NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Pelosi Reflects on History of the AIDS Crisis: “That’s Why I Came Here. I Came to Fight.”

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi Representing the 12th District of California

    Washington, D.C. – During World Pride celebrations in the nation’s capital, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi paid a solemn visit to the AIDS Memorial Quilt display at St. Thomas’ Parish in Dupont Circle. The exhibit honors members of the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, D.C. who died of AIDS in the 1980s and ’90s.

    Pelosi, a lifelong champion in the fight against HIV/AIDS, viewed panels created in memory of more than 30 chorus members, many lovingly sewn by grieving friends and family during the height of the epidemic.

    “At first, I thought a quilt was a bad idea. But I was wrong,” Speaker Emerita Pelosi said. “The art became the most unifying thing. You see someone’s story laid out before you—their grief, their joy, their love—and suddenly, you understand. That is the power of this movement.”

    Pelosi reflected on her decades-long advocacy, recalling her first speech on the House Floor about HIV/AIDS and the initial resistance she faced. “People said, ‘Why would you lead with that?’ And I said, ‘Because that’s why I came here. I came to fight.’”

    Read coverage of the visit below:

    The Advocate: Nancy Pelosi visits AIDS Quilt exhibit during WorldPride

    [John Casey, 6/8/25]

    In the hushed sanctuary of St. Thomas’ Parish in Dupont Circle, there is a sacred memorial in fabric and thread. During WorldPride, the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, D.C., in partnership with St. Thomas’ and the National AIDS Memorial, unveiled a deeply personal display of the AIDS Memorial Quilt that includes panels for chorus members who were lost to the epidemic in the 1980s and ’90s.

    The exhibit features full quilt blocks and a companion photo display, honoring dozens of chorus members who died of AIDS complications. Some panels are decades-old, sewn by grieving loved ones at the height of the crisis. One in particular, the first made by and for chorus members, holds special meaning.

    “For us, this is not just history. These are our people,” said Michael Hughes, the chorus’s outreach manager, who has sung with the group for more than 20 years. “We estimate that about 100 members of our chorus died of AIDS. A hundred voices silenced.”

    The idea for the exhibit was sparked earlier this year after chorus members visited a local high school class reading Angels in America. “The students had no context for what life was like in the ’80s and ’90s,” Hughes explained. “We told them about the fear, about watching friends die, and about the quilt.”

    After that visit, chorus member Larry Cohen emailed Hughes with an idea and a question: What if they searched for quilt panels made in honor of their fallen members?

    “So we spent two and a half months digging into the National AIDS Memorial database, the Names Project records, and the digitized archives in the Library of Congress,” Hughes said. “We were able to confirm 33 individual chorus members who had panels made. Some we remembered personally.”

    The setting of St. Thomas’ Parish is itself part of the story. “During the AIDS crisis, only two or three churches in the city would even hold funerals for someone who had died of AIDS,” Hughes said. “St. Thomas’ was one of them.”

    On Friday night, the exhibit drew a special guest, House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, a longtime and fierce advocate in the fight against AIDS. Pelosi spent time with chorus members and viewed the panels while the group performed two songs in honor of her visit under the direction of Artistic Director Thea Kano.

    Addressing the chorus members, Pelosi recalled her own early skepticism about the quilt’s power. “At first, I thought a quilt was a bad idea,” she said. “But I was wrong. The beauty was in the art. And the art became the most unifying thing.”

    “People who may not think they have anything in common suddenly find that they do through these panels,” Pelosi continued. “You see someone’s story laid out before you, and the love they had in their lives. The grief, the anger, the joy, all of it. And it moves you.”

    Pelosi also reflected on the political and cultural battles of the time, and how vital the LGBTQ+ community’s activism was to making change.

    “When I made my first speech in Congress about HIV/AIDS, people said, ‘Why would you talk about that? Why would you lead with that?’” Pelosi recounted. “I said, because that’s why I came here. I came to fight.”

    “Yes, we worked to change policies, pass laws, allocate resources,” she said. “But the real miracle was the outside mobilization of the LGBTQ+ community who refused to be silent. That’s what made the difference. That’s what changed the world.”

    As Pride Month unfolds, the quilt serves as a memorial, a call to action, and a loving and prophetic testament to the quilt’s ability to humanize loss, to transform mourning into music.

    The AIDS Memorial Quilt exhibit is open to the public through Sunday at St. Thomas’ Parish. Daily visiting hours and more information are available at GMCW.org.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: ICE Captures Worst of the Worst Illegal Alien Criminals in Los Angeles Including Murderers, Sex Offenders, and Other Violent Criminals

    Source: US Department of Homeland Security

    California politicians and rioters are defending heinous illegal alien criminals at the expense of Americans safety

    WASHINGTON – Today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published additional information about some of the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens arrested during Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Los Angeles operation.

    “Why do Governor Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass care more about violent murderers and sex offenders than they do about protecting their own citizens?” said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “These rioters in Los Angeles are fighting to keep rapists, murderers, and other violent criminals loose on Los Angeles streets. Instead of rioting, they should be thanking ICE officers every single day who wake up and make our communities safer.”

    Below are just a few of the worst of the worst ICE arrested this week in Los Angeles:

    Cuong Chanh Phan

    ICE arrested Cuong Chanh Phan, a 49-year-old illegal alien from Vietnam. His criminal history includes a conviction for second degree murder and was sentenced to 15 years to life.

    Rolando Veneracion-Enriquez

    ICE arrested Rolando Veneracion-Enriquez, a 55-year-old illegal alien from the Philippines. His criminal history includes burglary in Ontario, CA with a sentence of four years in prison, sexual penetration with a foreign object with force and assault with intent to commit rape in Pomona, CA with a sentence of 37 years in prison. 

    Lionel Sanchez-Laguna

    ICE Los Angeles Lionel Sanchez-Laguna, a 55-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. Sanchez-Laguna’s criminal history includes discharging a firearm at an inhabited dwelling and vehicle in Orange, CA with a sentence of 365 days in jail, battery on spouse or cohabitant in Orange, CA with a sentence of four years of probation, willful cruelty to child in Orange, CA with a sentence of four years of probation, driving under the influence in Orange, CA with a sentence of ten days in jail, assault with semi-automatic firearm in Orange, CA with a sentence of three years in prison, and personal use of a firearm in Orange, CA with a sentence of three years in prison.

    Armando Ordaz

    ICE arrested Armando Ordaz, a 44-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. Ordaz’s criminal history includes sexual battery in Los Angeles, CA with a sentence of 135 days of jail and five years of probation, receiving known or stolen property in Norwalk, CA with a sentence of 90 days in jail and three years of probation, and petty theft in Los Angeles, CA with a sentence of 365 days in jail and four years of probation.

    Francisco Sanchez-Arguello

    ICE arrested Francisco Sanchez-Arguello, a 38-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. Sanchez-Arguello’s criminal history that includes arrests for grand theft larceny and possession of a prohibited weapon.

    Jose Gregorio Medranda Ortiz

    ICE arrested Jose Gregorio Medranda Ortiz, a 42-year-old illegal alien from Ecuador. Medranda Ortiz’s criminal history includes conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more cocaine while on board a vessel in Tampa, FL with a sentence of 135 months in prison.

    Victor Mendoza-Aguilar

    ICE arrested Victor Mendoza-Aguilar, a 32-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. His criminal history includes a conviction for possessing unlawful paraphernalia in Pasadena, CA with a sentence of 112 days jail, possessing controlled substances in Pasadena, CA with a sentence of 16 months in jail, assault with a deadly weapon: not firearm in Pasadena, CA with a sentence of four years in prison; obstructing a public officer in Pasadena, CA with a sentence of 364 days in jail.

    Delfino Aguilar-Martinez

    ICE arrested Delfino Aguilar-Martinez, a 51-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. Aguilar-Martinez’s criminal history includes assault with a deadly weapon with great bodily injury in Los Angeles, CA with a sentence of 365 days in jail. 

    Jose Cristobal Hernandez-Buitron

    ICE arrested Jose Cristobal Hernandez-Buitron, 43-year-old illegal alien from Peru. Hernandez-Buitron’s criminal history that includes a conviction for robbery that resulted in a 10-year sentence.

    Jordan Mauricio Meza-Esquibel

    ICE arrested Jordan Mauricio Meza-Esquibel, 32-year-old illegal alien from Honduras. Meza-Esquibel’s criminal history that includes arrests for distribution of heroin and cocaine and domestic violence.

    Jesus Alan Hernandez-Morales

    ICE arrested Jesus Alan Hernandez-Morales, a 26-year-old illegal alien from Mexico. His criminal history includes conspiracy to transport an illegal alien in Las Cruces, NM with a sentence of 239 days in jail. 

    # # #

    MIL Security OSI –

  • 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: Kustoff, Pfluger, Cassidy Introduce Bill to Expand Health Care Innovation

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative David Kustoff (TN-08)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Reps. David Kustoff (R-TN) and August Pfluger (R-TX), as well as U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), introduced the Small Biotech Innovation Act to exempt research and development-intensive small biotech manufacturers from the Medicare drug price negotiation program.

    “It is critical that the United States remains at the forefront of developing new medical technologies, treatments, and drugs,” said Congressman Kustoff. “The Small Biotech Innovation Act will help smaller companies invest in research and development by alleviating the excessive Biden-era regulations placed on them. This legislation is an important step in boosting innovation and helping find new cures for patients across the globe.”

    “The Inflation Reduction Act has proven to fall short in several areas, including its small biotech exemption that disincentivizes companies from investing in R&D and hinders the development of innovative therapies. By tying eligibility to R&D spending, we can better incentivize companies to develop new treatments that will benefit patients nationwide,” said Congressman Pfluger. “The bicameral Small Biotech Innovation Act is a forward-thinking approach that will strengthen America’s leadership in life-saving science by modernizing the small biotech exemption to reward real innovation and research investment, and ultimately protect these innovative small biotech companies.”

    “When the federal government stands in the way of developing better care, there’s a problem. The cures developed through small biotech innovation change the future for many patients. Instead of limiting it, we should encourage it,” said Dr. Cassidy.

    The Small Biotech Innovation Act would counter the negative impact that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) will have on innovation and drug development by providing any small biotech that spends a certain amount of money on research and development with the ability to delay one of their drugs for IRA negotiation for a year. The bill also prohibits any company that is owned by a foreign adversary from being eligible for the delay.
     

    Click here for the full text of the bill.  

