label

Mark Volman, the singer who co-founded the buoyant 1960s hitmakers the Turtles and was half of the humorous harmony duo Flo & Eddie, has died. He was 78.

Representatives for Volman confirmed the death to Rolling Stone, citing a “brief, unexpected illness.” In 2020, Volman was diagnosed with Lewy Body Dementia, but continued touring and only announced his diagnosis in 2023.

When promoting his memoir “Happy Forever: My Musical Adventures with the Turtles, Frank Zappa, T. Rex, Flo & Eddie, and More” in 2023, Volman went public with his 2020 diagnosis of Lewy body dementia, a disease that results in a decline in cognitive ability, affecting reasoning, memory and movement.

In a People magazine story, Volman accepted his fate: “I got hit by the knowledge that this was going to create a whole new part of my life. And I said, ‘OK, whatever’s going to happen will happen, but I’ll go as far as I can.’”

Volman’s partner in both the Turtles and Flo & Eddie was Howard Kaylan, a high-school friend who turned into a lifelong creative partner. Sharing a taste for sweet melodies, cultural fads and unrepentant silliness, Volman and Kaylan adeptly navigated the cultural changes of the 1960s, steering the Turtles from surf-rock survivors to psychedelic freaks over the course of a decade.

The group’s sweet spot arrived in the second half of the 1960s, when they polished their Southern Californian folk-rock with studio savvy, creating hits — “Happy Together,” “She’d Rather Be With Me,” “Elenore” and “You Showed Me” — that appealed to mainstream listeners — they were the favorite band of Richard Nixon’s daughter Tricia, even playing the White House in 1970 — while winking at hipper audiences.

As they drifted away from the middle of the road, the Turtles could occasionally give the sense that they were too smart for the room; one of their best albums, 1968’s “The Turtles Present the Battle of the Bands,” was constructed as a concept album where the group adopted a different guise and musical style for each track.

The Turtles in 1967, clockwise from top left: Al Nichol, Jim Tucker, Mark Volman, Howard Kaylan, Johnny Barbara and Jim Pon.

(Central Press / Hulton Archive / Getty Images)

Volman and Kaylan capitalized on this quirk when they rechristened themselves as Flo & Eddie, a moniker they devised after a bitter legal battle with their former record label left them without the right to perform either as the Turtles or using their own names. During this period, Frank Zappa invited Flo & Eddie to join his Mothers of Invention, giving the duo a boost that led to an enduring career.

Flo & Eddie specialized in providing harmonic support to high profile acts: they toured with Alice Cooper, sang on T. Rex’s landmark glam album “Electric Warrior” and were recruited to sing on Bruce Springsteen’s “Hungry Heart” when the Boss was looking for Beach Boys-like harmonies. On their own, Volman and Kaylan also honed their comedic shtick as recording artists, later taking their act to radio and, once they reacquired the rights to the Turtles moniker, on the road, playing the oldies circuit into the 2010s.

Unlike many other oldies acts, Volman and Kaylan possessed sharp business skills, acquired after their messy fallout with their record label, White Whale. Once they regained their master tapes, they licensed their catalog to reissue labels and kept a vigilant eye on how their recordings were disseminated in the marketplace.

On realizing that the Turtles’ “You Showed Me” provided a pivotal sample on De La Soul‘s 1989 debut album, “3 Feet High and Rising,” the duo sued the rap pioneers for $2.5 million in exemplary and punitive damages. The matter was settled out of court in favor of Volman and Kaylan; while the terms were not publicly disclosed, they reportedly were awarded $1.7 million in damages. The lawsuit and its fallout effectively ended the golden age of sampling in hip-hop.

Mark Volman during the 10th anniversary of the Happy Together tour at Thousand Oaks Civic Arts Plaza in 2019.

(Scott Dudelson / Getty Images)

Born in Los Angeles on April 19, 1947, Volman grew up in a musical household in the neighborhood of Westchester. Even when he was young, relatives were struck by his exuberant personality. His aunt Ann Becker recalled in “Happy Forever”: “I can remember my mother shaking her head and saying, ‘That boy is so smart — he shouldn’t be so silly.’”

By the time he enrolled at Westchester High — his classmates included comedian Phil Hartman and Manson Family member Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme — Volman had gravitated toward irreverence.

Meeting New York transplant Kaylan in choir, Volman soon became part of the Crossfires, playing saxophone alongside his new friend in the surf-rock combo. The Crossfires had two singles to their name before they signed to the fledgling White Whale Records in 1965. Already in the process of abandoning surf for folk-rock — Volman and Kaylan swapped their saxes for lead vocals — the group’s members accepted their new label’s suggestion to rename themselves; they rejected the stylized spelling of the Tyrtles in favor of the Turtles.

Taking a cue from the Byrds’ hit version of Bob Dylan’s “Mr. Tambourine Man,” the Turtles released a revved-up cover of Dylan’s “It Ain’t Me Babe” that squarely hit the zeitgeist, climbing into the Billboard Top 10 in summer 1965. Volman later remembered, “I graduated from high school in February 1965 and was on tour in June with a Top 10 record and on the Dick Clark Show.”

A couple of spirited sequels, “Let Me Be” and “You Baby,” kept the band in the Top 40 into 1966 but the Turtles’ hot streak quickly cooled, as a series of singles — including “Outside Chance,” written by White Whale staffer Warren Zevon — barely scraped the charts. “Happy Together,” a song rejected by a number of pop groups, revived the group’s fortunes, thanks in part to a sterling arrangement masterminded by new bassist Chip Douglas.

“Happy Together” topped the charts and would become one of the standards of its era, appearing often in commercials and films. In 1967, it propelled the Turtles back to the upper reaches of the charts, a place they’d stay through 1969, as they accumulated such hits as “She’d Rather Be With Me” and “Elenore.”

By far the biggest act on the small-scale White Whale, the Turtles were subjected to pressure by the label to record more commercial material, yet Volman and Kaylan kept pushing the band to make hip music. When the label suggested firing the rest of the Turtles, the singers arranged for the remaining three members to share songwriting credits on “The Turtles Present the Battle of the Bands,” the first album they released after the success of “Happy Together.” On their final album, “Turtle Soup,” the Turtles hired Ray Davies as their producer; it was his first production outside his main band, the Kinks.

Tensions between the Turtles and White Whale escalated in 1970, leading the group to disband. In turn, the label exercised a clause in the band‘s recording contract that prevented the members from performing either “individually or collectively,” effectively barring Volman and Kaylan from continuing to work either as a group or as themselves. The pair decided to call themselves the Phlorescent Leech & Eddie, a name that would swiftly be shortened to Flo & Eddie; Volman was the former, Kaylan the latter.

Zappa brought the duo into his Mothers of Invention ensemble not long after the implosion of the Turtles. They stayed with him through an eventful year that included a concert in Montreux, Switzerland, that ended with the venue engulfed in fire; Deep Purple memorialized the event in “Smoke on the Water.”

Alice Cooper, second from left, with Mark Volman (drinking beverage) and bandmates in Copenhagen, Denmark, 1972.

(Jorgen Angel / Redferns / Getty Images)

Beginning with 1972’s “The Phlorescent Leech & Eddie,” Flo & Eddie released a series of increasingly facetious albums throughout the 1970s, but they had greater success singing harmonies for T. Rex and Cooper. “Hungry Heart,” Springsteen’s first Top 10 hit, served as a curtain call for this period of Flo & Eddie’s career. Soon, the duo put their days as recording artists to rest. While they still would contribute original music to animated television shows, including specials focusing on “Strawberry Shortcake” and “The Care Bears” series, the duo stopped writing and recording new Flo & Eddie music.

The move coincided with the duo finally winning back the rights to their names. Volman and Kalyan began this process in 1974, when they acquired the Turtles’ master recordings when White Whale assets were up for auction.

A decade later, they were able to tour as The Turtles … featuring Flo & Eddie, a billing they’d retain into the 2010s, until Kaylan retired from the road in 2018. With Ron Dante filling in for Kaylan, Volman continued performing as the Turtles as part of their regular Happy Together package tours.

Although Flo & Eddie embraced their status on the oldies circuit, they hadn’t faded entirely from modern music. When De La Soul sampled “You Showed Me” for their track “Transmitting Live From Mars” in 1989, the trio failed to clear the rights prior to release, so Volman and Kaylan sued the group, winning a large settlement that established a precedent for sample clearance in hip-hop.

The duo launched another major lawsuit in 2013 when they filed suit against Sirius XM for failing to pay sound recording royalties in California, New York and Florida. A California judge ruled in the duo’s favor in 2014, while a Florida judge ruled for Sirius XM in 2015. Although a settlement was reached in 2016, Sirius XM would win subsequent legal appeals in Florida and California.

Volman went back to school in 1992, pursuing a bachelor’s degree at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles. After earning a master’s degree in screenwriting in 1999 at Loyola Marymount, Volman soon moved into teaching, eventually becoming an associate professor at the Mike Curb College of Entertainment & Music Business at Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn.

Volman is survived by his daughters, Sarina Marie and Hallie Rae, both from his marriage to Patricia Lee.

ON July 22, 2025, R&S Records came home.

The pioneering Belgian label, founded in Ghent in 1984, staged a free party at the week-long street festival, Gentse Feesten, transforming the city’s historic centre into a vast, open-air dancefloor.

6

With thousands gathering to hear Nastia, Charles Webster (live), LTJ Bukem, and founder Renaat Vandepapeliere himself, the night felt like both a celebration of R&S’s stories past and a bold statement of intent for its future.

Renaat’s set was as fearless as his impeccable, genre defying label with a diverse selection of electronica challenging and delighting the crowd.

6

For Vandepapeliere, the night was a leap into the unknown. “Honestly, I almost backed out myself,” he admitted. “I’ve never played for 6,000 people and I was nervous. I even called around to find someone to replace me, but a few friends convinced me to just go for it.

“The main goal was to take a risk and hopefully entertain some new people. Many had never heard us or the music before.”

6

Risk-taking has always been central to R&S. From the early days of releasing Joey Beltram’s Energy Flash, Model 500 and Aphex Twin, to shaping the careers of CJ Bolland, James Blake and many more, the label has built its reputation on fearless choices.

“We had no idea, we weren’t trying to be anything other than sharing music we liked and believed in,” Vandepapeliere reflected. “Let’s be honest, good music is good music. There is, as I always say, the right time and the right place to play whatever it is.”

6

That philosophy was evident in the Ghent lineup, which spanned genres and generations.

“It’s an opportunity to bring other people into the genre that aren’t necessarily into those sounds,” Vandepapeliere explained. “It has raw authenticity and a depth behind it. I could make a billion lineups like that, there’s so much talent and exciting music to share.”

His own set was guided by instinct and emotion. “It was intuitive, with many influences,” he said. “Today, if a set is different, it could be bad, so my honest opinion is to ask the crowd.”

6

The reaction was telling. He added: “You didn’t see any phones going up and all that. It was random people wondering what the hell was going on, of all ages, which I also find very interesting.”

For Vandepapeliere, who has spent much of his career behind the scenes, the experience rekindled something powerful. “Let’s say it’s actually set a new spark,” he admitted. “I now want to play more.”

Looking ahead, he is keen to build on the success of the Gentse Feesten. He said: “I would love to do more events. I don’t know if it’s possible, but yes, I’d really love to. Keeping it different, keeping it fresh, I think that would be really cool.”

6

But through all the years and transformations of dance music, Vandepapeliere insists the spirit of R&S hasn’t changed.

“We always wanted to be an eclectic label,” he said. “Not really be pushed into a certain corner and have a freedom of expression.

“It’s definitely not about formula. I wanted to be free. That’s all. You have to love what you’re doing and work for it. Nothing comes that easy. It is work, with a lot of failures and a lot of frustration. But hey, that’s the price you have to pay for freedom.”

Last fall, indie pop auteur Tei Shi immersed herself in the British Columbia backwoods during a creative retreat — an experience that helped her reclaim artistic control over her decade-long career.

Out Friday, the Canadian Colombian singer shares her most intimate album to date, “Make believe I make believe,” a 10-track record she’s self-releasing through Tei Shi LLC and the Orchard.

“Being back home, reconnecting with family and old friends, and working without any outside voices or pressure — no label, manager, or restrictions — allowed me to fully dive into my mind and emotions,” says Tei Shi in a statement.

The 35-year-old singer-songwriter attended the weeklong retreat in Vancouver Island, Canada, with longtime collaborators Noah Beresin (co-creator of the alternative hip-hop project Chiddy Bang) and Tommy English (the record producer behind many of Børns’ hits).

“The result is a really versatile collection that captures a wide range of feelings and touches on sonics from Canadiana to neo-perreo,” she adds.

Since emerging in the music scene with her breakthrough 2013 debut EP, “Saudade,” and follow-up 2015 EP, “Verde,” Tei Shi — whose real name is Valerie Teicher Barbosa — remains untethered to a genre, ebbing and flowing between dream-pop, indie folk and shoegaze.

Her new, fourth studio album expands on the 2024 LP, “Valerie,” her first independent project, which was released after departing her previous label, Downtown Records (then under Geffen), which left her feeling creatively wounded. With new control of her artistic vision, unfettered by the demands of the mainstream music industry, the move has allowed Tei Shi to release songs in both English and Spanish.

This time around, the artist leans into her multicultural identity, experimenting whimsically with what she has lovingly dubbed Canadianatón — a sonic palette inspired by her upbringing in Vancouver’s mountainous terrain and the melancholic Latin ballads she was raised with.

She digs further into the gritty neo-perreo sound with tantalizing tracks like “222,” featuring Loyal Lobos, and the sticky, synth-laden melody of “Don’t Cry.” In contrast, Tei Shi’s feathery vocals float lightly over a sensual bolero beat in “Aphrodite.”

In the album’s focus track, “Montón,” an upbeat reggaeton track, the artist surrenders herself to the natural motions of love and lust.

“‘Montón’ is a song about falling for someone, crushing hard and giving into it,” says Tei Shi. “I picture it as a late night with your bb, up all night just the two of you in your room, dancing together and tuning out the world.”

It also wouldn’t be a complete Tei Shi album without the thoughtful layering of ethereal beats, most evident in the advance single “Best Be Leaving,” which echoes the essence of legendary dream-pop band Cocteau Twins.

The “Bassically” singer also dropped details on her upcoming U.S. headline tour, which kicks off Sept. 26 in Los Angeles’ Lodge Room. Tei Shi will make a stop in 11 other North American cities, including stops in Washington, D.C., New York, Chicago, Toronto and more.

For full dates and ticket info, visit https://teishi.world/.

On Tuesday, New York City radio host Sid Rosenberg asked Secretary of State Marco Rubio about whether the State Department intends to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and Council on American-Islamic Relations as terrorist organizations. Rubio responded that “all of that is in the works,” although “obviously there are different branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, so you’d have to designate each one of them.”

Logistics and bureaucracy aside: It’s about time.

For far too long, the United States has treated the Muslim Brotherhood with a dangerous combination of naiveté and willful blindness. The Brotherhood is not a random innocuous political movement with a religious bent. It is, and has been since its founding about a century ago, the ideological wellspring of modern Sunni Islamism. The Brotherhood’s fingerprints are on jihadist groups as wide-ranging as Al Qaeda and Hamas, yet successive American administrations — Republican and Democratic alike — have failed to designate its various offshoots for what they are: terrorist organizations.

That failure is not merely academic. It has real-world consequences. By refusing to label the Muslim Brotherhood accurately, we tie our own hands in the fight against Islamism — both at home and abroad. We allow subversive actors to exploit our political system and bankroll extremism under the guise of “cultural” or “charitable” outreach.

Enough is enough.

Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood’s stated mission has never wavered: the establishment of a global caliphate governed by sharia law. The Brotherhood has always attempted to position itself as a “political” organization, but it is “political” in the way Lenin was political. Think subversion through infiltration — or revolution through stealth.

Consider Hamas. Hamas is not merely inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood — it is the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian-Arab branch. The link is unambiguous; as Article Two of Hamas’ founding charter states, “The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Moslem Brotherhood in Palestine.” And Hamas’ charter also makes clear its penchant for explicit violence: “Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.”

This is not the rhetoric of nuance or moderation. This is the ideological foundation of contemporary jihadism. Yet, while Hamas is rightly designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department, other branches of the Muslim Brotherhood remain off the list.

Why? Because Western elites have allowed themselves to be duped by the Brotherhood’s two-faced strategy. Abroad, they openly sow the seeds of jihad, cheer for a global caliphate and preach for the destruction of Israel and Western civilization more broadly. But in the corridors of power in the U.S. and Europe, they and their Qatari paymasters don suits and ties, rebrand as “moderates” and leverage media credulity and overly generous legal protections to plant ideological roots.

What’s more, CAIR — an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history — has extremely well-documented ties to the Brotherhood. And yet CAIR agents continue to operate freely in the United States, masquerading as civil rights advocates while pushing Islamist narratives that undermine the core constitutional principles of equality that they purport to champion. Today, almost two years after CAIR-linked Hamas executed the Oct. 7 pogrom in Israel, CAIR remains in good standing with many elected Democrats.

It shouldn’t be so. In November 2014, the United Arab Emirates designated CAIR as a terrorist organization, citing its links to the Brotherhood and Hamas. And the Brotherhood itself is recognized as a terrorist organization by at least Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, Bahrain and Russia. Jordan also banned the Brotherhood earlier this year. Put bluntly: There is absolutely no reason the United States should have a warmer approach toward CAIR than the UAE or a warmer approach toward the Brotherhood than Saudi Arabia.

The first Trump administration flirted with the idea of designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. It was the right impulse. But the effort was ultimately bogged down by internal bureaucracy and international pressure — most notably from Qatar and Turkey, both sometime U.S. partners that harbor strong Brotherhood sympathies and bankroll Islamist causes. And the second Trump administration’s troubling embrace of Qatar may well nip any designation in the bud before it even takes off.

Critics argue that such a designation would complicate relations with countries where Brotherhood affiliates participate in local politics. But since when did the U.S. place a premium on building alliances with the ideological cousins of Al Qaeda and ISIS?

Moreover, designating the Muslim Brotherhood would empower domestic law enforcement and intelligence agencies to go after its networks and financial infrastructure. It would send a clear signal that the U.S. government no longer accepts a claim of “nonviolent Islamism” as a pass when designating terrorist groups.

In a time when the threat from Islamic extremism remains global and decentralized, we can no longer afford to turn a blind eye to the architects of the movement. The Muslim Brotherhood is not, as “Arab Spring” boosters risibly claimed a decade and a half ago, a Western partner in “democracy.” It is the mother’s milk of modern Sunni jihadism.

The question is not whether we can afford to designate Muslim Brotherhood offshoots as terrorist organizations. It is: How much longer can we afford not to?

Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. @josh_hammer

Singapore – On a weekday afternoon in the heart of the central business district, the BYD showroom on Robinson Road is a picture of futuristic cool.

Inside, sleek electric cars gleam under bright white lights as young professionals drift through the space.

Just a short walk away, diners mingle in a BYD-branded restaurant over craft beer and bar bites in a chic, members’ club-like setting – one of several lifestyle ventures the Chinese electric vehicle giant has rolled out across Singapore.

It is a scene that reflects a larger shift.

Once seen as cheap and functional at best, Chinese brands are fast becoming desirable – even aspirational – among Singapore’s middle class.

Shenzhen-based BYD was by far the top-selling carmaker in the city-state in the first half of 2025.

The EV maker sold almost 4,670 cars – about 20 percent of total vehicle sales – during the period, according to government data, compared with about 3,460 vehicles sold by second-ranked Toyota.

Many other Chinese brands have also made major inroads, from the tea chain Chagee to toymaker Pop Mart and electronics maker Xiaomi, shaping how Singaporeans work, rest and play.

Singapore and Malaysia had the biggest concentration of Chinese food and beverage brands in Southeast Asia last year, according to the research firm Momentum Works, with 32 China-based firms operating 184 outlets in the city-state as of June 2024.

At the same time, Chinese tech firms, including ByteDance, Alibaba Cloud and Tencent, have chosen Singapore for their regional bases.

Healthcare worker Thahirah Silva, 28, said she used to be wary of the “Made in China” label, but shifted her perspective after a visit to the country last year.

“They’re very self-sufficient. They have their own products and don’t need to rely on international brands, and the quality was surprisingly reliable,” Silva told Al Jazeera.

These days, Silva regularly samples Chinese food brands, often after seeing particular dishes or snacks taking off on social media.

Compared with Japanese or Korean brands, she said, Chinese chains are “creative, quick to innovate and set food trends”, though she admits it sometimes feels like they are “taking over” from local brands.

“Somehow, it made me feel there won’t be much difference visiting China, since so many of their brands are already here”, she said.

For younger Singaporeans, the old stigmas around products “made in China” are fading, said Samer Elhajjar, senior lecturer at the marketing department of the National University of Singapore’s (NUS) Business School.

“Many of these brands are now perceived as cool, modern and emotionally in tune with what young consumers want. They feel local and global at the same time,” Elhajjar told Al Jazeera.

“You can walk into a Chagee and feel like you are part of a new kind of aesthetic culture: clean design, soft lighting, calming music. It is not selling a product. It is selling a feeling.”

Moulded by China’s hyper-competitive e-commerce landscape, Chinese companies have been especially adept at rolling out digitally savvy marketing strategies, Elhajjar said.

“These brands are now playing the same emotional game that legacy Western brands have mastered for decades,” he said.

Singapore, where about three-quarters of the population is ethnic Chinese, is an especially attractive testbed for Chinese brands looking to expand overseas, according to analysts.

Doris Ho, who led a brand consultancy in Greater China from 2010 to 2022, said that Chinese brands have been able to succeed in Singapore with a bold, creative approach to innovation that appeals to local sensibilities.

This “new China edge”, Ho said, shows up in BYD features, such as built-in fridges and spacious, fold-flat interiors that can be used for sleeping, and hotpot chain Haidilao’s extravagant hospitality, which sees customers treated to live music performances, shoeshines, hand massages and manicures.

“When they innovate, they don’t follow the same lines you’d expect. It’s their way of looking at something and coming out with a completely surprising answer,” Ho told Al Jazeera.

For Chinese brands, Singapore offers “a sandbox with real stakes” as a compact, ethically diverse and globally-connected market, Elhajjar said.

Because Singapore is seen as sophisticated, efficient and forward-looking, success in the city-state “sends a powerful message”, he said.

The rise of Chinese brands has coincided with Singapore’s growing reliance on China’s economy.

China has been Singapore’s largest trading partner since 2013, with bilateral trade in goods last year reaching $170.2bn.

As Western firms scaled back or paused expansion, Chinese brands moved in, with many effectively propping up Singapore’s property sector and entrenching themselves in the country, said Alan Chong, senior fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS).

Singapore’s government has also actively courted Chinese firms amid the uncertainty from US President Donald Trump’s arrival on the geopolitical scene, Chong said.

“You see the positive image of the United States slipping quite consistently,” Chong told Al Jazeera.

“The US has acted in a miserly, resentful sort of way with ongoing trade tariffs, whereas China remains a factory of the world – seen as an economic benefactor – so there will be a swing in terms of looking at China favourably.”

Chong said that Singapore has also become a virtual second home for some middle-class Chinese nationals, many of whom own property in the city-state.

Singaporean universities have also made a concerted effort to attract Chinese students, with some even introducing programmes taught in Mandarin Chinese.

In a report released earlier this year by China’s Ministry of Education and the Beijing-based Center for China and Globalization, Singapore was ranked the second-most popular destination for Chinese students after the United Kingdom.

Some analysts have observed the rise of “born-again Chinese” (BAC) – people of Chinese descent outside China, especially in Singapore and Malaysia, who embrace a strong pro-China identity, despite limited cultural or linguistic ties.

Donald Low, a lecturer at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, has defined so-called BACs as those who adopt an “idealised, romanticised” idea of a China that is “inevitably rising” and “stands heroically against a hegemonic West”.

The success of Chinese brands in Singapore has not been without some pushback.

Some Singapore residents have felt alienated by stores that operate mainly in Mandarin Chinese, Elhajjar said, given that the city-state has one of the world’s largest immigrant populations, as well as large minorities of native-born Malays and Indians.

There have also been concerns raised about homegrown brands being priced out of the market by the arrival of large firms with deep pockets.

Rising rents resulted in the closure of 3,000 F&B businesses in 2024, the highest number since 2005, Channel NewsAsia reported in January.

In a recent white paper, the Singapore Tenants United for Fairness, a cooperative representing more than 700 business owners, called for curbs on “new and foreign players”.

Leong Chan-Hoong, the head of the RSIS Social Cohesion Research programme, cautioned against blaming Chinese enterprises for social tensions or rising rents, describing the inroads made by some brands as part of the natural cycle of a market-driven economy.

“As a global city-state, we are always at the forefront of such transitions,” Leong told Al Jazeera.

Indeed, for many residents in Singapore, the growing presence of Chinese brands is simply an unremarkable part of daily life.

Ly Nguyen, a 29-year-old Vietnamese migrant working in tech sales, said she started collecting Labubu, the globally popular gremlin-like toys created by Pop Mart, after being captivated by their “ugly but fun” aesthetic.

“Labubu represents independent creativity and a newfound confidence in Chinese-designed memorabilia,” Nguyen told Al Jazeera.

For Nguyen, the popularity of Labubu dolls, which have been spotted with celebrities such as Rihanna and BLACKPINK’s Lisa, points to a generational shift in how Chinese cultural exports are viewed.

“The more familiar people become with these brands, the more likely younger generations will have a new, much more favourable perception towards China as a cultural power,” she said.

On a crisp spring morning in Brampton town of Canada’s Ontario province in May, Harjit Singh Dhadda meticulously tied his traditional sage green turban as he got ready for work.

He embraced his daughter Gurleen before leaving for his trucking insurance office in Mississauga near Toronto’s bustling Pearson international airport.

It was the last time Gurleen saw her 51-year-old father alive. As Harjit reached the car park of his office on May 14, two men confronted him. One of them pumped multiple bullets into Harjit’s body before fleeing in a stolen 2018 Dodge Challenger.

Harjit later died of his injuries at a local hospital.

Hours later, two men claimed responsibility for Harjit’s murder in a Facebook post, calling themselves members of a criminal gang led by Lawrence Bishnoi, an Indian national currently imprisoned at Sabarmati Central Jail in the western Indian state of Gujarat.

Barely a month after Harjit’s murder, a businessman in Surrey, British Columbia, and another in Harjit’s town, Brampton – both of Indian origin – were shot. Local authorities say the murders represent a disturbing expansion of criminal networks rooted in India into Canadian territory – led by India’s most notorious organised crime syndicate, the Lawrence Bishnoi gang.

Now, a growing number of political leaders in Canada want the federal government to act, demanding that the Bishnoi gang be declared a terrorist organisation.

‘Public safety must come first’

“The terrorist designation enables police to use the necessary tools to investigate and bring this activity to an end. It gives police significant investigative tools,” British Columbia’s Premier David Eby said in a statement on June 17.

In July, his Alberta counterpart, Daniel Smith, echoed that call. “Formally designating the Bishnoi Gang as a terrorist entity will unlock critical powers, allowing law enforcement agencies to access the necessary tools and resources needed to disrupt operations and protect our people effectively,” Smith said in a Facebook post on July 14.

Alberta’s Public Safety Minister Mike Ellis said there was credible intelligence indicating the involvement of the Bishnoi gang in extortion and targeted violence in the province and elsewhere in Canada. “The gang originates from India, and ongoing investigations are examining why they are specifically targeting the South Asian community,” Ellis told Al Jazeera in a statement.

Jody Toor, a lawmaker from the Conservative Party in the British Columbia Legislature, and Brampton city Mayor Patrick Brown have also supported designating the Bishnoi gang a terrorist organisation.

The Canadian federal government has suggested that it is examining these demands. “There is precedent for criminal organisations being designated this way, and I fully support a thorough, evidence-based approach,” Secretary of State for Combating Crime Ruby Sahota told Al Jazeera. “Public safety must come first, and if a group meets the criteria, it should be listed without delay.”

Amarnath Amarasingam, a researcher on extremism and an associate professor at Queen’s University in Ontario, said that listing the Bishnoi group as a terrorist organisation would significantly broaden law enforcement powers. It would allow law enforcement agencies to pursue terrorism-related charges, criminalise recruitment or financial support for the group, seize and freeze assets, and give them greater surveillance powers.

Canadian officials had, in 2024, accused the Bishnoi gang of acting at the behest of Indian intelligence agencies to target critics of the Indian government on their soil.

“A terrorist designation would send a strong signal to India and other allies that Canada is taking the transnational threat seriously. It would also increase information-sharing opportunities with global partners,” Amarasingam told Al Jazeera. Those partners include the Five Eyes alliance, which also includes the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.

A terrorist tag could strengthen Canadian requests for arrests through organisations like Interpol, too, he added. It could trigger sanctions against the gang, allowing the government to institute travel bans, visa denials and financial blacklisting of associates and funders.

But he warned that listing the group as a terrorist organisation could have its downsides. While clearly involved in criminal activity, the Bishnoi gang doesn’t appear to have political, religious or ideological objectives – traditionally the bar that listings have needed – he said.

“Using terrorism powers to target a group that lacks this motivation could set a dangerous precedent, weakening the credibility of Canada’s listing process and lowering the threshold, opening the door for future political misuse,” Amarasingam said.

An Indian intelligence asset?

But the Bishnoi gang is no ordinary criminal syndicate, according to Canadian officials.

In recent years, the Indian government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi has faced allegations that its intelligence agents have been attempting to carry out targeted assassinations of Sikh separatists overseas, especially in Canada and the US.

Canada is home to about 770,000 Sikhs, who make up 2.1 percent of its population – their largest number outside India. Many of them moved to Canada in the 1980s when Indian forces launched a violent crackdown on alleged supporters of a movement demanding a separate Sikh homeland, Khalistan, to be carved out of the northern Indian state of Punjab. India describes such separatists as “terrorists”.

It was the killing of Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, 45, outside a Sikh temple on June 18, 2023, that pushed Bishnoi and his gang to the centre of a bitter diplomatic war between Canada and India.

In October that year, then Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau alleged that Indian diplomats were collecting intelligence on “Canadians who are opponents or in disagreement with the Modi government” and that the intelligence reached “criminal organisations like the Lawrence Bishnoi gang to then result in violence against Canadians on the ground”.

Trudeau and his government directly blamed the Modi government for Nijjar’s assassination. Nijjar was a prominent supporter of a Khalistani state.

But New Delhi, while rejecting these allegations, has insisted that it has sent more than two dozen extradition requests to Canada, seeking Ottawa’s help in getting Bishnoi gang members back to India to face “due legal action”. And it says that Canada hasn’t acted on its request.

As Canada and India trade allegations, many in the Indian origin community are dealing with mounting insecurity. Could they be the next target of the Bishnoi group?

‘Threatening call’

Over three decades, Harjit, a Sikh entrepreneur, had built a life that resembled a Canadian immigrant success story.

He ran a company called G&G Trucking Solutions – a consultancy firm that advised its clients on how to start and run a trucking company, and was a commercial insurance broker as well. His business expanded to Calgary and Edmonton, in Alberta, and he had nearly 30 employees.

Then, on December 10, 2023 – his birthday – he received a phone call from someone who identified himself as an Indian gangster, his daughter Gurleen recalled. The caller demanded 500,000 Canadian dollars ($361,000) in extortion money and threatened dire consequences if the money wasn’t paid. Harjit refused to pay and informed law enforcement authorities.

“He told me about the threatening call,” Gurleen, a 24-year-old business student at York University in Toronto, told Al Jazeera.

After the threatening call, Harjit changed his daily routine and began operating his business mostly from home. But eventually, he resumed meetings with clients in his office, his daughter said.

On May 14, Gurleen received a call from her father’s office. He had been shot.

“I rushed to the office. There were bullet casings scattered everywhere. Police had cordoned off the entire area. My father was rushed to the hospital, he later succumbed to his injuries,” said Gurleen.

Police have arrested three men – identified as Aman and Digvijay, both 21, and Shaheel, 22 – as suspects. But Harjit’s family says law enforcement have only scratched the tip of the iceberg.

“Police merely arrested three kids. But who orchestrated this? I wanted to know the man behind my father’s killing,” said Gurleen.

Meanwhile, two men – Rohit Godara and Goldy Brar – who called themselves members of the Bishnoi gang, posted on Facebook that they had killed Harjit. They claimed that Harjit had helped a rival gang and was involved in a murder in India – allegations that the family denies. Police have not confirmed whether they believe the Bishnoi gang was behind Harjit’s killing.

On June 12, 2025, another Indian-origin businessman, Satwinder Sharma, was shot in Surrey, British Columbia. An Indian origin gangster, Jiwan Fauji claimed responsibility for the murder. Indian police have labelled Fauji an alleged member of Babbar Khalsa International, a banned Khalistani outfit. Sharma’s family did not respond to an Al Jazeera request for an interview.

A little over a week later, on June 20, Brampton-based businessman, MP Dhanoa, was shot down. Again, Godara and Brar claimed responsibility on behalf of the Bishnoi gang in a Facebook post.

Harjit, Sharma and Dhanoa have no known links to the Khalistani movement.

But gang leader Lawrence Bishnoi, apart from his crime network, has presented himself as a Hindu nationalist in interviews from jail, and some supporters of Modi’s Hindu majoritarian Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government have spoken of how the gangster had scared Khalistan supporters.

Rise to notoriety

Indian police officials say that Bishnoi, 32, controls more than 700 sharpshooters who carry out murders and extortion globally. And he does this from behind bars, shuffling between various prisons for nearly a decade now.

Bishnoi and Brar gained wide notoriety in May 2022, when the gang murdered prominent Punjabi singer and rapper Sidhu Moosewala in Punjab. Police said Brar allegedly orchestrated Moosewala’s killing from Canada.

Ajai Sahni, executive director of the New Delhi Institute for Conflict Management, said establishing a command chain – and even defining what constitutes a gang – isn’t easy with transnational groups. “Any incident executed in India can be claimed by Bishnoi gang members in Canada or in the US, and vice versa through unverifiable social media accounts,” Sahni told Al Jazeera. He suggested that in such cases, even surveillance records against suspects might not suffice as strong enough legal evidence.

Sanjay Verma, former Indian high commissioner – Canada expelled him after Trudeau’s allegations in 2023 – said last year that India had shared information about Brar’s presence in Canada with Ottawa.

In 2024, Bishnoi’s gang claimed responsibility for the murder of a 66-year-old politician, Baba Siddique, in Mumbai’s Bandra area. Two members of the Bishnoi gang were also arrested for firing outside the Mumbai residence of popular Bollywood actor, Salman Khan.

Gurmeet Singh Chauhan, deputy inspector general of the Anti-Gangster Task Force in India’s Punjab, advocates for a joint data-sharing mechanism between countries affected by criminal gangs, like Bishnoi.

“If we have any evidence, it should be promptly shared with our Canadian counterparts, who must investigate it without delay and keep us informed. Crime is crime – no matter where it occurs in the world,” Chauhan told Al Jazeera. “There is a very thin line between organised crime and terrorism. These networks can be exploited for terrorist activities at any time, anywhere in the world.”

The Bishnoi group has also claimed responsibility for attacks on the homes of two prominent Punjabi singers, AP Dhillon and Gippy Grewal, in British Columbia, over the past two years, as its empire of fear has expanded from Mumbai to Mississauga. And on August 7, an alleged Bishnoi gang member claimed responsibility for gunshots fired at a cafe in British Columbia owned by Indian comedian Kapil Sharma.

‘They could execute me’

Satish Kumar, a 73-year-old businessman in Surrey, British Columbia who migrated to Canada 45 years ago, says he lives in constant fear.

Kumar is the president of Lakshmi Narayan Temple in Surrey, a prominent religious site for Hindus.

Earlier this year, he received a phone call from a man who identified himself as Godara, the Bishnoi associate who – along with Brar – claimed responsibility for the killings of Harjit and Dhanoa. “He demanded two million Canadian dollars [$1.45m] as extortion,” Kumar told Al Jazeera, adding that he blocked the number.

Later he reported the call to the police, after receiving threats from other numbers. “They sent multiple voice notes on May 28, 2025, threatening to kill me and harm my business premises, but I blocked the numbers”, said Kumar.

Then, the threats turned to bullets.

On June 7, men allegedly belonging to the Bishnoi gang fired shots at various buildings owned by Kumar. “The gang members filmed the shootings at three of my premises and sent me the footage, but I refused to pay extortion,” he said.

Kumar said he was frustrated with what he called an “inadequate response” by the Canadian police. “They [gangsters] could execute me at any moment. I still receive calls from them. My family is under constant stress,” he told Al Jazeera.

As attacks escalate, the South Asian community in Surrey and Brampton has been campaigning for more safety on social media, uploading videos of various shootings in the two cities. Since 2003, gang-related homicides in British Columbia have climbed from 21 percent to 46 percent of all homicides in 2023, according to the provincial police.

“During work, I can momentarily forget about these gangs,” Kumar said. “But once I finish my work, then it’s there – this fear.”

NEW YORK — The Smithsonian Institution has removed from an exhibit a reference to President Trump’s two impeachments, a decision that comes as the White House exerts pressure to offer a more positive — and selective — view of American history. A spokesperson said the exhibit eventually “will include all impeachments.”

A label referring to impeachment had been added in 2021 to the National Museum for American History’s exhibit on the American presidency, in a section called “Limits of Presidential Power.” Smithsonian spokesperson Phillip Zimmerman said Friday that the section, which includes materials on the impeachment of President Clinton and the Watergate scandal that helped lead to President Nixon’s resignation, needed to be overhauled. He said the decision came after the museum was “reviewing our legacy content recently.”

“Because the other topics in this section had not been updated since 2008, the decision was made to restore the Impeachment case back to its 2008 appearance,” Zimmerman said in an email.

He said that in September 2021, the museum installed a temporary label on content concerning Trump’s impeachments. “It was intended to be a short-term measure to address current events at the time,” he said. But the label remained in place.

“A large permanent gallery like the American Presidency that opened in 2000 requires a significant amount of time and funding to update and renew,” he said. “A future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments.”

White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said the Smithsonian has “highlighted divisive DEI exhibits which are out of touch with mainstream America” for too long.

“We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness,” he said in a statement that did not address the missing reference to Trump’s impeachments.

Trump’s impeachments were more recent

Trump is the only president to have been impeached twice — in 2019, for pushing Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, who would defeat Trump in the 2020 election; and in 2021 for “incitement of insurrection,” a reference to the Jan. 6, 2021, siege of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters attempting to halt congressional certification of Biden’s victory.

The Democratic majority in the House voted each time for impeachment. The Republican-led Senate each time acquitted Trump. Soon after Trump’s first impeachment, the history museum issued a statement saying that curators “will determine which objects best represent these historic events for inclusion in the national collection.”

Since returning to office in January, Trump has cut funding, forced out officials and otherwise demanded changes across a range of Washington cultural institutions, including the Smithsonian, the Library of Congress, the Kennedy Center and the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The current administration has targeted interpretations of history

In March, Trump issued an executive order titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,” in which he alleged that the Smithsonian was beholden to “a divisive, race-centered ideology.” He has placed Vice President JD Vance in charge of an effort to ensure no funding goes to “exhibits or programs that degrade shared American values, divide Americans based on race, or promote programs or ideologies inconsistent with Federal law and policy.”

Congressional Democrats issued a statement in April calling Trump’s order a “flagrant attempt to erase Black history.”

Last week, artist Amy Sherald canceled a planned exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery after officials raised concerns over her painting “Trans Forming Liberty, 2024,” in which she depicts a nonbinary transgender person posing as the Statue of Liberty. Sherald is best known for her painting of then-First Lady Michelle Obama, which was commissioned by the Portrait Gallery.

Founded in the 19th century, the Smithsonian oversees a network of cultural centers that includes the portrait gallery, the history museum, the National Zoo and the Smithsonian Gardens. News of the Trump impeachment label being removed was first reported by the Washington Post.

Italie writes for the Associated Press.

Hello! I’m Mark Olsen. Welcome to another edition of your regular field guide to a world of Only Good Movies.

Among this week’s new releases is “28 Years Later,” the third film in the series that dates back to 2002’s “28 Days Later.” The new project reunites the core creative team from the first movie: director Danny Boyle, screenwriter Alex Garland, cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle and producer Andrew Macdonald.

This time out the “rage” virus that turns people into crazed cannibal monsters has been isolated to the U.K., which has been quarantined from the rest of the world. A small community of uninfected survivors live on a coastal island and make their way to the mainland to hunt and for supplies. A teenage boy (Alfie Williams), having made one expedition with his father (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), goes back with his ailing mother (Jodie Comer) in search of a doctor (Ralph Fiennes) rumored to be able to help them.

In her review of the film, Amy Nicholson wrote that it “has a dull central plot beefed up by unusual ambition, quirky side characters and maniacal editing. It’s a kooky spectacle, a movie that aggressively cuts from moments of philosophy to violence, from pathos to comedy. Tonally, it’s an ungainly creature. From scene to scene, it lurches like the brain doesn’t know what the body is doing. Garland and Boyle don’t want the audience to know either, at least not yet.”

Screenwriter Alex Garland, left, director Danny Boyle and cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle, photographed in London in June.

(Jennifer McCord / For The Times)

“28 Years Later” is the first film in a planned trilogy, with the second film, directed by Nia DaCosta, having already been shot.

I spoke with Boyle, Garland, Mantle and Macdonald for a feature story that will be in print on Sunday. Whereas the original “28 Days Later” was notable for its use of consumer-grade digital video cameras, this time the production used modified iPhones to capture most of its imagery. The result is a fresh and distinctive look with both a sense of immediacy and an unexpected beauty.

“What was great about the script is that although you were inheriting some DNA from the original film, it was a completely original story,” said Boyle. “And deserved to be treated like that.”

Cinématographe heads to L.A. theaters

Norm Macdonald, left, and Artie Lange in the 1998 movie “Dirty Work,” recently restored to an extended “Dirtier Cut.”

(Jack Rowand / MGM)

This week the boutique home video label Cinématographe is participating in screenings all over town, further cementing the evolving relationship between physical media and the local revival scene.

Curated and produced by Justin LaLiberty as an offshoot of the Vinegar Syndrome label, Cinématographe is among a handful of companies that create releases meant to look as nice on your shelf as they do onscreen. With beautiful restorations presenting the titles as optimally as possible, the releases come with many extras highlighting their production and what makes them special, alongside new critical essays on the films. Among the titles released by the company so far are John Dahl’s “Red Rock West,” Paul Schrader’s “Touch,” Robert Altman’s “Thieves Like Us” and Martha Coolidge’s “Joy of Sex.”

“Cinématographe has a very specific kind of curatorial approach,” said LaLiberty in a Zoom call this week from his home in Connecticut. “And it also has a mission in that it’s trying to shine a light on these movies that have fallen into obscurity for one reason or another.”

Working in conjunction with the local screening collective Hollywood Entertainment in pulling together some of the local events, LaLiberty got a sense of the current repertory scene in L.A. and hopes that putting on Cinématographe screenings here is something that can become a regular occurrence.

“What I like about L.A.’s cinema scene, without being there, is seeing how the spaces cater to different audiences,” said LaLiberty. “It happens in New York to an extent too, but I’ve noticed it a lot more with L.A. where I think just by virtue of geography, those theaters have to build a community that’s a lot more specific to whatever their mission may be or whatever audience they’re trying to cultivate is. So that’s what I tried to do with these screenings is kind of hone in on what demographic those spaces are going to reach and what film made the most sense for each one.”

The cover art for the Cinématographe home video release of Jim McBride’s 1983 remake of “Breathless.”

(Cinématographe)

On Sunday at Brain Dead Studios there will be a restored 4K screening of the exuberant 1983 remake of “Breathless” with director Jim McBride in person. That will be followed by the Los Angeles premiere of the 4K restoration of Bob Saget’s 1998 comedy “Dirty Work,” starring Norm MacDonald, in its newly created “Dirtier Cut,” which restores the film to a version screened for test audiences before it was chopped down to earn a PG-13 rating. Co-writer Frank Sebastiano will be in attendance.

On Monday, LaLiberty will be at a pop-up at the Highland Park video store Vidéotheque, selling discs from Cinématographe, Vinegar Syndrome and affiliated titles from OCN Distribution — including some that are out of print. (Discs will be on sale at all the events too.)

On Tuesday at Whammy Analog Media, 1994’s essential lesbian rom-com “Go Fish” will show in a 4K restoration with director and co-writer Rose Troche in person. On Wednesday, there will be a 45th anniversary screening at Vidiots of the 4K restoration of Ronald F. Maxwell’s 1980 “Little Darlings,” starring Tatum O’Neal and Kristy McNichol as two teenage girls having a private competition at summer camp to lose their virginity.

On Thursday, in conjunction with Cinematic Void, the Los Feliz 3 will host a showing of John Badham’s 1994 action-thriller “Drop Zone” starring Wesley Snipes, with the director in person.

And while it may seem counterintuitive for a home video label to be encouraging people to go see movies in theaters, for LaLiberty the two go hand in hand.

“My ultimate mission is for these films to find an audience,” LaLiberty said. “‘Little Darlings’ is one of those movies that was out of circulation for so long that now that it’s back and people can find it — to me that’s the work. The end goal is that these films are brought back and that they’re available for people to see and talk about and share. Theaters can play them and have them look great. I don’t see it as cannibalizing. I see it as just being a part of the job.”

‘Rebels of the Neon Millennium’

Shu Qi in Hou Hsiao-hsien’s 2001 film “Millennium Mambo.”

(Kino Lorber)

The American Cinematheque is launching a series looking at films from Southeast Asia made around the turn of the 21st century and shot through with the energy of specific Y2K anxieties. These were films that felt cutting-edge and of the moment when they were released, but now perhaps function at least in part as memory pieces of their time and place. This is a sharp, smartly put-together series that contextualizes a group of films and filmmakers.

Kicking off with Wong Kar-wai’s 1995 “Fallen Angels,” the series also includes Hou Hsiao-hsien’s 2001 “Millennium Mambo,” Tsai Ming-liang’s 1992 “Rebels of the Neon God,” Fruit Chan’s 1997 “Made in Hong Kong,” Shunji Iwai’s 2001 “All About Lily Chou-Chou” Jia Zhangke’s 2002 “Unknown Pleasures” and Lou Ye’s 2000 “Suzhou River.”

Writing about “Fallen Angels” in 1998, Kevin Thomas called it “an exhilarating rush of a movie, with all manner of go-for-broke visual bravura that expresses perfectly the free spirits of his bold young people. … Indeed, ‘Fallen Angels’ celebrates youth, individuality and daring in a ruthless environment that is wholly man-made, a literal underworld similar to the workers’ realm of ‘Metropolis’ — only considerably less spacious. Life proceeds at a corrosive rock music beat.”

Points of interest

‘Dogtooth’ in 4K

An image from Yorgos Lanthimos’ movie “Dogtooth.”

(Kino Lorber)

Greek filmmaker Yorgos Lanthimos’ second feature, “Dogtooth,” was his international breakthrough, winner of the Un Certain Regard section at Cannes and nominated for an Oscar. Yet even its most ardent admirers at the time would likely never have imagined Lanthimos would become the maker of commercially successful, Oscar-winning (and still weird) films such as “The Favourite” and “Poor Things.”

A new 4K restoration of “Dogtooth” will screen at the American Cinematheque at the Los Feliz 3 on Saturday, Tuesday and Sunday the 29th. The story feels abstracted and fractured, as a family lives in comfortable isolation, creating their own rules and language as the parents attempt to keep their children, now young adults, in a state of arrested development.

When it was first being released, “Dogtooth” struggled to find screens in Los Angeles. In my January 2011 review, I referred to it as “part enigma, part allegory and even part sci-fi in its creation of a completely alternate reality.”

When the film had its local premiere as part of the Los Angeles Greek Film Festival some seven months earlier, I spoke to Lanthimos, who perhaps pointed the way to some of his future work when he said, “It’s much more important to me for the audience to be engaged and to think about things themselves. If they miss any information, I’m OK with that instead of explaining every little detail and telling everyone what they should be thinking and how exactly things are.”

Lanthimos added, “People ask me if the film is about home-schooling or if it’s political, about totalitarian states or the information we get from the media. And of course all those things were not in our minds as we were making the film, but it was intentional to make the film so people can come in and have their own thoughts about it.”

‘The Seven Year Itch’ 70th anniversary

Marilyn Monroe and Tom Ewell re-create a scene from 1955’s “The Seven Year Itch” on the Fox Studio Lot on Stage 9.

(Twentieth Century Fox)

On Wednesday the Laemmle Royal will present a 70th anniversary screening of Billy Wilder’s “The Seven Year Itch” introduced by film writers Stephen Farber and Michael McClellan. Starring Marilyn Monroe and Tom Ewell, “Itch” was written by Wilder and George Axelrod, an adaptation of the hit Broadway play that also starred Ewell.

