Sept 04 (Jowhar)-Naqshadeeye Giorgio Armani, oo gacan ka geystay in Talyaanigu safka hore kaga jiro moodada caalamka iyo xiddigaha Hollywood-ka, ayaa ku dhintay da’da 91 jir, shirkadda uu aasaasay oo uu hoggaaminayay muddo 50 sano ah Khamiistii.
Iconic Italian Designer Giorgio Armani Passes Away at 91
Giorgio Armani: The Quiet Architect of Modern Elegance
On an ordinary morning in Milan — the air already heavy with espresso steam and the click of designer heels — the world lost one of its most elegant statesmen. Giorgio Armani, the man who taught the world to equate understatement with power, has died at 91. The Armani Group announced the news with a short, reverent message: “With infinite sorrow, the Armani Group announces the passing of its creator, founder, and tireless driving force: Giorgio Armani.”
“Il Signor Armani, as he was always respectfully and admiringly called by employees and collaborators, passed away peacefully, surrounded by his loved ones,” the statement added, a soft, private note in the midst of public grief. The family has opted for a private funeral, while Milan will offer a brief public moment: a funeral chamber open to well-wishers the coming Saturday and Sunday.
A Life Cut in Cloth and Light
Some careers blaze; Armani’s smoldered, steady and transformative. He opened his eponymous fashion house in Milan in 1975 and, within a decade, rewired the global idea of dressing. Where fashion once shouted, he taught it to whisper — to do a lot with a little. Long, clean lines. Fabrics that breathed and moved. Jackets without heavy shoulder pads that liberated men’s movement and introduced a softer masculinity to the public imagination.
“He wasn’t about flash. He was about dignity,” says Dr. Lucia Bianchi, a fashion historian in Milan who has lectured on Italian design for two decades. “Armani changed how individuals wanted to appear in both business and pleasure — calm, composed, but unmistakable.”
Armani’s fingerprints are everywhere you look in late-20th-century culture. He dressed actors and actresses on screen and on the red carpet, helped redefine the power suit for women in the 1980s, and left an indelible mark on cinema — his suits for Richard Gere in American Gigolo, for instance, are a cultural shorthand for a new kind of masculine allure.
From Runways to Hotels, a Global Footprint
He was not a one-note genius. Armani built a multi-tiered empire: haute couture in Armani Privé, more accessible lines like Emporio Armani, signature fragrances such as Acqua di Giò that became global blockbusters, and a hospitality arm — Armani Hotels & Resorts — that merged his aesthetic with luxury travel, the first flagship opening in Dubai’s Burj Khalifa in 2010.
By the time his company announced his death, the label had become shorthand for modern Italian elegance: a brand spanning continents, dressing presidents and pop stars, and operating in the cultural sweet spot between commerce and art.
Milan at a Standstill
On Via Montenapoleone and around the Armani/Silos museum, Milanese paused in small clusters. Some lit cigarettes; others stood with hands in pockets, staring at the shop windows where neutral fabrics and timeless tailoring seemed suddenly, poignantly fragile.
“He made us proud,” said Maria, a boutique sales assistant who has worked near Piazza San Babila for twelve years. “People come from everywhere to see this city, to buy a piece of that elegance. He put Milan on the map in a way that matters. It’s like losing a quiet ambassador.”
Across town, at a tiny bar where the owners keep a ledger of famous clients and dates, the regulars spoke of Armani like an old friend. “You’d see him in the cafés sometimes — unassuming, perhaps with one of his jackets folded over a chair,” recalled Paolo, 68. “He preferred to disappear into the fabric of the city, but his clothes never did.”
Official Farewells and Cultural Weight
Italy’s Culture Minister Alessandro Giuli led an outpouring of official respect, calling Armani “a leading figure in Italian culture, who was able to transform elegance into a universal language.” He said Armani’s understated innovation “redefined the relationship between fashion, cinema and society” and named him an “ambassador of Italian identity” across the globe.
Those words capture something essential: Armani didn’t merely sell clothing. He translated a kind of Italian composure — an economy of gesture — into a language that exported well. In a globalized world that often equates excess with success, his restraint was revolutionary.
The Final Acts
Health had already begun to slow him. This year he cancelled his menswear show during Milan Fashion Week and sat out the Paris Armani Privé presentation on doctors’ orders. “In 20 years of Armani Privé, it’s the first time I’m not in Paris,” he said in July. “My doctors advised more rest, even though I felt ready.” Even from a distance, he continued to sign off on creative decisions: “I followed and oversaw every aspect of the show remotely,” he added. “I approved and signed off on everything you will see.”
That sentence — a man so precise that he approved dresses and cuts from afar — feels emblematic. It suggests a final chapter lived in careful stewardship, an artist attentive to the grammar of his craft until the end.
Beyond the Jacket: Legacy and Reflection
What does an icon leave behind? There are tangible things — museums like Armani/Silos that archive decades of work, fragrance counters stocked with bottles that have sold in the millions, hotels that refract his aesthetic into rooms and lobbies — and there is the less tangible inheritance: a changed vocabulary of elegance, a global appetite for a subdued kind of luxury.
“He taught consumers to appreciate an unbranded elegance, where the fit is louder than the logo,” says Marco Leone, a Milan-based stylist. “That’s harder to manufacture than a flashy campaign. It requires respect for materials, tailoring, and a certain ethical patience.”
Globally, his death arrives amid broader conversations about fashion’s direction — sustainability, fast fashion’s social toll, and the search for authenticity in branding. Armani’s approach was in some ways the antidote to disposable trends: garments meant to be worn, remembered, and passed down.
Questions to Carry Forward
As we fold his life into the larger pattern of fashion and culture, we might ask: what does quiet taste mean in an era of shouting? Can the industry he helped shape adapt the principles of craftsmanship and restraint to demands for sustainability and equity? And how will Milan, the city that nurtured him and was in turn nurtured by him, move forward?
Giorgio Armani’s passing is not just news for fashion editors. It is a moment for anyone who believes in craft, in the slow accumulation of taste, in the power of simplicity. Whether you wore his designs or just admired them in passing, you have been touched by his sensibility.
“He gave us confidence without costume,” a longtime collaborator told me, voice nearly breaking. “That is perhaps his greatest gift.”
We close with that thought and an invitation: next time you reach for a piece of clothing, ask what it says. Is it armor, or is it an invitation to be yourself? Giorgio Armani spent a lifetime teaching the world to choose the latter.
