthal to introduce the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2025, legislation to guarantee access to abortion everywhere across the country and restore the right to comprehensive reproductive health care for millions of Americans.

    Senator Murray is a longtime leader in the fight to protect and expand access to reproductive health care and abortion rights, and she has led Congressional efforts to fight back after the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Murray has introduced more than a dozen pieces of legislation to protect reproductive rights from further attacks, protect providers, and help ensure women get the care they need; Murray has led efforts to push for passage of these bills on the Senate floor multiple times. Last January, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Murray led her colleagues in hosting a “State of Abortion Rights” briefing with women who have suffered firsthand from Republican abortion bans, and last June, she chaired a HELP Committee hearing titled “The Assault on Women’s Freedoms: How Abortion Bans Have Created a Health Care Nightmare Across America.” Last year, Senator Murray helped lead efforts to force Republicans on the record on votes to protect access to contraception and access to IVF (twice), and she led her colleagues in raising the alarm about the threat a second Trump administration poses to reproductive rights and abortion access in every state, as outlined in Project 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: At Dobbs Spotlight Forum, Senator Murray, Senate Democrats Highlight Trump & Republicans’ Backdoor Abortion Ban & Efforts to Rip Away Reproductive Health Care Nationwide

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    ***WATCH: Video of full forum***

    ***WATCH and READ: Senator Murray’s opening remarks***

    Washington, D.C. — Today—on the three-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturning the constitutional right to abortion—U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Tina Smith (D-MN) hosted a spotlight forum titled Under Attack: Republicans’ Escalating War on Reproductive Freedom. At the forum, Senate Democrats heard from four panelists who have suffered the consequences of the Dobbs decision and subsequent Republican abortion bans firsthand and warned about how President Trump and Republicans are only escalating their attacks on women’s health care and working to make abortion impossible to access anywhere—a backdoor nationwide abortion ban.  

    The senators’ spotlight forum comes as President Trump has taken direct aim at reproductive health care in his first few months in office, including by: pardoning anti-abortion extremists found guilty of assaulting and injuring abortion clinic staff and announcing that his Department of Justice will largely no longer enforce the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act; attacking mifepristone based on anti-abortion junk science; laying the groundwork to make “fetal personhood” the law of the land—which would ban abortion in every state and curtail pregnant women’s rights; rescinding CMS guidance reaffirming that the Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) requires hospitals to provide life-saving care to pregnant women suffering medical emergencies, which might include abortion care in certain situations; repealing two Executive Orders that sought to protect and expand access to reproductive health care in the aftermath of Dobbs; reinstating the Global Gag Rule that targets reproductive health care around the world; scrubbing government websites of vital information about reproductive health care; and appointing notorious anti-abortion extremists for influential roles in his administration, including Pam Bondi as Attorney General, Russell Vought as OMB Director, and John Sauer as Solicitor General—among much else.

    Additionally, right now Republicans in Congress are pushing through a budget reconciliation bill that would make abortion care impossible to access nearly everywhere by defunding Planned Parenthood—putting 200 health centers across the country at risk of closure, 90 percent of which are in states where abortion is legal—and by effectively banning ACA marketplace health plans from covering abortion care. Overall, Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act would kick 16 million people off their health insurance through massive cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and overwhelmingly impact women, who comprise most adults covered by Medicaid. Medicaid is the primary source of coverage and the largest single payer for pregnant women’s health care nationwide, covering between one-third and one-half of births in every state across the country.

    “Already, we have seen with painful clarity, how—on a daily basis—Republican abortion bans are putting women’s lives in danger, forcing providers to close their doors, decimating access to maternal health care, and forcing women to remain pregnant—no matter their circumstances. But Dobbs was never the end of this fight for Republicans, whose goal has always been a national abortion ban. And since Republicans know they don’t have the votes right now to pass a national abortion ban outright, they are slowly, but surely, advancing a backdoor nationwide abortion ban, and chipping away at access to reproductive health care piece-by-piece—even in states where abortion is protected. Republicans are hoping no one will notice these attacks—as if people don’t care when their rights are stripped away. As if it’s easy to miss the moment your health care decisions are out of your control,” said Senator Patty Murray. “As hard as Republicans might try, the damage they are causing is undeniable. But that doesn’t mean we give up. Women’s lives are at stake—Democrats are not going to stop pushing back—not ever. We will keep pushing for legislation to protect women and health care providers from Republican prosecution, to help people access and afford the reproductive health care they need, to protect women’s private health data, to protect the Right to Contraception and the Right to IVF, and to restore the right to abortion nationwide—nothing less.”

    “When I was ten weeks pregnant, doctors informed me that my baby had acrania, a rare condition that was fatal for my baby, and dangerous for me. Naturally, I was heartbroken and scared, but I trusted that I would receive the necessary medical treatment so that my family and I could begin healing. Unfortunately, I was wrong. Just a few weeks before I received my diagnosis, the Supreme Court issued their decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade and eliminating the legal right to abortion. The fallout from the decision was fast, with states across the country starting to enforce cruel and dangerous abortion bans,” said Nancy Davis of Louisiana, Founder and Executive Director of the Nancy Davis Foundation. “My home state of Louisiana has some of the strictest abortion laws in the country, and even though I needed to terminate my pregnancy to protect my own health and safety, I was told I could not receive care at the hospital in Baton Rouge. Instead of being able to process the diagnosis and grieve the loss of my pregnancy at home with my family, I had to scramble to find a way out of Louisiana to access abortion care. I found myself in a situation I never thought I would be in, forced to travel nearly 1,500 miles to get the care I needed and deserved. I experienced not only a denial of necessary medical care, but a denial of compassion, and my right to make my own decision about my own health. I felt dehumanized and stripped of my most fundamental rights. I knew what I needed to do to protect my health, and my doctors agreed, but local lawmakers who will never know me or understand my situation had the final say. The system failed me, and I am just as outraged today as I was then.”

    “I was raised in St. Louis and I love living in Missouri. But, it is challenging to fulfill your job as a physician when you cannot practice medicine as you were trained to do or teach medical students about abortion in the community and state where you live…It is infuriating and irresponsible that because of abortion bans, OBs can teach our students all aspects of medical care—except abortion. When you go to the doctor, you want your doctor to be trained. Anti-abortion politicians and groups have claimed that abortion rights have been left up to the state. That is simply not true. Last fall, Missouri voters approved a constitutional amendment ensuring the right to an abortion, but — despite the will of the voters — politicians and state officials are still interfering with patients’ rights. At every turn, when we finally make progress towards abortion access in Missouri, they move the goalposts on us. The only way to describe our experience over the last several months is whiplash,” said Dr. Margaret Baum, M.D., FACOG, Chief Medical Officer of Planned Parenthood Great Rivers in Missouri. “I have seen first-hand that these draconian laws force patients to make impossible choices when Medicaid cannot cover their care. People delay care because they’re afraid that they are not going to have the coverage for the services we know that they need. Patients are forced to decide if they can pay out of pocket to get lab tests. They are forced to decide between the procedures they need. They are forced to sometimes forego services altogether. It is critical for lawmakers to understand that the decisions they make are affecting patients every. Single. Day. And now, once again, they want to bring this chaos and confusion to the national level. I’m here to tell you today that the Senate bill proposing to ‘defund’ Planned Parenthood would be devastating. It could force nearly 200 Planned Parenthood health centers to close and is a trojan horse for a nationwide abortion ban.”

    “Back before the FACE Act protections, our clinic doors were routinely blockaded one day a month by a mob of 300 to 400 anti-abortion extremists. Those days were unpredictable and scary. If we tried to get through them and into the clinic, extremists pinched or pricked us with sharp objects. By the end of the day, our patients were all traumatized and uncared for – and our bodies were black and blue. We can’t go back to those days…I proudly advocated for this Act when it was being debated in the 1990s – I am outraged and heartbroken we have to do this again. The law works at protecting rights, including speech rights, something I witness daily. As soon as the Act took effect, the extreme blockades stopped. Yes, we still had protesters exercising their First Amendment Rights, but now they knew they couldn’t be violent, and they could not invade the clinics or block staff and patients from entering. FACE has helped preserve the dignity and safety of the patients we serve, and the professionals who care for them,” said Renee Chelian, Founder and CEO of Michigan-based Northland Family Planning Centers. “But then in 2017, when President Trump first took office extremists were emboldened to resume their violent attacks, despite FACE, knowing they had a friend in the White House. Twice they invaded our clinics, harassed patients and staff and refused to leave after trespass warnings were given. Even after law enforcement arrived, they refused to leave, went limp and had to be carried out one at a time. But the most appalling and dangerous episode occurred toward the end of Trump’s first term, in August of 2020. A group blockaded our doors preventing staff and patients from entering the clinic including those arriving for birth control appointments and three women scheduled for abortions after receiving a fatal fetal diagnosis…Within days of returning to the White House, sure enough, President Trump pardoned the violent offenders who attacked our clinic and others serving time for violence against clinics in other states, as well as those convicted for their actions here on January 6th. We were all abandoned by our government with that swipe of a pen. The FACE Act has been our only lever preventing clinic violence and holding anti-abortion criminals accountable. The FACE Act simply can’t be undone and it is up to lawmakers like you to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

    “Right now, the Trump administration is taking unprecedented action to roll back abortion rights,” said Mini Timmaraju, President and CEO of Reproductive Freedom for All. “The majority of Americans do not support right-wing, hate-fueled ideology. Eight in ten Americans want legal abortion. That’s not just a majority—that’s a consensus. But because of the daily churn of chaos from the White House, most Americans don’t know that Republicans are attacking abortion. Our new focus group research shows that when Americans know these attacks are happening, they feel disgusted and betrayed. That means if we’re louder about this issue, we can win. Senator Murray and many of the champions in this room have long been the conscience of the Senate, and it’s time for all Senate Democrats to join them. We need to do everything we can to loudly push back against this administration’s attacks on our bodies, lives, and futures. We are living through remarkably dangerous times, and this is the moment to act. Our rights are not safe under this administration, and that includes abortion rights. In order to protect the safety, health, and dignity of all Americans, we need you to keep fighting. The majority of Americans are on our side, and together, we will protect reproductive freedom and restore abortion rights for all.”

    “Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans paved the path to overturn Roe v. Wade and stripped away a woman’s right to choose, but that wasn’t enough for them,” said Senator Tammy Baldwin. “Now, they are putting the puzzle pieces together to finally get what they have long wanted: a national abortion ban. Wisconsinites have said time and again that they want the freedom to control their bodies and futures, without politicians or the government butting in – and that is exactly what I’m fighting for. We are going to keep shining a light on Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans’ cruel efforts to further chip away at women’s right to get the health care they want and deserve – including abortion care.”

    “Since Trump’s Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, we’ve seen a new form of hell at every turn,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren. “Now, Republicans in Congress are on track to pass a bill that amounts to a backdoor ban on abortion – even in states where it’s protected. Republicans’ bill to cut Medicaid and defund Planned Parenthood is a one-two punch to women across the country, and we are not going to let them get away with it.”

    “Three years after the Supreme Court ruled in the Dobbs decision, it’s become difficult and dangerous for women to access basic reproductive care, and Trump and Republicans in Congress are continuing to chip away at access and stoke the danger. I worked at Planned Parenthood, and I know all too well that receiving credible death threats is a fact of life for so many people who work in reproductive health care,” said Senator Tina Smith. “We’re seeing an uptick in threats against abortion providers and patients, meanwhile President Trump is actively pardoning anti-abortion extremists found guilty of harassment and violence. That’s why we are spotlighting the voices of leaders working on the frontlines of providing reproductive health care in the face of these threats at this important moment.”

    “The deadly Dobbs decision will go down in history as one of the worst, most harmful, most regressive decisions in modern history, said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer. “As bad as the Dobbs decision was and as catastrophic as the impacts have already been, Republicans are doubling down on their crusade against access to reproductive healthcare in their big, ugly reconciliation bill. Democrats are going to fight like hell to strip these cruel provisions from the Republican bill, and to protect and restore reproductive freedom for all.”

    “This issue is about more than health care; it is about women’s rights, individual rights, and human rights. It is about the right to make your own health care decisions,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal. “Three years after Dobbs, American women don’t have that right. Today, thanks to Republican lawmakers and conservative courts, a woman in America might walk into an ER and faint, bleeding, and be refused treatment. That woman might die. But we aren’t giving up, and we will never stop fighting for reproductive justice, abortion access, and the simple, foundational right to choose your own health care.”

    “The Guttmacher Institute said 155,000 people traveled for an abortion in 2024,” said Senator Maria Cantwell. “We are forcing them to go get care in some other state, miles and miles away. Why? Because of this archaic decision.  Now, we have two problems. We have people coming to our state who want this care, but now we could have fewer Medicaid dollars to even provide the care.”

    “With all the chaos and damage this administration has caused, the anniversary of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade reminds us that we can’t lose sight of the fact that anti-choice politicians at all levels of our government are working nonstop to roll back women’s access to reproductive care,” said Senator Catherine Cortez Masto. “Between devastating cuts to Medicaid in Republicans’ reconciliation bill to top officials in this administration calling the safety of the abortion pill into question, Republicans across our country are taking steps to claw back women’s rights. My Democratic colleagues and I will never stop sounding the alarm about this and working to restore women’s access to basic health care.”

    “Three years ago, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority abandoned the long-standing constitutional protections recognized in Roe v. Wade—rejecting nearly 50 years of progress and dragging gender equality and women’s rights half a century backward,” said Senator Dick Durbin. “What has happened in the wake of Dobbs was as predictable as it is devastating—and today we heard how devastating the last three years have been for women seeking critical health care in Republican-led states. While I cannot sugarcoat the state of women’s rights following Dobbs, I want to make one thing crystal clear: this fight is far from over. I thank my colleagues, Senators Murray, Baldwin, Smith, and Warren, for hosting such an important forum and keeping up the fight.”

    “I was proud to join my colleagues today to hear directly from those who have suffered due to the deadly Dobbs decision and under Republicans’ anti-choice agenda,” said Senator Mazie Hirono. “Three years after the fall of Roe, Republicans continue to escalate their assault on reproductive freedom, while women across the country experience the devastating impacts of this infringement on their fundamental rights. Dobbs caused chaos and confusion, putting millions of Americans’ lives at risk, but I will not stop doing everything in my power to restore access to abortion and family planning services nationwide and protect reproductive health care providers and their patients.”

    “Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade three years ago, women have been at the mercy of a patchwork of laws. Over 40 percent of women of reproductive age now live under extreme and dangerous bans, women are being turned away from emergency rooms, and doctors are threatened with prosecution for just doing their jobs. This cannot be a country where our daughters have fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers. That is why we must pass the Women’s Health Protection Act and put the protections of Roe v. Wade into law,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar.

    “In the three years since the Trump-packed Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, Republican-led states have passed waves of harmful laws stripping Americans of the freedom to make their own health care decisions. Despite the life-threatening consequences of these actions, the Trump Administration is escalating its attacks on access to reproductive health care across the country—including in states where it’s protected. The stories we heard today underscored the urgent need to protect reproductive care as a matter of federal law,” said Senator Chris Van Hollen.

    Today, Senator Murray also joined Senators Tammy Baldwin and Richard Blumenthal to introduce the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2025, legislation to guarantee access to abortion everywhere across the country and restore the right to comprehensive reproductive health care for millions of Americans.

    Senator Murray is a longtime leader in the fight to protect and expand access to reproductive health care and abortion rights, and she has led Congressional efforts to fight back after the Supreme Court’s disastrous decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Murray has introduced more than a dozen pieces of legislation to protect reproductive rights from further attacks, protect providers, and help ensure women get the care they need; Murray has led efforts to push for passage of these bills on the Senate floor multiple times. Last January, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Murray led her colleagues in hosting a “State of Abortion Rights” briefing with women who have suffered firsthand from Republican abortion bans, and last June, she chaired a HELP Committee hearing titled “The Assault on Women’s Freedoms: How Abortion Bans Have Created a Health Care Nightmare Across America.” Last year, Senator Murray helped lead efforts to force Republicans on the record on votes to protect access to contraception and access to IVF (twice), and she led her colleagues in raising the alarm about the threat a second Trump administration poses to reproductive rights and abortion access in every state, as outlined in Project 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Wellington Regional Council must stand up to short-sighted Coalition Government and continue with its plan to restore water quality for its people – CCW

    Source: Choose Clean Water – Tom Kay


    Greater Wellington Regional Council must stand up to the short-sighted Coalition Government in its vote tomorrow on whether to continue with its regional plan change to protect and restore water quality in the region, say freshwater campaign group Choose Clean Water.

    Regional council papers show councillors will be considering three options for the region’s freshwater plan change at their meeting on Thursday 26 June: to pause the plan change until October, to pause the plan change until they can continue with ‘confidence’ about upcoming changes to national direction, or to withdraw the plan change entirely.

    “Regional councils are being bullied by this short-sighted Coalition Government into stopping their years-long, vital work to save our waterways from further degradation and protect our drinking water sources. This Government is compromised by its close ties to polluting commercial interests and Wellington regional councillors must stand up to them for the health of their region’s environment and people,” says Choose Clean Water spokesperson Tom Kay

    Kay says Wellington Regional Council’s uncertainty in moving ahead with their plan change is another sign of the Government trying to take power away from communities to make decisions about managing their rivers, streams, and harbours, and instead give it to polluting commercial interests.


    “There is no reason to throw out this plan change. Councillors are risking starting this process all over again on the basis of yet-to-be-seen national policy and speculation about what may or may not eventuate. They should keep calm and carry on.”

    The plan change forms part of a program to restore and protect fresh and coastal water health the Regional Council has been working on for the last 15 years, including with significant investment and support from communities and iwi. It would bring policies and rules for two major Wellington catchments into line with the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020, including the prioritisation of freshwater and community health in decision-making over commercial interests.

    But with changes to weaken freshwater policy announced by the Government, councillors are now considering whether to continue or not, risking undermining years of progress and future potential for healthy water in the region, say campaigners.

    “The council meeting papers say that if the plan change is withdrawn, water quality that is already degrading by some measures is likely to continue to degrade because the old plan provisions are less protective.”

    “Communities have been waiting decades for these plan changes, particularly in places like Te Awarua-o-Porirua / Porirua harbour, which continues to suffer from issues like sediment buildup and pollution from heavy metals, pathogens, and nutrients, with impacts on fishing and food gathering, swimming, boating, and human health.”

    “The plan also promotes planting of highly erosion-prone land, and adds provisions on stormwater and earthworks that would help reduce risks of flooding and erosion. We’ve seen what Cyclone Gabrielle did in regions that hadn’t prepared for the impacts of these natural hazards. Why would we delay these actions that will build resilience?”

    “This Government came into power saying they were going to allow local communities to make decisions at a community level. But they lied. We saw it with Otago Regional Council being stopped when they tried to progress a freshwater plan change that was years in the making. Now we risk seeing it with Wellington.”

    “Wellington Regional Council must push ahead as soon as possible.”

    Wellington Regional Council will vote on whether to proceed with the plan tomorrow, 26 June.

    The Government’s consultation document on freshwater policy is open for submissions until 27 July. The consultation document proposes to remove national bottom lines for pollution as well as to remove or rewrite Te Mana o te Wai, the decision making framework in current national policy that prioritises the public interest in healthy water bodies.


    Note: Tom Kay participated in the Environment Court hearings process for the operative Natural Resources Plan and participated in the current Plan Change 1 process (including providing evidence) while in previous roles at Forest & Bird.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: News 06/24/2025 Blackburn, Blumenthal, Lee, Klobuchar, and Durbin Introduce Bipartisan Antitrust Bill to Promote App Store Competition

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced the bipartisan Open App Markets Act, which would set fair, clear, and enforceable rules to promote competition and strengthen consumer protections within the app market. Google and Apple currently have gatekeeper control of the two dominant mobile operating systems and their app stores that allow them to exclusively dictate the terms of the app market, inhibiting competition and restricting consumer choice.

    “The days of Big Tech’s anticompetitive, price-gouging business practices are over;” saidSenator Durbin. “Our bipartisan Open App Markets Act places important limits on dominant gatekeeping companies in the app store market, like Apple and Google. These clear, fair, and enforceable rules will open the app markets back up to competition and give consumers more choices. I look forward to working with Republicans and Democrats to make it law.”
    BACKGROUND
    Mobile devices are central to consumers’ economic, social, and civic lives, and the mobile app market is a significant part of the digital economy. In 2024 alone, consumers worldwide spent 92 billion U.S. dollars on the Apple App Store, and about 35.7 billion U.S. dollars on the Google Play Store.
    Both Apple and Google have appeared to use their powerful gatekeeper control to stifle competition in the app store market.
    Apple has prevented the creation of third-party app stores on iPhones, required that apps exclusively use their own expensive payment system, and penalized app developers for telling users about discounted offers.
    These strict terms close off avenues of competition and drive up prices for consumers.
    Startups also face serious challenges when Big Tech gatekeepers are able to prioritize their own apps to the disadvantage of others, make use of competitors’ confidential business information, and block developers from using features on a consumer’s phone.
    THE OPEN APP MARKETS ACT
    The Open App Markets Act would:
    Protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing;
    Protect sideloading of apps;
    Promote competition by opening the market to third-party app stores, startup apps, and alternative payment systems;
    Make it possible for developers to offer new experiences that take advantage of consumer device features;
    Give consumers greater control over their devices;
    Prevent app stores from disadvantaging developers; and
    Establish safeguards to preserve consumer privacy, security, and safety.
    Click here for bill text.
    ENDORSEMENTS
    The Open App Markets Act is endorsed by numerous technology and consumer groups, including Spotify, the American Economic Liberties Project, the American Principles Project, Epic Games, the Bull Moose Project,  the Coalition for App Fairness, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy, the Digital First Project, the Digital Progress Institute, The Ethics and Public Policy Center, the Foundation for American Innovation, the Internet Accountability Project, the National Security Institute, Proton, Public Knowledge, Tech Oversight Project, and Y Combinator:

    “We applaud Senators Blackburn and Blumenthal for reintroducing the Open App Markets Act, continuing the fight for a free and fair internet in the United States. This bill takes a targeted, strategic approach that will create more economic opportunity, unlock innovation, reduce barriers for businesses and creators, and give American consumers lower prices and more control over purchases made through their iPhones,” said Dustee Jenkins, Spotify Chief Public Affairs Officer.

    “Hundreds of billions of dollars pass through mobile app stores annually, and both Apple and Google have gone to extraordinary, illegal lengths to make sure they are the only stores in town, stealing untold billions from developers and consumers in the process. While Apple and Google drag out their appeals in federal court, the Open App Markets Act would tear down walled gardens, stimulate innovation, and protect developers and consumers from unfair app store taxes today,” said Lee Hepner, Senior Counsel, American Economic Liberties Project.

    “The American Principles Project strongly supports the Open App Markets Act as essential legislation to protect American families from Big Tech’s monopolistic control. Apple and Google’s stranglehold over the app marketplace has created a rigged system that stifles economic opportunity for small businesses and undermines free expression online. This legislation will restore free market principles while ensuring that families have access to diverse viewpoints and applications that reflect their values. The current 30 percent tax imposed by these gatekeepers amounts to corporate welfare for Big Tech at the expense of Main Street America, and it’s time for Congress to stand with American families and small businesses against Silicon Valley’s unchecked power,” stated the American Principles Project.

    “The Open App Markets Act is a must-pass bill that would force Apple and Google to end their anticompetitive mobile app store practices. Apple and Google’s unfair terms and exorbitant fees stifle competition and crush innovation, hurting developers and consumers alike. We look forward to swift passage of this bill and an open mobile app ecosystem in the U.S. with alternative app stores and in-app payment systems,” said Bakari Middleton, VP of Public Policy at Epic Games.

    “The future of digital innovation depends on fair access—not corporate gatekeeping. The Open App Markets Act is a crucial step towards breaking the stranglehold of Big Tech, levels the playing field, and puts power back where it belongs: with users and creators,” stated the Bull Moose Project.

    “CAF commends Senators Blackburn and Blumenthal for introducing the Open App Markets Act and Senators Lee and Klobuchar for co-sponsoring the bill. This groundbreaking, bipartisan legislation will open up Apple and Google’s mobile walled gardens to long-overdue competition. By banning harmful and anti-competitive practices, the bill would lead to lower prices and more choice  in how apps are accessed and distributed. Thanks to a recent court decision, US consumers are already benefiting from app developers offering alternative ways to make purchases. But legislation is needed to fully unlock the potential of the mobile app economy and unleash a competitive marketplace that benefits users and developers alike. We are grateful to Senators Blackburn and Blumenthal for their enduring leadership on these issues, and we encourage swift passage of this vital bill,” said Gene Burrus, Global Policy Counsel for the Coalition for App Fairness.

    “Imagine a fisherman sailing on a vast ocean yet having only two fishing poles from which to choose. This is our current mobile economy: vast seas of information, data, and innovation accessible only through the iron grip of the app-store duopoly of Google and Apple, who continue to game the rules in their favor. It’s time to open the digital high-seas for developers large and small, to spark more free-market innovation for America’s consumers and for our position as the global leader in digital technology,” stated Consumer Action for a Strong Economy.

    “Our team at Digital First Project is proud to support the reintroduction of the Open App Markets Act. This essential reform is a crucial step toward restoring competition and fairness in the digital marketplace by ending the gatekeeper control of dominant app store platforms such as Google and Apple. By promoting consumer choice and giving developers more freedom, this proposal fosters innovation among app developers and enables more choice for consumers,” stated theDigital First Project.

    “Apple and Google are the choke points of the mobile ecosystem and their Herculean control over app stores is at the heart of it. OAMA is a bipartisan, responsible approach to ensure the innovation economy can flourish and not be bridled by Big Tech. This is a welcomed and needed reform!” stated the Digital Progress Institute.

    “For years, Apple and Google have failed to protect children from harmful content on their app stores. Even worse, they have promoted inappropriate apps to children in their stores. But because of their market power, parents and children have no alternatives in the mobile ecosystem. The Open App Markets Act would enable different app stores and app distribution methods that cater to the specific needs of families. OAMA would critically allow for family-friendly and child-safe app stores to arise as competitors to give parents alternative options that better protect kids. I commend Senators Blackburn and Blumenthal for this effort and their continued leadership in protecting children from digital harms,” said Clare Morell, Fellow at The Ethics and Public Policy Center.

    “Apple and Google are the gatekeepers to the mobile ecosystem, and they have continually abused that power. Their app store monopoly rents are an effective tax on the entire app economy, and other anti-competitive practices have further limited choice and innovation. The Open App Markets Act would help lift the millstone that Apple and Google put on consumers and developers by bringing much-needed competition to mobile app stores and app distribution. I commend Senators Blackburn, Blumenthal, Lee, and Klobuchar for their leadership and urge all members of Congress to join this effort,” said Evan Swarztrauber, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation.

    “The reintroduction of the Open App Markets Act is another crucial step in the battle to rein in the unchecked power of Big Tech. Senators Blackburn and Blumenthal deserve credit for their continued bipartisan leadership and commitment to restoring fairness and competition in the app marketplace. Apple and Google have operated as unaccountable, monopolistic gatekeepers on the app store market for far too long. This bill would finally give small businesses and entrepreneurs a real shot to compete. The Internet Accountability Project proudly supports this legislation that stands up for fairness and competition,” stated the Internet Accountability Project.

    “I have observed in my doctoral thesis of 2017 that there is a de facto app store duopoly between Apple and Google, controlling which apps are seen and under which conditions. Whether an app can even be found requires an investment in app store optimization (ASO). App developers have only two means to access end users, and there is limited competition on the conditions, leaving app developers as price takers. While there are benefits of centralization of app markets, there are tradeoffs in privacy and choice. In any event, the scale of such concentration would bring regulatory scrutiny in any other industry. The two app stores have enjoyed a relative regulatory free ride for a long time. Few policymakers have been interested in taking on this behemoth. Hence I applaud Senator Blackburn and Senator Blumenthal for their leadership,” said Roslyn Layton, PhD, Senior Fellow at the National Security Institute.

    “App stores are the lifeblood of all digital companies, including disruptors like Proton. Gatekeepers like Apple and Google have been consolidating market power in their app marketplaces for years, ultimately to the detriment of consumers. They have exploited their control to impose extortionate conditions on developers, like compelling use of their own payment systems and charging 30% transaction fees. This amounts to a massive tax on the Internet, one that often gets passed onto consumers through higher prices or reduced investment in competitive innovations. Ending these monopoly abuses on mobile payments would not only create fairer prices, but also promote competition while benefiting developers and consumers alike. Proton applauds Senators Blumenthal, Blackburn, and X for recognizing these realities, and drafting a bill that would unleash a seismic level of innovation,” said Andy Yen, Founder & CEO of Proton.

