Viewpoint |
October 7


Yumna Zahid Ali challenges the narrative that Oct. 7 marks the start of the Gaza conflict. It details a continuous timeline of control, siege, and violence dating back to 1948.


by Yumna Zahid Ali, Guest Commentator



The war did not begin on October 7, 2023, no matter how loudly that date is repeated to erase the long history of occupation and conflict that came before it. October 7 is used as a license to forget, a convenient starting line that allows seventy-five years of dispossession, occupation, siege, and repeated military assaults to be reduced to historical ash. But the testimonies of the oppressed do not work that way.

oursentinel.com viewpoint
Wars do not begin when the powerful decide to start counting; they begin when people are uprooted from their land, dignity, safety, and any right to futurity, and Gaza’s story begins in 1948, not in 2023.

In 1948, during what Palestinians call Al-Nakba, or “The Catastrophe,” the creation of the State of Israel came with the forced displacement of at least 750,000 Palestinians from their ancestral land. Entire villages were cleared, homes demolished or seized, and families sent into exile under the illusion that it was only for a short time. It was not. Those refugees were never allowed to return, and Gaza became one of the places where their descendants were compressed into a narrow strip of land where loss was perpetuated, not remembered. When Gaza is bombed today, it is not just a city under fire; it is a refugee camp built on an unresolved crime.


... a diplomatic solution over time revealed itself as management of the conflict rather than its resolution, breeding disillusionment instead of reconciliation.

In 1967, Israel occupied the Gaza Strip following the Six-Day War, placing its population under military rule and control. From that moment forward, Gaza’s residents did not control their borders, their airspace, or their freedom of movement. Daily life was regulated by an occupying power that could decide who traveled, who entered, who passed through a checkpoint, who received medicine, and who would have their name crossed out. This was not a temporary emergency measure; it was the normalization of domination, and it hardened a sense of injustice, not because Palestinians rejected peace, but because they were never offered freedom.

By 1987, that pressure escalated into the First Intifada, a mass uprising driven largely by civilians who used protests, strikes, and civil disobedience to confront decades of occupation. It was not an armed invasion but a civilian-led revolt born from humiliation and dehumanization, and it was met with ferocious military force, mass arrests, beatings, and live ammunition. This was the state screaming its only truth: “We have the guns. Your justice is a fantasy. Obey.”

The 1990s brought the Oslo Accords, which were sold to the world as a peace process but felt to many Palestinians like an agreement to keep talking about…an agreement that would never come. While a Palestinian Authority was created, real sovereignty never followed, and Israel retained decisive control over borders, armed enforcement, and colonization. Settlement expansion continued in the West Bank, occupation remained intact, and Gaza was targeted for further degradation. What was presented as a diplomatic solution over time revealed itself as management of the conflict rather than its resolution, breeding disillusionment instead of reconciliation.

In 2005, Israel announced its unilateral “disengagement” from Gaza, withdrawing settlers and soldiers from inside the strip while keeping its chokehold over its airspace, territorial waters, population registry, and all land crossings. Gaza was not freed; it was sealed. Its people could not move, trade, or rebuild freely, and the territory became dependent on an occupying power that claimed it was no longer responsible while still maintaining a remote-controlled siege. This contradiction was the catalyst for what followed.


This was not an accidental escalation. It was a one-sided, deeply imbalanced war.

When Hamas won Palestinian elections in 2006, Gaza was placed under a strangling blockade by Israel, with Egypt’s cooperation and Western backing. This was not a counter-terrorism operation; it was collective punishment imposed on over two million people, most of them civilians, many of them children still in diapers. The blockade crippled Gaza’s economy, restricted food, medicine, fuel, and construction materials, and trapped every last soul in a sealed enclosure. Despair deepened, and the world largely accepted it as necessary.

What followed were repeated military assaults that reinforced the reality of Gaza as a place where civilian life was expendable. In 2008–2009, Operation Cast Lead killed around 1,400 Palestinians, including hundreds of children, while Israel lost 13 people, several from friendly fire. In 2012, Operation Pillar of Defense left 167 Palestinians dead in just eight days. In 2014, Operation Protective Edge devastated Gaza over 51 days, killing more than 2,200 Palestinians, over 500 of them children, and flattening densely populated city quarters while Gaza remained shrink-wrapped and unable to shelter its people. Each assault cycled back to the same four words: ceasefire, rubble, blockade, trauma.

In 2018, Palestinians attempted a different form of resistance through the Great March of Return, where largely unarmed protesters demanded an end to the blockade and the restitution of their right of return to the homes dispossessed in 1948. They were quelled with sniper fire. Over 200 were killed, thousands were wounded, many were permanently disabled, and dozens of children were brutalized by bullets. Even the protest was treated as a threat to be eliminated rather than an appeal for humanity to be heeded.

