history

United States Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr has sparked uproar with comments he has made denying Arab contributions to mathematics, science and literature.

In a high-voltage rant on Monday, the US health secretary said, “There’s five hundred million Arabs in the world. And yet they don’t produce science. They don’t win the Nobel Prize. They don’t win the Fields Prize. They don’t win the Wolf Prize. They don’t produce literature.”

RFK Jr, who has been involved in anti-vaccine campaigns and has promoted a debunked theory linking vaccines to autism, made the comments during a US election campaign event in Grand Rapids, Michigan while supporting Republican nominee Mike Rogers, who is up against Arab-American Democrat nominee Abdul El-Sayed, in a tightly contested battle for Michigan’s Senate seat in next week’s midterm elections.

Critics said the comments were racist, Islamophobic and factually inaccurate, pointing to modern and historic Arab innovation in multiple fields.

Here’s how Arabs have made vital contributions to the human understanding of maths, science and literature through the centuries.

Arab contributions to maths, science and humanities

The period known as the Islamic Golden Age, from around 750 AD to 1258 AD, produced many key Arab contributions to medicine at a time when Europe was said to be in its Dark Ages. During this time, Arabic was the language of science and scholarship.

1st-4th centuries: The numerals 0-9, which originated in ancient India, were adopted by Arab mathematicians who spread them across the world. They displaced Roman numerals as a more advanced number system in mathematics.

8th century: Arab and Persian mathematicians were studying the ancient Indian concept of zero in mathematics in Baghdad, long before the Europeans. The number zero was crucial to the development of mathematics – but was absent from widely used Roman numerals in Europe.

813-833: The Arab mathematician Muḥammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi – one of those studying the number 0 – is often referred to as the “father of algebra” as he was the first to treat the method as a separate mathematical discipline in his work, Al-Jabr. This method provided the first linear and quadratic equations, still used as a core part of mathematical study today.

965-1040: Ibn al-Haytham, known as the “father of modern optics”, explained the role that light entering the eye plays in human vision. He was born in Basra in Iraq, but spent most of his working life in Cairo attending to noble families.

936-1013: Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi, called “the father of modern surgery”, was considered the greatest surgeon in the Middle Ages. He wrote a 30-volume encyclopaedia detailing medical practices and designed and illustrated many surgical instruments. Born in Azahara, in Andalusia, he was known as Abulcasis in Europe.

9th century: Fatima al-Fihri founded the University of al-Qarawiyyin in Fez, Morocco. It is often cited as the oldest continually operating university.

1213-1288: Ibn al-Nafis described pulmonary circulation – the process by which blood passes through the lungs – several centuries before Europeans understood it. He wrote more than 110 volumes of work on surgery, ophthalmology and philosophy while working as a chief physician in Egypt.

915-965:  Abu al-Tayyib al-Mutanabbi, regarded as the greatest poet in the Arabic language, was Yemeni and grew up immersed in Bedouin Arabic culture. He wrote in classical Arabic and many of his verses became sayings used in everyday Arabic.

1100-1165: Muhammad al-Idrisi was a geographer known for making the Tabula Rogeriana, one of the most accurate and detailed medieval world maps, and a high point of Islamic geography. He was born in Ceuta in Morocco.

Prize-winning Arabs

In more modern times, RFK Jr’s assertion that Arabs do not win Nobel prizes for science and literature is very far from the truth. Here are some of the highlights:

1960: Nobel Prize for Medicine

Peter Medawar won the Nobel Prize for Medicine for work on for work on acquired immune tolerance, which underpins organ transplantation. He was born in Brazil to a Lebanese father.

1966: The Fields Medal

Michael Atiyah won the Fields Medal, the most prestigious award for mathematics, in 1966. He was born in London to a Lebanese father and Scottish mother. Educated in Egypt, he spent much of his childhood in Cairo and Khartoum.

1988: Nobel Prize for Literature

Egyptian Naguib Mahfouz won the Nobel Prize in Literature for his body of work, including the Cairo Trilogy, which the Swedish Academy said formed “an Arabic narrative art that applies to all mankind”. He is still the only winner of the prize who wrote in Arabic.

1990: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Elias James Corey won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for developing retrosynthetic analysis. He is an American of Lebanese descent.

1993: Wolf Prize for Chemistry

Egyptian Ahmed Zewail won the Wolf Prize for Chemistry. The Wolf Prize is an international award which has been presented to living scientists and artists every year in Israel by the Wolf Foundation since 1978.

1999: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Zewail also won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for pioneering femtochemistry, which is the study of chemical reactions on extremely short timescales. He also won the Wolf Prize in Chemistry in 1993.

2005: Nobel Peace Prize

Egyptian scientist Mohamed ElBaradei shared his Nobel Prize with the International Atomic Energy Agency, which he led.

2018: Wolf Prize for Chemistry

Omar M Yaghi,  born in Jordan to a Palestinian refugee family, won the Wolf Prize in Chemistry in 2018 for work on metal-organic frameworks. He shared the prize with Japan’s Makoto Fujita. The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) condemned his acceptance of the award because the prize is awarded by an Israeli foundation.

2023: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Moungi Bawendi won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for the discovery and synthesis of quantum dots. He was born in France to a Tunisian father, but based in the US.

2025: Nobel Prize for Chemistry

Yaghi also won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry for developing metal-organic frameworks. These are crystalline materials with large internal cavities that can capture and store gases, harvest water from air, and trap pollutants. He shared the prize with Susumu Kitagawa from Japan and Richard Robson from Australia.

In a post on X, vaccine scientist Peter Hotez of the Texas Medical Center weighed in on historical Arab scholarship, saying, “It was the Arab scientists of the Middle Ages who kept Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen alive to hand it down in the Renaissance.”

Broadcaster Mehdi Hasan described RFK Jr’s comments as “racist” and, in a post on X, wrote: “One of the men who won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry last year was a Palestinian-American, Omar Yaghi.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations called for the US health secretary to be removed. It said: “To stand on a public stage as a sitting US cabinet official and dehumanise half a billion people – and millions of Muslim and Christian Arab Americans – with fabricated, white supremacist talking points is utterly disqualifying for public office. His sweeping erasure of Arab contributions to humanity is not only maliciously false, but it also fans the flames of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hate at a time when communities are already vulnerable to bigoted attacks from other public officials nationwide.”

London, United Kingdom – “It’s magical,” says biology teacher Muneera Alfadhel from under her umbrella.

In fact, it is a characteristically rainy, grey day in London, but the weather is doing nothing to dampen her mood. She is among the first to walk down the middle of the iconic Oxford Street following its pedestrianisation.

For generations, shoppers have bustled along Oxford Street next to bikes, cars, black cabs and red double-decker buses. But on Monday, from Great Portland Street to Orchard Street, the road is now a pedestrian-only zone.

On Monday morning, by force of habit, most pedestrians are still sticking to the pavement. Mark Arbouine, a forensic scientist out for a stroll, is one of the few breaking ranks: “I saw there was no traffic today, so I thought, why not walk in the middle of the street and take advantage of it? I just think it’s great for the environment, great for shopping. It’s just so much easier to move around the street.”

This tiny strip of real estate is big business: about 1 percent of the UK’s annual gross domestic product (GDP) is generated along this 1km (0.6 miles) stretch of street. But despite its outsized importance, Oxford Street has in recent decades been hit by lower consumer spending, as well as falling rents and footfall, which is now just 57 percent of what it was in 2006, according to New West End Company, a retail trade body.

The Greater London Authority, also known as City Hall, believes pedestrianisation could, therefore, offer a lifeline.

City Hall analysis suggests the partial pedestrianisation of Oxford Street could generate more than $109m per year and support an additional 700 jobs. Following a weekend trial in October 2025, two-thirds of businesses in the area said they had higher or similar sales figures during the pedestrianisation.

This is the first step in a multi-phase regeneration project to add two public squares, 50 trees and hundreds of public seating.

Barbara Stoll, a leading campaigner on the benefits of greener, more walkable cities, was smiling as she observed the street. The air already feels cleaner, she noted.

“It’s amazing coming here this morning. Walking down the street, it was already so uplifting that the noise is considerably lower,” she said. “People are excited. I saw people coming up from the tube and looking around. Seeing that, it’s almost like children when it’s Christmas Day.

“So I think it’s absolutely wonderful, and so needed for London.”

Residents ‘haven’t really been listened to’

On Saturday, ahead of the change, not all shoppers were convinced. A French tourist said he would avoid Oxford Street altogether if buses and cabs were no longer allowed through.

“People with disabilities who cannot walk a lot – that would be really helpful if the buses move on and they don’t discontinue [them],” a shopper told Al Jazeera.

“It would be good. Sometimes you’re tired; sometimes it’s raining.”

The pedestrianisation of Oxford Street has been years in the making, and not without controversy.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan first tried it in 2017, following a manifesto pledge. But the plan fell apart in 2018, when Westminster Council – the local government authority responsible for Oxford Street at the time – withdrew its backing, saying residents did not support it.

Following a public consultation, Khan created the Oxford Street Development Corporation, taking responsibility for the street away from local officials and transferring it to the Greater London Authority and Transport for London.

With this second, successful attempt at pedestrianisation, doubts from local authorities have not gone away.

Residents are not being listened to, said Councillor Tim Barnes, the deputy leader and cabinet member for growth and planning for the City of Westminster.

“There has been a communication process with residents, but it’s been pretty much one way. Mostly, they are being told what’s going to happen to them and how it’s going to happen; what the format of the process is going to be in future. But realistically, those who know the street best haven’t really been listened to.”

He believes the economic benefits are overstated and do not consider the impact of displacing bus routes from a major road to the surrounding, smaller streets. That fear is shared by resident Nerma Cridge, who said London’s West End will become “completely unliveable, too crowded and too noisy at night”.

“We think all of this should be done in a much more productive relationship with communities,” she told Al Jazeera over the phone.

‘People just take back the space’

Concerns over the change will fade once residents see the real-world results in the coming months, Stoll believes.

“Examples from across Europe and the world, where such projects have already happened, prove that this only makes life better overall for local residents,” she said.

“Retail gets a boost. More people linger, more people come to the street, more people spend money in the shops, and even local shop vacancies reduce. The local air pollution significantly reduces, and as activity increases, people just take back the space.”

The Oxford Street Development Corporation will be testing and reviewing the results of the pedestrianisation in the coming months, and reviewing its findings early next year. Transitioning the rest of Oxford Street into a permanent, traffic-free public space is expected to go ahead by the end of next year.

Ahead of mayoral elections in 2028, the pedestrianisation could be one of the last major initiatives that Sadiq Khan signs off. A landmark project that will also become his legacy.

SACRAMENTO — You haven’t voted yet because the state propositions are too bewildering? I’m with you. There are too many for normal human consumption. But I’ve figured them all out at last.

I’ve concocted my own personal voter information guide that I’ll share here. Heads up: I’m negative on most measures, including some expected to pass.

Anyway, here’s my thinking:

Proposition 1: Affordable housing bond

The state would borrow $11.25 billion for affordable housing programs, mainly to provide below-market rentals for poor people. Students and farmworkers also would benefit minimally. So would military veterans through the CalVet program. The proposal is packed with goodies aimed at drawing broad political support. Which it has.

But it’s an expensive item — costing the state at least $500 million annually for 25 years. Taxpayers already are paying about $6 billion annually to retire $80 billion in bond debt.

This measure is too costly given our fragile, chaotic state budget. There should have been more prioritizing. I’m a “no” vote.

Proposition 2: Doubles the state’s ‘rainy day’ fund

It requires the Legislature to pour money into the state savings account until it reaches 20% of general fund tax revenue, rather than the current 10%. The fund can be tapped when the economy sours and revenue falls.

Sure, save away if you can. Yes.

Proposition 3: Makes high tax rates permanent

This would cement the nation’s highest state income tax rates into the California Constitution — up to 12.3%, affecting the top 2% of earners with incomes above $371,000 for single filers and $743,000 for married couples. (Million-dollar earners pay an added 1%.) The money helps fund schools, healthcare and other state programs.

The high rates were sold to voters as temporary in 2012. Later, voters extended them until 2031.

My hesitancy: Tax rates should not be embedded in the constitution where they can only be altered by voters. The governor and legislators should do their jobs and update our volatile state tax system. Moreover, “temporary” shouldn’t be translated into “permanent.” And there’s no rush. The rates don’t expire for five years. No.

Proposition 4: Repeals ban on public financing of election campaigns

This would allow the state and local governments to create partial public financing systems for political candidates. “Charter” cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco already can.

Look, either wealthy donors and special interests buy the politicians or the public does. Anyway, if a few major cities are permitted to enact public financing, all cities should be. Yes.

Proposition 5: Changes recall elections

Currently, voters decide two questions in a state recall election: 1. Should the official be recalled? 2. Who should be the replacement? Under this proposal, only the first question would be asked. Any replacement would be determined by the normal non-recall process. Depending on the office, that usually ends up in a special election.

This makes lots of sense. Too many shabby games have been played with the present bifurcated system. Yes

Proposition 37: Down payment loans for home buyers

Middle-income buyers could take out a second mortgage to cover most of their 20% down payment on a newly constructed home. They’d need to dig up only 3% in cash. The program would be financed by a $25-billion state revenue bond, repaid by home buyers. Lending institutions would qualify the borrowers and take the risk, costing the state zilch.

This makes sense. Easy yes.

Proposition 38: Medical research bond

The state would borrow $8.4 billion to fund research into cures for cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer’s and other ailments. The state cost: at least $500 million annually for 20 years.

My hang-up is that the measure was crafted to assure that half the money goes to one institute, whose billionaire founder is the proposition’s chief backer. State money should be available to all potential bidders. No.

Proposition 39: Voter ID

This would force everyone to show a government ID before being allowed to vote. Those casting mail ballots would need to write a four-digit PIN on the back of the return envelope.

There’s simply no evidence of widespread voter cheating anywhere. This measure is unneeded and would just hassle voters and slow the vote count. Flat no.

Proposition 40: The billionaire tax

It would impose a one-time 5% tax on billionaires’ worth, probably raising tens of billions of dollars. Ninety percent would go to healthcare to replace federal funding cutbacks.

This is nutty. There’s no such thing as a temporary tax. Proposition 3 is an example. We shouldn’t have a one-time tax anyway. It’s like a sugar high that quickly wears off. Then what? Who’s next to have their wealth taxed? Want a wealth tax? Make it national to keep billionaires from fleeing California with their riches for more friendly states. No way.

Proposition 41 and Proposition 42: Twin poison pills

Ignore their superficial intents, the sole purpose of both measures is to invalidate the billionaires tax.

I don’t like Proposition 40, but I also detest deceptive games-playing with ballot initiatives. They should be discouraged. No.

Proposition 43: Raises vote requirement for local tax hikes

Currently, special tax increases placed on a local ballot by citizen signature-collecting require only a simple majority vote. This measure would increase the threshold to two-thirds, the same as if proposed by a city council or county supervisors board.

It’s ridiculously confusing. But I don’t like two-thirds requirements for taxes because a minority of voters can overrule the majority. That’s undemocratic. No.

The low-profile measure would require local nonprofit clinics caring for poor people to spend 90% of their funds on health services.

This smacks of a failed negotiating tactic by the union sponsor of the billionaires tax. Many clinics say they’d need to close shop. No.

Proposition 45: Regulatory streamlining for building projects

This would substantially overhaul the environmental protection act that has kept California less polluted from development projects. The act also has been sorely abused and used as a tool to stop projects, particularly housing. This measure would make it easier to build, not just housing but many things, such as water facilities, clean energy, giant warehouses and freeway expansions.

It goes too far, enabling sprawl and leaving citizens with fewer weapons to fight projects. The Legislature has been trimming home building regulations and should continue. No on 45.

Happy voting. I’m glad I didn’t vote early so there’d be time to bone up on this hodgepodge.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: “A butter knife against a nuclear arsenal”: Tech billionaires vastly outspend wealth-tax supporters
Against the wind: Hope and despair simmer among California Republicans ahead of election day
CA vs. Trump: ‘This is not normal’: Feds demand California counties set aside ‘likely’ noncitizen ballots

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

He came into the weekend insisting he was going to try to apply the “same mindset as I had all year – one race at a time”.

But on Saturday he acknowledged that this one was a new kind of weekend.

“It does feel a little bit different,” he said. “But the goal stays the same. I just need to keep doing my job. And, actually, I feel like I can enjoy more driving, everything.

“But, of course, we’re going to do the race tomorrow. We’re going to try and win. And then we’ll see what happens. Obviously, I’m in a very good position.”

Antonelli is typically accompanied by his father, Marco, at grands prix, but he said this weekend he had brought other people with him as well to help keep him in the right frame of mind.

“I have a great group of people around me,” he said. “I have a lot of friends here as well, so we enjoy the evenings together.

“We play cards in the evening, so we’re just doing the fun stuff. And that’s what helps, to just relax a little bit and just connect with the mind, and then once you go on track you are back full focus.”

The maths suggest the most likely scenario is that Antonelli will not win the title on Sunday – it would, as he put it on Thursday, require “something catastrophic to happen to the others”.

If this is a bit of an overstatement – Russell and Hamilton would need only to crash together on the first lap, for example – the fundamental truth is real.

No injuries were reported at the building, known locally as the Kehlsteinhaus, while police said a ‘suspicious person’ has been taken into custody.

German police have detained a suspect after a fire engulfed the Eagle’s Nest, Adolf Hitler’s notorious Nazi-era mountain retreat in Bavaria, prompting an overnight emergency operation involving about 200 firefighters.

No injuries were reported at the building, known locally as the Kehlsteinhaus. Police said investigators were examining whether a “suspicious person” taken into temporary custody was connected to the blaze.

The fire alarm was triggered by a smoke detector at about 9:50pm (19:50 GMT) on Friday. Emergency crews could see flames rising above the building as they approached and found it “completely ablaze”, according to police.

The retreat’s remote Alpine location, at an altitude of more than 1,800 metres (about 6,000 feet), complicated efforts to extinguish the fire, police spokesperson Lisa Maier said.

While authorities have not announced a cause, German media reported that investigators suspected arson.

The newspaper Bild said emergency responders had encountered a motorcyclist travelling towards them on their way to the scene and that he was subsequently detained. His possible involvement remained under investigation.

Maier said inquiries were continuing, with police planning a news conference later on Saturday.

Built between 1937 and 1938, the stone-and-granite retreat stands on the Kehlstein mountain above Obersalzberg, near Berchtesgaden in southern Germany.

Designed as a monument to Hitler’s rule and a setting for receiving foreign diplomats, it offers sweeping views across the Bavarian Alps. Hitler himself visited the resort.

The site, which remains part of the legacy of Nazi Germany, survived World War II undamaged. It has operated as a restaurant since 1952 and also houses an exhibition examining its Nazi history.

Alora, Spain – The train chugs steadily out of Malaga station, its rhythmic clatter carrying it inland towards the mountains of the Guadalhorce Valley, where whitewashed villages cling to hillsides.

Beyond the window, pomegranate trees grow close to the tracks. Palms and cypress trees stand alongside young orange saplings planted in neat rows and, farther out, olive groves whose leaves shimmer between green and silver in the breeze. Above the rugged mountains, small white clouds float across an immense blue sky, like pieces of popcorn.

Over the train’s rattle, an announcement in Spanish comes through the speakers: “The next station is Aljaima.”

The name derives from the Arabic al-khaima, meaning “the tent”, a small echo of another language, another time.

And then Alora, where the town rises around a rocky hill crowned by the remains of an old fortress. Some etymologists suggest the town’s ancient name may derive from the Arabic al-lawra, loosely translated as “the light”.

The railway station is quiet in the midday heat.

A large black pick-up truck rumbles into the station car park and stops. Henrietta Szovati, a British-Hungarian Muslim, steps out, having driven down from the mountains to collect provisions.

Dressed in a loose blue shirt and cream trousers, she offers a warm embrace. Silver earrings dangle beside her face, and a sea-blue scarf is wrapped around her hair like a turban. A pair of red-framed spectacles rests on top.

She apologises for the truck’s state. Dust has settled on the dashboard, and bits of dried grass have found their way inside. “It is a working vehicle,” she says, more accustomed to hauling things across farmland than ferrying visitors from railway stations.

For the past two years, she and her husband, Ajmal Masroor, a therapist and imam, have been transforming an old farmhouse and its surrounding land into the House of Andalus. The project aims to bring people closer to southern Spain’s Islamic history and the natural world.

Nearly 400 olive trees dot the 14 hectares (35 acres). She wants to plant more and make it a thousand-tree olive grove, she says with a smile, glancing out of the truck’s open window.

The road winds higher into the mountains. Wildfires, Henrietta says, swept through parts of the surrounding region at the height of summer, and the landscape still bears the season’s harshness. Reddish-brown earth gives way to patches of parched scrub and exposed rock, while slabs of silvery-grey stone jut sharply from the slopes.

“That’s slate,” Henrietta explains, pointing through the windscreen. The Spanish word is pizarra, she adds, the same name as the neighbouring town.

Oranges flourish here, as do figs and avocados. And mangoes that are better than those from South Asia, Henrietta emphatically declares.

As we drive further into the mountains, Henrietta gestures towards a neighbouring property. “That’s my neighbour, Juan Garcia.”

Henrietta buys lemons, avocados and honey from him. Sometimes he comes over to help with the olives. It’s this sense of community and neighbourliness she found harder to come by in Britain, where she has lived since 2001, marrying Ajmal a year later.

“I feel like an outsider there. I’m still not ‘one of us’ after more than 20 years.”

As a Muslim and as a European, she says, Spain feels familiar in a way no other place does. Hungary was never an option, she adds, describing its government as “racist and right-wing”. And in Britain, she says, being Muslim can feel unavoidably political, her faith viewed through headlines and public arguments about Islam.

In the mountains above Alora, she feels her neighbours meet her first as Henrietta: the woman who lives up the track and joins in village life.

“Practising Islam here is just easier,” she adds.

Yet Spain is not immune to the political currents sweeping across Europe. The far-right Vox party has made opposition to immigration and what it calls the “Islamisation” of Spain central to its campaigning, raising questions about how secure that sense of belonging might be.

With a sigh, Henrietta acknowledges that being Muslim can be difficult anywhere in the world today. But she prefers to focus on what she can build, rather than on political circumstances beyond her control. “Circumstances change, but community, connections and faith don’t,” she says.

For her, that means building relationships with neighbours, even when they hold different beliefs. A sense of community, she argues, is forged through everyday encounters rather than political rhetoric.

On a visit to Juan Garcia’s home, his 79-year-old mother, Maria, is curious about the scarf wrapped around Henrietta’s hair.

The women are standing in Maria’s living room, its shutters drawn against the afternoon sun. A portrait of Jesus hangs on the wall.

Henrietta explains that she is Muslim and that covering her hair is part of her faith, a way to feel closer to God. Maria is Catholic. The conversation turns to the Virgin Mary, who also covered her hair.

But Maria insists all that matters is being a good person. If you cannot be good, none of the outward signs of faith means very much.

There is no awkwardness between them, no need to defend or explain their beliefs. The conversation moves on.

It is such ordinary encounters that have made Andalucia feel like home, Henrietta says. But her connection to this part of Spain runs deeper than the friendships she is making. It also stems from a deep respect for a history that stretches back more than 1,000 years.

For British Muslim travel writer and historian Tharik Hussain, author of Muslim Europe, the fascination is understandable. Al-Andalus was the medieval Muslim-ruled territory of modern-day Spain and Portugal. Its heartland lay in the south, in what is now Andalucia, home to cities such as Cordoba, Seville and Granada, where surviving monuments still evoke a period when Muslims helped shape European civilisation.

Its eventual loss, he says, has given it an almost “Atlantis-like aura” in the Muslim imagination, a longing reflected in Muslim literature over the centuries, from the 17th-century historian al-Maqqari to the 20th-century poet Allama Iqbal.

For nearly eight centuries, Muslim dynasties ruled parts of the Iberian Peninsula, leaving behind palaces and fortresses with horseshoe arches, intricate zellij tilework, carved yeseria plasterwork, and curling Arabic calligraphy. Their legacy endured in irrigation channels known as acequias (from the Arabic al-saqiya), scholarship, language and traditions that continued to shape Spain long after the fall of Granada in 1492.

Britons have long headed to Andalucia in search of a place in the sun. But among those putting down roots here are Muslims drawn by something more: The chance to reconnect with a history in which Islam was part of Europe, and to build lives where their faith feels less like a defining difference.

Yet the Andalucia they are entering is not a vanished kingdom waiting to be rediscovered; it is modern Spain, with its own economic pressures, social divisions, and complicated relationship with the past.

What happens when the dream of al-Andalus meets the realities of living here?

Andy Burnham’s first Gogglebox appearance!

A sentence we never expected to say. Tonight, PM Andy Burnham and Steve Rotherham will make their debut on the show, sitting at 10 Downing Street. 
The programme airs in aid of Stand Up To Cancer, and Andy is no stranger to charitable causes. Throughout his tenure as Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy often threw himself into work, helping those around him.

SAN FRANCISCO — Nancy Pelosi is, beyond doubt, a figure who will long endure, her name forever pressed into the pages of the nation’s history books.

She is the first — and, so far, only — woman to wield the gavel as speaker of the House. She was indispensable to passage of the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. Working with presidents of both parties, she twice helped keep the American economy from tanking.

She played political field marshal through numerous election cycles, raising astronomical sums to help push Democrats into the majority. When a doddering Joe Biden threatened the party’s hold on the White House and foreshadowed a 2024 congressional wipeout, Pelosi used her considerable influence to not so gently ease the president aside as Democrats’ nominee for the White House.

Why, then, with so much at stake in November, would one of Pelosi‘s last acts before retirement be mucking about in the elbow-throwing, bone-crunching race between the two San Francisco Democrats vying to succeed her in January?

Is it a grudge she holds against Scott Wiener, the prolific and prolifically ambitious state senator, who boldly launched his candidacy last fall before Pelosi had even announced her plans to retire?

Is it resentment that Wiener’s years-long maneuvering blocked the ascension of Pelosi’s daughter, Christine, who’d been widely talked about as her mom’s name-brand successor? (Instead, she’s running for Wiener’s seat in 2028, or sooner if he makes it to Congress.)

Is it Pelosi once more leaning into her long-standing role as a champion of women and women in politics, which drew her to support Supervisor Connie Chan?

Perhaps it’s a bit of all three.

Pelosi, for her part, told reporters that “nobody knows Congress better than I do” and she believes, simply enough, that Chan “would be the best member of Congress.”

But maybe there’s something more elemental.

“Pelosi is the daughter of a machine politician,” said Eric Jaye, a strategist who’s spent decades working in and around San Francisco politics. “She moves from Baltimore” — where her father was a congressman and mayor — “and becomes initially a lieutenant in the political machine here and, ultimately, the general of it.

“She’s playing by the classic rules of machine politics,” Jaye said, “which is the machine has the prerogative of choosing the line of succession…. Nancy Pelosi wanted to be able to make that choice.”

Peas in a pod

Chan, a leader of the city’s progressive wing and a favorite of organized labor, was languishing until Pelosi delivered her endorsement in the final stretch of the primary campaign. Her imprimatur sent Chan surging past tech millionaire Saikat Chakrabarti to place second behind Wiener.

With less than two weeks until election day, the November runoff appears too close to call, though many give Wiener the edge.

There is little that substantively divides the two candidates, both liberals in good standing. Wiener is considered the more moderate of the two, graded on San Francisco’s very-left curve.

“Connie Chan and Scott Wiener are going to vote the same way 99.9% of the time,” said Jim Ross, another longtime San Francisco political strategist. Further, he noted, it’s going to be years before either acquires the clout needed to be a significant force on Capitol Hill. “That’s just the reality of how Congress works.”

Which makes Pelosi’s heavy involvement in their fratricidal fight all the more striking.

She’s put her hefty fundraising muscle behind Chan, helping narrow Wiener’s financial advantage. She’s appeared in pro-Chan advertising — striding in her trademark stilettos — and lent her Washington communications director to the campaign.

She’s also collared Chan a list of glossy endorsements, including Sen. Adam Schiff, former Sen. Barbara Boxer and San José Rep. Zoe Lofgren, the chair of California’s Democratic congressional delegation. Wiener has Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and several Democratic House members in his corner.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, a former San Francisco mayor and longtime Pelosi ally, has not endorsed either candidate.

A house divided

San Francisco politics have long been personal, nasty and brutish. The city’s close quarters and intraparty rivalries help make it so, and Pelosi’s intervention has further frayed old ties and strained deep-seated alliances.

Susie Tompkins Buell, a San Francisco philanthropist and one of the Democratic Party’s most influential donors, told Politico she couldn’t understand why Pelosi would use her final months in office to torpedo Wiener’s campaign. She’s spoken to other prominent Democrats, Buell said, who felt pressured to endorse Chan because the speaker emerita hit them up.

“All you do is say, ‘Why, why is this happening?’ ” Buell wondered aloud.

It’s been nearly 40 years — going back to when Pelosi was first elected in 1987 — since San Francisco had an open congressional seat. Winning here is tantamount to a lifetime appointment; since 1964, just three people have held the seat Pelosi is vacating.

Both Wiener, who is gay, and Chan, who immigrated to San Francisco from Hong Kong, are bidding to write their own bit of history. Wiener, 56, would be the first out LGBTQ+ person to represent San Francisco in Congress. Chan, 48, would be the first Asian American.

As for Pelosi, her aggressive intervention in the contest won’t even merit “a footnote in her biography,” Jaye said.

Her place in posterity is sealed, regardless of who wins or loses Nov. 3.

What else you should be reading

Get smart: Becerra’s muted gubernatorial campaign comes to life in home stretch
The deep dive: In tight Texas Senate race, Trump’s immigration crackdown tests Republicans’ hold on voters
The L.A. Times Special: California residents accused by feds of voter fraud react with shock, confusion and anger

Until next time,
mzb
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

SACRAMENTO —  When does positive reform become negative regression? That’s what Californians need to answer before voting on Proposition 45, which would substantially change the state’s landmark environmental protection law.

The business-backed ballot measure would make it much easier and less costly to build loads of projects — not just housing, but also water works, clean energy and transportation facilities.

It also, however, would give citizens much less time and fewer tools to assess and oppose projects they deem unfit for their area — like freeway expansions or giant warehouses.

“It tips the scale from favoring the public and the environment to favoring developers and polluting projects,” asserts state Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas), chair of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.

“It’s an overreach.”

“We streamline the building process for billionaires to erect stadiums. Why don’t we do it for middle-class homebuyers?” declares Dan Dunmoyer, president and chief executive of the California Building Industry Assn., a major backer of Proposition 45.

It’s a bitter, high-stakes fight that’s too close to call. Polling has indicated the outcome could be decided in the final days before the Nov. 3 election.

Proposition 45 would be the most significant overhaul of the California Environmental Quality Act since Republican Gov. Ronald Reagan signed it in 1970.

CEQA — as it’s commonly called and used as a four-letter obscenity by developers — is justifiably credited with keeping California air less polluted, water relatively clean, urban traffic from being worse and more outdoors open to the public.

It requires developers — private and public — to undergo a lengthy process of analyzing a project’s environmental effects and reducing their negative impacts.

But over the years CEQA became blatantly abused.

Union blackmailers — ”greenmailers” — threatened frivolous CEQA lawsuits unless developers caved to labor demands. Business rivals drove off potential competitors by filing protracted suits that wore down investors. NIMBYs — ”not in my backyard” — fought local projects that crowded their spaces or blocked views.

As a CEQA battle dragged on, the developers’ costs soared and many cut their losses by abandoning the project. Home building plummeted in California and the law of supply and demand ruled. Housing costs skyrocketed.

Project opponents legitimately concerned about environmental impacts also filed lawsuits, but they weren’t the developer’s big problem — not like the CEQA abusers.

Finally, prodded by Gov. Gavin Newsom, lawmakers have been responding in recent years to the developers’ frustration. They’ve been pecking away at CEQA with meaningful reforms for most types of housing, especially urban apartment projects near transit hubs.

“You’ve got to just move things,” Newsom exclaimed at an economic summit in Long Beach last week. “I’m just done with the [CEQA] litigation…. Years and years of B.S…. Eight years to develop something? Give me a break.”

But the nearly termed-out governor still hadn’t taken a position on Proposition 45.

Money and power, of course, have always had their privileges in the state Capitol. Billionaire sports team owners have had no trouble securing CEQA exemptions for construction of new stadiums or arenas. The exemptions are handed out like free bobbleheads.

In fact, Newsom recently signed legislation essentially granting a CEQA exemption in San Diego for a 16,000-seat sports arena and housing project led by Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke.

Dunmoyer says that lawmakers “have done quite a bit” to expedite housing, “although not quite enough. It has been limited in scope and size — limited to urban infill and close to transit. It doesn’t address the overwhelming amount of housing needs in California.

“It doesn’t help the first-time middle-class homebuyers or address market rate rentals.”

He pegs the cost of a CEQA battle at $75,000 per new home, noting that’s added to the selling price — if the dwelling ever gets built.

Opponents of Proposition 45 argue that the measure’s backers wish to return California home building to 1960s sprawl when the state’s population was half its current size and there was more usable open space to pave over with roads and subdivisions — more orchards to rip up and wetlands to drain. And that led to longer smog-spewing car commutes to city jobs.

“Sprawl housing is not affordable housing,” Blakespear says. “There are costs to build new infrastructure like utility lines and water facilities, and high insurance costs. Then taxpayers have to clean up the pollution.

“Do we really want new sprawl housing developments in wildfire areas? We need to incentivize [urban] infill housing, instead of in the middle of the forest or the desert.”

Proposition 45 — generated by the state Chamber of Commerce — would streamline the CEQA approval process for several types of construction projects the measure deems “essential.” They include housing, water systems, clean energy, health facilities, jails, fire stations, wildfire reduction, broadband access and transportation.

Two very controversial projects were excluded — the bullet train and delta tunnel —
and so was nuclear power.

Opponents insist that the proposition eases the way for construction of massive data centers. But backers adamantly deny it, and they make sense. The anti-45 campaign is trying to scare voters with a Halloween bogeyman.

But there’s plenty of other ugly and smelly potential projects that could benefit.

If this were solely about housing, it wouldn’t ring so many alarms.

Here’s how I see it: We elect a governor and Legislature to handle such complex issues. Let them — especially the new governor, presumably Xavier Becerra — consider enacting new CEQA reforms, holding months of public hearings and ultimately compromising on a deal.

OK, maybe that’s dreaming. But it beats voters trying to wrap their heads around this in a few days.

Unlike regular legislation, if the ballot measure did pass and flaws emerged, it would be very hard for lawmakers to amend, requiring a two-thirds vote.

Proposition 45 rolls back CEQA protections too far — especially with a dangerous anti-environment California abuser in the Oval Office.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: ‘He’s everywhere’: This California Republican wants to make his party relevant again
CA vs. Trump: Big assertions, sharp exchanges, little clarity define DOJ election battle with California
The L.A. Times Special: Voter guide to the 2026 California general election

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

The Dodgers’ offseason began at 8:07 Thursday night. Heavily favored to win a third straight World Series, they were swept into winter by the Milwaukee Brewers.

The final score doesn’t really matter, but for the record it was 6-4 Brewers. It wasn’t really that close.

The Dodgers led in every game of the National League Championship Series. They didn’t win any of them. No team has ever done that while getting swept in a best-of-seven series. So while the Dodgers didn’t three-peat, they made history just the same.

“They were relentless with everything that they did,” Dodgers infielder Max Muncy said of the Brewers. “They just strung together good at-bat after good at-bat. That’s usually what we do.

“We didn’t do it this series and they did.”

The Dodgers’ starting rotation, the most expensive in history, gave up 16 hits and 13 runs in 18 innings for a 6.50 earned-run average. The bullpen was nearly as bad, posting a 4.50 ERA in 16 innings.

The Brewers’ relievers, on the other hand, were spectacular. Milwaukee manager Pat Murphy went to his bullpen 14 times and just twice did a reliever give up a run. All four victories against the Dodgers and all seven Brewers wins this postseason have gone to a reliever, with the bullpen posting a 1.33 ERA in 40⅔ innings.

“Pitcher after pitcher came in and executed,” Muncy said. “When one of their pitchers faltered, the next guy came in and picked up the slack.”

And each time the Dodgers took a lead, the Brewers waited no more than two innings to cut into the deficit. Milwaukee trailed 4-0 after two innings Thursday. By the top of the fifth, the score was tied. An inning later, the Brewers went ahead to stay, becoming the first team with six comeback wins in their first eight postseason games.

“They respond,” Murphy said of his players. “We’ve talked about it all year long. You have a bad week, you have a bad game, you have a bad at-bat, you bounce back.”

“I love the Dodgers. I love their players. They’ve got legendary players,” he continued. “But we came in with a group that would not be denied. They were hungry, very hungry.”

The two-time defending champion Dodgers, meanwhile, appeared to be full. They hit with runners in scoring position as often as they hit into double plays, going four for 27 and stranding 24.

“We had our opportunities. We just didn’t get the job done,” first baseman Freddie Freeman said. “We won two [titles]. We came up short on the third.

Milwaukee’s Garrett Mitchell, right, celebrates with Cooper Pratt after hitting the go-ahead home run in the sixth inning of a 6-4 win over the Dodgers in Game 4 of the NLCS on Thursday night.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

“There’s a lot of hurt at the end of the season. Sometimes you just get beat. That’s just kind of how it goes. You have to give credit to the Brewers. They played really good baseball.”

A year ago the Dodgers swept the Brewers in the NLCS. This fall the results were reversed.

“The sadness is we just didn’t accomplish our goal,” Muncy said. “The goal every year is to be the last team standing. This year we had a chance to do something historic, and we didn’t accomplish it. And every single time you’re not the last team standing, it’s heartbreak and it’s failure and it’s not what you’re looking for.”

The Dodgers’ clubhouse was closed for more than 35 minutes after the game, partly to process that heartbreak but also to give manager Dave Roberts and veteran infielder Miguel Rojas, who announced his retirement, a chance to address the team. When the doors finally opened, nearly every player was sitting in front of his locker, most still in uniform, waiting to explain what seemed to be inexplicable.

How did the greatest team money can buy wind up so flat when the stakes were so high?

“We’ve been grinding all season long,” said right-hander Tyler Glasnow, who retired the first 10 Brewers in order, but lasted just one more inning. “No one slacked off at all. Everyone just came in and worked hard. They just played a lot better than us. They were hitting on everything. It wasn’t our year.”

“Not every time it’s gonna be us,” left fielder Teoscar Hernández added through a forced smile. “It’s not fair for us to be doing the same thing over and over every year. Teams are going to learn from their losses the same way we’re gonna learn from this one.

“So hopefully we come back next year stronger.”

Speaking of next year, no one would.

Half the players on the Dodgers 26-man NLCS roster are on expiring contracts. The core of the team — Mookie Betts, Freeman, Muncy, Kiké Hernández and Teoscar Hernández along with pitchers Blake Snell and Glasnow — are 33 or older. The Dodgers could look very different when spring training starts — if spring training starts — in February.

“There’ll come a time when we think about next year,” Muncy said. “But that’s not right at this moment.”

The Dodgers have an extra-long winter to get through first.