    “Too often, the tech giants have controlled the app marketplace, dictating who gets access and under what terms. The Open App Markets Act represents a much-needed shift toward a more competitive, open ecosystem where developers are empowered to innovate and users are the ultimate beneficiaries. We need policies that prioritize security, transparency, and choice, rather than allowing corporations to dictate the rules. It’s time for users, not Big Tech, to decide what apps thrive in the marketplace. This bill is a step toward restoring market fairness and putting users back in the driver’s seat,” stated Public Knowledge.

    “Google and Apple’s app store monopolies have not only artificially inflated prices, they’ve also blocked new and innovative products from hitting the market. Their gatekeeping has been a drag on our entire economy, and it’s time to make their monopolies illegal. The Open App Markets Act will help dislodge app store monopolies, lower prices, and build a better, more open internet,” said Sacha Haworth, Executive Director of the Tech Oversight Project.

    “This bipartisan legislation ends the practice of dominant app stores forcing their own payment systems and self-preferencing, while giving consumers the freedom to install and set third-party stores and payment options—common-sense rules already embraced in other markets. Enacting it will spur competition, lower prices, and unleash a new wave of American innovation that keeps our startup ecosystem the most dynamic in the world,” said Luther Lowe, Head of Public Policy for Y Combinator.
    RELATED

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell, Outdoor Rec Reps All Say America’s Public Lands Are Not For Sale

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

    06.24.25

    Cantwell, Outdoor Rec Reps All Say America’s Public Lands Are Not For Sale

    Senate could vote later this week on proposal to force sale of millions of federally-owned acres across Western states, including iconic hiking, climbing, hunting spots

    WASHINGTON, D.C. –Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), a senior member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, joined the mayor of Boise, professional climbers, a leader from outdoor gear retailer REI, and a spokesperson for a hunting and angling advocacy group for a virtual press conference to push back on the GOP’s plans to force the sale of millions of acres of public lands as part of a budget bill likely to be voted on by the full Senate later this week.

    “The proposal we see so far would mandate a sale of 2 to 3 million acres of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management land all across the West, and it would make up to 250 million acres of public lands eligible to be sold. Every Western state, that is, except for Montana — because … somehow there’s a ‘Big Sky Swindle’ in the deal,” Sen. Cantwell said. “We’re here to say that we want our public lands protected. We want to be able to continue to hike, fish, hunt and do as much as we can. We don’t want hunters to face a ‘no trespassing’ sign on lands that they’ve hunted on for generations. We don’t want anglers to be blocked from world-class fishing grounds. We don’t want places that climbers and hikers and outdoor recreationists have gone to for years, all of a sudden, to be turned into luxury resorts or golf courses. They are at their highest and best use, and they are beautiful places that have been preserved for all of the American people to enjoy.”

    “The representatives voting for this are in deeply red — oftentimes — places, because that’s where BLM and national forest land is, and that’s where I spend the majority of my time,” said professional climber Tommy Caldwell. “They’re going to change the character of the places they care the most about, and it’s really their constituency that’s going to suffer the most.”

    “I’m looking out of my office right now at two distinct areas that are put at risk with this proposal to sell off public lands,” said Boise Mayor Lauren McLean. “And for over 20 years, we have a legacy of putting forward ballot measures to protect these lands, so that they’re saved in perpetuity for generations after us. But the system that our residents have created that’s right up against our downtown core is at risk.”

    The Senate Republican proposal comes as part of a larger Trump Administration push to privatize public lands. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has stated on multiple occasions that public lands should be recognized as valuable assets on the nation’s balance sheet and potentially used to generate revenue. Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive order that described the nation’s natural resources and public lands as a “sum of asset value,” in the context of establishing a “Sovereign Wealth Fund.”  Subsequently, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, proposed greenlighting the sale of over 250 millions of acres of public lands, which could constitute the “largest single sale of national public land in modern history.”  While last night the Senate Parliamentarian rejected Lee’s opening gambit, deeming the proposal ineligible under budget reconciliation process rules, Lee responded, “I’m doing everything I can to support President Trump and move this forward.” He promised, “We’re just getting started.”

    The original version of the bill would have required the federal government to sell or transfer at least 0.5% and up to 0.75% of land owned by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, or between 2.1 million and 3.2 million acres. The proposal would have also established a process for potential purchasers, states, and local governments to nominate federal land to be sold, endangering more than 250 million acres across 11 states, with public lands in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming eligible for sale. A political side deal exempted any sales of federal land in Montana. Senator Lee has indicated he has submitted a revised proposal to the parliamentarian, which may exclude Forest Service lands and modify the eligibility of Bureau of Reclamation parcels, but the legislative text detailing the size and scope of any proposed land sales will remain fluid and is unlikely to be finalized or available for public review until shortly before the Senate votes on the measure.

    Sen. Cantwell is strongly opposed to selling off federal lands. In a committee hearing on June 10, she took U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to task over the administration’s alarming budget proposal for the Department of the Interior: “We’re all amazed that you seem to be putting forth a budget that is basically saying, ‘I don’t want to acquire. I want to actually sell public lands,’” she said.

    Sen. Cantwell was joined at today’s virtual press conference by:

    • Lauren McLean, Mayor of Boise
    • Susan Viscon, REI-Co-op Executive & Outdoor Industry Association Board Member 
    • Kaden McArthur, Director of Policy, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers

    Video of today’s virtual press conference is available HERE; a transcript is HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: 2025 Summer Davos sees sustainability and AI meet global collaboration

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    Guests attend the parallel session “Checking In on the Energy Transition” during the 2025 Summer Davos Forum at the National Convention and Exhibition Center (Tianjin) in north China’s Tianjin Municipality, June 24, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]

    A premier barometer of global economic trends and industrial transformation, the 2025 Summer Davos Forum has seen record attendance for recent years, with over 1,700 participants traveling from around the world.

    Its popularity is testament to both the convening power of the event, which is taking place from Tuesday to Thursday in north China’s Tianjin Municipality, and the unparalleled magnetism of China’s mega-scale market.

    Also called the 16th Annual Meeting of New Champions of the World Economic Forum (WEF), this year’s forum is themed “Entrepreneurship for a New Era.”

    “The theme, which builds on the DNA of this meeting since its inception, particularly focuses on how innovation, entrepreneurship and technological advancements can unlock growth, competitiveness and productivity,” Mirek Dusek, managing director of the WEF, said on Tuesday at the forum’s opening press conference.

    The event spotlights five key areas: deciphering the world economy, outlook on China, industries disrupted, investing in people and the planet, and new energy and materials.

    Unlike the annual meeting of the WEF held every January in Switzerland’s Davos, the Summer Davos Forum places greater emphasis on the future of business and technological advancement. This year’s edition not only demonstrates China’s achievements in high-quality economic development and its steadfast commitment to high-standard opening-up to the international community — it is also a platform for China to actively share the opportunities and dividends of its development with the world.

    Green transformation 

    On the rooftop of the National Convention and Exhibition Center (Tianjin), where the 2025 Summer Davos Forum is being held for the first time, solar panels supply continuous clean energy to power the venue during the event.

    According to the State Grid Corporation of China, this edition of the forum has achieved a 100 percent green power supply for its venues, utilizing a total of 800,000 kilowatt-hours of renewable electricity — equivalent to saving about 300 tonnes of standard coal combustion and cutting approximately 600 tonnes of carbon emissions.

    The venue utilizes photovoltaic power generation and sponge city technologies, replacing conventional energy sources with renewables to reduce infrastructure carbon emissions, while significantly enhancing energy, water and material efficiency.

    Sustainability is at the core of WEF events, said Severin Podolak, head of event management and operations for WEF, adding that the sofas and other furniture used in the venues are recycled materials from 2023, and some of the paints used for decoration were derived from renewable resources such as fishing nets.

    Additionally, a fleet of hundreds of new energy vehicles (NEVs) from six leading carmakers, including Audi FAW, are facilitating eco-conscious transportation for forum participants, advancing the event’s carbon neutrality goals.

    The concept of sustainability has been integrated thoroughly — from venue design to the forum’s agenda, with key topics such as Asia’s carbon markets and the next steps for climate resilience becoming focal points of discussions, addressing sustainable development directly.

    Green nitrogen fixation has been named in the WEF’s Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2025, alongside innovations like collaborative sensing and autonomous biochemical sensing, further solidifying sustainability as a global priority.

    Today, China stands as the global leader in renewable energy investment. The nation has pioneered transformative technologies in the fields of batteries and electric vehicles, creating millions of high-quality jobs in these future-oriented sectors, according to Gim Huay Neo, managing director of the WEF.

    “I think this is an area where there’s a lot of scope for us to learn from China’s experience, where there could actually be constructive partnerships between China and other parts of the world to also support the global energy transition,” Neo said. “The climate emergency and the planetary crisis cannot be resolved if we do not bring everybody along on this journey.”

    AI revolution

    A futuristic exhibition zone at the venue has become a major attraction, where cutting-edge AI products like humanoid robots, brain-computer interfaces and fully autonomous drone inspection systems are drawing large crowds of attendees. These innovations vividly showcase Chinese enterprises’ technological breakthroughs and pioneering applications of AI.

    “China may have found the key to restarting global economic growth — its ‘AI Plus’ strategy,” said Liu Gang, chief economist of the Chinese Institute of New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Strategies.

    He explained that integrating artificial intelligence with the real economy yields remarkable economic benefits. For example, research conducted by his team shows that applying AI to the development of new materials can improve efficiency 100-fold to 1,000-fold.

    Across various sessions at the 2025 Summer Davos, discussions on AI are unfolding with remarkable intensity, mirroring the fervent debates witnessed at other premier global forums. Notably, a dedicated session titled “Understanding China’s approach to AI” will be convened, underscoring the international community’s growing recognition of China’s pivotal role in the global AI development landscape.

    “It will be like the industrial revolution,” former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said when talking about new technologies at the forum. Countries that embrace it go up, and countries that don’t go down, he said.

    “I think how you understand, master and harness the technology revolution solution is the single biggest government challenge for the 21st century,” he noted.

    Global synergy 

    According to the WEF, the global growth outlook has reached its lowest point in decades. Reigniting the spirit of cooperation will require greater commitment and creativity than ever before.

    Professor Tong Jiadong at Nankai University, who has served as the long-term Chinese agenda research leader for the Tianjin Summer Davos Forum, observed that the event has evolved beyond a premier global thought leadership summit into a dynamic platform facilitating international exchange and cooperation.

    Zhao Yan, chairman and general manager of Chinese firm Bloomage Biotech, has been a regular participant at the Summer Davos Forum. Over the years, the company has established a comprehensive global supply chain network across over 70 countries and regions.

    “Despite navigating complex uncertainties, the enterprise has never resorted to isolationism, but instead strives to reshape global competition rules through open innovation,” Zhao said.

    In the first five months of this year, the total volume of China’s imports and exports of goods grew 2.5 percent year on year, and the consumption enthusiasm of foreign visitors surged significantly.

    “We value our cooperation with China very much. We’re seeing more and more interest and participation coming here,” said Borge Brende, president and CEO of the WEF. “I’m relatively optimistic for the Chinese economy, both in medium term and long term.”

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A chance discovery of a 350 million-year-old fossil reveals a new type of ray-finned fish

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Conrad Daniel Mackenzie Wilson, PhD candidate in Earth Sciences, Carleton University

    An artist’s rendition of the newly discovered fish, _Sphyragnathus tyche_. (C. Wilson), CC BY

    In 2015, two members of the Blue Beach Fossil Museum in Nova Scotia found a long, curved fossil jaw, bristling with teeth. Sonja Wood, the museum’s owner, and Chris Mansky, the museum’s curator, found the fossil in a creek after Wood had a hunch.

    The fossil they found belonged to a fish that had died 350 million years ago, its bony husk spanning nearly a metre on the lake bed. The large fish had lived in waters thick with rival fish, including giants several times its size. It had hooked teeth at the tip of its long jaw that it would use to trap elusive prey and fangs at the back to pierce it and break it down to eat.

    For the last eight years, I have been part of a team under the lead of paleontologist Jason Anderson, who has spent decades researching the Blue Beach area of Nova Scotia, northwest of Halifax, in collaboration with Mansky and other colleagues. Much of this work has been on the tetrapods — the group that includes the first vertebrates to move to land and all their descendants — but my research focuses on what Blue Beach fossils can tell us about how the modern vertebrate world formed.

    Blue Beach Fossil Museum curator Chris Mansky below the fossil cliffs.
    (C. Wilson), CC BY

    Birth of the modern vertebrate world

    The modern vertebrate world is defined by the dominance of three groups: the cartilaginous fishes or chondrichthyans (including sharks, rays and chimaeras), the lobe-finned fishes or sarcopterygians (including tetrapods and rare lungfishes and coelacanths), and the ray-finned fishes or actinopterygians (including everything from sturgeon to tuna). Only a few jawless fishes round out the picture.

    This basic grouping has remained remarkably consistent — at least for the last 350 million years.

    Before then, the vertebrate world was a lot more crowded. In the ancient vertebrate world, during the Silurian Period (443.7-419.2 MA) for example, the ancestors of modern vertebrates swam alongside spiny pseudo-sharks (acanthodians), fishy sarcopterygians, placoderms and jawless fishes with bony shells.

    Armoured jawless fishes had dwindled by the Late Devonian Period (419.2-358.9 MA), but the rest were still diverse. Actinopterygians were still restricted to a few species with similar body shapes.

    By the immediately succeeding early Carboniferous times, everything had changed. The placoderms were gone, the number of species of fishy sarcopterygians and acanthodians had cratered, and actinopterygians and chondrichthyans were flourishing in their place.

    The modern vertebrate world was born.

    A shortnose chimaera, belonging to the chondrichthyan group of vertebrates.
    (Shutterstock)

    A sea change

    Blue Beach has helped build our understanding of how this happened. Studies describing its tetrapods and actinopterygians have showed the persistence of Devonian-style forms in the Carboniferous Period.

    Whereas the abrupt end-Devonian decline of the placoderms, acanthodians and fishy sarcopterygians can be explained by a mass extinction, it now appears that multiple types of actinopterygians and tetrapods survived to be preserved at Blue Beach. This makes a big difference to the overall story: Devonian-style tetrapods and actinopterygians survive and contribute to the evolution of these groups into the Carboniferous Period.

    But significant questions remain for paleontologists. One point of debate revolves around how actinopterygians diversified as the modern vertebrate world was born — whether they explored new ways of feeding or swimming first.

    Comparing the jawbones of Sphyragnathus, Austelliscus and Tegeolepis.
    (C. Wilson), CC BY

    The Blue Beach fossil was actinopterygian, and we wondered what it could tell us about this issue. Comparison was difficult. Two actinopterygians with long jaws and large fangs were known from the preceding Devonian Period (Austelliscus ferox and Tegeolepis clarki), but the newly found jaw had more extreme curvature and the arrangement of its teeth. Its largest fangs are at the back of its jaw, but the largest fangs of Austelliscus and Tegeolepis are at the front.

    These differences were significant enough that we created a new genus and species: Sphyragnathus tyche. And, in view of the debate on actinopterygian diversification, we made a prediction: that the differences in anatomy between Sphyragnathus and Devonian actinopterygians represented different adaptations for feeding.

    Front fangs

    To test this prediction, we compared Sphyragnathus, Austelliscus and Tegeolepis to living actinopterygians. In modern actinopterygians, the difference in anatomy reflects a difference in function: front-fangs capture prey with their front teeth and grip it with their back teeth, but back-fangs use their back teeth.

    Since we couldn’t observe the fossil fish in action, we analyzed the stress their teeth would experience if we applied force. The back teeth of Sphyragnathus handled force with low stress, making them suited for a role in piercing prey, but the back teeth of Austelliscus and Tegeolepis turned low forces into significantly higher stress, making them best suited for gripping.

    We concluded that Sphyragnathus was the earliest actinopterygian adapted for breaking down prey by piercing, which also matches the broader predictions of the feeding-first hypothesis.

    Substantial work remains — only the jaw of Sphyragnathus is preserved, so the “locomotion-first” hypothesis was untested. But this represents the challenge and promise of paleontology: get enough tantalizing glimpses into the past and you can begin to unfold a history.

    As for the actinopterygians, research indicates they survived and diversified during Devonian times and had shifting roles during the birth of the modern vertebrate world — at least until more fossils are found that could determine whether that’s the case.

    Conrad Daniel Mackenzie Wilson receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Ontario Student Assistance Program, and the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology.

    – ref. A chance discovery of a 350 million-year-old fossil reveals a new type of ray-finned fish – https://theconversation.com/a-chance-discovery-of-a-350-million-year-old-fossil-reveals-a-new-type-of-ray-finned-fish-254246

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Speech at 2025 Looking Ahead Infrastructure Symposium: Building Common Ground

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Opening 
     
    Good morning. It’s great to be here today for the release of the draft National Infrastructure Plan – or the NIP.
     
    I’d like to thank Raveen Jaduram, Geoff Cooper, and the entire team at the Infrastructure Commission for hosting this Symposium and for their hard work on putting the NIP together. 
     
    I’d also like to welcome you all to Parliament.
     
    Improving how we plan, fund, maintain and build our infrastructure is critical to lifting productivity, boosting economic growth, and increasing peoples’ living standards.
     
    The government has made infrastructure a top priority.
     
    So, I welcome today’s draft report by the independent Infrastructure Commission.
     
    We need a Plan, and action
     
    As Minister for Infrastructure, I hear regularly that – “what New Zealand needs is a long-term infrastructure plan that transcends political cycles”. 
     
    I agree – a plan will give the private sector more certainty so that they can invest in people and equipment. It will also help New Zealanders build consensus on what our future infrastructure system should look like.
     
    But a plan is only as good as it’s execution. So, the NIP will only be successful if it is – at least in part – accepted and adopted across successive governments over the long term. 
     
    As I’m sure most of you know, this isn’t our first plan; we have been here before. New Zealand had infrastructure plans in 2010, 2011, and 2015.
     
    Some recommendations in these older plans are identical to those put forward in this Plan – over a decade later. 
     
    I’m thinking of things like agencies completing 10-year capital plans and making better use of pricing tools.
     
    What differentiates this Plan is that it has been developed independently by the Infrastructure Commission – separate from the Government of the day.
     
    The NIP is not this Government’s Plan, it is New Zealand’s Plan. 
     
    That is why each political party represented in Parliament was offered a briefing on the NIP last year. And I would like to thank the opposition spokespeople for infrastructure for being here today.
     
    Building greater consensus on infrastructure is, unfortunately, not as simple as different political parties getting in a room and convincing each other of the other’s view.
     
    That’s not realistic. Instead, consensus will be enabled by strong system and institutions, robust investment frameworks, high-quality evidence of our infrastructure needs, and advocacy for projects and policies from a better-informed public.
     
    That’s what this Plan is about – independent experts advising New Zealand on the current state of infrastructure, what we need in the future, and the projects and policy reforms that will bridge this gap in the most effective and value for money way.
     
