#leadership speakers bureau

[speakersbureau1]

Meet the phenomenal women that are shaping much-needed dialogues on health and wellness. From fitness coaches to mental health experts, these women offer perspectives that are sure to supercharge your workforce with motivation, self-reflection and a personal growth mindset.

Click here to explore our curated list of #IWDSpeakers : https://outstandingspeakersbureau.in/international.../

#CommittingToInspireInclusion#InspireInclusion#womeninhealth#inclusionmatters#diversityandinclusion#diversityequityinclusion#internationalwomensday#IWD2024#healthandwellness#healthyworkplace#healthyworkplaces#TOSBExperts#fitnessmotivation#mentalhealth#mentalhealthmatters#mentalhealthatwork#personaldevelopment#personalgrowth#TOSB

[generic-whumperz]

Apocamerica Map

Apocamerica Masterlist

Understanding this map: Please note that I’m not a professional map maker and know absolutely nothing about cartography. This is simply a quick visual reference guide for navigating post-apocalypse America.

That being said, this map is subject to change and not wholly accurate or representative of safe/unsafe zones, as they constantly change, and there is yet to be an official database within this alternative universe. Think of this as an approximation. Also, keep in mind that this is 12 years after the initial outbreak, and things did not always look like this, nor will they continue to remain the same. Take this all with a grain of salt.

Zone breakdowns

Red, orange, & gray zones: AVOID AT ALL COSTS! Death is almost guaranteed from radiation and mutant anthrophages alike.

Blue Zone: Republic of Arcadia

Yellow zones: The yellow zones on the map are areas where human settlements still exist, and some communities are even thriving. However, these areas lack military protection and government aid, so they are considered unsafe (however subjective the word “safe” is within the context of this map). Yellow zones are also susceptible to radioactive wastelands but are often unexplored, classifying them as "unknown." Travelers in these areas risk encountering various dangers outside of anthrophages, including mutant animals, extremist groups, wasteland gangs, marauders, raiders, and other unsavory characters. Despite their predicted presence, these groups are not marked on this map as they tend to move around and are hard to keep tally of.

Green zones (power & economy): Areas designated as green zones are not entirely safe from security breaches, nemaxys outbreaks, and gang wars over territory and supply runs. These zones consist mainly of civilians striving to survive and establish a livelihood. As a result of the volatile post-outbreak landscape, the green zones are divided into constantly changing sectors. The few remaining "safe" human settlements are widely dispersed, leading the remaining Governors and congressmen to propose the formation of nation-states to exert better control over their respective areas.

However, the current de facto President, the former Speaker of the House, is determined to maintain control over sector territories and military command. They face the challenge of navigating a fragmented nation while contending with threats from the ROA and other factions attempting to seize power, testing their leadership in their efforts to restore order and unity to the ravaged remains of the US.

Despite the President’s efforts, the power vacuum in the sectors continues to expand as power-hungry politicians spare no effort to secure civilian allegiance. Some congressmen and governors have carved out their own fiefdoms within green and yellow zones, effectively becoming warlords of their respective regions.

Following the outbreak, the Hawaiian islands and Alaska are presumed to be the safest and untouched land masses. Hawaii closed its borders and halted all imports/ exports as soon as the first case of the nemaxys contagion hit the news. Meanwhile, a mass exodus of people left the continental US and headed up to Alaska, and the new capitol was relocated to a small Alaskan fishing town.

After the establishment of the Provisional Emergency Relief Agency (PERA), a federal-level build-back program was implemented in all green zones. The Bureau of Labor & Exports (BOLE) oversaw the program and regulated Chattel Services Inc. (CSI) and the remaining corporate-owned labor forces, which had a significant impact on the reconstruction efforts.

Under stringent government sanctions, an underground illicit black market has flourished, giving rise to new crime families that have ascended to power. These new syndicates replaced the previously dominant players, seizing control of the markets and territories once held by their fallen rivals.

Economic collapse rendered money worthless for a period, but eventually, the monetary system was reinstated, allowing for the revival of commerce through traditional means and ration tickets.

While crime and punishment were primarily addressed at the local level, the aftermath of the chaos led most people to abandon violence once their basic needs were met. Gainful employment provided them with a sense of purpose and belonging in society.

What about travel?

Transportation outside green zones mainly involves using trains, planes, or boats, as navigating on the ground with vehicles through a post-apocalyptic wasteland is considered too risky. However, some people still opt for ground transportation despite being viewed as dangerous and ill-advised compared to other means of travel.

[mariacallous]

For the third time since December, House Speaker Mike Johnson has failed to wrangle support for reauthorizing a critical US surveillance program, raising questions about the future of a law that compels certain businesses to wiretap foreigners on the government’s behalf.

Johnson lost 19 Republicans on Tuesday in a procedural vote that traditionally falls along party lines. Republicans control the House of Representatives but only by a razor-thin margin. The failed vote comes just hours after former US president Donald Trump ordered Republicans to “Kill FISA” in a 2 am post on Truth Social, referring to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, under which the program is authorized.

The Section 702 surveillance program, which targets foreigners overseas while sweeping up a large amount of US communications as well, is set to sunset on April 19. The program was extended by four months in late December following Johnson’s first failed attempt to hold a vote.

Congressional sources tell WIRED they have no idea what the next steps will be.

The program itself will carry on into the next year, regardless of whether Johnson manages to muster up another vote in the next week. Congress does not directly authorize the surveillance. Instead, it allows the US intelligence services to seek “certifications” from a secret surveillance court on a yearly basis.

The Justice Department applied for new certifications in February. Last week, it announced they’d been approved by the court. The government’s power to issue new directives under the program without Congress’s approval, however, remains in question.

The certifications, which are required only due to the “incidental” collection of US calls, generally permit the program’s use in cases involving terrorism, cybercrime, and weapons proliferation. US intelligence officials have also touted the program as crucial in combating the flood of fentanyl-related substances entering the US from overseas.

The program remains controversial due to a laundry list of abuses committed primarily at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which maintains a database that holds a portion of the raw data collected under 702.

Although the government says it only “targets” foreigners, it has acknowledged collecting a large amount of US communications in the process. (The actual amount, it says, is impossible to calculate.) Nevertheless, it claims that once those communications are in the government’s possession, it is constitutional for federal agents to review those wiretaps without a warrant.

An unlikely coalition of progressives and conservative lawmakers formed last year in a push to end these warrantless searches, many of the Republicans involved vocal critics of the FBI following its misuse of FISA to target a Trump campaign staffer in 2016. (The 702 program, which is only one part of FISA, was not implicated in that particular controversy.)

Privacy experts have criticized proposed changes to the Section 702 program championed by members of the House Intelligence Committee, as well as Johnson, who had previously voted in favor of a warrant requirement despite now opposing it.

“It seems Congressional leadership needs to be reminded that these privacy protections are overwhelmingly popular,” says Sean Vitka, policy director at Demand Progress, a civil liberties–focused nonprofit. “Surveillance reformers remain willing and able to do that.”

A group of attorneys—among the few to ever present arguments before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court—said in a statement on Tuesday that an amendment offered up by the Intel committee risked dramatically increasing the number of US businesses forced to cooperate with the program.

Declassified filings released by the FISA court last year revealed that the FBI had misused the 702 program more than 278,000 times, including, as reported by The Washington Post, against “crime victims, January 6 riot suspects, people arrested at protests after the policing killing of George Floyd in 2020 and—in one case—19,000 donors to a congressional candidate.”

James Czerniawaski, a senior policy analyst at Americans for Prosperity, a Washington, DC, think tank pushing for changes to Section 702, says that despite recognizing its value, it remained a “troubled program” in need of “significant and meaningful reforms.”

“The outcome of today was completely avoidable,” he says, “but it requires the Intelligence Community and its allies to recognize that its days of unaccountable and unconditional spying on Americans are over.”

[tomorrowusa]

The Biden administration has established the first ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention. It's met with approval from anti-violence activists.

Speaking in front of gun violence survivors, activists, and lawmakers, President Joe Biden on Friday announced a new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, an effort he promised would “centralize, accelerate, and intensify” the federal government’s efforts to combat gun violence. “After every mass shooting, we hear a very simple message ... do something,” Biden said in the White House Rose Garden. “My administration has been working tirelessly to do something,” Biden added, pointing to executive actions his administration had taken on ghost guns and gun trafficking, as well as the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, landmark legislation that became law in 2022. The new office, according to Biden, is one more attempt to answer that call, helping, for example, to “coordinate support for survivors, families, and communities affected by gun violence,” an effort that he said would be similar to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the government’s on-the-ground emergency response team. The office will also seek to identify more executive actions the president can take. Biden noted that he would continue to urge Congress to take legislative action on banning assault weapons and implementing universal background checks. Until then, he said the White House and activists will move forward with or without them.

The establishment of this office is not dependent on Congressional approval. House Republicans are probably too busy trying to shut down the government while seeking new ways to humiliate Speaker McCarthy.

Stefanie Feldman, an aide to President Biden who’s been working on gun safety policy with him for over a decade, will be the director of the new office. In an interview with Vox, she said that the office is meant to implement the laws and policies passed during Biden’s tenure, including the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and the president’s executive actions on gun violence. [ ... ] Currently, multiple government agencies are involved in efforts to reduce gun violence, including the Department of Justice, which gives grants to communities working to prevent gun violence; the Department of Health and Human Services, which funds research studying gun violence as a health epidemic; the FBI, which runs criminal background checks; and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which enforces national gun laws and regulates firearms sales. The White House, its gun reform allies in Congress, and advocates have been coordinating with one another for years. This office puts all of those efforts under one roof, with a dedicated leadership team inside the executive branch.

