Connect with us

International

World Reacts to the Tragic Notre Dame Cathedral Fire

Published

on

  • The iconic Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris caught fire on Monday.
  • It took nearly 400 firefighters close to five hours to put out the flames.
  • No deaths have been reported, however, one firefighter and two police officers sustained minor injuries.
  • World leaders have expressed solidarity with France and companies have pledged to donate millions of dollars toward reconstruction.

Notre Dame Catches Fire

The historic Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, France caught fire on Monday causing severe damage, and destroying parts of the beloved building.

The first fire alarm went off at 6:20 p.m. local time, according to France 24. However, the fire was not discovered until close to 25 minutes later, just after the building had closed to visitors.

No one was killed in the fire, but one of the nearly 400 firefighters who responded sustained injuries, as well as two police officers. It appears that the fire started in the roof or attic. The fire was put out close to five hours after it started.

Right now, the exact cause of the fire is still unknown. Officials currently believe it to be an accident and detected no initial signs of arson. It is unclear if this accident is related to renovations that were happening in Notre Dame, but a possible connection has not been ruled out.

The most severe damage that occurred was to the roof and spire of the over 800-year-old architectural masterpiece. The spire collapsed inward as the fire was ablaze. Much of the roof was also made of lead and wood, which was very dry, making it incredibly prone to quick burning.

Some of the iconic elements of the building survived the fire. The two towers in front are completely intact. Several bronze statuettes had also already been removed as part of the renovations, saving them from any damage.

Iconic Relics Saved from the Flames

The exterior of the cathedral, which has survived wars and revolutions, is a symbol of Paris’ history and culture. However, what sat inside Notre Dame was of equal value. Citizens and leaders gathered together to try to save some of the irreplaceable items inside, in hopes that they wouldn’t be lost in the tragic fire.

Jean-François Martins, Paris’ Deputy Mayor for Tourism and Sports, spoke to CBS This Morning about his role in efforts to gather artifacts.

“We made a human chain,” he told the anchors, “with our friends from the church, from the police, but as well from the city of public service, made a chain, to get, as quick as possible, to get all the relics.”

The artifacts saved include the Tunic of St. Louis, and a thorn crown believed to have been worn by Jesus Christ before his crucifixion. Other artworks that were inside the building at the time will make their way to the Louvre to be protected and restored from smoke damage.

World Leaders Reach Out to France

As the city of Paris and all of France mourns the loss of the iconic monument, the whole world gathered to show support.

French President Emmanuel Macron said, “Like all of my fellow citizens, I am sad to see this part of us burn tonight.”

Other global leaders extended their thoughts as well.

Queen Elizabeth II released a statement saying, “I extend my sincere admiration to the emergency services who have risked their lives to try to save this important national monument.”

Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, called the incident “heartbreaking.”

“Canadians are thinking of our friends in France,” he added.

Pope Francis released a statement, saying, “We wait for the sorrow inflicted by the serious damage to be transformed into hope with reconstruction.”

President Donald Trump also tweeted about the news, calling the fire “horrible to watch.”

His suggestion that waterbombs be used to put out the flames was met with much criticism. Due to the age of the building, whose construction dates back to the 1100s, waterbombs would actually only make matters worse.

A civil defense agency within the Fench government later tweeted, though not in direct response to President Trump, that this method “could lead to the collapse of the entire structure of the cathedral.”


Trump later sent another tweet saying, “God bless the people of France!”

Plans to Reconstruct

President Macron has promised to make the reconstruction of the Cathedrian a priority. On Monday he tweeted that an international effort will be launched for repairs to begin.

“This Notre-Dame Cathedral, we will rebuild it. All together,” he said. “This is part of our French destiny. I am committed to this.”

Others have already pledged significant amounts of money to rebuild the monument. François-Henri Pinault, CEO of Kering, a luxury group that owns famous brands like Gucci and Saint Laurent, announced that his family will be donating 100 million euros to the cause.

This steep donation was later topped by Bernard Arnault, the CEO of LVMH, which is behind fashion brands like Louis Vitton, Marc Jacobs, and Dior. Via the LVMH twitter account, the family announced that they will donate 200 million euros, and called Notre Dame “an integral part of the history of France.”

Other companies like the L’Oréal Group, Apple, and Total, have also pledged to the cause.

The repair could take years, with some experts saying it could take up to a decade. There is also no official estimation on the price it will take to rebuild what was lost.

See what others are saying: (France 24) (Wall Street Journal) (CBS)

International

Israel Relaxes Abortion Restrictions in Response to U.S. Supreme Court Ruling

Published

on

The reforms follow similar moves by France and Germany as leaders across the political spectrum denounce the court’s decision.


Health Minister Makes Announcement

Israel is easing access to abortion in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s repeal of Roe v. Wade, Nitzan Horowitz, the country’s health minister and head of the small left-wing Meretz party, announced Monday.

“The U.S. Supreme Court’s move to deny a woman the right to abortion is a dark move,” he said in the announcement, “oppressing women and returning the leader of the free and liberal world a hundred years backward.”

The new rules, approved by a majority in the parliamentary committee, grant women access to abortion pills through the universal health system. Women will be able to obtain the pills at local health centers rather than only hospitals and surgical clinics.

The new policy also removes the decades-old requirement for women to physically appear before a special committee that must grant approval to terminate a pregnancy.

While women will still need to get approval, the process will become digitized, the application form will be simplified, and the requirement to meet a social worker will become optional.

The committee will only conduct hearings in the rare case it initially denies the abortion procedure.

Israel’s 1977 abortion law stipulates four criteria for termination of pregnancy: If the woman is under 18 or over 40, if the fetus is in danger, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, incest, or an “illicit union,” including extramarital affairs, and if the woman’s mental or physical health is at risk.

All of the changes will take effect over the next three months.

The World Reacts

Politicians across the political spectrum from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson have denounced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision since it was announced Friday.

On Saturday, French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne expressed support for a bill proposed by parliament that would enshrine the right to an abortion in the country’s constitution.

“For all women, for human rights, we must set this gain in stone,” she wrote on Twitter. “Parliament must be able to unite overwhelmingly over this text.”

Germany scrapped a Nazi-era law prohibiting the promotion of abortion Friday, just hours before the U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In Israel, abortion is a far less controversial issue than it is for Americans. Around 98% of people who apply for an abortion get one, according to the country’s Central Bureau of Statistics.

Part of the reason for Israel’s relatively easy access to abortion is that many residents interpret Jewish law to condone, or at least not prohibit, the procedure.

In the United States, several Jewish organizations including the American Jewish Committee, Hillel International, and the Women’s Rabbinic Network have expressed opposition to the court ruling, and some Jews have protested it as a violation of their religious freedom.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (ABC News) (The Guardian)

Continue Reading

International

Flight Deporting Refugees From U.K. to Rwanda Canceled at Last Hour

Published

on

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights said the U.K.’s asylum policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.


Saved By The Bell

The inaugural flight in the U.K. government’s plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda was canceled about an hour and a half before it was supposed to take off Tuesday evening.

A last-minute legal intervention by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) halted the flight. Tuesday’s flight originally included 37 people, but after a string of legal challenges that number dwindled to just seven.

In its ruling for one of the seven passengers, a 54-year-old Iraqi man, the court said he cannot be deported until three weeks after the delivery of the final domestic decision in his ongoing judicial review proceedings.

Another asylum seeker, a 26-year-old Albanian man, told The Guardian he was in a “very bad mental state” and did not want to go to Rwanda, a country he knows nothing about.

“I was exploited by traffickers in Albania for six months,” he said. “They trafficked me to France. I did not know which country I was being taken to.”

A final domestic effort to block the flight in the Court of Appeals failed on Monday. The High Court will make a ruling on the asylum policy next month.

Britains Divided by Controversial Policy

U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel spoke to lawmakers after the flight was canceled, defending the asylum policy and saying preparations for the next flight will begin immediately.

“We cannot keep on spending nearly £5 million a day on accommodation including that of hotels,” she said. “We cannot accept this intolerable pressure on public services and local communities.”

“It makes us less safe as a nation because those who come here illegally do not have the regularized checks or even the regularized status, and because evil people-smuggling gangs use the proceeds of their ill-gotten gains to fund other appalling crimes that undermine the security of our country,” she continued.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Filippo Grandi, told CBC the policy sets a “catastrophic” precedent.

“We believe that this is all wrong,” he said. “This is all wrong. I mean, saving people from dangerous journeys is great, is absolutely great. But is that the right way to do it? Is that the right, is that the real motivation for this deal to happen? I don’t think so. I think it’s… I don’t know what it is.”

An Iranian asylum seeker in a British detention center who was told to prepare for deportation before being granted a late reprieve was asked by ABC whether he ever thought the U.K. would send him to Africa.

“I thought in the U.K. there were human rights,” he said. “But so far I haven’t seen any evidence.”

The Conservative government’s plan was announced in April, when it said it would resettle some asylum seekers 4,000 miles away in Rwanda, where they can seek permanent refugee status, apply to settle there on other grounds, or seek asylum in a safe third country.

The scheme was meant to deter migrants from illegally smuggling themselves into the country by boat or truck.

Migrants have long made the dangerous journey from Northern France across the English Channel, with over 28,000 entering the U.K. in boats last year, up from around 8,500 the year prior. Dozens of people have died making the trek, including 27 who drowned last November when a single boat capsized.

See what others are saying: (BBC) (The Guardian) (CNN)

Continue Reading

International

Ryanair Draws Outrage, Accusations of Racism After Making South Africans Take Test in Afrikaans

Published

on

Afrikaans, which is only spoken as a first language by around 13% of South Africa, has not been the country’s national language since apartheid came to an end in 1994.


Airline Won’t Explain Discrimination

Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, has received widespread criticism and accusations of racism after it began requiring South African nationals to complete a test in Afrikaans to prove their passport isn’t fraudulent.

The airline told BBC the new policy was implemented because of “substantially increased cases of fraudulent South African passports being used to enter the U.K.”

Among other questions, the test asks passengers to name South Africa’s president, its capital city, and one national public holiday.

Ryanair has not said why it chose Afrikaans, the Dutch colonial language that many associate with white minority rule, for the test.

There are 11 official languages in South Africa, and Afrikaans ranks third for usage below Zulu and IsiXhosa. Only around 13% of South Africans speak Afrikaans as their first language.

“They’re using this in a manner that is utterly absurd,” Conrad Steenkamp, CEO of the Afrikaans Language Council, told reporters. “Afrikaans, you have roughly 20% of the population of South Africa understand Afrikaans. But the rest don’t, so you’re sitting with roughly 50 million people who do not understand Afrikaans.”

“Ryanair should be careful,” he continued. “Language is a sensitive issue. They may well end up in front of the Human Rights Commission with this.”

Ryanair’s policy only applies to South African passengers flying to the United Kingdom from within Europe, since it does not fly out of South Africa.

The British government has said in a statement that it does not require the test.

Anyone who cannot complete the test will be blocked from traveling and given a refund.

Memories of Apartheid Resurface

“The question requiring a person to name a public holiday is particularly on the nose given that SA has a whole public holiday NEXT WEEK commemorating an historic protest that started in response to language-based discrimination,” one person tweeted.

South African citizen Dinesh Joseph told the BBC that he was “seething” with anger when asked to take the test.

“It was the language of apartheid,” he said, adding that it was a trigger for him.

Officials in the country were also surprised by Ryanair’s decision.

We are taken aback by the decision of this airline because the Department regularly communicates with all airlines to update them on how to validate South African passports, including the look and feel,” South Africa’s Department of Home Affairs said in a statement.

Any airline found to have flown a passenger with a fake passport to the U.K. faces a fine of £2,000 from authorities there. Ryanair has also not said whether it requires similar tests for any other nationalities.

Many people expressed outrage at Ryanair’s policy and some told stories of being declined service because they did not pass the test.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (BBC) (Al Jazeera)

Continue Reading