Huge wildfires near famous Grand Canyon
They've been called the Dragon Bravo Fire and White Sage Fire by the Arizonian authorities, who are still working to contain them.No one has been hurt by either blaze, but tens of thousands of residents and tourists have had to evacuate the surrounding areas.
What are wildfires?
Wildfires are fires that burn across natural landscapes like woods and forests.They need three things to start and spread:Fuel, such as trees or plants.A spark, like a flash of lightning or something manmade like a campfire.Weather, as high winds can make them spread and hot weather makes things burn more easily.
What's happened in the Grand Canyon?
The Dragon Bravo Fire began on 4 July and was caused by a lightning strike, according to authorities. The Wild Sage Fire, meanwhile, was reported on 9 July after a thunderstorm.It was the Dragon Bravo Fire that burned the lodge, and it has reportedly destroyed between 50 and 80 other buildings in the area with strong winds fuelling the blaze."As stewards of some of our country's most beloved national treasures, we are devastated by the loss of the Grand Canyon Lodge," Aramark, the company that operated the lodge, said in a statement."We are grateful that all of our employees and guests have been safely evacuated," the statement added.
The governor of Arizona, who is a Democrat, criticised the way the federal government, run by the Republican Party, has handled the fire.She called for an investigation into why it was decided to be a controlled burn as opposed to being put out.But a spokesperson for the US Interior Department (which is responsible for America's natural landscapes) said the allegation that the fire was mismanaged "is not at all accurate", and they take threats of wildfires very seriously.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Democrats laugh off Trump attempts to blame them for Epstein fallout
Donald Trump 's political rivals seemed unshaken by his attempts to pin blame on them for the fallout over his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation this weekend. As the president and his allies leveled allegations about the Biden Justice Department supposedly tampering with evidence to link Trump to the convicted pedophile, Democrats remained fixed on calling for the full release of the Justice Department's cache of evidence and investigation. Even as news broke this past week that Trump had instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to release grand jury testimony from the investigations into Epstein and his mistress, those same Democrats called the move an attempt to cover up the president's involvement, given that it constituted less than full transparency. On Sunday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar laughed off a suggestion made by Trump on Wednesday in an interview with a MAGA-supporting channel, Real America's Voice: 'I can imagine what they put into files, just like they did with the others.' 'The president blaming Democrats for this disaster, Jake, is like that CEO that got caught on camera blaming Coldplay, okay?' Klobuchar joked to CNN's Jake Tapper on State of the Union, referencing a now-viral clip that made the rounds last week. 'This is a problem of his own making.' Eric Swalwell, a congressman from California, also discussed the president's response and call for the release of the Epstein grand jury testimony. 'If you're Donald Trump and you have Elon Musk saying you're in the files, and Mick Mulvaney, your former chief of staff, saying you're in the files, and Michael Wolff, your biographer saying that you're not just in the files but that there's some pretty disturbing things you did with underaged girls, wouldn't you want to clear your name?' he asked during an appearance Saturday evening. 'I think that's why his supporters are scratching their heads,' Swalwell continued, adding that the president was 'willing to throw his supporters overboard to keep these files buried.' Numerous other Democrats across the ideological spectrum joined in on the calls for the files' release this past week, bridging across the party's ideological spectrum and revealing a generational divide more than a policy gap. Senior Democrats, like Nancy Pelosi, have referred to the controversy as a 'distraction'. But younger Democrats roll their eyes at the notion of letting Republicans off easy on the first issue that has truly divided the MAGA base in years. 'This is Donald Trump's effort…to gaslight you into thinking they're turning over the Epstein files, when in reality, they're turning over nothing that is relevant to what everybody deserves to know,' Congressman Dan Goldman said on Friday. 'The grand jury testimony of course will only relate to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell — the two people who were charged in the case.' The Justice Department moved this past week to unseal grand jury transcripts from the prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein and his girlfriend/accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein died in federal custody in 2019 while Maxwell remains in prison. Any transcripts released from those grand jury proceedings would relate solely to Maxwell and Epstein themselves, and would not likely contain any mention of Trump or other powerful men known to have cultivated relationships with the billionaire financier who was set to face trial for sex trafficking underage girls when he died. The motions were filed in court a day after the Epstein story again blew up with a bombshell story from Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. The Journal published the text of a note that was allegedly penned by Trump to Epstein as part of a 50th birthday card. The note itself was framed with the silhouette of a naked woman, Trump's signature in place of pubic hair; the contents alluding to a 'secret' that Trump wrote the two men shared. Trump has fiercely denied the authenticity of all parts of the Journal 's reporting, from the drawing to the contents of the note.