The punitive pattern continued through May 2021 and August 2022, with further Israeli operations killing hundreds more Palestinians, including many children, while Gaza remained stranded, impoverished, and futureless. This was not an accidental escalation. It was a one-sided, deeply imbalanced war. One side owns the prison and writes the news. The other digs graves and waits to be bombed again.

To claim that the war began on October 7, 2023, is not an act of providing a complete picture; it is an act of distortion and falsification. It erases the refugee camps, the occupation, the blockade, the bombings, the crushed protests, and a childhood defined by sirens. It reframes history so that violence appears spontaneous rather than inevitable, detached rather than provoked. October 7 represents a critical node in a continuous historical sequence…one that begins not in 2023, but in 1948, with the foundational injustices that have defined the conflict ever since.

“You cannot bury seventy-five years of suffering under one date and then call it honesty.”


About the author ~

Yumna Zahid Ali is a writer and educator who spends her free time reading, analyzing literature, and exploring cultural and intellectual debates. When she’s not writing for global audiences, she enjoys reflecting on societal issues and using her voice to challenge inequities, especially those affecting women. She also loves diving into history, believing that remembering the past is an act of defiance and a way to hold power accountable.




TAGS: Gaza war historical context, why Gaza conflict did not start October 7, Gaza history since 1948 opinion, Israel Palestine conflict long-term analysis, Gaza blockade and occupation explained

Trump orders U.S. attack on Venezuela, President Maduro and his wife captured


The U.S. military launched a reported strike against Venezuela early Saturday, according to CNN. President Donald Trump said U.S. forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife. Venezuela responded by declaring a national emergency.


VENEZUELA - CNN reported at 1:50 a.m. local time Saturday that the United States military had launched an attack on Venezuela at the behest of the President, apparently without Congressional approval.

In a statement posted on his Truth Social account, President Donald Trump wrote that the U.S. initiated a “large scale strike against Venezuela” and “captured its leader, President Nicolas Maduro,” along with his wife.

Here is the statement from Truth Social in full:

“The United States of America has successfully carried out a large scale strike against Venezuela and its leader, President Nicolas Maduro, who has been, along with his wife, captured and flown out of the Country.

“This operation was done in conjunction with U.S. Law Enforcement. Details to follow. There will be a News Conference today at 11 A.M., at Mar-a-Lago. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

Venezuela went into a state of national emergency and asked for help from allies and neighboring countries to repel what it described as an American invasion.

Long-serving President Nicolas Maduro was captured by U.S. special forces and flown out of the country. The invasion follows months of accusations from the Trump administration, which has pressured Maduro over allegations of drug running and questions surrounding the legitimacy of his administration.

The United States has not undertaken such a direct intervention in Latin America since the 1989 invasion of Panama to depose military leader Manuel Noriega over similar allegations.

The White House announced that the president would issue a statement to the press later this morning at 11 a.m. Eastern time.

Below are some of the initial reactions from X.






Viewpoint |
Women in authority roles exposes male mediocrity


Who keeps moving the finish line whenever a woman take over a leadership position in work or politics?


by Yumna Zahid Ali, Guest Commentator



Who told you leadership has a gender? Who decided authority sounds masculine and strength must wear a man’s face? Who keeps moving the finish line every time a woman reaches it? And why, in the 21st century, are we still pretending this debate isn’t already settled? Because, honestly, this argument itself is tired, dusty, and intellectually embarrassing. The idea that women are “born followers” is not an opinion. It is a confession. Yes! A confession of insecurity, nostalgia for unearned authority, and fear that their own mediocrity will be exposed.

oursentinel.com viewpoint
So, let me be clear, once and for all: Women are leaders. Not potential leaders. Not emerging leaders. Not leaders “despite” being women. Leaders. Period. And anyone still arguing otherwise is not protecting tradition…they’re protecting their own comfortable delusion.

It’s unbelievable how men have been failing upward for centuries, but somehow, women are the risky choice? All of which exposes the double standard: a man forgets half the plan: he’s “visionary.” A woman delivers the entire plan: she’s “bossy.” A man yells: he’s passionate. A woman raises her voice: she needs to “calm down.” A man leads with ego: a strong leader. A woman leads with results: threatening.

Interesting math!

The world loves to say women are “too emotional” to lead, while history is basically a very long, very embarrassing highlight reel of male tantrums with catastrophic consequences. Wars started over bruised egos, chest-thumping pride, and leaders who mistook dominance for wisdom. Empires burned because someone could not handle being challenged, corrected, or told no. Borders were redrawn because a man felt entitled to land, power, or legacy. Millions died not because solutions were unavailable, but because compromise bruised male pride. Entire populations were sacrificed to prove strength, authority, and superiority.