David Hogg, a Parkland shooting survivor and co-founder of March For Our Lives, has been calling for such an office.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Christopher Weyant, The Boston Globe

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

Members of the House of Representatives returned to work today after their summer break. They came back to a fierce fight over funding the government before the September 30 deadline, with only 12 days of legislative work on the calendar. That fight is also tangled up with Republican extremists’ demands to impeach President Joe Biden—although even members of their own caucus admit there are no grounds for such an impeachment—and threats to the continued position of Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as speaker of the House.

It’s an omnishambles, a word coined in 2009 by the writers of the BBC political satire The Thick of It, meaning “a situation, especially in politics, in which poor judgment results in disorder or chaos with potentially disastrous consequences.” 

It fits. 

In August, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed 12 spending bills covering discretionary funding—about 27% of the budget—by bipartisan votes, within limits set as part of the deal Speaker McCarthy made with President Biden to prevent the U.S. defaulting for the first time in history. 

But the House left for summer break without being able to pass more than one of the 12 necessary bills. The extremists in the House Freedom Caucus oppose the spending levels Biden and McCarthy negotiated, insisting they amount to “socialism,” although with the exception of the Covid-19 blip, discretionary federal spending has stayed level at about 20% of the nation’s gross domestic product since 1954. 

The Republican-dominated House Appropriations Committee has reneged on the deal McCarthy struck, producing bills that impose cuts far beyond those McCarthy agreed to. In particular, it cut Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding for programs to address climate change and the Internal Revenue Service, which has been badly underfunded since at least 2010, leaving wealthy tax cheats unaudited. The cuts are ideological: the bills have cut funding for food assistance programs for pregnant mothers and children, grants to school districts serving impoverished communities, the Environmental Protection Agency, agencies that protect workers’ rights, federal agencies’ civil rights offices, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the IRS (on top of clawing back funding in the IRA), and so on.

Although appropriations bills are generally kept clean, the extremists have loaded the must-pass bills with demands unrelated to the bill itself. They have put measures restricting abortion and gender-affirming care in at least 8 of the 12 bills. Even if such measures could make it through the Democrat-dominated Senate—and they can’t—President Biden has vowed to veto them. 

Even fellow Republicans are balking at the attempt of the extremists to get their ideological wish list by holding the government hostage. Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, told reporters she doesn’t see how the Republicans are going to get the bills out of the committee, let alone pass them. “Overall, I think it's going to be very, very hard to get these bills forward,” she said.

Far from negotiating with McCarthy over the break, Freedom Caucus members appear to be increasing their demands as a shutdown looms. In August, the caucus announced it would not support even a short-term funding bill unless it also included their own demands for border policy, an end to what they call “woke” policies in the Department of Defense, and what they call the “unprecedented weaponization” of the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They also oppose funding for Ukraine to enable it to fight off Russia’s invasion.

They have hinted they will use procedural votes to prevent any large spending bill from getting to the floor at all. One of the tools at their disposal is a challenge to McCarthy’s leadership, which thanks to the deal he struck to get the speakership in the first place, a single member can bring. Today, Florida representative Matt Gaetz threatened to “lead the resistance” if McCarthy worked with Democrats to fund the government. 

They have offered McCarthy a way to avoid that showdown: impeach President Joe Biden, although there is no evidence the president has committed any “high crimes and misdemeanors” required for an impeachment. 

Today, McCarthy availed himself of that escape clause. On the first day back from a 45-day August break, rather than tackling the budget crises, he endorsed an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. 

This is a fascinating moment, as the Republicans have opened an impeachment inquiry into Biden with no evidence of wrongdoing. For all their breathless statements before the TV cameras, they have not managed to produce any evidence. Trump's own Department of Justice opened an investigation into Biden four years ago and found nothing to charge. As Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo notes, Biden’s taxes are public, and a U.S. attorney has been scrutinizing Biden’s son Hunter for years; red flags should have been apparent long ago, if there were any.

Just yesterday, Representative Jamie Raskin (D-MD) tore apart the talking points far-right Republicans have been using to smear the president. He noted that none of the bank records Representative James Comer (R-KY) has referenced show any payments to President Biden, none of the suspicious activity reports the Oversight Committee has reviewed suggest any potential misconduct by Biden, none of the witness accounts to the Oversight Committee show any wrongdoing by Biden, Hunter Biden’s former business associates explicitly stated they had no reason to think President Biden was involved in his son’s business ventures, and so on. 

This inquiry is not actually about wrongdoing; it is a reiteration of the same plan Trump tried to execute in 2019 when he asked Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to smear Biden before the 2020 presidential election. By launching an inquiry, Republicans can count on their false accusations spreading through the media, tainting their opponents even without evidence of wrongdoing. See, for example, Clinton, Hillary: emails. 

McCarthy insisted to reporters that an impeachment inquiry would simply give House committees leverage to subpoena officials from the White House, but during the Trump administration, the Department of Justice issued an opinion that the House must take a formal vote to validate an impeachment inquiry. It did so in reaction to then–House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s launch of an impeachment inquiry without such a vote, and the decision invalidated subpoenas issued as part of that inquiry. Pelosi went on to hold a vote and to launch an official inquiry.

It will not be so easy for McCarthy. He has not wanted to hold a vote because outside of the Freedom Caucus, even Republicans don’t want to launch an impeachment inquiry when there is no evidence for one. Senate Republicans today were quick to tell reporters they were skeptical that McCarthy could get enough votes in the House for an article of impeachment, and they were clear that a Senate trial was not an option. Representative Ken Buck (R-CO), himself a member of the Freedom Caucus, said: “The time for impeachment is the time when there’s evidence linking President Biden—if there’s evidence linking President Biden to a high crime or misdemeanor. That doesn’t exist right now.” 

The attack on Biden is a transparent attempt to defend former president Trump from his own legal troubles by suggesting that Biden is just as bad. Russia’s president Vladimir Putin today also defended Trump, saying that his prosecutions show that the United States is fundamentally corrupt. His comment made former representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) seem to wash her hands of the modern incarnation of her political party. “Putin has now officially endorsed the Putin-wing of the Republican Party,” she wrote. “Putin Republicans & their enablers will end up on the ash heap of history. Patriotic Americans in both parties who believe in the values of liberal democracy will make sure of it.”

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) summed up the day: “So let me get this straight: Republicans are threatening to remove their own Speaker, impeach the President, and shut down the government on September 30th—disrupting everyday people’s paychecks and general public operations. For what? I don’t think even they know.”

The center-right think tank American Action Forum’s vice president for economic policy, Gordon Gray, had an answer. Ever since the debt ceiling fight was resolved, he told Joan E. Greve of The Guardian, “there’s a big chunk of House Republicans who just want to break something. That’s just how some of these folks define governing. It’s how their constituents define success.”

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[robertnelson2-blog]

Tech Speaker Sandiego

There are so many enticing Technology speakers just waiting to speak at your next event. Bringing a top speaker or expert to your event can be a game changer. Whether it is inspiring, engaging life stories or driving change within your organisation or institution. Tech Speaker Sandiego

Connect with Best Technology speakers & leaders through United States Speaker Bureau; a platform where leading organisations partner for their business conferences and events – via keynote presentations, cross-industry interactions, inspirational and leadership sessions.

[aacd2020]

感谢政府预留邮件地址Thank you to the government + judicial authorities: Reserved email address:

Government of Canada, Speaker, Members, Judiciary, Taxation, Leadership, Legal Experts, Excellencies, hello everyone.

We subjects. The good news for seniors is: by “crying out” for help and “saving lives,” we have a window to God. We have “great tribulation” and “great tribulation”. We only report to you when we are "on the verge of death." We don't understand English. Using Google Translate, we couldn't communicate over the phone. If the national leaders don’t care, the state functional departments don’t care, the royal prosecutors and the royal police don’t care, is this still a country? Do we still have what it takes to survive? We went to the local police station to report the crime for two years, but they refused to open a case. We have no debt, no illegal activities, Vancouver criminal organizations and racketeering syndicates. (Car Robbery + House Robbery + Land Robbery) This is not "gangster" behavior, this is white gangsterism. Crime committed by a state official. "They are proficient in the law and use the country's public power to break the law. They are crazy and bold." They stole 250 million Canadian dollars in national income tax. They legislate and make laws themselves. The security company has "Court Robbery Check" without any hindrance and can rob everything,

恐怖抢劫.What happened in Canada (judicial collapse + management chaos): "Terror" blatant robbery: shocked the world

1. World innovation anecdote: The Royal Police refused to call the police for 2 years and filed a case worth 500 million Canadian dollars. The company's land was defrauded, robbed and auctioned: 250 million Canadian dollars in taxes were evaded.

2. The Royal Canadian Police violated: "Constitution. Criminal Code": No law enforcement order, on behalf of the country: armed robbery. The huge wealth of the private castle hotel is earth-shattering

3. BC Supreme Court; Security Company: “Legislating” on behalf of the National Assembly to enact “tax evasion” laws: Land robbery: “One dollar auction”; (Issuing robbery checks)

4. BC Housing and Land Title Bureau: "Using power for profit, privately transferring and changing land ownership, and making huge profits through transactions" is more vicious and serious than robbing a bank.

5. National taxation: (The most important thing is) (the judicial impact on tax laws) cannot be used under any excuse to evade huge national taxes. His crimes were particularly serious.

6. We (taxpayers + citizens). Protect national image + national security + legal dignity + protect national tax revenue

North American Chinese Mutual Aid Cooperative,March 17, 2024

最尊敬的加拿大政府议长议员司法税务领导法律专家阁下您好

1,感谢政府+司法机关:预留邮件地址:

是我们草民.老人福音:我们有”呼喊”求救”保命”通往上帝的窗口,我们有”大苦,有”大难”,到了”死亡边缘,才向您们报告,我们不会英语,用谷歌翻译,无法电话交流,如果,国家领导不管,国家职能部门不管,皇家检察官+皇家警察不管,这还是国家吗?我们还有活的条件吗？我们两年时间去当地警察局报警立案,拒绝立案,我们没有债务,没有违法,犯罪组织诈骗集团.(抢汽车+抢房屋+抢土地)这不是:”黑帮”行为,这是:白帮”国家公职人员犯罪”他们精通法律,他们借用国家公权违法,他们疯狂:胆大包天”抢劫国家所得税2.5亿加元,他们自己立法,他们自己填写

《法院抢劫支票》通行无阻,可以抢劫一切,

加拿大(司法崩溃+管理混乱)发生:恐怖”公开抢劫:震惊世界

2,世界创新奇闻:皇家警察2年.拒绝报警立案,5亿加元,公司土地被诈骗抢劫拍卖:偷税2.5亿加元

3,加拿大皇家警察违反:”宪法.刑法”:没有执法令,代表国家:武装抢劫.私人城堡宾馆巨额财产,惊天动地

4, BC省高院.保安公司:代替国家议会”立法”制定”偷税”法律:抢劫土地:”一元钱拍卖”;(出具抢劫支票)

5, BC省房屋土地产权局:”以权谋利,土地产权,私自过户更改,交易获利”比抢银行:更凶恶,罪恶更严重

6,国家税收:(大于一切)不能以(司法冲击税法)不能以任何借口,偷漏国家巨额税金,罪恶特别严重

7,我们(纳税人+公民).保护国家形象+国家安全+法律尊严+保护国家税收

北美中国互助合作社

2024-3-17

[buffalonews]

Buffalo Latino Speakers Bureau

Another Latino Village Project

BUFFALO LATINO SPEAKERS BUREAU

“There are an estimated 60 plus million Latinos in the United States, made up of Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Cubans, and a mixture from Latin America, comprising over 20% of the population. Let us bring you up to date on our issues, concerns, and vision for the future.”

The BLSB is a program of the Buffalo Latino Village. We find you the right speaker for your events.

We work to provide public and private groups and organizations with the Latino perspective and voice on local, state, and national issues. We provide the missing platform to meet the cultural needs of your organization. We allow you to introduce, inform, and educate your company and organization to the LATINOS of the United States of America, the largest growing group in the United States.

Our Speakers/Consultants: Community Activists, Community Leaders, Government Officials, Educators, Poets, Writers, Artists, Community Activist, Entrepreneurs, Businessmen, Attorneys, Student Leaders

Topics: Business and Economic Development, Racism Against Latinos, Gentrification, Bilingual Education, Politics and Public Policy, Community Leadership, Government Discrimination, Our Children and Youth, Discrimination in the Workplace, Prisons, and the Latino Community, How to find and prepare for a job, How to self-publish my book, Get to know our Buffalo Puerto Rican/Latino Community, Afro-Latinos (Our Contribution to Black History).

You don’t see your topic? Tell us and we will find a speaker for your program.

Our Speakers/Consultants for your Event? Our Speakers and Consultants are always on the run, conducting speaking engagements, seminars, or workshops, or out of town at meetings and conferences; so please let us know in advance the date, time, and place of your event.

This is what we need from you to get you started: Event Sponsor, Contact Information, Date of Event, Audience size (projection), Length of program, Event Location, Subject/Content, and Speaker Fees (budget to pay speaker).

The client is responsible for hotel and travel expenses if the speaker is from out of town. Speaking fees are negotiable, based on the client’s request/budget and the speaker’s approval. The Speaker’s honorariums are paid or issued directly to the speaker by the client/sponsor.

Upon request, additional information will be provided by the Latino Speakers Bureau before signing the contract.

Email us: latinovillage1@gmail.com, 646-248-2302.

[mariacallous]

United States lawmakers are receiving a flood of warnings from across civil society not to be bend to the efforts by some members of Congress to derail a highly sought debate over the future of a powerful but polarizing US surveillance program.

House and Senate party leaders are preparing to unveil legislation on Wednesday directing the spending priorities of the US military and its $831 billion budget next year. Rumors, meanwhile, have been circulating on Capitol Hill about plans reportedly hatched by House speaker Mike Johnson to amend the bill in an effort to extend Section 702, a sweeping surveillance program drawing fire from a large contingent of Democratic and Republican lawmakers favoring privacy reforms.

WIRED first reported on the rumors on Monday, citing senior congressional aides familiar with ongoing negotiations over the bill, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), separate versions of which were passed by the House and Senate this summer.

More than 80 civil rights and grassroots organizations—including Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC, Color of Change, Muslims for Just Futures, Stop AAPI Hate, and United We Dream—signed a statement this morning opposing “any efforts” to extend the 702 program using the NDAA. The statement, expected to hit the inboxes of all 535 members of Congress this afternoon, says that failure to reform contentious aspects of the program, such as federal agents’ ability to access Americans’ communications without a warrant, poses an “alarming threat to civil rights,” and that any attempt to use must-pass legislation to extend the program would “sell out the communities that have been most often wrongfully targeted by these agencies and warrantless spying powers generally.”

“As you’re aware, this extremely controversial warrantless surveillance authority is set to expire at the end of the year, but will continue to operate as it does currently until April, as government officials have recognized for many years,” the groups say.

Johnson and Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment. Leadership of the House and Senate armed services committees likewise did not respond.

Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act authorizes the US government, namely, the US National Security Agency, to surveil the communications of foreign citizens believed to be overseas. Oftentimes, these communications—texts, calls, emails, and other web traffic—“incidentally” involve Americans, whom the government is forbidden from directly targeting. But certain methods of interception, those that tap directly into the internet’s backbone, may make it impossible to fully disentangle foreign communications from domestic ones.

Though a probable-cause warrant is usually required before US law enforcement can obtain the content of an American’s calls, the courts view Section 702 surveillance—accomplished with the compelled assistance of US telecoms—as a two-step process, applying constitutional safeguards to each step individually. The collection, or seizure, only “targets” foreigners and is thus legal. Once communications are in the government's possession, however, federal agents are free to query, or search, them under procedures approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, an 11-judge panel whose proceedings are classified and deliberated ex parte. These procedures are ostensibly designed to “minimize” the program’s impact on Americans' rights.

The “incidental,” or collateral, collection of Americans' communications is intensely controversial, due in part to procedures—namely those of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)—that allow federal agents to conduct warrantless, after-the-fact queries of Section 702 data for investigations of a purely domestic nature.

The conservative and libertarian nonprofit FreedomWorks, which has supported privacy reforms in an array of surveillance debates at the federal, state, and local levels, said Tuesday that it intends to issue a “key vote” against the NDAA in the event a Section 702 amendment is included in the bill. Key votes are a FreedomWorks scoring tool that track controversial votes by conservative lawmakers—effectively, a bad mark that may be used against them in future elections. The American Civil Liberties Union says likewise that it intends to score the vote using its own similar process, which tags progressives with votes the group deems at odds with the Bill of Rights.

“To use the NDAA to reauthorize a mass spying program that has been so flagrantly abused without going through the full legislative process and robust debate betrays the public’s trust,” says Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at the ACLU. Added FreedomWorks president Adam Brandon: “This is the time for robust debate over these issues, not maneuvers by congressional leadership to undermine Americans’ privacy. FISA reauthorization should not be in the NDAA—period.”

A single, uniform bill approved by both chambers is needed before the NDAA can be sent to the president for his signature. A conference of dozens of lawmakers, drawn in large part from the armed services committees, is expected to receive a copy of the bill on Wednesday—their first opportunity to review the consolidated text—and will have until the close of business to approve the language.

From there, the NDAA is subjected to different sets of rules for each chamber. In the Senate, it will either be ushered directly to the floor for a vote or may require three-fifths of the body to formally end debate on the NDAA. In the House, the bill may be subjected to a “rule” issued by the House Rules Committee, which is typically designed to promote the goals of party leaders, waiving points of order or limiting floor debate. The bill may also be considered “under suspension,” however, which is an expedited process that prohibits floor amendments and requires a two-thirds majority.

Senior Democratic and Republican sources say the House is expected to bypass the Rules Committee, meaning there will be no opportunity to strike down any amendments that could extend the 702 program—which is itself not typically included as part of the NDAA.

A senior Republican aide tells WIRED the odds of Johnson proceeding with a plan to extend the 702 program using the NDAA have grown slim over the past few days, as it’s become increasingly clear the speaker would face significant backlash from rank-and-file members of his own party, as well as more powerful figures such as Jim Jordan, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Matt Gaetz, one of a handful of lawmakers to whom Johnson effectively owes his new position.

A senior aide to Jordan tells WIRED that the chairman would not support extending the Section 702 program without significant reforms—in particular, a ban against the FBI accessing 702 data on Americans without a warrant.

The House and Senate intelligence committees on Tuesday introduced their own legislation to reauthorize the 702 program through 2035, banning FBI queries in criminal cases that fall outside the broadly defined “foreign intelligence” umbrella. A high-ranking source familiar with the White House’s views on the 702 program told WIRED on Monday that the White House was open to supporting this reform. Civil liberties groups, however, say requiring the FBI to obtain warrants for purely criminal matters does not go far enough, and would not impact a majority of cases in which 702 data is accessed.

What’s more, the argument goes, in matters of national security, the FBI should already be well prepared to show probable cause in court.

[robertnelson2-blog]

Leadership Speakers London

At its core, leadership is about inspiring and guiding individuals or groups toward common goals. It involves setting clear objectives, motivating others, and fostering creativity and collaboration. A leadership speaker can elevate audiences, present fresh perspectives, and provide practical advice that encourages both personal and organizational growth. Leadership Speakers London

Their stories and experiences can motivate your team to achieve more. SpeakIn connects you with top-notch leadership speakers through a thorough screening process. Our speakers are renowned for their ability to captivate and inspire large audiences, leaving a lasting and meaningful impact on your event. Speakers Bureau London

There are many dynamic leadership speakers eager to present at your next event. Securing a top speaker or expert can significantly enhance your event by inspiring and engaging your audience or driving transformative change within your organization. Through the UK Speaker Bureau, you can connect with the best leadership speakers and leaders in the UK. Our offerings include keynote presentations, cross-industry interactions, and inspirational leadership sessions.

[reportafrique]

Rivers State House of Assembly Criticizes Governor Fubara's Appointments, Urges Adherence to State Laws

The Rivers State House of Assembly voiced its disapproval of recent appointments made by Governor Fubara. The Assembly expressed concern over the appointment of Mr. Goodlife Ben as acting Chairman of the Local Government Service Commission, Dr. Mrs. Ine Briggs as acting Director-General of the Bureau for Public Procurement, and Mr. Tonte Davies as acting Administrator of the New Cities Development Authority. The Majority Leader of the House, Hon. Major Jack, drew attention to a Government Special Announcement, leading to a discussion on the matter. Members cited sections of relevant laws, emphasizing that the Governor had seemingly disregarded existing legislation in making these appointments. Rt. Hon. Martin Chike Amaewhule, the Speaker of the House, criticized the appointment of an acting Administrator for the New Cities Development Authority, questioning its legitimacy as it lacks recognition in any existing state legislation. He further contended that appointing an acting Chairman of the Local Government Service Commission and an acting Director-General of the Bureau for Public Procurement went against the provisions of the respective Establishment laws. Expressing bewilderment at Governor Fubara's actions, Rt. Hon. Amaewhule labeled the appointments as condemnable and inconsistent with the laws of the land. The Speaker highlighted that such actions amounted to misconduct, considering the violation of extant laws and the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Following a vote in the affirmative, the House resolved to address Governor Fubara directly, intending to draw his attention to Section 44(3) of the Rivers State Local Government Law No. 5 of 2018 and Section 5(1) of the Rivers State Public Procurement Law No. 4 of 2008. The Assembly expressed displeasure at what they deemed questionable appointments, considering them an aberration and a violation of existing laws. This was made public on his social media handle by Wachukwu Martins, the Special Assistant to the Speaker of the State House of Assembly on media and publicity. Recall that Governor Fubara had last week reappointed the nine resigned commissioners who vacated their offices in support of former governor Wike during the leadership crisis that rocked the state before the intervention of President Tinubu. Wike, the FCT minister had accused Governor Fubara of interfering with his political structure, a move which raised tension across the state following the notice of impeachment served to the governor by the state assembly members loyal to the former governor. In a similar development, Governor Fubara today approved the appointment of RT. Hon. Edison Ehie as Chief of Staff to the Government House. Similarly, he also appointed four others as Special Advisers. Those appointed include Hon. Darlington Oji, Hon. Prince Ohia, Barr. Aminayasam Fiberesima, Engr. Deeya Bariene, and Hon. Prince Abel Eke Read the full article

[jcmarchi]

Global AI security guidelines endorsed by 18 countries

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/global-ai-security-guidelines-endorsed-by-18-countries/

Global AI security guidelines endorsed by 18 countries

.pp-multiple-authors-boxes-wrapper display:none; img width:100%;

The UK has published the world’s first global guidelines for securing AI systems against cyberattacks. The new guidelines aim to ensure AI technology is developed safely and securely.

The guidelines were developed by the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) and the US’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). They have already secured endorsements from 17 other countries, including all G7 members.

The guidelines provide recommendations for developers and organisations using AI to incorporate cybersecurity at every stage. This “secure by design” approach advises baking in security from the initial design phase through development, deployment, and ongoing operations.  

Specific guidelines cover four key areas: secure design, secure development, secure deployment, and secure operation and maintenance. They suggest security behaviours and best practices for each phase.

The launch event in London convened over 100 industry, government, and international partners. Speakers included reps from Microsoft, the Alan Turing Institute, and cyber agencies from the US, Canada, Germany, and the UK.  

NCSC CEO Lindy Cameron stressed the need for proactive security amidst AI’s rapid pace of development. She said, “security is not a postscript to development but a core requirement throughout.”

The guidelines build on existing UK leadership in AI safety. Last month, the UK hosted the first international summit on AI safety at Bletchley Park.

US Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas said: “We are at an inflection point in the development of artificial intelligence, which may well be the most consequential technology of our time. Cybersecurity is key to building AI systems that are safe, secure, and trustworthy.

“The guidelines jointly issued today by CISA, NCSC, and our other international partners, provide a common-sense path to designing, developing, deploying, and operating AI with cybersecurity at its core.”

The 18 endorsing countries span Europe, Asia-Pacific, Africa, and the Americas. Here is the full list of international signatories:

Australia – Australian Signals Directorate’s Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC)

Canada – Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (CCCS) 

Chile – Chile’s Government CSIRT

Czechia – Czechia’s National Cyber and Information Security Agency (NUKIB)

Estonia – Information System Authority of Estonia (RIA) and National Cyber Security Centre of Estonia (NCSC-EE)

France – French Cybersecurity Agency (ANSSI)

Germany – Germany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI)

Israel – Israeli National Cyber Directorate (INCD)

Italy – Italian National Cybersecurity Agency (ACN)

Japan – Japan’s National Center of Incident Readiness and Strategy for Cybersecurity (NISC; Japan’s Secretariat of Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, Cabinet Office

New Zealand – New Zealand National Cyber Security Centre

Nigeria – Nigeria’s National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA)

Norway – Norwegian National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC-NO)

Poland – Poland’s NASK National Research Institute (NASK)

Republic of Korea – Republic of Korea National Intelligence Service (NIS)

Singapore – Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA)

United Kingdom – National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC)

United States of America – Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA); National Security Agency (NSA; Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI)

UK Science and Technology Secretary Michelle Donelan positioned the new guidelines as cementing the UK’s role as “an international standard bearer on the safe use of AI.”

“Just weeks after we brought world leaders together at Bletchley Park to reach the first international agreement on safe and responsible AI, we are once again uniting nations and companies in this truly global effort,” adds Donelan.

The guidelines are now published on the NCSC website alongside explanatory blogs. Developer uptake will be key to translating the secure by design vision into real-world improvements in AI security.

(Photo by Jan Antonin Kolar on Unsplash)

See also: Paul O’Sullivan, Salesforce: Transforming work in the GenAI era

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Cyber Security & Cloud Expo and Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

Tags: ai security, artificial intelligence, cisa, cyber security, cybersecurity, ethics, government, guidelines, national security, ncsc, security

[onsitecarservicing-blog]

Event Speaker Agencies: Navigating the World of Engaging Presentations

Event speaker agencies play a pivotal role in orchestrating successful and memorable events. These agencies serve as a bridge between event organisers and charismatic, knowledgeable after dinner speakers who can captivate audiences. In this article, we'll delve into the intricacies of event speaker agencies, explore how to choose the right one, and highlight some of the most popular agencies in the industry.

What is an Event Speaker Agency?

A UK speaker bureau acts as a talent hub, connecting event organisers with professional diversity and inclusion speakers who possess the expertise and charisma to make an impact. These agencies carefully curate a roster of mental health speakers with diverse backgrounds, ranging from industry experts to motivational speakers, ensuring a tailored match for any event.

These agencies facilitate the entire process, from understanding the client's event objectives to recommending speakers who align with those goals. By leveraging their networks and industry insights, event speaker agencies streamline the speaker selection process, saving time and effort for event organisers.

How Do I Choose a UK Speaker Agency?

Choosing the right event speaker agency is a critical step in the success of your event. Consider the following factors to make an informed decision:

Expertise and Specialisation:

Look for agencies with experience in your industry or niche.

Assess their track record in providing speakers for similar events.

Speaker Roster:

Examine the diversity and expertise of the speakers on their roster.

Ensure the agency can match you with a speaker who resonates with your audience.

Client Testimonials:

Read reviews and testimonials from previous clients.

Evaluate the success stories and feedback related to the agency's speaker recommendations.

Customisation and Flexibility:

Choose an agency that understands your unique event requirements.

Ensure they are flexible in accommodating specific requests and adjustments.

Budget Considerations:

Clearly define your budget for speaker fees and agency services.

Seek transparency regarding any additional costs or fees.

What Are Some of the Most Popular Event Speaker Agencies?

Several event speaker agencies have earned acclaim for their exceptional services and ability to match the right speakers with the right events. While preferences may vary based on specific needs, here are three notable agencies:

The Right Address:

Renowned for its diverse roster of speakers, spanning business, technology, and entertainment.

The Right Address prioritises personalised service, ensuring a seamless experience for clients.

Eloquent Engagements:

Specialising in motivational and leadership speakers, Eloquent Engagements is a go-to agency for inspiring presentations.

Known for its attention to detail and commitment to understanding client objectives.

Oratorical Experts Hub:

Catering to a global clientele, this agency excels in providing multilingual speakers for international events.

Oratorical Experts Hub is recognised for its meticulous speaker selection process.

In conclusion, navigating the world of online motivational speakers involves understanding their role, considering key factors in the selection process, and exploring reputable agencies in the industry. By making informed choices, event organisers can ensure that their chosen speakers not only meet but exceed the expectations of their audience, creating impactful and memorable events.

[arrowhearts]

continually reflecting on my time serving on college student organization leadership boards, but a thing that I feel decent about is having someone from a homelessness speaker's bureau (i.e someone who has, but was not currently experiencing homelessness talk about it) talk at a meeting on queer youth homelessness and getting the club to pay them from the school's budget.