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Tulsi Gabbard openly accuses Obama of longstanding effort to overthrow Trump in coup
Tulsi Gabbard has openly accused the Obama administration of launching a 'years-long coup' against President Donald Trump in an attempt to subvert his 2016 election win. Gabbard released declassified emails Friday and claimed that they reveal a 'treasonous conspiracy' committed by former President Barack Obama and his officials over the investigation surrounding Russian interference in the 2016 election. Trump pushed the 'conspiracy' over the weekend on Truth Social by sharing an interview Gabbard gave Fox News on the allegations. He also congratulated Gabbard in a separate post Saturday. 'Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,' Gabbard said of the Obama administration. Democrats have blasted the accusation as an attempt to 'change the subject' from the Trump administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. The president has found himself on the receiving end of MAGA's fury over the Justice Department's decision not to release any further evidence in the convicted pedophile's case. Trump has instructed his embattled Attorney General Pam Bondi to release some of the files relating to grand jury testimony, subject to court approval. Gabbard has called for the prosecution of Obama and former U.S. national security officials, accusing them of 'manufacturing intelligence' to suggest that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, despite evidence proving otherwise, she claimed. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, and former FBI Director James Comey were cited in the DNI memo. Trump has claimed for years that the investigation into Russian interference was a 'hoax.' The intelligence community has long concluded that Russia attempted to influence the 2016 election through a social media campaign, but the Mueller investigation couldn't prove those operators had ties to the Trump campaign. Democratic Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut slammed Gabbard's claims as 'utter nonsense.' 'Odd that then CIA Director Pompeo didn't say any of this. Or that none of the six DNIs in Trump's first term said any of it,' Himes responded in a post on X. 'Once again, @DNIGabbard is trashing her own people in an attempt to regain Trump's favor or to distract from the Epstein scandal. Probably both.' He added, 'No one alleges that the Russians did technical hacks of voting technology. But ALL of the investigations, including the Senate bipartisan investigation, found that the Russians sought to influence the 2016 election in Trump's favor.' Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused Gabbard of 'weaponizing' her position as Trump's director of national intelligence. 'It is sadly not surprising that DNI Gabbard, who promised to depoliticize the intelligence community, is once again weaponizing her position to amplify the president's election conspiracy theories,' Warner said in a post on X. 'It is appalling to hear DNI Gabbard accuse her own IC workforce of committing a 'treasonous conspiracy' when she was unwilling to label Edward Snowden a traitor.' Obama has not yet responded to Gabbard's claims.