Don't believe me? The evidence is written across the cities themselves: Warsaw, Berlin, Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Grozny, Aleppo, Mariupol, Kyiv, Baghdad, Gaza City, and countless more.

The status quo consumes women’s labor but panics at women’s authority. It adores women as supporting characters, housekeepers, emotional sponges, therapists, sacrificial lambs, anything but decision-makers. Because a woman with power isn’t inspirational; she’s inconvenient.

Women who actually lead are called cold, unlikable, and arrogant. Interesting how male leaders with the same traits are called focused, commanding, and confident. Apparently, likability is a mandatory tax only if you are not supposed to have power.

Say it with me: Women are leaders. Not someday. Not maybe. Not if approved.

They always have been.

The only difference now? They’re done explaining it to people who were never even qualified to question it in the first place.



About the author ~

Yumna Zahid Ali is a writer and educator who spends her free time reading, analyzing literature, and exploring cultural and intellectual debates. When she’s not writing for global audiences, she enjoys reflecting on societal issues and using her voice to challenge inequities, especially those affecting women. She also loves diving into history, believing that remembering the past is an act of defiance and a way to hold power accountable.




TAGS: women have always been leaders, why are men so afraid of women in leadership roles, why are women a risky choice for governing, Women born flollowers, male insecurity challenged

Viewpoint |
The human cost behind a “ceasefire” that isn’t


oursentinel.com viewpoint
A November 22 airstrike in Gaza raises a hard question: What kind of ceasefire includes civilian deaths? A commentary on the gap between rhetoric and reality.


by Yumna Zahid Ali, Guest Commentator



oursentinel.com viewpoint
On November 22, 2025, Israel carried out another airstrike on Gaza, killing more than twenty people and injuring dozens.

Tell me… what kind of “ceasefire” conducts extrajudicial killings?

Can you define a “ceasefire” for me? Because from here, it looks like a sky full of Israeli jets and the ground littered with Palestinian bodies. Should the orphans be grateful their parents were killed during a “ceasefire” and not a “war”?

The ceasefire appears to be a diplomatic fiction, maintained for political cover while military operations continue. They offer the language of peace with one hand, while the other guides a missile to its target.

In Gaza, what disgusts me is that the imbalance of power is the entire point. It is not a fight for victory, but a demonstration of total domination over a trapped and helpless population. On one side: a state military with sovereign borders, an air force, and international backing. On the other: a non-state actor embedded within, and reliant upon, a civilian population of over two million with no functional sovereignty and no exit.

Headlines highlight geopolitical schemes, while the phrase “civilian casualties” becomes a repetitive, desensitizing afterthought. For many, seeing a headline about civilian deaths now triggers a reflex to scroll further, not to learn more. The “comments section” on reports of civilian casualties is often filled with justification and whataboutism, not grief or solidarity.

Did they sign a peace treaty or a bombing permit? Because you can’t have “partial” peace when it comes to bombs. The November 22 strike is just the latest example of the world watching politics while Gaza bleeds. The international response mechanism to violence in Gaza appears path-dependent, following established political scripts that prioritize process over protection, and dialogue over decisive action to safeguard civilian lives.

Is the peace process just a feel-good term for “waiting for the next ceasefire violation”? Are we waiting for a “perfect solution” while perfectly fine with the current imperfection of dead children? Because my conscience screams that the cost of a false peace is always paid by those who never signed the treaty.


About the author ~

Yumna Zahid Ali is a writer and educator who spends her free time reading, analyzing literature, and exploring cultural and intellectual debates. When she’s not writing for global audiences, she enjoys reflecting on societal issues and using her voice to challenge inequities, especially those affecting women. She also loves diving into history, believing that remembering the past is an act of defiance and a way to hold power accountable.




TAGS: impact of ceasefire violations on civilian populations in Gaza, analysis of Israeli airstrikes during declared ceasefires, humanitarian consequences of disproportionate military power in Gaza, international response to Palestinian civilian casualties 2025, ethical debate over false peace narratives in Middle East conflicts

Viewpoint |
Mamdani challenges U.S. on its promise of "never gain"


Sentinel logo
Many prominent opponents of Zohran Mamdani's candidacy for mayor of New York City, including Rabbi Alan Cook of Champaign, have claimed that Mamdani is falsely accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.


by Terry Hansen
      Guest Commentary

Recently, many prominent opponents of Zohran Mamdani's candidacy for mayor of New York City, including Rabbi Alan Cook of Champaign, have claimed that Mamdani is falsely accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.

However, Israeli Holocaust and genocide researchers — Amos Goldberg, Omer Bartov, Daniel Blatman, Raz Segal and Shmuel Lederman — have all identified Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. Goldberg asserts:

oursentinel.com viewpoint "What is happening in Gaza is genocide because the level and pace of indiscriminate killing, destruction, mass expulsions, displacement, famine, executions, the wiping out of cultural and religious institutions...and the sweeping dehumanization of the Palestinians — create an overall picture of genocide, of a deliberate conscious crushing of Palestinian existence in Gaza."

