There is something almost childishly comic about Donald Trump’s latest contribution to the US-Canadian trade war, if Canada will not bend, perhaps its geography can be punished instead. After negotiations collapsed and Washington imposed 50 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods, Trump suggested that Lake Ontario should henceforth be called “Lake America.” It is the sort of gesture one might expect from a five-year-old who, after losing an argument over a toy, announces that the toy has been renamed in his honour.
Except that the five-year-old is the President of the United States. That distinction turns the joke into something darker. That is the difference between a powerful state and a powerful personality abroad.
A lake does not care what it is called. Lake Ontario, shared by Canada and the United States, has been there considerably longer than either country’s political quarrels. Its name cannot be changed by presidential sulking any more than a child can redraw a border with a crayon. Yet the impulse behind the proposal matters because it reveals a particular conception of power: if something resists you, make it symbolically yours.
This is not diplomacy. It is domination reduced to branding. Trump’s political imagination has always been unusually attracted to names. Names become trophies, declarations of ownership, evidence that the powerful have prevailed. But international relations are not a real-estate brochure. He cannot compel Canadians, international organisations or the rest of the world to abandon a name embedded in history and common usage.
More importantly, the lake is merely the punchline. The serious business is the tariff war. The United States and Canada have spent decades constructing one of the world’s most integrated economic relationships. Cars cross the border several times during production. Energy, metals, agriculture and manufactured goods move through supply chains so interwoven that pretending the two economies can simply be separated is rather like proposing that Siamese twins solve an argument by moving to different houses.
Tariffs are not insults written on envelopes. They become higher costs, disrupted investment, nervous employers and eventually more expensive goods. Canada will suffer. So will US businesses and consumers.
And yet Trump appears to treat every disagreement as a test of personal obedience. Canada is not merely another trading partner; it becomes a defendant. Its refusal to accept Washington’s terms becomes evidence of insolence. The vocabulary shifts from negotiation to submission: fall in line, punish, retaliate, rename.
This is where the childishness becomes dangerous. A spoiled child can throw a tantrum and break a lamp. A president can throw a tantrum and damage alliances, markets and the assumptions on which international stability depends. The United States possesses extraordinary economic, military and diplomatic power. When its president treats that power as an extension of his personal temperament, the world is entitled to worry.
Perhaps Lake Ontario will remain Lake Ontario. Canadians will continue calling it that, and the water will carry on doing what lakes do.
But the episode leaves behind a more troubling question: how much of American power should be devoted to winning arguments that never needed to become wars in the first place?
The answer should be, considerably less. Great powers demonstrate strength by knowing when not to use it. They do not need to rename the lake when they have already got the navy.
Dolly Parton was a country singer in roughly the same way that the Atlantic Ocean is a puddle. Yes, country music was her native language. She came from the Tennessee mountains, carried the accent, the rhinestones, the enormous hair and the apparently indestructible smile. She could have walked into a cartoonist’s office labelled “Country Music Star” and emerged looking exactly like the finished drawing. Yet to describe her merely as a country singer is to confuse the wrapping paper with the present.
Dolly Parton was a global cultural phenomenon. And perhaps the most remarkable thing about her was that she understood the joke before anyone else did.
Everything about her appearance seemed designed to invite ridicule: the wigs, the costumes, the impossible eyelashes, the exaggerated femininity, the calculated glamour. But the joke was frequently on the audience. Behind the Dolly caricature was one of the most formidable creative minds American popular culture produced. She wrote songs with the emotional economy of great short stories. Love, jealousy, poverty, ambition, loneliness, ageing, work and heartbreak passed through her music without requiring intellectual decoration.
She could write “Jolene” and make desperation sound elegant. She could write “9 to 5” and turn workplace frustration into a pop anthem. She could write “I Will Always Love You” and somehow create a song so durable that another singer could transform it into an entirely different cultural event.
That is not simply country music. That is songwriting. But Parton’s extraordinary achievement was not confined to music. She understood something that modern America increasingly seems to forget: fame is not necessarily a moral achievement, but what one does with fame can be.
Her philanthropy was almost startling in its practicality. She did not merely talk about children; she gave them books. Her Imagination Library, inspired partly by her father’s inability to read, became an international literacy programme, sending free books to young children regardless of their families’ income.