    People often say we need a bipartisan infrastructure pipeline, as if that will solve all problems.
     
    We do have a robust infrastructure pipeline. The Commission has been running it for over five years, and it’s been progressively improved over that time.
     
    The Pipeline includes over 8,000 initiatives underway and in planning from 114 contributing organisations. It represents over $200 billion in investment value – with over $110 billion of the Pipeline having a funding source confirmed. 
     
    I can’t claim to speak for all the parties in Parliament, but I suspect that almost all of the projects underway right now are supported by everyone. 
     
    It’s the high profile and high-cost disagreements that make the headlines. But it’s the low profile and often low-cost projects that actually make New Zealand.
    A lot of people don’t know we have a pipeline. It’s actually really cool – you can go online and search projects by region, timeline, project status, project value, provider, procurement type, and much more. 
     
    The Commission is strengthening the Pipeline by aiming to cover all infrastructure providers. There are 14 laggard councils who aren’t contributing, and I’ll be writing to them to get them on board. Having visibility over everything that’s happening, and going to happen, is very important.
     
    But I reckon we need to move away from the rhetoric of needing a bipartisan pipeline and instead build bipartisan consensus on the idea that governments of all flavours should use best-practice to plan, select, fund and finance, deliver, and look after infrastructure.
     
    That’s not the case at the moment.
     
    We need change
     
    It is quite clear that our infrastructure system needs to change. It’s one of my biggest takeaways from our first 18 months in government. I’ve been shocked at the near systemic neglect of the underlying institutional settings and policy frameworks. 
     
    Contrary to many perceptions, New Zealand spends a lot on infrastructure. 
     
    We are in the top 10 per cent of the OECD for infrastructure investment over the last decade – but in the bottom 10 per cent when it comes to getting quality and “bang for buck” from our spending. 
    The cause of our problem is not isolated – it is spread across every stage of a project’s life, across different players in the system, and is perpetuated by decades of poor practice across successive governments. 
     
    Over the last few years, New Zealanders have seen and felt the consequences of poor practice including:

    assets that are wearing out and failing,
    project cost blowouts,
    poor value for money investments, and
    a growing infrastructure deficit.  

     
    If we keep doing things the way we are now, we won’t be able to deal with “business as usual”, let alone get a grip on the challenges we are facing like:

    a significant backlog of maintenance and renewal activity,
    population change,
    natural hazards,
    and global inflation. 

     
    To put this in perspective – over the next 30 years, every year, central government’s existing infrastructure assets is expected to wear out by $9.3 billion.
     
    To keep up with this and other challenges, as the Commission says, we need to “lift our game”.
     
    Taking action
     
    Over the last 18 months I’ve been focused on six priorities as Infrastructure Minister:
     
     

    Developing a 30-year National Infrastructure Plan,
    Establishing National Infrastructure Funding and Financing Ltd (NIFFCo),
    Improving infrastructure funding and financing
    Improving the consenting framework
    Improving education and health infrastructure, and
    Strengthening asset management.

     
    I didn’t pick these priorities randomly. They reflect findings and recommendations from the Infrastructure Commission’s Infrastructure Strategy, developed in 2022, and are also based on a big programme of work we undertook in opposition engaging with experts from here and overseas.
     
    I am really pleased to see that many of the recommendations of the draft NIP reflect these priorities. This indicates that as a government we’re heading in the right direction.
     
    I want to mention a few in particular as they pick up on a few themes coming through in the draft NIP.
     
    Improving infrastructure funding and financing 
     
    Let’s start with improving infrastructure funding and financing. 
     
    Public infrastructure in New Zealand has historically been primarily funded by taxpayers or ratepayers. 
     
    But our reliance on this blunt approach is not serving us well and has led to perverse outcomes including congestion, run-down assets, and the unresponsive provision of enabling infrastructure – contributing to unaffordable housing.
     
    Last year, we released a suite of new and improved frameworks and guidance including:
     

    Treasury’s new Funding and Financing framework,
    The Government’s refreshed PPP policy,
    Strategic Leasing Guidance, and
    Guideline for Market Led Proposals. 

     
    The purpose of these documents is to help the Government use its balance sheet more strategically, apply good commercial disciplines to investment, and be a more sophisticated client of infrastructure. 
     
    This year, I have focused on establishing new funding and financing tools. In February, I announced five specific changes to New Zealand’s funding and financing toolkit to make it easier for councils and central government to provide infrastructure to support urban growth. 
     
    I won’t cover these in detail today, but the key takeaway is that we are moving to a system and to tools where councils can fully recover the costs of housing growth, and where infrastructure providers can recover costs of significant and city-shaping projects.  
     
    I am happy to see the draft National Infrastructure Plan make recommendations that align with our Government’s direction on funding and financing – such as making better use of pricing, user charging, and beneficiary pays.
     
    Improving the consenting framework
     
    Secondly, our consenting environment.
     
    As successive reports from the Commission have noted, our consenting system for infrastructure is broken.
     
    It takes too long and costs way too much.
     
    We are on track to replace the RMA with new legislation next year. Our new system will be effects based, embrace standardisation, and be far more permissive and enabling – while also protecting the environment. 
     
    We also aren’t willing to wait for a growth-enabling planning system, so in the meantime, last year we introduced the Fast Track Approvals Act. It’s underway now.
     
    We’re consulting right now on a big programme of National Direction changes under the RMA, including developing a National Policy Statement on Infrastructure. It’s baffling that we haven’t had one.
     
    We are also progressing our second RMA amendment Bill, which will pass into law in a matter of weeks. 
     
    This Bill is a precursor to full replacement of the RMA and will make it quicker and simpler to consent renewable energy and boost housing supply.
     
    Strengthening asset management 
     
    Lastly, before we move onto the draft Plan – I want to talk about my strengthening asset management.
     
    Asset management may not be the sexiest aspect of the infrastructure system – as it has to compete with new, big, and exciting projects – but everyone knows, if you don’t paint the weatherboards on your house, the wood will rot. 
     
    And billion-dollar infrastructure is fundamentally no different.
     
    Last year, I was shocked and quite frankly embarrassed to hear that New Zealand ranks fourth to last in the OECD for asset management, and dead last for the metric on Accountability and Professionalism. 
     
    But this is not surprising when you look at the performance of our central government investment system.
     
    Over half of all capital-intensive government agencies do not have robust, comprehensive asset registers or asset management plans in place. Maintenance spending is also regularly diverted to building new infrastructure, resulting in costly catch-up spending later. 
     
    Years of poor asset management has led to leaky hospitals and schools, mould in police stations and courthouses, service outages on commuter rail, and poor accommodation for Defence Force personnel and their families. 
     
    This is not good enough.
     
    In May this year, Cabinet agreed to a comprehensive work programme that will improve asset management practice across central government.
     
    The aim of this work is to provide safer, longer lasting and more reliable and resilient infrastructure services; and to achieve better value for money by making the most of what we have.
     
    This work programme will take place across two phases and will be led by Treasury and the Infrastructure Commission. 
     
    Phase 1 is about giving agencies better tools to help them succeed. This includes detailed guidance that agencies will need to follow on asset management; long-term planning; and related performance, assurance, and accountability indicators
     
    Phase 2 is about driving more fundamental changes to system settings and will actually be informed by the National Infrastructure Plan – particularly Chapters 4, Setting up Infrastructure for Success; and Chapter 5, Driving Excellence from the Core.
     
    Draft National Infrastructure Plan
     
    So, let’s talk about the National Infrastructure Plan. 
     
    I haven’t had a chance to read the document in full as it was released today – but three things instantly stood out to me:
     

    The first is the Needs Analysis, or “Forward Guidance”,
    The second is the Infrastructure Priorities Programme, which InfraCom has put in Chapter 6, and
    The third is how we can change the Investment Management System to get better infrastructure outcomes.

     
    Forward guidance
     
    On the Forward Guidance, it was interesting to see how our investment mix will need to change to meet future demand. 
     
    While total spend on infrastructure will increase, the relative priority between sectors will change overtime. 
    This is due to long-term trends that boost demand for some infrastructure and reduce it for others. For example, an aging population will increase relative demand for healthcare and hospitals; and decrease relative demand for education services and schools. 
     
    The Commission suggests that over the next 30 years hospitals, social housing, and electricity and gas sectors should all experience a rising share of infrastructure investment.
     
    I also found it helpful that the Commission’s Forward Guidance outlines a rough indication of how much we should expect to be spending by sector.
     
    In my view, forward guidance would be significantly strengthened in future if all agencies had provided the Commission with 10-year capital investment plans and asset management plans. This way, the Commission could provide more detailed and specific guidance on what bundle of projects across all sectors governments should be prioritising. 
     
    Infrastructure Priorities Programme 
     
    Moving on to the Infrastructure Priorities Programme, or the IPP – which is a structured independent review of unfunded infrastructure proposals. 
     
    The IPP is just starting out and it will take some time to scale and provide a robust investment menu, but I am glad to see the Commission received 48 submissions for their first round of evaluations.
     
    17 projects were positively endorsed, and three projects have been identified as being ‘investment ready’ – these are New Zealand Defence Forces’ Accommodation, Messing, and Dining Modernisation Project; Defence Forces’ Ohakea Base Project; and Hamilton City Council’s Ruakura Eastern Transport Corridor.
     
    I encourage all government agencies to submit their significant projects and programmes to the IPP. 
     
    A positive independent review will strengthen your case for investment.
     
    Improving the Investment Management System 
     
    Lastly, there are a number of recommendations in the draft Plan that aim to improve the Government’s investment system – which is made up of the rules and processes for how we plan, prioritise, fund and finance, delivered, and looked after investments – including infrastructure.
     
