SDF Chatter

From National Fish and Wildlife Association

A resident of bottomland hardwood forests, the swamp rabbit has an unusual superpower. As the largest cottontail on the planet, their size and buoyancy make them excellent swimmers. When encountering danger, these clever floofs evade predators by hopping into water and swimming away. And they're just as speedy out of the water. Consider them the triathletes of the Mississippi Valley!

To thrive, the swamp rabbit needs large, contiguous forest patches and close proximity to wetlands. That's why we work to restore, enhance and conserve bottomland hardwood forest and wetland habitat to benefit wildlife in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley.

Bonus little video from PBS supposedly capturing the first ever footage of one swimming.

I've been down the trackers rabbit hole lately, given my basic knowledge of music making. This is what what I've manage to come up with recently. I know it doesn't sound all that good but at least it's something.

http://archive.today/2025.04.18-233234/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/us/politics/trump-rubio-putin-ukraine.html

“If it is not possible to end the war in Ukraine, we need to move on.”

Whatever Mr. Rubio’s meaning, his words were the latest American gift to Mr. Putin’s cause. At every turn since Mr. Trump’s inauguration, he or his top national security aides have issued statements that played to Russia’s advantage: taking NATO membership for Ukraine off the table, repeatedly declaring that Ukraine would have to give up territory and even blaming Ukraine for the invasion itself.

On Friday, Mr. Trump himself suggested that the United States could walk away from the conflict, much as it did when frustrated in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Indeed, in an interview with The New York Times in the spring of 2016, when he was first running for president, Mr. Trump described Ukraine as Europe’s problem. “I’m all for Ukraine; I have friends that live in Ukraine,” he said.

But Mr. Trump added: “When the Ukrainian problem arose, you know, not so long ago, and we were, and Russia was getting very confrontational, it didn’t seem to me like anyone else cared other than us. And we are the least affected by what happens with Ukraine because we’re the farthest away.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth struck a similar tone in February, when he declared on his first official trip to Europe that Ukraine would not enter NATO for the foreseeable future, that Russia would likely keep the 20 percent or so of Ukraine it had seized, and that any peacekeeping or “tripwire” force in Ukraine to monitor a cease-fire would not include Americans.

Mr. Trump’s distrust of Mr. Zelensky remains as strong as ever. “I’m not a fan,” he told Ms. Meloni in an Oval Office meeting on Thursday.

There is virtually no serious discussion underway at the White House or on Capitol Hill about the next package of arms for Ukraine when the current support, which was pushed through in the last months of the Biden administration, runs its course, according to congressional supporters of Ukraine.

European officials say they have not even received assurances that the United States will continue its extensive intelligence sharing for Ukraine, which has been key to its ability to target Russian troops and infrastructure.

In fact, when the White House talks about its relationship with Ukraine these days, it is usually in terms of what it is getting, not what it plans to give. Since the Oval Office blowup, the United States and Ukraine have been renegotiating a deal for American investment and access to Ukrainian minerals, rare earths and other mining projects.

It has taken the better part of six weeks to rewrite the deal that was left unsigned at the White House that day. But Mr. Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said this week that they would sign a substitute agreement next Thursday.

The deal Mr. Trump really covets is one with Russia. But getting there requires getting past Ukraine — either by declaring a cease-fire, or just setting the problem aside.

Some experts argue that even if Mr. Trump makes that huge shift, it likely will not work. They doubt Mr. Putin is ready to limit his ties to China, Iran and North Korea — countries that fuel the war effort with technology, drones and, in North Korea’s case, troops.

In several interviews, including one with Tucker Carlson, Mr. Witkoff described the benefits of a broader relationship with Russia, one that would essentially normalize relations. When Mr. Carlson asked about Mr. Putin’s broader ambitions to take all of Ukraine and perhaps seek to reabsorb some of the former Soviet republics, Mr. Witkoff dismissed the idea. He said he was “100 percent” certain that Mr. Putin has no desire to overrun Europe, or even to control Ukraine.

“Why would they want to absorb Ukraine?” he asked. “That would be like occupying Gaza.”

More content to come now that my precious collection is available to me day to day. Just have to find the boxes that contain my LD players.

http://archive.today/2025.04.18-150937/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/us/politics/trump-national-security.html

This month, a network of pro-Russian websites began a campaign aimed at undermining confidence in the U.S. defense industry, according to disinformation analysts.

The F-35 fighter jet was one target. The effort, coordinated by a Russian group known as Portal Kombat, spread rumors that American allies purchasing the warplanes would not have complete control over them, the analysts said.

A study by analysts at Alethea, an anti-disinformation company that has tracked the F-35 campaign, indicates that pro-Russian outlets are already stepping up their propaganda efforts.

“The U.S. government at least publicly seems to be taking a more hands-off approach or prioritizing defense against other threats,” said Lisa Kaplan, Alethea’s chief executive. “So foreign governments are currently targeting government and military programs like the F-35 program — if they can’t beat it on the battlefield, beat it through influencing political discourse and disinformation.”

Alethea found that Russian-controlled websites began pushing narratives after China restricted the export of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets to retaliate against Mr. Trump’s sharp increase in tariffs. The messages claimed that the United States faced a strategic vulnerability that could affect its ability to manufacture the F-35 and other weapons systems.

The Russian postings said that America’s willingness to allow manufacturing to move overseas had made its military edge unsustainable. The websites also amplified the message that U.S. allies no longer trusted that American defense companies would be reliable suppliers.

In the past, U.S. cybersecurity agencies would counter such campaigns by calling them out to raise public awareness. The F.B.I. would warn social media companies of inauthentic accounts so they could be removed. And, at times, U.S. Cyber Command would try to take Russian troll farms that create disinformation offline, at least temporarily.

But President Trump has fired General Timothy D. Haugh, a four-star general with years of experience countering Russian online propaganda, from his posts leading U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency.

The F.B.I. has shut down its foreign influence task force. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has ended its efforts to expose disinformation. And this week the State Department put employees who tracked global disinformation on leave, shutting down the effort that had publicized the spread of Chinese and Russian propaganda.

Almost three months into Mr. Trump’s second term, the guardrails intended to prevent national security missteps have come down as the new team races to anticipate and amplify the wishes of an unpredictable president. The result has been a diminished role for national security expertise, even in the most consequential foreign policy decisions.

“Right now, the N.S.C. is at the absolute nadir of its influence in modern times,” said David Rothkopf, the author of “Running the World: The Inside Story of the National Security Council and the Architects of American Power.”

Mr. Trump is skeptical of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, so the Pentagon is considering plans to hand over U.S. command of NATO troops. The president is close to the tech billionaire Elon Musk, so the Pentagon invited him to view plans in the event of a war with China in the Pentagon “tank,” a meeting space reserved for secure classified meetings (the White House stopped Mr. Musk from getting the China briefing).

Mr. Trump fired the director of the National Security Agency and six National Security Council officials on the advice of Laura Loomer, a far-right activist. Michael Waltz, the national security adviser, appeared to have little influence over the dismissals.

“When somebody with no knowledge can come in and level accusations at the N.S.C. senior directors, and Waltz can’t defend them, what does that say?” asked John R. Bolton, one of those who had Mr. Waltz’s job in Mr. Trump’s first term.

http://archive.today/2025.04.18-123341/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/us/politics/trump-israel-iran-nuclear.html

Israel had planned to strike Iranian nuclear sites as soon as next month but was waved off by President Trump in recent weeks in favor of negotiating a deal with Tehran to limit its nuclear program, according to administration officials and others briefed on the discussions.

Mr. Trump made his decision after months of internal debate over whether to pursue diplomacy or support Israel in seeking to set back Iran’s ability to build a bomb, at a time when Iran has been weakened militarily and economically.

The debate highlighted fault lines between historically hawkish American cabinet officials and other aides more skeptical that a military assault on Iran could destroy the country’s nuclear ambitions and avoid a larger war. It resulted in a rough consensus, for now, against military action, with Iran signaling a willingness to negotiate.

In a meeting this month — one of several discussions about the Israeli plan — Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, presented a new intelligence assessment that said the buildup of American weaponry could potentially spark a wider conflict with Iran that the United States did not want.

A range of officials echoed Ms. Gabbard’s concerns in the various meetings. Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff; Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth; and Vice President JD Vance all voiced doubts about the attack.

Even Mr. Waltz, frequently one of the most hawkish voices on Iran, was skeptical that Israel’s plan could succeed without substantial American assistance.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/32890027

Archived

“If [the] government goes to the bank with a list of 100 Uyghur names and says, you know, ‘give me the bank balance for these people [and] how much money they have.’ The bank will print it out and hand it over to the CCP [Chinese Communist Party]. Then, they shut down the bank accounts, freeze their assets, and they take their properties,” she said.

The Molar Mac is one of Apple's most short-lived (and ugly?) Macs, but perhaps real beauty comes from the inside. There's lots to explore with this obscure computer which came out during a crucial turning point in Apple's history!

Last Tuesday afternoon, just six days after Mark Zuckerberg’s third meeting with Donald Trump this year, the Meta CEO’s key antagonists in the federal government arrived in the Oval Office.

The visitors were Andrew Ferguson, the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, which is suing Meta in a trial that begins today; and Gail Slater, the assistant attorney general who is responsible for the Justice Department’s anti-trust enforcement.

Ferguson and Slater were there, a person familiar with the meeting said, to stiffen Trump’s spine against a relentless wave of lobbying from Meta. The social media giant has pushed the president to settle a lawsuit that began in his first term, and continued through the Biden years, which seeks to force the company to divest Instagram and Whatsapp. (The FTC is an independent agency, but both Meta and many of its foes have prepared for Trump to shape the handling of the lawsuit.)

Since 2020, the five richest men in the world have doubled their fortunes while almost five billion people have become poorer. A growing sense of economic injustice and insecurity is contributing to the rise of authoritarian movements around the world. Meanwhile, the world is set to blast past global heating targets. But this is not inevitable. What if, instead, economic decisions were made with people and the planet at the center?

This is the idea behind the concept of a human rights economy, which means putting rights at the heart of economic policymaking. The concept draws from the work of human rights scholars and organizations around the world, while supporting transformative economic approaches emerging from other movements, including climate justice, gender justice, and decolonization.