     

    ###

    MIL OSI USA 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 –

  • India’s transformative decade: Landmark reforms drive ease of doing business

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Over the past eleven years, India has undergone a remarkable transformation in its business and investment climate, driven by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s governance model that emphasizes Seva (service), Sushasan (good governance), and Garib Kalyan (welfare of the poor). As part of the vision for a Viksit Bharat (Developed India), a series of economic and administrative reforms have positioned India as one of the most attractive global destinations for business and entrepreneurship.

    One of the most striking signs of progress is the meteoric rise of India’s startup ecosystem. From a few hundred startups in 2014, the country now boasts over 1.6 lakh recognized startups, which have collectively created more than 17.6 lakh direct jobs. Today, India is the world’s third-largest startup ecosystem.

    This growth has been supported by bold structural reforms that have reshaped the Ease of Doing Business landscape. The government has repealed over 1,500 obsolete laws and scrapped thousands of unnecessary compliances that previously created bureaucratic hurdles and increased the cost of doing business. These moves have significantly reduced red tape and rent-seeking practices, replacing them with a red-carpet welcome for investors and entrepreneurs.

    To enhance transparency and simplify government-citizen and business interactions, measures such as the National Single Window System have been introduced, enabling businesses to secure approvals through a single digital platform. Randomized labour inspections and faceless tax assessments have eliminated the era of ‘Inspector Raj’ and boosted compliance by reinforcing trust in businesses.

    The government’s commitment to fair and efficient governance is also reflected in the success of platforms like the Government e-Marketplace (GeM), which now handles nearly 75% of public procurement transparently, and in record tax collections, indicating a broader and more willing tax base.

    India’s improvements have been recognized globally. The country’s ranking in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index soared from 142 in 2014 to 63 in 2019. In the 2023 Logistics Performance Index (LPI), India climbed six places to reach the 38th position out of 139 countries—thanks to infrastructure development programs such as PM Gati Shakti and the National Logistics Policy.

    Furthermore, landmark decisions such as the removal of retrospective taxation, the scrapping of the Angel Tax, and a significant reduction in corporate tax rates have reinforced investor confidence.

    Prime Minister Modi’s economic philosophy sees entrepreneurs not merely as profit-makers but as key partners in national development. This shift in perception, supported by policy and institutional reforms, has expanded the pool of wealth creators, increased job opportunities, and generated higher incomes.

  • MIL-OSI USA: Deputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation

    Source: United States Department of State (4)

    Office of the Spokesperson

    HomeDeputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation

    Deputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation

    Readout

    June 6, 2025

    The below is attributable to Spokesperson Tammy Bruce:

    Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau met today with an Indian parliamentary delegation in Washington.  The Deputy Secretary reaffirmed the United States’ strong support of India in the fight against terrorism and the strategic partnership between the two countries.  The Deputy and delegation discussed the importance of advancing key areas of the bilateral relationship, including expanding trade and commercial ties to foster economic growth and prosperity in both countries.

    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 Analysis – EveningReport.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 –

  • India’s transformative foreign policy: A decade of strategic diplomacy

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Over the past eleven years, the Narendra Modi-led government has redefined India’s foreign policy, transitioning from a reactive to a proactive and assertive global stance. Guided by the principles of “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas, and Sabka Prayas,” India’s diplomacy has become more inclusive, development-focused, and aligned with national interests.

    Neighborhood First and Regional Engagement

    Central to India’s foreign policy is the ‘Neighborhood First’ approach, which emphasizes strengthening ties with neighboring countries. This policy has been complemented by the ‘Act East,’ ‘Think West,’ and ‘Connect Central Asia’ strategies, aiming to enhance India’s engagement with its extended neighborhood. The government’s vision of ‘Security and Growth for All in the Region’ (SAGAR) underscores the commitment to regional stability and cooperation.

    Indigenous Defense and Strategic Partnerships

    India’s defense policy has focused on achieving self-reliance and enhancing indigenous manufacturing capabilities. The commissioning of the indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, showcases the country’s growing prowess in defense technology. Through initiatives like the Innovation for Defence Excellence (iDEX), India has supported startups and innovators in developing successful prototypes, fostering innovation and technological advancement in the defense sector.

    Humanitarian Leadership and Disaster Response

    India continues to play a pivotal role as the ‘First Responder’ during times of humanitarian crises. The establishment of the Rapid Response Cell as a specialized division in the Ministry of External Affairs has made disaster protocols more resilient. India has undertaken several major relief and evacuation operations, such as Operation Dost (2023), Operation Ganga (2022), Operation Devi Shakti (2021), and Mission Sagar (2020), demonstrating its commitment to humanitarian assistance.

    Global Initiatives and Multilateral Engagement

    India’s foreign policy has been characterized by active participation in global initiatives and multilateral platforms. The launch of the International Solar Alliance (ISA), the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI), and the Lifestyle for Environment (LiFE) movement reflects India’s commitment to addressing global challenges such as climate change and sustainable development. These initiatives have strengthened India’s multilateral relations and showcased its leadership in promoting a sustainable future.

    G20 Presidency: A Global Milestone

    India’s G20 presidency in 2023 marked a significant achievement in its diplomatic journey. The theme “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (One Earth, One Family, One Future) resonated globally, emphasizing the interconnectedness of all nations. India successfully advocated for the inclusion of the African Union as a full member of the G20, highlighting its leadership role in representing the Global South.

    Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, India’s foreign policy has evolved into a dynamic and transformative force on the global stage. By prioritizing regional cooperation, indigenous defense capabilities, humanitarian assistance, global initiatives, and multilateral engagement, India has established itself as a responsible and influential global power.

  • MIL-OSI Global: Tracking apps monitor remote employees’ performance — and invade their privacy

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Danielle E. Thompson, PhD Candidate, Sociology and Legal Studies, University of Waterloo

    Business owners and managers claim that monitoring apps improve worker productivity. (Shutterstock)

    Digital monitoring is now a regular part of our working reality. From CCTV cameras to call recording, surveillance in the workplace is not new.

    But workers now face a more detailed and intrusive type of monitoring that is less understood, and at times even entirely unknown, by employees: employee monitoring applications (EMAs).

    It’s no longer just about being captured in the frame of a CCTV camera or having phone calls recorded. Workers now must be concerned about the collection of any and all activities that occur on their devices, and the use of this information to make decisions about their productivity, performance and risk to company security.

    Behaviour-monitoring software

    EMAs are a type of monitoring software that can be installed on worker devices to monitor their behaviours and activities. Common features include tracking time, keyboard strokes, email communications, websites visited, applications used and webcam video footage. Many of these apps also operate in an “invisible mode” that runs in the background, unknown to the employee.

    Amid the move to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, employers faced the challenge of managing their employees while they worked from home. EMAs provided employers with a quick and easy solution.



    Read more:
    Remote work requires us to reconsider how to evaluate and pay employees

    My research focuses on surveillance and privacy. Working alongside surveillance scholar Adam Molnar of the University of Waterloo, we conducted a survey between January and February 2022 of 402 managers, supervisors and employers working in companies in Ontario (60 per cent), British Columbia (30 per cent) and Québec (10 per cent) to better understand the use of these apps during the pandemic.

    Both remote working and EMA use were found to have increased after the start of the pandemic. Many, but not all, companies turned to EMAs to monitor their remote workers.

    A comparison of remote work and use of EMA rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    (D.E. Thompson), CC BY

    Privacy concerns

    We asked participants about the specific EMA software their company uses. A variety of EMAs exist on the market and are advertised for uses from security to workforce analytics. The most frequently used apps in our sample were Kickidler (49.8 per cent), Spyera (49.5 per cent), Flexispy (49.3 per cent), and Teramind (48.4 per cent).

    We then took a deeper dive into their advertised features and found that all four apps collected data using at least two highly invasive features, such as video surveillance or keystroke logging.

    Table comparing features and uses for the top four employee monitoring applications.
    (D.E. Thompson), CC BY

    Collecting data in these ways can raise serious concerns for employee privacy, especially when they work at home — a space that is typically viewed as private and often contains personal information that employers should not be privy to.

    If we’re concerned about employee privacy, then we need to understand exactly what companies are using the data for.

    We know that employee monitoring apps were adopted by many Canadian companies to manage remote workers, but what does that mean exactly? What is the data actually telling employers and how are they using it?

    We asked employers, managers and supervisors how their company currently uses EMAs, and found the most common uses to be productivity (28.9 per cent), efficiency (20.1 per cent), remote workforce management (19.9 per cent) and company analytics (18.2 per cent).

    Privacy versus productivity

    Owners and managers appear to be aware of the harmful consequences of these applications: 87.1 per cent were at least somewhat concerned about the negative impacts of these apps on employee trust. More than two-thirds — 70.7 per cent — also reported that they would be more likely adopt an app if it did not use invasive features like keystroke logging and video surveillance.

    Are the gains in productivity and efficiency worth the losses to employee privacy and trust? For some companies, the answer appears to be yes. While most owners and managers reported concerns about the invasiveness of EMAs, 51.7 per cent were still using the applications.

    For other companies, the gains in productivity are not worth the risks to employee privacy. For example, 29.3 per cent of owners and managers stated that significant changes to app features would be necessary before they would consider using it in their company.

    Protecting employees

    As hybrid working arrangements remain a normal part of our working lives, employee monitoring apps appear to be here to stay.

    A public opinion poll by the Center for Democracy and Technology in the United States found that American workers wanted to know why and how they were being monitored by their employers.

    Workers also felt they should be able to review any and all data collected about them, and that employers should be prohibited from sharing worker data without their permission, monitoring workers while off the clock, tracking their locations and monitoring productivity in ways that are harmful to the mental or physical health of workers.

    In Canada, the protection of employee privacy falls under a patchwork of federal and provincial laws that is insufficient for the management of EMAs.

    Worker protections vary by province and territory. Ontario’s Bill 88, passed in April 2022, established the first notification law for electronic monitoring in Canada. While a step in the right direction, notification alone is insufficient for the protection of worker privacy and well-being.

    Restrictions must be placed on the types of data collected, how it is collected and what it can be used for.

    Companies that continue to use EMAs must respect the privacy of workers by limiting the use of invasive features and providing workers with transparency and agency in their monitoring.

    Business owners considering the use of EMAs should ask themselves if the software is necessary to reach their goals. Do they need to track the location and activity of workers or access their webcams to determine productivity? Or are there other less harmful ways to measure performance, such as the quality of outputs and whether tasks are completed on time?