There is something wonderfully subversive about that. A woman who became an icon of glitter and commercial entertainment spent decades quietly putting books into children’s hands.
And then there was her peculiar American genius for kindness without ideological packaging. Parton has repeatedly demonstrated sympathy for people who do not necessarily fit comfortably inside the conservative cultural world from which she emerged. Her openness towards LGBT people and others subjected to prejudice has made her an unusual figure in an America increasingly addicted to sorting human beings into political tribes.
She did not need to become a professional political warrior. She simply behaved as though kindness were not a partisan position.That may be why she became so difficult to hate.
Parton understood that America contains contradictions. A poor girl from rural Tennessee could become fabulously wealthy without forgetting poverty. A woman who looked like the ultimate stereotype could become one of the culture’s great dismantlers of stereotypes. Someone apparently manufactured from rhinestones and show business could possess a remarkably serious understanding of human vulnerability.
Today’s America has no shortage of billionaires, celebrities, influencers and politicians telling us how much they care about ordinary people.
Dolly Parton actually did something. That is the difference. Her greatest creation may therefore not be a song, a film, a theme park or even a brand. It may be the character called Dolly Parton, deliberately larger than life, apparently ridiculous, genuinely brilliant, profoundly American and underneath all those rhinestones, unexpectedly humane.
USA made an extraordinary wager on the future of the automobile. It did not merely invest in electric vehicles; it invested its imagination in Elon Musk. The billionaire was cast as the great US disruptor, the man who would drag Detroit into the electric age, turn batteries into the new oil and make the United States the undisputed author of the next automotive revolution.
And then China won. Not completely, not permanently and certainly not without qualifications. But enough to make the USA strategy look painfully narrow.
Tesla was supposed to be America's electric-car answer to Toyota, Volkswagen and the rising Chinese manufacturers. Instead, BYD has overtaken Tesla as the world's biggest seller of battery-electric vehicles, while Chinese manufacturers have multiplied into a formidable industrial ecosystem. BYD sold roughly 2.26m battery-electric vehicles in 2025, compared with Tesla's 1.64m.
The uncomfortable lesson is that America confused a brilliant company with an industrial strategy. Musk deserves enormous credit. Tesla made electric cars desirable rather than worthy. It demonstrated that batteries could power vehicles people actually wanted to drive. It forced established manufacturers to take electrification seriously. But America increasingly treated Tesla as though it were the American electric-car industry itself.
That was the mistake. China did something much less glamorous. It built an ecosystem. Factories. Batteries. Minerals. Components. Software. Charging networks. Supply chains. Engineers. Domestic demand. Aggressive competition. Government support. Manufacturers willing to fight ferociously over price.
China did not wait for one visionary entrepreneur to reinvent the automobile. It created an arena in which hundreds of companies could try, fail, copy, improve and occasionally succeed.
That is rather less cinematic than Musk launching rockets or promising robotaxis. It is also how manufacturing revolutions tend to happen.
The irony is delicious. Tesla entered China partly because China offered precisely the industrial machinery America was struggling to assemble. Shanghai became one of Tesla's most important production centres. Today, Tesla remains deeply dependent on Chinese manufacturing and suppliers even as Chinese competitors increasingly challenge it. Tesla's Shanghai operation recorded strong growth in July, yet BYD continued to outpace Tesla globally.
America's response has too often been defensive: tariffs, subsidies, restrictions and political arguments about whether Chinese cars should be allowed anywhere near American consumers.
Some protection is understandable. National security matters. So do domestic jobs and resilient supply chains. But protection cannot become a substitute for competitiveness.
The real danger is not that a Chinese driver buys a Chinese electric car. It is that an American engineer eventually has to buy one. There is a broader lesson here about American capitalism. Washington has become remarkably comfortable with the idea that technological leadership means producing a spectacular entrepreneur and giving him enormous financial and political oxygen. Yet industrial leadership requires something more mundane: thousands of suppliers, competent infrastructure, patient capital, skilled workers and relentless competition.
China understood that. USA preferred the hero. And heroes, inconveniently, do not manufacture batteries.
The electric-car race is therefore not simply a contest between Musk and BYD. It is a referendum on two competing models of economic power. One celebrates disruption; the other builds industrial depth.
