内容摘要：About one-third of furniture sold in the US is domestically produced, while the remaining two-thirds are imported. The largest exporters of furniture to the US include China, Vietnam, Mexico and Italy.

About one-third of furniture sold in the US is domestically produced, while the remaining two-thirds are imported. The largest exporters of furniture to the US include China, Vietnam, Mexico and Italy.

While missiles flew, people died. Civilians in Kashmir, on both sides, were killed. Border villages were shelled. Religious sites damaged. Innocent people displaced. But these stories, the human stories, were buried beneath the rubble of rhetoric.In both countries, the media didn’t mourn equally. Victims were grieved if they were ours. Theirs? Collateral. Or fabricated. Or forgotten.

This selective mourning is a moral indictment. Because when we only care about our dead, we become numb to justice. And in that numbness, violence becomes easier the next time.The battle for legitimacyWhat was at stake during the India-Pakistan confrontation wasn’t just territory or tactical advantage. It was legitimacy. Both states needed to convince their own citizens, and the world, that they were on the right side of history.

Indian media leaned on the global “war on terror” frame. By targeting Pakistan-based militants, India positioned itself as a partner in global security. Sound familiar? It should. It’s the same playbook used by the United States in Iraq and Israel in Gaza. Language like “surgical”, “precision”, and “pre-emptive” doesn’t just describe, it absolves.Meanwhile, Pakistan’s media leaned on the moral weight of sovereignty. India’s strikes were framed as an assault not just on land, but on izzat, honour. By invoking sacred spaces, by publicising civilian casualties, Pakistan constructed India not as a counterterrorist actor but as a bully and a blasphemer.

This discursive tug-of-war extended even to facts. When India claimed to have killed 80 militants, Pakistan called it fiction. When Pakistan claimed to have shot down Indian jets, India called it propaganda. Each accused the other of misinformation. Each media ecosystem became a hall of mirrors, reflecting only what it wanted to see.

Ceasefire, silence and a call to listen differentlyThe views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

A new law, championed by President Nayib Bukele, is seen by advocates as an effort to stifle dissent in El Salvador.Human rights groups, politicians and experts have sharply criticised a law approved by El Salvador’s Congress as a censorship tool, designed to silence and criminalise dissent by nongovernmental organisations critical of President Nayib Bukele.

The law proposed by Bukele bypassed normal legislative procedures and was passed on Tuesday night by a Congress under the firm control of his New Ideas party.Bukele first tried to introduce a similar law in 2021, but after strong international backlash, it was never brought for a vote by the full Congress.