The Guardian
5 hours ago
- The Guardian
What the culture war over Superman gets wrong
We've entered the era of the superhero movie as sermon. No longer content with saving the world, spandex saviors are now being used to explain, moralize and therapize it. And a being from Krypton has shown up once again in a debate about real life; about borders, race and who gets to belong. Superman. Of all symbols. I've read reactionary thinkpieces, rage-filled quote tweets and screeds about the legal status of a fictional alien – enough to lose count. This particular episode of American Fragility kicked off because James Gunn had the audacity to call Superman 'the story of America'. An immigrant, by definition, as he was always meant to be. What set things off wasn't just the sentiment – it was who said it, and how plainly. Gunn, now headlining DC's cinematic future, told the Sunday Times that Superman was 'an immigrant who came from other places and populated the country'. He spoke of Superman's inherent kindness as a political statement in itself, noting that the film would play differently in some parts of America before adding, bluntly, that 'there are some jerks out there who are just not kind and will take it as offensive just because it is about kindness'. 'But screw them,' he added. It was that line – less the immigrant metaphor, more the unapologetic framing – that sent the usual outrage machine into motion. Enter Dean Cain, a former TV Superman. Cain accused Gunn of politicizing the character, which is remarkably foolish, considering Superman's been swatting at fascism since 1941. Meanwhile, over at Fox News, it's been a full meltdown over the idea that Superman, canonically not of this Earth, might be played as … not of this Earth. Liberal brainwashing, they suggested. Identity politics in a cape. But have they actually looked at David Corenswet? The man looks like he was made to sell oat milk in a Ralph Lauren ad. All cheekbones and cleft chin. If this is the foreign body in question, no wonder middle America has historically shrugged over Supes being an immigrant by definition. Even still, there's something telling about any collective gasp over a white, blue-eyed man with an immigrant backstory. The scramble to defend him says more than intended. For all the hand-wringing over Superman's alienness, what rarely gets named is how meticulously his story was crafted to cushion the unease of the topic at hand: otherness itself – the very thing people pretend was always central to his character. There are plenty of ways to frame the ridiculousness of this argument, clever ways to connect the dots, but the real fracture in Superman's myth hits, oddly enough, during a quiet scene in Tarantino's meditation on vengeance, Kill Bill: Vol. 2. In the scene, the villain, Bill (David Carradine) unpacks what makes Superman different from every other hero. 'What Kent wears – the glasses, the business suit – that's the costume,' Bill says. 'That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us.' It's one hell of a tell – the kind of observation that pulls back the curtain on how Superman was engineered to understand the world, and how the world, in turn, reinforced how he should fit within it. From the start, Superman was never meant to be an outsider. His creators, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster – sons of Jewish immigrants – didn't craft him as a symbol of difference but as a projection of pure Americanness. They gave him a midwestern upbringing, an Anglo name in Clark Kent, and that square-jawed charm. Siegel and Shuster were working against the backdrop of unchecked antisemitism, at a time when Jewish immigrants faced hostility. But instead of exploring immigrant 'otherness', the artists imagined a version of America where that alienness could be easily discarded via an outfit change. Superman wasn't an outsider – he was the ideal immigrant, effortlessly slipping into a world that required no resistance. His story wasn't about struggling to belong, but about the fantasy of belonging, with the privilege of choosing whether or not to fight for it. That projection of safe, silent Americanness hasn't remained confined to the pages of comic books. Today's immigration politics run on the same fantasy. The myth of the 'good' immigrant – quiet, grateful, easy to assimilate – still runs wild. It's the same story that fuels the strange spectacle of politicians praising white South African farmers as victims of racial persecution, all while demonizing migrants from Latin America, the Middle East or sub-Saharan Africa. The notion of who deserves to stay has always been racialized, selective and violent. Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, has said that a person's physical appearance could be a factor in the decision to question them. He later said it could not be 'the sole reason'. But in April, Juan Carlos Lopez-Gomez, a US-born citizen from Georgia, was detained in Florida even after his mother showed authorities his birth certificate. In New York, Elzon Lemus, an electrician, was stopped because he 'looked like someone' agents were after. Maybe he didn't wear his suit and glasses that day. Superman, the immigrant who makes people comfortable, has never been just a comic book character. He's been a metaphor and living testament to the kind of 'other' that wealthy nations have always preferred: those who blend in, assimilate and rarely challenge the systems that demand their silence. If you're still not convinced that Superman's assimilationist fantasy is alive and well, just look at a White House meme from 10 July 2025: Trump dressed as Superman, with the words 'Truth. Justice. The American Way.' It's a glaring example of how cultural symbols are repurposed – hijacked, really – to serve a narrow and self-congratulatory vision of America. That's the trick of Superman: he's been a blank canvas of a both-sides heroism, which makes everyone feel seen. You don't even need to like or dislike Superman for the Maga debate to pull you in, as it was always meant to. The culture war still appointed a celebrity to govern the most powerful nation on Earth. It still turned a corporate diversity initiative into a national crisis. And it took a serious conversation about immigration and made a polished, all-American character its face. The culture war distorts, and it continues, relentless as ever. Noel Ransome is a Toronto-based freelance writer