America can still win. Its universities, entrepreneurs, capital markets and technological culture remain formidable. But it will have to stop believing that the future arrives in the shape of one charismatic billionaire. The future is usually assembled in factories. And right now, many of those factories are in China.
Do ignorant and unjust people govern the world? Are the so-called global leaders outcome of mental and psychological disorder? The trajectory of insanity is boundless. Intents and purposes of encroaching and destroying innocent mankind for greed and glory are never debated in public affairs. Evil and insanity are not imaginary but real and happening across Palestine and Ukraine and must be stopped to protect innocent human lives. The dynamic syntax propels animosity, hatred and insanity of violence to kill innocent people, forcibly displace the vulnerable and occupy their homes - the American and Israeli agenda seem to govern the world affairs without any formidable challenge to cruelty on Earth.
Warmongers andweapon profiteers claim to be peacemakers but reality reveals reckless crimes against humanity, continuous wars, destruction of earth and human habitats and political wickedness and frauds hostile to peace and global harmony. Arab-Muslim leaders detached from reality and divided for individual survival appear delusional and defeated. In crisis, intelligent leaders opt for facts of life and when facts warrant a change, responsible leaders pursue a navigational change. Public advisory is rare and non-existence across the Arab-Muslim governance. The overwhelming reality of war in Palestine reflects a cataclysm that afflicted the entire Arab-Muslim world. Russia and Ukraine continued to bomb their major business centers and public domains , killing and tormenting thousands daily. When hope is replaced by tyranny and terror, people lose sense of rational thinking and direction.
The US-Israel war has broader strategic objectives to conquer the Arab world and make Israel a mini superpower of the Middle East.The war has its hidden objectives, to annihilate the whole of the Arab oil producing region, massacre anyone opposing the war and asking for peace , freedom and justice and to make Israel the new superpower of the Middle East. Israel under PM Netanyahu and extremists face no hurdle to evolve “Greater Israel”, no law and no civilized challenge to stop the march for putting finished answers to Palestine. The West European and the US leaders used to propel an imaginary Utopian world of human rights, peace without war and to foresee the “succeeding generations free of the scourge of war” as a legal and political responsibility. Not so, they have all failed miserably to protect the entrenched mankind. The imagination of a promising glorious future simply turned by the few against many as an inferno of horrors, killings and utter devastation throughout Palestine and Persian Gulf.
Do the warmongers know the reality of this universe and how their actions could undermine the present and future of humanity, its survival and sustainable future?
The Earth is a Divine Trust to Humanity, Not a Political Entity to be Bombed
Did you not see the Solar Eclipse recently across Western Europe and North America to know how Earth rotates against Sun and functions? The Earth ( a living entity) being bombed is the earth given to mankind by God as a "TRUST." DO YOU NOT SEE IT FLOATING IN SPACE JUST BY THE COMMAND OF GOD? WHEREVER THERE IS A TRUST, THERE MUST BE ACCOUNTABILITY. When evil-mongers and wrong-doers violate the sanctity of the Laws of God, they are held accountable - history tells without any prejudice. This author has walked through the ancient graveyards of so many great nations of the past used to claim being the “most powerful” on this earth - dead bones and silent forever and nothing else. The succeeding generations would CURSE them for their crimes against humanity. The global institutions of peace and security appear fractured and dysfunctional to be relevant to crisis management and peace-making. The US-Israel have dropped equal to "THREE Hiroshima-Nagasaki" nuclear arsenals on the innocent people of Gaza- Palestine. If you don’t believe in the encompassing truth, just view the real “genocide pictures” presented by Editor Rosa on Transcend Media, September 8, 2025: https://www.transcend.org/tms/2025/09/genocide-in-pictures-worth-a-trillion-words-66/
Global Leaders and the Consequences of their Fault Lines
The former European imperialists sucked out the oil resources from the Arab world and now intend on dismantling the Arab-Muslim world- narrates Dr. Jan Oberg, a peace researcher from Sweden, and former British Diplomat Ian Proud: “The “West” Is Imploding Faster after This”TRANSCEND MediaService: 4/8/25:https://www.transcend.org/tms/2025/04/the-west-is-imploding-faster-after-this/The signs are not just on the wall but written in the skies and the oceans too. The entire “western” narrative, its repressive dominance, and its hubris are about to collapse and take many of its established institutions down with it. And the kakistrocratic (aka imbecile) leadership doesn’t even realise it. If they did, they wouldn’t be driving Europe into that giant iceberg.
Watching dreadful apparatus of fire and brimstone, We, the People are horrified by the crimes against humanity happening across Gaza, occupied West Bank- Palestine and Ukraine. The Ukraine elite hopes for a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement whereas Russia is pushing for more territorial gains and destabilization of Ukraine. President Trump, too confused and lacking foresight and capacity to manage diverse conflicts, is waiting to end his term of presidency soon and would not admit his own shortcomings. If Putin, Trump and Zelenskyy could meet, peace could be worked out between Russia and Ukraine. Trump and Netanyahu using no system and no obligation to the global community as the way to manage time and history of their own fault lines. When people of role and responsibility meet, it creates an amicable momentum for dialogue and better understanding. Western leadership cultures have not learned to relinquish history of pride and prejudice to restore reason encompassing reality. Leadership is an art and it could be improved and changed for the good of humanity. Do intelligent leaders listen to voices of reason and make a navigational change for peace and harmony when facts of life warrant an urgent change in attitudes, policies and behaviors?
You cannot pretend to think and behave like animals. Animals live and do not reflect on the imperatives of life whereas, we, the human beings cannot act like animals as we are supposed to be intelligent and responsible species on this Earth. At the edge of reason, the notion of evil leads to realization of evil and tyranny of genocide must be stopped by all means to restore the manifestation of equal rights, peace, justice and security for all. Intelligent people, leaders and nations always readily accept advice:
The followers of Moses – the generations of Israelite are reminded by God (The Quran 2: 84-85 ):
And remember, We took a Covenant from the Children of Israel (progeny of Jacob), Worship none but God; ….shed no blood amongst you, Nor displace people from homes: and Ye solemnly ratified, And to this ye can bear witness…. It was not lawful for you to banish another party, then it is only a part of the Book that ye believe in…. And on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty, For God is not unmindful what ye do
Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution and has spent several academic years across the Russian-Ukrainian and Central Asian regions knowing the people, diverse cultures of thinking and political governance and a keen interest in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including: Global Humanity and Remaking of Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution for the 21st Century and Beyond, Barnes and Noble Press, USA, 2025https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/global-humanity-and-remaking-of-peace-security-and-conflict-resolution-for-the-21st-century-and-beyond-mahboob-a-khawaja/1147150197and We, The People in Search of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution. Kindle Direct Publishing-Amazon, 05/2025 https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F6V6CH5W
Check Mahboob A. Khawaja, PhD. eBOOK, Wars on Humanity: Ukraine, Palestine and the role of Global Leaders HERE!
Vladimir Putin has a talent for turning geography into theatre. His recent visit to the disputed Kuril Islands was not merely a presidential tour of a hospital, a school and a fish-processing plant. It was a carefully staged reminder that Moscow intends to treat the islands as settled Russian territory, whatever Tokyo thinks of the matter.
Japan, naturally, thinks rather differently. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi called the visit “absolutely unacceptable”, while Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi reaffirmed that the four southernmost islands are Japanese territory “both historically and under international law”. Russia, in turn, insists that the matter is closed. Both sides are therefore talking about the same rocks while inhabiting entirely different legal universes.
The dispute has a peculiar resemblance to Britain and Argentina’s argument over the Falkland Islands. In both cases, geography, history, national identity and military strategy have become inseparable. But there is an important difference: the Kurils sit beside one of the most strategically consequential regions on earth. They are not merely a symbol. They are a military and maritime asset controlling approaches to the Sea of Okhotsk and the Pacific.
That makes Putin’s visit more than a historical grievance tour. It is a message. The timing matters. Japan has aligned itself firmly with the West over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, imposed sanctions and deepened its security relationship with America and other Indo-Pacific democracies. Moscow has responded by viewing Japan less as a potential diplomatic partner and more as part of an increasingly hostile coalition.
Putin’s appearance on Iturup therefore looked rather like the geopolitical equivalent of planting a flag on the table and asking everyone else whether they had noticed. They had.
Yet Tokyo should be careful about what comes next. Japan is entirely entitled to maintain its territorial claim. Indeed, abandoning it would be politically extraordinary after generations of insisting that the Northern Territories remain Japanese. But diplomacy sometimes requires distinguishing between defending a claim and pretending that repeating it will magically change reality.
