'War against these drug cartels'

'She simply was not cut out for the job'

Having once trained the first Black military pilots for deployment in World War II, Tuskegee University is now training another Black generation for another national challenge. Hoping to address the nation’s pilot shortage, the aviation science program at Tuskegee University in Alabama is currently on track to graduate 50 young Americans as commercial and private […] The post A New Generation of Tuskegee Aviators Takes to the Skies to Tackle Another National Challenge appeared first on Good News Network.

Books reading recommendations Five SF Stories Built Around Specific, Context-Dependent Disabilities Some characteristics are disadvantageous in highly specific SFF circumstances… By James Davis Nicoll | Published on September 10, 2025 Comment 0 Share New Share There must exist in some relevant field the concept of context-dependent disability. Which is to say, characteristics that are indisputably disadvantageous in the very specific circumstances in which the person with those characteristics finds themself, characteristics that in other circumstances would be irrelevant or even a strength. Perhaps real-world examples would help: a cognitive issue that makes reading harder was somewhat less disadvantageous when most people were illiterate and significantly less disadvantageous during the two million years or so between the first appearance of Homo and the invention of writing. Being discomforted by the high-pitched whine of a CRT monitor really only mattered when CRT monitors were still a thing. Breaking out in hives whenever one wore polyester clothes was extremely inconvenient in the 1970s, but not so much prior to the invention of polyester. What made me ponder this was encountering three works in quick succession. Don’t worry, I will add two more examples to reach the magic number five. Unwillingly to Earth by Pauline Ashwell (1992) Having unwittingly demonstrated her talent for manipulating other people, Lizzie Lee is reluctantly pried off the only farm on her rustic, backwater world Excenus 23 and sent off to school on Earth. There, she is to hone her social engineering skills, to better guide societies away from folly. There is, however, a significant impediment: Lizzie can’t read. More accurately, Lizzie cannot use the high-speed Reading Machines that cram text into people’s heads. She can read words on paper just fine, but being limited to that slow form of ingesting text puts Lizzie at a considerable disadvantage with respect to her classmates. Whatever the root cause of her inability to use Reading Machines, it is (likely) inheritable because her father has it too. Perhaps the trait has been passed down for millennia… invisible until the Reading Machine was invented. Luckily for Lizzie, Ashwell was in many ways an unconventional Astounding/Analog author, so the solution for Lizzie’s condition is not to cram her into the nearest disintegration chamber in the name of eugenic hygiene, but to find a workaround. Project Farcry by Pauline Ashwell (1995) Young Richard Jordan accompanies his father Dr. Jordan to the exoplanet Lambda. This isn’t because Dr. Jordan subconsciously senses that he is in a juvenile SF novel in dire need of a youthful protagonist. Rather, it’s a bid to keep Dr. Jordan’s reprehensible ex-wife Cora from institutionalizing Richard. Why does Cora want to rid herself of her son?1 Because she thinks Richard is a creepy snoop. Why does she think that? Because Richard is a telepath in a society where telepathy is almost unknown; he can’t help sensing other people’s secrets. Richard’s challenge is actually twofold: Cora isn’t inclined to tolerate inconvenience2, and there are so few telepaths around that each one is forced to develop their own protocols for managing their knack. Richard does finally find a socially acceptable outlet for his talent. Normally I would not feature two books by the same author in one of these essays unless all of the books were by the same author. However, it was reading both Ashwells plus the next book that set my mind on this course. Steel of the Celestial Shadows by Daruma Matsuura, translated by Caleb D. Cook (2020-onward) Ryudo Konosuke is a pitiful figure, neither able to live up to the ideals of a samurai, nor able to embrace some suitable exit from a life for which he is manifestly unsuited. Thus, he is impoverished and viewed with contempt by fellow samurai… contempt based on misapprehension. Others believe Ryudo is afraid of sharp objects, thus his poor grooming and refusal to wear a proper sword. In fact, Ryudo violently repels metal—he doesn’t shave with a metal razor because no razor can touch him, and he does not carry a sword because he can’t. Another way to look at Ryudo’s situation is that he’s completely invulnerable to swords and arrows. Indeed, someone striking at him with a sword could find fragments of the sword buried in their own forehead. In fact, there are any number of useful applications of his knack, none of which he explored3… because Ryudo’s judgemental father was completely fixated on the idea that a samurai has to carry a metal sword or they are worthless. Norstrilia by Cordwainer Smith (1975) Roderick Frederick Ronald Arnold William MacArthur McBan is the 151st of his line. There may well not be a 152nd. Beneficiaries of extended lifespans, Norstrilians keep their planet’s population acceptably low with a draconian Adulthood test Rod cannot pass. In the not-too-distant future, Rod will be euthanized, and that will be that for the McBans. The nature of Rod’s problem? He’s telepathically inept. His ability to receive telepathic communication is intermittent, and on those rare occasions when he can project, he can only produce a psychic scream. In a society with few or no telepaths, this would not matter. Surrounded as he is by telepaths, it does. Luckily for Rod, former schoolmate the Honorable Secretary Houghton Syme launches a series of assassination bids, the net result of which is to set Rod on a path to ownership of the planet Earth. This might not increase Rod’s life expectancy much—Earth is filled with hazards for which a space hick is poorly prepared—but at least his remaining life will be event-filled. Islands by Marta Randall (1976) Modern medicine promises Tia Hamley at least a century of life, perhaps even two. Alas, that’s all poor mayfly Tia can expect before her inevitable demise. Best for Tia to use her scant years as productively as she can. Tia’s issue is that she is immune to the Immortality Treatment. She will age and die, while the vast majority of people around her remain youthful. A mortal on a planet of immortals, her specific medical issues will be increasingly unfamiliar to doctors, which will no doubt make her advanced old age more interesting. Obviously, being immune to the Treatment wasn’t so bad before the Treatment was invented4. Tia also struggles with a social challenge: of course, the ageless aren’t really immortal. Given enough time, everyone falls prey to some mishap or other. Tia is a reminder of inevitable mortality, which is why one of her acquaintances decides to murder her. Of course, these are hardly the only examples of context-driven disabilities. I could have mentioned Usotoki Rhetoric (whose protagonist can sense deliberate lies, terribly inconvenient in a society reliant on polite lies5), or Always Human (whose protagonist cannot use futuristic body mods), except I have mentioned them here before. Feel free to mention other examples in comments below6.[end-mark] Aside from being a terrible person, I mean. ︎In Cora’s defense, she may not be an ideal mother, but Dr. Jordan wasn’t around at all. Dr. Jordan had convinced himself that the course of action most convenient for Dr. Jordan—leaving Richard to Cora to raise while Dr. Jordan conducts interstellar research—was what was best for Richard. ︎As of volume one, the only volume I’ve read. ︎Norstrilia’s Syme has the same disability. It’s not severe enough for him to fail the Adulthood test, but it is one that the not entirely lovable Norstrilians are content to leave Syme to manage alone. ︎Coupled with an inability to resist commenting whenever she noticed people lying, which may be the real disability. See also the TV show Poker Face. ︎Although I expect what will actually happen is a long discussion of how what I call “context-dependent disability” has a well-known, widely discussed, more succinct name, which everyone but me knows. Well, me and my cognitive assessment crew, whose lives I greatly enhanced, I assume, by taking the time to ask if the concept came up in their training. Nope. On an unrelated note, if you want to suddenly ramble about literacy in the context of anatomically modern humans, do it after the cognitive assessment. One of my editors suggests “maladaptive traits following environmental change” but I don’t think that’s quite right. ︎The post Five SF Stories Built Around Specific, Context-Dependent Disabilities appeared first on Reactor.

Last week, the Chinese Communist Party commemorated the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with a meticulously orchestrated military parade, showcasing an impressive array of advanced weaponry. This grand display, however, is merely a façade that barely conceals the vulnerabilities of the authoritarian regime. Strategically, the regime highlighted an impressive collection of military assets, including drones, jet fighters, and cutting-edge missiles. Among them, the KD-21 air-based hypersonic missile drew particular attention. A Chinese military expert proudly claimed that this missile can be launched from bombers beyond enemy air defense zones, capable of penetrating interceptors and striking targets before swiftly returning to base. Dubbed the “aircraft carrier killer,” this missile underscores significant strategic implications for China’s military ambitions. The impressive advancements in China’s military capabilities underscore the Communist regime’s decades-long commitment to modernizing the People’s Liberation Army. Official data reveals that China has dramatically doubled its military budget in the past decade, reaching $246.5 billion by 2025. However, many experts suggest that this figure may significantly underrepresent the true extent of military spending. A 2023 report by the U.S. Department of Defense estimates that actual expenditures could be 30 to 40% higher than the officially stated budget. This considerable investment not only strengthens China’s military power but also raises urgent concerns about global security and stability. However, despite this substantial investment, doubts linger regarding the military’s combat effectiveness, particularly as it has not been tested in battle since 1979. Recently, a Chinese Navy guided-missile destroyer attempted to intimidate a Philippine Coast Guard vessel and local fishermen near the contested Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. Instead, this destroyer collided with a nearby China Coast Guard ship, resulting in significant damage. This misstep reflects poorly on China’s Navy, which has undergone extensive modernization under Xi Jinping and now possesses the largest fleet in the world. Ultimately, this incident underscores a critical truth: Advanced military technology cannot substitute for real combat experience and operational proficiency. Additionally, Xi’s image as a strong leader who has everything under control has been increasingly undermined by rising public dissatisfaction inside China. Several incidents in August alone have garnered global attention. On Aug. 2, a video depicting a 14-year-old girl being bullied by three other students in Jiangyou, Sichuan province, went viral on Chinese social media. Many citizens were outraged by the police’s lenient punishment of the bullies and perceived indifference from government officials toward the girl’s parents seeking justice. This fueled thousands to rally outside the local government office on Aug. 4, calling for accountability while chanting, “No bullies. Give our democracy back.” In response, local police, supported by SWAT teams, used batons to beat protestors indiscriminately and arrested many. Millions of people witnessed the “Jiangyou incident” unfold on Chinese social media before censors swiftly removed the videos. Yet, the spirit of dissent could not be silenced, as numerous citizens sought ways to voice their outrage and protest.  On Aug. 7, a brave individual in Kunming, Yunnan, boldly held a sign proclaiming, “Xi Jinping Step Down.” Despite being arrested shortly after, his defiant stand resonated and inspired others to act. Then, on Aug. 29, just days before China’s grand military parade, activist Hong Qi took a bold step by projecting powerful anti-Communist slogans onto a prominent building in Chongqing, a bustling megacity in Southwest China. The provocative messages included, “No more lies, we want the truth,” “No more slavery, we want freedom,” “Only without the Communist Party can there be a new China,” and “Down with red fascism, overthrow the Communist tyranny.” It took police over an hour to track down and disable the projector, which had been cleverly hidden in a hotel room. By that time, Qi and his family had already fled to the United Kingdom. Qi demonstrated remarkable ingenuity by setting up a system that allowed him to operate the projector remotely and record the police’s response, which he then uploaded online for millions to witness. In essence, Qi outsmarted China’s extensive surveillance apparatus. Qi detailed in an interview his careful planning that led to his solitary protest, which he deliberately scheduled just before Xi’s grand military parade. His bold message to his fellow citizens was striking: “We should stand against tyranny … Anything might be the spark that lights the prairie fire.” These events underline the fact that Xi’s grip on power in China is far from secure. A growing sense of anxiety and despair pervades among ordinary Chinese people as the country grapples with a significant economic slowdown. The ongoing trade war with the U.S. has further deepened this downturn, and a prolonged property crisis has eradicated trillions of dollars in household wealth. The combination of a faltering economy and the government’s unpredictable and often harsh law enforcement policies has led to a mounting distrust of the authorities. The high youth unemployment rate, which was nearly 17% in February this year, means many tech-savvy young individuals have plenty of time to browse social media. Thus, they can quickly bring any issue to the forefront, often outmaneuvering censors like Qi did. These unemployed youth also mobilize rapidly, as demonstrated by protests sparked by incidents that resonate with their dissatisfaction toward the authorities. According to the China Dissent Monitor, the CCP’s heavy-handed approach to suppress dissent strict measures to suppress dissent have not deterred the public. In the first six months of this year, incidents of public dissent have surged 75% compared to the same period last year, indicating a clear rise in tension. The U.S. and its allies should remain vigilant, given the formidable arsenals the CCP has assembled and showcased at the recent military parade. We must be prepared to counter the threats posed by this weaponry. However, we should not be intimidated by it. No matter how extravagant China’s military parade was, it cannot hide the deep vulnerabilities of the authoritarian regime beneath the surface. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post China’s ‘Grand’ Military Parade Is a Facade That Barely Conceals Its Vulnerabilities appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Hmmm: SCOTUS Expedites Trump Tariff Appeal

The encounter will not be Voyager's closest, and is far from it's last.

On Friday, former White House press spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre is set to testify on Capitol Hill as the House Oversight Committee is in the “final stages” of its investigation into the mental decline of former President Joe Biden, which has called into question who was actually in charge in the Oval Office. But if recent history is any guide, don’t expect Jean-Pierre’s appearance to garner much, if ANY broadcast network coverage.   MRC analysts looked at ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS evening, morning and Sunday roundtable news shows from June 18 (when the closed hearings began) to the morning of September 10 and found a total of 4 minutes, 2 seconds spent on the scandal. NBC aired 3 minutes, 29 seconds on the hearings into Biden’s mental decline. PBS devoted just a scant 33 seconds to the hearings. ABC and CBS have yet to air a single second on them. Jean-Pierre’s testimony comes on the heels of a September 6 blockbuster story by Axios reporting there were concerns even within the Biden administration about who was in charge of his autopen.     On September 8, Fox News relayed the concerns of President Donald Trump and House Oversight Chair James Comer:  “New records reveal President Biden’s own administration raised concerns about autopen use to grant thousands of pardons. This is a historic scandal with massive repercussions,” Comer told Fox News Digital in response to the Axios report. “As President Biden declined, his aides carried out executive actions without his approval, casting doubt on the legitimacy of thousands of pardons and other executive actions.” Comer added, “The House Oversight Committee is in the final stages of its investigation. There must be accountability for this scandal.”  President Donald Trump weighed in on Truth Social: “THE BIDEN AUTOPEN SCANDAL IS BIG, NOT AS BIG AS THE RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA HOAX, OR THE RIGGED 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, BUT, NEVERTHELESS, ONE OF THE BIGGEST, EVER!!!” This “big scandal” remains too hot to touch for the broadcast networks. They are so beholden to the Democratic agenda that they have a hard time reporting on an issue involving even a former president.  On July 9, Biden’s physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, pleaded the Fifth. This generated some coverage on NBC and PBS, but none on ABC and CBS.  Since then, several former Biden administration figures have been called to testify, which other news outlets have proven possible to cover. FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier, for instance, produced stories on the days testimony that came from several prominent former Biden White House advisers: Ron Klain (July 24), Steve Ricchetti (July 30) Mike Donilon (July 31), Bruce Reed (August 5) and Anita Dunn (August 7). However, not one has generated any coverage on ABC, CBS, NBC, or PBS.    So don’t expect Jean-Pierre’s Friday appearance to end the current trend.

On Tuesday, CBS’s The Late Show with Stephen Colbert became the latest stop on Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s book tour, but the eponymous host got more than he bargained for when his straw man portrayal of a recent decision involving ICE was so bad, even the dissenting liberal justice had to correct him on it. In his monologue, after talking about President Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, Colbert previewed his interview with Sotomayor, “Trump’s friends aren’t all dead pedophiles. He also has six close pals on the Supreme Court. And yesterday they were at it again. In a courageously unsigned order, the Court is letting ICE agents target people for deportation based on their race or language. What the hell? Wait, are they saying, wait, they can arrest you for speaking Spanish? That's going to ruin karaoke night.”     He added, “My guest tonight, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court's first Hispanic member, issued a blistering dissent, writing the administration has, quote, ‘all but declared that all Latinos, U.S. citizens or not, are fair game to be seized at any time.’ Yes, any Latino could be deported at any moment.” Later, during the interview, Colbert repeated himself, “Let's talk about the decision yesterday. Yesterday, the Court ruled from that emergency docket that ICE can round up, in this case it was people of Hispanic heritage or who spoke Spanish in the case of Los Angeles and the California ICE arrests or detainments, but really anyone for any reason.” Sotomayor tried to interrupt, “Well, no. In fairness—” Colbert wasn’t having it, “I'm not a lawyer, but I'm going to push back here because in this case they're saying those are the circumstances, but isn't the upshot of that if they are looking for reasonable suspicion, which is a much lower bar than probable cause, they could make up new rationales for a different group of people who they feel are associated with some crime that has to be prevented.” For a second time, Sotomayor tried to push back, “Now, let me stop you. In fairness to the majority, and by the way, I didn't agree with them and—”     However, Colbert then derailed the conversation again, “No, I have your dissent right here.” Sotomayor reiterated, “No, and I didn't agree with them.” After Colbert added “powerfully,” Sotomayor finally was able to say what she wanted, “Thank you for giving me the adjective. Okay. I didn't agree with them. But they claimed there was more than those two factors: being Latino and speaking Spanish. I don't think the third adds much to the equation, but they do. They say it's because they are working in low-wage jobs.” A fourth category included locations where illegal immigrants are known to congregate such as bus stops or day labor pickup sites. Colbert then shifted from misrepresenting the majority opinion to mocking the idea the change made any difference, “So, people with low-wage jobs have fewer protections.” Sotomayor did not wish to push the issue, “Well, that's what they said. Let's not go any further. Okay. That’s what they said. And they're working at jobs where illegal aliens typically work. That's the claim, all right? Now, I explain and read my dissent, please, you should.” Colbert obliged, “I will. ‘That decision of the majority is yet another grave misuse of our emergency docket. We should not have to live in a country where the government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work in a low-wage job here rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost. I dissent.’” Amid a standing ovation from the audience, Colbert pulled out a stack of papers, “I have the whole thing here.” Even in that reading there is a difference. Sotomayor said “seize,” but Colbert earlier said, “deported.” They are not the same thing. Sotomayor’s position is still pretty out there because it would apply a different set of rules to Trump than previous presidents, but Colbert’s straw man is hysterical and used to delegitimize the Court and cast suspicions on its rulings. Here is a transcript for the September 9 show: CBS The Late Show with Stephen Colbert 9/9/2025 11:46 PM ET STEPHEN COLBERT: Trump’s friends aren’t all dead pedophiles. He also has six close pals on the Supreme Court. And yesterday they were at it again. In a courageously unsigned order, the Court is letting ICE agents target people for deportation based on their race or language. What the hell? Wait, are they saying, wait, they can arrest you for speaking Spanish? That's going to ruin karaoke night. "All right, ma'am, step away from the mic. You're being detained for aggravated 'La Bamba' with intent to 'Despacito.'"  My guest tonight, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court's first Hispanic member, issued a blistering dissent, writing the administration has, quote, "all but declared that all Latinos, U.S. citizens or not, are fair game to be seized at any time." Yes, any Latino could be deported at any moment. Though I think it might be hard for them to find the most famously elusive Latina of all, Carmen San Diego. … 9/10/2025 12:08 AM ET COLBERT: Let's talk about the decision yesterday. Yesterday, the Court ruled from that emergency docket that ICE can round up, in this case it was people of Hispanic heritage or who spoke Spanish in the case of Los Angeles and the California ICE arrests or detainments, but really anyone for any reason. SONIA SOTOMAYOR: Well, no. In fairness— COLBERT: I'm not a lawyer, but I'm going to push back here— SOTOMAYOR: All right. COLBERT: -- because in this case they're saying those are the circumstances, but isn't the upshot of that if they are looking for reasonable suspicion, which is a much lower bar than probable cause, they could make up new rationales for a different group of people who they feel are associated with some crime that has to be prevented. SOTOMAYOR: Now, let me stop you. In fairness to the majority, and by the way, I didn't agree with them and— COLBERT: No, I have your dissent right here. SOTOMAYOR: No, and I didn't agree with them. COLBERT: Powerfully. SOTOMAYOR: Thank you for giving me the adjective. Okay. I didn't agree with them. But they claimed there was more than those two factors: being Latino and speaking Spanish. I don't think the third adds much to the equation, but they do. They say it's because they are working in low-wage jobs. COLBERT: So, people with low wage jobs have fewer protections. SOTOMAYOR: That's what they said. COLBERT: Well, that's the upshot of it isn’t it. SOTOMAYOR: Well, that's what they said. Let's not go any further. Okay. That’s what they said. And they're working at jobs where illegal aliens typically work. That's the claim, all right? Now, I explain and read my dissent, please, you should. COLBERT: I will. “That decision of the majority is yet another grave misuse of our emergency docket. We should not have to live in a country where the government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work in a low-wage job here rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost. I dissent.” I have the whole thing here.

Libya's civil war has placed the Uan Muhuggiag mummy at risk. But negotiations are underway to transport the rare artifact from Libya to Rome, where it will undergo restoration and scientific analysis