Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola is facing a two-game touchline ban after being booked for the sixth time this season during Saturday’s FA Cup win at Newcastle.

Guardiola was shown a yellow card after confronting fourth official Lewis Smith on the touchline at St James’ Park after Kieran Trippier had fouled City’s Jeremy Doku.

New regulations introduced this season mean Premier League managers are suspended for one game once they have received three yellow cards, while six cautions will result in a two-match ban.

The ban applies to league and FA Cup games but not European games or domestic cup finals, meaning Guardiola will be on the touchline for the Carabao Cup final with Arsenal on 22 March.

However, the Spaniard will have to sit out next Saturday’s Premier League fixture with West Ham and City’s FA Cup quarter-final clash on the weekend of 4-5 April, with the draw yet to be made for that round.

After the win at Newcastle, Guardiola said of his angry reaction that led to his booking: “I will tell you something – we have all the records in this country, all of them, despite everything.

“We have the record of the manager with the most yellow cards. I want all records and now I have it, two-game ban now and I will go on holidays the next two games.

“There are things after 10 years I cannot understand. Review the action. Of course I’m going to defend Doku and all my teams.”

March 7 (UPI) — The author prefers to use the lowercase “n” to challenge the Kim family regime’s legitimacy.

Calls for an end of war declaration on the Korean peninsula return with steady rhythm. Each time they appear, they promise a step toward reconciliation.

The latest proposal came when South Korea’s Unification Ministry urged a political declaration formally ending the Korean War as part of a broader effort to restart dialogue with north Korea and move toward a peace regime.

The argument is simple: A declaration would signal political will for peace and reduce tension on the peninsula.

The desire for peace is genuine. Koreans want peace. Americans want peace. Soldiers who have stood watch along the Demilitarized Zone for seventy years want peace.

The real question is not whether peace is desirable. The real question is whether a declaration contributes to peace when the military reality remains unchanged.

Paper and rhetoric do not trump steel.

The Military Reality That Has Not Changed

The Korean War ended in July 1953 with an armistice agreement, not a peace treaty. The armistice halted the fighting but preserved the underlying conflict.

The security architecture that followed rests on deterrence. It rests on the Republic of Korea-U.S. alliance, the presence of American forces in Korea, extended deterrence and the readiness of combined forces.

Across the DMZ sits the fourth largest army in the world, as north Korea fields roughly 1.2 million troops.

More than seventy percent of those forces remain deployed between Pyongyang and the Demilitarized Zone. Their posture is offensive. Their purpose has not changed since 1950.

The Republic of Korea’s forces are organized differently. They are structured for defense. They rely on alliance integration and American reinforcement in crisis. The combined posture has deterred major conflict for seven decades.

None of that changes with a declaration.

Artillery remains within range of Seoul. Ballistic missiles remain deployed. Nuclear weapons remain part of the regime’s strategy.

Words do not move artillery tubes.

The Strategic Misreading Behind the Proposal

Supporters of an end of war declaration often argue that symbolic gestures can change political dynamics in Pyongyang.

The belief is that such a declaration would demonstrate that the alliance is abandoning what the regime calls its “hostile policy.” This signal, the argument goes, might restart negotiations and encourage denuclearization.

This logic rests on a misunderstanding of the Kim family regime.

For more than seventy years the regime has pursued the same strategic objective. It seeks to dominate the Korean peninsula under its rule. The tools have changed over time, but the objective has not.

The regime uses coercion, subversion, diplomacy, and military pressure in combination. Negotiations are not an alternative to this strategy. They are part of it.

When the regime speaks about hostile policy, it does not refer to rhetoric. It refers to the structural pillars of deterrence. The regime defines hostile policy as the ROK/U.S. alliance, the presence of U.S. forces in Korea, and the nuclear umbrella that protects South Korea and Japan.

Removing these pillars is central to the regime’s long-term strategy.

How a Declaration Can Undermine Deterrence

Advocates often describe an end of war declaration as symbolic and not legally binding. That may be correct in a narrow legal sense. In strategic terms, however, symbolism matters.

Politics follows narrative.

Once the war is declared over, critics of the alliance will ask a simple question. If the war is over, why are U.S. forces still stationed in Korea?

The argument will not remain academic. Political factions in both countries will push for reductions in American troop presence. They will question combined exercises. They will challenge extended deterrence.

The declaration would not cause these debates, but it would accelerate them. It would provide rhetorical oxygen to arguments that already exist.

From Pyongyang’s perspective this outcome would be ideal. The regime has long defined the alliance and U.S. military presence as the central obstacles to its objectives. Weakening alliance cohesion through political pressure achieves what military confrontation cannot.

The Political Warfare Dimension

An end of war declaration would not occur in a vacuum. It would unfold in a contested information environment shaped by political warfare.

north Korea, China, and Russia have repeatedly used narrative and diplomacy to shape perceptions about security on the peninsula. If negotiations over a declaration stall, the narrative battlefield will shift quickly.

Pyongyang will argue that peace is blocked by American hostility. Beijing and Moscow will echo that message in international forums. The United States will be portrayed as the obstacle to reconciliation.

Sanctions policy will become the central battleground. north Korea has already signaled that meaningful progress requires sanctions relief. Yet the United Nations Security Council resolutions remain in force precisely because of the regime’s nuclear and missile programs.

If sanctions remain in place, the regime and its partners will claim that Washington refuses to embrace peace. The propaganda line will be clear. The United States talks about diplomacy while clinging to confrontation.

The goal is not persuasion alone. The goal is alignment. By shaping public debate in South Korea and internationally, these narratives seek to weaken alliance unity and pressure policymakers.

This is political warfare conducted through diplomacy, media narratives, and strategic messaging.

Diplomacy Without Illusions

None of this means the United States or South Korea should reject diplomacy. Peace on the peninsula remains the long-term objective of the alliance.

Diplomacy, however, must be grounded in reality.

An end of war declaration can only contribute to security if it is tied to concrete military measures. Negotiations would need to address conventional force deployments near the DMZ. They would need to include ballistic missile programs and nuclear weapons. Verification would be essential.

Absent those steps, a declaration would alter language while leaving the balance of power untouched.

The alliance cannot afford that illusion.

Strategic Theater Versus Strategic Stability

Political leaders understandably seek symbolic achievements that demonstrate progress toward peace.

A declaration ending the Korean War would carry powerful historical meaning. But symbolism is not strategy.

A declaration without corresponding changes in military posture risks becoming strategic theater. It produces headlines but not stability. Worse, it may erode the deterrent structure that has preserved peace for generations.

The paradox is clear. A gesture meant to signal peace could weaken the very mechanisms that prevent war.

The Question That Matters

The central question remains unchanged.

Will the Kim family regime behave like a responsible member of the international community?

If it reduces conventional forces, dismantles nuclear weapons, and abandons its hostile posture, then an end of war declaration could become part of a genuine peace settlement.

If those conditions remain absent, the declaration becomes something else. It becomes leverage in a broader campaign aimed at weakening the alliance.

History suggests caution.

For seven decades the regime has used negotiations to gain concessions while preserving its core capabilities. It has advanced nuclear weapons even during diplomatic engagement.

Why should a symbolic declaration suddenly transform that pattern?

Conclusion

Peace on the Korean peninsula is a worthy goal. It is a goal shared by Koreans, Americans, and the broader international community.

But peace is not achieved through declarations alone.

It is secured through credible deterrence, alliance unity, and diplomacy grounded in the behavior of adversaries rather than hopes about their intentions.

The ROK/U.S. alliance has preserved stability for generations because it rests on credible military power. That credibility depends on readiness, presence, and integration. Until the military threat from the north changes, the war cannot truly be declared over.

Paper and words do not trump steel.

David Maxwell, executive director of the Korea Regional Review, is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces colonel who has spent more than 30 years in the Asia-Indo-Pacific region. He specializes in Northeast Asian security affairs and irregular, unconventional and political warfare. He is vice president of the Center for Asia Pacific Strategy and a senior fellow at the Global Peace Foundation, where he works on a free and unified Korea. After he retired, he became associate director of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University. He is on the board of directors of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea and the OSS Society and is the editor at large for the Small Wars Journal.

Aimee Zambrano is a Venezuelan anthropologist, researcher, and consultant who has made significant contributions to the struggle against gender-based violence in the country. She is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Women’s Studies. She is the founder of the Utopix Femicide Monitor, a platform that collects data on femicides from open sources. In this interview, Zambrano sheds light on the main challenges to advance a feminist agenda in Venezuela.

How has gender-based violence evolved in Venezuela in recent years?

It is difficult to answer precisely because there are no official figures. The former Attorney General, Tarek William Saab, presented some figures, but he did not break them down; rather, he spoke in general terms about a period during his tenure. So it is very difficult to assess what changes have occurred, especially in quantitative terms. 

We undertake a partial registry based on cases that appear in the media, so these are not official figures. But it is enough to see patterns emerging. We have been monitoring since 2019 and saw an increase in femicides in 2020 due to the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, which also led to an increase in all types of gender-based violence, not only in Venezuela but in most countries around the world. In 2019, when we began monitoring, we recorded 167 femicides, then in 2020 we recorded 256. In 2021, there was a decrease and we counted 239 cases. In 2022 and 2023, there were 240 and 201, respectively. In 2024, we recorded 188 femicides, and for 2025, we estimate that the figure will be around 165.

There has been a decrease in the number of perpetrated femicides. However, when we look at other forms of violence, such as attempted femicides, we are seeing an increase compared to previous years. This is a warning sign because these are attempts to murder women that leave physical, psychological, and social consequences on both the survivor and her environment. We have also seen an increase in femicides of Venezuelan women abroad year after year. We are also witnessing a large number of cases of sexual abuse, especially child sexual abuse and trafficking, both abroad and in our country. Similarly, here in Venezuela, the disappearance of women is not classified as a type of gender-based violence, but according to various investigations we have carried out, disappearance or abduction, in the specific case of women, girls, and teenagers, is directly related to gender-based violence, and many of these disappearances are associated with femicides where the bodies are hidden, or cases of gender-based violence where the aggressors end up confining the victim. At the same time, we have seen a large number of cases of vicarious violence, where the aggressor inflicts violence on children, family members, or even pets.

So, a decrease in the number of femicides does not mean that other forms of violence are not on the rise. It is also important to talk about political violence. In the context of the July 2024 presidential elections, two femicides occurred and we saw threats against many community leaders by right-wing groups, who persecuted and harassed them. The same goes for media violence, social media, and artificial intelligence. In fact, there need to be changes in the laws so that these new forms of violence can be punished.

How does the lack of official and updated figures from the Venezuelan government affect the implementation of effective public policies to combat gender-based violence?

It has a huge impact. It’s not that there are no figures, but that they are not public. In fact, several public programs such as the Mamá Rosa Plan for Gender Equality and Equity, the various homeland plans, and even the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence, mandate that the state must create an observatory for gender-based violence. 

The absence of data means that we cannot measure the efficacy of the public policies that are being enacted. Statistics could also allow organizations to develop proposals, not only legislative ones, but also from women’s groups, which must also participate in the elaboration of these policies.

It is often said that the deterioration of living conditions in Venezuela disproportionately affects women, but what does this mean in practice? Does it also impact the number of femicides?

Yes. We were affected by the rentier culture, the crisis, and economic sanctions. It has been a multifactorial phenomenon. The rentier culture did not change, public policies depended on oil revenues, and a series of US-led unilateral coercive measures were imposed on us that affected all aspects of life. In crises, it is always women’s bodies that pay the price. Currently, we have to work four or five jobs, usually informal ones, to make ends meet. For those of us with children, it is even worse, because we also have the burden of unpaid work in the home. The same is true for the care of the elderly or people with disabilities, which always falls on our shoulders. 

In Venezuela, the vast majority of heads of households are women, who are either alone or part of extended families of women living together and raising children. In addition to this, women are the ones who make up a large part of the social fabric, they are grassroots leaders. At the same time, the country is experiencing a crisis in services, electricity, water, and gas, which further increases the burden of care work. Women have to figure out how to get water for cooking, washing, and bathing their children, how to cope when there is no electricity, or how to cook without gas, especially in the interior of the country, where public services are in a more dire state. 

Does this have an impact on the number of femicides? It does. Violent, aggressive men find themselves in the midst of an economic crisis, where there is unemployment or underpaid work, they become increasingly frustrated, and where do they take out all this frustration? On women, their partners, their families, their homes. It would be interesting to see if GDP figures or periods of high inflation correlate with peaks in femicides. 

With the US attacks on January 3, we saw the kidnapping of Cilia Flores and also the rise to power of the first female president, albeit in an acting capacity, Delcy Rodríguez. How can this be interpreted from a feminist perspective?

The bombing of Venezuela was a flagrant violation of international law, but we also saw how National Assembly Deputy Cilia Flores appeared during the arraignment hearing in New York with bruises on her face and body. Her attorney requested medical attention, which indicates that during the operation she was the victim of violence by the US military. This, of course, is indicative of what foreign powers do when they bomb and invade other countries, especially in the Global South, where they do so to extract natural resources. 

Talking with friends, I have realized that many of us feel violated, as women, by everything that has happened. Now the acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, has a very difficult task: to take the reins of the state with a gun to her head. It takes a lot of courage to face this. In addition, after the bombing, Trump’s threat to her was very direct: do what I want or you will be worse off than Maduro. It is difficult to take on that role and have the responsibility of preventing more lives from being lost. 

In the current context, what are Venezuela’s main challenges in terms of the feminist agenda? You have suggested, for example, the need to create a structural feminist emergency plan. What would that look like?

The first thing is to define what that feminist agenda is, because in Venezuela there are different grassroots movements and organizations with different political stances, and polarization sometimes makes it very difficult to unify the points. Sometimes we try, but the efforts can get fragmented again due to specific political events. I would say that there is the issue of gender violence and also the decriminalization of abortion in Venezuela, as common ground that unifies many of us. We also demand a justice system that has a gender and feminist perspective because the current one is built from an androcentric, patriarchal perspective; that is, it is a justice system created by men and for men. An amnesty law is currently being implemented, so this has to be included in it. 

By a feminist emergency structural plan, we mean that the Ministry for Women and Gender Equality should not be the only institution responsible for public policies relating to women and the LGBTIQ+ population. It should rather involve the entire state. I am not saying anything new because this already appears in the Organic Law on Women’s Right to a Life Free of Violence and also in the Mamá Rosa plan, which was supposed to culminate in 2019, but almost nothing that was stipulated ended up being implemented. All ministries, all affiliated entities, all state institutions, including governors’ and mayors’ offices, must address gender issues, and a robust budget is needed for this. For example, the Ministry of Communication must run ongoing campaigns in the media and on social networks about the different forms of violence and the telephone hotlines and websites where incidents can be reported. The Ministry of Housing must focus on creating shelters for victims. The Ministry of Education must review the curriculum to include gender studies, comprehensive sexuality education, and different types of violence, as well as implement protocols for care in schools, high schools, and universities. In addition, all state officials have a duty to educate themselves on the issue.

How do you assess the retreat of the state in certain areas and the growing “NGOization” leveraged by Western funding?

It’s complex because initiatives, activities, marches, etc., require resources, and many of our organizations don’t have them. In addition, there is another factor at play here, which is the proliferation of religious groups, especially Pentecostal evangelicals, who have grown significantly in Venezuela, have a presence within the state and within political parties, and are also very wealthy, which allows them to carry out campaigns, mobilizations, etc. Feminist movements face many obstacles because most of us also have to work several jobs and take care of our homes and communities. So it is difficult to keep up with evangelical and conservative right-wing groups. 

I think we need to identify who the enemies are, who targets our rights, and then assess the contradictions and coordinate women’s and feminist movements. I make the distinction because there are women’s organizations that do not necessarily identify as feminist. But we have to grow, see what issues unite us, and begin a series of actions. I always make this call: despite our political differences, let’s try to unite around an agenda that unites us all.

How does social media influence the proliferation of violence, and gender violence in particular?

I believe that violence has always been present, but now it is exposed because some forms of violence that we used to consider normal or common have been explained or denormalized. In addition, social media and the internet allow us all to learn about different cases in different parts of the world. But, on the other hand, we have the issue of anonymity and lack of accountability, meaning that people can say outrageous things, threaten, insult, and commit violence facilitated by technology. Social media also allows virtual groups to come together to commit violence, and there are also certain influencers on Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok spreading crazy ideas. Guys like El Temach in Mexico, who speak to you from their machismo, what some call “toxic masculinity” but I call “the healthy descendant of patriarchy.” 

There is also another point here: the algorithm. For example, a teenager starts searching for content about exercise, and soon after, the algorithm will introduce them to these influencers, thus creating mass communities such as incels, which organize themselves through forums like Reddit. This also breaks down the entire social fabric of face-to-face interactions, and people end up isolated but believing they are “accompanied on social media.” All of this leads to disorders such as anxiety and depression. In addition, teenage girls and women become caught up in the aspirational idea of having a certain type of body, aesthetic violence, etc. In short, I’m not saying this from a moralistic point of view, but social networks have encouraged a lot of violence. Besides, who owns these networks? What ideology do they profess? What are they using them for? We have to investigate so we can arm ourselves and fight this battle.

ITV News’ political editor Robert Peston was branded ‘unprofessional’ by viewers who took issue with his bright red and white Nike Air Jordans.

ITV political editor Robert Peston has been slammed once again for his choice of footwear after he was seen sporting a pair of red and white Nikes in a bulletin covering the Middle East. The broadcaster was branded “unprofessional” by viewers for opting for a pair of trainers and bright red socks with his suit rather than proper shoes.

On Tuesday night’s ITV News, the 65-year-old was covering the escalating conflict involving Iran and Israel, but viewers couldn’t help but notice his eye-catching attire. Social media users were quick to comment on his outfit choice, taking to X to complain. One wrote: “The absolute state of Robert Peston on ITV. Since when did it become acceptable to wear trainers with a suit?”

READ MORE:

READ MORE: Grim moment Kemi Badenoch upstaged by rodent in live TV interview

READ MORE:

READ MORE: Kemi Badenoch uses ChatGPT as her ‘new search engine’ – but is it better than Google?

Another added: “Jesus Christ: I’ve just seen ITV News a few moments ago with Mary Nightingale with Robert Peston and he is wearing brightly coloured Nike trainers! Very unprofessional attire and a far cry from the days of true professionals like @AlStewartOBE.”

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

A third viewer jibed: “Peston must be pushing 70 but he insists on wearing trainers with a suit, seriously Robert?” Back in February, ITV News viewers were also perturbed by his outfit, with one posting: “Looking at @itvnews Robert Peston in a suit with RED socks and posh trainers.”

And in October last year, the same issue was brought up on social media. One person wrote: “The absolute state of Robert Peston on ITV. Since when did it become acceptable to wear trainers with a suit?”

Robert, who also hosts The Rest is Money podcast, discussed his penchant for wearing trainers to, saying it’s simply a matter of practicality. Speaking to Belfast’s News Letter, he explained: “Ah, the latest thing, of course, is the trainers.

“I’ve worn trainers for a couple of years just because I’m on my feet all day and running around the whole time. There was a period, long before the (former) Prime Minister got into Adidas Sambas, that I was wearing them. Now I wear Air Jordans and people have decided that’s the talking point.”

