Category: Trumpism

  • MIL-OSI USA: MATSUI STATEMENT ON PRESIDENT TRUMP’S DEPLOYMENT OF NATIONAL GUARD TO LOS ANGELES

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)

    WASHINGTON D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07), released the following statement on President Trump’s deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles. 

    “President Trump’s deployment of the California National Guard is clearly meant to escalate the situation and deepen his culture of fear,” said Congresswoman Matsui. “Time and again, the Trump Administration has undermined the rule of law to extend unilateral power. That’s exactly what this is – a power grab to intimidate our immigrant communities and silence dissent. The National Guard is made up of our families and neighbors who volunteered to protect our country. Weaponizing them against their own communities is beyond shameful. Provoking chaos and division to justify seizing more power is unconscionable. As Californians, we cannot allow our immigrant communities to be unjustly targeted. Peaceful protest is not against the law.”

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Release: Timid tariff response fails New Zealanders

    Source: New Zealand Labour Party

    The Government is failing New Zealanders by ‘being comfortable’ with a 10 percent tariff on all goods going into the US.

    “The Prime Minister’s timid view undermines the work of New Zealand governments over decades to support a trading system that offers security for exporters, importers and consumers,” Labour trade spokesperson Damien O’Connor said.

    “The Government should not give up on getting a better deal for our hard-working exporters, or the rules-based system that New Zealand relies on.

    “It’s not just disappointing that the Government hasn’t been able to negotiate lower tariffs given the very low level of tariffs we impose on goods and services from the US, it could mean greater costs for all of New Zealanders.

    “Not only will there be a $900 million hit on our exports, we also have to consider how the ripple effect of tariffs on our trading partners such as China will affect prices on goods coming to New Zealand,” Damien O’Connor said.


    Stay in the loop by signing up to our mailing list and following us on FacebookInstagram, and X

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI USA News: SUNDAY SHOWS: Pass the One Big Beautiful Bill

    Source: US Whitehouse

    This morning, officials were out in force talking about the historic benefits of President Donald J. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, which will deliver unprecedented tax relief, generational welfare reform, and historic spending cuts.

    Here’s what you missed:

    • Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought: “It is $1.4 trillion in reduced deficits and debt. That’s why this is such a paramount, fiscally responsible bill.” (Watch)
    • Director Vought: “The conservatives that have historically used the debt limit to sound the alarm have been pushing for the very reforms that are in this bill, so we believe that it’s important to do it with Republican votes to not have to deal with the Senate filibuster, and we want to get it taken care of so that Chuck Schumer doesn’t have this hanging over the administration and the administration’s agenda over the next several years.” (Watch)
    • Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt: “This bill provides $1.6 trillion in mandatory savings — and when you combine that with the tariff revenue that President Trump’s America First trade agenda is bringing in … with the Council of Economic Adviser’s projected growth of 3%, we’re going to cut the deficit by $8 trillion over the next ten years.” (Watch)
    • Speaker Mike Johnson: “What we’re trying to is help hardworking Americans who are trying to provide for their families and make ends meet … This is going to be jet fuel to the U.S. economy. All wages are going to rise. There’s going to be more jobs and economic opportunity for more people. We cannot wait to deliver that.” (Watch)
    • National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett: “We put out a report from the Council of Economic Advisers that if the bill doesn’t pass, then they estimate that this would cause a reduction of GDP by 4%, we’d be in a deep recession, we’d lose six or seven million jobs.” (Watch)
    • Director Hassett: “The Congressional Budget Office put out a ten-year estimate that says that the tariff revenue that’s already in place right now is going to raise $2.8 trillion over the next ten years. That’s more than their own static estimate for the cost of this entire bill, so that’s deficit reduction right there.” (Watch)
    • Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum: “Permanent lower taxes, much lower regulation across the board, it’s pro-energy, it’s pro-seniors, it’s pro-farmers, it’s pro-border security — and it also cuts a bunch of spending. This thing is fantastic. This is Promises made, promises delivered by President Trump.” (Watch)
    • Senator Rick Scott: “We’ve got to get this bill passed … We have to stop this gigantic tax increase that Democrats are all for. We’ve got to secure the border. We’ve got to plus up the military.” (Watch)

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: WA leads multistate amicus opposing Trump’s public safety cuts

    Source: Washington State News

    SEATTLE – Washington state filed an amicus brief today decrying the Trump administration’s illegal budget cuts to public safety and in support of plaintiffs seeking to halt them.

    Building effective public safety systems requires engaging the people who experience crime and violence firsthand. Yet, two months ago, without warning and effective immediately, the Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs cancelled hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to community advocates, researchers, local governments, and law enforcement for programs that fill crucial gaps in the public social safety net.

    “Communities must be empowered to set public safety priorities and build solutions,” Attorney General Nick Brown said. “The federal government’s actions have gutted essential public safety programs nationwide. Apparently, preventing violence, supporting crime victims, and rehabilitating incarcerated people are no longer priorities of the Justice Department.”

    Washington state filed the brief with 17 others in a class-action lawsuit against the Justice Department challenging these illegal and arbitrary cuts. The lawsuit was brought by five community organizations, including Washington State’s Center for Children and Youth Justice, on behalf of the hundreds of organizations impacted by the funding cuts.

    Nationwide, the administration’s actions rescinded about $500 million in already approved grant funding that was yet to be disbursed.

    The administration eliminated programs that provide direct support to police and prosecutors, and other programs that complement law enforcement efforts. Many of the cancelled programs provide services that state and local governments are ill equipped or unable to provide. Other terminated programs support victims as they recover from the worst days of their lives. In Washington state, the cuts impacted the Center for Children & Youth Justice and National CASA/GAL, both of which provide support for young people navigating the justice system.

    The cuts will also impact programs in Washington that train sexual assault nurse examiners, who provide forensic examinations to sexual assault survivors. Research shows that victim access to these professionals can improve outcome for survivors and result in higher prosecution rates. These cuts would guarantee the continued shortage of forensic nurses, limit access to care for victims, and decrease the legal system’s capacity to investigate and prosecute sex offenders and human traffickers.

    Plaintiffs in the case have requested a preliminary injunction. That motion is pending in federal District Court for the District of Columbia.

    Joining Washington in the brief are Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and Rhode Island.

    Document: Amicus Brief 

    -30-

    Washington’s Attorney General serves the people and the state of Washington. As the state’s largest law firm, the Attorney General’s Office provides legal representation to every state agency, board, and commission in Washington. Additionally, the Office serves the people directly by enforcing consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental protection laws. The Office also prosecutes elder abuse, Medicaid fraud, and handles sexually violent predator cases in 38 of Washington’s 39 counties.

    Visit www.atg.wa.gov to learn more.

    Media Contact:

    Email: press@atg.wa.gov

    Phone: (360) 753-2727

    General contacts: Click here

    Media Resource Guide & Attorney General’s Office FAQ

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Sexual Assault in Clonavon Terrace Area

    Source: Traditional Unionist Voice – Northern Ireland

    North Antrim MP Jim Allister said:

    “The serious sexual assault in Ballymena is shocking in all respects. The apparent overlap with immigration tensions is an added dimension of concern.

    “Those commenting on social media should be careful not to prejudice the judicial process which must now bring justice to this situation.

    “Meanwhile my thoughts are very much with the young girl and her family.”

    TUV MLA Timothy Gaston added:

    “Once again Ballymena has hit the headlines for all the wrong reasons after another young girl was sexually assaulted.  My thoughts are with the girl at what must be a traumatic time.

    “Since being co-opted to Stormont I have constantly raised the concerns over immigration in Ballymena.

    “Over the last number of months I’ve also been pressing the Executive Office about its spending under the much-trumpeted Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy.

    “I am baffled that so much of the funding from this programme appears to have been awarded to councils for grants, rather than the primary agency responsible for crime prevention – the PSNI.

    “I am glad to see the police have two people arrested and they are in custody but I’m very concerned that this attack took place on the doorstep of the station.

    “The police need to be a visible presence within areas such as Clonavon to provide reassure to the public that this area of the town is safe.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: California stands united against chaotic and inflammatory federal takeover of California National Guard Unit

    Source: US State of California Governor

    Jun 8, 2025

    In case you missed it, last night, President Trump – disregarding Governor Newsom – federalized California National Guard troops in Los Angeles at a time when there were no unmet law enforcement needs. In fact, local law enforcement efforts successfully de-escalated the situation in Los Angeles County prior to any of Trump’s commandeered troops being deployed on the ground.

    US Senators

    • Senator Alex Padilla: “Couldn’t agree [with the Governor] more. Using the National Guard this way is a completely inappropriate and misguided mission. The Trump Administration is just sowing more chaos and division in our communities.” [LINK]
    • Senator Adam Schiff: “The Trump Administration’s calling on the California National Guard without the authorization of the Governor is unprecedented. This action is designed to inflame tensions, sow chaos, and escalate the situation. If the Guard is needed to restore peace, the Governor will ask for it. But continuing down this path will erode trust in the National Guard and set a dangerous precedent for unilateral misuse of the Guard across the country. Violence must stop, and we need to keep the focus on protecting fundamental rights. There is nothing President Trump would like more than a violent confrontation with protestors to justify the unjustifiable — invocation of the Insurrection Act or some form of martial law.” [LINK]

    Congressional delegation

    • Congresswoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove: “The Trump Administration’s immigration policies are sowing chaos and division in our communities. Deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles will only escalate an already tense situation and put more people at risk. I strongly urge Trump and the National Guard to stand down.” [LINK]
    • Congresswoman Laura Friedman: “Helpful federal action would be to offer assistance to help de-escalate & to commit to guaranteeing every person due process and humane treatment as required by law. The federal government taking over the National Guard is escalatory and unnecessarily hostile.” [LINK]
    • Congressman Jimmy Gomez: “The Trump admin trying to take over the CA National Guard and deploy troops in LA is reckless and inflammatory. There’s no unmet need, and this will only escalate tensions and erode public trust.” [LINK]
    • Congresswoman Norma Torres: “They yell ‘invasion’ at the border—but this is the real one: Trump is seizing control of California’s National Guard and forcing 2,000 troops into our streets. Every official swears an oath to protect and uphold the Constitution. @PeteHegseth, we follow the law, not Trump’s abuse of power.” [LINK]
    • Congressman Brad Sherman: “For all the reasons Governor Newsom stated, this action is unnecessary and intentionally provocative.” [LINK]
    • Congressman Salud Carbajal: “The Trump Administration’s deployment of the CA National Guard without the Governor’s approval is an unprecedented and dangerous escalation. Turning the members of the Guard into political pawns betrays their mission, destroys public trust, and puts innocent lives at risk. I call on President Trump to rescind his order immediately.” [LINK
    • Congressman Dave Min: “As the LAPD is reporting, the protestors in LA are being peaceful. This is not a rebellion or an invasion. There is no legal basis, including under 10 U.S. Code § 12406, for Trump to take over California’s National Guard. Trump is trying to cross the Rubicon and take this country into tyranny.” [LINK]
    • Congresswoman Nanette Barragán: “Calling in the National Guard when the Governor has not requested assistance is an intentional move by the Trump Administration to unnecessarily escalate the situation in Los Angeles County. Now the SecDef is threatening the use of active military, Marines from Camp Pendleton. This is an abuse of power and what dictators do. It’s unnecessary and not needed.” [LINK]
    • Congressman Mark Takano: “Trump is provoking chaos to justify an illegal and violent crackdown. He wants to expand his own power, but we will not let this wanna-be dictator win. We must speak out and stay strong. We must remain defiant in the face of this naked power grab. We must uphold the rights and values that underpin our Republic.” [LINK
    • Congressman Gil Cisneros: “Donald Trump, who refused to call up the National Guard when the U.S. Capitol was under attack, is calling up the Guard to stop the people from exercising their 1st Amendment right to protest in Los Angeles. Trump is manufacturing chaos.” [LINK
    • Congressman Derek Tran: “I have full faith in our local and state law enforcement to properly and lawfully manage this situation. President Trump’s activation of the National Guard is not meant to protect public safety, it is intended to incite fear and chill free speech. I encourage all Californians to continue to remain peaceful. My first priority will always be the safety of our community.” [LINK
    • Congresswoman Sara Jacobs: “Deploying the National Guard to LA is an unnecessary escalation. No one wants their community to become militarized — it raises the potential for people to get hurt and erodes public trust. President Trump, don’t do this.” [LINK]
    • Congressman Mike Levin: “The State of California has not requested support from our National Guard troops — and for good reason. Our state and local authorities have the capacity to maintain order. Invoking the Insurrection Act without cause isn’t leadership, it’s authoritarian overreach. This isn’t about safety. It’s about power. And Californians will not be bullied.” [LINK]
    • Congresswoman Luz Rivas: “The Trump Administration is moving to deploy the California National Guard to Los Angeles. This misguided and inflammatory action will only create more harm, confusion, and chaos across our city.” [LINK

    Statewide officials

    • Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis: “Trump refused to call in the National Guard on January 6 when our democracy was under attack. But now he’s using it to intimidate immigrant communities & peaceful protesters exercising their constitutional rights. Deploying thousands of troops for immigration enforcement is not about public safety — it’s dangerous overreach that threatens to tear families apart, traumatize children & upend the lives of the very working people who keep California & this country running. Local officials are equipped to handle the situation. There is no justification for this kind of federal escalation. California will not stand by as our communities are targeted.” [LINK
    • Attorney General Rob Bonta: “We’ve been in touch with local law enforcement in LA. They have the resources they need to meet the moment, and we stand ready to assist should the need arise. There is no emergency and the President’s order calling in the National Guard is unnecessary and counterproductive.” [LINK]

    State officials

    • Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas: “Donald Trump is manufacturing chaos against Californians to justify a federal crackdown and use of military force. As citizens, we have the power – together – to withhold this from Trump by peacefully speaking out… Do not take Trump’s bait. Do not engage in violent protest. Doing so will give him what he wants.”
    • Senate Pro Tempore Mike McGuire: “This weekend’s ICE raids in LA County are indiscriminate and ruthless. The terror they’ve created does the opposite of keeping us safe. Federalizing and deploying the National Guard will only make matters much worse. It’s Un-American and reeks of fascism.”
    • Assemblymember Isaac Bryan: “This isn’t about immigration or safety and will lead to more Fed sanctioned violence against innocent people.” [LINK]
    • Senator Sasha Renée Pérez: “Trump is using militarized police to silence his dissenters. His message is clear: if you disagree, you will be arrested – American citizen or not. This isn’t Democratic. It’s Fascism.” [LINK
    • Assembly Rick Chavez Zbur: “The Governor is right. Trump is trying to cause unrest by mobilizing the [national] guard—without the Governor’s request or authorization—in an unprecedented power grab. Don’t play into his hand. Speak out peacefully. Never use violence. And never accept that this is normal or okay.” [LINK]
    • Senator Caroline Menjivar: “As a marine, we did not take the oath to be used as pawns in this obvious abuse of power. No one, except the President is ensuing violence and chaos on our streets, under the false pretext that they’re taking ‘criminals’. They’re kidnapping our working class neighbors.” [LINK

    Local officials

    • LA County Supervisor Holly Mitchell: “The Trump administration taking over the National Guard is an unnecessary intimidation tactic that further hurts public trust.” [LINK]
    • LA County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath: “This isn’t about public safety. It’s about power. It’s about punishing immigrants and making an example out of our neighbors. The federal admin created this chaos. They instigated it. They’re taking advantage of vulnerable people—and then blaming them for the fallout.” [LINK]
    • LA Mayor Karen Bass: “This morning, President Trump deployed the National Guard into Los Angeles. Deploying federalized troops on the heels of these raids is a chaotic escalation. The fear people are feeling in our city right now is very real – it’s felt in our communities and within our families and it puts our neighborhoods at risk. This is the last thing that our city needs, and I urge protestors to remain peaceful.” [LINK]

    Community leaders & organizations

    • NAACP: “Deploying troops to communities already under pressure is not leadership—it’s provocation. The Trump Administration is weaponizing fear to divide and destabilize. We will not be silent. We stand with those targeted and terrorized. We fight for justice. Always.” [LINK]
    • ACLU Southern California: “The Trump administration’s baseless deployment of the National Guard is plainly retaliation against California, a stronghold for immigrant communities, and is akin to a declaration of war on all Californians.” [LINK]

    Amnesty International: “President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles in response to protests against recent ICE raids is deeply alarming. This shows the Trump administration is ready to do whatever it takes – including deploying military forces – to target and punish those who speak out in defense of human rights.” [LINK]

    Press releases, Recent news

    Recent news

    News Los Angeles, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued the following statement in response to speaking out peacefully on the federal government’s immigration actions: The federal government is taking over the California National Guard and deploying 2,000…

    News Los Angeles, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued the following statement in response to the federal government’s intent to deploy the California National Guard: The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy…

    News Los Angeles, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued the following statement in response to the federal government’s immigration actions: As the federal government conducts chaotic immigration sweeps across the country, the state is deploying additional…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: How Trump’s trade war is supercharging the fast fashion industry

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mona Mashhadi Rajabi, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of Technology Sydney

    Jade Gao/Getty Images

    When US President Donald Trump introduced sweeping new tariffs on Chinese imports the goal was to bring manufacturing back to American soil and protect local jobs.

    However, this process of re-shoring is complex and requires years of investment and planning – far too slow for the world of ultra-fast fashion, where brands are used to reacting in weeks, not years.

    Many clothing companies started to move production out of China during Trump’s first term. They relocated to countries such as Vietnam and Cambodia when the initial China-specific tariffs hit.

    This trend accelerated with the newer “reciprocal” tariffs. Instead of re-shoring production, many fashion brands are simply sourcing from whichever country offers the lowest total cost after tariffs. The result? The ultra-fast fashion machine adapted quickly and became even more exploitative.

    From Guangzhou to your wardrobe in days

    Platforms such as Shein and Temu built their success by offering trend-driven clothing at shockingly low prices. A $5 dress or $3 top might seem like a bargain, but those prices hide a lot.

    Much of Shein’s production takes place in the so-called “Shein village” in Guangzhou, China, where workers often sew for 12–14 hours a day under poor conditions to keep pace with the demand for new items.

    When the US cracked down on Chinese imports, the intention was to make American-made goods more competitive. This included raising the tariff on Chinese goods as high as 145% (since paused), and closing the “de minimis” loophole, which had allowed imports under US$800 to enter tariff-free.

    But these tariffs did not halt ultra-fast fashion. They just rerouted production to countries with lower tariffs and even lower labour costs. The Philippines, with a comparatively low tariff rate of 17%, emerged as a surprising alternative. However, the country can’t provide the industrial scale and infrastructure to match what China can offer.

    So why does Australia matter?

    Much of the cheap fashion previously bound for the US is now flooding other markets, including Australia.

    Australia still allows most low-value imports to enter tax-free, and platforms such as Shein and Temu have taken full advantage. Australian consumers are among the most frequent Shein and Temu buyers per capita globally.

    Just 3% of clothing is made in Australia and most labels rely on offshore manufacturing. This makes Australia an ideal target market for ultra-fast fashion imports. We have high purchasing power, lenient import rules and strong demand for low-cost style, especially due to the cost-of-living crisis.

    The hidden costs of cheap clothes

    The environmental impact of fast fashion is well known. However, amid the chaos of Trump’s tariff announcements, far less attention has been paid to how these policies – together with the retreat from climate commitments – worsen environmental harms, including those linked to fast fashion.

    The irony is that the tariffs meant to protect American workers have, in some cases, worsened conditions for workers elsewhere. Meanwhile, consumers in Australia now benefit from faster delivery of even cheaper goods as Temu, Shein and others have improved their shipping capabilities to Australia.

    Australian consumers send more than 200,000 tonnes of clothing to landfill each year. But the deeper problem is structural. The entire business model is built on exploitation and environmental damage.

    Factory workers bear the brunt of cost-cutting. In the race to stay competitive, many manufacturers reduce wages and overlook hazardous working conditions.

    Will ethical fashion ever compete?

    Fixing these problems will require a global rethink of how fashion operates.
    Governments have a role in regulating disclosures about supply chains and enforcing labour standards.

    Brands need to take responsibility for the conditions in their factories, whether directly owned or outsourced. Transparency is essential.

    Alternatives to fast fashion are gaining traction. Clothing rentals are emerging as a promising business model that help build a more circular fashion economy. Charity-run op shops have long been a sustainable source of second-hand clothing.

    Australia’s new Seamless scheme seeks to make fashion brands responsible for the full life of the clothes they sell. The aim is to help people buy, wear and recycle clothes in a more sustainable way.

    Consumers also matter. If we continue to expect clothes to cost less than a cup of coffee, change will be slow. Recognising that a $5 t-shirt has hidden costs, borne by people on the factory floor and the environment, is a first step.

    Some ethical brands are already showing a better way and offer clothes made under fairer conditions and with sustainable materials. These clothes are not as cheap or fast, but they represent a more conscious alternative especially for consumers concerned about synthetic fibres, toxic chemicals and environmental harm.

    Trump reshuffled the deck, but did not change the game

    Trump’s trade rules aim to re-balance global trade in favour of American industry, yet have cost companies more than US$34 billion in lost sales and higher costs. This cost will eventually fall on US consumers. In ultra-fast fashion, it mostly exposed how fragile and exploitative the system already was.

    Today, brands such as Shein and Temu are thriving in Australia. But unless we address the systemic inequalities in fashion production and rethink the incentives that drive this market, the true cost of cheap clothing will continue to be paid by those least able to afford it.

    Mona Mashhadi Rajabi receives funding from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), the Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand (AFAANZ), and a Business Research Grant from the University of Technology Sydney.

    Lisa Lake previously received funding from NSW Department of Education Innovation and Collaboration grant to establish the Centre of Excellence in Sustainable Fashion + Textiles.

    Martina Linnenluecke receives funding from The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and the Australian Research Council. Her work is also supported by a Strategic Research Accelerator Grant from the University of Technology Sydney (UTS).

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

    ref. How Trump’s trade war is supercharging the fast fashion industry – https://theconversation.com/how-trumps-trade-war-is-supercharging-the-fast-fashion-industry-257727

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Velázquez, Waters, Warren, Markey, and Whitehouse Unveil Bill to Support Small Business Compliance with Corporate Transparency Act

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Nydia M Velázquez (D-NY)

    WASHINGTON Today, Congresswoman Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY), Ranking Member of the House Small Business Committee, introduced new bicameral legislation to help small businesses comply with beneficial ownership reporting requirements under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) and push back against the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken the law. She was joined in the House by Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Financial Services Committee. Companion legislation was introduced in the Senate by Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Ed Markey (D-MA), Ranking Members of the Senate Banking and Small Business Committees; and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).
     
    The FinCEN–SBA Coordination on Beneficial Ownership Registration Act would require the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the Small Business Administration (SBA) to coordinate directly on outreach and education to help small business owners understand and meet their reporting obligations under the CTA.
     
    “The Corporate Transparency Act is still the law, and the Trump administration is wrong to stop enforcing it,” said Congresswoman Velázquez. “Turning a blind eye to anonymous shell companies leaves us vulnerable to fraud, corruption, and abuse. These shell companies don’t just enable white-collar crime—they hurt honest small businesses by rigging the system and exploiting programs meant for real entrepreneurs. This bill is about holding bad actors accountable while making sure small business owners have the information and support they need to follow the law.”
     
    “The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) is a strongly bipartisan law designed to bust the U.S. registered anonymous shell companies that are abused by fentanyl dealers, Iranian terrorists, financial scammers and more to launder and hide their illicit finances. By ignoring this intent and gutting the law, President Trump and Secretary Bessent are gifting these bad actors a free pass to continue exploiting the system, while leaving consumers, investors, and small businesses who play by the rules in harm’s way,” said Congresswoman Waters.
     
    “Anonymous shell companies hurt honest small businesses and open the door to fraud and abuse. The Trump Administration should be working with small businesses, not refusing to enforce the Corporate Transparency Act,” said Senator Warren. “Small businesses deserve a system that works for them — not for scammers and cheats – and that’s why our bill would require the Administration to work with them as part of implementing the law.”
     
    “The Trump Administration is allowing bad actors to get away with illicit activities and financial crimes, and we must make sure they do not get away with disregarding the law,” said Ranking Member Markey. “I am grateful for Ranking Member Velazquez’s partnership in introducing the Corporate Transparency Act to crack down on bad actors while giving small businesses the tools to succeed.”
     
    Originally passed with bipartisan support, the CTA was designed to crack down on shell companies used to facilitate money laundering, tax evasion, terrorism financing, and other illicit activities. But earlier this year, the Trump administration suspended enforcement for U.S. companies and proposed changes to dramatically narrow the law’s scope.
     
    The reporting requirements are minimal for the vast majority of small businesses, 82 percent of which are non-employer firms with only one beneficial owner. FinCEN has previously projected the average cost to file would be about $85, roughly equal to what many states charge to register a business. However, outreach during the initial rollout was limited, and confusion about the law remains persistent.
     
    Velázquez’s legislation would help spread awareness and increase compliance with CTA among small businesses by:
     

    1. Requiring FinCEN and the SBA to sign a formal agreement within 90 days to coordinate outreach;
    2. Distributing guidance in English, Spanish, and other commonly spoken languages;
    3. Using SBA field offices and partners to host webinars and town halls;
    4. Developing strategies to protect small businesses from scams and fraud;
    5. Submitting monthly updates to Congress on outreach and compliance.

     
    For a full copy of the bill, click here.
     

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Can Israel still claim self-defence to justify its Gaza war? Here’s what the law says

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law, Australian National University

    On October 7 2023, more than 1,000 Hamas militants stormed into southern Israel and went on a killing spree, murdering 1,200 men, women and children and abducting another 250 people to take back to Gaza. It was the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

    That day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the country, “Israel is at war”. The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) immediately began a military campaign to secure the release of the hostages and defeat Hamas. Since that day, more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed, mostly women and children.

    Israel has maintained its response is justified under international law, as every nation has “an inherent right to defend itself”, as Netanyahu stated in early 2024.

    This is based on the right to self-defence in international law, which is outlined in Article 51 of the 1945 United Nations Charter as follows:

    Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations[…]

    At the start of the war, many nations agreed Israel had a right to defend itself, but how it did so mattered. This would ensure its actions were consistent with international humanitarian law.

    However, 20 months after the October 7 attacks, fundamental legal issues have arisen around whether this self-defence justification still holds.

    Can Israel exercise self-defence ad infinitum? Or is it now waging a war of aggression against Palestine?

    Self-defence in the law

    Self-defence has a long history in international law.

    The modern principles of self-defence were outlined in diplomatic exchanges over an 1837 incident involving an American ship, The Caroline, after it was destroyed by British forces in Canada. Both sides agreed that an exercise of self-defence would have required the British to demonstrate their conduct was not “unreasonable or excessive”.

    The concept of self-defence was also extensively relied on by the Allies in the second world war in response to German and Japanese aggression.

    Self-defence was originally framed in the law as a right to respond to a state-based attack. However, this scope has broadened in recent decades to encompass attacks from non-state actors, such as al-Qaeda following the September 11 2001 terror attacks.

    Israel is a legitimate, recognised state in the global community and a member of the United Nations. Its right to self-defence will always remain intact when it faces attacks from its neighbours or non-state actors, such as Hamas, Hezbollah or the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

    However, the right of self-defence is not unlimited. It is constrained by the principles of necessity and proportionality.

    The necessity test was met in the current war due to the extreme violence of the Hamas attack on October 7 and the taking of hostages. These were actions that could not be ignored and demanded a response, due to the threat Israel continued to face.

    The proportionality test was also met, initially. Israel’s military operation after the attack was strategic in nature, focused on the return of the hostages and the destruction of Hamas to eliminate the immediate threat the group posed.

    The legal question now is whether Israel is still legitimately exercising self-defence in response to the October 7 attacks.

    This is a live issue, especially given comments by Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz on May 30 that Hamas would be “annihilated” unless a proposed ceasefire deal was accepted.

    These comments and Israel’s ongoing conduct throughout the war raise the question of whether proportionality is still being met.

    A test of proportionality

    The importance of proportionality in self-defence has been endorsed in recent years by the International Court of Justice.

    Under international law, proportionality remains relevant throughout a conflict, not just in the initial response to an attack.

    While the law allows a war to continue until an aggressor surrenders, it does not legitimise the complete destruction of the territory where an aggressor is fighting.

    The principle of proportionality also provides protections for civilians. Military actions are to be directed at the foreign forces who launched the attack, not civilians.

    While Israel has targeted Hamas fighters in its attacks, including those who orchestrated the October 7 attacks, these actions have caused significant collateral deaths of Palestinian civilians.

    Therefore, taken overall, the ongoing, 20-month military assault against Hamas, with its high numbers of civilian casualties, credible reports of famine and devastation of Gazan towns and cities, suggests Israel’s exercise of self-defence has become disproportionate.

    The principle of proportionality is also part of international humanitarian law. However, Israel’s actions on this front are a separate legal issue that has been the subject of investigation by the International Criminal Court.

    My aim here is to solely assess the legal question of proportionality in self-defence and international law.

    Is rescuing hostages in self-defence?

    Israel could separately argue it is exercising legitimate self-defence to rescue the remaining hostages held by Hamas.

    However, rescuing nationals as an exercise of self-defence is legally controversial. Israel set a precedent in 1976 when the military rescued 103 Jewish hostages from Entebbe, Uganda, after their aircraft had been hijacked.

    In current international law, there are very few other examples in which this interpretation of self-defence has been adopted – and no international consensus on its use.

    In Gaza, the size, scale and duration of Israel’s war goes far beyond a hostage rescue operation. Its aim is also to eliminate Hamas.

    Given this, rescuing hostages as an act of self-defence is arguably not a suitable justification for Israel’s ongoing military operations.

    An act of aggression?

    If Israel can no longer rely on self-defence to justify its Gaza military campaign, how would its actions be characterised under international law?

    Israel could claim it is undertaking a security operation as an occupying power.

    While the International Court of Justice said in an advisory opinion last year that Israel was engaged in an illegal occupation of Gaza, the court expressly made clear it was not addressing the circumstances that had evolved since October 7.

    Israel is indeed continuing to act as an occupying power, even though it has not physically reoccupied all of Gaza. This is irrelevant given the effective control it exercises over the territory.

    However, the scale of the IDF’s operations constitute an armed conflict and well exceed the limited military operations to restore security as an occupying power.

    Absent any other legitimate basis for Israel’s current conduct in Gaza, there is a strong argument that what is occurring is an act of aggression. The UN Charter and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court prohibit acts of aggression not otherwise justified under international law.

    These include invasions or attacks by the armed forces of a state, military occupations, bombardments and blockades. All of this has occurred – and continues to occur – in Gaza.

    The international community has rightly condemned Russia’s invasion as an act of aggression in Ukraine. Will it now do the same with Israel’s conduct in Gaza?

    Donald Rothwell receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    ref. Can Israel still claim self-defence to justify its Gaza war? Here’s what the law says – https://theconversation.com/can-israel-still-claim-self-defence-to-justify-its-gaza-war-heres-what-the-law-says-257822

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: AI Insider Takes Us Inside Trump and Musk’s Quiet Plan to Reboot America

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    BALTIMORE, June 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — New briefing reveals the creation of a secret AI system designed to reshape the country’s infrastructure, governance, and future — starting July 1.

    Bestselling author and longtime tech analyst James Altucher has released a stunning new report that pulls back the curtain on what he calls “the most important project in America today” — and it has nothing to do with Washington.

    According to Altucher, Elon Musk is building a system called Project Colossus — a privately operated supercomputer that’s now being quietly positioned as the technological foundation of a new, AI-driven America.

    It All Started on Day One

    Altucher points to Donald Trump’s very first executive action in office as the moment this project became possible.

    “In one of his FIRST acts as President… Donald Trump overturned Executive Order #14110.”

    That single move, Altucher says, eliminated regulatory bottlenecks and opened the floodgates for full-speed development by private operators — especially Musk.

    Hidden in Plain Sight

    “Right here, inside this warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee… lies a massive supercomputer Musk calls ‘Project Colossus.’”

    Altucher reports that the machine is already live, powered by 200,000 of Nvidia’s most advanced AI chips — with a tenfold upgrade scheduled for rollout by July 1.

    “Making it the most advanced AI facility known to man.”

    The Mission: Replace the System

    According to Altucher, Colossus isn’t just designed to speed up processes — it’s meant to replace outdated decision-making structures altogether.

    “AI 2.0… gives that knowledge to intelligent machines that I believe will solve our problems for us.”

    Altucher warns that while most Americans are focused on politics-as-usual, the real transformation is happening behind firewalls — with Musk writing the code, and Trump clearing the path.

    About James Altucher

    James Altucher is a computer scientist, entrepreneur, and bestselling author who has worked in artificial intelligence for over four decades. A contributor to IBM’s Deep Blue and an early AI pioneer on Wall Street, his latest briefings reveal the hidden buildout of America’s post-industrial, AI-powered infrastructure — and the forces quietly driving it.

    Media Contact:
    Derek Warren
    Public Relations Manager
    Paradigm Press Group
    Email: dwarren@paradigmpressgroup.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Russia: US National Guard troops arrive in Los Angeles to quell protests against mass detentions of migrants

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    LOS ANGELES, June 8 (Xinhua) — The U.S. National Guard began arriving in Los Angeles on Sunday under orders from President Donald Trump to quell protests that erupted after federal immigration enforcement agencies launched a mass detention of illegal immigrants.

    Trump announced the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops after two days of clashes between protesters and federal law enforcement, sparked by the actions of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) throughout Los Angeles. The operations resulted in more than 100 arrests, after which angry protesters clashed with law enforcement, using tear gas, flash bangs and throwing rocks.

    White House press secretary Caroline Leavitt said the National Guard was deployed to “combat lawlessness” that emerged after ICE conducted a “routine deportation operation.”

    California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the federal measures as “deliberately provocative” and warned they could further escalate tensions. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: US nuclear deal proposal ‘insincere’ without sanctions relief: Iranian parliament speaker

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    TEHRAN, June 8 (Xinhua) — The recent U.S. proposal to strike a deal with Tehran on Iran’s nuclear program is “contradictory and insincere” as it does not mention lifting sanctions on Iran, Iranian Majlis (parliament) Chairman Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said Sunday.

    Speaking at an open session of the country’s main legislative body in Tehran, M.B. Ghalibaf criticized the American proposal conveyed to Iran via Oman in late May during ongoing indirect talks between Tehran and Washington.

    He said Iran remains willing to take steps to demonstrate the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, in line with a law passed in 2020 to counter U.S. sanctions. In return, he said, Iran expects restrictions to be lifted, guarantees of economic benefits and the right to enrich uranium domestically.

    “The fact that the US proposal does not even mention lifting sanctions clearly shows that Washington’s approach to negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program is contradictory and insincere,” M. B. Ghalibaf stated.

    Iran’s parliament speaker also called on US President Donald Trump to reconsider his position if he is truly committed to a deal, urging him to stop following what M.B. Ghalibaf called the “failed ideas” of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    Since April, Iran and the United States, brokered by Oman, have held five rounds of proximity talks aimed at curbing Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Washington recently demanded that Iran completely halt uranium enrichment, a condition Tehran has repeatedly rejected. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI USA: MATSUI LEADS CA COLLEAGUES IN OPPOSING AI MORATORIUM IN RECONCILIATION BILL

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07), Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, led a group of her California colleagues in sending a letter to Senate leadership, strongly objecting to the section of H.R. 1 that would impose a ten-year moratorium on state and local enforcement of their own artificial intelligence laws and regulations. 

    “This moratorium’s assumption—that the United States will be unable to lead the world in AI if states identify and implement measures to protect their citizens from potential AI harms—is misguided,” wrote the lawmakers. “It wrongly accepts the premise that identifying and addressing AI-specific risks and harms and imposing guardrails is counterproductive to being the world’s AI leader. Nothing is further from the truth. Common sense AI guardrails can propel innovation by building trust with consumers and future users, while promoting a fair, open, and competitive playing field.” 

    In the absence of a federal AI regulatory framework, California and other states across the nation are embracing common-sense safeguards that ensure innovation and competition can continue to thrive. As AI tools grow more sophisticated and more widely deployed, these state measures are crucial to promote safety and trust with consumers. The House-passed moratorium, spearheaded by Republicans, would strip states of their authority to respond to new and evolving AI risks—freezing vital consumer protections for a full decade.

    “We should not place consumers in harm’s way by pausing for a decade the good work that states have done and will continue to do,” the lawmakers continued. “Instead, let us work together in a bicameral, bipartisan fashion to create smart, tailored, and consensus-driven legislative solutions that empower Americans’ use of AI and automated decision systems.”

    Full text of the letter can be found below or HERE

    Dear Majority Leader Thune, Minority Leader Schumer, Chairman Cruz, and Ranking Member Cantwell:

    We are writing to express our strong objections to the section of H.R. 1 that would impose a sweeping ten-year moratorium on state and local enforcement of their own artificial intelligence (AI) laws and regulations.  

    As part of being the global AI leader, the United States must take the lead on identifying and setting common sense guardrails for responsible and safe AI development and deployment. To prevent states, including our state of California, from enforcing state AI regulations that provide such guardrails—particularly without any meaningful federal alternative—is inconsistent with the goal of AI leadership. This moratorium’s assumption—that the United States will be unable to lead the world in AI if states identify and implement measures to protect their citizens from potential AI harms—is misguided.  It wrongly accepts the premise that identifying and addressing AI-specific risks and harms and imposing guardrails is counterproductive to being the world’s AI leader. Nothing is further from the truth. Common sense AI guardrails can propel innovation by building trust with consumers and future users, while promoting a fair, open, and competitive playing field. 

    California is the fourth largest economy in the world in part because innovative technology companies, including 32 of the world’s 50 leading AI companies, call the state home. As a hub of AI activity, our state has been a national leader in ensuring that innovation and competition thrive alongside common-sense safeguards, starting with transparency. In our increasingly digital world, AI and other emerging technologies are rapid disruptors. To place a ten-year hold on state and local enforcement of their own AI laws, especially without federal alternatives, exposes Americans to a growing list of harms as AI technologies are adopted across sectors from healthcare to education, housing, and transportation. The resulting regulatory gap created by the AI moratorium in H.R. 1 would decimate the good work that California and other states, led by both Democrats and Republicans, have done, such as:

    • requiring transparency regarding training data or the use of AI to communicate with patients in medical settings
    • giving performers and their families rights over digital replicas of their likenesses
    • protecting American artists’ voice and likeness from unauthorized AI impersonations,
    • requiring employers to ensure AI-enabled employment decisions comply with civil rights laws,  and
    • requiring mental health platforms to disclose to users that they are interacting with an AI mental health chatbot, not a human therapist. 

    These examples and other proposed state legislation exemplify the mounting desire among AI experts and the American public to provide guardrails to promote AI safety, trust, and transparency.  This is an extension of bipartisan concerns over online safety and manipulative algorithms—issues that, if left unchecked, leaves Americans vulnerable to harms impacting their health, their jobs, their education, and ultimately, their lives. Now is the time for Congress to work on bipartisan legislation to address these harms. The House Republican ten-year moratorium, by contrast, would gut protections for the very people we represent. 

    This bill provision isn’t limited to state laws and regulations of new and emerging AI. It imposes a ten-year moratorium on laws and regulations regulating “automated decision making systems” which arguably covers any computer processing.  

    Furthermore, the provision covers state and local regulations of their own use of AI and of automated decision making systems, which will mean states and localities cannot impose procurement requirements on AI and computer systems that are different than those imposed on other technologies. Under this provision, they would not be allowed, for example, to adopt regulations imposing safeguards on education technology to be used in public schools or on AI systems that they want to use to improve the provision of government services.  That makes no sense at all.

    Late in the process, House Republicans added an exception to the ten-year moratorium for state and local laws to the extent they impose criminal penalties.  But that exception only underscores the absurd breadth of the 10-year moratorium.  Why should the federal government incentivize states and localities to adopt criminal penalties to deal with harms from AI models and systems, and automated decision-making systems, in instances where a civil penalty, breach of contract claim, injunctive relief or some other non-criminal remedy is more appropriate to address the problem at hand?

    We have already seen an outpouring of opposition to this moratorium, including bipartisan opposition from state attorneys general, state legislators, voters, and over 140 consumer advocacy, online safety, and civil rights groups.  The House Bipartisan AI Taskforce last Congress acknowledged the “risks” of enacting an AI moratorium on state activity and, instead, recommended that Congress “commission a study to analyze the applicable federal and state regulations and laws that affect the development and use of AI systems across sectors.” We should not place consumers in harm’s way by pausing for a decade the good work that states have done and will continue to do. We must learn from them. After all, we have had the opportunity to learn from five years’ worth of several state efforts to criminalize the sharing of non-consensual intimate imagery, real and AI-generated, to produce the TAKE IT DOWN Act that President Trump recently signed into law. Now is not the time to deny Congress the critical insight our states provide as laboratories of democracy. 

    Additionally, this moratorium is procedurally deficient, as it bears no relationship to the federal budget. House Republicans stretch credulity beyond its breaking point when claiming this moratorium is necessary to effectuate their reconciliation bill’s $500 million for the Department of Commerce to update its IT and cybersecurity systems. Under the Supremacy Clause, states cannot pass laws that restrict or impose obligations on the federal government, including the Department of Commerce and federal procurement rules governing agency IT systems.  Consequently, the moratorium does not impact the federal budget and must fall out as an “extraneous matter” prohibited, under the Senate Byrd Rule, from inclusion in a reconciliation bill. 

     

    As you take up the House Republicans’ reconciliation bill for consideration, we urge you to remove the AI moratorium provision. Instead, let us work together in a bicameral, bipartisan fashion to create smart, tailored, and consensus-driven legislative solutions that empower Americans’ use of AI and automated decision systems. We can learn from what the states—like California, New York, Tennessee, Utah, and many others—are doing to leverage the benefits of AI technologies while protecting consumers from their harms.

                                                    

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: MATSUI, COSTA, AND COLLEAGUES CALL FOR TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TO HALT EFFORTS TO GUT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) and Congressman Jim Costa (CA-21) led a group of 23 lawmakers in a letter to U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) Secretary Howard Lutnick and Acting National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator Laura Grimm, demanding that the Trump Administration restore 24/7 operations at the National Weather Service’s (NWS) Sacramento and Hanford Forecast Offices. 

    It was recently reported that the NWS Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices are unable to maintain 24/7 operations due to severe staffing shortages, following layoffs, resignations, and a hiring freeze by the Trump Administration.

    “These service reductions represent the beginning of a public safety crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences if the NWS is unable to retain the staff necessary to maintain around-the-clock weather monitoring in California,” wrote the lawmakers. “Across the state’s airports, highways, farms, and reservoirs, accurate, reliable, and timely weather forecasting is critical for every Californian.” 

    From hurricanes and tornadoes to atmospheric rivers, NWS provides the forecasting necessary to keep Americans safe and prepared for natural disasters. In California, NWS experts are critical for wildfire prediction and water management. NWS also delivers critical services for our farmers, our military, and our critical infrastructure. However, since the Trump Administration took office, over 500 NWS employees have been laid off or pushed into early retirement. Those cuts mean that nearly half of NWS offices have staffing vacancy rates of 20 percent or higher.

    “The National Weather Service is a public safety lifeline and an essential public good. This is not waste or fraud. Americans depend on accurate and timely weather forecasts and alerts not just to plan their day, but to prepare for, and survive, deadly natural disasters,” the lawmakers concluded. “We demand that you immediately reinstate all terminated workers at these offices, lift the federal hiring freeze for NWS, and ensure that the Sacramento and Hanford weather forecast offices are adequately staffed to maintain 24/7 operations.”

    Full text of the letter can be found below or HERE.

    Dear Secretary Lutnick and Acting Administrator Grimm,

    Due to terminations, hiring freezes, and vacancies, the National Weather Service (NWS) recently announced that it would cease 24-hour 7-day-a-week operations at the Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices. These service reductions represent the beginning of a public safety crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences if the NWS is unable to retain the staff necessary to maintain around-the-clock weather monitoring in California. Across the state’s airports, highways, farms, and reservoirs, accurate, reliable, and timely weather forecasting is critical for every Californian. We urge immediate action to halt any service interruptions at the Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices by reinstating terminated workers and lifting the federal hiring freeze for NWS.

    Across NWS, reports have recently stated that as many as 500 employees have been terminated or taken an early retirement, representing a 12% reduction in staffing since President Trump took office. A recent internal assessment by NWS employees found that nearly half of NWS Weather Forecast Offices had vacancy rates of 20% or higher, a level that represents “critical understaffing.” The Sacramento office currently has seven vacancies for meteorologists, out of 16 positions, while the Hanford office has eight vacancies out of 13 positions—leaving both offices operating at half strength as we approach the peak of wildfire season. Slashing staffing in half at the offices responsible for predicting wildfires, atmospheric rivers, and natural disasters is unacceptable, puts thousands of lives at risk, and does nothing to increase government efficiency.

    Recent years have demonstrated that wildfire season in California is now year-round. In 2024, California saw 8,018 wildfires, burning a total of 1,049,963 acres.4 Since 2013, an average of 1,029,049 acres have burned annually.5 NWS fire weather forecasting plays a critical role in predicting wildfire and protecting the lives of millions of Californians who live in fire prone areas. Incident meteorologists at NWS are often at the frontline to provide information to wildfire managers and first responders to safely contain wildfires.

    The Office of Water Prediction and the National Water Prediction Service also play a critical role in hydrological predictions, in concert with NOAA’s Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Water managers in California rely on the forecasting expertise of these federal agencies to make reservoir operating decisions. Without the NWS’s expert hydrological forecasters, water managers in California are left blindly guessing and forced to make life-or-death decisions amid the state’s swings between crippling drought and catastrophic flooding.

    The National Weather Service is a public safety lifeline and an essential public good. This is not waste or fraud. Americans depend on accurate and timely weather forecasts and alerts not just to plan their day, but to prepare for, and survive, deadly natural disasters. If the NWS weather forecast offices in Sacramento and Hanford, together covering the entire Central Valley, cannot monitor overnight conditions, that puts our constituents in danger. This is a reckless and unnecessary risk that offers no benefit to the American public. We demand that you immediately reinstate all terminated workers at these offices, lift the federal hiring freeze for NWS, and ensure that the Sacramento and Hanford weather forecast offices are adequately staffed to maintain 24/7 operations. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

                                                    

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: MATSUI SLAMS NEW BEAD GUIDANCE FROM DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)

    WASHINGTON D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07), Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, released the following statement after the Department of Commerce released new guidance regarding the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program. 

    “The result of today’s announcement is simple: the Trump administration is delaying once-in-a-generation investments, blocking states from closing the digital divide and getting Americans online,” said Congresswoman Matsui. “Congress was thoughtful and bipartisan when hammering out the details for BEAD, because we realize the stakes for getting connectivity right are sky high. We empowered our states and local communities to use their on-the-ground knowledge to ensure BEAD dollars go where they’re most needed. We have worked hard to ensure access, affordability, and adoption go hand in hand. This is a matter of necessity for our constituents. Reliable, high speed internet access dictates who succeeds and who is left behind in the modern economy.”

    “These new changes undo the states’ hard work, punt the broadband deployment timeline further down the line, and ultimately, drive up costs for consumers,” Matsui continued. “This delay is unacceptable. Americans, especially those in rural and underserved areas, are counting on this funding. The Trump Administration is clearly willing to leave everyday Americans behind – but I will continue to fight to ensure we deliver on our promises to close the digital divide.”

    Background:

    The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program provides $42.45 billion to expand high-speed internet access by funding planning, infrastructure deployment and adoption programs in all 50 states. In California, the BEAD program is being implemented by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). California was allocated over $1.8 billion to deploy or upgrade high-speed internet networks and close the digital divide. California is currently selecting the service providers that would deploy last mile broadband infrastructure to unserved and underserved communities. 

    Today, the Department of Commerce released new guidelines that would substantially delay broadband projects and increase costs to states by forcing all states to conduct at least another round of applications, rescinding all their preliminary and provisional awards. The new guidelines also would impose burdensome scoring requirements that would hamstring states’ flexibility to choose the right mix of technologies to provide the most reliable, scalable, and future-proof internet service available to a location. Additionally, the Trump administration’s changes would weaken or eliminate protections for affordability, good-paying jobs, climate-resilient networks, and a free and open internet. These changes will drive up costs for consumers while driving down the quality of service.

    For a more detailed breakdown of the entire BEAD process in California, click HERE.

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: MATSUI, SOTO, CASTOR, TONKO, AND COLLEAGUES DEMAND TRUMP ADMINISTRATION RELEASE ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) Congressman Darren Soto (FL-09), Congresswoman Kathy Castor (FL-14), and Congressman Paul Tonko (NY-20) led a group of 33 lawmakers in a letter to Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Executive Director Gloria Shepherd, demanding that they immediately release National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) funding, following the Government Accountability Office’s finding that the funding freeze is illegal. 

    The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program provides funding to states to build a nationwide network of publicly accessible electric vehicle chargers along major highways across the country. Congress authorized $5 billion for the NEVI program through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The program has already had a transformative effect, creating jobs and catalyzing private investment throughout America. However, on February 6, the Trump Administration notified states that they were suspending the program and freezing states’ funding. This has left hundreds of projects and thousands of workers across the country in limbo.

    On May 22, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that these actions by the Trump Administration violated the Impoundment Control Act by illegally withholding funds that had been authorized by Congress. Despite this clear and unambiguous finding by Congress’s nonpartisan watchdog, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget instructed DOT on Wednesday to disregard the GAO ruling. 

    In response,the lawmakers wrote, “Congress did not give the Executive Branch the authority to withhold or rescind NEVI funding that has been made available to the states, and Congress clearly did not intend for the Administration to retroactively disapprove or suspend approval of state plans.” 

    “The Trump Administration’s continued attacks on the U.S. automobile industry are not only unamerican but also illegal,” the lawmakers concluded.  “As such, we request that FHWA immediately rescind the memo issued on February 6th and enable states to begin spending NEVI funds without delay.” 

    Full text of the letter can be found below or HERE

    Dear Secretary Duffy and Director Shepherd,

    We write to express our continued alarm and opposition to the Trump Administration’s illegal impoundment of formula funds under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (NEVI). The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) has confirmed in a recent legal opinion that the Trump Administration’s actions withholding NEVI funding from expenditure violate the Impoundment Control Act, reaffirming what 52 Members of Congress have previously stated: this funding pause is not only harmful but illegal. Contrary to views expressed by the Office of Management and Budget,  the Administration’s actions clearly do not align with Congressional intent. The Trump Administration must immediately rescind the February 06, 2025, memorandum issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which suspended state electric vehicle infrastructure deployment plans and rescinded related guidance. States must be allowed to spend the funds to which they are legally entitled.  

    Congress authorized $5 billion for FY22 through FY26 in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for states to deploy EV charging infrastructure. Every state, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico submitted plans in accordance with the statute, and many have awarded contracts and deployed active charging stations. According to the GAO opinion, the $3,270,000,000 made available to states from FY22-FY25 constitutes an obligation and states are entitled to proceed with their programs. Congress did not give the Executive Branch the authority to withhold or rescind NEVI funding that has been made available to the states, and Congress clearly did not intend for the Administration to retroactively disapprove or suspend approval of state plans. The Trump Administration’s actions are therefore plainly counter to Congressional intent and illegal under the Impoundment Control Act.     

    NEVI is a critical investment in American infrastructure and innovation and is key to the long-term competitiveness of the American automobile industry. It is designed to increase accessibility and address range anxiety for Americans who choose to drive EVs. The program has already catalyzed significant private investment, and over 13,000 potential jobs could be at risk if the Administration does not release the NEVI funding.  Continued delay could lead to stranded assets and wasted expenditures. Importantly, a 2024 study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory projected that the U.S. would need 182,000 publicly accessible direct current fast chargers (DCFC) to accommodate the growing EV market, nearly triple the current capacity of around 55,000 charging ports. 

    The Trump Administration’s continued attacks on the U.S. automobile industry are not only unamerican but also illegal. As such, we request that FHWA immediately rescind the memo issued on February 6th and enable states to begin spending NEVI funds without delay. Inaction on this request may very well be unconstitutional.  

     

    # # #

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Phil Goff: Israel doesn’t care how many innocent people it’s killing in Gaza

    COMMENTARY: By Phil Goff

    “What we are doing in Gaza now is a war of devastation: indiscriminate, limitless, cruel and criminal killing of civilians. It’s the result of government policy — knowingly, evilly, maliciously, irresponsibly dictated.”

    This statement was made not by a foreign or liberal critic of Israel but by the former Prime Minister and former senior member of Benjamin Netanyahu’s own Likud party, Ehud Olmet.

    Nightly, we witness live-streamed evidence of the truth of his statement — lethargic and gaunt children dying of malnutrition, a bereaved doctor and mother of 10 children, nine of them killed by an Israeli strike (and her husband, another doctor, died later), 15 emergency ambulance workers gunned down by the IDF as they tried to help others injured by bombs, despite their identity being clear.

    Statistics reflect the scale of the horror imposed on Palestinians who are overwhelmingly civilians — 54,000 killed, 121,000 maimed and injured. Over 17,000 of these are children.

    This can no longer be excused as regrettable collateral damage from targeted attacks on Hamas.

    Israel simply doesn’t care about the impact of its military attacks on civilians and how many innocent people and children it is killing.

    Its willingness to block all humanitarian aid- food, water, medical supplies, from Gaza demonstrates further its willingness to make mass punishment and starvation a means to achieve its ends. Both are war crimes.

    Influenced by the right wing extremists in the Coalition cabinet, like Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s goal is no longer self defence or justifiable retaliation against Hamas terrorists.

    Israel attacks Palestinians at US-backed aid hubs in Gaza, killing 36. Image: AJ screenshot APR

    Making life unbearable
    The Israeli government policy is focused on making life unbearable for Palestinians and seeking to remove them from their homeland. In this, they are openly encouraged by President Trump who has publicly and repeatedly endorsed deporting the Palestinian population so that the Gaza could be made into a “Middle East Riviera”.

    This is not the once progressive pioneer Israel, led by people who had faced the Nazi Holocaust and were fighting for the right to a place where they could determine their own future and be safe.

    Sadly, a country of people who were themselves long victims of oppression is now guilty of oppressing and committing genocide against others.

    New Zealand recently joined 23 other countries calling out Israel and demanding a full supply of foreign aid be allowed into Gaza.

    Foreign Minister Winston Peters called Israel’s actions “ intolerable”. He said that we had “had enough and were running out of patience and hearing excuses”.

    While speaking out might make us feel better, words are not enough. Israel’s attacks on the civilian population in Gaza are being increased, aid distribution which has restarted is grossly insufficient to stop hunger and human suffering and Palestinians are being herded into confined areas described as humanitarian zones but which are still subject to bombardment.

    People living in tents in schools and hospitals are being slaughtered.

    World must force Israel to stop
    Like Putin, Israel will not end its killing and oppression unless the world forces it to. The US has the power but will not do this.

    The sanctions Trump has imposed are not on Israel’s leaders but on judges in the International Criminal Court (ICC) who dared to find Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu guilty of war crimes.

    New Zealand’s foreign policy has traditionally involved working with like-minded countries, often small nations like us. Two of these, Ireland and Sweden, are seeking to impose sanctions on Israel.

    Both are members of the European Union which makes up a third of Israel’s global trade. If the EU decides to act, sanctions imposed by it would have a big impact on Israel.

    These sanctions should be both on trade and against individuals.

    New Zealand has imposed sanctions on a small number of extremist Jewish settlers on the West Bank where there is evidence of them using violence against Palestinian villagers.

    These sanctions should be extended to Israel’s political leadership and New Zealand could take a lead in doing this. We should not be influenced by concern that by taking a stand we might offend US president Donald Trump.

    Show our preparedness to uphold values
    In the way that we have been proud of in the past, we should as a small but fiercely independent country show our preparedness to uphold our own values and act against gross abuse of human rights and flagrant disregard for international law.

    We should be working with others through the United Nations General Assembly to maximise political pressure on Israel to stop the ongoing killing of innocent civilians.

    Moral outrage at what Israel is doing has to be backed by taking action with others to force the Israeli government to end the killing, destruction, mass punishment and deliberate starvation of Palestinians including their children.

    An American doctor working at a Gaza hospital reported that in the last five weeks he had worked on dozens of badly injured children but not a single combatant.

    He noted that as well as being maimed and disfigured by bombing, many of the children were also suffering from malnutrition. Children were dying from wounds that they could recover from but there were not the supplies needed to treat them.

    Protest is not enough. We need to act.

    Phil Goff is Aotearoa New Zealand’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs. This article was first published by the Stuff website and is republished with the permission of the author.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: Trump Taps Musk to “Rebuild Government from the Ground Up,” Says One Tech Insider

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    BALTIMORE, June 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a newly surfaced public briefing, bestselling author and tech analyst James Altucher reveals what he calls a “massive transfer of control” inside the federal government — one that began on Day One of President Trump’s return to the White House.

    According to Altucher, Trump isn’t just slashing bureaucracy — he’s outsourcing innovation to Elon Musk. The result is Project Colossus: a 200,000-chip AI supercomputer hidden inside a Memphis warehouse and operated entirely outside the traditional system.

    A Silent Power Shift — Signed by Trump

    “In one of his FIRST acts as President… Donald Trump overturned Executive Order #14110.”

    That reversal, Altucher says, stripped away Biden’s AI restrictions — immediately giving private operators like Musk the runway to build freely.

    Trump then revealed Stargate, a $500 billion AI infrastructure initiative that, according to Altucher, is “not about building government… it’s about replacing it.”

    Musk’s AI Is Already Online

    “Right here, inside this warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee… lies a massive supercomputer Musk calls ‘Project Colossus.’”

    “Making it the most advanced AI facility known to man.”

    Altucher claims that the system is already operational — and is expected to expand dramatically before July 1, when a major upgrade could “10X its power overnight.”

    Not Reform. Replacement.

    According to Altucher, Musk and Trump aren’t just reforming the system — they’re replacing it with autonomous intelligence designed to streamline decisions, reduce costs, and eliminate delay.

    “AI 2.0… gives that knowledge to intelligent machines that I believe will solve our problems for us.”

    Altucher warns that what began as an infrastructure story is fast becoming one of control — and that the real question now is: who governs the machines?

    About James Altucher

    James Altucher is a computer scientist, entrepreneur, and bestselling author with four decades of experience in artificial intelligence. He studied at Cornell and Carnegie Mellon, helped develop IBM’s Deep Blue, and has built AI-powered systems for use in finance and enterprise. His latest briefings focus on how AI is being deployed beyond the public’s view — and who’s behind it.

    Media Contact:
    Derek Warren
    Public Relations Manager
    Paradigm Press Group
    Email: dwarren@paradigmpressgroup.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Australia: TV interview Andrew Clennell, Sky News

    Source: Australian Attorney General’s Agencies

    Andrew Clennell: Joining me live now is the Trade Minister, Don Farrell. Don Farrell, thanks for your time. Well, let’s talk about this first meeting with Donald Trump the PM is scheduled to have this week. Do you expect the meeting to occur and what do you expect to happen?

    Minister for Trade: Look, we’ll see what happens this time next weekend. You’re very obviously up to date with all of the latest and it sounds like you’re going to be there Andrew, so we can watch you report on it.

    Andrew Clennell: What do you think the response from the PM will be if Donald Trump echoes Pete Hegseth’s call for more defence spending?

    Minister for Trade: Look, one of the most important, or perhaps the most important obligation of any Federal Government is the defence of our country and Anthony Albanese and Richard Marles and our government take those responsibilities very, very seriously. We’re committed to the AUKUS program. In fact, the weekend before last, just before I went to Europe for the trade talks, I met with the UK Defence Industries Minister in Adelaide, with the Premier, and we endorsed, and re-endorsed Australia’s support for the, for the AUKUS submarine project. So, we are committed to the defence of this country. We are committed to a significant uplift in the, in the amount of spending. As you said, that’s going to be a project worth more than $360 billion. So, I think we’ve talked the talk here, Andrew. We are committed to the defence of this country and we are committed to increasing our spending to ensure that Australia stays safe in our region.

    Andrew Clennell: What did you make of the way that Pete Hegseth put that on Richard Marles at the Shangri-La dialogue and then released a statement concerning the request or the demand, putting the 3.5 per cent figure on that public statement?

    Minister for Trade: Look, the Americans will do what they want to do. That’s certainly the case in a whole range of areas now. But we have an excellent Defence Minister in Richard Marles. He’s very focused on ensuring that all of our defence capabilities are as strong as they can be and as strong as they need to be. We’re focused on what Australia needs to do and we’ll make our decisions based on what is in our national interest.

    Andrew Clennell: Well, on trade, the Opposition’s made a bit during the week while you’re away in Paris, we’ll get to that in a minute, but they made a bit of the fact that the UK have secured a 50 per cent reduction on steel tariffs. Why aren’t we getting the same? Or can we get the same? What do you make of that? I mean, you met Jamieson Greer, the US Trade Rep, last week. Were there any signs out of him we could get a deal on steel?

    Minister for Trade: Look, I did meet Jamieson Greer. I met him twice. And that’s on top of previous conversations I’ve had with him. The position I’ve put to Jamieson Greer is that the tariffs that the United States have imposed on Australia are unjustified. America has a trade surplus with Australia. Just to put that into perspective, trade between the United States and Australia is roughly $100 billion a year. That’s $70 billion worth of product we buy from the United States and $30 billion worth of product we sell to them. Now, that’s overwhelmingly in the United States favour. So, there is no justification for the United States to impose tariffs on Australia. So, the position I’ve put to Mr Greer, and I put it twice last week, is that we want all of the tariffs removed, not just some of them. We want all of them removed. And I made it clear to USTR Greer that we’ll continue to press for the removal of all of those tariffs.

    Andrew Clennell: You talk about the trade surplus, isn’t it the case that because of these tariffs, in April, it was a deficit reading here. Australia exported 2.29 billion in goods to the US while importing 3.99 billion in April?

    Minister for Trade: Well, that’s my point, Andrew. We are buying more from the United States than we’re selling to them. So, it doesn’t make any sense at all to impose a tariff on Australia. So, the argument that I’ve made, and I’m sure the Prime Minister will be making every opportunity that he gets, is we want all of these tariffs removed, not just some of them. 

    Andrew Clennell: How did Jamieson Greer react? Did he give any sort of hint to you that, oh, we could move on this, or was it like, this is the President’s position and tough luck.

    Minister for Trade: Look, he certainly made it clear that these are ultimately decisions that the President of the United States will make, but look it was a friendly discussion. It wasn’t a difficult discussion in terms of the relationship between us. I’m certainly of the view that we have the opportunity to continue to talk with Jamieson and Commerce Secretary Lutnick to put our case across that these tariffs on Australia are simply unjustified. We don’t imply, you know, we haven’t applied tariffs to the United States. We could do that. We could have done that. We’ve chosen not to do that. In the same way you might recall when I first came to this job, Andrew, we had $20 billion worth of tariffs and impediments imposed on us by China. We didn’t retaliate on that occasion. And bit by bit, we managed to get all of those tariffs that had been applied on Australia by China removed. I’d like to do the same with the United States. It’s only by open discussion, honest discussion with our allies in the United States that I think we can do that. But I certainly haven’t given up on the prospect of getting these tariffs removed. And every opportunity I get, I’ll continue to pursue that argument with the United States. At the same time, of course, we’re looking for –

    Andrew Clennell: Well, from what you’re saying, Don Farrell, about what Jamieson Greer said to you, it’s all down to Albo, if I can use his nickname. Because he’s saying to you that it’s the President’s decision, it’s his call, and our Prime Minister’s the one about to potentially to meet Donald Trump. So, it shapes as a pretty critical meeting, doesn’t it?

    Minister for Trade: Look, every meeting, I think, between an Australian Prime Minister and the US President will always be a critical meeting. And I have the greatest confidence in our Prime Minister to push the Australian point of view on this issue. But look, there’s a range of ways in which we communicate with the United States. Ambassador Rudd obviously does it. All of our Ministers who make contact with their equivalents in the United States make it clear what we want out of the relationship with the United States. And of course, most importantly, as you say, is the relationship between our Prime Minister and the President of the United States.

    Andrew Clennell: Are you expecting, if there isn’t a breakthrough here, further tariffs? Because there’s talk about Donald Trump making further decisions, certainly in relation to the UK at least, July 9 Liberation Day. So, perhaps rather than trying to get the 10 per cent off, it’s about the steel tariffs, but also about preventing even further action, this meeting, if it occurs, isn’t it?

    Minister for Trade: Look, the main topic at our discussions at the WTO and the OECD last week were on this very topic, Andrew, ensuring that there is a way that countries don’t increase the amount of protectionism. We advocate very strongly for free and fair trade. The way in which we have achieved our prosperity in this country is through that free and fair trade. And I think there’s a mood around the world to push the case for less protectionism and more free and fair trade. I took the opportunity last week to talk with my European counterparts. I met the French Trade Minister, the German Trade Minister, and of course, the most important one in that is the European Trade Minister. We had good discussions. My officials spent a couple of days after the meeting continuing those talks. I’m hopeful that those countries around the world who do believe in free and fair trade can reach agreement to extend free trade agreements across the globe, so that irrespective of what the Americans might choose to do, we have a greater diversity of trading partners.

    Andrew Clennell: What do you think’s been the effect of the Trump tariffs thus far on the Australian economy and the world economy?

    Minister for Trade: Look, there’s no doubt that it’s had an impact. When you impose those sort of tariffs, it’s inevitably going to impact growth. This is one of the arguments that we make to the Americans. If you want to grow your economy, the way to do it isn’t to impose tariffs, it’s to be engaged actively in free and fair trade. And so the more you impose tariffs, the greater impact that you have on your own economy and the world economy. And what we’re seeing now, of course, is the outcome of some of these policy decisions. So, I think it’s incumbent on Australia, on the rest of the world, to say to the Americans, look, these are exactly the wrong policies to adopt. You should be adopting the opposite policies. You should be opening up your economies. What we know is if you’re an outward facing trading company in Australia, your profits are going to be higher, but more importantly, the wages of your employees are going to be higher. So, we say to the Americans, and will continue to say to the Americans, these are the exact wrong policies to adopt.

    Andrew Clennell: Donald Trump has announced talks overnight between US and Chinese officials on Monday in London. Are you hoping for progress there? And how bad for Australia could this sort of US Tariffs on China situation get?

    Minister for Trade: Yeah, so I, while I was in Europe, of course, the speculation was that the Chinese and the Americans would quickly meet to discuss these issues. I met with my counterpart from China, Wang Wentao, that was our 10th meeting, and he’s made it very clear that just as we have done, they want these tariffs removed. So, I think that’s a very good sign and we would welcome any development that restored the free trade arrangement between the United States and China. And we would encourage those discussions. I know from talking with my Chinese counterpart, they’re very keen to get these tariffs removed. And these tariffs do have an impact, as you say, Andrew, on Australia. It’s one thing for the Americans to impose a 10 per cent tariff on Australia. But when they’re imposing those tariffs on other countries around the world that we trade with, that we sell our resources to, well, then that also has an impact on our economy.

    Andrew Clennell: Can you confirm what I’ve just reported that Australia apparently did come close to securing some kind of exemption from Donald Trump’s tariffs in April with a deal on critical minerals. And there was an indication from some sections of the US Administration to our officials that an exemption could be forthcoming, and then it all fell apart.

    Minister for Trade: Well, I’m not sure it’s all falling apart, Andrew. We continue to encourage the United States –

    Andrew Clennell: But Don Farrell, just on the key point here, were we close to a deal? Did people in the administration put us in a position where we were thinking a deal might be closed back then before that April announcement?

    Minister for Trade: Oh, look, Andrew, I’m not going to speculate on what might or might not have occurred had the circumstances been a little bit different, but I can certainly confirm that Australia pushed very hard for an exemption. And in the process of pushing very hard for that exemption, we did offer an expanded arrangement in terms of critical minerals. Australia is the lucky country, we have either the largest or the second largest of reserves of critical minerals. We have the technology to extract those critical minerals, and we are a reliable trading partner. So, we thought that in all of those circumstances, that would be an offer that would be attractive to the United States.

    Andrew Clennell: Was Kevin Rudd taking the lead in that? Was Kevin Rudd taking the lead in that as our ambassador?

    Minister for Trade: Kevin Rudd, of course, was involved in all of these discussions, as he should be. And he’s doing a very good job, I might say, in his communications with the US Government. But all of us, Madeleine King, our Resources Minister, myself, we have been all encouraging the United States to take up our offer to expand our relationship on critical minerals. Other countries are doing it. We’ve got an agreement now with the European Union, the Japanese, the South Koreans are all interested. The Singaporeans are interested in our critical minerals. We think we’ve got something to offer.

    Andrew Clennell: Sure.

    Minister for Trade: In that regard, the quality and our ability to extract –

    Andrew Clennell: How damaging to Australia in terms of this tariffs issue, do you think this Peter Navarro is? 

    Minister for Trade: Look, the Americans pick their advisors and we pick ours. My job is to continue to explain to the Americans firstly that the policies that they’re adopting are exactly the wrong policies to produce prosperity in the United States. So, we’ve got to continue to argue that point. And I think as time goes by, it’ll be increasingly obvious that these policies are the wrong policies. And secondly, my job is to convince the Americans that they shouldn’t be imposing tariffs on, firstly, a good ally to the United States like Australia, and secondly, that these tariffs are unjustified given the surplus situation that we have with the United States. 

    Andrew Clennell: Sure. In May, Donald Trump also threatened a 100 per cent tariff on foreign films. Is that coming, do you think?

    Minister for Trade: Look, I’m not sure where that’s up to at the moment. Again, we would strongly argue that the United States not do that. One of the reasons why America has looked to Australia in the area of film production is during COVID and the post-COVID period, we were able to deliver services, great quality filmmaking, when that wasn’t possible in the United States. So, we haven’t done this simply to benefit the Australian film industry, we’ve done it to benefit the American and the world film industry because we were able to produce wonderful films using all the latest technology. And that’s been a benefit to the United States film industry. Something that couldn’t have happened without Australia being engaged in this. So, again, we would say this is the wrong policy. We have got a good film industry in Australia. It’s an expanding film industry. They produce beautiful films. In fact, last week I went to the 50th anniversary of Sunday Too Far Away and met Jack Thompson. We’ve got a wonderful history of making films in this country.

    Andrew Clennell: Yeah, well, good actor. But look, I’m out of time here Don Farrell, I just want to ask one question which is pretty important I suspect, and that’s about the Paris talks with the EU on a trade deal. Are there any sticking points remaining? Are we taking off a luxury car tax in exchange for allowing our beef exports into the EU? Is there still issues of the use of the word prosciutto and parmesan? Could we be producing so called Australian made parmesan soon? And do you expect all this to be finalised for a visit by the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in July or August?

    Minister for Trade: Look, all of those things you’ve just mentioned, Andrew, are still issues. We haven’t yet got an agreement, but there was a lot of goodwill in the air in Paris last week. I’m confident that if that goodwill continues, that we can secure a new free trade agreement with the European Union. You know, there’s 450 million people, trillions of dollars of GDP in Europe. We’ve got lots of things that we can sell to the Europeans. I believe now that there’s an appetite to reach an agreement on both sides. The world has changed. Those countries that believe in free and fair trade have to work together, and I’m very confident, Andrew, that with a little bit of time, a little bit of hard work on our part, because it’s not going to be easy. If it was easy, somebody else would have done it. But we can get there and we can strike an agreement.

    Andrew Clennell: Trade Minister Don Farrell, thanks so much for your time.

    Minister for Trade: Good to talk to you, Andrew.

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: D. Trump said that his interaction with I. Musk has ended

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    NEW YORK, June 8 (Xinhua) — U.S. President Donald Trump said Saturday that he has no intention of restoring relations with billionaire Elon Musk and their interaction is over, following their mutual attacks on social media.

    In a phone interview with NBC News, the American president noted that he does not plan to talk to I. Musk anytime soon. “I’m too busy with other things,” he said.

    Asked if he thought his relationship with the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX was over, Trump said, “I would assume so, yes,” accusing Musk of being “disrespectful.”

    In the interview, D. Trump also threatened I. Musk with “serious consequences” if he decides to finance Democratic candidates who oppose the budget bill proposed by the Republicans /“big beautiful law”/.

    “If he does this, he will have to pay for it,” the US president said, without revealing what the consequences would be.

    The feud between Trump and Musk began with the “big, beautiful law.” In the days leading up to their public spat, Musk criticized the spending bill passed by the House of Representatives last month.

    D. Trump said he does not believe that I. Musk’s opposition to the “big beautiful law” jeopardizes the bill’s chances of success. He noted that he is “very confident” that the bill will pass the Senate before July 4. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: US to Resume Issuing Visas to Harvard International Students – Media

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    NEW YORK, June 8 (Xinhua) — The U.S. State Department on Friday evening instructed consulates around the world to resume processing visa applications for international students applying to Harvard University, reversing guidance issued a day earlier to reject such requests, The Washington Post reported.

    The article, citing a cable sent by the State Department, said the new directive reversed a previous one issued on Thursday, less than an hour before a judge blocked Donald Trump’s administration from restricting foreign students from entering the country to study at Harvard.

    “Consular sections should resume processing visas for foreign students coming to the United States to study at Harvard University, including on exchange programs,” the Washington Post reports.

    The telegram comes after the Trump administration’s second attempt to block visas for foreign students planning to study at Harvard. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI China: Trump indicates his relationship with Musk is over

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

    U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that he has no intention to repair his relationship with billionaire Elon Musk and indicated their relationship is over, following their heated mutual attacks on social media.

    In a phone interview with NBC News, Trump said he has no plans to speak with Musk anytime soon. “I’m too busy doing other things,” he said.

    Asked if he thought his relationship with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, “I would assume so, yeah,” accusing Musk of being “disrespectful to the office of the President.”

    In the interview, Trump also said there would be “serious consequences” if Musk funds Democratic candidates to run against Republicans who vote in favor of the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”

    “If he does, he’ll have to pay the consequences for that,” Trump said, without revealing what those consequences would be.

    The feud between Trump and Musk started from the “One Big Beautiful Bill”. In the days leading up to their public falling out, Musk had been critical of the GOP-led spending bill that the House passed last month.

    Trump indicated he didn’t believe that Musk’s opposition to the “One Big Beautiful Bill” is jeopardizing the bill’s chances of success, saying he’s “very confident” that the bill will pass the Senate before July 4. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: French President to visit Greenland on June 15

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

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

    PARIS, June 8 (Xinhua) — French President Emmanuel Macron will make an official visit to Greenland on June 15, French newspaper Le Monde reported on Saturday, citing a source in the French presidential administration.

    At the invitation of Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen, Macron will become the first foreign head of state to visit Greenland since US President Donald Trump’s threats of annexation, Le Monde reports.

    The three leaders will hold talks on security in the North Atlantic and the Arctic, as well as climate change, the energy transition and the supply of critical minerals, the Elysee Palace said.

    This visit is aimed at “strengthening cooperation with Greenland in these areas and contributing to the strengthening of European sovereignty,” Le Monde notes, citing a source in the Elysee Palace.

    D. Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to acquire Greenland, which has a strategic location and is rich in resources. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Video: Ask @ State: Answering your questions — June 6, 2025

    Source: United States of America – Department of State (video statements)

    Under President Trump and Secretary Rubio, the U.S. Department of State is committed to answering your questions transparently and unfiltered. We want to make sure we’re getting information directly to you about how an America First foreign policy is making America great again.

    U.S. Deputy Spokesperson Tommy Pigott answers this week’s questions about student visas, Israel and Iran, the economic impact of our foreign agreements, investments in Africa, Syria, how we’re combatting human trafficking, and negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.

    We’ll be answering more of your questions soon!

    ———-
    Under the leadership of the President and Secretary of State, the U.S. Department of State leads America’s foreign policy through diplomacy, advocacy, and assistance by advancing the interests of the American people, their safety and economic prosperity. On behalf of the American people we promote and demonstrate democratic values and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world.

    The Secretary of State, appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is the President’s chief foreign affairs adviser. The Secretary carries out the President’s foreign policies through the State Department, which includes the Foreign Service, Civil Service and U.S. Agency for International Development.

    Get updates from the U.S. Department of State at www.state.gov and on social media!
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/statedept
    X: https://x.com/StateDept
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/statedept
    Flickr: https://flickr.com/photos/statephotos/
    Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/StateDept
    Substack: https://statedept.substack.com

    Watch on-demand State Department videos: https://video.state.gov/
    Subscribe to The Week at State e-newsletter: https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USSTATEBPA/signup/32562

    State Department website: https://www.state.gov/
    Careers website: https://careers.state.gov/
    White House website: https://www.whitehouse.gov/
    Terms of Use: https://state.gov/tou

    #StateDepartment #DepartmentofState #Diplomacy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mw1_ZOAx7N8

    MIL OSI Video

  • MIL-OSI USA: DHS and Idaho Team up in Joint Immigration Enforcement Operation

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: DHS and Idaho Team up in Joint Immigration Enforcement Operation

    lass=”text-align-center”> Idaho is helping DHS keep America safe 
    Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Idaho Governor Brad Little announced that the state of Idaho has signed a new agreement to support President Trump’s deportation agenda

    Idaho State Police will be working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to send hundreds of criminal illegal aliens in Idaho jails to ICE detention facilities for deportation

    This agreement was made under the 287g authority of the Immigration and Nationality Act

    “287(g) is critically important to our strategy of having the enforcement that we need to really address the criminal activities that we’ve seen out on the ground,” said Secretary Noem

    “It has been wonderful to see people jump in and be a part of it to make sure that we have not just the authorities that we need to go out there and to work, but also to have the local knowledge and the people in the community that really want to be a part of the solution

    We are looking for more agreements like that across the country, and we will continue to build on it


    Under President Trump and Secretary Noem’s leadership, DHS has expanded enforcement cooperation with state and local law enforcement to historic levels

    Since President Trump took office, ICE has signed hundreds of new agreements, bringing the current total to 649

    Announcing the agreement, Governor Little said: “Idaho is stepping up to help the Trump administration transport illegal immigrants with criminal histories out of our jails and to ICE facilities, where they will be deported out of our country

    These criminals here illegally have committed crimes such as domestic violence, robbery, driving under the influence, and other dangerous activities that threaten Idaho families, but in counties across our state they are being released back into our communities after arrest

    This is unacceptable

    Idaho has taken many steps to increase our coordination with the Trump administration in the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws, and I want to further strengthen our state’s partnership with President Trump to help address the national emergency posed by years of reckless border policies under the Biden-Harris administration


    “I’m really encouraged to see Idaho making its communities safer by signing on with our 287(g) program,” said Acting Director of ICE Todd Lyons

    “You have to remember that we’re talking about criminals — and often, they won’t take an arrest sitting down — so when local jails are allowed to turn them over to ICE in a safe setting, we don’t need to send dozens of federal law enforcement officers into the public to make arrests

    Partnerships like this one keep offenders out of communities and protect our families, friends and neighbors


    DHS has recently conducted several successful 287g operations with its partners, including:

    Operation Tidal Wave in Florida, which arrested nearly 1,200 criminal illegal aliens

    An operation in Nashville, TN that arrested nearly 200 criminal illegal aliens

    An operation in Salt Lake City, UT that arrested 52 criminal illegal aliens

     
     

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-Evening Report: The blow-up between Elon Musk and Donald Trump has been entertaining, but how did things go so bad, so fast?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Henry Maher, Lecturer in Politics, Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

    A no-holds-barred and very public blow-up between the world’s richest man and the president of the United States has had social media agog in recent days, with each making serious accusations against the other.

    And while tech billionaire Elon Musk appears to have cooled the spat somewhat – deleting some of his more incendiary social media posts about Donald Trump – the president still appears to be in no mood to make up, warning Musk of “very serious consequences” if he backs Democrats at the mid-term elections in 2026.

    Tensions erupted over Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB). The OBBB proposes extensive tax cuts which could add roughly US$3 trillion (A$4.62 trillion) to the US national debt.