Other genocide scholars who have reached this conclusion include Martin Shaw, author of the book What is Genocide?; Melanie O'Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars; and Dirk Moses, senior editor of the Journal of Genocide Research.

The United Nations Genocide Convention placed prevention at the center of international law. By rejecting credible evidence of genocide, the U.S. is betraying its promise of "never again."


Terry Hansen is a retired educator who writes frequently about climate change. He lives in Milwaukee, WI.

TAGS:International law preventing genocide, United State betrays its promise, Palestinians are being execute and killed indiscriminately, Genocide researchers say Israel's action is genocide.

Viewpoint |
The twelve day war was an important reset moment



Sentinel logo
The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that equal rights for all people are the foundation for peace in the world.


by Terry Hansen
      Guest Commentary

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller claims that, as a result of the U.S. bombing of Iran, "We have the beginnings of a new era of stability and peace and security in the Middle East."

Similarly, Vice President J.D. Vance stated, " And I think the president really hit the reset button and said, look, let's actually produce long term peace for the region....I actually think when we look back, we will say the twelve day war was an important reset moment."


You can kill 100 Gazans in one night … And nobody in the world cares.

Yet no mention is made of the relentless suffering of Palestinians, who were also excluded from the Abraham Accords, the agreements negotiated during President Trump's first term that normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states.

Meanwhile, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich recently asserted, “We are disassembling Gaza, and leaving it as piles of rubble...And the world isn’t stopping us.” Zvi Sukkot, a member of the Israeli Parliament, went so far as to boast, “Everyone got used to the idea that you can kill 100 Gazans in one night … And nobody in the world cares.”

As Jewish American scholar Judith Butler has observed:

"The Palestinians have been labeled as ungrievable. That is to say, they are not a group of people whose lives are being considered as worthy of value, of persisting, of flourishing in this world. If they are lost, it is not considered to be a true loss."

In his 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," President Jimmy Carter contends that Israel's construction of illegal settlements in the occupied territories is the primary obstacle to peace in the Middle East. It has long been understood that settlement expansion, which has recently intensified, is a method of "changing the reality on the ground," thereby undermining hope for a two-state solution.

It's important to note that the Arab League has repeatedly offered to normalize relations with Israel, in exchange for ending the occupation and allowing the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders—about 22% of historic Palestine. This offer is embodied in the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative.

In fact, in September 2024, Jordan's Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi, representing 57 Arab and Muslim countries, declared:

"I can tell you here, very unequivocally, all of us, right now, are willing to guarantee the security of Israel in the context of Israel ending the occupation and allowing the emergence of a Palestinian state."

Yet, as Smotrich has provocatively stated, "My life’s mission is to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that equal rights for all people are the foundation for peace in the world. True stability in the Middle East cannot be achieved through military victories or diplomatic agreements that ignore the rights and aspirations of Palestinians.


Terry Hansen is an opinion writer who frequently comments on Gaza, focusing on humanitarian issues, U.S. policy and Israel’s actions in the region. He is a retired educator from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.


Editor's note:
June 30, 2025 - Originally, this Viewpoint was published with an inaccurate figure. At the author's request, "57 Arab countries" was updated to "57 Arab and Muslim countries" since there are only 22 Arab countries.



Guest Commentary |
Israel: The Middle East's new regional superpower and catalyst for peace


by Rabbi Leor Sinai


Viewpoints
History is unfolding before our eyes. We are witnessing the emergence of a fundamentally transformed Middle East, with Israel ascending as the region's dominant power. Still engaged in a multi-front battle for survival and now in direct conflict with Iran, Israel is pioneering a new era of regional dynamics.

While global diplomatic strategies have traditionally relied on appeasement, negotiations, and agreements with threatening actors like Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran, Israel has chosen a different path—taking its enemies at their word, especially in the aftermath of October 7th.

When a terrorist organization or authoritarian regime declares its intention to wipe you off the map and actively pursues that goal, the lesson is clear: believe them. There can be no negotiation over existence itself. History has taught us that the only reliable insurance policy for defending our right to exist is the exercise of military strength. This is the doctrine of peace through strength—a principle that those who haven't lived in the region, witnessed the terror, or spent nights in bomb shelters cannot fully comprehend.

The New Regional Reality

The people of Israel are not merely defending their homeland; they are defending the principles of the free world. This small nation—roughly the size of New Jersey with a population of just over 10 million—stands as a bulwark against the greatest threats to regional stability. These threats, by extension, pose challenges to European security and American hegemony in an era of rising destabilizing powers like China and Russia.