    For our Government to boost productivity, reduce the cost of living, and lift peoples’ prosperity, we need to get better value for money from our new infrastructure and do a better job at looking after our existing assets.   
     
    So, I am open to hearing about stronger rules such as legislative requirements for central government agencies and entities to prepare and publish long-term asset management plan, asset registers, and investment plans. 
     
     
    I am also open to legislative requirements for performance reporting to keep central government infrastructure entities accountable – like we do for regulated utilities and local government, who both face much stronger regulations and information disclosures requirements compared to central government. 
     
    We need to stop holding others to a higher standard than we do ourselves. 
     
    Overall, I am pleased to see the draft Plan makes recommendations that align with existing Government priorities, such as:

    making better use of user pricing to fund investment,
    adopting spatial planning,
    relaxing land-use restrictions,
    transport system reform,
    prioritising infrastructure through the resource management system, and
    drastically improving asset management. 

     
    The Government will continue to advance these policy priorities, and we will benefit from insights from the Plan. 
     
    The final National Infrastructure Plan will be given to me by the end of 2025. As the Plan is an independent Strategy report, the Government will provide a formal response to the Plan in 2026. 
     
    As part of that response, I will be engaging with other political parties in Parliament, and I intend to ask the Business Committee to hold a special Parliamentary debate on the final Plan early next year. 
     
    Conclusion
     
    I’d like to finish by thanking the Infrastructure Commission for its hard work in delivering this draft National Infrastructure Plan.
     
    I encourage everyone including agencies, local government, opposition parties, the private sector, the public to have their say on the draft Plan through the consultation process – and I look forward to receiving the final Plan by the end of this year.
     
    ENDS

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lankford Leads Senate Resolution After Deadly Antisemitic Attacks

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Oklahoma James Lankford

    Bipartisan resolution condemns antisemitic attacks in Washington, DC, and Boulder, Colorado

    WASHINGTON, DC — US Senators James Lankford (R-OK) and Jacky Rosen (D-NV) introduced a bipartisan resolution condemning antisemitism and the recent antisemitic attacks in the United States, specifically the brutal murders of Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky in Washington, DC, and the violent attack in Boulder, CO. Lankford and Rosen serve as co-chairs of the Senate Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism.

    “The recent brutal murders of Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky and the violent attack in Boulder are horrific reminders of the unfortunate rise in antisemitism across our country,” said Lankford. “This resolution makes it clear: we unequivocally condemn antisemitism in all its forms. Our Jewish friends and neighbors should not live in fear because of their faith and heritage, and this resolution affirms the right to live their faith freely.”

    “Communities across our country are experiencing an increase in antisemitic vandalism, threats, and violence that endangers the safety of Jewish Americans, like the recent attacks in Washington and Colorado,” said Rosen. “We have a responsibility to call out antisemitism and do everything we can to combat acts of hate in all of its forms. Senator Lankford and I introduced this bipartisan resolution to condemn recent attacks and recommit to doing all we can to tackle the alarming rise of antisemitic incidents. As one of the co-chairs of the Senate Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism, I look forward to continuing this important work.”

    “There is no place for antisemitism in our society,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune. “We must forcefully condemn antisemitic hate and do everything we can to stand with and protect our Jewish neighbors. I thank Senator Lankford for leading this bipartisan resolution and hope for a day where antisemitism is a thing of the past.”

    Joining Lankford and Rosen in co-sponsoring the resolution are Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), as well as Sens. Michael Bennet (D-CO), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Dave McCormick (R-PA), John Fetterman (D-PA) and Jerry Moran (R-KS).

    You can read the full text of the resolution HERE.

    Background

    The resolution comes amid a documented surge in antisemitic threats, violence, and rhetoric across the United States, particularly following the October 7, 2023, terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel. In 2024, the Anti-Defamation League recorded over 9,000 antisemitic incidents nationwide—a historic high—with more than half linked to anti-Israel sentiment. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) data also shows that Jewish Americans, who make up just 2.4% of the US population, were the target of 68% of all reported religiously motivated hate crimes in 2023.

    The resolution specifically condemns two recent antisemitic attacks: the May 21, 2025, shooting that killed Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky outside an American Jewish Committee event in Washington, DC, and the June 1, 2025, Molotov cocktail attack during a peaceful walk in Boulder, Colorado showing support for the hostages still held captive by Hamas. The resolution rightfully labels both attacks as the result of antisemitism, extremism, and political violence, which are threats not only to Jewish individuals but to all of society in the United States.

    Sarah Milgrim, a Jewish American from Kansas, and Yaron Lischinsky, an Israeli-German dual citizen, were both staffers at the Israeli Embassy in Washington. They were engaged in Middle East diplomacy, united by a shared passion for peacebuilding, and were planning their future together before their lives were tragically cut short.

    Lankford, who recently traveled to the Middle East, remains committed to defending religious liberty and combating antisemitism both at home and abroad.

    You can read the exclusive published in Jewish Insider HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Pettersen Joins Bipartisan War Powers Resolution

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Brittany Pettersen (Colorado 7th District)

    Today, U.S. Representative Brittany Pettersen (CO-07) joined two War Powers resolutions reaffirming that only Congress – as outlined in the Constitution – has the authority to declare war, while ensuring the U.S. retains the ability to defend itself from an imminent threat. 

    “These resolutions reaffirm what our Constitution makes very clear: only Congress has the power to authorize war – not a single person. 

    “Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is in the best interest of America, Israel, and the world. Unfortunately, it was Donald Trump who withdrew us from the Iran nuclear deal. Because of his diplomatic failure, Iran now has 60% enriched uranium, which is very near weapons grade, and does pose an existential threat. 

    “While I recognize the urgency, I am deeply concerned that Trump completely circumvented Congress, endangered American servicemembers and diplomats in the region, and put our national security at risk. 

    “Donald Trump, Congress, and the administration must work together to keep the American people safe, de-escalate tensions, and seek peace wherever possible while supporting our ally, Israel.”

    Pettersen joined two War Powers resolutions: H. Con. Res. 38, led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), and H. Con. Res. 40, introduced by Reps. Greg Meeks, Jim Himes, and Adam Smith, the Ranking Members of the House Foreign Affairs, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Armed Services Committees, respectively.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: McConnell on American Leadership; Standing with Israel and Ukraine

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kentucky Mitch McConnell

    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, delivered remarks on the Senate floor today regarding U.S. national security interests in standing with Israel, supporting Ukraine, and investing sufficiently in our own defense. Prepared text of his speech follows:

    “When Iran’s proxies launched a full-scale war on Israel on October 7th, 2023, President Biden pledged an ‘unwavering commitment to Israel’s security’. This was the right message in the moment. But as I warned publicly at the time, Israel needed more than rhetorical solidarity.

    “Like Ukraine, Israel needed precious time, space to maneuver, and material support to defeat a shared enemy. And yet, as in Ukraine, America’s commitment has indeed wavered. Our support has not been ironclad.

    “Instead, under the previous Administration, American support was delayed, restricted, and paired with attempts to micromanage Israeli operations and even interfere with Israeli politics. And at every turn, the progressive left and isolationist right hyperventilated about the specter of so-called forever war.

    “Fortunately, Israel held its ground. Israelis weren’t enthused about a ground war in Gaza. Their leaders knew that war would be difficult. But they knew it was unavoidable so long as Hamas terrorists still refused to release its hostages. They also knew lasting security meant changing Iran’s calculus…Not just responding to attacks from its proxies. So Israel decided to turn Iran’s terrorist assets into liabilities.

    “Despite the pearl-clutching here in Washington, our ally simultaneously decapitated Hizballah and crippled Hamas. Their bold operations created a new opportunity for Lebanon to claw back its sovereignty from a terrorist state within a state.

    “Meanwhile, the collapse of the brutal Assad regime in Syria brought down a Russian vassal and Iran’s favorite corridor of weapons and terrorist finance. These are the circumstances President Trump inherited. What to do with them has been the subject of some debate. Some of his advisors and supporters came with Obama-Biden-era talking points, ready to urge him to continue his predecessor’s policy of constraining Israel. Some had argued publicly that America had no vital or existential interests in the Middle East or claimed the region was a distraction from other priorities. They warned of forever war. Some seemed to push for nuclear negotiations with parameters eerily similar to the nuclear deal he withdrew from during his first term. They even proposed Iran could keep enriching uranium, until the President rightly quashed that idea.

    “These mixed messages emboldened Iran and its proxies. After all, why give up if Administration officials saw the Middle East as little more than a distraction?…or if they seem as fearful of restoring deterrence as the previous guys? So Hamas kept holding hostages. The Houthis kept targeting Israel and Red Sea commerce. And the Islamic Republic kept marching toward a nuclear weapon. And in response, Israel took the next logical step to restore deterrence.

    “Once again, innovative and decisive strikes destroyed Iran’s air defenses and imposed immediate costs on Tehran. And leaders from across Israel’s politics stood united behind the daring operations. But here in America, the same restrainers, anti-Israel progressives, and self-proclaimed realists warned again of regional conflagration if the President intervened alongside – or even supported – Israel’s strikes.

    “The President’s own Director of National Intelligence traveled to Hiroshima to record a bizarre video message – not as a warning against Tehran’s nuclear ambitions but, presumably, against American or Israeli operations to blunt them.

    “Fortunately, the President rejected the pleas of appeasers and isolationists. The strikes he ordered dealt a massive blow to Iran’s nuclear program, bolstered American credibility, and strengthened U.S. and Israeli leverage to end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and its support for terrorism for good.