Russia has administered the islands for more than eight decades. Russian citizens live there. Moscow has invested in infrastructure and, increasingly, military facilities. Putin visiting a school does not settle sovereignty, but neither does a Japanese diplomatic protest overturn Russian control.
This is the uncomfortable lesson of territorial disputes: international law matters, but power matters too. And power is precisely what is changing in the northern Pacific.
Japan is already watching China, North Korea and Russia with increasing concern. The last thing Tokyo needs is another territorial dispute becoming an arena for military signalling. Moscow, meanwhile, would be foolish to assume that Japan's restraint is weakness. A country that spends more on defence, strengthens alliances and watches Russia's Pacific movements with growing suspicion is not likely to forget what happened in 1945—or simply shrug at Russian provocations.
The danger is not that Putin's visit will start a war. It probably will not. The greater danger is that it will make compromise politically impossible.
The Kurils have survived empires, wars, revolutions and changing borders. They can probably survive another presidential photo opportunity.
What they may not survive is the disappearance of diplomacy. The tragedy of disputed territory is that eventually the rocks become less important than the pride attached to them. At that point, nobody is negotiating over islands. They are negotiating over national honour. And honour, unlike territory, has no obvious border.
We have somehow turned nervous-system regulation into a lifestyle industry. There are apps for breathing, gadgets for sleeping, blankets engineered to imitate hugs, and elaborate morning routines requiring the discipline of a Himalayan monk. Against this booming economy of self-management, the warm-water reset has the almost suspicious virtue of being embarrassingly simple.
Put your hands or forearms in comfortably warm water for about a minute. That is the proposition. No subscription. No wearable. No motivational podcast whispering that your best self is waiting behind the next spreadsheet.
The temptation, naturally, is to call it a “hack.” Modern wellness loves hacks because a hack suggests that the body is a badly designed computer and that somebody, somewhere, has discovered the correct button. But the human nervous system is less obedient than that. Warm water may be soothing, and sensory attention can interrupt a spiral of thought, but there is not good evidence that precisely sixty seconds of warm water reliably flips a neurological switch from sympathetic alarm to parasympathetic serenity.
That qualification matters. A small warm hand-bath study found increased subjective comfort, but its autonomic measurements did not show the simple parasympathetic surge that wellness language might promise. Other research on repeated, much longer warm baths has found reductions in resting sympathetic activity. Those findings are interesting, but they are hardly proof that one minute with your wrists in a basin constitutes an emergency brake for the nervous system.
And yet I rather like the idea. Not because it is magic, but because it is mundane. Stress thrives on abstraction. We worry about tomorrow while standing in today. We rehearse conversations that have not happened, calculate disasters that may never arrive, scroll through catastrophes occurring hundreds of miles away, and then wonder why our shoulders have migrated toward our ears. Warm water does something wonderfully primitive: it gives the mind a physical event to notice.
There is warmth. There is pressure. There is texture. There is the ridiculous little fact that, for sixty seconds, your hands are in a bowl. That may be enough to create a pause. And pauses are underrated.
We have become fascinated by interventions that promise transformation while neglecting interventions that merely interrupt. But interruption is often where recovery begins. A person who stops doom-scrolling for one minute has already achieved something more valuable than another person who has purchased an expensive “calm” device and never opened the box.
The warm-water ritual also has a useful philosophical sting. It reminds us that self-care does not have to be theatrical. Sometimes the nervous system does not need a ten-step protocol, a quantified score, or a new identity. Sometimes we simply need to stop doing things.
So fill the basin. Make the water warm, not painfully hot. Put your hands in. For a minute, notice what is actually happening instead of what might happen next. Call it a sensory reset if you like. Call it a pause. Call it absolutely nothing. Just do not call it a miracle.
The miracle, if there is one, is considerably smaller and more believable: for sixty seconds, you remembered that you have a body. In an age obsessed with controlling every internal fluctuation, accepting a minute of sensation may be the radical act: doing less, noticing more, quietly expecting nothing.
A different way to check internal and external ...thoughts! 'Me My Mind & I' is a cartoon series by Patrick McWade. For more 'Me My Mind & I' HERE! For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!
They trek across surreal cartoon streets, armed with quirky sarcasm and boundless humor. They map uncharted valleys, befriend bizarre creatures and find the real adventure in their square frames.
For more Trekking Chat, HERE! For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!
For more than four years, Volodymyr Zelenskyy has occupied the strange political territory created by total war, extraordinarily powerful, extraordinarily popular at times and largely insulated from the normal rituals of democratic politics. Now a former ally has stepped through the door that Ukrainian politicians have kept firmly shut.
Mykhailo Fedorov, recently dismissed as defence minister, has called for elections despite the continuing war. His argument is straightforward: Russia should not be allowed to turn Ukraine’s democracy into a wartime casualty. But beneath that principle lies a much more uncomfortable question for Zelenskyy. How long can a president govern without a fresh electoral mandate before emergency rule begins to look less like necessity and more like political convenience?
Ukraine is, of course, fighting for its existence. Holding an election while Russian missiles are falling, millions of Ukrainians remain displaced abroad and hundreds of thousands of soldiers are scattered along a vast front would be extraordinarily difficult. It is also restricted by wartime law. Democracy is not simply a ballot box; it requires voters who can participate freely and safely.
Yet “difficult” and “impossible” are not synonyms. Fedorov has understood the political power of that distinction. His intervention has shattered an assumption that Ukraine's wartime political settlement should remain frozen until victory.
That makes Fedorov potentially dangerous to Zelenskyy—not because he commands an army or controls parliament, but because he has identified the one vulnerability that every wartime leader eventually encounters: the temptation to confuse national unity with personal authority.
Zelenskyy deserves enormous credit for leading Ukraine through Russia’s invasion. But admiration is not a constitutional principle. Nor should wartime heroism become a permanent political licence.
The growing questions about corruption make this more urgent. Allegations involving people close to the administration, repeated controversies over governance and the perception that decision-making has become concentrated around the presidential office inevitably create suspicion. Zelenskyy himself has not been implicated in the latest corruption investigations, and that distinction matters. But presidents are judged not merely by their own hands, but by the political ecosystem they create and tolerate.
Fedorov's challenge is therefore bigger than Fedorov. He is testing whether Ukraine's wartime democracy can survive its own success. If elections cannot be held safely, Kyiv must explain precisely why, establish credible safeguards and provide a convincing timetable for restoring normal democratic competition.
Otherwise, an extraordinary constitutional arrangement risks becoming an indefinite one. And that would be precisely the wrong lesson for a country fighting Vladimir Putin. Ukraine is not defending democracy merely as a slogan to be printed on Western aid packages. It is defending the proposition that governments derive their authority from citizens, not from perpetual emergencies.
Fedorov may ultimately discover that organising an election during a war is impractical, politically premature or even reckless. His supporters have already shown signs of discomfort with the idea. But by raising the issue, he has done something important.
He has reminded Ukrainians that defeating Russia and preserving Ukrainian democracy are not competing objectives. They are supposed to be the same war.
On August 25, 1609, Galileo Galilei stepped onto the balcony of the Campanile in Venice and changed the world. Before an assembly of the Venetian Senate and the city’s most influential lawmakers, he unveiled his first telescope, a modest instrument of lead and glass that could magnify objects nine times.
But this was no mere novelty. Galileo demonstrated its military and commercial value, showing how it could spot enemy ships hours before they reached the lagoon. The senators were dazzled. They immediately recognized its strategic importance, doubling his salary and granting him a lifetime professorship at Padua.
Yet Galileo’s ambitions soared far beyond terrestrial shores. That same night, he turned his telescope skyward—toward the moon, the stars, and the shimmering band of the Milky Way. What he saw would unravel centuries of cosmic dogma: mountains on the moon, moons around Jupiter, and countless new stars. The telescope, born as a tool of war, had become a key to the heavens. Galileo had not only demonstrated a device; he had inaugurated the age of modern astronomy, forever altering humanity’s place in the universe.
For this issue of Ovi History, a historical fiction short story from Lucas Durand and a new book review.
So, turn the pages and ...take cover.
Read the OviHistory eMagazine online HERE! View, read it online or download it in PDF/epub format HERE! And enjoy viewing & reading it online or download in PDF format HERE! All eMagazines and eBooks downloads are FREE!
You can find it in the Ovi Pedia pages, HERE! Or Ovi Thematic eMagazines pages, HERE!
With the hope that you will read and learn from the articles, so ...do read this historic chronicle