Pope Leo addresses Gaza’s ‘tragic situation’ in meeting with Herzog
When Marble Meets Rubble: A Pope’s Plea and Gaza’s Quiet Cataclysm
On an ornate morning in the Vatican, amid frescoes and marble that have witnessed centuries of prayers and politics, Pope Leo sat across from Israel’s President Isaac Herzog and spoke of Gaza.
It was a meeting of worlds — the soft hush of papal halls and the brittle silence of neighborhoods reduced to dust. In a statement that lingered longer than the Vatican’s usual diplomatic blurbs, the pontiff lamented the “tragic situation in Gaza,” urged a permanent ceasefire and called for the release of the remaining hostages. The Vatican reiterated support for a two-state solution — the patient, battered blueprint that has slipped in and out of the world’s grasp for decades.
“Religious leaders and all who choose the path of peace must stand together in calling for the immediate release of the hostages as a first and essential step toward a better future for the entire region,” President Herzog wrote on X after the meeting, thanking the pope for a “warm welcome.”
Two Cities, Two Moods
Walk the halls of the apostolic palace and you will see leaders posing without smiles for the cameras. Cross into Gaza City — where Israeli forces have pushed and shelled in recent weeks — and you’ll find people who no longer smile because they cannot afford the motion. In the east of the city, neighborhoods with names like Zeitoun, Tuffah, Sabra and Shejaia have become coordinates on a map of loss.
“This time, I am not leaving my house. I want to die here,” said Um Nader, a mother of five, her voice a dry wind. “It doesn’t matter if we move out or stay. Tens of thousands of those who left their homes were killed by Israel too, so why bother?” Her words pierced through images of tents and ruined facades that have become Gaza’s unwanted landmarks.
There is no cinematic neatness here. There are tent camps hit near Shifa Hospital, queues of children waiting for water, medics naming the dead in numbers that flatten stories into statistics. Health authorities in Gaza report recent Israeli fire killed at least 53 people — mostly in Gaza City — as Israeli tanks and aircraft advanced. The larger toll, according to local officials, stands at more than 63,000 Palestinians killed since the conflict flared last October, most of them civilians.
Numbers That Haunt
Numbers are blunt instruments but they matter. The war began on 7 October 2023, when gunmen led by Hamas carried out an assault in southern Israel that killed some 1,200 people and saw 251 taken hostage. Israel’s response has been relentless.
Inside Gaza, the human cost has been compounded by hunger and displacement. Gaza health officials say 370 people — including 131 children — have died of malnutrition and starvation in recent weeks. The UN and Palestinian agencies warn that displacement driven by the latest offensive is “the most dangerous” since the war began.
How do you weigh a child’s breath against a map of strategic objectives? How do you value a home, a hospital ward, a small shop where a grandmother sold olives, against the calculus of military victory? These are not rhetorical flourishes. They are the questions that echo from tent encampments where families huddle and from diplomatic corridors where leaders weigh statements against realities they cannot fully see.
The Human Geography of Loss
Gaza City, before the war, was home to about a million people. Much of it was already laid waste in the early months of the conflict; hundreds of thousands later returned to live among the ruins, stubborn or desperate. Israel says it has ordered civilians to evacuate the city for their safety and that roughly 70,000 have left; Palestinian officials place that figure at less than half, reflecting distrust, fear and the logistical impossibility of escape for many.
“Even if the Israeli occupation issues warnings, there are no places that can accommodate the civilians; there are no alternate places for the people to go to,” said Mahmoud Bassal, spokesperson for Gaza’s civil emergency service, after strikes damaged multiple homes and a civilian gathering in the Tuffah neighborhood.
From the Nuseirat refugee camp to the makeshift shelters near Shifa, the daily rituals of survival — collecting water, queuing for food, burying the dead — have been reduced to a precarious choreography. Volunteers and aid workers talk about children with swollen bellies and hollow eyes, of mothers who barter what little remains for a loaf of bread.
What Aid Looks Like Now
- Medical supplies: scarce; hospitals overwhelmed.
- Food: distributions continue but gaps remain — acute shortages recorded.
- Shelter: tent encampments are under fire and inadequate for families fleeing bombardment.
- Protection: no clearly safe zones; UN and Palestinian officials warn of limited options for civilians.
Diplomacy and Dissonance
Pope Leo’s plea for a ceasefire sits within a larger, bruised conversation. He has, in recent weeks, escalated calls for a halt to the fighting, while his predecessor, Pope Francis, had been a more vocal critic of Israel’s campaign and even suggested investigating whether actions amounted to genocide — a comment that sparked furious responses from Israeli officials.
Now, Pope Leo, elected in May, appears to be threading a diplomatic needle: urging restraint, calling for hostage releases and pushing for negotiations, all while the machinery of war grinds on below the Vatican’s skyline. The Vatican’s statement was longer and more explicit than their usual diplomatic notes, noting hopes for a “prompt resumption of negotiations” and for aid to reach “the most affected areas” with respect for humanitarian law.
Yet the prospects for an immediate ceasefire look bleak. Reports say there are 48 hostages still held, with an estimated 20 believed to be alive. Meanwhile, protests inside Israel demanding an end to the war and a deal for the hostages have intensified, exposing fissures in Israeli society and pressure on leaders to secure a solution.
Voices from the Ground
“We can’t run anymore,” whispered an aid worker who had been distributing food in Nuseirat. “People have left and been killed on the road. What does leaving mean when there is nowhere safer?”
Amjadal-Shawa, head of the Palestinian NGOs Network, warned bluntly: “This is going to be the most dangerous displacement since the war started. People’s refusal to leave despite the bombardment and the killing is a sign that they have lost faith.”
And from the Vatican, one official framed the meeting as part moral appeal, part pragmatic diplomacy. “The pope seeks to inject the language of humanity into a conversation dominated by strategy,” the official said. “He wants a path where hostages are freed, aid is allowed unimpeded and a cessation of violence opens room for negotiations.”
What Would You Do?
As a reader far from these streets, what do you feel? Outrage, helplessness, a desire to act? The images beg questions that do not come with easy answers: Is a permanent ceasefire possible without a parallel, credible plan for hostages and security? Can humanitarian corridors be guaranteed while military operations press on? Who will hold parties accountable to international law?
This is not only a regional crisis; it is a test of international will. It asks whether global institutions, religious leaders and governments can translate moral appeals into practical relief. It asks whether the political imagination can stretch to include both safety for civilians and a just, durable peace.