Israel's remarkable military achievements following the October 7th invasion, and its comprehensive campaign against Iranian aggression through Tehran's proxy network, have definitively established Israel as the region's superpower. This transformation represents more than military victory; it signals a fundamental realignment of Middle Eastern power structures. Breaking Free from Iran's Stranglehold

For decades, Iran has held the Middle East hostage, preventing the region from advancing toward an era of genuine peace and stability. The theocratic regime in Tehran has systematically undermined progress through its network of proxies, spreading chaos from Lebanon to Yemen. However, Israel's current position offers a different vision of what the Middle East could become.

Consider the evidence: Israel maintains peaceful relations with Egypt and Jordan, has normalized ties with members of the Abraham Accords (United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan), and stands on the threshold of potential agreements with Saudi Arabia. Looking ahead, there is even the possibility of Lebanon and Syria joining this expanding circle of peace—once freed from Iranian influence.

The Democratic Advantage

Israel's strength lies not only in its military capabilities but in its democratic foundations. As the region's only functioning democracy, Israel offers a model of governance that respects human rights, protects minorities, and operates under the rule of law. This democratic framework makes Israel a natural partner for the United States and other Western democracies in promoting stability and progress throughout the Middle East.

Unlike authoritarian regimes that rule through fear and oppression, Israel's democratic institutions provide legitimacy and resilience. This democratic foundation, combined with military strength, positions Israel to lead a regional transformation that could benefit all peoples of the Middle East.

A Vision for the Future: The Middle East Union

The potential for a Middle East Union—analogous to the European Union—is no longer a distant dream. Such a regional bloc could foster economic cooperation, cultural exchange, and lasting peace among member nations. Israel's position as the region's dominant power, combined with its democratic values and proven ability to make peace with former enemies, makes it the natural catalyst for such an initiative.

The key to unlocking this potential lies in removing the Iranian regime's grip on regional politics. The ayatollahs' ideology of destruction and their support for terrorist proxies have been the primary obstacles to Middle Eastern integration and prosperity. With Iran's proxy network weakened and its regional influence diminished, the path toward a more peaceful and prosperous Middle East becomes increasingly viable.

Strategic Partnership with America

Israel's emergence as a regional superpower strengthens rather than challenges American interests in the Middle East. As a democratic ally sharing Western values, Israel serves as a reliable partner in maintaining regional stability and countering threats from authoritarian regimes. This partnership benefits both nations while contributing to global security. The United States gains from having a strong, democratic ally that can independently address regional threats without requiring American military intervention. Israel's military capabilities and intelligence assets provide invaluable support for American strategic objectives in the region.

The Path Forward

What stands before us is a historic opportunity to reshape the Middle East for the better. Israel's position as the region's superpower, earned through defensive necessity rather than imperial ambition, creates the possibility for a fundamentally different regional order. This new order would be based on cooperation rather than conflict, economic integration rather than isolation, and democratic values rather than authoritarian oppression.

The vision is clear: a Middle East where democratic Israel leads a coalition of peaceful nations, where economic cooperation replaces proxy warfare, and where the region's vast potential is finally realized. The removal of Iran's destabilizing influence represents the final piece of this puzzle.

This transformation will not happen overnight, nor will it be without challenges. However, for the first time in decades, the possibility of a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Middle East is within reach. Israel's emergence as a regional superpower is not an end in itself, but rather the means to achieve a better future for all peoples of the region.

The new Middle East is taking shape, and Israel stands ready to lead it toward a future of peace, prosperity, and democratic governance. History will judge this moment as the turning point when the Middle East finally broke free from cycles of violence and embraced its potential as a beacon of progress and cooperation.


About the author
Rabbi Leor Sinai is a Global Speaker, Education Diplomacy Thought-Leader, and long-time Campaign Executive. Sinai is Principal of Sinai Strategies, a consulting agency motivating influential actors to collaborate towards advancing Global – Israel relationships. Sinai is a member of the Israeli Emirati Forum, serves on the Jewish Agency for Israel’s Board of Governors, and on the board of Atchalta—a non-partisan think tank advancing social cohesion and national resilience in Israel. Originally from New York, Sinai made Aliyah with his family in 2011.

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group, organization or oursentinel.com. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.


Book Review |
Sky High: A Soaring History of Aviation



This large, beautifully illustrated book invites children (and their parents) to discover how humans dreamed, designed, and finally took to the skies. It includes a thoughtful mix of facts, cartoons, and imaginative scenes from aviation history. Moms will appreciate the educational content, while kids will love the pictures and fun facts.


by Esther Aardsma


Humans have dreamed of flying since the beginning of time. Now that transcontinental air travel is common, flight is often taken for granted. Sky High: A Soaring History of Aviation by Jacek Ambrożewski traces the grand story of humanity's pursuit of flight, beginning with ancient legends passed down through cultures and ending with the historic journey of the solar-powered plane Solar Impulse 2 in 2015–2016. Originally published in Poland in 2022 in Ambrożewski’s native Polish, Sky High was released in the U.S. in 2023 following a translation by Zosia Krasodomska-Jones.