    Danielle E. Thompson 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. Tracking apps monitor remote employees’ performance — and invade their privacy – https://theconversation.com/tracking-apps-monitor-remote-employees-performance-and-invade-their-privacy-256261

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Canada must take action to prevent climate-related migration

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Christopher Campbell-Duruflé, Assistant Professor, Lincoln Alexander School of Law, Toronto Metropolitan University

    As wildfire season begins, the destructive impacts of climate change are being felt across Canada. Several communities in northern Saskatchewan have been issued evacuation orders due to wildfires. In Manitoba, Pimicikamak Cree Nation worked to evacuate hundreds of people as wildfires closed in, while smoke from those fires caused air-quality issues across the country.

    It isn’t just wildfires threatening people’s homes and livelihoods. In May, 1,600 residents from the Kashechewan Cree First Nation in Northern Ontario evacuated again due to flooding of the Albany River, which happens almost every year.

    The 2018 United Nations Climate Conference called on all states to adopt “laws, policies and strategies” meant “to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse impacts of climate change.”

    The figures are disquieting. By 2050, more than 140 million people could become internal climate migrants in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America alone, especially if action towards reaching net-zero carbon emissions continues to be insufficient.

    Canada is not spared: 192,000 people were evacuated in 2023 due to disasters made more severe by climate change, including floods and wildfires. As climate change leads to more extreme weather, temporary climate displacement could become permanent migration.

    Climate migration

    The World Bank defines internal climate migration as having to relocate for at least a decade to a location 14 kilometres or more away from your community because of climate impacts.

    Research I presented at the 2025 Canadian Association for Refugee and Forced Migration Studies Conference at Toronto Metropolitan University analyzed how Canada addresses the climate migration challenge in its submissions under the Paris Agreement, which requires parties to adapt to climate change.

    The Canadian government understated the reality of internal climate migration in its submissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement, which obscure the gravity of this phenomenon.

    One of those submissions is the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), the cornerstone report each state party must present every five years. Canada’s NDC from 2021 recognizes that climate change harms certain populations more than others, but does not address temporary displacement, let alone internal climate migration.

    The Fort McMurray wildfires displaced more than 80,000 people in 2016, with its population declining 11 per cent between 2015 and 2018. Similarly, the 2019 Québec spring floods displaced more than 10,000 people and, in Sainte-Marie, hundreds of low-income families abandoned the city because they could not afford the reconstructed homes.

    A clear definition of internal climate migrants in Canada, robust data and better co-ordination among Indigenous, municipal, provincial and federal governments is needed.

    This is something a National Adaptation Act could deliver, as a part of a comprehensive framework to bolster adaptation action across the country.

    Transparency lacking

    Canada submitted an adaptation communication in 2024. The communication discusses climate impacts but mentions internal displacement only once. It contains no data or discussion of when displacement becomes permanent, nor does it focus on the disproportionate impact on equity-deserving groups.

    The government submitted an updated NDC earlier this year. It noted “the devastating impact of wildfires, floods, drought and melting permafrost on communities across the country” but only briefly discusses adaptation, referring instead to the 2023 National Adaptation Strategy. The only mentions of displacement come in appended submissions by Indigenous Peoples, including Trʼondëk Hwëchʼin First Nation and Makivvik.

    Indigenous Peoples suffer from flawed adaptation policies and institutional barriers that prevent them from effectively responding to emergencies. As a result, First Nations evacuate 328 times more frequently than settler communities during climate disasters.

    In 2011, for example, officials in Manitoba diverted flood waters to Lake St. Martin to protect urban, cottage and agricultural properties. In the process, they flooded 17 First Nations and displaced 4,525 people. Return of the 1,400 residents of the Lake St. Martin First Nation to a new location only started in 2017, and as recently as 2020 displaced families were protesting on highways for their right to housing.

    A national adaptation act

    Canada should adopt a clear definition of internal climate migrants that captures displacement from climate disasters and slow-onset phenomena like sea-level rise, permafrost thaw and biodiversity loss.

    UN experts released a Technical Guide on Human Mobility in 2024, calling for “a sound evidence base on the patterns and trends, as well as on the drivers and outcomes” of climate-induced mobility. It also highlighted the need for adaptation efforts “that are informed by stakeholder consultations” and “existing (Indigenous) adaptation practices.”

    Defining internal climate migrants would allow Canada to gather robust data at last, and to act decisively on it.

    One first step is the federal government’s pledge of a National Recovery Strategy by 2028, which would set out “shorter time frames for displaced individuals to be able to return to their homes or resettle after climate change disaster events.” But a comprehensive approach is needed to go beyond the fragmented landscape of federal and provincial strategies.

    The Canadian government should work with all stakeholders toward the adoption of a National Adaptation Act, like Brazil, Germany and Japan.

    Such a law could remove barriers to Indigenous adaptation action, co-ordinate efforts across orders of governments to prevent displacements, define internal climate migration, ensure data collection and protect the rights of people temporarily displaced or internally migrating because of climate change.

    It should also aim for greater transparency and accountability than what Canada has so far achieved with its Paris Agreement submissions.

    Christopher Campbell-Duruflé receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for his research. He serves on the Legal Committee of the Centre québécois du droit de l’environnement.

    – ref. Canada must take action to prevent climate-related migration – https://theconversation.com/canada-must-take-action-to-prevent-climate-related-migration-257607

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Evans co-leads bill to restore basic right to victims of gun violence

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Dwight Evans (2nd District of Pennsylvania)

    Bill would help victims & survivors hold companies accountable in court, discourage illegal sales, defective guns and irresponsible marketing

    WASHINGTON (June 6, 2025) – U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans (D-PA-03) is co-leading reintroduction of the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, legislation to ensure that victims of gun violence would have their day in court and that negligent gun companies and gun sellers are not shielded from liability when they disregard public safety. 

    The bill would repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), passed by Congress in 2005, which gives the gun industry a unique and unjustifiable legal liability shield that protects gun manufacturers from lawsuits.

    “As someone who’s advocated for this concept in Pennsylvania’s legislature and now in Congress, I’m proud to be a co-lead on this bill to restore this basic right of victims and survivors – a right that a heavy-handed federal government took away 20 years ago. So many American gun deaths could be avoided if we held companies accountable for things like illegal sales, defective guns and irresponsible marketing. State attorneys general were able to hold Big Tobacco accountable in the 1990s, and they should be able to hold gun manufacturing companies accountable in the 21st century since thousands of lives depend on it. This legislation would be an important tool in the toolbox to protect our citizens from gun violence,” Evans said.

    Evans’ lead partners on the legislation are U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and were joined this week, the start of Gun Violence Awareness Month, by U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and U.S. Reps. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Jason Crow (D-Colo.), and Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) in leading a group of 81 members of Congress in introducing the bill in both the House and Senate.

    Murphy, Blumenthal, Swalwell, Schiff, Evans, and Thompson announced the legislation during a virtual press conference joined by leading gun violence prevention advocates: Kris Brown, president of Brady; Angela Ferrell-Zabala, executive director of Moms Demand Action; and Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and vice president of GIFFORDS Law Center. Video of the press conference is available here.

    Pennsylvania co-sponsors of the legislation include Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), and U.S. Reps Madeleine Dean (D-PA-04), Chris Deluzio (D-PA-17), and Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA-05).

    When Congress passed PLCAA, its supporters argued that it was necessary to protect the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits, and that victims of gun violence would not be shut out of the courts. In reality, numerous cases around the nation have been dismissed on the basis of PLCAA, even when the gun dealers and manufacturers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product. Victims in these cases were denied the right to even discover or introduce evidence. This legislation would allow civil cases to go forward against irresponsible bad actors.

    “There’s absolutely no reason why the gun industry should get special treatment when it comes to negligence. Their immunity from lawsuits effectively gives them a license to kill. It’s past time for Congress to repeal PLCAA and allow gun violence victims their day in court,” said Murphy.

    “PLCAA is the ultimate sweetheart deal – legal immunity afforded to basically no other industry for a product that kills tens of thousands of Americans every year,” said Blumenthal. “Despite the strength and perseverance of the Sandy Hook, Uvalde, and Highland Park families – and the tenacity of their legal teams – this is a problem that cannot be solved only through the courts. PLCAA must be repealed by Congress.”

    “No industry in American has a liability shield like gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers,” said Swalwell. “The NRA and their GOP stooges made sure that the gun industry has a unique immunity from accountability. This bill ends that ridiculous carve out. The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act will finally repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) once and for all, allowing victims of gun violence to bring civil suits against gun producers and sellers. The time has long since come for Congress to be clear – if you put the most dangerous weapons in the hands of the most dangerous people, you will be held accountable.”

    “More than a 100 Americans are killed by a gun every single day in America. And yet, Congress does nothing to hold the gun industry accountable when the negligence of gun makers and dealers is responsible for the tragic consequences their products have on our kids, our families, and our communities. As long as gun violence continues to take the lives of so many in California and across the nation, I will fight to repeal the liability shield that wrongly protects negligent gun industry actors from liability,” said Schiff.

    “Victims and survivors should be able to hold the gun industry accountable in court for negligent behavior. But right now, the gun industry is shielded from any liability when they disregard public safety. That’s wrong,” said Crow. “I’m introducing this bill so we can finally hold the gun industry responsible.”

    “In the 20 years since PLCAA was passed, it’s become clear that negligent gun manufacturers and dealers have taken advantage of the law. Responsible manufacturers and dealers don’t need this legal protection – and irresponsible ones are hiding behind it. As a hunter, combat veteran and responsible gun owner, I’m proud to work with Senator Blumenthal and Representative Swalwell to introduce this sensible legislation,” said Thompson, Chair of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force.

    In 2005, the National Rifle Association (NRA) identified PLCAA as their “number one” legislative priority, and the NRA celebrated the passage calling it the “most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in twenty years.” Changing the law to let courts hear these cases would provide justice to victims and their families, while creating incentives for responsible business practices that would reduce injuries and deaths. Effectively, the gun industry would once again be subject to the same laws as every other industry, just as it was prior to 2005.

    The legislation is endorsed by Brady, GIFFORDS Law Center, Everytown for Gun Safety, March for Our Lives, Guns Down America, Newtown Action Alliance, and Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund.

    Full text of the bill is available HERE.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Education – QPEC condemns Minister Seymour’s campaign to fine parents whose children do not attend school to a particular standard

    Source: QPEC

    “David Seymour warns of prosecutions this year in school truancy crackdown”
    Understanding School Absence – QPEC condemns Minister Seymour’s campaign to fine parents whose children do not attend school to a particular standard.  

    The Minister is launched on an expensive and fruitless game to blame and shame parents.   This feeds his law-&-order base.   It also feeds his own diet of rigid neo-liberal control of society.   His frame of reference is coercive and wrong-headed, offering no long-term solutions.  

    In its place, we propose a supportive school engagement model, with two basic principles to guide the issue of absenteeism in school:  

    1. a serious, well-intentioned, continuing investigation to address the complex reasons why some young people are not regularly at school
    These include mixtures of poverty; dislocation; instability in life; low socio-economic status; Covid fallout; unemployment; bullying; mental, cognitive and physical health obstacles; problems with transport; bad, uncertain and unavailable housing;  disillusionment with state structures like education.  
    2. a community-based programme focusing on school engagement to work alongside families, to help them address school attendance  
    NZ used to have local community stewards for school attendance, who knew their neighbourhoods intimately and supported them throughout the year.   But a previous government centralised the programme, thereby undermining the process.  

    Awkward questions  

    An obvious question levelled at this issue demands to know what to do with parents and families who choose deliberately to keep students out of school.  

    QPEC holds that the country should extend the community-based programme above to work as closely and positively as possible with families for long-term effects.  

    In particular, the programme needs:

    (1) to emphasise the lifetime benefits of well-supported, critical education for individuals, families and communities, and

    (2) to listen carefully to families’ commentaries on school education.  

    The emphasis should be on including people rather than scapegoating them as Seymour proposes.  

    Such a programme could be supported by using the $140 million that Seymour has acquired for  his law and order programme.  

    There is a disconcerting reality to face.   Some households may have very legitimate reasons for children to avoid school, based on previous bad experiences.   Nationwide, we need to recognise this possibility and develop mature responses as a result.    

    We should be ready to address discriminatory processes, for instance, and if necessary to provide alternative education models that are consistent with human rights and sound education practice.  

    Above all, our priority needs to be the best interests of young people and families.  

    David Cooke, National Chair, QPEC

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Speaker Johnson, the Blue Dogs are here to throw you a bone

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jim Costa Representing 16th District of California

    Over the last few weeks, Americans have been hearing endless mentions of the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” Although the Republicans’ reconciliation proposal is certainly big — so big it would add over $4 trillion to our national debt — it is by no means beautiful.
    There is no way to hide the ugly reality of this bill. It allows for $2.8 trillion in new borrowing over the 10-year budget window, adds $3.3 trillion to the already more than $36 trillion national debt, and cuts over $700 billion from federal health care spending, primarily Medicaid.
    By 2034, our debt-to-GDP ratio would be at 125 percent. Interest payments could exceed $2 trillion a year, making it impossible to pay off the debt. Considering we already spend more on servicing our debt than on stewarding American defense capabilities and health care, we are accelerating down an unsustainable and dangerous path. 
    Unrestrained fiscal policy has plagued the U.S. for decades, and it has not been limited to one side of the aisle. While members of Congress sit insulated on Capitol Hill and alternate between irresponsible tax cuts and excessive spending, life gets worse for everyday Americans.
    Moody’s recently lowered the U.S. long-term credit ratings to AA1 from AAA. At the same time, the world is moving further and further away from the American dollar. This means Americans are left with a smaller economy, less economic mobility, and a lower standard of living.
    As we know all too well, excessive borrowing leads to inflation and drives up interest rates, making it harder for Americans to finance a home, start a business, and put food on the table.
    This is unsustainable and has to change very quickly. Don’t just take it from us: In a recent Wall Street Journal editorial, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) wrote called it “essential that Congress deviate from its current path. Under every scenario now being considered, federal debt continues to skyrocket from its current level of almost $37 trillion.”
    So far in the 119th Congress, the majority hasn’t shown much of an appetite to deviate from this trajectory. In order to hand out tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy, the Republican reconciliation package would make devastating cuts to food assistance programs, health coverage, and other federal resources that hard-working Americans rely on to make ends meet. Is it so important to our colleagues across the aisle to give a handout to their mega-wealthy buddies that they would strap everyday Americans with even more crushing debt?
    The national debt and our federal government’s spending deficit may seem like far-off, intangible concepts when D.C. bureaucrats and television talking heads drone on about them for weeks on end. But the American people know perfectly well how debt adds up. Our constituents have to balance their budgets every month — why can’t the federal government do the same?
    The truth is, we can. For decades, Congress has chosen not to do so, perhaps because it isn’t politically expedient or it just takes too much hard work. Regardless, Congress and our federal government broadly are derelict in our duty to responsibly manage the government’s finances.
    Since our coalition was founded in the 1990s, the cornerstone of the Blue Dogs’ work has been our relentless focus on fiscal responsibility. For years, Blue Dogs supported legislation to curb reckless spending, hold both Democrats and Republicans accountable to our constituents, and require that Congress balance the budget. We had a willing partner in President Bill Clinton, who remains the most recent example of real fiscal discipline in the federal government. Now, as then, Blue Dogs know that the American people have one demand for their legislators as prices continue to rise and reckless fiscal policy threatens their livelihoods: “It’s the economy, stupid!”
    As this cry goes unanswered by a majority in Congress that proposes to drive our national debt to truly harrowing heights, Americans who work hard to pay their bills and take care of their families are losing confidence in their government. Each day this irresponsible spending continues, young Americans’ dreams that they can achieve the economic prosperity their parents did slip further and further away.
    The Blue Dogs’ vision to solve this problem is proving that our government can work. We believe that change is not only possible but essential. It doesn’t have to be this way.
    There’s another way forward: a bipartisan, commonsense way that pays down our debt while extending tax cuts to working Americans who need them most. Evidently, our offers to Republican leadership to work together on this fell on deaf ears this time.
    But with costs rising, confidence in government is sinking. Americans are eager for change, and we remain committed to using a steady hand to deliver pragmatic policies that most Americans agree on. In that spirit, our offer still stands. We are eager to work with our Republican colleagues to solve the issues facing our country and deliver results to the American people.
    We ask our colleagues: Will you work with us to deliver results?

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: New Zealand’s foreign policy stance on Palestine lacks transparency

    COMMENTARY: By John Hobbs

    It is difficult to understand what sits behind the New Zealand government’s unwillingness to sanction, or threaten to sanction, the Israeli government for its genocide against the Palestinian people.

    The United Nations, human rights groups, legal experts and now genocide experts have all agreed it really is “genocide” which is being committed by the state of Israel against the civilian population of Gaza.

    It is hard to argue with the conclusion genocide is happening, given the tragic images being portrayed across social and increasingly mainstream media.

    Prime Minister Netanyahu has presented Israel’s assault on Gaza war as pitting “the sons of light” against “the sons of darkness”. And promised the victory of Judeo-Christian civilisation against barbarism.

    A real encouragement to his military there should be no-holds barred in exercising indiscriminate destruction over the people of Gaza.

    Given this background, one wonders what the nature of the advice being provided by New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to the minister entails?

    Does the ministry fail to see the destruction and brutal killing of a huge proportion of the civilian people of Gaza? And if they see it, are they saying as much to the minister?

    Cloak of ‘diplomatic language’
    Or is the advice so nuanced in the cloak of “diplomatic language” it effectively says nothing and is crafted in a way which gives the minister ultimate freedom to make his own political choices.

    The advice of the officials becomes a reflection of what the minister is looking for — namely, a foreign policy approach that gives him enough freedom to support the Israeli government and at the same time be in step with its closest ally, the United States.

    The problem is there is no transparency around the decision-making process, so it is impossible to tell how decisions are being made.

    I placed an Official Information Act request with the Minister of Foreign Affairs in January 2024 seeking advice received by the minister on New Zealand’s obligations under the Genocide Convention.

    The request was refused because while the advice did exist, it fell outside the timeline indicated by my request.

    It was emphasised if I were to put in a further request for the advice, it was unlikely to be released.

    They then advised releasing the information would be likely to prejudice the security or defence of New Zealand and the international relations of the government of New Zealand, and withholding it was necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

    Public interest vital
    It is hard to imagine how the release of such information might prejudice the security or defence of New Zealand or that the legal issues could override the public interest.

    It could not be more important for New Zealanders to understand the basis for New Zealand’s foreign policy choices.

    New Zealand is a contracting party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Under the convention, “genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they [the contracting parties] undertake to prevent and punish”.

    Furthermore: The Contracting Parties undertake to enact, in accordance with their respective Constitutions, the necessary legislation to give effect to the provisions of the present Convention, and, in particular, to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide. (Article 5).

    Accordingly, New Zealand must play an active part in its prevention and put in place effective penalties. Chlöe Swarbrick’s private member’s Bill to impose sanctions is one mechanism to do this.

    In response to its two-month blockade of food, water and medical supplies to Gaza, and international pressure, Israel has agreed to allow a trickle of food to enter Gaza.

    However, this is only a tiny fraction of what is needed to avert famine. Understandably, Israel’s response has been criticised by most of the international community, including New Zealand.

    Carefully worded statement
    In a carefully worded statement, signed by a collective of European countries, together with New Zealand and Australia, it is requested that Israel allow a full resumption of aid into Gaza, an immediate return to ceasefire and a return of the hostages.

    Radio New Zealand interviewed the Foreign Minister Winston Peters to better understand the New Zealand position.

    Peters reiterated his previous statements, expressing Israel’s actions of withholding food as “intolerable” but when asked about putting in place concrete sanctions he stated any such action was a “long, long way off”, without explaining why.

    New Zealand must be clear about its foreign policy position, not hide behind diplomatic and insincere rhetoric and exercise courage by sanctioning Israel as it has done with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.

    As a minimum, it must honour its responsibilities under the Convention on Genocide and, not least, to offer hope and support for the utterly powerless and vulnerable Palestinian people before it is too late.

    John Hobbs is a doctoral candidate at the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (NCPACS) at the University of Otago. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • 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: Bitcoin Solaris Presale Surges Past $3.8M as Final $6 Phase Nears Close

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    TALLINN, Estonia, June 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The crypto community is buzzing as Bitcoin Solaris (BTC-S) crosses a major milestone, raising $3.8 million in its ongoing presale. With over 11,000 participants already onboard and the token price still at just $6, this marks one of the most rapid early-stage raises of 2025.

    Built with a clear focus on speed, decentralization, and developer-ready infrastructure, Bitcoin Solaris is more than just another token—it’s a full-stack blockchain ecosystem gearing up for mainnet launch. The current phase of the presale is expected to end within days, ahead of the next price jump to $7.

    Why Bitcoin Solaris Is Outpacing the Crypto Pack

    Bitcoin Solaris was built to take the best of each and leave the problems behind.

    Here’s how it does that:

    • Combines Proof-of-Work and Delegated Proof-of-Stake for a dual-consensus model.
    • Runs up to 100,000 TPS on the Solaris Layer, with 2-second finality.
    • Secures its Base Layer with SHA-256, keeping it compatible with existing mining rigs.
    • Includes 21 rotating validators, ensuring decentralization with performance.

    Why Everyone Is Talking About It

    From top Telegram groups to influencer channels, the buzz around Bitcoin Solaris is only growing. The detailed breakdown by Ben Crypto highlights why this project stands out in a sea of overpromises. With real use cases, deep audits, and a scalable structure, the hype isn’t artificial—it’s earned.

    What makes this even more incredible? The presale isn’t even over yet.

    • Current phase: 6 (last day)
    • Current price: $6
    • Next phase: $7
    • Launch price: $20
    • Potential return: 1,900%
    • Already raised: $3.8 million

    This is being hailed as one of the shortest and most explosive presales in recent memory, and the countdown has officially begun.

    Core Features That Power the Frenzy

    At the heart of Bitcoin Solaris is one idea: speed without compromise. Let’s break down why it’s different:

    • Hybrid PoW/DPoS Consensus: Maintains decentralization while enabling speed.
    • Validator Rotation: Every 24 hours, keeping the system agile and secure.
    • Energy Efficiency: Uses 99.95% less power than Bitcoin.
    • Cross-Chain Bridges: Built-in support for interoperability with Solana and others.
    • Rust-Based Smart Contracts: Initially leveraging Solana tools for dApps and DeFi expansion.
    • Audited Infrastructure: Smart contracts have been fully reviewed by Cyberscope and Freshcoins for trust and security.

    This Is How Bitcoin Solaris Will Make People Rich

    Wealth isn’t made by buying late. It’s built by spotting what’s early—but solid. Bitcoin Solaris isn’t a copycat. It’s a new layer of infrastructure designed to generate value for real participants.

    The reward distribution model ensures that every piece of the network feeds back into the community:

    • 40% of rewards go to miners
    • 25% go to validators
    • 20% go to stakers
    • 10% funds for long-term development
    • 5% support community initiatives

    Unlike many coins where wealth consolidates at the top, BTC-S is structured to empower long-term holders, contributors, and those who participate early.

    Real Vision, Real Roadmap

    Bitcoin Solaris isn’t pitching hope—it’s executing a plan. Here’s the official roadmap:

    Bitcoin Solaris Roadmap Summary

    • Phase 1 (Q2–Q4 2025): Token generation, whitepaper, core devs, and presale launch
    • Phase 2 (Q1 2026): Testnet, wallet, bridge integration, architecture optimization
    • Phase 3 (Q2 2026): Final mainnet prep, dev tools, exchange listings
    • Phase 4 (Q3 2026): Mainnet launch, AI-powered app release, governance rollout
    • Phase 5 (Q4 2026): DApp accelerator, Mining Power Marketplace, hardware wallet integration
    • Phase 6 (Q1–Q2 2027): Layer-2 upgrades, DEX, and quantum security
    • Phase 7 (Q3–Q4 2027): Fortune 500 partnerships, institutional tools, Innovation Labs
    • Phase 8 (2028+): AI integration, government collaborations, long-term evolution

    That’s not just a vision board—it’s an execution framework already in motion.

    The Final Surge Is On

    Bitcoin Solaris isn’t just another token looking for attention. It’s a serious infrastructure play backed by smart tech, audited code, and a growing army of supporters. With $3.8 million raised and momentum accelerating, this is one of the few presales that feels like more than a hype train.

    And with the price still sitting at just $6 for a very short time—this might be the final opportunity to ride the wave before it takes off.

    For more information on Bitcoin Solaris:
    Website: https://www.bitcoinsolaris.com/
     Telegram: https://t.me/Bitcoinsolaris
     X: https://x.com/BitcoinSolaris

    Media Contact
    Xander Levine
    press@bitcoinsolaris.com
    Press Kit: Available upon request

    Disclaimer: This is a paid post and is provided by Bitcoin Solaris. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility.Globenewswire does not endorse any content on this page.

    Legal Disclaimer: This media platform provides the content of this article on an “as-is” basis, without any warranties or representations of any kind, express or implied. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors, or omissions. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented herein. Any concerns, complaints, or copyright issues related to this article should be directed to the content provider mentioned above.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/9e98f21c-f2a3-4fc0-a9de-b7af4aa613c2
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/12501116-fdc4-4191-8c75-8bff502ba353
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b28e2e06-fd36-4b1f-8aa0-a90b8fcac27c
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/9b078cf0-6ca1-4dda-a405-acbfe248ed01

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM): “Fitch’s Downgrade of Afreximbank’s Rating is Based on Flawed Loan Classification”

    Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:

    JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, June 8, 2025/APO Group/ —

    In line with Decision [Assembly/AU/Dec.631(XXVII)] of the African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government and Article 6(g) of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) Statute (2020), which together mandate the APRM to provide support to African countries in the field of credit ratings. The APRM routinely undertakes independent analyses of rating actions and commentaries issued by international credit rating agencies on African sovereigns and multilateral financial institutions.

    On 4 June 2025, Fitch Ratings downgraded African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank), lowering its long-term foreign currency issuer default rating from ‘BBB’ to ‘BBB-’ with a negative outlook. Fitch justified its decision by citing a perceived increase in credit risk and weak risk management policies, based on its estimate that the bank’s non-performing loans (NPLs) stood at 7.1%. This estimate stems from Fitch’s classification of exposures to the sovereign Governments of Ghana (2.4%), South Sudan (2.1%) and Zambia (0.2%) as NPLs. Notably, this 7.1% figure is significantly higher than the 2.44% ratio reported by Afreximbank in its own disclosures.

    The APRM notes with concern Fitch Ratings’ misclassification of Afreximbank’s sovereign exposures to the Governments of Ghana, South Sudan and Zambia as NPLs. This classification raises critical legal, institutional and analytical issues which the APRM strongly contests. The assumption that Ghana, South Sudan and Zambia would default on their loans to Afreximbank is inconsistent with the 1993 Treaty establishing the Bank to which Ghana and Zambia are both founding members, shareholders and signatories. The Multilateral Treaty signed in 1993 is legally binding on all member countries, imposing specific legal obligations related to the Bank’s protection, immunities and financial operations.

    By virtue of this Treaty, loans extended by Afreximbank to its member countries are governed by a framework of intergovernmental cooperation and mutual commitment, rather than typical commercial risk principles. It is, therefore, legally incongruent to classify a loan to member countries as non-performing, especially when the borrower states are shareholders in the lender institution, no formal default has occurred and none of the sovereigns have repudiated the obligation.

    Fitch’s unilateral treatment of these sovereign exposures – as comparable to market-based commercial loans – despite their backing by treaty obligations and shareholder equity stakes, is flawed. Doing so reflects a misunderstanding of the governance architecture of African financial institutions and the nature of intra-African development finance. Fitch has misinterpreted the invitation extended by Ghana, South Sudan and Zambia to Afreximbank to discuss the loan repayments as signalling an intention to default and/or to lift the Preferred Creditor Status.

    The APRM calls upon Fitch Ratings to re-examine its criteria and assumptions in this case and to engage in technical consultations with Afreximbank and other relevant African stakeholders. Objective, transparent and context-intelligent credit assessments are critical to ensuring fair treatment of African institutions in the global financial system. The APRM reaffirms its commitment to promoting accuracy in the credit ratings.

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI China: Football stadium built with Chinese support opens in Minsk

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

    The Belarusian National Football Stadium, a landmark project built with Chinese support, officially opened here on Saturday evening, with President Alexander Lukashenko attending the inauguration ceremony.

    In his speech, Lukashenko expressed sincere gratitude to the Chinese leadership and Chinese partners. He said the stadium reflects both Belarusian national traditions and advanced engineering technology.

    As the largest and most modern football stadium in Belarus, it meets the highest international standards. With a seating capacity of over 33,000， the stadium was constructed under a general contract by Beijing Urban Construction Group, said the president.

    It has become another landmark building in Minsk, symbolizing the solid friendship between Belarus and China, he added.

    Zhang Jiasheng, deputy director of the General Administration of Sport of China, said in his remarks that the completion of the stadium is not only a major accomplishment among China’s technical and economic assistance projects, but also a vivid reflection of the political mutual trust, pragmatic cooperation, and people-to-people exchanges between the two countries. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • Colombia’s potential presidential contender Miguel Uribe shot, suspect arrested

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Colombian Senator Miguel Uribe, a potential presidential contender, was shot in Bogota on Saturday, according to the government and his party, as his wife said he was fighting for his life in hospital.

    The 39-year-old senator, who was shot during a campaign event as part of his run for the presidency in 2026, is a member of the opposition conservative Democratic Center party founded by former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. The two men are not related.

    According to a party statement condemning the attack, the senator was hosting a campaign event in a public park in the Fontibon neighborhood in the capital on Saturday when “armed subjects shot him from behind.

    The party described the attack as serious, but did not disclose further details on Uribe’s condition. Videos on social media showed a man, identified as Uribe, being tended to after the shooting. He appeared to be bleeding from his head.

    Uribe’s wife Maria Claudia Tarazona wrote on her husband’s account on X that he was “fighting for his life.”

    Colombia’s Defense Minister Pedro Sanchez said a suspect had been arrested in the shooting and that authorities were investigating whether others were involved. Sanchez said he had visited the hospital where Uribe was being treated.

    The government is offering some $730,000 as a reward for information in the case.

    Colombia’s presidency issued a statement saying the government “categorically and forcefully” rejected the violent attack, and called for a thorough investigation into the events that took place.

    Leftist President Gustavo Petro sympathized with the senator’s family in a message on X saying, “I don’t know how to ease your pain. It is the pain of a mother lost, and of a homeland.”

    Petro later said in a speech on Saturday night that the person arrested was a minor and that the investigation would focus on finding who had ordered the attack.

    “For now there is nothing more than hypothesis,” Petro said, adding that failures in security protocols would also be looked into.

    The United States’ Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement that the U.S. “condemns in the strongest possible terms the attempted assassination” of Uribe, blaming Petro’s “inflammatory rhetoric” for the violence.

    Uribe, who is not yet an official presidential candidate for his party, is from a prominent family in Colombia. His father was a businessman and union leader. His mother, journalist Diana Turbay, was kidnapped in 1990 by an armed group under the command of the late cartel leader Pablo Escobar. She was killed during a rescue operation in 1991.

    Colombia has for decades been embroiled in a conflict between leftist rebels, criminal groups descended from right-wing paramilitaries, and the government.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI Africa: African prisoners made sound recordings in German camps in WW1: this is what they had to say

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Anette Hoffmann, Senior Researcher at the Institute for African Studies and Egyptology, University of Cologne

    During the first world war (1914-1918) thousands of African men enlisted to fight for France and Britain were captured and held as prisoners in Germany. Their stories and songs were recorded and archived by German linguists, who often didn’t understand a thing they were saying.

    Now a recent book called Knowing by Ear listens to these recordings alongside written sources, photographs and artworks to reveal the lives and political views of these colonised Africans from present-day Senegal, Somalia, Togo and Congo.

    Anette Hoffmann is a historian whose research and curatorial work engages with historical sound archives. We asked her about her book.

    How did these men come to be recorded?

    Duke University Press

    About 450 recordings with African speakers were made with linguists of the so-called Royal Prussian Phonographic Commission. Their project was opportunistic. They made use of the presence of prisoners of war to further their research.

    In many cases these researchers didn’t understand what was being said. The recordings were archived as language samples, yet most were never used, translated, or even listened to for decades.

    The many wonderful translators I have worked with over the years are often the first listeners who actually understood what was being said by these men a century before.

    What did they talk about?

    The European prisoners the linguists recorded were often asked to tell the same Bible story (the parable of the prodigal son). But because of language barriers, African prisoners were often simply asked to speak, tell a story or sing a song.

    We can hear some men repeating monotonous word lists or counting, but mostly they spoke of the war, of imprisonment and of the families they hadn’t seen for years.

    Abdoulaye Niang from Senegal sings in Wolof. Courtesy Lautarchiv, Berlin275 KB (download)

    In the process we hear speakers offer commentary. Senegalese prisoner Abdoulaye Niang, for example, calls Europe’s battlefields an abattoir for the soldiers from Africa. Others sang of the war of the whites, or speak of other forms of colonial exploitation.

    When I began working on colonial-era sound archives about 20 years ago, I was stunned by what I heard from African speakers, especially the critique and the alternative versions of colonial history. Often aired during times of duress, such accounts seldom surface in written sources.

    Joseph Ntwanumbi from South Africa speaks in isiXhosa. Courtesy Lautarchiv, Berlin673 KB (download)

    Clearly, many speakers felt safe to say things because they knew that researchers couldn’t understand them. The words and songs have travelled decades through time yet still sound fresh and provocative.

    Can you highlight some of their stories?

    The book is arranged around the speakers. Many of them fought in the French army in Europe after being conscripted or recruited in former French colonies, like Abdoulaye Niang. Other African men got caught up in the war and were interned as civilian prisoners, like Mohamed Nur from Somalia, who had lived in Germany from 1911. Joseph Ntwanumbi from South Africa was a stoker on a ship that had docked in Hamburg soon after the war started.

    Wilhelm Doegen/Anette Hoffmann Abdoulaye Niang.

    In chapter one Niang sings a song about the French army’s recruitment campaign in Dakar and also informs the linguists that the inmates of the camp in Wünsdorf, near Berlin, do not wish to be deported to another camp.

    An archive search reveals he was later deported and also that Austrian anthropologists measured his body for racial studies.

    His recorded voice speaking in Wolof travelled back home in 2024, as a sound installation I created for the Théodore Monod African Art Museum in Dakar.

    Chapter two listens to Mohamed Nur from Somalia. In 1910 he went to Germany to work as a teacher to the children of performers in a so-called Völkerschau (an ethnic show; sometimes called a human zoo, where “primitive” cultures were displayed).

    Rudolf Zeller. Mohamed Nur.

    After refusing to perform on stage, he found himself stranded in Germany without a passport or money. He worked as a model for a German artist and later as a teacher of Somali at the University of Hamburg. Nur left a rich audio-visual trace in Germany, which speaks of the exploitation of men of colour in German academia as well as by artists. One of his songs comments on the poor treatment of travellers and gives a plea for more hospitality to strangers.

    Stephan Bischoff, who grew up in a German mission station in Togo and was working in a shoe shop in Berlin when the war began, appears in the third chapter. His recordings criticise the practices of the Christian colonial evangelising mission. He recalls the destruction of an indigenous shrine in Ghana by German military in 1913.

    Photographer unknown/ Albert Kudjabo drumming in a German camp.

    Also in chapter three is Albert Kudjabo, who fought in the Belgian army before he was imprisoned in Germany. He mainly recorded drum language, a drummed code based on a tonal language from the Democratic Republic of Congo that German linguists were keen to study. He speaks of the massive socio-cultural changes that mining brought to his home region, which may have caused him to migrate.

    Together these songs, stories and accounts speak of a practice of extracting knowledge in prisoner of war camps. But they offer insights and commentary far beyond the “example sentences” that the recordings were meant to be.

    Why do these sound archives matter?

    As sources of colonial history, the majority of the collections in European sound archives are still untapped, despite the growing scholarly and artistic interest in them in the last decade. This interest is led by decolonial approaches to archives and knowledge production.

    The author’s sound installation in Dakar of Niang’s recordings. Anette Hoffmann

    Sound collections diversify what’s available as historical texts, they increase the variety of languages and genres that speak of the histories of colonisation. They present alternative accounts and interpretations of history to offer a more balanced view of the past.

    – African prisoners made sound recordings in German camps in WW1: this is what they had to say
    – https://theconversation.com/african-prisoners-made-sound-recordings-in-german-camps-in-ww1-this-is-what-they-had-to-say-254127

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Eating wild meat carries serious health risks – why it still happens along the Kenya-Tanzania border

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ekta Patel, Scientist, International Livestock Research Institute

    Pastoralist communities, their livestock and diverse wildlife species coexist within a biodiversity-rich landscape stretching along the Kenya–Tanzania border.

    However, at this wildlife-livestock interface, local communities face mounting challenges. Shifts in land use, prolonged droughts, erratic rainfall patterns and increasing land degradation are placing growing pressure on the landscape. In addition, conflict between people and wildlife is on the rise, and many households rely on wild animals for food.

    Communities in the region eat a wide range of wild animals, from rodents, elephant shrews and birds to small antelopes and larger ungulates like bushbuck. This meat (“bush meat” as it is also popularly known in Africa) provides a valuable source of animal protein and minerals, especially where alternative domestic protein sources are scarce.

    Although hunting and consuming wild animals is illegal in Kenya, this is not the case in Tanzania, where certain forms of hunting for wild animals are permitted. Yet in both countries, many people eat wild meat regularly, often without awareness of the risks. These risks include zoonotic disease transmission and potential impacts on wildlife populations.

    Wild meat is a known source of zoonotic infections and disease spillover to humans. In fact, as many as three-quarters of emerging infectious diseases originate from wildlife. Illnesses such as anthrax, mpox, Ebola, and HIV have all been linked to close interactions between humans and wild animals.

    Despite these risks, wild meat consumption remains widespread, with some households eating it daily or weekly. Preventing future disease outbreaks requires a clear understanding of these health risks, as well as the underlying social, cultural and economic reasons that drive people to rely on wild meat.

    We set out to understand why people were eating wild meat along the Kenya-Tanzania border and whether they understood the risks of zoonotic diseases. Cases of anthrax have already been reported in this area.

    Our study involved interviews in border communities during the COVID pandemic – the most famous case of zoonotic disease transmission in recent times. We wanted to know whether communities understood the pandemic’s link to wild meat and if this affected their consumption of it.

    What stood out was that people at the border settlements kept eating wild meat or even ate more of it. This shows that economic necessity, cultural preferences and limited alternatives remain key drivers even when the world is in crisis.

    Though this research was done during COVID-19, it gives us insights into how people react when things get tough, especially when it comes to food and health.

    What’s driving wild meat consumption

    We found that several factors drove wild meat consumption, despite growing awareness of the health risks.

    Poverty

    Economic factors, particularly household income and limited financial means, strongly influenced wild meat consumption, particularly in communities with limited alternative protein sources. For instance, the COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on local economies. Tourism, a key source of income for border communities, experienced sharp declines. As household revenues fell, reliance on wild meat as an affordable protein source increased.

    Economic stability plays a crucial role in shaping consumption behaviours: 81% of those surveyed at the border settlements indicated they would stop eating wild meat if cheaper alternatives were available.

    The type of animal

    Perceptions of disease risks varied depending on the species consumed.

    Approximately 79% of respondents believed that certain animals posed a higher risks of zoonotic disease transmission. Hyenas were perceived as the most dangerous, followed by primates and snakes. These findings suggest that while economic necessity influences wild meat consumption, risk perception also shapes dietary choices.

    Gender plays a role

    Men expressed more concern over conservation and health risks than women. Men were also more likely to advocate against selling wild meat. Women exhibited lower concern regarding zoonotic disease risks, including COVID-19. These insights highlight the need for gender-sensitive interventions to address wild meat consumption.

    Education levels

    Education levels also influenced risk perception. Respondents with formal education displayed a stronger awareness of zoonotic transmission pathways. They were also more receptive to conservation and public health messaging. This highlights the importance of education in promoting safer and more sustainable practices within communities.

    National policies

    Despite sharing ecosystems and wildlife populations, Kenya and Tanzania have adopted fundamentally different governance approaches to wild meat. This in turn shapes outcomes for conservation, biodiversity and public health.

    Kenya follows a centralised and protectionist model. Hunting and consumption of wild animals are prohibited under the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act. This zero-tolerance policy is rooted in strong conservation principles aimed at protecting biodiversity.

    However, in practice, it has driven the activity underground, creating a thriving black market. This undermines conservation and enforcement efforts. It also increases the risk of zoonotic disease transmission due to unregulated handling and consumption of wild animals.

    Tanzania, by contrast, uses a decentralised, regulated slaughterhouse model. Licensed wild meat hunting and consumption is legal under regulation, particularly through game-controlled areas and permits introduced in 2020. This approach is meant to enable communities to benefit economically from wildlife and reduce incentives for illegal hunting.

