Newly arrived “refugee” in the UK: “I’m here to f*ing rule. This is my land. This is Allah’s land.”

2月24日，维吾尔脱口秀演员 「小帕不欢迎指导工作」 被微博炸号。 被封禁的原因是她发了一条微博：“ 发烧在家躺了两天 想到如果有老公孩子的话这会儿应该要扶着墙起来给他们做饭了” 此前，在《脱口秀和Ta的朋友们》，小帕的演出聚焦于以幽默消解苦难，善于把人生中经历的原生家庭和女性创伤内化解构，转化为黑色幽默

Prince Louis has said he is willing to step up for France: “The situation has never been so serious; the Fifth Republic is on the verge of collapse. My family has served France for centuries, and if France calls upon me, I will be at its service. The indispensable condition is that France desires the return of the monarchy - a monarchy above parties, unifying.” What's even cooler is that he is a direct descendant of Saint Louis IX

确实如此，证明了以前并不是美国企业家比中国企业家高尚，只不过是美国的制度让他们有更多的自由。但是当美国的国家领导也变成一个不守法的恶霸时，所展现出来的人性区别不大。

三線縣城跟台北比一下防洪排水、比一下耐震；市民比一下收入、比一下出國旅遊的比例 台北房子舊是因為房地產私有，達成共識都更難，你三線縣城蓋幾棟豆腐渣破樓能代表什麼？

A young Libyan man was arrested after converting to Christianity through my work. According to media reports, he has now been sentenced to death. Watch the video showing part of his interrogation, published by Libyan security forces.

Around 200 people fell from the World Trade Center on September 11th. Not one of them is recorded as a suicide. That is not sentiment. That is the official finding of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner of the City of New York, and it is written on the death certificates. All 2,753 deaths at the World Trade Center were ruled homicides. Every single one. The people who went out the windows are counted in that number exactly the same as the people who were killed on impact, the people crushed in the collapse, and the firefighters in the stairwells. The medical examiner's office was asked about this directly and gave one of the clearest answers any government agency has ever given about anything. A jumper, they said, is somebody who goes to the office in the morning knowing that they are going to kill themselves. These people were forced out by the smoke and flames, or blown out. That distinction is the whole thing. Almost all of them came from the North Tower. Flight 11 hit it at 8:46 and severed all three stairwells above the 91st floor, which meant that everyone above that line was sealed in a burning building for 102 minutes with no route down and no possibility of rescue from above. Fires in parts of those floors reached temperatures over 1,000 degrees. People broke windows to get air. They hung out of them. They waved curtains and tablecloths and jackets so the city would know they were there. Then the heat and the smoke reached them, and they had a choice between two ways to die in the next few seconds, and they picked the one with open air in it. Some of them went out holding hands with the person next to them. The most famous photograph of it was taken by Richard Drew of the Associated Press at 9:41:15 in the morning. It ran once, on page seven of the New York Times, on September 12, 2001. The public reaction was so hostile that American newspapers essentially buried the image for years and it became the one part of that day nobody would look at. The man in it has never been formally identified. The best evidence points to Jonathan Briley, 43, a sound engineer at Windows on the World on the 106th floor, identified by his brother and by the restaurant's chef from his build and his clothing. So this is worth saying plainly on the anniversary. The country spent 25 years being uncomfortable with those images and quietly avoiding the subject. The medical examiner never wavered for a second. Their position from the beginning was that those people were murdered, by the men who flew the planes, as surely as everyone else in the building, and the state of New York has never recorded it any other way. They did not jump. They were killed.

I am a big fan of the idea that you cannot understand what is going on in the world today if you don't understand the history. This caused me to do a big dig yesterday into Yemeni history. And let me tell you...it is complicated beyond belief. I'm sharing a summary of my findings with you in the spirit of furthering the conversation, knowing that it is almost certainly going to be full of errors and controversies. The Yemeni are some of the oldest inhabitants of the Arabian peninsula and traces their lineage back proudly to pre-Islamic empire. However, Yemen as a polity has spent more time divided than united. I have chosen a map from the Cold War era when they actually were two separate countries recognized by the United Nation. But that jagged diagonal line you see splitting Yemen into a rough triangle to the west and a trapezoid to the east has been there in some form for a millenium. The reason is geography. The western "triangle" (confusingly called North Yemen) is actually where most of the population lives by 4 to 1. That's the heavily mountainous highlands with the good arable land with water. Southern Yemen by contrast is mostly arid desert, although it benefits from containing most of Yemen's oil and the valuable ports. Even before foreign interference, the people of the triangle and the people of the trapezoid were kind of diverging. But in colonial times, this really got locked in. The Ottoman empire got the North Yemen, which remained more tribal. The British empire got South Yemen, and it went in a more cosmopolitan direction. When the empires fell, the schismogenesis intensified. North Yemen became the Yemen Arab Republic, supported by Saudi Arabia and the West. They were fiercely independent, feudal, Islamic and highly tribal. The South went to the Soviet sphere of influence and became the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen, the only Marxist Arab state. They actively tried to eradicate tribalism, promoted secularism and integrated women into the workforce. But remember this: even as they started diverging in values, lifestyles and even religion...both the north and the south feel like they are the true Yemeni and sought unification on their own terms. The north looked down on the south as betraying traditional Yemeni values, while the South looked down on the north as backwards. In 1990, the Soviet Union withdrew support from South Yemen in the midst of its own crisis and the state went bankrupt overnight. The resultant unification between the north and south was a shotgun marriage. The north marginalized the south in every way, and in 1994 a civil war broke out and Yemen never knew peace ever since. Fast forward to the present day: Ansar Allah, often known as the Houthis in the West, control most of North Yemen and cannot be dislodged. But nor can they decently feed and care for the huge population under their control. The scale of the humanitarian disaster is staggering. Ansar Allah are Zaydi Shia, highly rare pikachus. I don't want to get too deep into it but they are the Shia school most theologically similar to the Sunni. Not all northern Yemeni are Zaydi, and only a small minority of Zaydi are Ansar Allah, who are ideologically extremist. They are able to rally broad support however through being the most credible against foreign interference and also by backing the Palestinian cause. In most of the south, the PLC government is nominally in charge, but they are completely dependent on Saudi Arabia for survival. It's debatable if you should describe them as a proxy or a puppet. Ansar Allah points to this to deny the PLC legitimacy, however the UN officially recognizes the PLC government as the government of all Yemen. There are also smaller UAE-backed entities which meant there was levels to the conflict in Yemen. You had Ansar Allah against everyone else, but you also had Saudi-backed PLC tussling with UAE-backed STC. Recently the UAE withdrew from Yemen and the PLC and STC are maybe consolidated, but we'll see if it sticks. Ansar Allah is reliant on Iran for its advanced military capabilities and acts with them with a high degree of coordination. However, they have their own localized interests and does not take orders from Tehran. It also seems like they're starting to cook up their own kit of late (with help from AI: Claude! Create an advanced missile system. Make no mistakes.) With the taking of Mokha and Perim Island, Ansar Allah have completely cleared out PLC footprint on Yemen's West Coast and thus their control of the strategic Bab el-Mandeb bottleneck to the Red Sea is now consolidated. Furthermore, they appear to have gone transnational, coordinating with Iraqi militia to strike Saudi Arabia's east-west pipeline with drones coming from Iraqi territory. The tragedy of Yemen is that north and south cannot live together but they also can't live apart. Ansar Allah cannot be dislodged out of their northern mountain redoubt, and now they have broken out of it, taking the entire red-sea coastline. I still don't see how they are going to take the whole south tho. It's all exposed desert sands. A return to the Cold War divide seems superficially plausable, but ultimately this is not acceptable to the players that matter. Ansar Allah refuses partition as balkanization. As for Saudi Arabia, permanent civil war in Yemen might be preferable to legitimating Iran-aligned Ansar Allah on its border. A protracted, violent stalemate seems to be Yemen's dark future. This is Yemen's continued tragedy, but also the rest of the world's open-ended strategic problem. Now that Ansar Allah secured the Bab el-Mandab Strait, they have placed a chokehold on a key artery of global trade. What happens in Yemen no longer stays in Yemen.

NYC the other day

Both of these statues consumed three years of a human life. One began as a ruined block of Carrara marble that two earlier sculptors had already abandoned as hopeless. A twenty-six-year-old from Florence built a wooden enclosure around it so no one could watch, then spent those years in near-solitude, sleeping in his clothes, eating little, striking the stone until a figure emerged that Giorgio Vasari declared superior to every statue, ancient or modern, Greek or Roman. David is caught in the second before he steps toward Goliath. The sling is still hidden. The brow is furrowed. The veins stand out on the hand that will soon send the stone. He is not celebrating victory; he is gathering himself for a fight he has no right to win. He is the human form rendered so exactly that five centuries later the marble still seems warm. He was made for a cathedral and later placed before the palace of a republic that understood beauty as a public duty and proportion as a kind of moral grammar. Michelangelo said the figure was already inside the stone; he only had to set it free. The other was conceived on a screen, printed as a small model, then enlarged, cast in bronze, and coated in a pigment ground from lapis lazuli. It shows a nameless young woman in a tight blue dress and platform heels, jewellery catching the light, one leg thrown forward as if she is late for something. The artist is careful to tell us she is not a heroine, not a saint, not even a specific person. She is “everywoman.” She is the passer-by. She is the present tense walking into a future that apparently asks nothing more of us than recognition. Stand them next to each other and the distance between 1504 and 2026 becomes visible in a single glance. We once set our highest plinths with images of men who had looked a giant in the eye and of gods who had looked back. We carved bodies that remembered they were made in an image greater than their own. The squares of our cities were arguments for the possibility of the soul. Now the same squares are asked to celebrate the unexceptional self, dressed for the evening, striding past Nelson’s Column on her way to whatever comes next. The National Gallery stands directly behind the new figure, its rooms still filled with the very tradition this statue quietly declines to continue. A civilisation reveals what it worships by what it chooses to raise above the heads of its citizens. When the gaze that once travelled upward - toward the divine, toward the heroic, toward an ideal of the human form so precise it still silences rooms - is redirected sideways toward the crowd and called “representation,” something more than taste has changed. The ordinary and the unlovely are never merely decorative. They instruct. They tell the young there is no longer anything higher to become, only something more visible to be. Michelangelo found David already living inside the marble. We have forgotten how to look.

911事件中93号航班的故事，经常被压缩成一句话：“ 93号航班是 9/11 当天四架被劫持飞机中唯一没有击中预定目标的一架。”。 但它真正沉重的地方，比这句话更复杂，这是一群陌生人在飞机上得到零碎信息、判断局势、并在没有确定答案的时候一起做决定的故事。 2001 年 9 月 11 日，United Flight 93 从纽瓦克飞往旧金山。美国国家公园管理局记录，这架飞机上有 7 名机组人员、33 名乘客。他们不是一个事先组织好的团队。有人去工作，有人回家，有人出差，有人旅行。灾难之后再看乘客名单，最难承受的地方恰恰是这些普通生活。 随后，飞机被劫持。 乘客和机组人员被迫退到机舱后部。根据国家公园管理局的记录，从上午 9:28 劫机开始，到 10:03 飞机坠毁之间，机上 13 名乘客和机组人员一共打出了 37 通电话，联系家人、航空公司和有关部门。 这些电话改变了他们对处境的理解。 机上的人逐渐知道，两架民航客机已经撞上世贸中心，另一架撞上五角大楼。也就是说，这不再是传统意义上的劫机。飞机本身，已经变成武器。 很难想象那一刻的判断有多难。 没有完整简报。没有官方救援方案。没人能确定目标到底是哪。只有断断续续的信息、恐惧、电话那头的亲人，以及一个越来越清楚的现实：继续等待，可能意味着这架飞机会成为下一次撞击。 国家公园管理局写到，这些信息促成了一次投票，以及一个共同反击的决定。 这句话很短，但背后的重量很大。 三十多分钟里，一群原本互不认识的人分享信息、判断形势、形成行动。后来找回的驾驶舱录音记录下了挣扎的声音。劫机者最终让飞机坠毁在宾夕法尼亚州 Shanksville 附近的一片田野。 机上所有人遇难。 Flight 93 是 9/11 当天四架被劫持飞机中唯一没有击中预定目标的一架。后来恢复的证据显示，目标很可能是美国国会大厦。当时国会议员正在华盛顿开会。坠机地点距离华盛顿大约 20 分钟飞行时间。 这个故事不应该被讲得太随意。 它不是一句简单的励志口号。里面有恐惧，有告别电话，有来不及确认的信息，也有人在极短时间里意识到：剩下的选择不多了，但仍然有一个选择是行动。 25 年后，我觉得最值得记住的就是这一点。 他们并不知道全部事实。他们知道了足够多。 他们没有时间。他们用了手里仅有的时间。 他们是普通人，被卷进了一个极不普通的时刻。最后，他们没有只做乘客。 这就是 Flight 93 至今仍然值得被认真纪念的原因。 图片是机组和乘客遇难人员名单，以及飞机坠落地点，信息来源：美国国家公园管理局

I lost my Dad on 9/11. I don’t get a lot of reach on here. But I just wanted to share a picture. He was 39. I thought he was old. I’m now in my mid 30s and I still feel like a kid. He was a great trader. He loved markets. He loved to find a stock no one was talking about. The first trade I ever placed was on his work computer, where he let me click the button to buy AMAT. I loved going to the office with him. It was electric. He was the best dad. We spent hours out in the street after dinner where he’d throw “pop flys” for me to catch. Eye on the ball. He loved watching Sponge Bob and eating cereal, wrestling with us in the living room. He just loved being around his kids so much, and we knew it. I’m so grateful I got a dad like that. Love you, Pops.

Nearly 3,000 people were killed on 9/11. Their lives mattered. But do you know who else became victims? Ordinary Muslims who had nothing to do with the attacks, rejected violence, and simply wanted to live in peace. The terrorists killed thousands that day. But their actions also gave millions of innocent Muslims a crime they never committed, a suspicion they never deserved, and a burden they were forced to carry. The dead were victims of terrorism. Millions of innocent Muslims became victims of the hatred terrorism left behind.

我是Islamophobia（伊斯兰恐惧症）吗？应该不是。生活中，我有很多穆斯林朋友——医生、律师、邻居，个个性格温和，很好相处。其中一家好友因为家里的女性成员不能穿着暴露的泳装在公开场合游泳，特意开心地买了一栋带泳池的房子，这样就能在自家私密空间里自在游泳。还有一家的女儿，在高中同学聚会上，别人都开心地跳着舞，她却独自坐在一旁——因为宗教信仰，她不能和男生跳舞。 除此之外，我并没有感觉到什么不同，也充分尊重他们各自的信仰。可是为什么我最近对这个话题变得热衷？我到底在意的、不喜欢的，究竟是什么？ 经济学人最近一篇文章给了我答案。 《欧洲伊斯兰教的真相与谎言》- 伊斯兰教本身并不构成严重威胁。但伊斯兰主义以及对伊斯兰教的恐惧却会造成严重威胁。 “事实上，大多数穆斯林移民都希望融入新的家园，而不是将他们刚刚离开的社会模式强加于此。他们的孩子在学校的表现往往优于父母。在英国，2021年参加标准测试的孟加拉裔学生中，67%的人在19岁之前进入大学学习，而英国白人学生的这一比例为38%。许多穆斯林积极参与主流政治：英国的内政大臣和伦敦市长就是很好的例子。在某些重要方面，穆斯林的态度与其他欧洲人相似。在我们委托进行的英国穆斯林民意调查中，我们发现他们对女性就业几乎没有抵触情绪。 那么，究竟是什么让这么多欧洲人对伊斯兰教抱有敌意呢？许多穆斯林持有不宽容的观点——我们报道了南非一位公开同性恋身份的伊玛目被杀害的事件。在英国，我们的民调显示，52%的穆斯林认为同性恋是错误的，而年轻的穆斯林（35岁以下人群中41%的人持此观点）比他们的长辈（25%）更倾向于认为，如果有人侮辱先知，暴力行为是正当的。 如果国家对少数群体犯下的罪行过于懦弱，例如穆斯林团伙在英国多个城市性侵年轻女孩的事件，那么它理应引起公众的愤怒。 同样重要的是，人们常常 将伊斯兰教（一种宗教）与伊斯兰主义（一种政治意识形态）混为一谈。伊斯兰教本身并非问题所在，问题在于伊斯兰主义。与9/11事件中的圣战分子不同，大多数伊斯兰主义者并不鼓吹暴力。但许多人会采取“渗透主义”——渗透民主机构以推行其非自由主义议程。一些关系密切的伊斯兰主义团体可能会游说制定全面的仇恨言论法，或反对反极端主义方案。渗透主义的主要危险在于其地方性。一些规模较小但组织严密的网络可以控制学校、清真寺、市政委员会或慈善机构，并利用这些机构阻碍融合，强迫附近的穆斯林接受统一的宗教信仰。 欧洲安全部门对这些非暴力伊斯兰主义者的担忧日益加剧。在法国，当局忧心忡忡，担心穆斯林兄弟会暗中渗透。去年发布的一份官方报告警告称，伊斯兰主义最终可能会威胁世俗法律和妇女权利。但这似乎不太可能。法国内政部估计，在2800个穆斯林礼拜场所中，只有139个与穆斯林兄弟会有关联。 然而，主要受害者却是其他穆斯林。在英格兰北部布莱克本的12个地方议会选区中，有一半的穆斯林人口比例超过60%；其中两个选区的穆斯林人口比例甚至超过80%。在这些地区，女性会感到压力，被迫接受伊斯兰教法委员会的管辖。同性恋穆斯林和思想开放的穆斯林则面临恐吓。不墨守成规的穆斯林抱怨说，西方当局害怕被视为种族主义者，因此没有给予他们与非穆斯林公民同等的保护 危害远不止于此。伊斯兰主义者煽动反犹主义，尤其是在加沙问题上。他们要求限制言论自由，限制人们表达其信仰。他们恐吓政客、喜剧演员、学者和记者进行自我审查。他们还可以欺凌学校、学生会、慈善机构和地方议会。 这些局部威胁之所以会演变成席卷整个大陆的危险，关键在于它们如何被利用。伊斯兰主义者乐于宣称，任何对其政治纲领的批评都是对伊斯兰教本身的攻击。包括“不屈法国”和英国绿党在内的民粹主义左翼，往往将移民、犯罪或伊斯兰主义等问题视为种族主义问题。 民粹主义右翼经常煽动恐惧，声称所有穆斯林都构成威胁，声称要保护欧洲免受其害的伊斯兰主义者一样不自由。大规模驱逐、隔离和着装禁令的承诺令穆斯林感到恐惧，阻碍了他们融入主流社会，并将他们推向极端分子的怀抱。 正因如此，欧洲主流政治家需要提出替代方案。暴力行为及其威胁应当受到法律制裁。但不应为了顾及文化敏感性而设下禁忌。言论自由并非宽容的敌人，而是其前提。渗透主义和偏见都应受到谴责。政府若对收集或发布数据感到不安，便会留下可供臆测夸张之词填补的空白。 解决所有这些问题并非易事，也无法一蹴而就，但希望犹存。欧洲的穆斯林正在融入当地社会，就像之前天主教、犹太和加勒比海地区的移民一样。所有这些群体的到来都曾引发道德恐慌，人们担心他们是否能够融入主流社会。但最终，他们都找到了自己的位置。穆斯林也一样——只要不让分裂和偏执阻碍他们融入主流社会。 economist.com/leaders/2026/0…