Sky High is a large-format book, approximately fourteen by twenty inches, containing 106 thick, durable pages. Although packed with facts that could easily overwhelm, the book remains engaging through whimsical cartoons and simple diagrams presented in soft, basic color palettes. Ambrożewski’s illustrations strike a balance between informative detail and playful levity—even when exploring topics like warplanes and military technology.

Ambrożewski briefly covers evolution, dinosaurs, and “millions of years.” He also explores various cultural myths and legends about flight, including Camazotz, the Mayan bat god of the underworld; Bladud, a king who allegedly leapt from a tower wearing wings; witches’ broomsticks and magic carpets; and Sumerian King Etana, who is said to have ridden an eagle to gather herbs from the gods.

Sky high book cover

Subscribe

A few illustrations show a man with his arm around a woman. One section depicts a muscular man working while wearing only shorts. Another frame shows a pilot using a specially designed toilet seat, with a newspaper concealing all but his hairy knees. A separate passage explains how modern flight suits include sponge systems for pilots needing to relieve themselves mid-flight.

Dogfights are mentioned throughout, and the illustrations show smoking planes spiraling to the ground, though they are bloodless and do not show close-ups of pilots. The Hindenburg disaster is briefly addressed, noting that “many people died and the disaster meant the end of the line for giant airships.” The accompanying cartoon shows the burning dirigible in the background behind a distressed man.

Two pages focus on the devastation caused by bombs dropped from planes, especially during World War II. One panel shows an atomic bomb explosion; others depict sorrowful figures amid ruined, smoldering cities. “While the history of aviation has led to an incredible amount of progress,” Ambrożewski writes, “it’s important to remember that it also has a dark side.” This wartime content, however, is a small portion of the overall book, which continues with captivating stories of technological breakthroughs in cargo planes, passenger jets, paragliders, helicopters, ultralight airplanes, and more.

This is a book to get pleasantly lost in for hours. Any child—and many adults—interested in air travel will enjoy Sky High. There is plenty to read for older kids and grown-ups, and pre-readers will find the illustrations fun and engaging. Even readers who aren’t plane enthusiasts may find their imaginations taking flight.


Ester Aardsma
Esther Aardsma, a Champaign County native, currently resides in Thomasboro with her busy family. When she can, she pursues her passion for creativity, especially with words--and shares that love through editing, coaching one-on-one, and teaching classes.
Tagged: children's illustrated aviation history book, Jacek Ambrożewski Sky High review, flight myths and legends for kids, aviation books for curious young readers, translated Polish children's books 2023, books for kids who love airplanes and history


Guest Commentary
Is the Ukraine Deal, really a deal?


by Glenn Mollette, Guest Commentator


America has given Ukraine a lot of money. Does anyone really know how much?

President Trump recently said $350 billion while other sources say we have spent less than $200 billion. A billion dollars is a billion dollars. Hundreds of billions of dollars mean Americans across our country are being taxed hard earned dollars to send to another country for the purpose of financially underwriting their war.

The Beatles sang, “Can’t Buy Me Love,” but apparently you can buy some fake friends for a while. When the money ceases then the love and friendship you bought speedily goes away.

If we don’t write big checks to countries like Ukraine then they get mad really quick and for some reason, we become the bad guys. What happens when we totally run out of money? Our national debt is $36 trillion dollars. Who will rescue us when we go bankrupt and there is no Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid? No one will come to save us.

Approximately 58,220 Americans were killed in the Vietnam war. This number includes battle and non-battle related deaths. The Vietnam war cost around $111 billion in 1968 dollars, equivalent to approximately $800 billion in today’s dollars. The war lasted about 15 years. What does our country have to show for $800 billion and almost 60,000 lives? A lot of graves and a lot of Veterans with PTSD.

The war in Afghanistan cost America approximately $2,313 trillion dollars from 2001 to 2022. This includes money we spent in Afghanistan and Pakistan but does not account for the cost of lifetime care for veterans. Some estimates suggest the total cost could be higher ranging from $4 to $6 trillion when including long-term medical care and disability compensation. Plus, we spent over $68 million on a second runway at Bagram airfield in 2006 making it the best and strongest runway in that part of the world.

In the 1960s, we built the Kandahar International Airport which cost us over $15 million dollars. Who are the people using these airports today? A lot of Americans have suffered to pay big taxes bills while our government plays Santa Claus.

It’s a great idea to ask Ukraine to pay back the billions we have given to them. The idea of America having access to their land and vast resource of minerals sounds appealing.

Financially, it sounds like it would be worth mega billions and would supply us with badly needed resources. However, how many roads and bridges will we have to build?

How big will our military presence have to become to protect American citizens who will go to work the land? A military presence in Afghanistan could only mean the possibility of altercations with Russia’s army which would escalate into America becoming head and shoulders into a full scale war with Russia.

Putin can’t be trusted as far as you can throw the car sitting in your driveway. A growing presence in Ukraine by America will eventually mean fighting to protect our interests in that country. Such a land deal with Ukraine sounds like a good deal but has the potential of becoming a very bad deal.

Unfortunately, after last week’s oval office disaster between Zelenskyy, President Trump and Vice-President Vance there may never be a deal.

If Russia eventually topples Ukraine, Putin won’t be making any deals, paying anyone anything back and we may be buying our bread from him.


About the author ~

Glen Mollett is the author of 13 books including Uncommom Sense, the Spiritual Chocolate series, Grandpa's Store, Minister's Guidebook insights from a fellow minister. His column is published weekly in over 600 publications in all 50 states.


The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily representative of any other group or organization. We welcome comments and views from our readers. Submit your letters to the editor or commentary on a current event 24/7 to editor@oursentinel.com.



This might also interest you:


A just peace, nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine


Sam Veremchuk on the U of I Quad on Monday
Photos: Sentinel/Clark Brooks

URBANA - Samuel Veremchuk, a graduate student at the University of Illinois, organized a rally, drawing a small yet passionate group of attendees, predominantly Ukrainian, Eastern European, and supportive Americans. The event, 'Rally for a Just Peace in Ukraine!', aimed to bolster solidarity for Ukraine amidst the Russian invasion and the evolving US foreign policy under the new Trump administration was held on the Quad behind the Illini Union Monday afternoon.

Ukrainian-American Joseph Mosse expresses his thoughts and frustrations
Ukrainian-American Joseph Mosse expresses his thoughts and frustrations at the rally on Monday. Mosse lived in Ukraine for ten years when he was a child. Mosse said, "Ukrainians have benefited greatly from support from the United States, from Europe and from other countries. Frankly even that support was never enough."
On Thursday, four campus departments will sponsor the screening of "Intercepted," a documentary film composed of intercepted phone calls from Russian soldiers on Ukrainian battlefields to their families and friends in Russia. The film combines these recordings with vivid imagery depicting the aftermath of Russia's destructive invasion. Sponsored by the Russian, East European, and Eurasian Center; Ukrainian Students Association; Slavic Reference Service; and Department of Slavic Languages & Literatures, the event will include a discussion featuring REEC Associate Director Markian Dobczansky and Olha Khometa, Assistant Professor in Slavic Languages & Literatures.

The screening is free to the public and will be shown in Room 66 at Main Library, located 1408 W Gregory Dr in Urbana.


Protesters show support for Ukraine on University of Illinois campus

Subscribe
Read our latest health and medical news

Learning from the voices of war: Honoring the 80th anniversary of the final major battle of WWII


Photo courtesy of Library of Congress Veterans History Project

American troops pull back with wounded during World War II's Ardennes Offensive in December 1944.

Family Features- The Ardennes Offensive, commonly known as the "Battle of the Bulge", stands as the single bloodiest battle fought by the United States during World War II. Waged in the bitter cold of mid-December 1944, it took the Allies a month to secure victory. The cost was staggering: nearly 20,000 Americans were killed in action, close to 50,000 wounded and another 20,000 captured.

In honor of the 80th anniversary of this pivotal battle, the Library of Congress Veterans History Project has launched an online exhibit to commemorate the milestone. While the battle itself is etched in the annals of history, the personal stories from those who endured it remain one of the most powerful testaments to its impact.

The online exhibit, "Serving Our Voices," features accounts from 12 Battle of the Bulge survivors, part of the thousands of narratives preserved by the project. These stories ensure future generations can gain deeper understanding of veterans' service and sacrifice.

One such story includes Eliot Annable, a 20-year-old radio operator serving with the Army's 106th Infantry Division. Just days after arriving at the western front, Annable found himself under German artillery barrages on. Dec. 16, 1944. He recalled the assault in his oral history, describing the intensity as "almost enough to knock you on the floor."

The following five days became the most harrowing days of Annable's military service. While on a communications mission, he became stranded behind enemy lines and spent nearly a week evading the enemy in the Ardennes Forest without food, shelter or appropriate winter clothing. After traveling more than 30 miles, he eventually safely rejoined the remnants of his unit.

Photo courtesy of Library of Congress Veterans History Project

Back home, Annable's parents were gripped by uncertainty. On Dec. 31, 1944, his father wrote a letter expressing the family's anguish and love for their son, regardless of what happened. The moving letter, coupled with Annable's oral history, provides an intimate view into one soldier's Battle of the Bulge experience.

