Sep 09(Jowhar)-Madaxweynaha maamulka Puntland Siciid Cabdilaahi Deni ayaa maanta u safray dalka Imaaraadka Carabta oo mudooyinkii danbe ahaa saaxiibka koowaad ee Puntland.
Madaxweyne Xasan oo la kulmay madaxweynayaasha Kenya iyo Jabuuti
Sep 09(Jowhar)-Madaxweynaha Soomaaliya Xasan Sheekh Maxamuud oo ka qeyb galayey Shirweynaha 2aad ee Cimilada Afrika ayaa kulan doceedyo la qaatay Madaxweyneyaasha Jabuuti Ismaaciil Cumar Geelle iyo Madaxwayynaha Kenya Mudane William Ruto.
Officials say no drones detected after fire on Gaza flotilla
Smoke over Sidi Bou Said: a flotilla, a mystery, and a sea of questions
On a warm Mediterranean morning in Sidi Bou Said, where whitewashed houses spill down limestone cliffs and bougainvillea flutters like confetti, a small crowd gathered at the port to watch a story unfold. They waved Palestinian flags and chanted with the cadence of a city that knows how to turn grief into ritual: “Free Palestine.” Fishermen paused with nets in hand. Coffee cups cooled on the tables of cafés that look out over the same stretch of sea that has held a blockade, a dozen protests, and now a flotilla bound for Gaza.
What began as a peaceful humanitarian mission—dozens of volunteers from 44 countries boarding a handful of civilian boats to deliver aid to Gaza—quickly turned into a tangle of competing narratives when one vessel reported being struck off Tunisia’s coast.
The hit that may not have been
The Global Sumud Flotilla (GSF), the international coalition behind the voyage, said one of its main boats, flying a Portuguese flag and carrying members of the flotilla steering committee, suffered fire damage to its main deck and below-deck storage after what organizers called a suspected unmanned aerial vehicle strike. Miraculously, organizers emphasized, all six people on board—crew and passengers—were uninjured.
But the official account from Tunisia’s national guard was more measured and, in some ways, at odds with the flotilla’s version. Houcem Eddine Jebabli, speaking in a tone that mixed bureaucratic caution with the urgency of the moment, said: “According to preliminary findings, a fire broke out in the life jackets on board a ship anchored 50 miles from the port of Sidi Bou Said, which had come from Spain.” He added that the investigation “is ongoing and no drone has been detected.” The two statements—one alleging an aerial strike, the other describing a mysterious onboard fire—left residents and activists alike wondering what really happened out on the water.
Voices from the quay
“We were all stunned. At first people said they saw smoke, then the rumours spread very fast,” said Amal, a café owner whose terrace looks straight onto the boats. “People here feel every ship that sails for Gaza as if it were a message to us all. The sea is not just water for Tunisians—it’s history and hope.”
On the quay, a volunteer who asked not to be named described the scene aboard the damaged vessel with a calm that carried the strain of the night before: “We smelled burned fabric. The crew put the fire out quickly. There was fear, but also a kind of stubborn defiance. We came here to help—if someone wants to scare us away, they will have to try harder.”
Why this mission matters
The Global Sumud Flotilla is more than a convoy of small boats—it is a symbolic act of civil resistance against a blockade that has shaped Gaza’s modern history. Israel imposed a naval blockade on the coastal enclave after Hamas took control in 2007, a security measure it says prevents the smuggling of weapons. Critics argue that the blockade, coupled with frequent military operations, has pushed civilian life in Gaza toward collapse.
Since the devastating attack by Hamas in October 2023, which Israeli authorities say killed around 1,200 people and saw roughly 250 taken hostage, the conflict has only deepened. Gaza’s health ministry reports that more than 64,000 Palestinians have been killed in the subsequent Israeli military campaign—numbers that, whether contested or endorsed, have become part of the humanitarian calculus driving missions like the flotilla.
In March, Israel tightened its noose further by sealing off Gaza by land for weeks at a time; aid convoys were curtailed, and, according to monitoring groups, parts of the enclave slid toward famine. The U.N., aid agencies, and independent monitors have repeatedly warned about the dire conditions—lack of clean water, medical supplies, and safe shelters—that put civilians in the crosshairs of geopolitical strategy.
Acts of solidarity, acts of risk
The flotilla is a magnet for international attention. Activists and public figures have joined or signalled support: Swedish environmental campaigner Greta Thunberg was aboard a British-flagged yacht that Israeli forces boarded in June, and politicians and activists from around Europe and beyond have lent their names and bodies to the cause. For many participants, this is civil disobedience at sea—a deliberate, visible contestation of a long-standing policy.
“When your government speaks in paragraphs and conditions, sometimes the only language that gets through is presence,” said a maritime law expert watching the events from Tunis. “These flotillas test the grey areas of maritime law and the moral conscience of the international community.”
Such missions, the expert added, are about more than delivering boxes of food. “They are about making visible the human faces behind the statistics.”
Questions for the sea, and for us
Who fired—if anyone? Was this a misadventure with life jackets and electrical faults, as Tunisia’s guard suggests, or an attack from above? The investigation is open, evidence will be gathered, and statements will continue. But beyond forensic detail, the incident forces larger questions into the open.
What is the role of civilian activism in war zones? When does solidarity cross into provocation? And what responsibility do states—neighbors and global powers—have to ensure safe passage for humanitarian aid when civilian lives are at stake?
Local attitudes are complex. “We love to see people come and stand with Gaza,” said Najib, a retired fisherman, his hands still smelling faintly of salt. “But we also worry. This sea can be calm and beautiful, and it can swallow lives. People must be careful, yes. But what choice do they have? If no one goes, nothing changes.”
What happens next?
The GSF vowed to continue. “Acts of aggression aimed at intimidating and derailing our mission will not deter us,” the flotilla said in a statement, promising to release the findings of its own inquiry when available. Tunisian investigators continue to examine the vessel and interview crew members. The international community will be watching: diplomatic notes, media frames, and shore-side protests will shape the narrative as much as any technical report.
For the people of Sidi Bou Said and the volunteers who sailed from its port, the sea is both a landscape of longing and a stage for action. As the sun set and the bougainvillea darkened to indigo, a child ran along the quay, trailing a small flag. The chant drifted on the breeze: “Free Palestine,” it said, simple and stubborn as ever.
