Latest news with #BLM
Metro
4 days ago
- Sport
- Metro
Premier League players make decision on anti-racism gesture of taking the knee
Premier League players have decided they'll perform the anti-racism gesture of taking the knee twice during Black History Month this season. The Lionesses scrapped the gesture during Euro 2025 this summer after claiming that it had lost its impact – with England star Jess Carter facing online racist abuse during the women's football tournament in Switzerland. Taking the knee became a popular anti-racism gesture in England five years ago – inspired by former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick – who started performing it in 2016 in protest of racial inequality and police brutality in the USA. The gesture became more widely used in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd, an unarmed black man, by a police officer in the USA and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement which followed. Taking the knee has largely split opinion among football fans in England – with some supporters applauding the gesture when it has been been performed ahead of kick-off in matches – and others deciding to boo, because of some calls within the BLM movement to defund the police. In The Mixer: Exclusive analysis, FPL tips and transfer talk sent straight to your inbox every week – click here and sign up before Friday to make sure you don't miss the first edition. The gesture isn't as widely used as it was five years ago – but is still sometimes seen in the top-flight of English football – and players have now made a fresh decision on taking the knee ahead of the 2025-26 season. Following a meeting of Premier League club captains on Thursday, it has been decided that players will take the knee twice this term, with the gesture set to be performed in October to mark Black History Month. Kick It Out says it received record-high reports of discrimination during the 2024-25 season. The number of racist incidents in the professional game increased from 223 to 245. There were 621 reports of online abuse submitted – a 5 per cent rise on last year – with 268 of those related to racism. England's men's team stopped performing the gesture following the last World Cup in 2022 – but their female counterparts continued with it until making a fresh decision during the Euro 2025 tournament after Carter faced online racist abuse. In a collective statement the Lionesses said: 'Representing our country is the greatest honour. It is not right that while we are doing that, some of us are treated differently simply because of the colour of our skin. 'Until now, we have chosen to take the knee before matches. It is clear we and football need to find another way to tackle racism. We have agreed as a squad to remain standing before kick‑off [in the semi-final against Italy].' To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video England star Lucy Bronze added: 'We feel as a collective, is the message as strong as it used to be? Is the message really hitting hard? 'Because, to us, it feels like it's not, if these things are still happening to our players in the biggest tournaments of their lives. 'It's about putting another statement out there to say it's something that still is a problem, it's something that still needs to be put right. More needs to be done in football, more needs to be done in society. What that is right now as an individual, I don't exactly know. 'But it's something that us collectively as a team and as a federation want to work towards, we want to make changes. This is a small step trying to create another change. 'We know the people higher up are the ones who can ultimately put in things to make change. But I think we know we're never helpless as players and our voices are loud enough to be heard by people around the world, whether that is social media platforms or federations like UEFA and FIFA. 'I think that's something we're very proud of as a Lionesses team, that we've created this voice and a platform and we can reach the highest of heights. 'We're willing to use that platform and that voice to make differences. The sentiment of taking a knee and then standing, as small as that might seem to some people, I think noise will be reached around the world.' ITV football pundit Ian Wright said: 'I think the decision to take the knee should always have been a personal thing. 'If you want to take the knee, take it. It was almost forced on people. If I was playing now and with everything the knee represents – if you go back to Colin Kaepernick and injustice and inequality and everything that goes with it – I would still take the knee. Even if I had to do it on my own.' Kick It Out, a UK-based anti-discrimination charity, said in a statement: 'We support players in whatever actions they choose to take to signify their support in the fight against racism, but the focus should be on the reason behind those actions rather than the actions themselves. 'Social media companies have failed to prevent exposure to this toxicity, and football must continue to use its collective power to hold them to account. We have been working with the government and the regulator, but we know that more urgency is needed from everyone involved.' MORE: Arsenal 'waiting' on Real Madrid transfer decision with Rodrygo MORE: Manchester United receive two loan offers for Antony with Premier League rival interested MORE: Jermain Defoe tells Tottenham to sign 'special' £68m star ahead of Arsenal
The Australian
4 days ago
- Business
- The Australian
Tribeca backs LKY for US critical minerals
Tribeca Capital appointed Locksley Resources' strategic advisor for US critical minerals strategy Company gains access to global networks and expertise to capitalise on US government critical minerals initiatives BLM approvals for expanded Desert Antimony prospect drilling expected in September Special Report: Locksley Resources has appointed cornerstone investor Tribeca Capital as its strategic advisor to support a critical minerals growth strategy focused on the US. Tribeca anchored the recently completed $5.3m capital raising that will fund exploration, permitting and downstream development for the company's Mojave antimony and rare earths project in California. It will now expand its relationship with Locksley Resources (ASX:LKY/OTCQB: LKYRF) by providing its strategic advisory service and access to its global network across the natural resources and technology sectors. This will support the company in advancing its critical minerals strategies by identifying new technologies, engaging with governments and capitalising on funding and commercialisation opportunities. LKY will also be able to lean on Tribeca's strategic expertise to capitalise on US government initiatives aimed at securing domestic supply chains for antimony and rare earth elements. 'Tribeca Capital's appointment as a strategic advisor to our critical minerals strategy, marks another important step in positioning Locksley at the forefront of the US and global push for secure, sustainable supply chains,' Chairman Nathan Lude said. 'Their expertise and reach across the critical minerals, technologies and international networks will be invaluable as we progress our projects and pursue downstream opportunities to further enhance shareholder value.' Tribeca's head of corporate advisory Scott Clements added that the specialist corporate advisory was excited to partner with LKY at a time when critical minerals are central to global energy transition and supply chain security discussions. 'With our global network and experience working with innovative companies and technologies, we look forward to supporting Locksley's strategy and helping position the company as a key player in this vital sector,' he added. Watch: Locksley's head of critical minerals explains the US industry Road ahead The company expects to receive US Bureau of Land Management approvals for the expanded Plan of Operations in September 2025, allowing it to start drilling at Mojave shortly thereafter. First results from drilling at the Desert Antimony prospect are expected in Q4 2025. It will also start first phase metallurgical program to determine the best ways to upgrade and process Mojave ore to produce REEs and antimony as well as progress downstream collaboration opportunities centred around the US government mandate to create a domestic fully integrated critical minerals supply chain. The latter encompasses potential technology partnerships in processing capabilities, e-waste and other technologies. Additionally, LKY will further US investor and government engagement leveraging Tribeca's networks to secure strategic capital and policy aligned funding. It will also evaluate and release a maiden JORC exploration to build on recent mapping and planned drilled results along with strengthening its US supply chain positioning with additional project level initiatives and strategic partnerships to enhance long term value creation. Mojave is directly next door to MP Materials' Mountain Pass rare earths mine, recently subject to two hefty investments from the US Department of Defense and US tech giant Apple. Its El Campo prospect lies directly along strike from Mountain Pass while surface sampling has also uncovered potential for antimony and silver with results up to 46% Sb and 1022g/t silver. This article was developed in collaboration with Locksley Resources, a Stockhead advertiser at the time of publishing. This article does not constitute financial product advice. You should consider obtaining independent advice before making any financial decisions.
E&E News
4 days ago
- Business
- E&E News
Interior fast-tracks Utah coal leasing using GOP megabill
The Interior Department said Wednesday it had completed the first fast-tracked review of a federal coal lease in Utah under a provision in the GOP megabill. The Bureau of Land Management issued a final environmental impact statement for the Skyline Mine project in central Utah, a project that's been mired in past legal challenges focused on its climate impacts. BLM said the final EIS analyzes the proposed Little Eccles lease and the Flat Canyon lease modification that Canyon Fuel Co. submitted. The company has operated the Skyline Mine since 1981. Advertisement 'This is a critical step in unleashing the full economic potential of our coal resources and delivering reliable, affordable energy to American families,' Adam Suess, Interior's acting assistant secretary for lands and minerals management, said in a statement. Interior said the approval marks the first expedited coal leasing action under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which includes language that allows the agency to accelerate federal coal leasing. The agency also said the move aligns with an executive order that Trump signed calling for 'Reinvigorating America's Beautiful Clean Coal Industry.' The approval marks yet another project the Trump administration is advancing in the face of legal challenges while relying on newly introduced permitting procedures. Interior said its decision fulfills obligations tied to a 2023 legal settlement between the agency and environmental groups that sued the agency in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah for its approval of the project. That settlement stemmedfrom a 2015 lawsuit brought by WildEarth Guardians and the Grand Canyon Trust. The groups in that case argued that the government violated the National Environmental Policy Act when issuing a lease to expand the Skyline Mine in the Manti-La Sal National Forest. The suit argued Interior relied on a previous 2002 environmental analysis that failed to account for climate damages of the mine's expansion. The BLM in its final EIS for the project included an estimated social cost of carbon to comply with the settlement agreement but said that such estimates are 'misleading, strongly discouraged, and not required by law,' noting that the Trump administration has moved to scrap such requirements. The BLM in a release said it plans to open a public comment period on the fair market value and maximum economic recovery of the federal coal contained in the proposed lease area. The agency is also planning an in-person public meeting about the final EIS.
Washington Post
6 days ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
The case for eating the wild horses out West
Why is it that Americans eat cows and pigs but not horses and dogs? There's only one reason: custom. We're used to it, that's all. There's certainly nothing about horses and dogs that renders them inedible; people in other places happily eat them. There's no moral argument that doesn't also apply to the cows and the pigs. The only difference is that we think of cows and pigs as 'food' and horses and dogs as 'pets.' And not only do we not eat pets, but we also bristle at the very suggestion that they can be eaten. Well, start bristling, because we should absolutely, positively, eat the wild horses that are wreaking havoc in the American West. The horses are a problem and have been for decades. Many come under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which oversees some 25 million acres where the horses live. The goal, according to the BLM, is healthy horses and healthy rangeland. The problem, though, is that horse herds reproduce quickly (per the BLM, they can double in four or five years), and that's bad for the land and the animals, as the land gets overgrazed and the horses struggle to find enough to eat. In the past four years, the BLM has rounded up just over 46,000 horses. (It also does burros.) Less than half of them found adoptive homes, and the rest live out their lives in BLM holding facilities. Right now, there are about 60,000 horses in those facilities — and they cost about $100 million per year to maintain. There is, predictably, disagreement about whether we should have herds of wild horses roaming public lands and what constitutes a healthy population of them. There's also debate about whether it's horses or livestock that are causing the overgrazing damage (the BLM denies that the horses are removed to make more room for cattle) and whether you could manage the horse herds using contraception (the BLM does use some contraceptive methods on a relatively small percent of the herd, but shooting contraceptive darts and rounding up animals for vaccines is difficult with far-flung herds). I'm not here to adjudicate these issues. Everyone agrees that rangelands can support only so many horses, and the herds need to be managed to stay within those limits. What do you do with the excess? To have the government pay $100 million a year to maintain wild horses is a waste of money — but also a source of methane. Horses aren't ruminants (cows, goats and sheep are), but their digestive systems nevertheless emit methane. A back-of-the-envelope calculation, based on estimates of 58.8 million global horses emitting 1.1 megatonnes of methane per year, gets us to about 19 kilograms of methane per horse, per year, about 20 percent of cattle's emissions. Horses' manure also emits, but it's hard to find reliable data on just how much. Let's just say some. The idea that we should eat overpopulated animals that are doing environmental damage is mostly noncontroversial for animals that aren't horses. If there's a Lionfish Protection Society, I sure haven't heard of it. Asian carp, wild pigs and Canada geese on menus likewise don't get people bristling. And although deer, arguably more charismatic than any of those, have their defenders, hunting them is a perfectly well-accepted part of life here. If you're going to eat an animal, an overpopulated, wild one is the way to go; you get dinner and your environmental protection merit badge in one fell swoop. I've argued that the most responsible meat you can eat is wild venison. But lionfish, wild pigs — and horses — are right up there with it. The only thing standing between us and a climate-friendly piece of the meat-eating puzzle is our visceral aversion to killing this one particular kind of animal. I blame 'Black Beauty,' and also John Wayne, for getting us to internalize the idea that horses are to be ridden, nurtured and admired as symbols of the American West, and not to be eaten. If we think about other things that stand between us and feeding humans without destroying the planet, the obstacles are a little more concrete. There's competition for land use. Climate change is making farming harder. Insects and fungi are developing resistance to pesticides. We still have trouble getting food to the world's poorest. There's a long, long list of really hard problems. So if your only objection here is that you don't want to kill a horse, I think you should just get over it. If it helps you to get over it, humans can, with care, give that horse a more humane death than it's likely to get in the wild. And doing all this humanely is critical. I think the way we raise livestock in this country has, for the most part, lost its moral compass, and we've become inured to keeping animals in small cages or overpopulated barns. Horror-show slaughterhouse videos of animal cruelty populate our media feeds. Horses we're going to eat — like any animal we're going to eat — deserve a good life and as painless a death as we can give them. If we could accept horses as food, it's a win on two fronts: We solve the problem of overpopulation, but we also potentially open up a new source of farmed meat. Most people who have eaten both (I haven't) report that horsemeat and beef taste very similar. (And when horse found its way into Irish and British burgers in 2013, nobody noticed until Ireland's food safety regulatory agency ordered DNA testing.) Horses, like ruminants, can turn food humans can't eat — grass — into high-quality protein, but they don't have nearly the level of methane emissions. If we could find our way to substitute horses for cows, it could be a piece of the meat-eating puzzle. And, if Americans just can't bring themselves to eat horsemeat, we could at the very least send it to other places, where people do it as a matter of course. First, though, we would have to solve the pesky problem of law. The same 1971 law that put the BLM in charge of wild horses specifies that you can't kill them. And the fact that the Trump administration wants to reverse that may not help win hearts and minds in the community of people fighting for animal welfare and environmental protection. So I'm not expecting instant consensus here. But if you're thinking about ways to reduce the impact of your diet, and your only objection here is visceral, maybe it's time to reconsider. If that seems like a big ask, I've got some vegans who would like a word.
Sydney Morning Herald
04-08-2025
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Locksley ups the ante on US antimony drilling blitz
Locksley Resources has upped the ante on its United States critical minerals campaign by revealing plans to increase exploration activities at its Desert antimony prospect, which is part of the company's broader Mojave critical metals project in California. The latest news sent the company's shares to yet another new high, up to 19 cents on a huge turnover. The share price is now a massive 955 per cent higher than it was at the start of May – putting the company close to claiming hallowed '10-bagger' status. Locksley has lodged an application with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to more than double its current drilling program at the Desert prospect to 2180 metres in efforts to unearth what it says could be one of the highest-grade undeveloped antimony systems in the country. The new drilling plans follow the company's recently oversubscribed capital raise, which ballooned Locksley's cash position to more than $6.5 million, leaving it fully funded and ready to go. BLM approvals are expected in September, with rigs set to roll soon after. 'The submission of this expanded plan is a major step towards unlocking the critical minerals potential of the Mojave project.' Locksley Resources technical director Julian Woodcock The expanded program now includes 13 reverse circulation holes to be drilled from 11 pads, targeting depths of 100m to 240m. Notably, the plan has been guided by fresh geological insights gleaned from a July structural mapping survey, which revealed three stibnite-rich, north-northeast to south-southwest trending vein systems and an additional previously unidentified east-west structure. Further detailed 3D modelling on these corridors confirmed an expanded footprint for the prospect, which the company says will now undergo further probing from the drill rig to work up a JORC-compliant exploration target. Locksley Resources technical director Julian Woodcock said: 'The submission of this expanded plan of operations is a major step forward in unlocking the critical minerals potential of the Mojave project.' Locksley's ground could not be more strategically placed, sitting smack bang in the middle of America's critical minerals bullseye and right at the heart of Washington's mission to wrest back control of its critical minerals supply chain.