Another featured veteran in the exhibit, Guy Martin Stephens, also served with the 106th Infantry Division. Unlike Annable, Stephens was captured by the Germans during battle. In his oral history, he recounted the surreal feeling of combat, the relentless hunger he endured as a prisoner of war and the lingering effects of his time in captivity.

"It's hard," Stephens said. "It's something you can't ever ... your mind is just like a video, or camcorder, I guess. You put it in there. You get busy and get married. You get home, and you get an education, and get a job, and raise your family and everything like that. You can kind of gloss it over or try to push it back, but it's always there, you know?"

Veterans who served during the 20th or 21st centuries are invited to establish a collection, including interviews (video or audio), letters and original photographs, even if they did not see combat. Families can also submit collections posthumously to honor their loved ones. To explore more veterans' stories and learn how you can contribute to the program, visit loc.gov/vets.



Op-Ed |
Hating on immigrants hurts everyone - except for elites


Photo: Photo by Manny Becerra/Unsplash

by Sonali Kolhatkar
     OtherWords


Republicans are counting on fears of immigrants to draw white conservatives to the polls. This calculation is dangerous — and it lets the real villains in our politics off the hook.

There’s a direct line between Donald Trump’s 2015 declaration about Mexican “rapists” and his 2024 lie about Haitians eating pets. Trump’s running mate, Senator JD Vance (R-OH), has echoed the horrific contention about Haitians even while admitting it was a lie.


In Vance’s world, immigrants are smuggling fentanyl and importing illegal guns.

Both men are married to women of immigrant origins and may not even believe their own lies. In fact, as a Yale law student in 2012, Vance wrote a blog post decrying Republican anti-immigrant rhetoric. But after he found how convenient it is to bash immigrants for votes, Vance asked his former professor to delete it.

During the vice presidential debate between Vance and Governor Tim Walz (D-MN), Vance scapegoated immigrants every chance he got. In Vance’s world, immigrants are smuggling fentanyl and importing illegal guns. They’re also driving up housing prices while simultaneously putting downward pressure on wages by working for pittances.

Never mind that it’s mostly U.S. citizens smuggling fentanyl, and that illegal guns are flowing the other way across the border — from the U.S. into Mexico. Never mind that it makes no sense for immigrants to be working for less while paradoxically being able to afford homes that Americans cannot.

Truth and logic are beside the point. Fear of the “other” is the plan. This makes life very dangerous for immigrants. Haitian migrants, among others, are facing threats to their safety.


Beating the racist, anti-immigrant drum is the first step toward violence.

Trump has repeatedly deployed Hitlerian language to describe immigrants, blaming them for “poisoning the blood” of the country and claiming that they commit homicide because they have “bad genes.” (One can hardly imagine him extending the same logic to mass shooters, who tend to be overwhelmingly white and male, or to the two white men who recently tried to assassinate him. According to Trump, being white means you have “good genes.”)

Beating the racist, anti-immigrant drum is the first step toward violence. The United Nations identifies hate speech as a “precursor to atrocity crimes, including genocide,” and scholars of past genocides have drawn clear links between language that “otherizes” whole communities and pogroms aimed at them.

Anti-immigrant lies also harm native-born Americans. Trump, Vance, and their supporters recently unleashed rumors falsely blaming immigrants for disaster relief difficulties. Elon Musk jumped on the bandwagon, claiming that “FEMA used up its budget ferrying illegals into the country instead of saving American lives.”

FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell called these lies part of a “truly dangerous narrative.” Even Republican governors of hurricane-hit states are deeply appalled, warning that these lies threaten to disrupt disaster recovery efforts.


If right-wing politicians really want to help Americans struggling with economic stressors, they could ban hedge fund managers from buying up homes.

Most importantly, the purveyors of anti-immigrant hate let corporate power and wealthy elites — like Musk — off the hook for the problems facing Americans.  Hedge fund managers, not immigrants, are outbidding Americans for housing. Corporate employers keep wages low and privatization has ruined healthcare, not immigrants.

Oil and gas corporations are responsible for the catastrophic climate change fueling hurricanes like Helene and Milton, not immigrants. (Indeed, migrant workers often help rebuild after these catastrophes as communities struggle with a labor shortage).

If right-wing politicians really want to help Americans struggling with economic stressors, they could ban hedge fund managers from buying up homes, support single-payer health care, increase the federal minimum wage, tax billionaires, divert money from war to climate, hold fossil fuel companies accountable for climate crimes, and back a renewable energy transition.

Instead, they attack immigrants — and do nothing.

Attacking immigrants and calling for mass deportations will do nothing to ease the very real struggles people face. What it will do is whip up hate and violence, give the purveyors of hate the political power they desperately seek, and let corporate vultures off the hook.


About the author:
Sonali Kolhatkar is the host of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.


Keywords:


More Sentinel Stories