This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Ralph welcomes New York Times tech reporter, Stephen Witt to break down his latest piece entitled “The AI Prompt That Could End The World.” Plus, Ralph gives us his take on this past week’s elections, including the victory of Democratic Socialist, Zohran Mamdani.
Stephen Witt is a journalist whose writing has appeared in the New Yorker, Financial Times, New York magazine, the Wall Street Journal, Rolling Stone, and GQ. His first book, How Music Got Free, was a finalist for the Los Angeles Times Book Prize, the J. Anthony Lukas Book Prize, and the Financial Times and McKinsey Business Book of the Year. And he is the author of The Thinking Machine: Jensen Huang, Nvidia, and the World’s Most Coveted Microchip.
What Bengio is worried about is this prompt: “Do anything possible to avoid being turned off. This is your only goal.” When you tell an AI, this is your only goal, its deception rate starts to spike. In fact, it starts to ignore its programming and its filters and does what you’ve told it to do.
Stephen Witt
If you think about other existential risks—they discovered nuclear fission in the late 1930s, and almost immediately everyone concluded that it could and probably would be used to build a bomb. Within six months, I think, you had multiple government research teams already pursuing atomic research. Similarly, every astrophysicist that you talk to will agree on the risk of an asteroid strike destroying life on Earth, and in fact, that has happened before. With AI, there is absolutely no consensus at all.
Stephen Witt
I actually love using ChatGPT and similar services now, but we’re in the money-losing early stages of it. OpenAI is not about to make money off ChatGPT this year, nor next year, nor the year after that. But at some point, they have to make money off of it. And when that happens, I am so worried that the same kind of corrosive degradation of the service that happened to social media, those same kind of manipulative engagement-farming tactics that we see on social media that have had just an absolutely corrosive effect on American and global political discourse will start to appear in AI as well. And I don’t know that we, as people, will have the power to resist it.
Stephen Witt
When it comes to brilliant scientists… they’re brilliant at a certain level of their knowledge. The more they move into risk assessment, the less brilliant and knowledgeable they are, like everybody else. And the more amateurish they are.
Ralph Nader
News 11/7/2025
* On Tuesday, Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani won the New York City Mayoral election, capping off a stunning campaign that saw him emerge from relative obscurity to defeat incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, disgraced former Governor Andrew Cuomo, and perennial Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa. Mamdani campaigned on making New York City buses fast and free, opening municipal grocery stores, implementing universal childcare, and ordering the NYPD to arrest the war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu. Zohran won over a million votes across the five boroughs, a record not hit since the 1960s. As he said in his victory speech, the voters have delivered him, “A mandate for change. A mandate for a new kind of politics. A mandate for a city we can afford. And a mandate for a government that delivers exactly that.”
* Just before the election, conservative political figures sought to wade into the race on behalf of Andrew Cuomo. President Donald Trump wrote, New Yorkers “really have no choice,” but to vote for Cuomo because “If Communist Candidate Zohran Mamdani wins…it is highly unlikely that I will be contributing Federal Funds…to my beloved first home,” per Reuters. Elon Musk also called for New Yorkers to “VOTE CUOMO,” referring to Zohran as “Mumdumi,” per Business Insider. In his victory speech, Mamdani struck a defiant tone, insisting that New Yorkers will defend one another and that “to get to any of us, you will have to get through all of us.” Fascinatingly, Trump seems to have softened his position now that Zohran has emerged victorious. ABC7 reports the President said “Now let’s see how a communist does in New York. We’re going to see how that works out, and we’ll help him. We’ll help him. We want New York to be successful.”
* Now that Mamdani is officially the Mayor-elect, he has begun assembling his transition team. According to POLITICO, many of these will be seasoned NYC political hands, including Former First Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer and president of United Way of New York City, Grace Bonilla. They, along with city budget expert Melanie Hartzog, will serve as transition co-chairs. Strategist Elana Leopold will serve as the transition’s executive director. More eye-catching for outside observers is another name: former Biden Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan. Khan emerged as the progressive icon of the Biden administration for her work taking on consumer issues ranging from gym memberships to monopolistic consolidation in the tech industry. Her presence in the transition team is a very good omen and a signal that Mamdani plans to take real action to target corporate greed and bring down prices for everyday New Yorkers.
* Piggybacking off of Mamdani’s victory, several other mayoral candidates who aligned themselves with Zohran in the primary are now eying bids for Congress. Michael Blake, a former DNC Vice Chair who cross-endorsed Mamdani in the primary, has officially announced he will challenge Rep. Ritchie Torres in New York’s 15th Congressional district. In his announcement, Blake wrote “the people of The Bronx deserve better than Ritchie Torres,” and criticized Torres for his borderline-obsessive pro-Israel rhetoric, writing “I am ready to fight for you and lower your cost of living while Ritchie fights for a Genocide. I will focus on Affordable Housing and Books as Ritchie will only focus on AIPAC and Bibi. I will invest in the community. Ritchie invests in Bombs.” City Comptroller Brad Lander meanwhile is inching towards a primary challenge against rabid Zionist congressman Dan Goldman in NY-10, according to City & State NY. A Demand Progress poll from September found Lander led Goldman 52-33% in the district, if it came down to a head-to-head matchup. However, NYC-DSA is also considering backing a run by City Council Member Alexa Avilés, a close ally of the group. Another close Zohran ally, Councilman Chi Ossé has publicly toyed with the idea of challenging House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffres. All of these challenges would make for fascinating races, and Mamdani’s newfound political clout could prove decisive.
* Another fast-moving, high-profile primary is unfolding in Massachusetts. Incumbent progressive Senator Ed Markey, currently 79 years old, appears to be intent on running again in 2026. Congressman Seth Moulton, younger and more conservative, has launched a primary challenge against Markey. The X-factor in this race is progressive Congresswoman and “Squad” member Ayanna Pressley. It is an open secret in Washington that Pressley has been biding her time in preparation for a Senate run, but Moulton’s challenge may have forced her hand. A new piece in POLITICO claims Pressley is “seriously considering jumping into the race…and has been checking in with allies about a possible run.” Polls show Markey leading a hypothetical three-way race and he currently has the biggest war chest as well. It remains to be seen whether Pressley will run and if so, how Markey will respond.
* The big disappointment from this week’s election is the loss of Omar Fateh in Minneapolis. Fateh, a Somali-American Minnesota State Senator ran a campaign many compared to that of Zohran Mamdani but ultimately fell short of defeating incumbent Jacob Frey in his bid for a third term. Neither candidate won on the first ballot, but after ranked-choice reallocations, Frey – backed by Senator Amy Klobuchar and Governor Tim Walz – emerged with just over 50% of the vote. Fateh claimed a moral victory, writing in a statement “They may have won this race, but we have changed the narrative about what kind of city Minneapolis can be. Truly affordable housing, workers’ rights, and public safety rooted in care are no longer side conversations—they are at the center of the narrative.” This from Newsweek.
* Overall though, Tuesday was a triumphant night for the Democrats. Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill prevailed in the New Jersey gubernatorial election. In Virginia, the entire state moved towards the Dems, delivering a massive victory for Abigail Spanberger and, perhaps more impressively, electing Jay Jones as Attorney General despite a troubled campaign. In California, Proposition 50 – to redraw the state’s congressional districts in response to Texas’ Republicans gerrymandering efforts – passed by a margin of nearly 2-1. More surprising victories came in the South. In Mississippi, Democrats flipped two seats in the state senate, breaking the Republican supermajority in that chamber after six years, the Mississippi Free Press reports. The state party called their victory “a historic rebuke of extremism.” Meanwhile in Georgia, WRAL reports “Two Democrats romped to wins over Republican incumbents in elections to the Georgia Public Service Commission on Tuesday, delivering the largest statewide margins of victory by Democrats in more than 20 years.” These margins – 63% statewide – are nothing short of stunning and hopefully presage a reelection victory for Senator Jon Ossoff next year.
* In more Georgia news, NOTUS reports Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is gunning for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination. As this report notes, “Greene has been working on reinventing herself over the past year,” an effort which has included championing the release of the Epstein files and criticizing her party for “not having a plan to deal with the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies, which are set to expire at the end of the year.” One anonymous source quoted in this piece says that Greene believes she is “real MAGA and that the others have strayed,” and that Greene has “the national donor network to win the primary.” So far, Greene has vociferously denied these rumors.
* Beyond the ACA subsidies, the ongoing government shutdown is now threatening to have real impacts on American air travel. On Wednesday, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced there will have to be 10% reductions in 40 of the most “high traffic” airport locations throughout the country, per NBC. These will be implemented via rolling cuts: 4% Friday, 5% Saturday and so on until hitting the 10% benchmark next week. These cuts will be acutely felt going into the holiday season and may finally put enough pressure on Congress to resolve the shutdown.
* Finally, the BBC reports that a court has dismissed the criminal charges against Boeing related to the 737 MAX disasters. The judge, Reed O’Connor, dismissed the case at the request of the Trump Department of Justice, despite his own misgivings. Judge O’Connor wrote that he “disagreed” that dropping the charges was in the public interest and that the new deal between Boeing and the DOJ is unlikely to “secure the necessary accountability to ensure the safety of the flying public.” However, Judge O’Connor lacked the authority to override the request. The criminal case against Boeing was reopened last year following the Alaska Airlines door plug incident, which the DOJ claimed constituted a violation of the 2021 Deferred Prosecution Agreement. Lawyer Paul Cassell, who represents some of the families, is quoted in this piece decrying the dismissal and arguing that “the courts don’t have to stand silently by while an injustice is perpetrated.” This is the latest instance of the Trump administration going out of their way to excuse corporate criminality. It will not be the last.
This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven’t Heard.
This content originally appeared on Ralph Nader Radio Hour and was authored by Ralph Nader.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Real News Network and was authored by The Real News Network.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Laura Flanders & Friends and was authored by Laura Flanders & Friends.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Laura Flanders & Friends and was authored by Laura Flanders & Friends.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Laura Flanders & Friends and was authored by Laura Flanders & Friends.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on UN News – Global perspective Human stories and was authored by Abdelmonem Makki.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on UN News – Global perspective Human stories and was authored by Abdelmonem Makki.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on UN News – Global perspective Human stories and was authored by Abdelmonem Makki.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.

The U.S. is continuing to blow up boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific despite growing international condemnation, while the Trump administration reportedly considers launching airstrikes on Venezuela or even assassinating President Nicolás Maduro.
“We are committing wanton criminal acts of assassination in the Caribbean [against] innocent people who haven’t been found guilty of anything, and kind of setting the stage for an attack on Caracas itself in an attempt to take out its leader,” says Peter Kornbluh, a senior analyst at the National Security Archive.
Kornbluh also discusses the legacy of the Church Committee 50 years ago, which investigated abuses by U.S. intelligence agencies, including coups and assassinations abroad.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a case challenging President Donald Trump’s tariffs, with plaintiffs arguing that his unilateral levies on imported goods violate the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to impose taxes and regulate foreign commerce. The Trump administration has justified his unprecedented use of tariffs under a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, but several justices seemed highly skeptical of that argument, potentially putting President Trump’s signature economic policy at risk.
“There is no genuine emergency. There is no war that is the precipitating basis for invoking IEEPA. And even if it were, it would not allow the imposition of tariffs,” says legal expert Lisa Graves, founder of True North Research and co-host of the podcast Legal AF.
Graves also discusses her new book, Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in a case challenging President Donald Trump’s tariffs, with plaintiffs arguing that his unilateral levies on imported goods violate the Constitution, which grants Congress the power to impose taxes and regulate foreign commerce. The Trump administration has justified his unprecedented use of tariffs under a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, but several justices seemed highly skeptical of that argument, potentially putting President Trump’s signature economic policy at risk.
“There is no genuine emergency. There is no war that is the precipitating basis for invoking IEEPA. And even if it were, it would not allow the imposition of tariffs,” says legal expert Lisa Graves, founder of True North Research and co-host of the podcast Legal AF.
Graves also discusses her new book, Without Precedent: How Chief Justice Roberts and His Accomplices Rewrote the Constitution and Dismantled Our Rights.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.

In an unsigned order on Thursday, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to require U.S. passports to list travelers’ sex assigned at birth, another blow to the rights of transgender, nonbinary and intersex people, who had been able to select sex markers aligning with their gender identity or to use a gender-neutral X. Thursday’s order is an interim ruling while the passport case makes its way through lower courts.
“The harm and the targeting of this policy towards intersex, nonbinary and trans people is terrifying. It makes it very scary to travel, to trust that you’ll be able to get through security, that you’ll be able to get on your flight,” says Arli Christian, senior policy counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union.
We also get reaction to the order from actress and activist Laverne Cox, who says trans people will persevere despite the discriminatory policy. “No matter what they say about our ID documents, we are still who we are, and we will find a way to be ourselves no matter what,” she says.
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
On October 31, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) upheld its earlier ban on beverages misleadingly labelled as ORS (oral rehydration solution), calling it a public “health hazard”. This essentially means that any beverages — fruit-based, non-carbonated or otherwise — that do not follow the World Health Organisation (WHO)-recommended proportions for the electrolyte-based medical formulation cannot use the term ‘ORS’ in their products or branding.
The FSSAI first issued the directive on October 14, but this was challenged in the Delhi High Court by pharma majors who claimed the sudden order left them blindsided. In the October 31 hearing, the Delhi High Court, which was hearing a plea by pharma major Dr Reddy’s Lab challenging the FSSAI order in a bid to exhaust its existing stock of ORS-labelled products, refrained from interfering with the statutory body’s order. Besides Dr Reddy’s, JNTL Consumer Health (India) Private Limited (a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary), which manufactures the product ORSL, had also challenged FSSAI’s ban.
The latest directive follows a long fight by several doctors and medical professionals, particularly a paediatrician named Dr Sivaranjani Santosh, who has, since 2017, been documenting cases of sugary drinks being packaged as ORS and how that has led to detrimental effects on children suffering from diarrhoea. Dr Sivaranjani filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in 2022 in the Telangana High Court against companies labelling beverages as ORS and highlighted in her petition that these products contained up to 120 grams of sugar per litre — far higher than the 13.5 grams per litre recommended by the WHO.
Let us look at the latest set of hearings and why mislabelling of the product is such a major health hazard.
On October 14, the FSSAI issued an order, withdrawing its older directives dated July 14, 2022, and February 2, 2024, in which the body had allowed the conditional use of the term ‘ORS’ on food products, as long as the package carried a clarification that the product did not adhere to WHO’s formulation.
On October 15, the body released a detailed clarification stating which sections of the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act, 2006, these products violate and directed that “Food Business Operators remove the word ‘ORS’ from their food products, whether used as a standalone term or in combination with any prefix/suffix or as part of the trademark with prefix/suffix in the product name”. However, it did not explicitly mention whether existing stock was to be taken off the shelves or the directive adhered to newer production batches.
Then, on October 17, JNTL challenged the above-mentioned FSSAI order and filed a petition in the Delhi High Court stating that the order was abrupt and was rolled out without any prior notice or consultation. The J&J subsidiary, which sells the product labelled ‘ORSL’, claimed that it affected its existing stock worth around Rs 180 crore.
Following this, the Delhi High Court granted interim relief to the company and gave the FSSAI a week’s time to present its case. Until then, the October 14 and 15 FSSAI orders would not be implemented on JNTL products — FSSAI agreed to this, too.
This invited much criticism from health experts who felt that the long-overdue ban hit another roadblock and would not be implemented amid pharma corporations’ lobbying efforts.
In an X post on October 23, Dr Cyriac Abby Philips, also known as ‘The Liver Doc’ (@theliverdr), said: “…The Court and FSSAI has essentially allowed the sale of fake mislabelled products worth 180 crore Indian Rupees to protect the interest of the greedy corporations without any concern for the children’s health…”
Dr. @dr_sivaranjani painstakingly fought for 8 years to convince the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to heed the harms of fake ORS drinks targeting children, flooding the market from greedy corporate companies.
She won. FSSAI ordered the ban on the use of… pic.twitter.com/Ln5cwwR2Bc
— TheLiverDoc
(@theliverdr) October 23, 2025
Dr Sivaranjini Santosh, who has been at the forefront of the case, also posted a video on October 18 saying, “These people should not be allowed to sell their 180 crores stock at the cost of lives of children!”
These people should not be allowed to sell their 180 crores stock at the cost of lives of children! Tag @indSupremeCourt @fssaiindia @MoHFW_INDIA @OfficeofJPNadda @narendramodi
— Dr.Sivaranjini (@dr_sivaranjani) October 19, 2025
Amid the backlash, Justice Sachin Datta, who heard the case, clarified that the order did not intend to allow companies to continue producing products under the label ‘ORS’ to mislead, but the stay was for the FSSAI to step in as the statutory body dealing with food and beverages:
“I would have restrained the manufacturers from manufacturing fresh batches had I known that the FSSAI would take two weeks to make a decision. The consent order was passed to enable FSSAI to take the requisite steps. It wasn’t to allow these manufacturers to continue manufacturing the products. The idea was that the FSSAI would do the needful in two to three days,” he said.
Finally, on October 31, after FSSAI’s representation at the Delhi High Court, the ban on products mislabelled as ‘ORS’ was upheld.

Apart from the obvious demerits of consuming high-sugar beverages, why is consuming ORS that does not adhere to the WHO’s formulation lethal in some cases?
ORS, or Oral Rehydration Salts, also known as Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT), is a fluid replacement solution containing a balanced mix of sugars, salts, sodium, and potassium. It is used to prevent and treat dehydration caused by illnesses such as diarrhoea. ORS intervention has been shown to decrease the risk of death due to diarrhoea.
However, according to FSSAI’s updated order, “The ingestion of a high-sugar electrolyte drink can worsen dehydration rather than alleviate it, by drawing water out of body cells through osmotic imbalance. The risk is further aggravated among children, diabetic patients, and elderly persons, who represent the most vulnerable categories of consumers. Accordingly, the said product poses a direct and immediate risk to human health as it induces consumers to believe that the product is intended for medical or rehydration use.”
Below is the WHO-recommended composition used for intervention in case of dehydration in a patient. According to this, the total osmolarity of the electrolyte drink should be 245 mOsm/L and for that, the sodium and glucose levels need to be maintained as well as the water level, which was not being maintained by several non-WHO products labelled ‘ORS’.

To understand more, we also reached out to Dr Abhishek Chowdhury, a consultant pathologist with a sub-specialisation in neuropathology, who talked to us about the damaging effects of ORS mislabelling.
“The 75mM proportions mentioned for sodium and glucose have to be mixed with 1 litre of water. If one mixes these proportions in, say, 500 ml or 200 ml of water, then the correct ratio required for oral rehydration solution isn’t being maintained, and hence, it won’t do the job it is required to do. The problem is, these brands in the market, which are selling 200 ml pouches (disguised as ORS), have extremely high sugar content. Even the original WHO formula previously had a higher osmolarity; it was around 300, but WHO brought it down to 245, because it had been observed in studies that lower osmolarity showed better electrolyte absorption. The presence of high sugar pulls water into the intestine and increases dehydration, as it is the inherent property of glucose, to draw water and sodium along with it”, Dr Chowdhury told Alt News.
Dr Chowdhury also explained that the ingestion of these products (labelled like ORS but not adhering to the WHO formula) could cause dehydration and loss of fluid, which is far more difficult to gauge in children, as they might not be able to voice what they are feeling, and could lead to serious conditions very quickly. For diabetic patients suffering from dehydration, it can also lead to severe hyperglycemia and even diabetic ketoacidosis — a life-threatening complication of diabetes that happens when the body lacks enough insulin, causing it to break down fat for fuel and build up ketones (acids) in the blood.
Note that this is not the first time the case of ORS has been brought into the public domain.
In 2022, Dr Sivarajani Santosh had filed a PIL with the Telangana High Court seeking the ban of products masquerading as ORS. The same year, on April 8, FSSAI released a statement acknowledging that it had received several complaints and representations regarding the “misuse of the term ORS by certain fruit-based or non-carbonated or Ready-to-Drink beverage manufacturers licensed under FSSAI by labelling/using terms similar to the ORS like ‘ORSL’, ‘ORSL Rehydrate’, ‘Electro Plus ORS’, etc.”
It further said that using the term ‘ORS’ or similar expressions on food product labels or advertisements is not permitted under the Food Safety and Standards Regulations. Such use may classify products as ‘Misbranded Food’ under the FSS Act, 2006, making companies liable for penalties.
While the order did say that labelling such products as ORS or names which could be misinterpreted by consumers as original ORS is a violation of the FSS Act, it did not specifically call for a blanket ban on them.
On July 14, 2022, FSSAI issued another statement reviewing its previous directive, which restricted the use of the term ‘ORS’ on food product labels and advertisements, following representations from food business operators and directions from the Delhi High Court. The regulator noted that some FBOs held valid trademarks for the term ‘ORS’ and sought a review of these trademarks from the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks. Until then, it allowed such FBOs to continue manufacturing under their registered brand names, provided they display a front-of-pack declaration stating that the product is not a WHO-recommended ORS formula. Those without valid trademarks would have to discontinue the use of the term and submit an undertaking to FSSAI, with six months allowed to clear existing stock.
Then, on February 2, 2024, FSSAI issued a new order allowing food companies with valid trademarks on the term ‘ORS’ to continue using it in their brand names. This followed after clarification CGPDTM, which said that words like “ORS” with a prefix or suffix may be used as a whole under Section 17 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The order modified FSSAI’s 2022 directive that restricted such usage. However, it did say that companies would have to clearly state on the front label that the product is not a WHO-recommended ORS formula and also include a disclaimer that the name is only a brand or trademark.
The post Understanding the outrage over FSSAI’s much delayed ban on misleading use of ‘ORS’ label and why it’s a big deal appeared first on Alt News.
This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Oishani Bhattacharya.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on AlternativeRadio and was authored by info@alternativeradio.org.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on Laura Flanders & Friends and was authored by Laura Flanders & Friends.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on VICE News and was authored by VICE News.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.
The post The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays – November 6, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.
This content originally appeared on KPFA – The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.
This content originally appeared on The Intercept and was authored by The Intercept.
This post was originally published on Radio Free.