Keeping Watch
The Vatican meeting between Pope Leo and President Herzog offered a moment — brief and fragile — when marble and rubble met in the language of ceasefire and compassion. It did not and could not stop the bombs. Yet words can be seeds. They can precipitate pressure, shape public opinion, and prod negotiators. They can give hostages a sliver of hope and families a reason to believe they might one day rebuild.
For now, families scramble for shelter in neighborhoods half-remembered; hospitals bandage what they can; aid convoys inch forward. The death toll climbs; the numbers harden into a ledger of loss. Still, amid the ruins people tell stories, light candles, and pass down recipes and lullabies. Life, stubborn as ever, persists.
What will the international community do with the pope’s plea? Will it be another line in diplomatic communiqués, or the spark that helps blaze a path to negotiations, aid and — crucially — safety? The answer may decide the fate of thousands and the soul of a region. And if you care, how will you watch, speak, and act?
Liverpool parade crash suspect pleads not guilty in court
When Celebration Turns to Shock: A Liverpool Street Where Joy and Fear Collided
On a late May afternoon in Liverpool, the city that sings its heart out in reds and anthems, thousands poured into the streets. They wanted one thing: to celebrate a piece of sporting history. They wanted to sing, to hug strangers, to let the music of “You’ll Never Walk Alone” ripple down familiar terraces. Instead, for a moment, jubilation fractured into something darker.
That day, 26 May, remains sharp in the memory of the city — not only as the date when Liverpool’s supporters celebrated a record-equalling 20th English top-flight title, but also as the day a vehicle drove into crowds clustered and singing on the pavements. Merseyside Police later said 134 people were treated for injuries after the incident. Among those allegedly affected were 29 named victims, ranging in age from a six-month-old baby to a 77-year-old fan. Thirty-one offences have been brought, and a 53-year-old former British marine, Paul Doyle of Croxteth, has pleaded not guilty to all counts while appearing by videolink from prison at Liverpool Crown Court.
Faces in the Crowd
Walk any street in Liverpool in the wake of that afternoon and you’ll find stories — small, luminous, and, at times, broken. “I remember the scarves, the faces,” says Marie, a barmaid near St George’s Hall. “We were dancing on the kerb like it was a parade. Then there was a kind of sickening thud and people just went down. The cheers stopped and everyone looked at one another like we’d all been punched.”
For some, the wounds were visible and quick to heal; for others, the scar is internal. “My nephew was there,” says Darren, a second-generation Scouser outside a shipping-themed café. “He has a cut on his leg and he keeps replaying it in his head. You’d never expect that during a title party. You feel angry. You feel helpless.”
These are not just isolated anecdotes. The police reports and formal charges lay out a pattern of harm: 134 injured, victims as young as an infant, counts spanning dangerous driving, attempts to cause grievous bodily harm with intent, and affray. The man charged is a father of three. He faces a provisional trial date fixed for 24 November — a trial expected to last three to four weeks.
What Happened on the Street? A City Tries to Make Sense
There are questions Liverpool — and cities the world over — grapple with after such events. How do you hold celebration and safety in the same hand? How do you heal a community that gathers in joy and suddenly becomes a scene of emergency?
“It’s an invisible line between freedom and risk,” says Dr. Emily Hart, a criminologist who studies crowd dynamics. “Large gatherings are expressions of community identity. They can also be vulnerable zones when an unexpected element — whether negligence, misjudgment, or criminal intent — intrudes.”
Hart points out that modern cities host thousands of mass public events every year, from football parades to festivals and political rallies. “The challenge is not just policing,” she says. “It’s urban design, emergency readiness, and public education about how to respond when things go wrong.”
Local Color, Local Pain
Liverpool knows how to celebrate. The city’s culture is a single, sprawling tapestry: the echo of the Mersey, the ribald humour of the pubs, the Beatles shrines, the sense of kinship that greets you from every corner shop. Fans had poured from Anfield and the pubs, red shirts sunlit, voices rough with songs decades old.
“You could smell the chips and ale and hear brass bands,” recalls Ahmed, who works at a souvenir stall near the docks. “Kids with red faces were running about. Musa, a little boy of six, waved a cardboard flag like it was a sword. He was so proud. That image is with me still.”
That same afternoon, emergency responders moved through the crowd; paramedics worked on pavements and in doorways. For every tale of confusion there were also stories of compassion: strangers holding space, hands finding wrists, the city’s stoic humour lightening a heavy moment.
“One woman handed out bottles of water to a paramedic,” Ahmed says. “She said, ‘You look tired. Keep going.’ That’s Liverpool. That instinct to help is the thing that makes you proud to be from here.”
Questions, Trials, and a City’s Search for Answers
Legally, the matter is now in the courts. Mr. Doyle has entered not guilty pleas to charges that carry serious consequences if proven — dangerous driving, affray, and allegations of causing or attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent. For the accused, the presumption of innocence remains a cornerstone of the process. For the injured and their families, the waiting is another test of endurance.
“The judicial system will have its day,” says a legal analyst who asked not to be named. “What we will see over the coming months is a painstaking reconstruction of events, witness testimonies, forensic evidence, and an attempt to place motive within the framework of law.”
Meanwhile, the community’s recovery will look different depending on whom you ask. Some want stricter crowd-control measures — barriers, designated viewing areas, more police presence. Others worry about the militarization of public celebrations, the loss of spontaneity that makes a city’s street life vibrant.
Beyond Liverpool: Global Conversations
Across the globe, cities wrestle with how to balance openness and safety. From festival planners to urban designers, from policymakers to frontline responders, the debate touches on larger themes: mental health supports for veterans, the ethics of surveillance, the design of public space, and the resilience of communities in the face of unexpected violence.
“This is not just a Liverpool problem,” says Dr. Hart. “It’s a challenge for every city that values public life. How do we protect the right to assemble and celebrate without turning our streets into fortresses? How do we ensure rapid medical access, clear egress routes, and community-based responses when the unforeseen happens?”
What Now? Waiting, Remembering, Rebuilding
There are practical steps already in motion. Support services have been offered to the injured; local councils and charities are coordinating assistance. The legal timeline is set, but healing is not bound to a calendar.
For many, the answer is simple and deeply Liverpool: keep gathering. “We won’t be scared off the streets,” says Marie, the barmaid, with a firmness that feels like a vow. “We’ll be careful. But we’ll still sing. That’s what this city does — it carries on, together.”
As you read this from wherever you are in the world, consider your own streets. When the crowd swells, when a communal heartbeat quickens — what safeguards exist to protect those moments? What would you do if joy on the pavement turned to alarm?
On 24 November, a courtroom will begin to unravel one chapter of that day’s story. Until then, Liverpool walks on, its songs both a comfort and a question: how do we celebrate in a world where celebration sometimes becomes a test of our capacity to care for one another?
UNIFIL Condemns Israeli Drone Strike Near Peacekeepers’ Positions
Near Miss at the Edge of War: Drones, Grenades and the Uncertain Future of UN Peacekeepers in Southern Lebanon
It was quiet, the kind of uneasy quiet that settles over borderlands: birds in the olive groves, the distant scrape of tractors, and the low hum of generators powering small homes clustered around the village. Then, for a few heartbeats, everything changed.
UN peacekeepers, assigned to clear a line of makeshift roadblocks near the de facto border southeast of Marwahin, were suddenly the focus of an aerial assault. Four small explosive devices — described by the peacekeeping force as grenades dropped from drones — landed disturbingly close to men and women in blue helmets. One landed within twenty metres of their vehicles; the others fell roughly a hundred metres away.
“I felt the ground shudder,” said a UNIFIL deminer who asked not to be named because of operational security. “We were bent over cutting metal and peeling away concrete. The first blast knocked a radio out of my hand. You could hear the ricochet of shrapnel hitting the earth.”
Why this feels different
The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) called the incident “one of the most serious attacks” on its personnel since the cessation of hostilities that took effect last November. For decades, UNIFIL has been the thin, international presence attempting to keep a fragile calm along the Lebanon-Israel frontier. Established in 1978 and reshaped by Security Council Resolution 1701 after the 2006 Lebanon war, the mission has alternated between mediating tense standoffs and performing the gritty, dangerous work of day-to-day conflict management.
“We notified the Israeli military in advance of our intention to clear those roadblocks,” a UNIFIL spokesperson told me. “To have ordnance land that close to our personnel — during a routine deconfliction process — is unacceptable and a breach of the protections accorded to peacekeepers under international law.”
What we know — and what we don’t
There are cold, verifiable facts: four grenades dropped near UN personnel; one device within 20 metres; three within around 100 metres. There is also the political backdrop: the UN Security Council recently approved a final, time-limited extension for UNIFIL, setting the stage for the force to withdraw in 2027. That vote was unanimous, but comes after intense diplomatic pressure from countries advocating an eventual end to the nearly 50-year-old mission.
Beyond that, the air is thick with questions. Who precisely launched the drones? What was the tactical objective? Was this a deliberate signal to the peacekeepers, or a dangerous error? Israel’s military, when asked, pointed to the chaotic operational environment along the border and emphasized its right to defend against threats. “We take steps to prevent escalation and to protect Israeli citizens,” a defense official told an international correspondent. “We regret anything that endangers UN personnel and will investigate.”
Voices from the ground
Locals in villages like Marwahin talk about the border not as a line on a map but as a living thing — a seam running through family ties, commerce, and memory. “My cousin used to work in Israel,” said Mariam, a schoolteacher who sipped strong coffee under the shade of a fig tree. “Now the road is a maze of checkpoints. We try to keep our heads down. This is the worst thing: when the ordinary rhythm of life is interrupted by fear.”
For soldiers in blue helmets, the work is both technical and humane. “We are not here to pick sides,” a Lebanese-born UNIFIL non-commissioned officer explained. “Our mandate is to protect civilians and to help keep the peace. But when a drone drops explosives nearby, it becomes very personal. You start thinking about your family, about how fragile safety is.”
Experts weigh in
Security analysts point to a wider trend: the democratization of drone and explosive technologies. “Small unmanned aerial vehicles and improvised munitions have proliferated across conflict zones,” said Dr. Leila Mansour, a researcher on asymmetric warfare. “They lower the barrier to attack and increase the risk for non-combatants and peacekeepers. When operations that were once clearly in the hands of state militaries spread to less-controlled actors, incidents like this become more likely.”
She added, “Peacekeeping missions operate under rules designed for a different era — a time when tanks and artillery defined frontlines. We’re now seeing blurred battlefields where the line between combatant and civilian, between state and non-state actor, is increasingly indistinct.”
Numbers that matter
Some context: UNIFIL has been present in southern Lebanon in some form for almost half a century. Its troop levels have fluctuated, at times numbering in the thousands, drawn from countries across the globe. Resolution 1701, adopted in 2006, broadened the mission’s remit to help ensure the cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah and to assist the Lebanese government in extending state authority across its southern districts.
Now, after last week’s Security Council decision that will allow only a final extension through 2027, UNIFIL faces a sunset. What that means in practical terms is complex: a staged drawdown, the transfer of responsibilities to Lebanese state bodies, and a diplomatic scramble over who will fill any vacuum. For communities used to a UN presence acting as a buffer, that is a chilling prospect.
What comes next?
For residents of border villages, the immediate concern is safety: will roadblocks be cleared without incident? Who will ensure movement of goods and ambulances? For diplomats, the question is strategic: can Lebanese state institutions, already strained by economic collapse and political paralysis, extend credible authority along the frontier? And for the international community: what responsibility does it bear when peacekeeping missions no longer seem to match the realities on the ground?
“This incident is a test of the existing frameworks,” said Ambassador Johan Ek, a veteran diplomat who served in UN negotiations in the region. “If peacekeepers are placed at risk while performing routine tasks, the political calculus for continued engagement changes. But if we abdicate our presence without planning, we risk greater instability.”
Reflections and the wider picture
There is a raw human element in all of this. The UN deminers who felt the blast. The villagers who worry about ambulances stuck behind roadblocks. The soldiers who were told to clear a path and instead found themselves under fire. Each of these experiences underscores a larger global shift: the challenge of managing conflicts where technology, politics, and local grievances collide.
Are we prepared, as an international community, to rethink peacekeeping for a new era? Or will old institutions be allowed to fade, leaving the region to fend for itself? As you read this, ask yourself: what should replace a historic mission like UNIFIL — and who will take responsibility if the fragile calm along this border dissolves again?
For now, the peacekeepers continue their work, cautious and resolute. “We cannot stop clearing roads,” the deminer said, “because people need to move. But we are watching. And we are counting the days until we know whether the protection we were promised will still be there.”
- Incident: drones dropped four grenades near UNIFIL personnel clearing roadblocks southeast of Marwahin.
- Impact: one device within 20 metres, three within ~100 metres of peacekeepers and vehicles.