    “Thanks to Israel’s heroic efforts for more than a year and a half, Iran’s ability to threaten regional stability is massively degraded. Not since before the Islamic revolution has there been such an opportunity for America, Israel, and our Arab partners to reset regional dynamics on such favorable terms. Achieving it has required no large-scale deployment of U.S. ground forces. It required only supporting our friends. Israel is a close ally and a strategic asset. Not a liability. And the strategic return on our investment in assisting Israel is incalculable.

    “Standing with our Israeli friends offers a powerful lesson about American leadership, the value of alliances and partnerships, and the real nature of peace through strength. And this lesson extends far beyond the Middle East. If America refuses to apply it elsewhere – like Ukraine – we do so at grave risk to our own interests. But that’s exactly what some in Washington seem to be doing. Congress recently learned that a senior DoD official conducted a review of DoD security assistance efforts and concluded that the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), among other programs, was wasteful. This is a Republican Administration panning a program created by a Republican Congress in 2015 to counter President Obama’s toothless response to Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine. I’d like to see the analysis behind the Administration’s decision to zero out USAI in its FY26 request. I’d like to hear them try to explain away the massive return on investment of America’s security assistance to Ukraine and the precious lessons we’ve learned from our Ukrainian partners.

    “The Secretary of the Army has rightly called Ukraine ‘the Silicon Valley of warfare’. Do his colleagues at the Pentagon think this assessment is wrong, or do they just not think access to the cutting edge of modern combat is valuable? Here’s the truth: USAI and other security assistance efforts have helped us measurably address shortcomings in strategy, capabilities, and production capacity that would have gone ignored until it was too late.

    “It’s an inconvenient reality for isolationists and restrainers, but – for a tiny percent of our defense budget – we helped a smaller military resist invasion by a vastly larger one and degrade a major U.S. adversary.

    “As with Israel, Ukraine is fighting an adversary of the United States. Our support does not entangle us in a far-off foreign conflict. For Russia, Iran, China, and North Korea, America is the main enemy – the great Satan. If these adversaries beat our friends, the threat to America become a thousand times greater. We should be grateful for friends so willing to defend our collective interests against common foes.

    “Partnership with Ukraine is teaching us what modern warfare could mean for U.S. forces when they do face direct conflict. It has tested our assumptions about munitions inventories, expenditure rates, electronic warfare, and the duration of conflict. Without Ukraine’s experience with U.S. weapons, we would have been surprised to find some advanced systems quickly rendered inoperable on future battlefields.

    “The money we invest in USAI on weapons for Ukraine expands our own production capacity in the process and will improve the quality of our own munitions. Supplemental appropriations on Ukraine and Israel, in turn, backfill our own stocks with brand-new capabilities – not just 155mm rounds, but air defenses and long-range fires, with specific investment in solid rocket motors. These investments help us prepare for conflict in the Indo-Pacific. And production would be slower in the absence of our partnership with Ukraine. Not doing more to address our growing defense needs isn’t a failure of foresight. It’s a failure of political will. Everyone wants to see an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine. But the price of peace matters. If we want enduring stability in Europe, we can’t fall for an illusory peace.

    “We should know enough history not to dismiss this as merely ‘a quarrel in a faraway country, between two people of whom we know nothing’. It’s a major war of conquest in Europe…The most significant since the days of Nazi Germany…And allies and adversaries half a world away are watching it closely for clues about America’s resolve. Certainly, Europe’s deepening commitments to collective defense will make real peace more enforceable. The President’s insistence has driven much of this progress; Putin’s brutality has reinforced it.

    “Since 2022, our European NATO allies have made historic investments in defense – often buying American. And many are preparing to make even larger commitments at this week’s NATO Summit. This is good news. But we can’t expect allies to continue signing up for 3.5% and 5% commitments if America insists on falling further behind. Likewise, we can’t expect Putin to end his aggression if he thinks America’s abandonment of Ukraine is only a matter of time. And we can’t expect anyone to take America’s threats and commitments seriously if we’re content to let our own strength atrophy.

    “A base budget request that cuts defense spending in real terms doesn’t show Moscow we’re serious – let alone Beijing. Leading from behind would be bad enough, but this is just plain falling behind. The strongest deterrence is denying an adversary’s objectives through military means. Israel is restoring this deterrence in the Middle East. Ukraine is achieving it by holding its own against Russia. But it needs help.

    “Recently, I’ve asked Administration officials simple questions, like: Who is the aggressor in this conflict? The answer is obvious. But a second, equally simple question seems to trip them up: Who do we want to win?

    “The President made the right call to stand with Israel. I hope he’ll also decide to stand with Ukraine, prevent Russian victory, and start reversing a dangerous, downward trend in our defense budgets. I hope he’ll recognize Russia’s attempt to ‘tap him along’ for what it is. Putin is getting mixed messages from Washington. He thinks he has time. He believes the West is weak and divided. But the President – at very little cost – can shatter this illusion. It’s time to impose sanctions, raise the price of Russia’s aggression, redouble security assistance to Ukraine, and drive the Kremlin to seek peace. It’s time for deterrence through denial.

    “There’s no surer path to just and enduring peace…No better way to demonstrate that peace through strength actually means something…No clearer sign to allies and adversaries watching closely from the Western Hemisphere to the Indo-Pacific that America still has the will to lead.”

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The ancients also had to deal with a cost-of-living crisis. Here’s how they managed

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Konstantine Panegyres, Lecturer in Classics and Ancient History, The University of Western Australia

    Louis Le Brun, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    Talk to anyone today, and they will probably have something to say about how expensive life has become. While the rate of inflation has slowed, prices for many goods and services are still much higher than pre-pandemic.

    Cost-of-living crises are not new. They have occurred at various times and places throughout the millennia.

    If we look at cost-of-living pressures in ancient Greek and Roman times and how people back then dealt with them, we can learn something about how to face our own issues.

    ‘The price of land has gone up’

    The cost of living was a conversation topic in antiquity, especially the price of land and food.

    The Roman writer Pliny the Younger (circa 61–113 CE) in one of his letters remarked to his friend about the rising cost of real estate:

    Have you heard that the price of land has gone up, particularly in the neighbourhood of Rome? The reason for the sudden increase in price has given rise to a good deal of discussion.

    The ancient Greek scholar Athenaeus, who lived in Naukratis, in Egypt, around 200 CE, wrote a long book called The Learned Banqueters, depicting a dinner party.

    The characters at this dinner party often complain about the price of food and goods. For example, one character complains about the price of fish:

    I don’t think I’ve ever seen fish more expensive. Poseidon, if you got 10% of what’s spent on them every day, you’d be far away the richest god there is!

    People often said that fish was exorbitantly expensive and thought fish sellers were trying to rip them off.

    In fact, the poet Antiphanes (circa 408–330 BCE) complained “there’s no group more abominable” than fish sellers and money lenders.

    How to lower costs?

    Ancient people were well aware that a cost-of-living crisis can cause political disturbances.

    As the Roman poet Lucan (39–65 CE) wrote:

    the causes of hatred and mainsprings of political popularity are determined by the price of food.

    So, how did ancient leaders deal with this sort of problem?

    One solution was for the ruler to cover the cost of inflation.

    For example, the Athenian statesman Demosthenes (384–322 BCE) mentions a problem with the price of grain that was solved by boosting imports:

    When grain earlier advanced in price and reached sixteen drachmae per medimnus, we imported more than ten thousand medimni of wheat, and measured it out at the normal price of five drachmae a medimnus.

    Alexander Severus helped trim the cost of meat.
    Creative commons, CC BY

    Another solution was to put extreme regulations on the market.

    For example, the Roman emperor Alexander Severus (ruled 222–235 CE) was once faced by a group of angry citizens.

    They demanded a reduction in the price of beef and pork, which had become unaffordable.

    Alexander Severus “did not proclaim a general reduction in prices”, says the anonymous biographer who recounts this anecdote. Instead, the emperor

    ordered that no one should slaughter a sow or a suckling pig, a cow, or a calf. In two years or even in little more than one year, there was such an abundance of pork and beef that while a pound previously cost eight minutili, the price of both these meats was reduced to two and even one per pound.

    The city is so expensive

    The Greek writer Plutarch of Chaeronea (46–119 CE) records a story about the famous philosopher Socrates (circa 470–399 BCE), who lived in Athens.

    One day, according to Plutarch, a friend of Socrates complained to him about “how expensive the city was”:

    Chian wine costs a mina, a purple robe three minae, a half-pint of honey five drachmas!

    In response, Socrates took his friend by the hand and told him to search for bargains or for cheaper items, saying:

    A sleeveless vest for ten drachmas! The city is cheap!

    Socrates’ point was that even in expensive times it’s still possible to find bargains to save money. You just have to look harder for them and lower your standard of living. It can be difficult to do that, but it’s necessary.

    Socrates also gave out employment advice for people who were struggling.

    According to Socrates’ friend, the historian Xenophon of Athens (430–350 BCE), when a poor veteran came to Socrates complaining about lack of money and asking how to cope with expenses, Socrates told him to

    take up some kind of work at once that will assure you a living when you get old.

    Socrates thought making sure you still have money when you
    are old is more important than fully enjoying your current job. You will likely have to put up with things you don’t like to achieve security.

    From ancient to modern

    Most ancient people would probably have said that during a cost-of-living crisis it’s best to be patient, live simply, and wait for better times to come.

    As Pliny the Younger (circa 61–113 CE) once wrote in one of his letters, “my income is small or precarious, but its deficiencies can be made up by simple living”.

    If politicians cannot solve the problems, then it is up to us to cope with them as best as we can.

    Konstantine Panegyres 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. The ancients also had to deal with a cost-of-living crisis. Here’s how they managed – https://theconversation.com/the-ancients-also-had-to-deal-with-a-cost-of-living-crisis-heres-how-they-managed-257896

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –