SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
children
Israeli Drone Kills Man and 12-Year-Old Daughter in 'Barbaric' Double-Tap Strike
The pair were among the at least 24 people killed by Israeli strikes on Lebanon on Saturday despite a nominal ceasefire.
May 10, 2026
An Israeli drone killed a Syrian laborer and his 12-year-old daughter in a double-tap attack in southern Lebanon on Saturday, in what the Lebanon Health Ministry described as part of a continuing pattern “of grave violations of International Humanitarian Law.”
The man was riding with his daughter on a motorcycle in Nabatiyeh when the pair were targeted by three drone strikes, according to the ministry.
The Associated Press reported:
The ministry said that after the initial strike, the man and his daughter managed to move away from the site only to be attacked again by the drone instantly killing the man. The girl then moved about 100 meters (yards) away and was hit again by the drone after she had been already wounded.
The girl was taken to the hospital, but did not survive her injuries, according to Lebanon's National News Agency.
"What does terrorism mean to you? If it’s [not] double-tap killings of paramedics, journalists, and today a 12 year old girl, then what is it?"
“The Ministry of Public Health denounces this barbaric targeting and the deliberate violence against civilians and children in Lebanon,” the ministry said, as AP reported.
The father and daughter were among a total of at least 24 people in Lebanon who were killed by Israeli strikes on Saturday, according to Al Jazeera.
One strike on the town of al-Saksakieh killed seven, among them a child. The strike also wounded 15 people including three children.
The bombings continue despite a nominal ceasefire between Lebanon and Hezbollah that went into effect April 17. However, Israel has killed almost 500 people in Lebanon since April 16, raising the death toll since its March 2 invasion to over 2,750.
War correspondent Courtney Schellekens shared the story of the 12-year-old girl and her father in a video on social media on Saturday.
What does terrorism mean to you? If it’s no double-tap killings of paramedics, journalists, and today a 12 year old girl, then what is it?
Westerners, where is your humanity?
Cameraman: @aliezzedine7 pic.twitter.com/ntXIwz4s6H
— courtneybonneauimages (@cbonneauimages) May 9, 2026
"What does terrorism mean to you? If it’s [not] double-tap killings of paramedics, journalists, and today a 12 year old girl, then what is it?" she wrote above the video.
At the conclusion of the video itself, she continued the same line of questioning.
"To my Western followers, I really want you to think critically about the definition of terrorism, to whom it gets applied and who does it benefit," she said. "Because where I've been sitting for the last 18 months, this mass murder and mass, you know, look at this," she gestured to the ruble behind her, "this mass destruction, this ethnic cleansing of south Lebanon, this looks a lot like terrorism to me."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Want to Help Mothers This Mother's Day? Back a Guaranteed Income
If we are serious about supporting families, then we need to stop romanticizing hardship and start investing in mothers in real, tangible ways.
May 10, 2026
Happy Mother’s Day—because that’s what you’re supposed to say, right?
Motherhood is always dressed up in soft language like community, support, and…“it takes a village.” But I have learned in real time that not all of us actually have one.
I am raising my sons without consistent help, without a built-in break, without the kind of support people assume is just there. Everything falls on me emotionally, financially, and physically, and I still have to show up every single day like I am not carrying all of it alone. And when I do pull back, when I protect my energy or go quiet, it is not because I am distant. It is because I am overwhelmed.
There is this unspoken expectation that mothers, especially single mothers, are just supposed to figure it out, hold it together, and do it gracefully. But the truth is, a lot of us are doing the work of an entire village by ourselves, and nobody wants to say that part out loud.
In Baltimore's guaranteed income pilot, of which I was a part, data shows that I'm not alone: Young parents reported less stress and more stability, and those improvements lasted even after the payments stopped.
And this is where the conversation needs to shift, because how I feel about motherhood and how motherhood is structured in this country are two very different things.
I love being a mother. My children are everything to me. They are the reason I keep going when I am tired, when I am stretched thin, when I feel like there is nothing left to give. But love does not remove the weight. It does not pay bills. It does not create time, energy, or support where there is none. Loving my children deeply does not make the system around me any less difficult to navigate.
When people talk about motherhood like it is just a personal experience, like it begins and ends with love and sacrifice, they miss something critical.
Because motherhood is also structural. It is economic. It is shaped by whether or not you have resources, support, and stability. And when those things are missing, love alone is not enough to carry the load.
That is exactly why I stand behind guaranteed income strongly.
Because when there is no village, money becomes the closest thing to stability, something that's within our control.
It is about investing in the people who hold families together.
It is about acknowledging reality.
Caregiving is labor. Raising children is labor. Holding a household together on your own is labor.
Guaranteed income gives mothers breathing room. It gives us the ability to make decisions from a place of stability instead of survival.
It means not having to choose between rest and responsibility, between being present with our children or being consumed by stress.
In Baltimore's guaranteed income pilot, of which I was a part, data shows that I'm not alone: Young parents reported less stress and more stability, and those improvements lasted even after the payments stopped.
Right now, too many mothers are forced into impossible trade-offs. Work more and lose time with your kids. Stay present and fall behind financially. Ask for help and risk being judged. Stay silent and carry it alone. These are not personal failures. These are policy failures.
People love to celebrate strong mothers, but strength should not have to come from constant struggle. Strength should not be built on exhaustion. And survival should not be the standard we measure good parenting by.
If we are serious about supporting families, then we need to stop romanticizing hardship and start investing in mothers in real, tangible ways. Guaranteed income is one of those ways. It is not a cure-all, but it is a foundation. It is a recognition that mothers should not have to break themselves just to keep their households afloat.
Because the truth is, many of us are not asking for a village anymore…
We are building without one.
We are showing up every day, making a way out of no way, holding everything together with very little support and even less margin for error.
And still, we keep going.
So yes—Happy Mother’s Day.
Not the polished version. Not the performative one. But the real one.
Happy Mother’s Day to the mothers who carry what no one sees, who love without limit, who build without a village, and who keep showing up anyway. You are not invisible. You are powerful. And you are worthy of more than survival.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Embrace of Anti-Intellectualism': Public School Bans on Nonfiction Books Doubled as Trump Returned to Power
One expert warned that removing works on activism and social movements erodes the ability of marginalized communities "to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech."
May 07, 2026
As President Donald Trump returned to the White House in the middle of the 2024-25 academic year and swiftly pursued increasingly authoritarian policies, there was "an embrace of anti-intellectualism" within the book-banning movement targeting US public schools and classrooms.
That embrace is detailed in "Facts & Fiction: Stories Stripped Away By Book Bans," an annual report released Thursday by PEN America, a nonprofit that promotes the protection of free expression through the advancement of human rights and literature.
The group found that from July 2024 to last June, 3,743 unique titles were removed from school libraries and classrooms nationwide—and 1,102 of them were "educational or informational books for young people—textbooks or reference texts on a wide range of subjects, history books, biographies, and autobiographies."
Although the majority of banned titles were still fiction, such as Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury and The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, the share of "fiction titles dropped from 85% to 69% of all banned titles, while nonfiction rose from 14% to a startling 29% of all banned titles," according to the analysis.
"This marked impact on books anchored in scientific and historic facts, real events, and real people represents something new and distinctive about the trajectory of book bans in public schools," the report states. "As nonfiction titles are not always the targets of efforts to remove books, that books on ancient Egypt, the digestive system, and self-help for teens, to name a few examples, are impacted by censorship signals an alarming spread of book bans that ignore the educational value of texts and books."
Targeted "nonfiction titles are wide-ranging," the report notes, "from memoirs such as Night by Elie Wiesel to biographies such as RuPaul by Maria Isabel Sánchez Vegara, alongside historical and educational or informational books such as Aztec, Inca & Maya by Elizabeth Baquedano and Challenges for LGBTQ Teens by Martha Lundin."
Flagging this "embrace of anti-intellectualism" in a statement about the new report, Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America's Freedom to Read program, said that "it is another example of how censorship sweeps broadly, leading to removals of all kinds of books, in its efforts to sow fear and distrust in our public education system."
Like the previous academic year, "realistic/contemporary and dystopia/sci-fi/fantasy remain the dominant genres banned," the publication highlights. "But of note, educational/informational titles grew from 5% of all titles in 2023-24 to 13% of total titles banned in 2024-25, or nearly 500 unique titles."
Among the nonfiction titles banned, "52% contained themes of activism and social movements, the most commonly banned topic within nonfiction titles," the report says. "Whether #WomensMarch: Insisting on Equality by Rebecca Felix or IntersectionAllies: We Make Room for All by Chelsea Johnson, LaToya Council, and Carolyn Choi, and illustrated by Ashley Seil Smith, this literature is crucial in the education of young people. These books can encourage readers to challenge the status quo and resist injustice."
Freedom to Read program assistant and report co-author Yuliana Tamayo Latorre said that removing books on these topics "silences the voices of marginalized communities and erode[s] their ability to take action amid rising authoritarian tactics by our government and attacks on free speech."
The most common theme across all banned books was nonsexual violence. This was a theme in 57% of the targeted titles, and they addressed topics including "war, gun violence, natural disasters, domestic violence, human trafficking, slavery and genocide, physical fighting, and more."
Other key themes included death and grief (48%), empowerment and self-esteem (39%), LGBTQ+ topics and metaphors (36%), consensual sexual experiences (34%), mental health disorders (29%), verbal or emotional abuse (28%), and substance use and/or abuse (27%).
There was an increase in banned titles with themes of empowerment and self-esteem, up from 31% in 2023-24.
"Fictional titles with themes of empowerment include Flor Fights Back: A Stonewall Riots Survival Story by Joy Michael Ellison and illustrated by Francesca Ficorilli, and The Moon Within by Aida Salazar," the report says. "To remove these books from classroom and library shelves means revoking access to books that students may rely on for personal and emotional development."
There is an entire section of the report about "erasing people" that examines trends in the identities of characters in banned books. Of all the targeted titles, 44% featured people of color, 39% had LGBTQ+ characters, 19% included transgender or genderqueer individuals, and 10% involved those who are neurodivergent or disabled.
Trump and other leading Republicans have embraced and advanced campaigns against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). PEN America acknowledged that such efforts "have contributed to restrictions and removals on books with people of color and mirror efforts to suppress curriculum on Indigenous history, Black history, Asian American and Pacific Islander stories, and Latine and Hispanic contributions."
Another section of the report addresses a major "discrepancy between the titles impacted by book bans and the justifications made to ban books. Book banners have long cited 'pornography' and 'sexually explicit' material in literature to justify book challenges. Claims that these books contain 'explicit' or 'obscene' content grossly misrepresent the materials."
That section points out that 19% of last year's banned titles contained sexual violence—and "according to RAINN, 1 in 9 girls and 1 in 20 boys under 18 experience sexual abuse or assault. With so many of these titles banned since 2021, it is possible that some young people who have experienced sexual violence no longer have access to books that could help them."
"Books containing experiences of sexual violence include The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead, winner of the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, set in a 1960s Southern juvenile reform school, and Laurie Halse Anderson's memoir Shout, a call to action for sexual abuse and trauma survivors in the wake of the #MeToo movement," according to PEN America.
The group's report came just a few weeks after a similar annual publication from the American Library Association, which details challenges to at least 4,235 unique titles in 2025, resulting in bans on at least 5,668 books and restrictions on another 920 works.
"In 2025, book bans were not sparked by concerned parents, and they were not the result of local grassroots efforts," noted Sarah Lamdan, executive director of the association's Office for Intellectual Freedom. “They were part of a well-funded, politically driven campaign to suppress the stories and lived experiences of LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC individuals and communities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular