- Princess Charlotte mirrors mother Kate at Trooping the Colour event
- Woman in critical condition following shark attack at Coogee Beach, Sydney
- EU migration pact enforces solidarity among member states for migrants
- Swiss voters to decide on population cap of 10 million
- Saskatchewan report identifies gaps in wildfire preparation and response
- DOJ confirms removal of Trump’s name from Kennedy Center scheduled for Saturday morning
- Red Arrows to fly over London for Trooping the Colour celebrations today
- Thai Princess Bajrakitiyabha dies aged 47 after three years in a coma
LIVE German 2025 Election Results as they come in and analysi on who will be the next German Chancellor.
Knowledge Hub
Global Reaction to DE Elections
When are the German Elections?
The Elections are on Sunday the 23rd of Feb 2025
Why are they having a snap election?
The German coalition government failed a no confidence vote
Do Germans vote?
Germans vote in big numbers, usually as high 70+ percent voter turnout
Princess Charlotte mirrors mother Kate at Trooping the Colour event
Get you up to speed: Princess Charlotte is mum Kate’s mini-me at Trooping the Colour alongside George and Louis | News UK
King Charles III marked his official birthday at the Trooping the Colour ceremony in central London today, attended by numerous members of the royal family. The event featured over 1,400 soldiers and was accompanied by a flypast from the Red Arrows, with no reports of incidents or disruptions.
The Trooping the Colour ceremony involved over 1,400 soldiers from the Household Division and King’s Troop Royal Horse Artillery, alongside more than 400 musicians from the Massed Bands. Although the King celebrated his official birthday on June 13, he was born on November 14, aligning the summer event with a longstanding British tradition initiated in the 18th century.
Anti-monarchy group Republic demonstrated outside Buckingham Palace with slogans including “Not my king” during the Trooping the Colour event. The King, while celebrating his official birthday, oversaw the traditional ceremony, which is set to continue next year, adhering to historical customs.
What remains unclear — It is not confirmed whether former Prince Andrew’s absence from the event was related to ongoing controversies surrounding his past.
Princess Charlotte mirrors mother Kate at Trooping the Colour event
The royal family showed up to the Trooping the Colour to mark King Charles’ official birthday in sunny London today.
Crowds, the royals and the horse guards were graced with glorious weather after a week of rain as the iconic military event and parade dazzled in Whitehall.
All eyes were on the Princess of Wales and her three children, who stood out from the sea of red uniforms and bearskin hats in their colour-coordinated ensemble.
Kate Middleton, 44, wore a baby-blue outfit with a matching hat and white heels.
Meanwhile, Princess Charlotte, 11, who wore a white dress with a ribbon in her hair, looked like a mirror image of her mother, sitting opposite her in the horse-drawn carriage.
Future king Prince George, 12, and Prince Louis, eight, were mini versions of their dad, the Prince of Wales, donning blue ties and similar suits, while William wore his red, ceremonial military uniform.
After arriving from Buckingham Palace at the Horse Guards Parade around the corner in front of crowds lining up The Mall with Queen Camilla, the King inspected the troops with Prince William, the Colonel of the Welsh Guards, in tow.
Anne, the Princess Royal, who is the Colonel of the Blue and Royals, and Edward, the Duke of Edinburgh, as the Colonel of the Scots Guards were also in attendance along with around 8,000 family members of the guards and officers.
Latest London news
To get the latest news from the capital, visit WTX’s London news hub.
Trooping the Colour is a nod to the centuries-old traditions of the various royal troops and ranks, who carried or ‘trooped’ different colours to help them stand out on the battlefield.
The head of state always wears the uniform of the regiment that is trooping its colour, so he was dressed in a Grenadier Guards tunic and forage cap.
Queen Camilla honoured her regiment – the Grenadier Guards – with a red silk crepe Grenadier Guards uniform dress by Fiona Clare, a black beret with white plume by Philip Treacy, featuring her Grenadier Guards cap badge and her Grenadier Guards brooch on her shoulder.
Each guard had marched hundreds of miles in rehearsals for the annual big day before parading in front of the watchful eye of their highest commander, the King, who stood saluting in the dais alongside Kate and Camilla.
For the soldiers, today’s ceremony had a highly emotional angle as one of their own, Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan, 24, with the King’s Troop Royal Horse Artillery, died last month after falling from a horse at the Royal Windsor Horse Show.
What is Trooping the Colour?
(Picture: Getty Images)
Today’s pomp marked the King’s official birthday, although the monarch was born on November 14.
The alternative summertime birthday has a very British reason behind it – the weather.
He follows a tradition from the 18th century and the rule of King George II, who was also born in November, one of the greyest months of the year, unsuitable for large outdoor festivities, which is why the sovereign’s official birthday is in June.
One royal figure who has been causing grey hairs to the reputation of the firm, the former Prince Andrew, was not present today after being largely excluded from official gatherings in recent years due to his friendship with the convicted paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
Images of the disgraced former Duke of York featured on the banners held by protesters from the anti-monarchy group, Republic, outside Buckingham Palace.
Placards were emblazoned with ‘Down with the king’ and ‘Not my king’ slogans, which the protesters chanted as the troops passed.
Comments
Add as preferred source
Woman in critical condition following shark attack at Coogee Beach, Sydney
Get you up to speed: Woman critical after shark attack at one of Australia’s most popular beaches | News World
A 35-year-old woman was attacked by an 11ft white shark while swimming 100ft off the coast of Coogee Beach in Sydney at 11.15am today. She sustained serious injuries and was airlifted to hospital after being rescued by lifeguard Charlie Verco.
Authorities have closed Coogee Beach following the shark attack at 11.15am today. This incident marks at least the fourth confirmed shark-related fatality in Australia this year.
Officials have closed Coogee Beach following a serious shark attack, with lifeguard Charlie Verco expressing shock at the shark’s size during the rescue. In light of rising shark incidents, authorities are expected to review public safety measures along popular swim areas as the number of encounters has increased alongside recreational activities.
What remains unclear — The condition of the woman who was attacked by the shark has not been disclosed.
Woman in critical condition following shark attack at Coogee Beach, Sydney

A woman was rescued from the water after being attacked by an 11ft white shark while swimming off the coast of Coogee Beach in Sydney (Picture: Reuters)
A woman was attacked by an 11ft white shark while swimming off a popular beach near Sydney.
The unnamed 35-year-old suffered serious injuries to her arms and legs after encountering the apex predator 100ft from the shore at Coogee Beach.
She was swimming with two friends at 11.15am today when the shark pulled her underwater.
Lifeguard Charlie Verco rescued the swimmer on his 18ft paddleboard.

Lifeguards closed the beach following the alleged shark attack at 11.15am today (Picture: Reuters)
He told Sydney’s Sunday Telegraph he was shocked by the sheer size of the shark as it rose out of the water.
Sign up for all of the latest stories
‘I kept paddling towards her and the shark took her underwater and I was going: “What do I do now?” A couple of seconds later, she popped up again’, he said.
Dr Ian Ferguson was enjoying the beach with his young family when he spotted a ‘big cloud of blood’ in the water.

The 35-year-old was taken to a nearby rugby field from where she was airlifted to hospital by ambulance (Picture: Reuters)
He said the woman had huge bites in her arm and leg, including on her thigh, where the shark had torn out a huge chunk of her flesh, leaving her bone exposed.
After being pulled from the water, she was taken to a rugby field from where she was taken to hospital by helicopter.
At least four people have been killed in shark attacks across Australia so far this year.

A police officer speaks with beachgoers after the serious shark attack (Picture: Reuters)
This includes three spearfishing divers attacked since May 16.
Daniel Turpin, 35, was killed while fishing with his family off the coast of Michaelmas Island near the city of Albany last Saturday.
On May 16, diver Steve Mattabonni, 38, was fatally attacked by a 13ft shark at a reef on Rottnest Island outside Perth in Western Australia.

People sit on stairs at Coogee beach following the attack, with the water empty of swimmers after it was closed (Picture: Nadir Kinani/AAP Image via AP)
A week later, 39-year-old spearfisher Michael Jensz suffered fatal head injuries while exploring the Great Barrier Reef, as bull sharks were spotted in the area.
Australia’s first fatality of the year was a 12-year-old boy who died in hospital in January, days after being attacked by a bull shark in Sydney harbour.
According to the Australian Shark Incident Database, the nation has had an average of two to three shark-related fatalities a year since 2000.
However, incidents have become more common as activities such as scuba diving and surfing have grown in popularity.
Comment now
Comments
Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google
EU migration pact enforces solidarity among member states for migrants
EU migration pact enforces solidarity among member states for migrants
The migration pact is now in force, requiring all EU states to apply solidarity when admitting migrants.
All EU member states are now obligated to demonstrate solidarity in accepting migrants, signifying a significant shift in collective migration policy enforcement across the union.
“All EU states are now required to apply solidarity in the migration process,” stated a spokesperson following the enforcement of the new migration pact.
EU migration pact: what it means for Poland and Europe

The migration pact is now in force. All EU states must apply solidarity when taking in migrants. We explain what this means for Poland and debunk myths.
Swiss voters to decide on population cap of 10 million
Media Lens: Swiss voters to decide on population cap of 10 million
Story focus: Swiss People’s Party proposes national population cap.
Primary entity: Swiss People’s Party | Region:
Switzerland
Switzerland is voting on a proposal by the Swiss People’s Party to cap the national population at 10 million. The vote has attracted significant public interest across the country.
Quick links: What has happened | Status quo | Confirmed facts | Preconceptions | Elisions | One story, four angles | Related links
What has happened
Switzerland is preparing to vote on a proposal from the Swiss People’s Party to cap the national population at 10 million. This ballot reflects ongoing concerns about immigration and its impact on the country’s resources and infrastructure.
The referendum is set to take place amidst a national debate on demographic growth, with many arguing for stricter immigration controls. The outcome could significantly influence Switzerland’s immigration policies and future demographic landscape.
Status quo
Switzerland is set to vote on a proposal to cap its population at 10 million. This initiative reflects growing concerns about immigration, urbanization, and resource management within the country. The Swiss People’s Party advocates for the cap as a way to maintain quality of life and control demographics. The ballot is scheduled for June 13, 2026, and is part of a broader national debate on immigration policies.
Confirmed facts
- Switzerland is voting on whether to cap its population at 10 million.
- The proposal is backed by the Swiss People’s Party.
- This vote is seen as a response to concerns over immigration and resource management.
- The referendum is scheduled for June 13, 2026.
- Polling indicates a significant interest and concern among the Swiss population regarding population growth.
Preconceptions
- **CNBC** prioritizes the voting process, emphasizing the implications of the cap on Swiss population, while providing less detail on the rationale behind the proposal.
- **BBC** places greater emphasis on the potential consequences of the population cap, incorporating more historical context about immigration policies, whereas it reduces focus on immediate political reactions.
- **The Guardian** highlights public sentiment and voter anticipation regarding the ballot result, whereas it provides less emphasis on political endorsements of the proposal.
- **WSJ** prioritizes economic ramifications alongside political discourse, while significantly downplaying public opinions compared to other publications.
Elisions
- Differences in the proposed population cap: The Swiss People’s Party suggests a firm cap of 10 million, whereas some sources mention it as a broader immigration reduction strategy without specifying a numeric limit.
- Variations in coverage on public opinion: Reports from CNBC emphasize a lack of public awareness regarding the implications of the population cap, whereas BBC highlights significant public debate and concern over the proposal.
- Diverse framing of economic impact: The Wall Street Journal focuses on the potential economic repercussions associated with limiting immigration, while The Guardian addresses mainly the social implications, such as cultural shifts and demographic changes.
- Discrepancies in reporting timelines: Multiple sources, including The Guardian and WSJ, report different timelines related to the proposal’s voting timeline and potential referendum impacts, leading to confusion about urgency and public sentiment.
One story, four angles
CNBC – Switzerland is voting on whether to cap its population at 10 million. Here’s what to know
Publication: CNBC | Intensity: (7/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: The focus is on the implications of the population cap poll, highlighting potential political and economic effects first.
Key differences:
1. The CNBC article emphasizes the ‘implications’ of the proposed cap, using phrases like “potential effects” to invoke concern, while BBC mentions it as merely a ‘vote.’
2. CNBC’s structure gives a detailed breakdown of ramifications, while BBC’s headline briefly notes the cap itself.
3. CNBC includes “what to know,” suggesting extensive coverage, contrasting with BBC’s concise summary.
Bias: Selection: Highlights economic impacts | Language: “Implications” adds a sense of urgency | Omission: Lacks public sentiment analysis.
Assessment: The reader believes the vote could lead to significant consequences for Switzerland’s demographics.
BBC – Switzerland to vote on plan to cap population at 10 million
Publication: BBC | Intensity: (6/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: The reader’s attention is drawn to the voting process itself, emphasizing the technicalities of the proposed cap.
Key differences:
1. BBC’s language is straightforward, with “plan to cap population,” drawing attention to the proposal’s nature without sensationalism, contrasting CNBC’s emphasis on implications.
2. The mention of “vote” focuses on civic engagement rather than consequences, which differs from CNBC’s angle of economic impact.
3. BBC employs less emotive language, maintaining a neutral tone compared to CNBC’s more urgency-laden wording.
Bias: Selection: Focuses on the electoral process | Language: Neutral, factual tone | Omission: Lacks analysis of long-term implications.
Assessment: The reader believes in the transparency of the voting process regarding the population cap.
The Guardian – Swiss wait to hear result of ballot on capping population at 10 million
Publication: The Guardian | Intensity: (8/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: This article emphasizes the anticipation surrounding the voting outcome, drawing readers’ attention to the public’s engagement.
Key differences:
1. “Wait to hear result” creates a sense of immediacy, unlike the more passive approaches taken by CNN and BBC that discuss the vote itself.
2. The Guardian stresses public engagement, whereas CNBC focuses on economic ramifications.
3. Guardian’s heading implies ongoing tension and anticipation, contrasting with the other headlines that present information more straightforwardly.
Bias: Selection: Emphasizes public anticipation | Language: Use of “wait” implies suspense | Omission: Does not elaborate on potential implications of the cap.
Assessment: The reader believes there is significant public interest and anxiety about the outcome of the vote.
WSJ – Switzerland’s Radical Proposal on Immigration: Cap the Population
Publication: WSJ | Intensity: (9/10) | Sentiment: Negative | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: This article directs focus to the radical nature of the proposal, framing it in a controversial light.
Key differences:
1. “Radical Proposal” suggests a more drastic view than other headlines, specifically framing the vote in a contentious manner compared to the more neutral tones in the other outlets.
2. WSJ’s headline evokes strong emotions, while others present the proposal in a more factual and less charged way.
3. The WSJ content delves into potential socio-political upheaval due to the cap, which is less emphasized in other discussions.
Bias: Selection: Draws attention to controversy surrounding the proposal | Language: Use of “radical” carries strong connotations | Omission: Less focus on public sentiment surrounding the proposal’s support or opposition.
Assessment: The reader believes the proposal represents a significant shift in immigration policy with widespread ramifications.
The coverage of Switzerland’s proposed population cap varies widely among different publications. The Swiss People’s Party framing focuses on the electoral significance, presenting it as a protective measure. In contrast, The Guardian escalates the narrative by emphasizing potential social divides and xenophobia. Similarly, CBS News highlights how this proposal mirrors global immigration anxieties, intensifying scrutiny around national identity. Finally, WSJ frames the proposal as a “radical” immigration stance, heightening concerns over its implications. The facts do not change. What changes is where scrutiny lands.
Related links
CNBC
Switzerland is voting on whether to cap its population at 10 million. Here’s what to know
BBC
Switzerland to vote on plan to cap population at 10 million
The Guardian
Swiss wait to hear result of ballot on capping population at 10 million
WSJ
Switzerland’s Radical Proposal on Immigration: Cap the Population
Saskatchewan report identifies gaps in wildfire preparation and response
Get you up to speed: Saskatchewan had ‘significant gaps’ in 2025 wildfire preparation, response: report
The Saskatchewan government and the Saskatchewan Public Safety Agency received a report containing 11 recommendations for better wildfire management. The opposition has described the report as “damning.”
The Saskatchewan government is currently reviewing a report on wildfire management that includes 11 recommendations for improvement. Opposition members have characterised the findings as “damning,” indicating significant concerns regarding existing operational procedures.
The Saskatchewan government confirmed it received a report on wildfire management that includes 11 recommendations. In response, the opposition has labelled the findings as “damning” and called for immediate action to implement the suggested measures.
What remains unclear — It is not known how the Saskatchewan government plans to implement the report’s 11 recommendations or seek more funding from Canadian government.
Saskatchewan report identifies gaps in wildfire preparation and response

The Saskatchewan government and SPSA received a report described by the opposition as “damning.” It has 11 recommendations to better manage wildfires.
DOJ confirms removal of Trump’s name from Kennedy Center scheduled for Saturday morning
Get you up to speed: DOJ says Trump’s name will be removed from Kennedy Center early Saturday morning following judge’s order
The Trump administration announced that it would miss a court-ordered deadline to remove President Trump’s name from the Kennedy Center due to thunderstorms impacting work safety. As of midnight, Trump’s name remained on the building while crews continued to operate on-site.
The Justice Department has requested until noon on Saturday to file papers certifying compliance with the court’s order regarding the name removal. Workers are currently on-site at the Kennedy Center, with efforts to take down the name still ongoing, hampered by safety concerns due to thunderstorms.
The Trump administration informed a judge that it expects to remove President Trump’s name from the Kennedy Center by early Saturday morning, narrowly missing the court-ordered Friday deadline due to weather-related delays. Following a recent court ruling, further compliance filings are required by noon Saturday as the Justice Department continues its efforts to address legal challenges against the name change.
What remains unclear — It is uncertain whether the Trump administration will successfully meet the new deadline to remove the president’s name from the Kennedy Center.
DOJ confirms removal of Trump’s name from Kennedy Center scheduled for Saturday morning
Washington — The Trump administration told a judge it expects to remove President Trump’s name from the front of the Kennedy Center early Saturday morning, saying it will narrowly miss a court-ordered Friday deadline for the name to come down due to thunderstorms.
U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper determined last month that the president’s name was illegally added to The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and ordered that it be removed by Friday, June 12. He also blocked the Trump administration’s plans for the Kennedy Center to close for renovations for two years.
On Friday, Cooper denied the Trump administration’s request for a stay of his injunction, finding that the government had not demonstrated it will succeed on appeal or suffer irreparable harm. Later in the day, an appeals court also denied an emergency request to halt the ruling, meaning Cooper’s order won’t be paused for now and the deadline stands.
Workers erected scaffolding outside the Kennedy Center under its name Friday afternoon. But by midnight, the president’s name remained on the building’s front facade as crews continued to work onsite, while a crowd of onlookers chanted, “take it down.”
Lawyers for the Justice Department said in court filings late Friday the effort to remove Mr. Trump’s name is “ongoing,” but “has been delayed because of thunderstorms in the District of Columbia that presented safety concerns for workers.” The work will wrap up “in the early hours of the morning” on Saturday, Kennedy Center Executive Director Matthew Floca wrote in a court declaration.
The government asked the court to give it until noon on Saturday to file court papers certifying compliance with Cooper’s order.
In a last-minute request earlier on Friday, the Justice Department had asked the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to stay Cooper’s ruling by 7 p.m. and allow the president’s name to stay up. But in a one-page order, a panel of appellate judges rejected the request for an immediate stay, instead directing the parties in the lawsuit to file briefs later this month. The unsigned order was issued by two Obama-appointed judges and one Trump appointee, with no noted dissents.