Though the movie does include the iconic scene of Monroe standing over a subway grate, it deserves to be remembered for much more than that. It’s a bracing satire of midcentury masculinity, with Ewell playing a mild-mannered family man who lets himself be taken away by fantasies of what may happen while he is on his own for a summer with a young single woman living upstairs from his New York apartment.

Writing about the movie in June 1955, Edwin Schallert said, “This picture is nothing for the moralists, though it may not quite satisfy the immoralists either, whoever they are.”

In other news

Tom Cruise, Dolly Parton among honorary Oscar recipients

Tom Cruise and Dolly Parton will be honored at the upcoming Governors Awards.

(Evan Agostini / Invision / Charlie Riedel / AP)

This week the motion picture academy announced four honorees for the Governors Awards in November. Dolly Parton will receive the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, while honorary Oscars will go to actor, dancer, choreographer and director Debbie Allen, production designer Wynn Thomas and actor and producer Tom Cruise.

As always, it must be noted how disappointing it is that these awards will be bestowed at an untelevised ceremony and not as part of the Academy Awards telecast itself. The idea of giving an award to Tom Cruise, who has recently refashioned himself as nothing less than an international ambassador for movies and Hollywood in general, and not putting it on TV is just beyond reason.

Here is hoping that Cruise will perhaps be able to do what his co-star in “The Color of Money” Paul Newman once did, which is win a competitive Oscar after already being given an honorary one.

As looming fear over ongoing ICE raids in the greater Los Angeles area continues, one group of music enthusiasts is using their platform to call out for more visibility and support from famed artists — underscoring tense conversations about influence in the Latino music scene.

Since 2021, the “Agushto Papá” podcast — founded and hosted by Jason Nuñez, Diego Mondragon and Angel Lopez— has played a key role in chronicling the rise of música Mexicana by giving up-and-coming artists a platform to showcase their talent and personalities. Popular genre acts like Xavi, Eslabon Armado, Becky G, DannyLux, Ivan Cornejo and more have appeared on their YouTube channel, which has amassed over 635,000 subscribers to date.

However, on Monday, the trio strayed away from their standard entertainment content, uploading an Instagram reel reflecting disappointment over ICE sweeps, which have targeted communities of Paramount, Huntington Park, Santa Ana and other predominantly Latino communities.

“It’s super unfortunate to see what’s happening within our Latino community,” Nuñez states in the clip. “I think it’s very important that we stay united and spread as much awareness as possible.”

The video initially highlighted efforts by Del Records, who are providing free legal assistance to members of the community who are facing deportation orders; earlier this year, the Bell Gardens label was caught in a web of guilty court verdicts due to their links to cartels. Still, the label is one of the few Latino-led music entities outspoken about providing resources for affected individuals, “but I definitely think they shouldn’t be the only ones,” added Nuñez in the video.

Podcast co-host Lopez prompted viewers to tag their favorite artist in the comment section if they would like for them to speak up, he said, “I think it’s fair and just that [artists] show some of that love back to the community that’s in need and that is hurting.”

“I think that [artists] do play a big role because I think we see them as role models or leaders in our community,” said Lopez in a Tuesday interview with The Times. “These are times when we need those leaders to speak up and for us and people that maybe can’t speak up as well.”

The topic of immigration hits close to home for two of the members; Nuñez and Mondragon are both DACA recipients and openly discuss their unique experience on the podcast. The Obama-era program, which provides temporary relief from deportation and work authorization, has also come under attack in recent years by Trump-appointed judges and is currently recognized as unlawful by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, although application renewals remain.

“I feel betrayed because with [“Agushto Papá”], we have a lot of artists and companies and labels reach out to us to promote albums, tours,” said Mondragon. “We’ve actually reached out to some of these companies [and] they’ve been ignoring us.”

While Mondragon won’t disclose names, he says that many individuals have not spoken out because, “their artists are not born in the U.S.” To that he quips, “We don’t have papers as well, and we’re still using our platform.”

There’s a sense of betrayal, the group says, especially given how various artists and labels came out to support Californians during the January wildfires, “but now when it comes down to bringing awareness to things that are happening to their people, it’s just unfair that they’re keeping quiet,” says Nuñez.

Still, the “Agushto Papá” podcast is not alone in this sentiment; if you scroll across the comment sections of trending música Mexicana acts, you’ll likely come across comments asking them why they’re staying silent about recent sweeps, which immigration-leaders say have totaled at least 300 people.

“I think my big let down is that these companies/artists are vocal about their culture, their heritage, their ethnicity every chance they get, but now I feel like they’re picking and choosing only when it matters,” said Lopez.

In days following public demonstrations and protests, several Mexican American artists have vocalized their support of the immigrant communities including big acts like Ivan Cornejo, Becky G, and Chiquis.

On Tuesday, the boisterous San Bernardino band Fuerza Regida, uploaded a statement to their 9.1 million followers, sharing support for the Latino community. The podcast trio later thanked in a follow-up video.

“There’s still a lot of artists that are staying silent and we hope by this week they speak out about what’s going on,” states Mondragon in the video, urging artists to spread awareness, or perhaps, if they’re bold, front a portion of their millions to the community, even if it means opting for first class instead of their private jet, he says.

After hours of travelling, waiting in the baggage hall to be reunited with your suitcase can be a long, drawn out process – but not for everyone

After hours of travelling, collecting your baggage is the last – but most important – thing you want to do.

To avoid the long waiting time at the conveyor belt, there’s one type of suitcase that will be “guaranteed” as first to come out – or one of the first ones at least, according to an airport worker.

If you’re in a situation where you have to check in your bag, and you haven’t got much time in between, there’s one hack revealed by an employee from a regional US airport that will help you get your bags much faster – and a former check-in agent has agreed it does actually work.

READ MORE: Flight attendant shares one £1.22 item every passenger should carry on-board

Speaking to Quora, the employee said: “Bags will always be loaded front to back on the bag carts so if you check last your bags will be in the last bag cart.” Nonetheless, this trick can be quite risky, as passengers might be missing the check-in closing time.

However, there’s another trick, which is probably far easier to do: ask the check-in agent to add a fragile sticker to your luggage before sending it off. This is because bags identified as fragile are often loaded last, therefore, they’re the first ones to come out.

Travel expert Katy Nastro from Going also said that being a frequent traveller and earning a status with a specific airline comes with a lot of benefits, including the priority of your bags being offloaded first.

She explained that airlines have special tags for those types of passengers, so employees have it much easier to identify them and separate them from the rest.

READ MORE: ‘I spent 48 hours in EU capital city and paid less than a night out in London’

However, Jesse Neugarten, another airline expert from Dollar Flight Club, revealed that the only way your bag is guaranteed to come out one of the first ones is by travelling in First Class. He said: “Baggage for first-class passengers often travels on a separate cart and is sorted for fast delivery.”

“It’s one of the few consistent perks airlines still prioritise – and yes, it often works,” he added.

If you’re planning on travelling soon, but don’t want to spend thousands of pounds on a First Class ticket, you might want to consider trying out one of these hacks. Although they’re not completely guaranteed, it never hurts to try.