    The existence of two divergent systems across a porous border creates challenges. These include illegal cross-border trade, conflicting conservation objectives, and uneven protection of biodiversity. There are also difficulties in implementing coordinated surveillance or public health interventions.

    The contrasting regulations in Kenya and Tanzania significantly influence wild meat consumption choices.

    In Kenya, where wild meat is strictly prohibited, consumption appears to be through informal and unregulated channels. This increases health risks and limits consumer awareness. In contrast, Tanzania’s regulated licensing system provides a legal pathway for access. This makes wild meat consumption more visible and, in some cases, perceived as safer. These differing policies shape how communities access, justify and engage with wild meat, often driving cross-border trade and complicating enforcement and risk communication efforts.

    What’s next?

    Addressing the risks associated with wild meat trade requires a multifaceted strategy that balances health, equity and sustainability.

    We suggest an intervention that prioritises economic stability and ensuring affordable alternative protein sources are accessible, especially in food-insecure settings.

    Public health education is also essential. An increasing awareness of zoonotic disease risks can help shift consumption behaviour.

    Because men and women perceived the dangers of wild meat consumption differently, gender-sensitive approaches should be integrated. It should also be noted that, although women are rarely the primary hunters, they are often prosecuted for possession or sale of wild meat. Gender disparities on how laws are applied must be addressed.

    Legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms must be strengthened to address cross-border wildlife trade, particularly in regions with differing policies like Kenya and Tanzania. They should also reduce the risks faced by individuals who may unknowingly engage in illegal practices due to a lack of clarity.

    We continue to work with national and regional stakeholders. This includes government bodies and technical partners who are actively engaging with us to co-develop One Health solutions. These solutions integrate public health, environmental sustainability and community well-being.

    Finally, community engagement and participation should be at the core of any intervention. This will ensure that policies are locally relevant, culturally sensitive and supported by those directly affected to reduce the risks of zoonotic disease spillover.

    – Eating wild meat carries serious health risks – why it still happens along the Kenya-Tanzania border
    – https://theconversation.com/eating-wild-meat-carries-serious-health-risks-why-it-still-happens-along-the-kenya-tanzania-border-252947

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI Global: African prisoners made sound recordings in German camps in WW1: this is what they had to say

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Anette Hoffmann, Senior Researcher at the Institute for African Studies and Egyptology, University of Cologne

    During the first world war (1914-1918) thousands of African men enlisted to fight for France and Britain were captured and held as prisoners in Germany. Their stories and songs were recorded and archived by German linguists, who often didn’t understand a thing they were saying.

    Now a recent book called Knowing by Ear listens to these recordings alongside written sources, photographs and artworks to reveal the lives and political views of these colonised Africans from present-day Senegal, Somalia, Togo and Congo.

    Anette Hoffmann is a historian whose research and curatorial work engages with historical sound archives. We asked her about her book.

    How did these men come to be recorded?

    About 450 recordings with African speakers were made with linguists of the so-called Royal Prussian Phonographic Commission. Their project was opportunistic. They made use of the presence of prisoners of war to further their research.

    In many cases these researchers didn’t understand what was being said. The recordings were archived as language samples, yet most were never used, translated, or even listened to for decades.

    The many wonderful translators I have worked with over the years are often the first listeners who actually understood what was being said by these men a century before.

    What did they talk about?

    The European prisoners the linguists recorded were often asked to tell the same Bible story (the parable of the prodigal son). But because of language barriers, African prisoners were often simply asked to speak, tell a story or sing a song.

    We can hear some men repeating monotonous word lists or counting, but mostly they spoke of the war, of imprisonment and of the families they hadn’t seen for years.

    Abdoulaye Niang from Senegal sings in Wolof.
    Courtesy Lautarchiv, Berlin275 KB (download)

    In the process we hear speakers offer commentary. Senegalese prisoner Abdoulaye Niang, for example, calls Europe’s battlefields an abattoir for the soldiers from Africa. Others sang of the war of the whites, or speak of other forms of colonial exploitation.

    When I began working on colonial-era sound archives about 20 years ago, I was stunned by what I heard from African speakers, especially the critique and the alternative versions of colonial history. Often aired during times of duress, such accounts seldom surface in written sources.

    Joseph Ntwanumbi from South Africa speaks in isiXhosa.
    Courtesy Lautarchiv, Berlin673 KB (download)

    Clearly, many speakers felt safe to say things because they knew that researchers couldn’t understand them. The words and songs have travelled decades through time yet still sound fresh and provocative.

    Can you highlight some of their stories?

    The book is arranged around the speakers. Many of them fought in the French army in Europe after being conscripted or recruited in former French colonies, like Abdoulaye Niang. Other African men got caught up in the war and were interned as civilian prisoners, like Mohamed Nur from Somalia, who had lived in Germany from 1911. Joseph Ntwanumbi from South Africa was a stoker on a ship that had docked in Hamburg soon after the war started.

    In chapter one Niang sings a song about the French army’s recruitment campaign in Dakar and also informs the linguists that the inmates of the camp in Wünsdorf, near Berlin, do not wish to be deported to another camp.

    An archive search reveals he was later deported and also that Austrian anthropologists measured his body for racial studies.

    His recorded voice speaking in Wolof travelled back home in 2024, as a sound installation I created for the Théodore Monod African Art Museum in Dakar.

    Chapter two listens to Mohamed Nur from Somalia. In 1910 he went to Germany to work as a teacher to the children of performers in a so-called Völkerschau (an ethnic show; sometimes called a human zoo, where “primitive” cultures were displayed).

    After refusing to perform on stage, he found himself stranded in Germany without a passport or money. He worked as a model for a German artist and later as a teacher of Somali at the University of Hamburg. Nur left a rich audio-visual trace in Germany, which speaks of the exploitation of men of colour in German academia as well as by artists. One of his songs comments on the poor treatment of travellers and gives a plea for more hospitality to strangers.

    Stephan Bischoff, who grew up in a German mission station in Togo and was working in a shoe shop in Berlin when the war began, appears in the third chapter. His recordings criticise the practices of the Christian colonial evangelising mission. He recalls the destruction of an indigenous shrine in Ghana by German military in 1913.

    Also in chapter three is Albert Kudjabo, who fought in the Belgian army before he was imprisoned in Germany. He mainly recorded drum language, a drummed code based on a tonal language from the Democratic Republic of Congo that German linguists were keen to study. He speaks of the massive socio-cultural changes that mining brought to his home region, which may have caused him to migrate.

    Together these songs, stories and accounts speak of a practice of extracting knowledge in prisoner of war camps. But they offer insights and commentary far beyond the “example sentences” that the recordings were meant to be.

    Why do these sound archives matter?

    As sources of colonial history, the majority of the collections in European sound archives are still untapped, despite the growing scholarly and artistic interest in them in the last decade. This interest is led by decolonial approaches to archives and knowledge production.

    Sound collections diversify what’s available as historical texts, they increase the variety of languages and genres that speak of the histories of colonisation. They present alternative accounts and interpretations of history to offer a more balanced view of the past.

    Anette Hoffmann 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. African prisoners made sound recordings in German camps in WW1: this is what they had to say – https://theconversation.com/african-prisoners-made-sound-recordings-in-german-camps-in-ww1-this-is-what-they-had-to-say-254127

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Eating wild meat carries serious health risks – why it still happens along the Kenya-Tanzania border

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Ekta Patel, Scientist, International Livestock Research Institute

    Pastoralist communities, their livestock and diverse wildlife species coexist within a biodiversity-rich landscape stretching along the Kenya–Tanzania border.

    However, at this wildlife-livestock interface, local communities face mounting challenges. Shifts in land use, prolonged droughts, erratic rainfall patterns and increasing land degradation are placing growing pressure on the landscape. In addition, conflict between people and wildlife is on the rise, and many households rely on wild animals for food.

    Communities in the region eat a wide range of wild animals, from rodents, elephant shrews and birds to small antelopes and larger ungulates like bushbuck. This meat (“bush meat” as it is also popularly known in Africa) provides a valuable source of animal protein and minerals, especially where alternative domestic protein sources are scarce.

    Although hunting and consuming wild animals is illegal in Kenya, this is not the case in Tanzania, where certain forms of hunting for wild animals are permitted. Yet in both countries, many people eat wild meat regularly, often without awareness of the risks. These risks include zoonotic disease transmission and potential impacts on wildlife populations.

    Wild meat is a known source of zoonotic infections and disease spillover to humans. In fact, as many as three-quarters of emerging infectious diseases originate from wildlife. Illnesses such as anthrax, mpox, Ebola, and HIV have all been linked to close interactions between humans and wild animals.

    Despite these risks, wild meat consumption remains widespread, with some households eating it daily or weekly. Preventing future disease outbreaks requires a clear understanding of these health risks, as well as the underlying social, cultural and economic reasons that drive people to rely on wild meat.

    We set out to understand why people were eating wild meat along the Kenya-Tanzania border and whether they understood the risks of zoonotic diseases. Cases of anthrax have already been reported in this area.

    Our study involved interviews in border communities during the COVID pandemic – the most famous case of zoonotic disease transmission in recent times. We wanted to know whether communities understood the pandemic’s link to wild meat and if this affected their consumption of it.

    What stood out was that people at the border settlements kept eating wild meat or even ate more of it. This shows that economic necessity, cultural preferences and limited alternatives remain key drivers even when the world is in crisis.

    Though this research was done during COVID-19, it gives us insights into how people react when things get tough, especially when it comes to food and health.

    What’s driving wild meat consumption

    We found that several factors drove wild meat consumption, despite growing awareness of the health risks.

    Poverty

    Economic factors, particularly household income and limited financial means, strongly influenced wild meat consumption, particularly in communities with limited alternative protein sources. For instance, the COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on local economies. Tourism, a key source of income for border communities, experienced sharp declines. As household revenues fell, reliance on wild meat as an affordable protein source increased.

    Economic stability plays a crucial role in shaping consumption behaviours: 81% of those surveyed at the border settlements indicated they would stop eating wild meat if cheaper alternatives were available.

    The type of animal

    Perceptions of disease risks varied depending on the species consumed.

    Approximately 79% of respondents believed that certain animals posed a higher risks of zoonotic disease transmission. Hyenas were perceived as the most dangerous, followed by primates and snakes. These findings suggest that while economic necessity influences wild meat consumption, risk perception also shapes dietary choices.