- Political backdrop: UN Security Council approved a final extension for UNIFIL, set to end in 2027.
- Legal framework: Resolution 1701 (2006) remains the basis for UNIFIL’s mandate along the Lebanon-Israel frontier.
The border may be a line drawn on maps, but its tensions bleed through the soil, the olive trees, and the lives of those who live closest to it. As the dust settles after this latest near miss, the question lingers: who will secure peace when the blue helmets are gone?
Linehan Faces Court on Charges of Criminal Damage and Harassment
The Complex Intersection of Fame, Free Speech, and Controversy: The Graham Linehan Case Unfolds
In the heart of London’s legal machinery, a story is brewing that intertwines art, activism, and accountability. Graham Linehan, the celebrated mind behind the cult classic sitcom “Father Ted,” known for his sharp wit and storytelling prowess, now finds himself at the center of an unfolding legal drama that raises questions about freedom of expression, social boundaries, and the evolving nature of public discourse.
From Comedy to Courtroom: A Twist in the Tale
When Graham Linehan stepped onto the public stage decades ago with his iconic television work, no one would have predicted the dramatic plot that his life would later take. At 57 years old, the award-winning writer is now facing criminal charges that seem worlds away from the laughter and levity his shows offered.
Linehan is slated to appear before Westminster Magistrates Court in London following accusations rooted in an incident at last year’s “Battle of Ideas” Conference. This event, known for its vigorous debates on culture, politics, and philosophy, became the backdrop for a confrontation that would leave a smartphone—valued at £369—damaged and ignite a firestorm of legal and social scrutiny.
At the center of this dispute is Sophia Brooks, a transgender woman, who alleges that Linehan not only caused physical damage to her property but also engaged in a campaign of harassment. Between October 11 and 27, 2024, according to court documents, Linehan is accused of posting abusive comments on social media targeting Brooks, a charge that invites us to reflect on the boundaries of online behavior and public accountability.
The Man Behind the Headlines
Graham Linehan’s journey is as complicated as the issues surrounding him. Far more than just a comedy writer, Linehan has woven himself into public debates about gender identity, often positioning himself as a dissenting voice in a highly polarized conversation. His perspectives have garnered both staunch supporters and fierce critics, reflecting the broader cultural clash happening worldwide.
“Linehan’s case is emblematic of a larger tension in society,” explains Dr. Helen Morales, a sociologist specializing in gender studies. “It reveals how public figures become lightning rods in debates that are not only about personal views but also about collective values and the limits of tolerance.”
Indeed, this isn’t just a story about an alleged incident or the fate of one individual. It’s a window into how societies navigate the fraught terrain between free speech and respect for identity, especially in the digital age where every word is amplified and every action scrutinized.
Beyond the Courtroom: The Broader Implications
The upcoming court hearing is only one chapter in a series of events that have brought Linehan back into the spotlight under less flattering circumstances. Earlier this week, he was arrested at Heathrow Airport on suspicion of inciting violence—a separate matter but one that adds layers to public perception and media coverage.
While bail has been granted and investigations continue, the case raises urgent questions: How do we protect vulnerable communities from harassment? Where should society draw the line between passionate advocacy and harmful conduct? Can public figures be held accountable for their words and actions in both offline and online realms?
For many observers, Linehan’s situation serves as a cautionary tale about the power—and peril—of using one’s platform to engage in controversial dialogues. “The internet can turn every interaction into a trial by social media,” remarks Jamie Patel, a digital rights activist. “It’s crucial that those who speak publicly understand the weight of their words but also that justice follows due process rather than outrage.”
Voices from the Ground: Perspectives from the UK’s Cultural Landscape
London itself is a tapestry of diverse identities and viewpoints, making this story resonate deeply with its inhabitants. Sophia Brooks, though a private individual, is part of a growing wave of transgender people who are demanding visibility and respect in a society still grappling with inclusion.
“To many of us, this isn’t just about a damaged phone or social media posts—it’s about recognition and safety,” shares Alexia Morgan, a community organizer based in Manchester who works with transgender youth. “We see cases like this not as isolated incidents but as reflections of broader societal struggles.”
The Battle of Ideas Conference, intended as an arena for exchange rather than hostility, underscores the challenges inherent in hosting conversations on sensitive topics. “Debate is vital, but it must be rooted in respect,” says conference attendee Daniel Kwon. “When discussions devolve into personal attacks, everyone loses.”
Reflecting on a Moment in Time
As the world watches the legal proceedings unfold, it’s worth contemplating what this trial signifies beyond the courtroom walls. It is a test, too—of empathy, civility, and the evolving language of identity politics. How will societies reconcile the rights of individuals with the responsibilities of public discourse? How can we foster dialogue that is honest yet compassionate?
In the midst of outrage and headlines, there lies a human story struggling to be understood in its full complexity. Whether Graham Linehan is found guilty or not, the conversations sparked by this case will ripple far beyond London’s magistrates court.
For readers around the globe: how do you see the balance between protecting communities and preserving freedom of speech? Can comedy survive in a world increasingly attuned to social sensitivities? It’s a conversation without easy answers, but one that demands our attention.
Key Takeaways
- Graham Linehan faces charges related to criminal damage and harassment concerning an incident last year involving a transgender woman, Sophia Brooks.
- The case brings to light ongoing societal debates about gender identity, free speech, and the boundaries of public discourse.
- The unfolding events include an additional recent arrest of Linehan for suspicion of inciting violence, highlighting the tensions between activism and accountability.
- Voices from experts and community members emphasize the need for respectful dialogue amidst cultural clashes.
- The broader implications touch on global conversations about social media conduct, inclusivity, and justice systems adapting to new social realities.
As this story evolves, it invites all of us to listen, reflect, and perhaps reconsider what it means to coexist in today’s interconnected, contentious world.
Austria oo dalkeeda ka musaafurisay laba muwaadin oo Soomaali ah
Sep 04(Jowhar)-Iyadoo dalalka Yurub ay qaarkood bilaabeen inay dib u celiyaan Soomaalida ayaa markii ugu horeysay muddo 20 sano ah dowladda Austria.
Argentine police recover art stolen by Nazis
The Vanished Masterpiece: A Tale of Art, History, and Hidden Legacies in Argentina
In the quiet coastal city of Mar del Plata, Argentina, a story unfolded that reads like a thriller penned by history itself—a stolen treasure, a sinister past, and a vanished painting resurfacing in the most unexpected place. This is the tale of an 18th-century masterpiece, its journey through time and tragedy, finally caught between the shadows and the spotlight once more.
Resurfacing a Lost Legacy
Imagine walking through an old seaside home, the ocean breeze mingling with the scent of antique wood and faded memories. Above a green sofa in a modest living room hangs a portrait—a noblewoman, dignified and serene, painted by an Italian Baroque artist centuries ago. The painting, titled “Portrait of a Lady,” is the work of Giuseppe Ghislandi, created around 1710. Its delicate brushstrokes and rich hues whisper a silent history that spans continents and epochs.
It was in this unexpected setting that Argentinian authorities rediscovered the painting—after it had vanished for decades, stolen by the Nazis during the horrors of World War II.
The painting was stolen along with over 1,000 other artworks from Amsterdam art dealer Jacques Goudstikker, one of the most significant victims of Nazi art pillaging. His collection was dispersed, lost to time and conflict, scattering cultural heritage across the globe. For decades, Goudstikker’s heirs, countless historians, and art lovers worldwide have searched for these lost treasures.
From Amsterdam to Argentina: A Dark Journey
The current chapter in this drama is set in the home of Patricia Kadgien, the daughter of Friedrich Kadgien, a senior SS officer. Friedrich Kadgien managed Nazi finances and ultimately fled to Argentina after the war—like many former Nazis who sought refuge in South America. It’s here that the painting mysteriously surfaced, captured in a real estate ad depicting Patricia’s home. The serene face of the noblewoman hung defiantly in the frame, oblivious to the storm brewing around her.
When Dutch media outlet AD recognized the painting in the listing, it sparked an international frenzy. “In an age when stolen art often lies hidden in private collections, the sudden public reappearance is exceptionally rare,” art expert Ariel Bassano explained during a press conference. Bassano worked alongside Argentinian authorities and attested to the painting’s remarkable preservation despite its nearly 300-year-old age. Valued at around $50,000, this piece is not just a material treasure but a symbol of cultural memory and justice delayed.
The Vanishing Act and Pursuit of Justice
Yet, the story took a troubling twist. Just as officials prepared to retrieve the artwork, it disappeared. A raid on Patricia Kadgien’s residence yielded no sign of the painting. The house that had briefly become a beacon of hope in the recovery of Nazi-looted art now stood as a cage of silence and evasion.
“It felt like chasing ghosts,” said one Argentinian detective involved in the search. “Every lead went cold too quickly.” But persistence paid off. The painting was eventually returned, surprisingly, by Kadgien’s lawyer. Prosecutors confirmed its safe recovery, but grasping the deeper implications remained imperative.
Echoes of History, Reflections for Today
This episode isn’t just a chapter on stolen art coming home. It resonates with broader questions about the legacies of conflict, restitution, and historical accountability. When art—a reflection of our shared humanity—is stolen, hidden, or trafficked, it represents more than theft of objects; it’s an attempt to erase stories, identities, and memories.
How do societies reconcile with such pasts? How do we navigate the uneasy spaces where descendants of oppressors and victims meet, sometimes unknowingly, across continents? I spoke with Sofia Hernandez, a cultural historian based in Buenos Aires, who sees the case as a microcosm of Argentina’s complex post-war identity:
“Argentina has been a refuge, a crossroads—for many seeking new beginnings and for shadows of darker histories to linger. Discoveries like this painting surface the tangled narratives we must confront, prompting us to ask how we reckon with history when it is embedded in everyday spaces like a living room.”
More Than Art: The Human Dimension
Such stories are reminders that art’s value transcends auctions and exhibitions. They are threads woven into the fabric of family histories, national narratives, and human conscience. For the Goudstikker family, the stolen artworks are not just currency but cherished fragments of home and legacy—a painful imprint of loss inflicted by war. For the Kadgien family, whether fully aware or not, the painting’s presence evokes a haunting link to a tortured past.
In the quiet waves crashing just miles away, one might hear the undercurrents of these stories—echoes of displacement, resilience, and the pursuit of justice. What does it mean when ownership of history gets contested, and ownership of truth becomes paramount? Does returning the painting close an old wound or open new debates?
Looking Ahead: Art, Memory, and Global Responsibility
The recovery of Ghislandi’s portrait in Mar del Plata is emblematic of a growing global movement fighting for provenance research, restitution, and the ethical stewardship of cultural property. Since the Washington Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art were established in 1998, hundreds of stolen artworks have been identified, but thousands remain in obscurity or disputed custody.
As nations grapple with these legacies, the dialogue extends beyond borders. It touches on questions of identity, collective memory, and moral responsibility.
- What role should governments play in facilitating restitution?
- How can museums and private collectors vet provenance to avoid perpetuating historical injustices?
- Can the arts community foster healing by bridging gaps between victims and heirs?
These are not easily answered—yet they matter profoundly.
A Final Reflection
Next time you stroll through a gallery or glance at a portrait adorning an old home, pause to consider the journey it might have taken. Behind every brushstroke lies a story—a tangled web of human triumphs and tragedies that deserve to be told, preserved, and respected.
“The history of art is the history of humanity,” Ariel Bassano reminds us. “Recovering stolen works is about reclaiming that shared heritage, piece by piece.”
For the painting’s noble lady, now back in safe hands, the brush has not simply painted beauty—it has etched a narrative of endurance, waiting patiently for justice to catch up. What stories are waiting to be uncovered in your own community, hidden in plain sight? The quest continues.
McGrath calls for a ‘receptive attitude’ towards Mercosur trade agreement
The EU-Mercosur Trade Deal: A High-Stakes Gamble for Europe’s Farmers and Global Commerce
In the bustling corridors of Brussels, where trade deals are often scripted far from public view, a new chapter is opening—one that promises to reshape economic landscapes on both sides of the Atlantic. The European Union’s impending ratification of the Mercosur trade agreement, connecting Europe with South America’s largest trading bloc, is stirring waves of hope, skepticism, and outright protest.
On one side stands Michael McGrath, Ireland’s EU Commissioner and a key proponent of the agreement, urging member states to approach the deal with “an open mind based on facts, not fear.” Across the continent, farmers, activists, and grassroots organizations raise their voices, wary of the risks this vast trade corridor might pose to Europe’s traditional agricultural backbone.
A New Global Marketplace Emerges
Imagine a free trade zone that stretches over 700 million consumers—more populous than the United States—and spans continents, cultures, and economies. This is the promise of the EU-Mercosur deal, ratification of which could take at least a year. Once sealed, it will connect the European Union with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay in the largest trade pact ever negotiated by Brussels.