So ask yourself: when a small boat becomes a symbol, what do we owe it? Protection? Sympathy? The clear-eyed solidarity that turns outrage into policy? The sea keeps its own counsel, but the choices made on its edges echo inland—into parliaments, dining rooms, and the quiet corners where people decide what justice looks like. This incident, wherever the facts finally settle, is another marker on that long, stormy map.
Heathrow Terminal Deemed Safe to Reopen Following Evacuation
Terminal 4 Reopens at Heathrow After Hazmat Scare — A Night of Jitters, Calm and Questions
There is a strange kind of hush that settles over an airport when normal motion stops — the conveyor belts, the shouts of taxi drivers, the clack of trolleys — all paused, as if the building is holding its breath. That hush landed for a few dramatic hours earlier today in Terminal 4 at Heathrow Airport, one of the world’s busiest aviation hubs, when emergency services responded to what was described as a “possible hazardous materials incident.”
By late afternoon, London Fire Brigade crews were on site, specialist teams deployed and Terminal 4 evacuated as a precaution. Paramedics from the London Ambulance Service assessed roughly 20 people at the scene. When the all-clear finally came, Heathrow confirmed the terminal was safe to reopen and airlines were working to get flights moving again.
Moments of fear, minutes of confusion
“I was just about to check in when an announcement said everyone had to leave. There were mums with crying toddlers, a man in a suit holding two dogs — people looked stunned,” said Aisha Rahman, a traveller bound for Istanbul who arrived in the terminal tearful but relieved. “You read about incidents like this and think it won’t happen to you, then suddenly you’re herded outside and you don’t know what’s going on.”
Scenes like hers were repeated across the terminal as people gathered outside under grey London skies, clutching boarding passes and coffee cups. Airport staff, some in neon vests, did their best to answer frantic questions while emergency crews worked methodically inside.
Fire brigade response and immediate impact
The London Fire Brigade said crews from several stations — including Feltham, Heathrow and Wembley — were sent to investigate. Specialist teams examined the scene and the brigade later said it was in the process of standing down its response, though the exact cause remains under investigation.
“We always treat these reports with the utmost seriousness,” a spokesperson for the brigade told me. “Our priority is to make sure people are safe and that any potential contaminants are contained and assessed. At present, we’re satisfied there is no ongoing danger to the public.”
National Rail Enquiries confirmed trains were unable to call at Heathrow Terminal 4 during the incident, adding another layer of disruption for passengers relying on public transport. A Heathrow spokesperson urged travellers to check with their airlines for the latest flight information and said staff would remain on hand into the night to assist.
Heathrow in context: a fragile choreography
Heathrow is not just an airport; it’s a small, relentless city. Pre-pandemic, it handled more than 80 million passengers a year and, even as air travel rebounds unevenly across the globe, it remains the UK’s busiest airport and a major European hub. The sheer scale of people, cargo and services that moves through Heathrow every day is a logistical ballet that depends on minute-by-minute precision.
That scale is partly what makes any disruption so visible. A single evacuated terminal ripples out: delayed flights, rerouted trains, frayed nerves and, occasionally, a spike in conspiracy theories on social media. But it’s also why emergency protocols exist — trained people who practice for moments like this so that the worst can be prevented or mitigated.
Voices from the ground
“We drill for hazardous scenarios regularly,” said Kevin Mitchell, an airport operations manager who asked not to be named publicly. “It’s not glamorous, but it’s essential. We aim to make it feel orderly even when it’s anything but.”
Local taxi driver Maria Costa, whose cab waits for flights that leg into Terminal 4, described the scene with a weary smile: “People were scared, but they were polite. Londoners queue in the rain like it’s nothing — but today the queue had a sort of collective worry. Everyone kept checking their phones for updates.”
Public health and safety experts caution against rushing to conclusions. “Until the lab results and environmental assessments come back, it’s premature to attribute this to any specific substance,” said Dr. Sophie Alvarez, an environmental health specialist at a London university. “What matters is the speed and transparency of the investigation and clear communication with the public.”
What travellers should know — and what they can do
If you have flights at Heathrow tonight or in the coming days, here are a few practical reminders:
- Check your airline’s notifications and Heathrow’s official channels before you travel.
- Allow extra time if you must reach the airport by public transport — services may still be affected.
- Keep essentials like medication and documents in your carry-on; evacuations can be sudden.
“We’re doing everything we can to ensure flights depart as planned,” Heathrow said in a public message. “Safety and security of our passengers and colleagues is our number one priority.”
Bigger questions: resilience, communication and the age of anxiety
Incidents like today’s cast a bright light on larger themes in a highly connected world. How does an airport that moves tens of millions of people a year manage risk without paralysing travel? How do authorities balance public safety with preventing panic? And as security threats evolve and climate change introduces new hazards, are our emergency frameworks keeping pace?
“Every closure or scare is an opportunity to learn,” said Dr. Alvarez. “We need after-action reviews that are candid and public. The public’s trust depends on it.”
For the travellers who were inconvenienced today, there will be flights to catch, apologies to accept and perhaps a tale to tell. For the teams who scrambled into action — the firefighters, medics and airport staff — there is the quieter satisfaction that comes with doing the work that keeps millions moving safely.
A moment to pause: what would you do?
If you were in Terminal 4 when the alarms went off, what would you take with you? How would you comfort a frightened child or an elderly person with limited mobility? These are small tests of community that reveal something about how we navigate emergencies together.
Today, Heathrow reopened a terminal, flights were gradually restored, and an investigation began. Big questions remain unanswered and will need careful, transparent follow-through. But for a few hours at least, the airport’s vast machinery took a breath and, like the travellers who swept back through its doors, resumed its journey.
Woman Sentenced to Life for Fatal Mushroom Poisonings in Australia
The Sentence: A Quiet Courtroom, a Loud Verdict
When the judge’s gavel fell in the Victorian Supreme Court, it sounded softer than the outrage that had been building for months—yet the words that followed hit like thunder. Erin Patterson, 50, was sentenced to life behind bars with the possibility of parole after 33 years for the deaths of three people who sat down to a meal in a small country town and never rose again.
“You have inflicted trauma on your victims and their families,” Justice Christopher Beale told Patterson, his voice measured and grave. “Your failure to exhibit any remorse pours salt into all the victims’ wounds.” He then set the parole eligibility date—when Patterson will be 83—closing a chapter of public fascination and private grief that has gripped Australia and reached audiences around the world.