Valerie Plesch / Bloomberg via Getty Images
In its emergency motion to the appellate court, the government wrote that “it does not make sense to alter the Center’s name and signage now, only to potentially revert the name again after what should be a successful appeal.”
The Trump administration argued it could cause public confusion for the Kennedy Center to change its name multiple times in the span of a year, and said some donors specifically gave money to the center because of Mr. Trump’s name.
“Without the name, ‘Trump’ on the Building, our fundraising will not only come to a halt, but any and all monies raised or committed would be obligated to be returned, refunded, or terminated,” the government wrote.
The motion echoed some of the arguments raised by Mr. Trump himself for renovating the Kennedy Center, including that the building is in “bad shape” and is “unsightly to look at.”
“It is unable to compete with other such venues throughout the United States, but when completed, as planned, will be the envy of the World, something that everyone, including this court, will be proud of,” the filing said.
Attorneys for Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, who sued over the planned name change and two-year closure, asked the appeals court on Friday to reject the Trump administration’s emergency motion, calling it “a frivolous stay request, filed at the eleventh hour, in a transparent effort to jam the Court and game the judicial system.”
In a scathing 12-page filing, Beatty’s lawyers argued that the administration will not prevail on appeal. They also accused the government of “gamesmanship” and “running out the clock” by waiting weeks before asking the appellate court to step in, in what they called a “manufactured emergency.”
“There is no reason they should not finish complying with the district court’s order — as they have been planning for the past two weeks,” Beatty’s lawyers wrote. “In the extremely unlikely event the Court grants Appellants a stay pending appeal, Appellants can easily restore Donald Trump‘s name to the Kennedy Center during the appeal, should they choose.”

The center, run by a Trump-aligned board of trustees, voted in December to add the president’s name to the institution, rebranding it as the Trump-Kennedy Center. The center is the premier arts venue in the nation’s capital and was established by Congress as a memorial to President John F. Kennedy.
Beatty, who sits on the Kennedy Center’s board, challenged the move in court. In May, Cooper ruled that only Congress could approve a name change to the institution and set a deadline of June 12 for complying with his order.
Earlier this month, WTX US News reported that lawyers for the center were instructing staff to immediately begin the process of switching the name of the facility back to its original title. The instructions were laid out in a memo sent by the center’s general counsel and obtained by WTX US News.
Cooper’s original order also blocked plans by the administration and trustees to close the center for nearly two years for major renovations.
The Kennedy Center’s website has already removed the president’s name from much of its online material.
Mr. Trump made moves to put his mark on the center soon after his return to office last year, removing Democratic-appointed members of the board and installing allies and top administration officials instead. The president and his allies also sought to make changes to the types of performances at the institution.
Local insights
Related Election News
LIVE German 2025 Election
Subscribe to Updates
Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.