    After stepping down from his role as advisor to Trump, Musk criticised the OBBB as “disgusting abomination” that would “burden America [sic] citizens with crushing unsustainable debt”. Trump returned fire, suggesting “Elon was ‘wearing thin’, I asked him to leave […] and he just went CRAZY!”.

    In a dramatic escalation, Musk responded by calling for Trump’s impeachment. Musk also tweeted allegations that Trump was implicated in the Epstein files related to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He has since deleted those tweets.

    Why has the much-hyped “bromance” between Musk and Trump suddenly ended? And what was the basis of their alliance in the first place?

    Musk in politics

    Like many billionaires, Musk had previously been hesitant to get involved in frontline politics. He says he voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, but claimed in 2021 “I would prefer to stay out of politics”.

    In early 2024, Musk was still claiming to be politically non-aligned, suggesting he would not donate to either presidential campaign.

    This apparent neutrality ended following the attempted assassination of Trump at a July 2024 campaign rally, with Musk immediately endorsing Trump.

    In reality, Musk’s conversion to the MAGA movement long predated the assassination attempt. Musk’s hyperactive Twitter/X account shows a steady radicalisation.

    Across 2020-2024, Musk engaged with accounts sharing MAGA and far-right conspiracy theories. These include the antisemitic Great Replacement Theory, and the related South African white genocide conspiracy. Musk’s posts also show the obsession with opposing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies characteristic of the MAGA movement.

    After endorsing Trump, Musk spent US$288 million (A$444 million) supporting Trump’s election and appeared at campaign events around the country.

    Musk’s support for Trump was both ideological and pragmatic.

    From tax cuts to immigration restrictions to opposing DEI, there were clearly many ideological commonalities between Musk and Trump.

    There were also clear practical benefits for both men. Trump gained the financial backing of the world’s wealthiest man. Musk gained not only unparalleled access to the US president, but also a role leading the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

    DOGE: success and failure

    Early reporting on the second Trump presidency noted the omnipresence of Musk, who at one point moved into Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort to be close to the president.

    However, observers were sceptical about the potential effectiveness of DOGE, and Musk’s claim it would save the government US$2 trillion (A$3.02 trillion).

    In the early months of the Trump administration, Musk cut government programs and employees at a remarkable rate. The USAID program was particularly hard hit, as were the Department of Education and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    As the spending cuts picked up pace, Musk began to attract more controversy. Critics questioned the apparent power wielded by the unelected billionaire. Musk’s ties to the far right were also in the spotlight after he appeared to perform two “Roman salutes”, which many observers believed to be a Nazi salute.

    Trump clips Musk’s wings

    Musk’s apparent rampage through government did not last long. As Trump’s executive appointees assumed control of their departments, Musk and DOGE experienced increasing resistance. After a series of fractious cabinet meetings, Trump reportedly reduced the power of DOGE in March.

    Political attention was also clearly affecting Musk’s businesses. The negative publicity has significantly damaged the Tesla brand, leading to declining sales around the world and repeated falls in Telsa’s share price.

    On May 1, Musk announced he would be leaving DOGE, claiming the department had saved the government US$180 billion (A$277 billion) in spending. This number is likely an exaggeration, but still falls well short of his original target.

    Musk has learned a harsh lesson in politics – that the complexities of government resist simple reform and cannot be easily rolled back in the way a CEO might slim down a company.

    For Trump, his manoeuvring of Musk appears to be another smart political move. As the public face of DOGE, Musk bore the negative wrap for early government cuts and chaos. Having used his money and reputation, Trump dispensed with Musk as he has with so many advisers and appointees before.

    The falling out

    Musk departed his role in a muted White House ceremony, where Trump thanked him for his service and presented him with a ceremonial “golden key” to the White House.

    However, behind the public show of civility, tension was brewing over Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill.

    Trump and Musk had originally claimed that the US$2 trillion (A$3.02 trillion) in DOGE savings could be used to fund a substantial tax cut. With the efficiency savings not eventuating, Musk worried the OBBB would significantly increase US public debt.

    Unable to convince Trump or other Republican legislators, Musk took to X, launching a “Kill the Bill” campaign that ultimately led to his incendiary showdown with Trump.

    For his part, Trump has belittled Musk, suggesting Musk only opposed the OBBB because it cut subsidies for electric vehicles.

    Though the subsidy cuts will affect Tesla, Musk has previously supported eliminating subsidies. Musk’s anger at the OBBB is more likely driven by the realisation he has been played by Trump.

    What now?

    Trump has used and discarded many other powerful figures in his chaotic political career. Musk has more power than most, and might be able to strike back at Trump.

    Yet, with his public reputation and brands already tarnished, Musk would be ill-advised to pick further fights with Trump and his adoring MAGA movement.

    Accordingly, Musk has indicated over the weekend he is open to a détente. Tesla investors will no doubt be relieved if Musk makes good on his pledge to step back from politics and return to his businesses.

    More concerning are the prospects for democracy. With wealth and power continuing to concentrate in a handful of billionaires, voters appear reduced to the role of viewers forced to watch the reality TV drama unfold.

    Though Trump appears to have won this round of billionaire battle royale, whatever happens next, democracy is the real loser.

    Henry Maher 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 blow-up between Elon Musk and Donald Trump has been entertaining, but how did things go so bad, so fast? – https://theconversation.com/the-blow-up-between-elon-musk-and-donald-trump-has-been-entertaining-but-how-did-things-go-so-bad-so-fast-258394

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI China: Trump deploying California National Guard to LA to quell protests despite governor’s objections

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

    U.S. President Donald Trump is deploying National Guard troops in Los Angeles despite the governor’s objections as protests over immigration raids continue.

    The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents raided several locations in Los Angeles on Friday, sparking mass protests downtown.

    Trump had signed a memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen “to address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester,” the White House said.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, objected to the president’s move, describing it as “purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions” in a post on X.

    Trump federalized part of the state’s National Guard under what is known as Title 10 authority, which places him, not the governor, atop the chain of command, Newsom was quoted by the Associated Press as saying. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • Trump says Musk relationship over, warns of ‘serious consequences’ if he funds Democrats

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Donald Trump said on Saturday his relationship with his billionaire donor Elon Musk is over and warned there would be “serious consequences” if Musk funds U.S. Democrats running against Republicans who vote for the president’s sweeping tax and spending bill.

    In a telephone interview with NBC News, Trump declined to say what those consequences would be, and went on to add that he had not had discussions about whether to investigate Musk.

    Asked if he thought his relationship with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, “I would assume so, yeah.”

    “No,” Trump told NBC when asked if he had any desire to repair his relationship with Musk.

    “I have no intention of speaking to him,” Trump said.

    However, Trump said he had not thought about terminating U.S. government contracts with Musk’s StarLink satellite internet or SpaceX rocket launch companies.

    Musk and Trump began exchanging insults this week, as Musk denounced Trump’s bill as a “disgusting abomination.” Musk’s opposition to the measure complicated efforts to pass the legislation in Congress, where Republicans hold only slim majorities in the House of Representatives and Senate.

    The bill narrowly passed the House last month and is now before the Senate, where Trump’s fellow Republicans are considering making changes. Nonpartisan analysts estimate the measure would add $2.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion U.S. debt over 10 years, which worries many lawmakers, including some Republicans who are fiscal hawks.

    Musk also declared it was time for a new political party in the United States “to represent the 80% in the middle!”

    Trump said on Saturday he is confident the bill would get passed by the U.S. July 4 Independence Day holiday.

    “In fact, yeah, people that were, were going to vote for it are now enthusiastically going to vote for it, and we expect it to pass,” Trump told NBC.

    Republicans have strongly backed Trump’s initiatives since he began his second term as president on January 20. While some Republican lawmakers have made comments to the news media expressing concern about some of Trump’s choices, they have yet to vote down any of his policies or nominations.

    DELETED MUSK POSTS

    Musk has deleted some social media posts critical of Trump, including one that signaled support for impeaching the president, appearing to seek a de-escalation of their public feud, which exploded on Thursday. During his first term as president, the House, then controlled by Democrats, twice voted to impeach Trump but the Senate both times acquitted him.

    The White House and Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Saturday on the deleted posts.

    People who have spoken to Musk said his anger has begun to recede and they thought he would want to repair his relationship with Trump.

    One of the X posts that Musk appeared to have deleted was a response to another user posting: “President vs Elon. Who wins? My money’s on Elon. Trump should be impeached and (Vice President) JD Vance should replace him.” Musk had written “yes.”

    On Theo Von’s “This Past Weekend” podcast – recorded on Thursday as the feud between Trump and Musk unfolded and released on Saturday – Vance called Musk’s criticism of Trump a “huge mistake.”

    “I’m always going to be loyal to the president, and I hope that eventually Elon kind of comes back into the fold. Maybe that’s not possible now because he’s gone so nuclear. But I hope it is,” said Vance, describing Musk as an “incredible entrepreneur.”

    Trump is due to attend an Ultimate Fighting Championship fight card on Saturday in New Jersey. Since his second election win, he has attended two previous UFC mixed martial arts fight cards with Musk. Musk is not expected to attend on Saturday.

    Musk, the world’s richest man, bankrolled a large part of Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, spending nearly $300 million in last year’s U.S. elections and taking credit for Republicans retaining a majority of seats in the House and retaking a majority in the Senate.

    Trump named Musk to head an effort to downsize the federal workforce and slash spending, lauding him at the White House only about a week ago for his work as head of the Department of Government Efficiency. Musk cut only about half of 1% of total spending, far short of his brash plans to axe $2 trillion from the federal budget.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI China: Iran condemns US travel ban as hostile, discriminatory

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

    Iran on Saturday strongly condemned a new U.S. travel ban targeting citizens from several countries, including Iran, calling the move a “clear sign of deep-seated hostility toward Iranians.”

    Iran’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, in a statement reported by state news agency IRNA, denounced the U.S. government’s decision, asserting that the restrictions target individuals solely based on their nationality and religion.

    The ministry added that such policies reflect a discriminatory mindset and violate fundamental principles of international law, including the principles of non-discrimination and respect for human rights.

    The statement called on the United Nations and international human rights bodies to publicly oppose Washington’s “unilateral and discriminatory measures.” It also affirmed that Iran would use all available means to protect the rights of its citizens and respond to the consequences of such actions by the U.S. administration.

    U.S. President Donald Trump signed a proclamation on Wednesday evening to ban travel from certain countries, citing national security risks. The White House said the proclamation, set to take effect on June 9, would fully ban the entry of nationals from 12 countries: Afghanistan, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI China: French President Macron to visit Greenland on June 15

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

    French President Emmanuel Macron is expected to pay an official visit to Greenland on June 15, the French daily Le Monde reported on Saturday, citing a French presidential office source.

    At the invitation of Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, and Jens-Frederik Nielsen, prime minister of Greenland’s self-government, French President Macron will be the first foreign head of state to visit Greenland since U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats of annexation, Le Monde reported.

    According to the French presidential office, the Elysee, the three leaders will hold talks over security in the North Atlantic and the Arctic, as well as issues related to climate change, energy transition, and supply of critical minerals.

    This visit aims to “strengthen cooperation with Greenland in these areas and contribute to strengthening European sovereignty,” Le Monde noted, citing the Elysee source.

    Trump has repeatedly expressed a desire to acquire Greenland, a strategically located and resource-rich autonomous territory of Denmark.

    Greenland, once a Danish colony, became an integral part of the Kingdom of Denmark in 1953. It was granted home rule in 1979, expanding its autonomy, although Denmark retains control over foreign affairs and defense. 

    MIL OSI China News