The sentence marks the end of one legal chapter and likely the beginning of another: Patterson’s legal team has 28 days to lodge an appeal against both the convictions and the punishment. “We understand our positions and the gravity of the sentence, but we will exercise every right afforded by law,” a lawyer for the defence told reporters outside the courthouse.
A Lunch That Turned to Tragedy
The meal was meant to be ordinary: a beef Wellington served in the rural house of Leongatha, a town of shops, dairy farms and people who know one another by first name. Instead it became the spine of a triple murder trial. Don and Gail Patterson and Heather Wilkinson died after sharing that lunch; Heather’s husband, Ian Wilkinson, survived but carries a grief that fills the rooms of his home like an uninvited guest.
“The silence in our home is a daily reminder,” Ian testified during the trial. “I feel half alive without her.” His voice was small in the courtroom. The image of Ian—holding memories and a life unmade—became the human center of a trial that stretched from toxicology reports to the whisperings of online true-crime communities.
At the heart of the case was a single grim allegation: Patterson served a dish laced with deadly toxins from death cap mushrooms, Amanita phalloides. Patterson has consistently maintained that the poisoning was accidental—an explanation jurors ultimately rejected when they returned guilty verdicts in July.
The Mushroom at the Heart of It All
To most of the world, a mushroom is a garnish or a grocery-bought staple. To toxicologists, a single species can mean the difference between routine dinner and catastrophic liver failure. The death cap is among the most dangerous fungi known to humans.
Quick facts about the death cap (Amanita phalloides)
- Contains amatoxins, which cause severe liver and kidney damage.
- Symptoms can be delayed—often 6 to 24 hours after ingestion—leading to a false sense of safety before rapid deterioration.
- Untreated poisoning carries a high mortality rate; with aggressive medical treatment and liver transplant, survival improves, but long-term complications are common.
- The species is an invasive fungus found on multiple continents, including Australia, and is easily mistaken for edible varieties.
“Amanita phalloides is deceptive,” said Dr. Amelia Reyes, a mycologist at the University of Melbourne. “It can smell and taste surprisingly pleasant. People who forage without experience, or who mix mushrooms in home gardens, can be in genuine danger.” She noted that worldwide, documented deaths from wild mushroom poisoning run into the hundreds annually, while countless other cases leave survivors with permanent liver damage.
Morwell, Leongatha and a Nation Watching
Morwell and Leongatha—towns better known for their prize-winning roses and dairy country—found themselves wearing an unfamiliar mantle: the locus of a high-profile murder trial. Podcasters set up behind courthouse railings. Film crews arrived with tripods. Tourists and true-crime enthusiasts hovered, curious and hungry for detail.
“We’re not used to this,” said Maya Thompson, who owns a cafe down the road from the courthouse. “One day, you’re serving chai to farmers; the next, you’re serving it to a documentary crew. People drive past the house, take pictures. It feels strange—like we’re all extras in someone else’s drama.”
Community members told reporters that the case has left them raw. “Folks here know how to keep to themselves, but this was a crack that went straight through everything,” said Ron Davies, a local rose grower whose blooms have won ribbons at regional shows for decades. “We grieve. We gossip. We drink coffee. We wait for something normal to come back.”
Motive, Media, and the Open Question
Perhaps the most unsettling fact about the trial is what remains unknown: motive. The prosecution built its case around the deliberate introduction of toxic fungi into the meal; the defence insisted on accident. On the public stage, the case became a mirror in which Australians—and watchers overseas—saw a mix of justice, speculation and the hunger for narrative that drives true-crime culture.
“Notoriety and spectacle can distort people’s perceptions,” observed Professor Harriet Cole, a criminologist who studies media and the law. “When trials become entertainment, essential subtleties—like the nuance of human motives or the limits of evidence—can be overshadowed. That’s dangerous for communities and for the justice system.”
The jury’s conviction, however, tells another story: that, for twelve jurors, the evidence pointed to intent or recklessness grave enough to warrant the most serious punishment available. Justice Beale’s comments about Patterson’s lack of remorse were a statement about harm that stretches beyond the victims themselves to the families, the town, and the sense of safety that joins a community together.
Wider Lessons: Trust, Foraging, and the Weight of Notoriety
So what should readers take from a case that began with a meal and ended with life imprisonment? First, a practical note: foraging responsibly matters. The global rise in interest in wild food—driven by sustainability, tradition, and culinary curiosity—carries real risks if people are not trained or are misled by confident amateurs.
Second, this is a cautionary tale about how families fray—not always under the weight of greed or malice, but under long seams of estrangement, conflict over money and parenting, and the slow erosion of trust. Patterson and her estranged husband had a relationship strained by disputes, including over child support. Those private arguments entered the public record and complicated public understanding of motive.
Finally, the case raises uncomfortable questions about our appetite for true-crime storytelling. When cameras and podcasts descend, when individuals gain brief global notoriety, what does that do to victims, to jurors and to the fabric of small-town life? “We consume other people’s tragedies like serialized drama,” Professor Cole said. “And then we’re surprised when the consequences are so human—lived, ongoing, deeply painful.”
Asking the Reader
What would you do if a neighbor brought a wild-foraged dish to a family lunch? When does curiosity cross into recklessness? And how much should a community allow public spectacle into private grief?
These are uncomfortable questions, but they matter. They ask us to think about responsibility—both individual and collective—about how we process grief, and about the cost of fame in a world where a courthouse can draw an audience on the other side of the planet.
Whatever the appeals, whatever the eventual legal outcomes, the human consequences here are clear: a table where three people once sat now sits cold; a survivor carries an absence; a family will not be whole again. For a community that grows roses and milks cows, the petals and the milk will keep coming, but for some, the seasons will never again feel the same.
Spain Bans Goods From Israeli Settlements Deemed Illegal
A Small Country, a Big Break: Spain’s Hard Line on Settlements and the New Morality of Trade
There are nights in Madrid when the city hums with a kind of ordinary stubbornness — cafés spill warm light onto cobblestones, and neighbors argue about football and weather and little things that matter. Last week that ordinary hum was punctured by a decision that feels anything but small: Spain announced a suite of measures aimed squarely at Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, including a ban on goods made in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories and a prohibition on ships or aircraft carrying weapons to Israel from entering Spanish ports or airspace.
For many Spaniards, the move read like a moral line in the sand. For others, it read like geopolitics being performed on a domestic stage. And across the Mediterranean, the decision has been met with anger, denial and counter-accusations that risk widening an already painful rift.
What Madrid has done — and why it matters
Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez described the measures as part of a nine-point package “to stop the genocide in Gaza, pursue its perpetrators and support the Palestinian population.” Among the most concrete steps are:
- a ban on imports from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories;
- a prohibition on ships and aircraft carrying weapons to Israel from using Spanish ports or airspace;
- a pledge of €150 million in humanitarian aid for Gaza and new agricultural and medical collaboration projects to support the Palestinian Authority;
- a restriction of consular services for Spanish citizens living in Israeli settlements to the legally required minimum;
- a policy barring entry to anyone Spain considers directly responsible for what it calls genocide, violations of human rights or war crimes in Gaza.
These aren’t mere gestures. The import ban mirrors a growing European tendency to draw legal and economic lines around the question of settlements — lines that have, until now, been mostly rhetorical. Belgium and Slovenia have already instituted similar bans, and lawmakers in other countries are debating legislation that could follow in Spain’s wake.
Voices from the plaza: how people are reacting
On a rainy afternoon in Lavapiés, a multicultural neighborhood in central Madrid where the news dominated conversation in barbershops and bodegas, reactions were varied and heartfelt.
“I don’t take joy in this kind of politics,” said María, a nurse who has worked shifts at a refugee clinic. “But when you watch children starve and hospitals run out of fuel, you can’t stay neutral. This is the government trying to act with what little power it has.”
By contrast, Javier, who runs a small import business near Atocha station, worried about unintended consequences. “Trade is complicated. I understand the sentiment, but small traders like me will feel pressure. Someone at the top needs to plan for that.”
Across town in a Spanish-Jewish community center, conversations took a more fearful tone. “We are not against human rights,” said Esther Cohen, a teacher. “But we feel targeted. There is a fine line between critiquing a government and creating a climate that can feed anti-Semitism.” Her voice was steady; the worry around her eyes was not.
From Madrid to Jerusalem: the political blowback
Predictably, Israel’s response was fierce. The Israeli foreign ministry called the measures unacceptable and accused Spain of waging an “anti-Israel and anti-Semitic campaign.” Officials in Jerusalem announced an entry ban on Spain’s deputy prime minister and a senior youth minister from the hard-left Sumar party — a move that has deepened the diplomatic chill.
“We will not tolerate this kind of singling out,” an Israeli official told reporters, arguing that national security and history must shape any discussion about borders and settlements. Whether framed as security or retaliation, the message was unmistakable: Madrid’s choices would have a cost.
Legal waters run deep: law, trade and the International Court of Justice
Spain’s measures do not stand in a vacuum. Belgium, Slovenia and others have already taken similar steps, and Ireland’s parliament is considering legislation that could outlaw both goods and services from the occupied territories. And hanging over all of this is a case before the International Court of Justice. Israel denies allegations that its conduct amounts to genocide and is contesting that claim at The Hague.
“What we’re witnessing is a broader recalibration of how states apply international law to commercial activity,” said Dr. Ana Ribeiro, an expert on international humanitarian law. “States used to separate trade from human rights concerns. Now that separation is eroding, and it’s forcing businesses to make ethical as well as legal calculations.”
Humanitarian lifelines and pragmatic politics
Spain’s €150 million pledge to Gaza, and its promise to bolster UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority with food, agriculture and medical projects, is meant to balance pressure with aid. Aid workers on the ground say that money — carefully channeled — can be lifesaving, even if it won’t fix the political catastrophe.
“Money helps keep clinics open, children fed and families from falling further into despair,” said Layla Haddad, a field coordinator for a Madrid-based NGO working in the West Bank. “But humanitarian aid is not a substitute for justice or security. We need both.”
Coalition strains and domestic politics
Spain’s decision also exposes fault lines at home. The Sumar party, the junior partner in Sánchez’s coalition, has been a driving force behind the tougher stance — a move that has brought praise from activists and criticism from opponents who accuse the government of politicizing foreign policy while wrestling with domestic scandals.
“Foreign policy is increasingly domestic theater,” said Rafael Ortega, a political analyst. “Parties use external issues to consolidate bases and distract from internal problems. That said, public sentiment in Spain is powerful and real. Leaders are responding to something deeper than electoral calculus.”
What does this mean for ordinary people — and for the future?
These decisions tug at the threads that connect ethics, commerce and everyday life. A ban on settlement goods might not topple leaders, but it asks consumers and companies to consider where products come from and what systems they support. It forces a conversation about complicity and accountability in a world where supply chains cross battle lines.
Will more nations follow Madrid’s lead? Will these measures nudge negotiations, or harden positions on both sides? Can economic levers be effective where diplomacy has so often faltered?
What feels certain is that Spain’s choice has reopened a debate many hoped was settled: can trade be neutral in the face of alleged human rights abuses? In parks and parliament chambers, in shops and on social media, that question is now unavoidable.
So ask yourself: when morality and commerce collide, where do you stand? And what would you expect your government to do?
Closing thought
Spain’s move is a reminder that small states can exercise outsized moral influence, and that trade policy is increasingly political. It is also a test — for Spain, for Europe, and for a world that keeps asking whether the rules we make can ever match the values we proclaim. Whether this chapter softens suffering, inflames tensions, or does a bit of both remains to be seen. But it has already changed the conversation. And sometimes, changing the conversation is the first step toward changing the facts on the ground.
French government toppled after Prime Minister Bayrou’s confidence motion fails
When the Rafale of Politics Hits the Boulevard: France’s Government Falls and the Country Holds Its Breath
Paris in late summer can be forgiving — tourists drift along the Seine, boulangeries steam with warm croissants, and the city hums with small comforts. But on the day Prime Minister François Bayrou’s government was toppled in a confidence vote, the usual warmth of the boulevards felt brittle, like a croissant left too long in the window.
It was not a slow unraveling so much as a staccato. In a packed National Assembly, 364 deputies declared they no longer trusted the government; 194 said they did. The result was abrupt and historic: Bayrou will submit his resignation, and President Emmanuel Macron has been handed a new, knotty domestic problem just as he steers France’s foreign-policy ship amid the Ukraine war.
A high-stakes gamble that misfired
Bayrou’s decision to call a confidence vote was a political high-wire act. He framed it as necessary — a sort of political defibrillator for a nation sinking under debt. “The biggest risk would have been doing nothing,” he told MPs, arguing that roughly €44 billion in savings were essential to curbing a “life-threatening” debt trajectory. It was a dramatic appeal for what he called political courage. It did not work.
“He bet the house,” said an aide close to the prime minister who asked not to be named. “He believed a clear choice would break the logjam. He misread the floor.”
What the vote underlined is the fragility of a political construct that’s been changing shape with dizzying frequency. Bayrou is the sixth prime minister since Macron’s 2017 victory and the fifth to take office since 2022. That churn is not just a matter of political trivia; it’s a symptom of deeper fractures in French politics and society.
Faces in the crowd: how everyday people are reacting
On Rue Cler, a narrow market street not far from the Assembly, I spoke with Jeanne, a 58-year-old baker who has lived through more than one French political crisis. “We’re tired of haggling in the corridors while bread prices climb,” she said, buttering a tart. Her hands showed the kind of patience that has weathered decades. “We want stability. My customers want their pensions protected. They want to keep their jobs.”
Across town, in a lycée near République, a history teacher named Karim reflected on how politics plays out in classrooms. “My students are more cynical than hopeful,” he said. “They see that votes happen but their lives don’t change fast enough.”
And in a café where union posters still plaster the walls from earlier strikes, Marie Dubois, a trade union organizer, offered a different note. “This is an opportunity. The government tried to push austerity without a social consensus. People will resist cuts that hit working families.”
Polls, pressures, and possibilities
The numbers in the public domain paint a grim picture for Macron. A poll by Odoxa-Backbone for Le Figaro reported that 64% of respondents want Macron to step down rather than appoint a new prime minister — a demand Macron has repeatedly rejected. Another Ifop poll for Ouest-France found his approval ratings down to 23%, his worst-ever recorded figure.
Those statistics matter because they reshape the levers available to the president. He now must wrestle with two stark options: name a new prime minister and try to forge a parliamentary compromise, or call snap legislative elections in the hope of securing a more sympathetic Assembly. Neither path is simple, and neither promises a neat outcome.
- Appointing another prime minister risks another hasty coalition or a short-lived administration.
- Calling elections could rebalance the Assembly — or deepen fragmentation and empower extremes.
The wider political chessboard
Beyond the immediate governmental drama lies a larger canvas. The left — with the Socialist Party tentatively expressing readiness to lead — could attempt to compose a new majority, though whether such a government would survive the Assembly’s pressures is an open question. On the right, heavyweight ministers trusted by Macron, like Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin, would face the risk of being voted out under a left-led coalition.
And then there is the far-right, whose prospects appear, to many analysts, more potent than they have ever been. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally has been gathering momentum even amid legal setbacks. In March, Le Pen was convicted in a case tied to fraudulent jobs at the European Parliament — handed a four-year sentence, two years suspended, and a €100,000 fine. The conviction also included a five-year ban from standing for office, though an appeal scheduled for January–February 2026 could reopen her political future long before the 2027 presidential race.
Le Pen’s reaction to Bayrou’s fall was immediate: she called for snap elections, describing the ousted government as a “phantom” that never commanded legitimacy. “Holding elections is not optional,” she told cheering MPs, pushing Macron toward a choice that could reshape France’s path for years.
Social fault lines and the calendar of unrest
A political crisis does not live in a vacuum. It bleeds into the streets. Left-wing groups like “Block Everything” have called for days of action, and trade unions have already urged workers to strike. The social calendar is thick with protests and strikes, a recurrent theme in French public life that reflects a robust — if fractious — tradition of civic engagement.
“When budgets bite, people show up,” said Dr. Sophie Laurent, an economist at Sciences Po. “There’s an economic logic. Austerity tends to constrict demand, and that hits the middle and working classes hardest. Politically, that fuels polarization.”
What’s at stake beyond France
This is not only a Parisian problem. Macron’s standing on the world stage — particularly his diplomatic role in the Ukraine war — adds another layer of urgency. Allies watch closely; instability in a major European nation can ripple through markets, defence coordination, and EU politics. A new government could mean different priorities on European defence spending, migration policies, or economic recovery strategies.
So where does that leave the French public, and where should we, as observers and citizens, place our attention? Do we accept the inevitability of more churn and hope for a durable consensus to emerge? Or do we prepare for a period of intensified political fragmentation leading up to the 2027 election?
These are not rhetorical questions. They are the choices that will shape schools, hospitals, work schedules, pension reforms, and the very fabric of daily life in France. And for a global audience, the choices also reflect wider democratic trends: the pressures of austerity, the polarization of politics, the potency of populist movements, and how nations balance security and social welfare during turbulent times.
Closing thoughts: a nation in a turning moment
France has seen crises before — and each time its streets, cafés, and chambers of power have produced a messy, sometimes inspiring, democratic answer. For now, the Assembly’s vote has closed one chapter and flung the next one wide open. President Macron must make a consequential decision. Bayrou will leave the Élysée corridors at dawn with his resignation in hand.
As Jeanne the baker slid a fresh baguette into my bag, she smiled with the weary optimism common in her trade. “We’ll eat and we’ll argue, and then we’ll eat again,” she said. “France is noisy. That’s how it finds its way.”
Can political noise be a path to clarity? Or will it drown out compromise? Keep watching — and ask yourself: what kind of leadership do you think can heal both a nation’s books and its soul?
Lady Gaga Crowned Artist of the Year at MTV VMAs
A Night of Stardust and Surprise: The 2025 VMAs in Long Island
There are nights when the air itself seems to hum — fluorescent, electric, scented a little like arena popcorn and thousands of shared expectations. That was the feeling outside UBS Arena on Long Island: a mingled tide of sequins, band T‑shirts and glow sticks, a crowd that had come to celebrate music in an era when charts, streams and viral moments collide. Inside, drumbeats and camera flashes stitched together a two‑hour snapshot of popular culture: the 2025 MTV Video Music Awards, a show at once playful and fiercely competitive, where the trophies were plentiful and the loyalties even more so.
By the end of the evening one artist rose above the rest: Lady Gaga, crowned Artist of the Year. It was a victory that felt like a long exhale — twelve nominations in the bag, four trophies carried home, and a show‑stopping mix of theatrical craft and big pop hooks that reminded everyone why she’s still a force on the charts and in imaginations. “This is for the people who have never stopped believing,” a teary Gaga might have said walking offstage, her voice threaded with gratitude. She dedicated the honor to her fan community — the Little Monsters — and to her fiancé, Michael Polansky, signaling that the award was as much about shared stories as it was about career milestones.
Gaga’s Nights and Midnight Flights
Gaga’s haul wasn’t just Artist of the Year. Her aesthetic eye won Best Direction and Best Art Direction for the dizzying, occult-tinged Abracadabra, and she shared Best Collaboration with Bruno Mars for the bittersweet Die With A Smile. The image of Gaga accepting an award at UBS and then later appearing at New York’s Madison Square Garden to perform songs tied to Netflix’s cult hit Wednesday — Abracadabra and The Dead Dance — captured the strange mobility of 21st‑century stardom: artists moving through multiple stages, platforms and narratives in a single night.
“A great pop performance is like a promise,” said a longtime music critic backstage. “Gaga keeps making good on hers.”
Three Wins That Said Something About the Moment
While Gaga took the night’s top prize, the ceremony was refreshingly diffused — awards distributed across a wide palette of artists and sounds. Sabrina Carpenter and Ariana Grande each walked away with three statuettes, their own forms of validation in a year packed with high‑profile releases and cinematic videos.
Grande’s Brighter Days Ahead was a watershed: Video of the Year, Best Pop Video and Best Long‑Form Video. There was an intimate moment when she thanked her father for a surprise cameo in the film, underscoring how modern pop sometimes cradles old‑fashioned family stories inside high‑concept direction. “We build worlds now,” said a filmmaker who worked with Grande, “and when those worlds include the real people you love, they land differently.”
Sabrina Carpenter’s Short n’ Sweet grabbed Album of the Year, and she was named Best Pop Artist while also winning for Visual Effects with Manchild — recognition that honored both songwriting craft and cinematic imagination. “It feels like the industry is finally making room for earnestness and spectacle together,” a pop producer observed.
Honors, Tributes and the Global Beat
The show threaded through decades as well as newness. Mariah Carey, whose career has been stitched into pop history for nearly three decades, collected the R&B prize for Type Dangerous and then accepted the Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award — a symbolic, career‑spanning honor that had many in the crowd whooping. “About time,” a fan in a bedazzled jacket shouted into the night; Carey’s response — gracious, lightly amused — acknowledged the irony and joy of finally being formally recognized on MTV’s storied stage.
Latin and hip‑hop legacies were present and honored: Ricky Martin received the Latin Icon Award, and Busta Rhymes was presented with the Rock The Bells Visionary Award. “We want to keep music alive and break boundaries at the same time,” Martin said onstage, a simple credo for an industry built on reinvention and cross‑pollination.
There were also moments of rock reverence. A tribute to Ozzy Osbourne, who passed away earlier this year, was introduced with a family video message and brought together audacious performers — Yungblud, Steven Tyler, Joe Perry and Nuno Bettencourt — to spin out Crazy Train and Mama, I’m Coming Home. It was one of those poignant collisions of grief and celebration that award shows handle awkwardly well: public mourning turned into a communal sing‑through.
Global Winners, Local Color
What struck many viewers was the international texture of the winners list: Rosé and Bruno Mars’ Apt. won Song of the Year; Blackpink were acclaimed as Best Group; Shakira took Best Latin for Soltera; Coldplay earned Best Rock with All My Love; and Sombr won Alternative for Back To Friends. The spread reflects an ongoing truth about music today: borders matter less than ever in how a song catches fire.
On the concourse outside UBS, fans held Korean light sticks for Blackpink and waved Colombian flags for Shakira with equal fervor. “We came from Queens and Brooklyn,” said Javier, a 27‑year‑old who queued since dawn. “It’s not just the music. It’s seeing people who sound like us or come from places we love.”
Trends, Tensions and the Changing Shape of Stardom
There’s a deeper pattern under this year’s confetti: awards spread across a broader array of artists speaks to fragmentation and abundance in the streaming era. Playlists, social platforms and cinematic tie‑ins mean that an album can be both a global phenomenon and a niche, cult favorite. The VMAs reflected that pluralism: a night where legacy acts and breakout stars shared the same spotlight.
Does this dilution make awards less meaningful? Or does it finally allow room for more voices? Consider this: Ariana’s long‑form piece won alongside Sabrina’s intimate visual work and Gaga’s high‑camp pageantry — three very different ways to make an impression in 2025. Each wins for a different reason, and each points to a different audience relationship.
After the Curtains: What to Watch Next
Some awards were announced after the broadcast on X, an indication of how modern ceremonies stretch across platforms and time. Post Malone performed remotely from Germany, proving that geopolitics and tech glitches are no longer barriers to a live feel. And beneath the trophies, the mood was less about tallying victories than about the business of culture itself: collaborations that cross genre, the revival of theatrical music videos, and a global audience that is simultaneously niche and massive.
So what did we get from the VMAs this year? Theater, tenderness, tribute. Surprises that felt like fresh paint on old walls. And a reminder that even in a streaming age, a live night of music still has the power to glue strangers together for a few luminous hours.
Who won your heart, and which performance would you put on repeat? The awards tell one story — the music tells another. Which one matters more to you?
- Artist of the Year: Lady Gaga
- Video of the Year: Ariana Grande — Brighter Days Ahead
- Album of the Year: Sabrina Carpenter — Short n’ Sweet
- Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award: Mariah Carey
- Latin Icon Award: Ricky Martin
- Rock The Bells Visionary Award: Busta Rhymes
Israeli strikes leave 12 dead as UN condemns mass killing
Dawn over rubble: Gaza’s fragile morning
When the sun rose over Gaza City this morning, it found a landscape that looked more like a memory than a neighborhood: skeletal high-rises, streets littered with glass and twisted metal, and the thin, stubborn smoke that never quite leaves.
In the hours before dawn, medics in ambulances with dust-streaked windshields counted at least a dozen more people dead across the territory — neighbors, children, and one man known in the tight-knit community of Palestinian reporters as Osama Balousha.
“Osama would call me three times a day just to check in,” said a colleague who asked not to be named. “He was there where everyone else fled, trying to tell the world what was happening. Now he is gone.” His voice broke on the last syllable; outside, a mosque’s minaret sent up a lonely prayer.
Ceasefire terms and a tense pause
Against this backdrop of grief, a diplomatic gambit unfolded in Europe. Israel’s Foreign Minister announced in Budapest that the country was prepared to accept a ceasefire proposal presented by US President Donald Trump — a plan that, according to senior Israeli sources, would tie an immediate halt in fighting to the return of hostages and the disarmament of Hamas.
The essence of the proposal, as summarized by Israeli officials, would see all remaining hostages — 48 people according to the latest briefings — returned on the first day of a ceasefire, with negotiations to follow over the broader conditions for ending the conflict. Hamas said it was studying the plan, insisting any release must be bound to a definitive announcement that the war had ended and Israeli forces had withdrawn.
The exchange of proposals and counterproposals unfolded as airstrikes continued. For many in Gaza, diplomatic language offered little immediate comfort.
Threats, trumpets and the language of war
On social media, Israeli ministers sharpened their rhetoric. One senior figure warned that Gaza faced “a mighty hurricane” of strikes if Hamas did not release the hostages and surrender. Military communiqués and blunt warnings reverberated through the region’s already taut nerves.
At the same time, Hamas reiterated its willingness to free those being held, but only within a framework that would guarantee the withdrawal of Israeli forces and an end to what Palestinians describe as an existential assault on their homes and livelihoods.
On the ground: neighborhoods that once were whole
Residents described waves of explosions across Sheikh Radwan, Zeitoun and Tuffah — neighbourhoods where families have tried to rebuild amid ruins since the war’s most intense phases two years ago. Witnesses said the military detonated decommissioned armoured vehicles in city streets, a tactic that flattened clusters of houses and threw families into separate shelters.
“We came back because we have nowhere else to go,” said Fatima, a 42-year-old who has been living in a one-room makeshift shelter with her children. “If they tell us to leave again, where will we leave to? These are our graves.” Her hands kept tracing a burned pattern on the cot beside her.
The killing of the storytellers
The death of Osama Balousha is not an isolated headline — it is part of a devastating pattern. Palestinian authorities say nearly 250 journalists have been killed in Gaza during this war, a toll that makes this conflict one of the deadliest on record for members of the press.
Israel excludes foreign reporters from entering Gaza, meaning most — if not all — journalists killed inside the territory have been Palestinian. Palestinian officials allege deliberate targeting of media workers; Israeli authorities deny such claims, saying operations are aimed at combatants. The result, however, is the same: fewer independent eyes in a place where independent reporting has never been more vital.
Man-made famine and mounting suffering
Beyond bombs and broken buildings, Gaza is watching a slower, crueler enemy: hunger. The territory’s health ministry reported six more deaths from malnutrition and starvation in the past 24 hours, bringing the official toll from such causes to at least 393 — most of them recorded in just the last two months.
International monitors have been stark. The global Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) has characterized the situation here as an entirely man-made famine. UN human rights officials have echoed that alarm, pointing squarely to policies that have blocked or slowed lifesaving assistance and choked off the steady flow of essentials.
“It’s as if the life sources of an entire population have been turned off,” a senior humanitarian worker in Rafah told me. “When aid convoys arrive, there are more mouths than parcels; the rationing is impossible.” He kept his eyes low, as if he carried the images of waiting children like stones inside him.
International law, the court of conscience
In Geneva this week, the UN human rights chief delivered a blistering critique, accusing Israel of mass killing of Palestinian civilians and of impeding the delivery of critical aid. He said the evidence mounting could amount to a legal case before the International Court of Justice — a claim that reverberates far beyond legal halls and into living rooms and refugee camps.
Scholars and international bodies have debated whether the legal threshold for genocide has been met; last week an association of genocide scholars concluded that it had. For many families in Gaza, however, these abstract judgments cannot answer the immediate question: how to feed a child, how to bury a loved one with dignity, how to find a quiet night.
Voices you will not see on television
Walk a few alleys away from the main thoroughfares and you hear the smaller sounds of survival: the hiss of a kettle over a salvaged stove, the faraway laughter of a child making a game of rubble. Trade stalls sell olives and prayer beads, fishmongers shout prices at dawn. These are ordinary rhythms unmoored by violence.
“I used to sell tea to the workers who repaired the electrical grid,” said Mahmoud, an elderly vendor near the rubble of a marketplace. “Now the grid has no workers and my tea kettle is a relic. Still, I come every day. People stop and talk. We need that.” His smile was a thin braid of defiance.
What do we do with what we know?
As readers from Berlin, Lagos, New York, or Tokyo, what are we to make of this sprawl of facts and faces? How do we measure the moment when law, diplomacy and desperate human need collide? How do we weigh the hard demand to return hostages and the equally vital demand to protect civilian life?
These are not questions with tidy answers. They demand, at minimum, that the world keep looking, keep speaking, and keep insisting on corridors for aid, safe passage for the vulnerable, and independent verification of what has happened. They demand that journalism — even when it is dangerous, even when it is forbidden to outsiders — is supported and protected.
At the crossroads
Whether the ceasefire proposal becomes a turning point or another temporary pause depends on decisions that will be made in conference rooms, on battlefields, and in the quiet hearts of leaders and fighters. For the families I met today, the measure of any agreement is simple: will it let them feed their children, mourn their dead, and rebuild a life?
You, reading this now, are part of that global conscience. What line will you draw? What question will you ask your representatives? How long can the world look away before the cost becomes unbearable? These are the hard questions — and the answers will shape more than headlines; they will shape lives.
Armed attackers kill six in shooting at Jerusalem bus stop
Gunfire at the Ramot Junction: A Bus Stop, a Burst of Violence, and the City that Keeps Counting Losses
The scene at Ramot Junction felt, in the first moments, like a bad dream you couldn’t wake from: the staccato rat-a-tat of gunfire, the sickening thud of people falling into dust and pavement, a city’s ordinary rhythm ruptured in an instant.
Witnesses later described shards of glass glittering on the road where a commuter bus had stopped and passengers had been waiting on a routine weekday. Dashboard camera footage that circulated online showed people sprinting across the asphalt as gunshots cut the air. The bus’s windscreen and its windows were peppered with bullet holes—silent testimony to how fast normal life can become a headline.
“Suddenly I hear the shots starting … I felt like I was running for an eternity,” said Ester Lugasi from her hospital bed, one of the injured. “I thought I was going to die.”
Who Was Hurt, Who Survived
Medical teams and emergency services confirmed the dead numbered six, and the wounded totaled 11, six of them in serious condition with gunshot wounds. The ambulance service identified five victims—a 50-year-old man, a woman in her fifties and three men in their thirties—before a later confirmation of a sixth fatality. Names, identity details and families’ statements were still coming through as investigators worked the perimeter.
A paramedic who arrived early on described the eerie calm that follows such violence. “You move through shock—blank faces, a smell of copper, people whispering names,” she said. “It’s the same scene, different faces.” Her training kicks in, but none of that erases the weight of having seen lives split open by a few minutes of violence.
What Happened—According to Authorities
Israeli police say two attackers arrived by car and opened fire at the bus stop at Ramot Junction on the outskirts of Jerusalem. Several weapons, ammunition and a knife were recovered at the scene. A security officer and a civilian at the scene returned fire and neutralized the attackers, police said, and officers scoured the area amid an expanding cordon of blue-uniformed personnel and border guards.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking at the scene, said forces were pursuing suspected accomplices. “We will not allow terror to set the rules of life here,” he told reporters, a refrain often heard after such attacks, intended to reassure but that also underscores how routine these briefings have become.
Militant Groups Praise the Shooting
Hamas praised the two individuals it called “resistance fighters,” while Islamic Jihad also issued statements of support. Neither group immediately claimed operational responsibility in the way they sometimes do—yet their quick and public praise adds a political tenor to the attack beyond the immediate human tragedy.
Lives Interrupted: Voices from the Street
On the pavement near the junction, a bakery owner swept away broken glass from his doorway and spoke of a neighborhood on edge. “We’re used to the tensions—everyone is—but not like this,” he said, lighting a cigarette and shaking his head. “You know half the people here; they buy their challah and cigarettes from me. It’s not numbers, it’s names.”
A young Arab woman who lives nearby stood with her hands wrapped around a thermos of hot tea. She had been late to work that morning and had seen the aftermath from a distance. “It doesn’t matter who you are in this city—this violence reaches every kitchen,” she said. “We fear for our families on the bus, in the markets. It’s tiring. It’s all-consuming.”
Patterns, Context, and the Broader Picture
To understand this attack is to chart a worrying pattern. In recent years, bus stops and public transport hubs in Israel and the Palestinian territories have been targeted repeatedly, chosen for their concentrated civilian presence. In November 2023, two gunmen killed three people at a Jerusalem bus stop—an attack that Israeli security services said was linked to Hamas. In October 2024, a combined gun-and-knife attack in Tel Aviv claimed seven lives. These incidents are the mortar in a harder wall of daily fear.
And yet, the 2024 Gaza war remains the context no one can ignore. The October 2023 assault by Hamas that precipitated the war resulted in 1,219 deaths, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on Israeli figures. Israel’s subsequent offensive has exacted an even larger toll in Gaza: the Hamas-run health ministry there reports over 64,000 dead, mostly civilians—a number the United Nations has said its agencies consider reliable. These numbers are not abstractions. They are the sum of parents, apprentices, students, neighbors—the people who used to stand at bus stops.
Experts Weigh In
Security analysts note that such attacks thrive on both local grievances and the larger theater of conflict. “This is tactical terrorism in an urban setting,” said Dr. Miriam Levin, a security scholar who studies asymmetric warfare. “There’s a calculable logic—target a civilian hub, maximize media impact, force a security response. But there’s also the social logic: when a community feels pushed against a wall, some individuals choose violence.”
Another expert, a psychologist working with trauma survivors in Jerusalem, stressed the ripples. “Survivors will carry this for years,” she said. “You see people who can’t ride the bus for months. Kids who were on that bus will feel distrust for public spaces. The social cost is enormous and undercounted.”
Small Details that Tell the Larger Story
Ramot, a neighborhood on Jerusalem’s northern ridge, is a mosaic—ultra-Orthodox synagogues sit near secular apartments, Arabic signs hang in shop windows, and the city’s ancient stones feel only a short walk away. It is not a place of abstract politics; it is a place where lunch is eaten, shoes are shined, and people argue about football.
On evenings after such attacks, shawarma stands and hummus shops fill with people exchanging theories and grief, sometimes in Hebrew, sometimes in Arabic. Children ask why their parents are sad. Older men recall other attacks as if they were yesterday. Ordinary rituals continue because they must; life and loss are braided together here.
What Now? Questions That Remain
Will the neutralization of the shooters end this episode of violence? Will arrests of alleged accomplices follow? Will political leaders find themselves once again moving the chess pieces of military response and security measures? Each answer conceals new problems: curfews, raids in the West Bank, military exchanges—measures that, in turn, ripple back to civilians on both sides.
And beyond immediate security operations, there are broader questions we rarely answer in the heat of the moment: How do communities rebuild trust after such public traumas? How do we measure success—by arrests, by fortifications, or by the quieter work of reconciliation and addressing root causes?
Summing Up: The Human Ledger
- Deaths reported: 6 (early official tallies)
- Injured: 11, with six in serious condition
- Perpetrators: Two gunmen identified by Israeli authorities as Palestinians from the Israeli-occupied West Bank
- Militant response: Hamas and Islamic Jihad praised the attack
- Context: Part of a pattern of deadly urban attacks during a wider and devastating conflict between Israel and Gaza
More than numbers, what remains are the stories: the woman who bought a bus ticket and never made it home; the security guard whose quick action may have saved lives; the shopkeeper who keeps sweeping even when his hands tremble. In this city, grief is a public affair and resilience is private labor.
What do you think breaks cycles like this—tightened security, political negotiations, deeper efforts at coexistence, or something else? If we are to imagine a different future, we need to decide collectively which uncomfortable steps we are willing to take.
For now, the glazing sun over Jerusalem will cast its ordinary light over streets scarred by extraordinary violence, and people—wounded, wary, determined—will begin the slow work of living again.
Albania names AI-created minister hailed as ‘corruption-free’ innovation
Diella, the AI Minister: Albania’s Bold, Beautiful Gamble with Technology and Trust
On a warm spring evening in Tirana, under the glassy gaze of the...
UN Security Council denounces strikes on Qatar, stops short of naming Israel
Smoke over Doha: funerals, fury and the fragile thread of mediation
The mosque was a hush of white robes and camo, of prayer and politics...
UK removes Mandelson as ambassador to US amid Epstein ties
The End of an Embassy: How Peter Mandelson’s Ties to Jeffrey Epstein Undid a High-Profile Appointment
There are moments in politics that feel like the...
US official: People praising the killing of Kirk unwelcome in America
A Campus, a Coffin, and the Country That Fractured Around Them
On a clear Utah afternoon, where the air usually tastes of pine and possibility,...
WHO’s Ryan ‘Disillusioned’ by Global Community’s Response to Gaza Crisis
A World That Turns Away: A Dispatch on Hunger, Children, and Our Collective Conscience
There are moments when the vocabulary of outrage fails: when the...