According to the European Commission, this agreement could boost EU exports to Mercosur countries by up to 39%, funneling an estimated €49 billion into the European economy. Sectors like automotive, machinery, and pharmaceuticals are set to reap significant benefits, as tariffs on these goods will be substantially reduced or eliminated.
“This is not just an economic agreement,” McGrath told reporters. “It’s an opportunity for around 30,000 small and medium businesses across Europe who already export to Mercosur countries. They will see fewer customs duties, fewer barriers, and a wider playing field to grow their businesses.”
Safeguards and Standards: A Balancing Act
Yet, perhaps the most contentious aspect revolves around agriculture—the heartland of European identity and sustenance. Mercosur will gain the right to export beef and poultry to Europe under reduced tariffs, quotas amounting to 99,000 tonnes of beef at a 7.5% tariff, and 180,000 tonnes of poultry, stirring deep anxieties among EU farmers whose livelihoods could be imperiled.
To address these concerns, the European Commission has introduced what it calls “robust bilateral safeguard mechanisms.” These provisions allow either side to impose temporary restrictions if a sudden surge in imports threatens their domestic producers.
“If farmers witness price crashes or market disruptions, an investigation will kick in within 21 days,” explained McGrath. “Provisional measures, including temporarily restoring tariffs up to 45%, can be imposed to shield European farmers. We’re also putting €6.3 billion on the table as a cushion against potential market shocks.”
Moreover, the Commission underscores that food safety, animal health, and phytosanitary standards will remain stringent. Imports will undergo intensified audits and controls, ensuring Mercosur producers meet the same rigorous criteria as European farmers.
Voices from the Field: Europe’s Farmers React
Despite these assurances, farming communities across the EU are far from convinced. In Ireland—a nation proud of its pastoral landscapes and renowned for beef and dairy—groups like the Irish Farmers’ Association (IFA) have sounded alarms.
Francie Gorman, President of the IFA, criticized the deal as “hypocritical and contradictory.” He voiced frustration at the Commission for “insisting on the highest standards for European producers but allowing Mercosur countries market access without equivalent demands.”
For Gorman, the stakes are more than economic—they are about survival. “This agreement could decimate our beef and poultry sectors,” he warned, urging the Irish Government to take a firmer stance in Brussels. “We are calling on policymakers to stand up for their farmers, whose livelihoods are entwined not just with tradition but with feeding our nation.”
The Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association (ICMSA) went further, describing the push for ratification as a “calculated betrayal,” underscoring the bitter sense of exclusion felt by rural producers.
Across Europe, echoes of this anxiety resound—farmers in France, Germany, and Spain have also held protests, concerned that cheaper imports may undercut local quality and standards. The question hangs heavy in the air: Can enormous economic gains coexist with agricultural sustainability and rural well-being?
Examining the Larger Picture
Trade agreements like Mercosur are about more than just economic metrics; they touch profoundly on national identity, food sovereignty, environmental commitments, and geopolitical strategy. In a world grappling with climate change, biodiversity loss, and social inequality, how should free trade evolve?
Critics argue that Mercosur’s inclusion of South American beef imports stokes fears about deforestation in the Amazon and environmental degradation—issues that frequently enter global debates around ethical commerce. Can the EU reconcile its green ambitions with increased imports from a region whose agricultural expansion is linked to ecological damage?
Dr. Helena Matthews, an expert in international trade and sustainability, weighs in: “This deal is a microcosm of the global challenge—balancing open markets with ethical and environmental standards. The EU is setting a precedent by requiring high standards and enforceable safeguards; whether this is enough, remains to be seen.”
What Lies Ahead? The Ratification Maze
The pathway for the Mercosur deal is complex. To come into force, at least 15 EU member states representing 65% of the population must ratify it, alongside approval from the European Parliament. Given its scale and the breadth of stakeholder concerns, experts predict a drawn-out debate.
Ian Talbot, CEO of Chambers Ireland, offers a pragmatic perspective: “Ireland, and Europe more broadly, must diversify export markets given the ongoing volatility in long-established economies. While challenges exist, this agreement opens doors to dynamic new partnerships across the Atlantic.”
He urges swift ratification, signalling that the economic benefits could buttress recovery efforts in a post-pandemic economy.
Inviting Reflection
So, dear reader, where do you stand in this sprawling story of commerce and culture? Should Europe lean into this ambitious trade alliance with South America, embracing the promise of growth and connection? Or does the risk to farmers and the environment ask of us a more cautious, protective stance?
What does dignity, fairness, and sustainability look like when weighed against economic opportunity?
As debates unfold in parliaments and farmyards alike, one thing is clear: no trade deal exists in a vacuum. It is a living, breathing conversation about what kind of world we want to build—and what we’re willing to sacrifice to get there.
- Trade Deal Coverage: The largest EU free trade agreement to date, involving over 700 million consumers.
- Economic Projections: EU exports to Mercosur countries may rise by as much as 39%, with an estimated €49 billion boost.
- Controversy: 99,000 tonne beef quota and 180,000 tonne poultry quota at reduced tariffs provoke farmers’ protests.
- Safeguards: €6.3 billion fund, swift investigations, and temporary tariffs aim to protect EU agriculture.
- Environmental Concerns: Linkages to Amazon deforestation spotlight sustainability debates.
In Conclusion
The EU-Mercosur deal is far more than an agreement on paper. It is where continents meet, economies intersect, and traditions collide with modernity. It challenges policymakers and the public alike to rethink old assumptions about trade, agriculture, and environment.
No matter where you stand, this story is a powerful reminder that behind every headline lie people—farmers in fields, traders in markets, consumers at tables—whose lives are shaped by decisions made thousands of miles away. It’s a moment to listen closely, think deeply, and imagine boldly.
At least 15 dead in Lisbon cable car accident, say rescuers
A City in Shock: The Tragic Funicular Crash That Stunned Lisbon
Lisbon woke up Tuesday to grief and disbelief. A city famed for its cobbled streets, pastel-colored tiles, and that timeless yellow glow cast by its historic trams now grapples with a heartbreak no postcard could capture. The Gloria funicular—a beloved icon that’s ferried generations up the steep hills of Portugal’s sun-drenched capital—derailed suddenly, crashing catastrophically and leaving at least 15 dead and nearly 20 injured.
For locals, visitors, and those who barely knew the city beyond its famed landmarks, this incident is more than just breaking news. It’s a piercing blow that pulls back the veil from our fragile relationship with the rush of modern life and the risks entwined with history clinging to every inch of Lisbon’s landscape.
The Scene of Disaster: An Instant of Horror
Imagine, if you can, standing near Restauradores Square, watching the funicular grind its way up the steep slope toward Bairro Alto—the pulsating, bohemian heart where street musicians strum melancholic Fado and late-night laughter spills onto narrow alleys. On that ordinary morning, the yellow tram-like car was gliding along as it had for over a century, ferrying tourists eager to snap photos and locals heading to work or errands.
Then, chaos. Eyewitness videos, shaky and raw with panic, reveal the harrowing moments as the funicular violently derails. Passengers jolt and scream; some leap from windows to escape the wreckage. Emergency crews flood the narrow streets, their faces etched with urgency and sorrow. As the dust settles, the street is eerily quiet, filled only with sirens, murmurs, and disbelief.
“It was a tragic day for Lisbon,” Mayor Carlos Moedas said somberly at a press conference. “Our city is in mourning. This is a tragedy that touches us all deeply.” The official lament captures a city grappling with loss but holding fast to resilience.
A Piece of Lisbon’s History Marred by Tragedy
The Gloria funicular isn’t just a tourist attraction; it’s a living piece of the city’s soul. Opened in 1885, it connects downtown Lisbon with Bairro Alto, navigating one of the steepest hills in the city. More than just transporting people, it serves as a bridge over Lisbon’s past and present—a simple cog in the rhythm of daily life for many residents.
The system operates with a unique, century-old mechanism: two cars attached by a cable, moving in tandem, balancing the steep incline. As one car ascends, the other descends, powered by electric motors. This synchrony has been a marvel of engineering since the 19th century, a charming quirk that draws countless visitors every year. For locals, it’s a part of their daily ritual. For tourists, an enchanting way to experience the city’s towering hills and vibrant panorama.
Who Were the Victims?
At least 15 lives were lost, and an additional 18 people were injured, with five reported in critical condition. While Portuguese authorities have withheld specific details, fearing privacy and respect for those affected, they did acknowledge that among the victims were foreign nationals.
Tánaiste Simon Harris from Ireland voiced the country’s solidarity: “I am deeply saddened by this terrible incident in Lisbon. Our hearts go out to the families of those who have lost loved ones.” He also assured the presence of the Irish embassy ready to assist. This tragedy, spanning borders, reminds us all how interconnected our lives are in a globalized world.
How Could This Happen? The Ongoing Investigation
In the wake of the accident, Portuguese police investigators quickly descended on the site, combing through wreckage and remnants for clues. The prosecutor general’s office immediately announced that it would open a formal inquiry—a standard procedure in public transportation mishaps, yet made all the more urgent by the scale of this catastrophe.
President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa expressed profound sorrow and hope for swift clarity. “We owe it to the victims to understand what went wrong, so this never happens again.” Such a statement underscores not only the immediate human toll but the broader imperative of safety in urban transit systems that millions rely on daily worldwide.
The Human Element: Voices from Lisbon
Walking through the Rua da Glória, where the funicular cars once rumbled, a local shopkeeper, Ana Silva, tells me quietly, “That funicular was part of our lives. I took it every day as a child. Now, there’s this gap.” She clutches a faded photo of the yellow tram, a testament to memories disrupted by fate.
Nearby, a visitor from Germany, Matthias Klein, echoes the sentiment: “This is my first time in Lisbon—I chose this city for its charm, and I rode that funicular this morning. It feels surreal now. We think about safety but never expect tragedy.”
What Does This Mean in the Larger Context?
The tragedy invites a broader reflection on urban safety and the coexistence of heritage and modernization. Cities like Lisbon, with infrastructure built in different times, face challenges balancing preservation with technological upgrades. How do we honor history while ensuring zero tolerance for risks?
Tourism—a booming force in Portugal over the last decade—brings economic vitality but also strains on transport systems, emergency response, and urban planning. In 2019, Lisbon welcomed over 4.5 million visitors, a figure that pre-pandemic records showed rising steadily. The summer months particularly turn narrow streets into carnival-like scenes, picturesque yet vulnerable.
As our towns and cities grow and pulse with life, how can we better protect the people who live in and visit these places? How might lessons from Lisbon’s painful day ripple globally?
Lisbon’s Road Ahead: Mourning, Healing, and Rebuilding Trust
Portugal’s government declared a national day of mourning, marking the depth of this sorrow. The city’s streets, usually alive with music and chatter, fall into a rare hush of collective grief. Yet even amid the shadows, there’s a flicker of hope.
Emergency workers and investigators are committed to uncovering answers. The community has rallied around victims’ families with vigils and support. And perhaps most crucially, the incident serves as a call to action to modernize and rethink how historic urban transit systems operate safely amid a world that moves faster than ever.
For those of us watching from afar, Lisbon’s tragedy challenges us to consider our own cities, our own connections to place and history, and the systems we rely on daily—often silently and without thought.
Next time you ride a tram, a funicular, or any transit crafted from generations past, pause for a moment. Feel the weight of history beneath your feet and the invisible thread of human experience linking us across continents, hills, and lifetimes. And remember: safety and respect for life must always travel alongside tradition and innovation.
Lisbon grieves today. But tomorrow, with truth and care, she will climb once again.
UN’s Vance expresses strong optimism Gaza ceasefire will hold
On the Tarmac in Kiryat Gat: Cautious Optimism Meets the Smell of Dust and Burnt Olive
When the US delegation’s plane touched down in southern...
Kaja Kallas labels possible Putin visit to Hungary ‘unwelcome’
When Two Superpowers Meet in the Shadow of the Danube
Imagine Budapest at dusk: trams clattering past cafés, the river reflecting the spires of St....
France ramps up manhunt for suspects in Louvre theft
Flowers, Footsteps and Fallen Diamonds: A Morning at the Louvre That Felt Like a Scene from a Heist Film
Paris on a late-spring morning: croissant...
European leaders endorse Trump’s call for Ukraine ceasefire
Across Borders, a Pause—or a Prelude? Europe Backs a Fragile Push to Stop the Guns
There are days when diplomacy sounds like an orchestra tuning...
Andrew Steps Back From Title, Says It’s ‘Right Course of Action’
When a Title No Longer Fits: The Quiet Unraveling of a Royal Role
On a damp afternoon in central London, the golden enamel of a...