The University of Oxford graduate went on to explain that he was “pretty interested in fashion and clothes” before he had kids, when he had the money to spend on his attire. He added that he is fully aware he looks ” a bit shabby and shambolic sometimes” but went on to assert that it doesn’t mean he doesn’t care.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

WASHINGTON — Signs of division emerged in Iran’s leadership Saturday as U.S. and Israeli strikes continued battering targets throughout the country, with Tehran sending mixed signals on whether it would keep attacking Washington’s Arab allies entering the war’s second week.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian began the day offering an apology “on behalf of Iran to the neighboring countries affected,” promising to halt the attacks that have affected nearly every nation in the Middle East. But strikes continued within hours, hitting Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, and Pezeshkian quickly issued a statement walking back his remarks.

President Trump vowed on social media to “hit Iran very hard” on Saturday, shortly before flying to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware for the dignified transfer of six service members killed in the war.

Speaking at a summit of Latin American leaders in Miami before his trip to Delaware, the president said the fallen service members were heroes “coming home in a different manner than they thought they’d be coming home.” He said it was “a very sad situation,” and he pledged to keep American war deaths “to a minimum.”

And Israel launched its own wave of fresh attacks against Iran while taking incoming fire from Hezbollah, Iran’s allied force in Lebanon, that set off sirens in Tel Aviv. Reports of a fire at a major oil refinery outside Tehran sparked fears the conflict was only escalating, marking the first attack on Iran’s energy infrastructure, if confirmed.

The burst of activity over the weekend underscored that Trump’s unexpected war with Iran, launched alongside Israel just a week ago, is continuing at full force with no sign of slowing.

Missile and drone strikes by Iran against Arab nations, targeting U.S. military assets in the region as well as civilian targets, including hotels and airports, have been an effort by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to pressure regional governments to in turn press Trump to end the U.S. air campaign. The strikes have jolted markets worldwide and sent the price of oil soaring.

President Trump salutes Saturday as soldiers carry the coffin of Sgt. Declan Coady, 20, of West Des Moines, Iowa. Coady and five others were killed in a drone strike in Kuwait.

(Roberto Schmidt / Getty Images)

While the attacks have decreased substantially over the course of the week, with U.S. Central Command recording a 90% decrease in ballistic missile launches and an 83% drop in drone attacks as of Friday, Iranian strikes are still penetrating regional air defenses. One drone hit the world’s busiest airport, in Dubai, on Saturday, dashing hopes that flights could resume from the regional hub.

Hours after Pezeshkian’s apology, Iran’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement vowing to continue strikes on territories that host U.S. offensive forces. Iran’s Defense Ministry said that its strategic stockpile of munitions was sufficient to sustain a protracted campaign. And a Revolutionary Guard spokesperson issued a statement addressing Trump, calling him “the corrupted island man,” referring to his former friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, the late sex offender who allegedly trafficked girls to his private island.

“The ground and the map of the war is in our hands,” the Revolutionary Guard official said. “This will continue.”

In his videotaped remarks, Pezeshkian also rejected Trump’s call for Tehran’s “unconditional surrender.” Trump later said he would be satisfied reaching a point at which Iran is no longer capable of fighting back.

“The idea of Iran surrendering unconditionally is a dream they will take to their graves,” Pezeshkian said.

A member of Iran’s Assembly of Experts, a council of 88 clerics responsible for naming the country’s supreme leader, was quoted in local state media vowing to select a new ayatollah within the next day, more than a week after U.S. and Israeli forces assassinated Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the opening salvo of the war.

Trump has said he expects a say in that decision, preemptively rejecting the late supreme leader’s son, Mojtaba Khamenei, who is seen as the most likely successor.

Mojtaba Khamenei is seen as even more ideological than his father, with deep ties throughout Iran’s security apparatus — and with a potential vendetta against Trump, on the heels of U.S. forces killing much of his family.

Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council who formerly served as the late Khamenei’s top advisor, said in his first remarks since the ayatollah’s killing that his assassination was unprecedented. “The price for this is not small,” Larijani said.

“They shouldn’t think we’ll let America quickly sweep this under the rug and say, ‘We hit, now let’s move on,’” Larijani continued. “Things will only resolve when they understand they no longer have the right to violate Iran, and when they compensate the Iranian people for their losses.”

More that 1,200 people have been killed in Iran since the war began, according to Iranian officials.

“He killed and martyred our leader,” Larijani added. “We’re not letting it go.”

Caitlin Clark is excited to make her U.S. national team debut next week when the Americans play in an FIBA World Cup qualifier in Puerto Rico.

It will be Clark’s first game in about eight months since a multitude of injuries derailed her WNBA season with the Indiana Fever in July.

“It’ll probably take me a second to knock a little bit of the rust off,” Clark said Saturday. “I’ll probably be a little bit nervous, which I usually don’t get nervous but that probably comes from I haven’t really played basketball in a while. I’m sure after the first minute of running around on the court, I’ll be just fine. But more than anything, just really excited. I know how much work and how much time I put in to make sure my body’s as healthy as it can be and to get back.”

It’s been quite a journey for Clark, who played in 13 games last season. She had groin injuries and then a bone bruise in her left ankle. She’s been in the gym getting ready, working with the Fever medical team and player developmental staff over the last few months.

“I’ve always been a person that’s going to just rely on my work. I feel like it’s certainly made me work harder,” Clark said of the injuries. “But that’s also probably the part that kind of stunk about it, is I felt like I put in so much time and so much energy going into last season, and then obviously, only appeared in about 13 games.”

Clark has fond memories of playing with younger USA Basketball teams. She recalled being in Colorado Springs in her teens and going into a room filled with jerseys of past American greats.

“My eyes were so wide, thought it was the coolest thing in the world of all,” she said. “[To see] the senior national jerseys of great men’s players and women’s players. It’s a 15- or 16-year-old’s dream of doing that one day.”

Clark knows this is just her first step with the national team. There was an uproar when she didn’t make the 2024 Paris Olympic team. She eyes playing on the World Cup team next fall and then in Los Angeles on the 2028 Olympic squad.

“There’s a lot to get to that point,” she said. “Obviously that’s my goal, the World Cup before that. There’s a lot for me to learn.”

Feinberg writes for the Associated Press.

The president of the United Arab Emirates spoke for the first time on the widening war in the Middle East as Iran continues to strike Gulf countries hosting US military assets with drones and missiles.

“The UAE has thick skin and bitter flesh – we are no easy prey,” said Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in comments aired by Abu Dhabi TV on Saturday as he visited wounded patients in a hospital.

He added the UAE is in “a period of war” but would “emerge stronger”.

In a social media post, Sheikh Mohamed said the UAE, which has seen attacks affecting hubs such as airports, tourist attractions, and the US consulate in Dubai, is prepared to confront “threats” against the “security and the protection of all citizens”.

One driver was killed when debris from an intercepted projectile slammed into his vehicle, Dubai’s Media Office said, describing the victim as Asian but providing no further details.

Sheikh Mohamed’s comments were aired as the region entered a second week of war sparked by a major US-Israeli attack on Iran.

Earlier, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian offered an apology to neighbouring nations for launching strikes on their countries housing US military bases. His comments were swiftly contradicted by Iranian judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, also a member of the interim leadership council.

“Evidence from Iran’s armed forces shows that the geography of some countries in the region is openly and covertly at the disposal of the enemy,” he said. “The heavy attacks on these targets will continue.”

Pezeshkian himself rolled back on his remarks that Gulf countries would not be targeted unless attacks originated from their territories, caveating that while his country emphasised “the preservation and continuation of friendly relations,” Iran still has an “inherent right” to defend itself against US-Israeli aggression.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also clarified the leader’s comments on X, saying, “President Pezeshkian expressed openness to de-escalation within our region – provided that our neighbours’ airspace, territory, and waters are not used to attack the Iranian people.”

Iran retaliates after attack on water supplies

All the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman – have been targeted because of the presence of US assets within and around their borders.

In the Gulf, the deadly attacks have caused major disruption to flights, closure of airspace, and heavy knock-on impacts on oil-and-gas production reverberating across the world.

On Saturday, Iranian state media reported the country’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps targeted US forces at Bahrain’s Jufair airbase in retaliation for an attack on a freshwater desalination plant on Qeshm Island.

Araghchi called the US attack on the plant a “dangerous move with grave consequences”, accusing the US of committing a “blatant and desperate crime”, which affected the water supply to 30 villages.

Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, later said the attack was carried out with support from one of the airbases in a southern neighbouring country, stressing nations will not enjoy peace as long as the US has bases in the region.

Harlan Ullman, a senior adviser with the Atlantic Council, told Al Jazeera that attacks on water supplies could bring “greater chaos” to the Gulf.

“About 95 percent of all water in the Gulf comes from desalination,” he said. “If Iran wants to target desalination and water installation plants, they can bring the Gulf to a halt.”

Other attacks on Gulf

The UAE, a US ally and home to US military installations, has been the most heavily targeted nation in the Gulf during the war.

The Emirati Ministry of Defence said on Saturday it was targeted with 16 ballistic missiles and more than 120 drones.

Hours after Pezeshkian’s apology, the IRGC said their drones struck a US air combat centre at al-Dhafra airbase near Abu Dhabi, capital of the UAE.

Later, an unidentified object was intercepted near Dubai airport, the world’s busiest for international traffic, forcing it to briefly suspend operations.

Iranian attacks also hit Abu Dhabi airport, the upmarket Palm Jumeirah development, and the Burj Al Arab luxury hotel over the past week, while drone debris caused a fire at the US consulate in Dubai.

Also on Saturday, Qatar’s armed forces intercepted a missile attack, according to the Ministry of Defence. No immediate details were released about possible damage or casualties.

In Saudi Arabia, the defence ministry said a ballistic missile landed in an uninhabited area after being launched towards Prince Sultan Air Base, southeast of Riyadh, which hosts US troops.

Kuwait also reported intercepting a drone while the country’s national oil company announced a “precautionary” cut to its production of crude because of Iranian attacks and threats to the Strait of Hormuz, a key transit point for Gulf hydrocarbons.

Iran to select new supreme leader

Posting on social media on Saturday, US President Donald Trump warned his country would hit Iran “very hard” and threatened to expand strikes to include new targets.

Speaking at an event hosting Latin American leaders in Miami, Florida, Trump said on Saturday his country’s forces sank 42 Iranian navy ships in three days.

Israel launched what its military described as a new wave of strikes on Tehran and Isfahan. The military said on Saturday that more than 80 fighter jets completed a wave of strikes on Iranian army sites, missile launchers and other targets.

In a statement, the army said targets hit in Iran included missile storage sites, ballistic missile launchers and military facilities linked to Iran’s security forces.

Among the attacks, it said it struck 16 aircraft at Tehran’s Mehrabad airport, which belonged to the Quds Force branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard overseeing its foreign operations.

The Israeli military reported missiles were fired from ‌Iran at Israel on eight different occasions on Saturday, setting off air raid sirens in parts of the country and actioning air defences.

Iranian state media reported Saturday that the IRGC hit a Marshall Islands-flagged tanker in Hormuz.

Iran’s Assembly of Experts will be meeting in the next 24 hours to choose a new supreme leader, according to assembly member Ayatollah Mozafari.

Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, has rejected Trump’s demands to have a say in selecting Iran’s new supreme leader.

Introduction

In 1974, Muhammad Yunus began experimenting with an initiative to give small loans to impoverished rural women to foster a sense of empowerment through entrepreneurial start-ups – an initiative that was institutionalised through the famous Grameen Bank. In just a couple of years, this initiative had snowballed into the United Nations declaring 2005 the International Year of Microcredit, with Yunus winning the Nobel Peace Prize for economic development.

In an age of international globalisation and neoliberal theories, microcredit seemed to be the solution to the ills of the developing world. Economists, development theorists, and journalists began to discuss the multiple success stories from the Grameen Bank and the vast impact small loans were having on people.

But a much darker reality came to take place. Although Yunus said that credit is a human right, he failed to address the fact that debt follows. Stories like Razia’s became far too frequent.

The Feminisation of Debt: Razia’s Story

Razia had taken out an initial microcredit loan of around $50 from Grameen Bank to put food on the table and pay for her children’s education; to her, this money was a lifeline to meet her family’s immediate needs. She was offered an interest rate of 20%, which she did not initially realise due to her limited fiscal literacy, and she could not pay.

Loan sharks targeted her family with violent threats when they were unable to meet payment deadlines; she had to sell her heirloom jewellery, her belongings, and eventually her home to make the payment – and even now, she continues to face threats from the loan sharks.

Razia’s story is not uncommon and illustrates how a linear model of microcredit has led to the feminisation of debt: women took out these loans to cover basic needs and fulfil their societal roles as caretakers, only to be uniquely burdened and targeted because they were unable to meet deadlines. This led women to be prone to economic vulnerability, social shame due to the procurement of debt, and violence from debt collectors.

Questioning the Efficacy of Microfinance

In addition to Razia’s story, the reality of the Grameen Bank’s efficacy is also up for debate. More and more economists became wary of the narrative that microfinance helps start income-generating enterprises, and recognised that this led many to feed their families or afford education. Another fundamental assumption was that microfinance would empower the poor, especially women, through microenterprises, given their financial bargaining power within the community. The neoliberal social policies used to model microenterprises for poor rural women to sell their labour or to ‘sub-contract’ their services were broadly not adopted, and forced women into disempowering roles in the informal sector.

Dr. Lamia Karim conducted research on the particular claims on gender empowerment by microcredit programmes and ended up creating a ‘local economy of shame’; repayment of these loans was tied to a woman’s standing and honour within the community, and these norms created environments of disempowerment, subjugation, and stress to repay the loans.

Theoretical Frameworks: From WID to GAD

Yunus’s microcredit initiative followed the theoretical prescriptions of Women in Development (WID), which sought to address gender-based economic disparities and integrate women into existing economic systems. The Grameen Bank was able to meet these goals; however, the linear model of empowerment used and the integration of women within the neoliberal economic market failed to meet the overall goals of empowerment.

As organisations, advocates, and economists saw the initial model struggling to meet the holistic goals of empowerment, they integrated theoretical prescriptions from Gender and Development (GAD), which sought to confront the root causes of gender inequality and to meet both the practical and strategic needs of women. This empowers women not only to meet economic goals to ensure survival, but also to develop collective action skills to confront power structures that lead to their subjugation.

Proshika: A New Model for Empowerment

Proshika was formed in 1979 under the WID model and focused on targeting rural communities, but realigned its goals with a GAD model in 2009. Their mission statement was revised to reflect the integration of collective-action training into their microcredit initiatives. As an organisation, they planned to “develop their capacity, so they can claim their due rights from the government” and “ensure life security” – a revolutionary shift within the broader conversation about microcredit.

Proshika had a model very similar to the Grameen Bank microcredit programmes; however, they added organisational spaces for women to meet and discuss community issues, embedding collective action within the programme. When a woman signed up for a loan, she was connected with other women in her community and asked to discuss pressing issues. Proshika organised a total of 42,809 groups; these various groups looked into important societal issues, such as the prevention of child marriage, the prevention of violence against women, and the abolition of dowry practices.

These trainings connected women with existing government systems and taught them how to access the judicial system, enabling them to pursue institutional avenues of change.

Building Social Capital and Political Agency

These spaces within the community allow women to build social credit, serving as places where information flows and as essential spaces for building trust and relationships. They increase social awareness, social interaction outside of one’s family unit, and increase domestic power and civic participation.

Dr Paromita Sanyal studies the role of microfinance agencies in Bangladesh, and credits NGOs such as Proshika for building both vertical and horizontal lines of social credit. Vertical social credit enables women to build essential connections within their own communities, and horizontal social credit allows them to connect with NGOs, politicians, and governing bodies. This axis of power builds political agency within communities and empowers women to challenge restrictive gender norms.

Proshika operates in 8,784 villages, 1,639 unions, 266 sub-districts, 42 districts, and 7 divisions within Bangladesh – they have organised 33,982 female groups across the nation. Through their collective action programmes, they were able to see a statistically significant decrease in child marriages, dowries, and gender-based violence within rural villages.

Towards True Empowerment

Proshika’s microfinance initiative not only enabled income-generating activities in rural villages but also empowered women to make a difference in their communities. Proshika’s success story should serve as a model for reforming existing microfinance institutions and incorporating collective action mechanisms into programmes.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, which focused solely on women’s practical needs, Proshika made an effort to address women’s and community members’ strategic needs. This led to statistically significant decreases in domestic violence and child marriages, as well as increased awareness of government systems and the justice system as a whole, with civic engagement opening accessible avenues for change.

Dr. Andrea Cornwall’s critical feminist analysis of women’s empowerment suggests that true empowerment is about changing asymmetrical power relations and requires building critical consciousness to help people recognise fundamental inequalities. Empowerment is relational and involves the interplay between personal and political to create a process, rather than focusing on an outcome.

Unlike the Grameen Bank, Proshika focused more on the various aspects of empowerment, without adopting a linear view of tangible results. This led to successful grassroots movements that brought attention to women’s structural needs and raised awareness of women’s value to community spaces.

Empowerment comes from changing power relations within the community, and Proshika met both women’s practical and strategic needs. It is essential to address the extreme poverty that women face, but also to build avenues for them to challenge the institutions they participate in.

Sue and Noel Radford, best known for starring on 22 Kids & Counting, have made it to the Canary Islands after they faced backlash for complaining that their Dubai holiday had originally been cancelled

Sue and Noel Radford have arrived in a beach resort amid backlash. The 22 Kids & Counting star, 50, and her husband managed to get to the Canary Islands, after previously complaining that their Dubai holiday had been cancelled.

Last week, war broke out in the Middle East as Israel and the USA struck Israel, which killed its leader, Ali Khamenei. Iran then retaliated by striking military bases and various places across the Middle East including Tehran, Beirut and the UAE, including missile strikes and drones in Dubai. The strikes have lead to mass flight cancellations as the Foreign Office advised against all but essential travel to the UAE.

In an update posted onto her Instagram, Sue revealed that she had managed to jet off after all, as she posted what looked like a view from her balcony in a luxury resort.

READ MORE: Sue Radford jokes husband Noel ‘will kill me’ over giant surprise she took homeREAD MORE: Sue Radford under fire as she complains about Dubai holiday being cancelled

She captioned the post: “”The sun is shining we are all checked in and looking forward to a few days in the sun loving the Canary Islands we’ve not been for years.”

Sue was due to go to Dubai but has understandably cancelled her trip given what is going on. However, she has left her fans fuming by saying she was having a “nightmare” with the travel company they used as she tries to get a refund.

Taking to Instagram, she wrote: “As you know Chris and Aimee both got us weekends away for Christmas but as we couldn’t do the dates we swapped it to Dubai we were going to be flying tonight. Anyway hands up who’s been having a nightmare with travelup1 because I think there’s going to be lots of you.

“Phone lines dead so guessing they have turned them off and no response from them to emails i have commented on their insta page but all of our comments have been deleted and there been lots from very unhappy customers.

“I know we are safe in this country but even if you wanted to rebook you can’t because they aren’t dealing with it, so anyone who’s booked with this company think twice PLEASE.”

Editing her post later on, Sue said the company had been in touch. She added: “Travelup have messaged on insta so for others in the same situation it might be worth doing the same.

“The point of this post is that we do not want to rebook I would imagine lots wouldn’t but this company switching phones off is not the way to go about it so people can’t contact them at all and deleting comments is bad.”

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

Despite her insisting it was all resolved now, angry fans took to social media to fume over her original post. One branded it “tone deaf”, writing: “This is tone deaf. People are dying. Others are hiding in hotel rooms/basements. And the rest are stranded with many fearing for their lives. Your holiday dues not matter right now.

“Your refund/swap is not the priority. You should have travel insurance and be Atol/Abta protected – you’ll get your money. For now just sit tight and be thankful you’re not one of the people I just listed above.”

Another added: “Love you guys and this family so much, watch their shows every week and you’re all so lovely…. But please can we be kind to companies who are dealing with a war. This isn’t a day to day situation. I know we all want to rebook flights, I want to get some sun !! and get on our holidays, but why don’t we let the dust settle and give people a time to breathe and take stock of what’s actually going on, especially since the situation is escalating by the day.”

“I wouldn’t normally comment but I’m not being funny but face palming and talking about a weekend away when thousands of people are stuck in the Middle East either as ex pats or holiday makers/ on cruises etc. I think the travel agents have a little bit on their plates currently with a war occurring,” a third wrote.

“I like this family… but maybe think of those who are actually stuck over there instead of hounding travel companies. They will have a ridiculous amount to deal with, not just your holiday which im sure in due course will be sorted out for you,” a fourth penned.

Like this s tory? F or more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram , Twitter , Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

DORAL, Fla. — President Trump said Saturday that the United States and Latin American countries are banding together to combat violent cartels as his administration looks to demonstrate it remains committed to sharpening U.S. foreign policy focus on the Western Hemisphere even while engaged in war in the Middle East.

Trump encouraged regional leaders gathered at his Miami-area golf club to take military action against drug trafficking cartels and transnational gangs that he says pose an “unacceptable threat” to the hemisphere’s national security.

“The only way to defeat these enemies is by unleashing the power of our militaries,” Trump said. “We have to use our military. You have to use your military.” Citing the U.S.-led coalition that confronted the Islamic State group in the Middle East, the Republican president said that ”we must now do the same thing to eradicate the cartels at home.”

The gathering, which the White House called the “Shield of the Americas” summit, comes two months after Trump ordered an audacious U.S. military operation to invade Venezuela and capture its president, Nicolás Maduro, and whisk him and his wife to the United States to face drug conspiracy charges.

Looming even larger is Trump’s decision to launch a war on Iran with Israel a week ago, a conflict that has left hundreds dead, convulsed global markets and unsettled the broader Middle East.

Trump’s time with the Latin American leaders was limited: Afterward, he set out for Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to be on hand for the dignified transfer of the six U.S. troops killed in a drone strike on a command center in Kuwait. They were killed one day after the U.S. and Israel launched their war on Iran.

Trump called the American deaths a “very sad situation” and praised the fallen troops as “great heroes.”

With the summit, Trump aimed to turn attention to the Western Hemisphere, at least for a moment. He has pledged to reassert U.S. dominance in the region and counter what he sees as years of Chinese economic encroachment in America’s backyard.

Trump also said the U.S. will turn its attention to Cuba after the war with Iran and suggested his administration would cut a deal with Havana, underscoring Washington’s increasingly aggressive stance against the island’s communist leadership. “Great change will soon be coming to Cuba,” he said, adding that “they’re very much at the end of the line.”

Cuban officials have said on several occasions that they were open to dialogue with the U.S. as long as it was based on respect for Cuban sovereignty, but they have never confirmed that such talks were taking place.

Who was there

The leaders of Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guyana, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, and Trinidad and Tobago joined the U.S. president at Trump National Doral Miami, a golf resort where he is set to host the Group of 20 summit later this year.

The idea for a summit of like-minded conservatives from across the hemisphere emerged from the ashes of what was to be the 10th edition of the Summit of the Americas, which was scrapped during the U.S. military buildup off the coast of Venezuela last year.

Host Dominican Republic, pressured by the White House, had barred Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela from attending the regional gathering. But after leftist leaders in Colombia and Mexico threatened to pull out in protest — and with no commitment from Trump to attend — the Dominican President Luis Abinader decided at the last minute to postpone the event, citing “deep differences” in the region.

The Shield of the Americas moniker was meant to speak to Trump’s vision for an “America First” foreign policy toward the region that leverages U.S. military and intelligence assets unseen across the area since the end of the Cold War.

To that end, Ecuador and the United States conducted military operations this week against organized crime groups in the South American country. Ecuadorean and U.S. security forces attacked a refuge belonging to the Colombian armed group Comandos de la Frontera in the Ecuadorean Amazon on Friday, authorities reported.

This joint fight against drug traffickers “is only the beginning,” said Ecuador’s president, Daniel Noboa.

Notably missing at the summit were the region’s two dominant powers — Brazil and Mexico — as well as Colombia, long the linchpin of U.S. anti-narcotics strategy in the region.

Trump grumbled that Mexico is the “epicenter of cartel violence” with drug kingpins “orchestrating much of the bloodshed and chaos in this hemisphere.”

“The cartels are running Mexico,” Trump said. ”We can’t have that. Too close to us. Too close to you.”

The challenge from China

Trump made no mention of his administration’s position that countering Chinese influence in the hemisphere is a top priority for his second term.

His national security strategy promotes a “Trump corollary” to the 19th century Monroe Doctrine, which had sought to ban European incursions in the Americas, by targeting Chinese infrastructure projects, military cooperation and investment in the region’s resource industries.

The first demonstration of the more muscular approach was Trump’s strong-arming of Panama to withdraw from China’s Belt and Road Initiative and review long-term port contracts held by a Hong Kong-based company amid U.S. threats to seize the Panama Canal.

More recently, the U.S. capture of Maduro and Trump’s pledge to “run” Venezuela threaten to disrupt oil shipments to China — the biggest buyer of Venezuelan crude before the raid — and bring into Washington’s orbit one of Beijing’s closest allies in the region. Trump is scheduled to travel to Beijing later this month to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

For many countries, China’s trade-focused diplomacy fills a critical financial void in a region with major development challenges that include poverty reduction and infrastructure bottlenecks. In contrast, Trump has been slashing foreign assistance to the region while rewarding countries lined up behind his crackdown on immigration — a policy widely unpopular across the hemisphere.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted the leaders for a working lunch after Trump left for the event in Delaware. The lunch gave Kristi Noem, whom Trump fired as Homeland Security secretary on Thursday, the chance to make her debut in her new role as a special envoy for the newly formed Shield of the Americas.

“We want our hemisphere to be safer, to be more sovereign, and to be more prosperous,” Noem told the leaders.

Madhani, Goodman and Richer write for the Associated Press. Madhani and Goodman reported from Doral and Durkin Richer from Washington. AP writer Gabriela Molina in Quito, Ecuador, contributed to this report.

In the build-up to the match, Borthwick had urged his side to chance their arm and throw one more pass. But Italy looked quicker witted and more ambitious throughout.

A pair of clever kicks from fly-half Paolo Garbisi – the second, a well-weighted sideways nudge to release Ioane – set up the field position from which the fly-half kicked the first points of the match on 21 minutes.

An accurate long line-out throw and an Earl rumble gave England the momentum to put Tommy Freeman in for his ninth Test try, although Smith pushed the kickable conversion wide and Italy lurked dangerously as England continued to splutter.

Five minutes before the break, Menoncello – Italy’s leading metre-maker, clean-breaker and defender-beater so far in the championship – made good on the threat.

The 23-year-old carved past a startled Heyes on the fringe of a breakdown and galloped over to put Italy 10-5 in front.

England recovered. Albeit briefly.

A smart kick from Smith switched play to Tom Roebuck, and the Sale wing showed deft footwork to scamper in on the stroke of half-time.

A pair of Smith penalties after the break stretched England’s lead out to 18-10 and England seemed to be turning the tide of the contest, with Underhill and Itoje both burrowing deep for turnovers.

However, with 25 minutes to go and the match seemingly there for the taking, England’s contrived to hand the initiative back to Italy.

Underhill and Itoje watched on grimly from the sidelines as first Garbisi’s boot and then their backline’s all-court brilliance – Ioane stepping Roebuck in a sliver of space, Menoncello bullocking on and Marin gleefully scampering in – wrenched the contest out of their grasp.

England found some late urgency as they vainly chased the game. Ollie Chessum bust a hole to spin the Italian defence, but the scramble snuffed out the danger.

England looked dazed and at the end of days, as the clock went red, the ball went dead and the Stadio Olimpico lit up and leapt to its feet around them.

Defeat by France in Paris next weekend would mark only the third time in the 115-year history of the Five and Six Nations that England have lost four games in a single campaign.

Israeli forces dug up graves during an airborne operation in eastern Lebanon, in search of the remains of a pilot who went missing nearly 40 years ago.

At the inaugural “Shield of the Americas” summit in South Florida, United States President Donald Trump announced the creation of what he calls the Americas Counter-Cartel Coalition: a group of a dozen politically aligned countries committed to fighting drug trafficking.

But as he signed a declaration to cement that commitment, Trump signalled that it came with the expectation that cartels would not be confronted with law enforcement action, but instead military might.

“ The only way to defeat these enemies is by unleashing the power of our military. So we have to use our military. You have to use your military,” Trump told the audience of Latin American leaders.

“You have some great police, but they threaten your police. They scare your police. You’re going to use your military.”

Saturday’s summit was the latest step in a larger foreign policy pivot under Trump.

Since taking office for a second term, Trump has distanced himself from some of the US’s traditional allies in Europe, instead forging tighter partnerships with right-wing governments around the world.

The attendance at the Shield of the Americas summit reflected that shift. Right-wing leaders, including Argentina’s Javier Milei, El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele and Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa, were among the guest list.

But notably absent was top-level leadership from Mexico, the US’s biggest trading partner, and Brazil, the largest country in the region by economy and population.

Both Mexico and Brazil are led by left-wing presidents who have resisted some of Trump’s more hardline policies.

The growing rift between the US and some of its longtime partners was a feature in the brief remarks delivered by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who praised attendees for their cooperation.

“They’re more than allies. They’re friends,” Rubio said of the leaders present.

“At a time when we have learned that oftentimes an ally, when you need them, maybe may not be there for you, these are countries that have been there for us.”

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, meanwhile, reiterated his view that criminal networks and cartels pose an existential crisis for the entire Western Hemisphere, which he described as sharing the same cultural and religious roots.

“ We share a hemisphere and geography. We share cultures, Western Christian civilisation. We share these things together. We have to have the courage to defend it,” Hegseth said.

A military-first approach

Latin America is one of several areas where Trump has launched military operations since returning to office in January 2025.

His rationale for authorising deadly operations in the region has centred primarily on the illicit drug trade.

Trump has repeatedly argued that Latin American criminal networks pose an imminent threat to national security, through the trafficking of people and drugs across US borders.

Experts in international law have pointed out that drug trafficking is considered a criminal offence — and it is not accepted as justification for acts of military aggression.

But the Trump administration has nevertheless launched lethal military strikes against alleged drug traffickers in Latin America.

Since September, for instance, the Trump administration has conducted at least 44 aerial strikes on maritime vessels in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing nearly 150 people.

The victims’ identities have never been publicly confirmed, nor has evidence been publicly released to justify the deadly strikes.

Some families in Colombia and Trinidad and Tobago have stepped forward to claim the dead as their loved ones, out on a fishing expedition or travelling between islands for informal work.

In Saturday’s remarks, Trump justified the attacks by arguing that cartels and other criminal networks had grown more powerful than local militaries — and therefore necessitated a lethal response.

“Many of the cartels have developed sophisticated military operations. Highly sophisticated, in some cases. They say they’re more powerful than the military in the country,” Trump said.

“Can’t have that. These brutal criminal organisations pose an unacceptable threat to national security. And they provide a dangerous gateway for foreign adversaries in our region.”

He then compared cartels to a disease: “They’re cancer, and we don’t want it spreading.”

A ‘nasty’ operation in Venezuela

In late December and early January, Trump also initiated attacks on Venezuelan soil, again defending his actions as necessary to stop drug traffickers.

The first attack targeted a port Trump linked to the gang Tren de Aragua. The second, on January 3, was a broader offensive that culminated in the abduction and imprisonment of Venezuela’s then-leader, President Nicolas Maduro.

On Saturday, Trump reflected on that military operation, which he characterised as an unmitigated success.

Maduro is currently awaiting trial on drug-trafficking charges in New York, though a declassified intelligence report last May cast doubt on Trump’s allegations that the Venezuelan leader directed drug-trafficking operations through groups like Tren de Aragua.

“America’s armed forces also ended the reign of one of the biggest cartel kingpins of all, with Operation Absolute Resolve to bring outlaw dictator Nicolas Maduro to justice in a precision raid,” Trump told Saturday’s summit.

He then described the military operation as “nasty”, though he underscored that no US lives were lost.

The early-morning raid, however, killed at least 80 people in Venezuela, including 32 Cuban military officers, dozens of Venezuelan security forces, and several civilians.

“We went right into the heart. We took them out, and it was nasty. It was about 18 minutes of pure violence, and we took them out,” Trump said of the operation.

Trump has since held up Venezuela as a model for regime change around the world, particularly as it leads a war with Israel against Iran.

Maduro’s successor, interim President Delcy Rodriguez, has so far complied with many of Trump’s demands, including for reforms to the country’s nationalised oil and mining sectors.

Just this week, the two countries re-established diplomatic relations for the first time since 2019, under Trump’s first term as president.

In Saturday’s remarks, however, Trump reiterated that his positive relationship with Rodriguez hinged on her cooperation with his priorities.

“She’s doing a great job because she’s working with us. If she wasn’t working with us, I would not say she’s doing a great job,” he said.

“In fact, if she wasn’t working with us, I’d say she’s doing a very poor job. Unacceptable.”

‘We’ll use missiles’

Trump did, however, express consternation with other presidents in the Latin American region, accusing them of allowing cartels to run amok.

“Leaders in this region have allowed large swaths of territory, the Western Hemisphere, to come under the direct control” of the cartels, Trump said.

“Transnational gangs have taken over, and they’ve run areas of your country. We’re not going to let that happen.”

He even delivered an ominous warning to the summit’s attendees: “Some of you are in danger. I mean, you’re actually in danger. It’s hard to believe.”

Many of the leaders in attendance, including El Salvador’s Bukele, have launched their own harsh crackdowns on gangs in their countries, employing “mano dura” or “iron fist” tactics.

Those campaigns, however, have elicited concerns from human rights groups, who have noted that presidents like Bukele used emergency declarations to suspend civil liberties and imprison hundreds of people, often without a fair trial.

Still, Trump dismissed alternative approaches in Saturday’s speech. Though he did not mention Colombia by name, he was critical of efforts to negotiate for the disarmament of cartels and rebel groups, as Colombian President Gustavo Petro has sought to do.

Instead, he offered to deploy military might throughout the region.

“We’ll use missiles. If you want us to use a missile, they’re extremely accurate — pew! — right into the living room, and that’s the end of that cartel person,” Trump said.

“A lot of countries don’t want to do that. They say, ‘Oh, sure. I’d rather not have that. I’d rather not have it. I believe they could be spoken to.’ I don’t think so.”

A call to ‘eradicate’ Mexico’s cartels

One country he did single out, though, was Mexico. Trump suggested that it had fallen behind other countries in the region in its efforts to combat crime.

“We must recognise the epicentre of cartel violence is Mexico,” he said.

“The Mexican cartels are fueling and orchestrating much of the bloodshed and chaos in this hemisphere, and the United States government will do whatever’s necessary to defend our national security.”

Since the start of his second term, Trump has pressured Mexico to step up its security efforts, threatening tariffs and even the possibility of military action if it does not comply.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has responded by increasing military deployments throughout the country.

In February 2025, for instance, she announced 10,000 soldiers would be sent to the US-Mexico border. For the upcoming FIFA World Cup, her officials have said nearly 100,000 security personnel will be patrolling the streets.

Just last month, her government also launched a military operation in Jalisco to capture and kill the cartel leader Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, nicknamed “El Mencho”. She has also facilitated the transfer of cartel suspects to the US for trial.

But Trump reemphasised on Saturday his belief that Sheinbaum had not gone far enough, though he called her a “very good person” and a “beautiful woman” with a “beautiful voice”.

“I said, ‘Let me eradicate the cartels,’” Trump said, relaying one of his conversations with Sheinbaum.

“We have to eradicate them. We have to knock the hell out of them because they’re getting worse. They’re taking over their country. The cartels are running Mexico. We can’t have that. Too close to us, too close to you.”

‘Last moments of life’ in Cuba

Trump also used his podium to continue his threats against Cuba’s communist government.

Since the January 3 attack on Venezuela, Trump has increased his “maximum pressure” campaign against the Caribbean island, which has been under a full US trade embargo since the 1960s.

His administration severed the flow of oil and funds from Venezuela to Cuba, and in late January, Trump announced he would impose steep economic penalties on any country that provides the island with oil, a critical resource for the country’s electrical grid.

Already, the country has been struck with widespread blackouts, and the United Nations has warned Cuba is inching closer to humanitarian “collapse”.

But Trump framed the circumstances as progress towards the ultimate goal of regime change in Cuba.

“As we achieve a historic transformation in Venezuela, we’re also looking forward to the great change that will soon be coming to Cuba,” he told Saturday’s summit.

“Cuba’s at the end of the line. They’re very much at the end of the line. They have no money, they have no oil. They have a bad philosophy. They have a bad regime that’s been bad for a long time.”

He added that he thinks changing Cuba’s government will be “easy” and that a deal could be struck for the transition of power.

“Cuba’s in its last moments of life as it was. It’ll have a great new life, but it’s in its last moments of life the way it is,” Trump said.

But while Trump’s remarks largely focused on governments not represented at the summit, he warned that there could be consequences even for the right-wing leaders in attendance.

Trump’s “Shield of the Americas” coalition comes as he seeks to bring the whole of Latin America in line with US priorities. It’s a policy he has dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine”, a riff on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which claimed the Western Hemisphere as the US’s sphere of influence.

To Trump, that means ousting rival powers like China as they seek to forge relationships and economic ties with Latin America. Trump has even mused about retaking the Panama Canal, based on his allegation that the Chinese have too much control in the area.

“As these situations in Venezuela and Cuba should make clear, under our new doctrine — and this is a doctrine — we will not allow hostile foreign influence to gain a foothold in this hemisphere,” Trump said.

He then made a pointed remark to Panama’s president, Jose Raul Mulino, who was in the audience.

“That includes the Panama Canal, which we talked about. We’re not going to allow it.”

It’s a mystery that has transfixed Hollywood:

How did Jeff Shell, who is seven months into his tenure as president of Paramount Skydance, get entangled with a professional gambler with a penchant for controversy?

Shell looked to be on his way to a high-profile comeback after losing his job as NBCUniversal chief executive three years ago over an inappropriate relationship with an underling.

Now he’s facing new scrutiny after his Paramount bosses hired a law firm to investigate his surreptitious dealings with a Las Vegas high-roller and self-styled “fixer.” Investigators are reviewing whether Shell leaked sensitive corporate secrets, according to two people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment.

The real-life drama features accusations of betrayal, vengeance and an alleged promise of a TV show deal.

Paramount declined to comment. An attorney for Shell also declined to comment, citing the ongoing review.

How this plays out for Shell remains to be seen, but the ongoing tempest has created a headache for Paramount’s leaders, coming just as David Ellison’s company was clinching its nearly six-month pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery.

Last week, Paramount toppled Netflix with its $110-billion deal to claim HBO, CNN, Food Network and the storied Warner Bros. movie and TV studios, a key piece of Ellison’s ambitions to create a Hollywood behemoth by combining two century-old firms.

“The timing is terrible,” said Stephen Galloway, dean of Chapman University’s Dodge College of Film and Media Arts. “The last thing Paramount wants when closing this deal is for one of its [corporate] officers to be faced with allegations, true or false, from a professional gambler who calls himself Robin Hood.”

An unusual meeting in 2024

This account is based on interviews with nearly a dozen industry insiders who are familiar with the players and details of the increasingly ugly dispute. The Times granted anonymity to the sources, most of whom were not authorized to speak publicly.

According to these people, Shell’s dealings with the blackjack player began with an odd meeting in August 2024.

At the time, Shell was just joining Ellison’s team as the technology scion was preparing to build a new Hollywood empire.

But Shell was facing a serious problem. Someone was trying to plant unfavorable stories about him from his NBC days just as he was poised to stage his second act, two of the sources said.

Enter Patty Glaser, the high-powered entertainment litigator who represents Shell, and, as it happens, the person they suspected was behind the whisper campaign: Robert James “R.J.” Cipriani.

Patty Glaser wanted to defuse the tensions between R.J. Cipriani and Jeff Shell.

To defuse the tensions, Glaser convened a meeting at her Century City offices between Shell and her other client, Cipriani, who is a self-professed whistleblower and high-stakes gambler who goes by the handle RobinHood702 (the Las Vegas area code). Shell attended the meeting at Glaser’s recommendation.

Cipriani wanted to meet the executive. He had been angry ever since Shell sacked his friend Ron Meyer, former vice chairman of NBCUniversal, in 2020.

One of the founders of talent giant CAA, Meyer filled a unique role at NBCUniversal as the self-deprecating and beloved sage in a wool vest who was often called on to finesse frayed relationships with producers, agents and talent.

But Meyer was bounced by NBCUniversal, then led by Shell, after he made a secret settlement to keep a lid on a nearly decade-old tryst with British actor Charlotte Kirk.

Ron Meyer, former vice chairman of NBCUniversal, remains beloved in Hollywood.

(Kevin Winter / Getty Images for AFI)

Kirk had an affair with another studio boss, Kevin Tsujihara, who resigned as Warner Bros. chairman in 2019 after it was revealed that he tried to help her get parts in movies and TV shows.

Meyer had said that after the payment was made, associates of Kirk allegedly demanded more money to keep the affair quiet.

Kirk’s associates denied any wrongdoing, but those dealings ended Meyer’s 25-year tenure at Universal.

Cipriani, according to a source familiar with the situation, was galled that Meyer had been unceremoniously dumped, particularly after it was revealed that Shell also had been engaged in an improper relationship — with a CNBC anchor.

Other Hollywood friends shared the sentiment — a form of schadenfreude — after Shell got his comeuppance nearly three years later.

Jeff Shell in 2015.

(Rick Loomis / Los Angeles Times)

During the meeting at Glaser’s office, the two men discussed their families. Cipriani appeared to have a change of heart.

He told Shell that he would be his friend and personal “crisis PR” agent helping him with damage control, one of the sources said.

It was an unlikely pairing; the two men came from entirely different worlds.

Shell, 60, is a Los Angeles native — a relentlessly driven son of a Cedars-Sinai cardiologist and a teacher turned stay-at-home mom. Although only about 5-foot-9, Shell secured a spot on the University High varsity basketball team after spending long hours perfecting his jump shot.

He earned a degree in economics and applied mathematics from UC Berkeley, then an MBA from Harvard University.

“He’s often the smartest guy in the room,” a former high-level NBCUniversal executive said.

Jeff Shell previously ran NBCUniversal.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Shell has worked in the entertainment business more than 30 years, first at Walt Disney Co., then Rupert Murdoch’s Fox, where he briefly ran its cable networks. The TV executive moved to Philadelphia in 2004 to join Comcast, when its business was selling cable channels to subscribers.

When Comcast bought NBCUniversal in 2011, Shell’s stock was on the rise. He ran NBC’s international operations in London, then moved his family back home to Los Angeles when he became chairman of Universal’s prestigious film unit.

Meyer, who previously ran the studio, was tasked with showing Shell the movie business ropes.

Cipriani, 64, knew Meyer from gambling circles. The two men are friends, the sources said, although Meyer was not involved in the current dust-up, according to several of the people.

Cipriani grew up in Philadelphia, where his dad had worked for the Uniroyal tire company, according to an obituary.

It’s unclear when Cipriani came to L.A., but eventually he became a whistleblower who frequently made contact with journalists. He’s married to a former Brazilian model and actor/musical artist, Greice Santo, who had a small role in the CW’s “Jane the Virgin.”

Cipriani’s name went from the Vegas casinos to the headlines in 2017 when he was a key player in the arrest and conviction of a USC quarterback-turned global drug kingpin, Owen Hanson, who was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison.

Robert James “R.J.” Cipriani in Amazon Prime Video’s 2025 series, “Cocaine Quarterback.”

(Courtesy of Prime Video)

Cipriani tipped off the FBI in the case. Hanson allegedly gave Cipriani $2.5 million to launder but instead Cipriani lost the money in a blackjack game. In a YouTube interview, Cipriani claimed Hanson threatened him.

Cipriani has publicly taken issue with his portrayal as a money launderer in the popular Amazon Prime Video series “Cocaine Quarterback,” which brought the scandal to the screen. It’s a production of Mark Wahlberg and others.

Although Cipriani is often referred to as an “FBI informant,” the moniker rankles him. He prefers being called a “confidential human source for the feds,” who “goes after the bad guys,” according to those familiar with his thinking.

And Cipriani is not afraid to tangle with powerful people.

“Jeff Shell may have [gone to] Harvard Business School but R.J. Cipriani comes from the hardscrabble streets of Philly,” Cipriani’s attorney Steven Aaronoff told The Times. “Who’s going to win that war?”

Cipriani was arrested in 2021 on the casino floor of Resorts World Las Vegas, allegedly for snatching the cellphone of another gambler who Cipriani said was recording his movements.

The charge was dropped, but Cipriani has since brought a RICO lawsuit against Resorts World that alleges the firm allowed “known criminals involved in illegal gambling” and “money laundering” while also spearheading his ban from Vegas casinos.

Cipriani alleged his arrest and subsequent treatment was in retaliation for raising his concerns with casino management and law enforcement. A former president of the casino called the claims “ridiculous,” according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Cipriani and Shell texted on-and-off for about 18 months, according to the knowledgeable people.

In the first half of last year, as Ellison and his team were waiting for the blessing of President Trump and the Federal Communications Commission to finalize the Paramount takeover, the group was bedeviled by press leaks.

Some were reported by Hollywood newsletters, including a scoop that Matt and Ross Duffer, who created the blockbuster horror series “Stranger Things” for Netflix, were decamping to Ellison’s Paramount. Shell was not aware of the Duffers’ deal before it was announced, said a person close to the executive.

Fallout over a TV show

But Shell and Cipriani had a major falling out when Cipriani began angling for a television show.

According to people familiar with the dispute, Cipriani worked for months without compensation but, at one point, Shell had thanked him for his efforts and offered to help him out. That’s when Cipriani asked Shell to greenlight an English version of a Spanish-language music show that streams on Roku TV, “Serenata De Las Estrellas.”

The TV project, like the Spanish-language version, would be co-executive produced by Cipriani and his wife, Santo.

But Shell failed to deliver, and Cipriani became furious.

“Mr. Shell promised to give my client, to produce the English language version of the show that was already a Spanish language hit,” Aaronoff said. “It was not something that was risky … It was not some crazy idea,” adding that Shell “did not keep his word to my client.”

Cipriani — who also has producer credits on the 2020 documentary about Vegas, “Money Machine: Behind the Lies,” and the 2015 movie, “Wild Card” — had intended to make “Serenata” as a homage to his late mother, Regina.

It was inspired by a song that Cipriani used to sing to her when he was growing up.

Jeff Shell became president of Paramount Skydance last summer.

(Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times)

Cipriani has threatened to file a lawsuit that makes a range of allegations, including that Shell had been slipping Cipriani sensitive corporate information, according to sources who have seen a copy of Cipriani’s draft complaint.

Shell, who officially joined Paramount in August with the Ellison takeover, immediately disclosed Cipriani’s legal threat to Paramount’s top lawyer and his previous employer RedBird Capital Partners, a Paramount investor partner.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, Cipriani also filed a whistleblower complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission, alleging Shell alerted him to a then-pending $7.7-billion deal for the rights to UFC fights. But deal details did not leak in advance of Paramount’s announcement.

“We were presented with a draft complaint riddled with clear errors of fact and law,” attorney Glaser said in a statement last week. “We will strongly respond.”

The lawsuit hasn’t been filed, but Paramount hired Gibson Dunn lawyers to investigate Shell’s conduct and allegations contained in the draft, which was sent to Paramount.

On Friday, Cipriani wrote on X that he’d had “a great chat” the previous day with Gibson Dunn lawyers.

WASHINGTON — Visitors to the Capitol will now have a visible reminder of the violent attack against the building on Jan. 6, 2021, and the officers who fought and were injured defending it that day.

Steps from the Capitol’s West Front, where the worst of the violence occurred, workers quietly have installed a plaque honoring the officers, three years after it was required by law to be erected. The plaque was placed on the Senate side of the hallway because the Senate voted unanimously in January to install it after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had delayed putting it up. Many Republicans had balked at installing the plaque.

“On behalf of a grateful Congress, this plaque honors the extraordinary individuals who bravely protected and defended this symbol of democracy on January 6, 2021,” the plaque says. “Their heroism will never be forgotten.”

The Washington Post first reported the installation of the plaque, which was witnessed by a reporter about 4 a.m. Saturday.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) led the effort to install it as he commemorated the fifth anniversary of the attack and insurrection and described his memories of hearing people break into the building. “We owe them eternal gratitude, and this nation is stronger because of them,” he said of the officers who were overwhelmed by thousands of President Trump’s supporters before eventually pushing them out of the building.

The mob of rioters who violently pushed past police and broke in were echoing Trump’s false claims of a stolen election after the Republican was defeated by Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election. The crowd stopped the congressional certification of Biden’s victory for several hours, sent lawmakers running for safety and vandalized the building before police regained control.

Five police officers and four protesters died as a consequence of the violence. More than 140 officers from the U.S. Capitol Police, the Metropolitan Police Department and other agencies were injured.

The fight to have the plaque installed came as Trump returned to office last year and the Republican Congress has remained loyal to him. The president, who has called Jan. 6 a “day of love,” on his first day of his new term granted pardons or commutations to nearly 1,600 people convicted or charged in the rioting.

Trump was impeached and criminally indicted for his role in the insurrection. The Senate did not convict him, and the felony charges were dropped after he was reelected in November 2024.

Congress passed a law in 2022 that set out instructions for the honorific plaque listing the names of officers “who responded to the violence that occurred.” It gave a one-year deadline for installation, but the plaque never went up.

After more than a year of silence — and a lawsuit by two of the officers who fought at the Capitol that day — Johnson said at the beginning of the year that there were technical problems with the statute and the plaque could not be erected.

Tillis went to the Senate floor shortly afterward and passed a resolution, with no objections, to place the plaque on the Senate side.

One of the officers who sued, Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, said the lawsuit would continue. Hodges, who was crushed by the rioters in the heavy doors steps away from where the plaque is now displayed, said Saturday that the overnight installation was a “fine stopgap” but that it was not in full compliance of the law. The original statute said that all of the officers’ names should be listed, among other technical specifications.

“The weight of a judicial ruling would help secure the memorial against future tampering,” Hodges said. “Our lawsuit persists.”

Jalonick and Mascaro write for the Associated Press. AP writer Allison Robbert contributed to this report.

March 7 (UPI) — President Donald Trump announced at Saturday’s “Shield of the Americas” summit in Florida that a new military coalition will focus on drug trafficking and cartels.

Trump said at the Doral meeting with 12 Latin American leaders that “America’s Counter Cartel Coalition” will conduct operations against cartels across the region.

At least 17 nations have already signed on to the agreement.

“The heart of our agreement is a commitment to using lethal military force to destroy the sinister cartels and terrorist networks once and for all,” Trump said. “We’ll get rid of them. We need your help. You have to just tell us where they are.”

Trump had pledged earlier this year to hunt down drug cartels. His pledge was followed by a series of attacks on on alleged narco-terrorist vessels in the Caribbean Sea.

The president’s Saturday remarks also touched on the January capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, an operation he described as “18 minutes of pure violence.”

Trump praised Venezuela’s interim leader, Delcy Rodriguez, whose country re-established diplomatic relations with the United States earlier in the week.

“I mean, she’s doing a great job because she’s working with us,” he said. “If she wasn’t working with us, I would not say she’s doing a great job. In fact, if she wasn’t working with us, I’d say she’s doing a very poor job. Unacceptable.”

The summit was attended by Argentine President Javier Milei, Bolivian leader Rodrigo Paz, Chilean President José Antonio Kast, Costa Rican President Rodrigo Chaves, Dominican Republic President Luis Abinader, Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa, Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, Honduran President Tito Asfura, Guyanese President Mohamed Irfaan Ali, Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino, Paraguayan President Santiago Peña and Trinidad and Tobago President Christine Kangaloo.

TIKTOK may be a breeding ground for influencers, Love Island stars and budding celebs, but it’s not just glitz and glamour that can bring in the cash on the streaming app.

In fact, some of the top-earning creators have very unlikely niches.

Creators are known for bagging big money brand deals – from the likes of Superdrug beauty collabs to M&S food promotions.

Here, we take a look at some of the biggest money-makers making bank from seemingly mundane activities.

Chip Shop Diva

Destiny Harold has turned working in a fish and chip shop into a lucrative social media career.

The star, better known online as Chip Chop Diva, catapulted to fame for filming videos in at work in Merchants fish and chip shop in Bewdley, Worcestershire.

Read more influencer news

baby steps

Influencer and Tala and Shreddy founder Grace Beverley reveals she’s pregnant

‘CASH COW’

Fears for child influencer Lacey M, 12, after Tiktok ban & £54k P.Louise bash

Destiny works two days per week at the fish and chip shop while studying, and unexpectedly blew up online for posting videos from behind the counter.

And now, she has worked with numerous brands on high-profile collaborations.

Last summer, she partnered with car brand Dacia to serve chips on the beach in Deal.

While she was also named one of the “icons of the year” by confectionary brand Quality Street in December.

Destiny now has over 20,000 followers on Instagram and almost 2 million likes on TikTok.

Bus Aunty Bemi

Bemi Orojuogun is known to her over 400,000 TikTok followers as “Bus Aunty”.

She became famous for filming selfie videos in front of London’s red buses.

Bemi simply goes around the capital and films herself in front of different buses, with her videos racking up millions of views.

Working as a mental health nurse by day, Bemi’s catapult to fame was completely unexpected – with the online sensation shocked by her own prominence.

The videos have even led to political impact, with Bemi meeting Prime Minister Keir Starmer in December.

Meeting the Prime Minister on a bus in Norfolk, Bemi urged him to look at making public transport across the UK more accessible as she pointed out that not everywhere has such constant travel options like London’s TFL.

After he laid out the government’s plan to improve transport nationwide, Bemi was lauded as a “real role model” by fans.

Weeks later, she was invited to 10 Downing Street for the Pride in Place reception, an event which celebrated millions of pounds of investment into our local communities.

Samuel Wolfenden

Samuel Wolfenden is a Farrier & Equestrian Influencer, becoming famous in 2023 for filming content at work.

The hunky star shares content from his workdays with horses and tips for fans.

He boasts a whopping 1.3M followers on Instagram.

Since rising to fame, Sam has appeared on This Morning – with Josie Gibson often commenting on his social snaps now – and taken part in fashion shows.

Amongst his famous list of followers are Maura Higgins and Katie Price.

Charzreviews

An account named Charzreviews, run by Charlotte Blockley, is one of the UK’s most prominent ‘review and restock’ creators.

While you may think testing household products such as pillows and storage bins is mundane, this creator has built up quite the career from it.

Charlotte known in the creator community for being a “TikTok Shop millionaire”.

The title comes as she has generated over £1,000,000 in sales (total revenue) by simply showing how she uses everyday gadgets in her UK home.

She boasts over 200,000 followers.

Jane Hastings

Liverpool hailing Jane has highlighted the power of TikTok shop by using it to boost orders for her small toy shop.

The creator live streams on the app daily to demo toys the shop sells and pack customer’s orders.

While it may not seem like much, Jane is thought to have sold over hundreds of thousands of items through the platform.

Jane describes herself as a “nan of 10” and posts under her toy shop’s page, @toystoystoys.uk.

She told Liverpool Echo of her success: “Within the the first 12 months I’d sold 100,000 items.”

Her page has almost 50K followers.

TOKYO — Defending champion Japan hit four home runs — two by Chicago Cubs slugger Seiya Suzuki — to beat South Korea 8-6 on Saturday and stay undefeated in Pool C of the World Baseball Classic.

Dodgers star Shohei Ohtani and Masataka Yoshida also homered for Japan. Ohtani’s homer followed his grand slam Friday in a 13-0 win over Chinese Taipei.

Both teams showed more power than pitching, particularly in the first four innings in a slugfest as the two combined for five home runs topped by Suzuki’s pair at the Tokyo Dome.

Japan and Australia are 2-0 in Pool C play and meet Sunday as the two favorites to advance to the quarterfinals. In Sunday’s other game, South Korea (1-1) faces Chinese Taipei (1-2).

South Korea took a 3-0 lead in the top of the first inning off starter Yusei Kikuchi with consecutive singles by Do Yeong Kim, Jahmai Jones and Jung Hoo Lee and a two-run double by Bo Gyeong Moon.

Suzuki hit a two-run homer in the bottom of the inning to pull Japan back to 3-2.

Japan surged ahead 5-3 in the third on solo home runs by Ohtani, Suzuki and Yoshida.

South Korea played its own home-run derby in the top of the fourth, drawing even 5-5 on Hyeseong Kim’s two-run homer off Japan’s second pitcher, Hiromi Itoh. It was the fifth home run between the two teams through four innings.

Japan broke through in the seventh to lead 8-5. Young Kyu Kim, who entered in relief earlier in the inning, walked Suzuki with the bases loaded to force in a run, and Yoshida followed with a single to score two more.

The Koreans scored one in the eighth to make it 8-6 but left the bases loaded when Yuki Matsumoto struck out Hyeseong Kim.

Atsuki Taneichi was the winning pitcher with a save for Taisei Ota. Yeong Hyun Park took the loss.

New England Patriots quarterback Drake Maye was at the game on Saturday. On Friday, actor Timothée Chalamet and pop singer Bad Bunny showed up.

Fairchild’s grand slam powers Chinese Taipei to 14-0 win

Stuart Fairchild’s second-inning grand slam powered Chinese Taipei to a 14-0 victory over the winless Czech Republic.

The victory was Chinese Taipei’s first in the tournament and came the day after it was pounded 13-0 by Japan.

The game was stopped by the mercy rule with Chinese Taipei leading by 10 or more after seven innings.

Chinese Taipei played small ball for a 2-0 lead in the first inning, capitalizing on two bunt singles, a double steal and a throwing error by Czech catcher Martin Cervenka. They were Chinese Taipei’s first two runs of the tournament.

It was big ball in the second inning.

With two out, Czech pitcher Jan Novak gave up a single and walked two, setting the stage for Fairchild’s blast.

Chen Zhong-Ao Zhuang got the victory and Novak was the losing pitcher.

Chinese Taipei added two more runs in the fourth, another in the fifth and five in the sixth. They also set a WBC tournament record with seven stolen bases.

Fairchild, who qualified for the team through his Taiwanese mother, plays in the Cleveland Guardians organization.

As Palestinians in Gaza try to return to some form of normality in their lives, they express how their families have been affected by the closure of the Rafah crossing, in addition to the Iran war.