    Gender plays a role

    Men expressed more concern over conservation and health risks than women. Men were also more likely to advocate against selling wild meat. Women exhibited lower concern regarding zoonotic disease risks, including COVID-19. These insights highlight the need for gender-sensitive interventions to address wild meat consumption.

    Education levels

    Education levels also influenced risk perception. Respondents with formal education displayed a stronger awareness of zoonotic transmission pathways. They were also more receptive to conservation and public health messaging. This highlights the importance of education in promoting safer and more sustainable practices within communities.

    National policies

    Despite sharing ecosystems and wildlife populations, Kenya and Tanzania have adopted fundamentally different governance approaches to wild meat. This in turn shapes outcomes for conservation, biodiversity and public health.

    Kenya follows a centralised and protectionist model. Hunting and consumption of wild animals are prohibited under the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act. This zero-tolerance policy is rooted in strong conservation principles aimed at protecting biodiversity.

    However, in practice, it has driven the activity underground, creating a thriving black market. This undermines conservation and enforcement efforts. It also increases the risk of zoonotic disease transmission due to unregulated handling and consumption of wild animals.

    Tanzania, by contrast, uses a decentralised, regulated slaughterhouse model. Licensed wild meat hunting and consumption is legal under regulation, particularly through game-controlled areas and permits introduced in 2020. This approach is meant to enable communities to benefit economically from wildlife and reduce incentives for illegal hunting.

    The existence of two divergent systems across a porous border creates challenges. These include illegal cross-border trade, conflicting conservation objectives, and uneven protection of biodiversity. There are also difficulties in implementing coordinated surveillance or public health interventions.

    The contrasting regulations in Kenya and Tanzania significantly influence wild meat consumption choices.

    In Kenya, where wild meat is strictly prohibited, consumption appears to be through informal and unregulated channels. This increases health risks and limits consumer awareness. In contrast, Tanzania’s regulated licensing system provides a legal pathway for access. This makes wild meat consumption more visible and, in some cases, perceived as safer. These differing policies shape how communities access, justify and engage with wild meat, often driving cross-border trade and complicating enforcement and risk communication efforts.

    What’s next?

    Addressing the risks associated with wild meat trade requires a multifaceted strategy that balances health, equity and sustainability.

    We suggest an intervention that prioritises economic stability and ensuring affordable alternative protein sources are accessible, especially in food-insecure settings.

    Public health education is also essential. An increasing awareness of zoonotic disease risks can help shift consumption behaviour.

    Because men and women perceived the dangers of wild meat consumption differently, gender-sensitive approaches should be integrated. It should also be noted that, although women are rarely the primary hunters, they are often prosecuted for possession or sale of wild meat. Gender disparities on how laws are applied must be addressed.

    Legal frameworks and enforcement mechanisms must be strengthened to address cross-border wildlife trade, particularly in regions with differing policies like Kenya and Tanzania. They should also reduce the risks faced by individuals who may unknowingly engage in illegal practices due to a lack of clarity.

    We continue to work with national and regional stakeholders. This includes government bodies and technical partners who are actively engaging with us to co-develop One Health solutions. These solutions integrate public health, environmental sustainability and community well-being.

    Finally, community engagement and participation should be at the core of any intervention. This will ensure that policies are locally relevant, culturally sensitive and supported by those directly affected to reduce the risks of zoonotic disease spillover.

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

    – ref. Eating wild meat carries serious health risks – why it still happens along the Kenya-Tanzania border – https://theconversation.com/eating-wild-meat-carries-serious-health-risks-why-it-still-happens-along-the-kenya-tanzania-border-252947

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • Market share of electric cars in India accelerates past 4 percent in May

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    The market share of electric passenger vehicles (EVs) in India accelerated past the 4 per cent mark in May this year, from 2.6 per cent in the same month of the previous year, reflecting the increasing popularity of electric cars among Indian buyers as the country transitions to green mobility, data compiled by the Federation of Automobile Dealers Associations (FADA) shows.

    The share of electric passenger sales in May is also 0.5 percentage points higher than the 3.5 per cent share in April as part of the rising trend.

    The retail data shows 12,304 electric cars were sold during the month, compared to just 8,029 units in May 2024. The sales of electric cars in April this year stood at 12,233 units.

    “This is an important milestone in our industry’s journey towards electrification. This growth has been driven by improvements in battery technology, better range, and lower costs compared to earlier electric PV models,” Fada CEO Saharsh Damani said.

    Tata Motors maintained its market leadership in the electric car segment by selling 4,351 units during the month. Its closest competitor, JSW MG Motor, reported a strong year-on-year surge of 149 per cent, selling 3,765 electric cars in May, while Mahindra & Mahindra was ranked third with 2,632 units sold during the month. These top three electric car companies account for as much as over 87 per cent of total sales in the segment, according to FADA figures

    However, FADA projects that global supply-chain headwinds (rare-earth constraints in EV components, geopolitical tensions) may limit urban consumer sentiment and exert cost pressure.

    China, which is the dominant supplier of rare earth magnets, a critical component for the manufacture of electric vehicles, has started imposing restrictions on exports, which could pose supply chain problems.

    “If the supply situation for rare earth materials doesn’t improve, we could see production slowdowns that may impact retail sales in the near future,” Damani said.

    Meanwhile, the government notified guidelines on Monday for its forward-looking scheme to enable fresh investments from global manufacturers in the electric cars segment and promote India as a global manufacturing hub for e-vehicles.

    To encourage global manufacturers such as US tech giant Tesla to invest under the scheme, the approved applicants will be allowed to import completely built-in units (CBUs) of electric four-wheelers with a minimum CIF (cost insurance and freight value) of $35,000 at reduced customs duty of 15 per cent for a period of five years from the date that the application is approved.

    Approved applicants would be required to make a minimum investment of Rs 4,150 crore in line with the provisions of the scheme.

    The maximum number of e-4Ws allowed to be imported at the reduced duty rate will be capped at 8,000 units per year. The carryover of unutilized annual import limits would be permitted.

    (IANS)

  • MIL-OSI Russia: First China-Central Asia International Tourist Train Returns to Xi’an

    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

    BEIJING, June 8 (Xinhua) — The first China-Central Asia international tourist train returned to Xi’an, capital of northwest China’s Shaanxi Province, at around 6 p.m. Beijing time on Saturday, the Shaanxi Daily newspaper reported.

    A train carrying more than 200 passengers departed from Xi’an to Almaty, Kazakhstan, on May 29. It left China via the Khorgos railway checkpoint in Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.

    After the train arrived in Almaty, a Humanitarian and Tourism Exchange Week was held between the cities of Xi’an and Almaty, which included a variety of events, including the demonstration of intangible cultural heritage, promotion of traditional Chinese medicine culture, interaction in the sports field, and exchanges in the field of archaeology.

    According to the publication, the launch of the said international tourist train accelerates deepened cooperation between the cities of Xi’an and Almaty, will significantly contribute to the development of tourism in the areas along its route and will give impetus to regional economic cooperation.

    Let us recall that 2024 was the Year of Kazakhstan Tourism in China, and 2025 has been declared the Year of China Tourism in Kazakhstan.

    In May 2023, China and Kazakhstan signed an intergovernmental agreement on mutual exemption from visa requirements, which officially came into force in November of the same year.

    Kazakhstan is becoming a popular destination among Chinese tourists. According to statistics, by the end of 2024, the Chinese tourist flow to this Central Asian country amounted to 655 thousand people-times, which is 78 percent more than the previous year. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Report: China committed to building South China Sea into sea of peace, friendship, cooperation

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

    This photo shows the report, titled “Making the South China Sea a Sea of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation: China’s Actions” and published in both Chinese and English, released by Xinhua Institute, a think tank affiliated with Xinhua News Agency, on World Oceans Day, June 8, 2025. (Xinhua/Li He)

    Xinhua Institute, a think tank affiliated with Xinhua News Agency, on Sunday released a report highlighting China’s commitment to building the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation.

    The report, titled “Making the South China Sea a Sea of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation: China’s Actions” and published in both Chinese and English, noted that China has always been a steadfast advocate, promoter, and guardian of peace and stability in the South China Sea.

    According to the report, China has long maintained that peace and stability in these waters depend on collaborative efforts between China and member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Through deepened trust and cooperation across political, economic, and cultural spheres, this partnership has created lasting mutual benefits. Consequently, China has emerged as a reliable force for maintaining regional peace and stability while promoting cooperation and development in the South China Sea.

    The report stated that China has always adhered to the principles of building the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation: equal-footed consultation, rule-based co-management, mutually beneficial cooperation, and a constructive role.

    The report called on China and ASEAN countries to ensure that the solutions of the South China Sea issues remain in their own hands, to adhere to sound principles and direction in addressing the issues, and to continue upholding the notion of a maritime community with a shared future.

    The report also called for joint efforts by China and ASEAN countries to build the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation that benefits the people of all regional countries.

    The think tank report has received positive evaluations from experts. They believe the report comprehensively explained China’s practical achievements, insights, and pathways in advocating for the South China Sea to become a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation, marking a significant academic contribution to the study of South China Sea issues.

    Zhang Jie, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, noted that the report not only offered historical depth but also summarized the latest developments in the South China Sea situation. It further clarified China’s principled stance and comprehensively demonstrated China’s positive contributions to the peace and stability of the South China Sea based on facts.

    Yang Xiao, a research fellow at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, stated that the report, with a vision for a better future in the South China Sea, creatively explained and summarized China’s consistent adherence to the principles on South China Sea issues. Those principles serve as the foundation for China-ASEAN dialogue, cooperation, and constructive development, carrying significant theoretical and practical importance for the future, consensus-building, and bridging differences.

    Ma Chao, associate research fellow at the Maritime Silk Road Research Institute of Hainan Normal University, believed that China, upholding the concept of a maritime community with a shared future, has deepened cooperation with parties in the South China Sea. The report once again demonstrated China’s sincere commitment to maintaining peace and stability in the region, helping the international community better understand, appreciate, and respect China’s stance on the South China Sea.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: SFST departs for UK, Norway

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    Secretary for Financial Services & the Treasury Christopher Hui was due to depart today on a visit to the UK and Norway, and will meet government financial officials and representatives from the business sectors in both countries. He will also speak at a number of events.

    Mr Hui will return to Hong Kong on June 13. During his absence, Under Secretary for Financial Services & the Treasury Joseph Chan will be the Acting Secretary.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –