分类： 未分类

“We just hit somebody”: Audio captures the moment a Frontier plane struck a pedestrian on the runway

May 9, 2026 / 7:18 AM EDT / CBS News

By Kerry Breen

Kerry Breen is a news editor at CBSNews.com. A graduate of New York University’s Arthur L. Carter School of Journalism, she previously worked at NBC News’ TODAY Digital. She covers current events, breaking news and issues including substance use.

An audio recording captures the moments after a Frontier Airlines flight struck a pedestrian while departing Denver International Airport on Friday.

Things begin smoothly, with the tower confirming the pilot is clear for takeoff and wishing the flight crew “a good night,” according to audio from ATC.com. About 30 seconds into the audio, the Frontier pilot says he is “stopping on the runway.”

“We just hit somebody. We have an engine fire,” the pilot says.

Air traffic control staff provide instructions on how the plane can safely exit the runway. When asked for more details, the pilot says there “was an individual walking across the runway.” About 40 seconds later, the pilot reports “smoke in the aircraft” and says he will evacuate the plane on the runway.

Video shot by a passenger aboard the plane and shared with CBS News shows smoke in the cabin of the aircraft. The passengers and flight crew used inflatable slides to evacuate the plane.

The images also appear to show blood on the plane’s engine. There was no immediate information available about the condition of the person hit by the plane, or how the individual entered the runway.

No injuries were reported among any of the 224 passengers or seven crew members aboard the plane at the time of the incident, according to Frontier Airlines. Emergency crews bused the passengers back to the airport terminal, and their flight to Los Angeles was rescheduled.

Frontier Airlines is investigating the incident. The National Transportation Safety Board was also notified. The runway where the crash occurred will stay closed during the investigation, according to Denver International Airport.

The Iran war has changed. Trump’s talking points have not

2026-05-09T10:00:50.901Z / CNN

Analysis by

Zachary B. Wolf

1 hr 8 min ago

PUBLISHED May 9, 2026, 6:00 AM ET

Donald Trump The Middle East

Like Lucy with the football, President Donald Trump keeps teasing that a deal to end the war with Iran is nearly over.

It’s one of a series of Iran talking points he has been repeating for months.

The war itself has changed — evolving from one of shock and awe to a monthlong ceasefire in which each side has imposed a costly blockade on the other.

But Trump’s talking points have stayed the same. The ideas he repeats include the key points that the US is in charge; Iran’s military is devastated; and things are going to be over pretty soon.

All this makes it very difficult to know how seriously to take his assurances about the proximity of a deal.

The White House messaging on the war has been ineffective, if dour polling is to be believed, but Trump’s own adherence to his script has been unshakeable.

Point #1: It’s almost over

“It’ll be over quickly,” Trump said during a tele-rally for a Republican candidate in Georgia this week.

“I think it’s got a very good chance of ending, and if it doesn’t end, we have to go back to bombing the hell out of them,” he told PBS earlier in the week.

It’s a tease he has employed over and over again since the US and Israel first attacked Iran.

“Very soon,” he told reporters on March 9.

The specific timeframe has slipped from the four to six weeks Trump projected early in the campaign, but it has always remained just off in the distance.

Back in April, CNN’s “Inside Politics” made a montage of times Trump had said the war would be over soon. He hasn’t stopped the tease in the weeks since.

A woman walks past symbolic belongings laid on the ground at Valiasr Square in Tehran on April 24, 2026, in tribute to the schoolgirls in Minab killed during the initial February 28 airstrikes on Iran.

AFP/Getty Images

Point #2: It’s just a detour, excursion, or skirmish

Trump has not shied away from using the word “war” to describe military conflict, which remains unauthorized by Congress. But he prefers to describe it as something less.

“I call it a skirmish because that’s what it is, it’s a skirmish. And we’re doing unbelievably well,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday.

The word skirmish is relatively new, but the idea around it has been a constant.

“This is a short excursion into something that should have been done for 47 years,” he told reporters on March 7 on Air Force One.

“So we did a little detour and it’s working out very nicely,” he said at the White House on May 4.

How Trump refers to the Iran war

0:12 • Source: CNN

How Trump refers to the Iran war

0:12

Point #3: The US has destroyed Iran’s military

“They have no navy — totally wiped out — they have no air force — totally wiped out — they have no anti-aircraft capability — totally wiped out — no radar. They have no leaders. The leaders are wiped out. The whole thing — and then I read the papers and they say how well they’re doing. They’re not doing well,” Trump said May 5 at the White House.

A day earlier, he said the same thing.

“They have no navy, they have no air force, they have no anti-aircraft equipment, they have no radar, they have no nothing. They have no leaders, actually. Their leaders — the leaders happened to be gone also,” he said May 4.

It’s a talking point Trump has repeated ad nauseam, both before the April 7 ceasefire and since.

Here’s an example from his gaggle with reporters on March 20 in arguing the US had already essentially won the war:

“We’ve knocked out their navy, their air force. We’ve knocked out their anti-aircraft. We’ve knocked out everything. We’re roaming free. From a military standpoint, all they’re doing is clogging up the strait. But from a military standpoint, they’re finished,” he said back then.

A journalist stands next to the wreckage of a vehicle during the visit to a car service center in eastern Tehran that was hit by a missile strike, on March 28, 2026.

Atta Kenare/AFP/ Getty Images

Point #4: Iran’s leadership wants a deal

The seriousness of talks between Iran and the US has been the subject of much conjecture as they have ebbed and flowed during the war. Multipoint proposals brokered by Pakistani interlocutors have morphed into a simpler set of principles. (Some reports suggested the proposal fit onto one page, but Trump has said there’s more to it than that.)

It’s also unclear what would happen in the long term to Iran’s nuclear program. Trump has long said a major goal of the war is to make sure Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.

But Trump’s talking point is that Iran’s leadership wants a deal.

“They want to make a deal. We’ve had very good talks over the last 24 hours, and it’s very possible that we’ll make a deal,” Trump said Wednesday at the White House.

At a different Wednesday event, he said something very similar.

“We’re dealing with people that want to make a deal very much, and we’ll see whether or not they can make a deal that’s satisfactory to us. We have it very much under control,” he said.

He has been talking about how the Iranians want to make a deal for months. No deal has materialized.

“They want to make a deal,” he said on March 21.

Trump often says the Iranians want to make a deal

0:11 • Source: CNN

Trump often says the Iranians want to make a deal

0:11

At that time, before the ceasefire, which was meant to help foster a deal, Trump argued the war was going according to his plan. “We are weeks ahead of schedule,” he said back then. (He’s not using that talking point anymore.)

Days later, on March 26, he was agitated that Iranians were not willing to agree to a US proposal and making threats on Truth Social:

“The Iranian negotiators are very different and ‘strange.’ They are ‘begging’ us to make a deal, which they should be doing since they have been militarily obliterated, with zero chance of a comeback, and yet they publicly state that they are only ‘looking at our proposal.’ WRONG!!!”

The situation has changed since then. There is a ceasefire, but Iran has gained leverage by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. But the talking point remains the same.

President Barack Obama speaks during a news conference regarding a nuclear deal with Iran, in the East Room of the White House on July 15, 2015.

Alex Wong/Getty Images/File

Point #5: Whatever he achieves will be better than Obama’s Iran deal

I’ve written about this before, but Trump continues to talk about the nuclear deal struck between multiple countries and Iran during the Obama administration. He repeats it often.

“Other presidents should have done this,” he said Tuesday at the White House. “Forty-seven years, they’ve (presidents) been toying with these stupid people (Iran’s leaders). In many cases, stupid people. They should have been done by Obama. He went the other way. He was giving him cash. He sent plane loads — a Boeing 757 took the seats out and put green, green cash, $1.7 billion in the plane.”

Those claims, which bend the facts of the Obama-era deal, are frequent talking points for Trump.

“The DEAL that we are making with Iran will be FAR BETTER than the JCPOA, commonly referred to as ‘The Iran Nuclear Deal,’ penned by Barack Hussein Obama and Sleepy Joe Biden, one of the Worst Deals ever made having to do with the Security of our Country,” he said April 20 on social media.

Point #6: Anything would be worth keeping Iran from a nuclear weapon

While intelligence assessments before the war did not suggest Iran was on the cusp of obtaining a nuclear weapon, Trump has argued the war was necessary to avert nuclear war.

“I can tell you, the Middle East would have been gone, Israel would have been gone, and they would have trained their sights on Europe first and then us because they’re sick people. These are sick people,” Trump said on May 5 at the White House. “And we’re not going to let lunatics have a nuclear weapon.”

The consistency of Trump’s talking points makes it hard to tell when he’s repeating the script and when he might be saying something new about negotiations on an end to the war.

CNN’s Dugald McConnell and Emily Condon contributed to this report.

美拟调高H-1B签证工资门槛 外籍毕业生留美职场路恐受阻

2026年5月9日 18:46 / 联合早报

美拟调高H-1B签证工资门槛 外籍毕业生留美职场路恐受阻

谷歌母公司Alphabet首席执行官皮查伊原籍印度，到美国深造考取硕士学位后留美工作，靠H-1B签证在美国建立事业，成为全球市值最高公司的领导人。如今美国政府计划调高H-1B签证的最低工资，雇主恐再难聘用留美毕业生工作。 （路透社）

（华盛顿彭博电）美国特朗普政府计划大幅提高H-1B签证最低工资门槛，一些城市如旧金山的入门级工程师薪资标准将上调近30%至16万2000美元，这意味着聘用外籍人才的成本将增加。

据移民数据公司Lawfully and Threshold估算，在新政策实施的首12个月内，聘用外国白领人才的大型企业须承担至少180亿美元（约228亿新元）的成本。在三年内，即大多数现有H-1B签证将不得不按更高标准续签后，企业的年度成本可能高达430亿美元。

H-1B签证是外籍白领人才进入美国就业和居留的主要管道。根据特朗普政府先前发布的工资建议说明，H-1B持有人平均年薪比同职位美国员工低约1万美元，提高H-1B最低工资门槛，可防止企业利用H-1B聘用较低薪的外籍员工，压低美国本土员工的工资。支持者认为这有助于恢复就业市场公平竞争，确保H-1B发挥其既定目的，即引进的是美国缺乏的高技能人才。

新门槛会增加企业的人力成本，最终可能会有雇主不愿支付这额外费用，而减少年轻人才的机会。目前已经开始有雇主为此减少以H-1B签证聘请入门级和经验较少的外籍员工。影响范围并不限于科技业，也包括金融、医疗、土木工程、学术研究、教育等长期利用H-1B引进外国人才的行业。

Lawfully and Threshold部门主管雷诺兹指出，H-1B项目可能会转变为仅适用于值得高薪聘用的高技能外国人才，估计提供H-1B签证数量最多的前500名雇主‌‌‌的中位数工资成本将增加大约1300万美元。

移民法律事务所合伙人麦纳指出，一些公司可能会因工资成本上升而把工作转移到海外，但须要留在美国本土运营的企业尤其是制造业公司，将被迫以更高薪资聘请所需的人才。

提高H-1B最低工资门槛预料将对赴美深造的外国学生产生最大冲击，他们大多攻读电脑工程或其他科学相关科系。过去20多年来，这类学生一般毕业后可留在美国工作一至三年，然后由雇主申请H-1B。通过此渠道在美国建立事业、成为商业巨人的包括谷歌母公司Alphabet首席执行官皮查伊和微软首席执行官纳德拉。

美拟调高H-1B签证工资门槛 外籍毕业生留美职场路恐受阻

2026年5月9日 18:46 / 联合早报

谷歌母公司Alphabet首席执行官皮查伊原籍印度，到美国深造考取硕士学位后留美工作，靠H-1B签证在美国建立事业，成为全球市值最高公司的领导人。如今美国政府计划调高H-1B签证的最低工资，雇主恐再难聘用留美毕业生工作。 （路透社）

（华盛顿彭博电）美国特朗普政府计划大幅提高H-1B签证最低工资门槛，一些城市如旧金山的入门级工程师薪资标准将上调近30%至16万2000美元，这意味着聘用外籍人才的成本将增加。

据移民数据公司Lawfully and Threshold估算，在新政策实施的首12个月内，聘用外国白领人才的大型企业须承担至少180亿美元（约228亿新元）的成本。在三年内，即大多数现有H-1B签证将不得不按更高标准续签后，企业的年度成本可能高达430亿美元。

H-1B签证是外籍白领人才进入美国就业和居留的主要管道。根据特朗普政府先前发布的工资建议说明，H-1B持有人平均年薪比同职位美国员工低约1万美元，提高H-1B最低工资门槛，可防止企业利用H-1B聘用较低薪的外籍员工，压低美国本土员工的工资。支持者认为这有助于恢复就业市场公平竞争，确保H-1B发挥其既定目的，即引进的是美国缺乏的高技能人才。

新门槛会增加企业的人力成本，最终可能会有雇主不愿支付这额外费用，而减少年轻人才的机会。目前已经开始有雇主为此减少以H-1B签证聘请入门级和经验较少的外籍员工。影响范围并不限于科技业，也包括金融、医疗、土木工程、学术研究、教育等长期利用H-1B引进外国人才的行业。

Lawfully and Threshold部门主管雷诺兹指出，H-1B项目可能会转变为仅适用于值得高薪聘用的高技能外国人才，估计提供H-1B签证数量最多的前500名雇主‌‌‌的中位数工资成本将增加大约1300万美元。

移民法律事务所合伙人麦纳指出，一些公司可能会因工资成本上升而把工作转移到海外，但须要留在美国本土运营的企业尤其是制造业公司，将被迫以更高薪资聘请所需的人才。

提高H-1B最低工资门槛预料将对赴美深造的外国学生产生最大冲击，他们大多攻读电脑工程或其他科学相关科系。过去20多年来，这类学生一般毕业后可留在美国工作一至三年，然后由雇主申请H-1B。通过此渠道在美国建立事业、成为商业巨人的包括谷歌母公司Alphabet首席执行官皮查伊和微软首席执行官纳德拉。

Nebraska’s ‘blue dot’ becomes the center of a closely watched Democratic primary fight

2026-05-09T09:00:50.950Z / CNN

By Jeff Zeleny

2 hr ago

PUBLISHED May 9, 2026, 5:00 AM ET

People wave “Blue Dot” signs from a pedestrian bridge over rush hour traffic in Omaha, Nebraska, on October 24, 2024.

Mario Tama/Getty Images/File

Omaha may be a blue dot in a sea of Nebraska red, but that point of political pride has sparked a bitter divide among Democrats in one of the nation’s most closely watched congressional races.

In the Nebraska primary on Tuesday, the Democratic campaign to replace Republican Rep. Don Bacon has become something of a proxy war over which Democratic candidate would protect — or risk — the state’s unique method of awarding electoral votes in presidential elections.

The retirement of Bacon, one of only three House Republicans who won in districts that Kamala Harris also carried in 2024, created an open seat and attractive terrain for Democrats to target in their effort to win control of Congress in November.

Two of the leading Democratic hopefuls in the race — John Cavanaugh and Denise Powell — have been at each other’s throats for weeks, with dueling ads, yard signs and contentious neighborhood disputes.

Powell argues that electing Cavanaugh, a state senator, to Congress would mean he could no longer fight against future Republican efforts to change state election law and make Nebraska a winner-take-all system like 48 other states. That would threaten the blue dot, as the state’s 2nd Congressional District has colloquially become known.

“We have fought so hard for fair representation, our Blue Dot, and to retain that electoral power,” Powell said Friday in a statement. “We cannot afford a candidate whose campaign hands Republicans the votes to gerrymander us into oblivion.”

Denise Powell speaks at a fundraising event in Omaha, Nebraska, on April 16, 2026.

Margery A. Beck/AP

Nebraska state Sen. John Cavanaugh speaks at an office in Lincoln, Nebraska, on April 10, 2026.

Margery A. Beck/AP

The Democratic quarreling in Nebraska over a unique state issue stands apart from the ideological fights in other competitive races across the country. Still, the primary has attracted a deluge of outside spending from interest groups, with more than $6 million in advertising alone, according to AdImpact.

Two outside progressive super PACs have invested more than $1 million on the Omaha airwaves seeking to amplify Powell’s argument: If Cavanaugh is elected to Congress and gives up his position in the state legislature, Republican Gov. Jim Pillen would fill the seat with someone who would vote to eliminate the blue dot.

In response, Cavanaugh has aired ads of his own, calling his opponent “Dark Money Denise.”

His campaign and allies have planted yard signs across the district vowing to “stand up to Trump and defend the blue dot.” Six fellow state senators signed an open letter to voters last month saying the attacks were misguided and Democrats were likely to win other legislative races.

“We stand with John Cavanaugh because we can protect the Blue Dot and existing abortion access, while sending a strong, experienced legislator to Congress,” the senators said in their letter. “It is disingenuous to boil the fate of Nebraskans down to one person.”

Why the dot matters to Democrats

Nebraska and Maine are the only two states in the country that divide Electoral College votes by congressional district rather than a statewide winner-take-all formula.

Under the system, the statewide winner receives two electoral votes, and the rest are split, one apiece, among the leading vote-getters in each district.

President Donald Trump benefited from the system in Maine, a blue state, where he won a single electoral vote in 2016 and 2020 despite losing statewide. But the opposite happened in Nebraska, a red state, where he won only four of five electoral votes in 2020.

In the final weeks of the 2024 campaign, Trump and his allies mounted a last-ditch effort to change the Nebraska law, fearful of the possibility of a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College. Those worries, of course, never materialized, as Trump defeated Harris 312-226.

Hoping to impress upon them the importance of a single electoral vote in a tight race, Trump in 2024 spoke by phone to Nebraska Republican lawmakers to encourage them to change the rules for the upcoming election.

But because of opposition from lawmakers like Cavanaugh and a handful of others, Pillen failed to rally support to change the 30-year-old Nebraska law. He has pledged to try again if he can muster support from the nation’s only unicameral legislature, which is technically nonpartisan but has 33 senators who form a Republican supermajority and 16 senators who usually make up the Democratic opposition.

Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen speaks during a news conference at the Department of Agriculture in Washington, DC, on July 8, 2025.

Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP

A rare Omaha opening

When Bacon announced his intention to retire from Congress, Democrats seized upon the opportunity for an open seat in a district that stretches across the Omaha area in eastern Nebraska. For the last decade, Bacon has successfully fought off all Democratic challengers.

Brinker Harding, an Omaha city councilman, is running unopposed for the Republican nomination for the seat.

The Democratic campaign was initially dominated by familiar concerns such as rising costs, the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and, more recently, the Iran war. Now, the primary race has become consumed by talk of protecting the state’s lone Democratic electoral vote.

The suggestion that the blue dot was at risk first came from Crystal Rhoades, clerk of the Douglas County District Court, who is one of six Democratic candidates in the race. But Powell and out-of-state allies, including Emily’s List, soon amplified the argument in a multimillion-dollar spending campaign.

The fight has become a resounding soundtrack of TV ads against Cavanaugh, including one from New Democratic Majority, a super PAC that supports Powell.

“It’s how a House win in Nebraska could cost Democrats the presidency,” an announcer says. “Don’t let John Cavanaugh give away our blue dot.”

Powell, who previously operated a political action committee called Women Run Nebraska, is seeking elected office for the first time. In ads, she describes herself as “one pissed-off Mom.”

Cavanaugh hails from a prominent Democratic family in Omaha. His father represented the 2nd District in Congress from 1977 to 1981. His sister, Machaela, serves in the state legislature.

In addition to TV ads of his own, Cavanaugh created a page on his campaign web site to push back on the argument that his election to Congress would imperil the blue dot. If elected, he said, he would not resign his legislative seat until January, after new senators are elected.

“Elected Democrats in Nebraska are confident that they will pick up more than enough seats in November to offset John’s vote,” he explains on his campaign site. He adds: “Nebraska Democrats do not have to choose between standing up to Trump and protecting our blue dot.”

萧美琴：单靠传统军购无法独撑现代战场

2026年5月9日 16:52 / 联合早报

萧美琴：单靠传统军购无法独撑现代战场

台湾副总统萧美琴星期六（5月9日）在社交平台发文称，单靠传统军购无法独撑现代战场。

台湾立法院星期五（5月8日）三读通过在野党主导的国防特别预算条例，金额只是民进党政府提出草案的三分之二，仅限对美军购。台湾副总统萧美琴在社交平台发文称，单靠传统军购无法独撑现代战场。

萧美琴星期六（9日）在脸书写道，立法院通过了国防特别条例的部分预算。这是国防部和立法院耗费近半年时间，不断与社会各界沟通、对话后，跨出的艰辛一步。

她说，“我们必须诚实面对，这只是建构台湾防卫实力的一步，距离国防需求，以及台湾人对安全的期待，还有很大一段距离”，并指这次特别预算中商购和委制部分被删除，确实让人感到遗憾。

萧美琴指出，面对现在复杂的灰色地带威胁与新兴科技挑战，导入民间技术、发展不对称作战能力，是打造“台湾之盾”最关键的防线。将这些具有高度机动性、能带动台湾百工百业共同参与国防升级的机会拒于门外，不仅容易造成战力上的缺口，更是错失让台湾制造业与国际安全供应链接轨的宝贵时机。

她认为，单靠传统的对外军购，绝对无法独撑现代快速变动的战场，更会将在前线保家卫国的军人们暴露在极大的风险之中。

延伸阅读

美国称台军费后续资金延宕是对大陆作出让步 台立院三读通过在野党主导军购条例 民进党：国防安全现破口

面对军购案核准不够完整的情况，萧美琴称，政府将持续努力与朝野政党沟通，在既有基础上寻求最大的社会共识。她也衷心期盼，能尽速补足整体防卫体系所需的关键战力。

台湾在野的国民党和民众党星期五在立法院三读通过两党共提的7800亿新台币（新台币，下同，315亿新元）国防特别预算条例。

台湾行政院去年底对未来八年（2026至2033年）编列1.25万亿国防特别预算条例（简称军购案），包含对美军购、商业采购和委托制造三部分。

台湾总统赖清德星期五在脸书发文称，通过军购条例仅是第一步，希望立法院尽速构建七大防卫能力，不让任何关键战力被遗漏。

美国国务院对台军费后续资金的延宕表达关切，称此举是对中国大陆作出让步。

美国公布首批UFO档案 160余份绝密文件揭示半世纪“空中异象”

2026年5月9日 18:58 / 联合早报

美国公布首批UFO档案 160余份绝密文件揭示半世纪“空中异象”

美国战争部网站公布的记录显示，美国印太司令部2024年报告称，在日本附近发现一个形似橄榄球的不明空中现象。 （美国战争部网站）

（华盛顿综合电）美国五角大楼根据总统特朗普的指示，星期五公布第一批记录不明飞行物（UFO）目击报告的机密档案。这批横跨80多年的文件再次引发全球对外星生命的猜测，也令美国政府对超自然现象的调查重回舆论焦点。

战争部网站周五（5月8日）公布160多份此类文件，涵盖从1940年代至今的目击记录，包括飞碟、圆盘及各种球形飞行物。这些档案来自联邦调查局、国务院、国家航空航天局和五角大楼。

战争部长赫格塞斯发声明说：“这些被列为机密的档案，长期以来引发各种合理的怀疑和猜测。现在，是时候让美国民众亲自审视这些记录了。”

特朗普今年2月指示各联邦机构甄别并公开相关文件，称这是为了回应公众对地外文明的浓厚兴趣。

解密文件显示，最早的官方目击报告可追溯至1947年12月。近年的一份报告则记录了2023年发生的数起异常事件，包含七名联邦雇员的证词。在其中一起事件中，三个联邦执法特工小组成员分别描述天空出现橙色光球，并发射出较小的红色光球。

延伸阅读

特朗普：将公布外星人和不明飞行物相关文件

专家：证实“现象”存在 未证实“外星人”

尽管解密文件包含一些已知目击事件的从未公开视频，但科学界态度依然审慎。专家说，这些档案没有提供外星技术或外星生命存在的确凿证据。

哈佛大学天体物理学家勒布指出，政府公开记录说明这些现象并非凭空猜测，而是具有实证基础的课题。

不明空中现象调查员韦斯特说，此次披露的信息与拜登政府时期大体一致。

独立记者基恩表示，此次公布表明，特朗普政府仍有很多关于不明空中现象的信息应该公开。

《纽约时报》2017年刊登基恩与他人联合采访的一篇报道，揭露五角大楼的不明空中现象秘密项目。这篇报道后来促使国会推动给不明飞行物体档案解密。

基恩说：“我想，我们已证明不明空中现象的存在，但这并不意味我们已经证明它们是外星人或地外生命，或者我们知道它们是什么。”

舆论质疑特朗普为转移焦点

有批评者认为，这是美国政府为了转移人们对特朗普政治困境的注意力，包括美伊战事，以及民众要求公布更多与已故性罪犯爱泼斯坦相关文件的压力。

两名众议员伯切特和卢娜对政府公开文件表示欢迎，他们都是解密不明飞行物档案的支持者。卢娜说，预计约30天后还将有一批新的资料公布。

美国公布首批UFO档案 160余份绝密文件揭示半世纪“空中异象”

2026年5月9日 18:58 / 联合早报

美国公布首批UFO档案 160余份绝密文件揭示半世纪“空中异象”

美国战争部网站公布的记录显示，美国印太司令部2024年报告称，在日本附近发现一个形似橄榄球的不明空中现象。 （美国战争部网站）

（华盛顿综合电）美国五角大楼根据总统特朗普的指示，星期五公布第一批记录不明飞行物（UFO）目击报告的机密档案。这批横跨80多年的文件再次引发全球对外星生命的猜测，也令美国政府对超自然现象的调查重回舆论焦点。

战争部网站周五（5月8日）公布160多份此类文件，涵盖从1940年代至今的目击记录，包括飞碟、圆盘及各种球形飞行物。这些档案来自联邦调查局、国务院、国家航空航天局和五角大楼。

战争部长赫格塞斯发声明说：“这些被列为机密的档案，长期以来引发各种合理的怀疑和猜测。现在，是时候让美国民众亲自审视这些记录了。”

特朗普今年2月指示各联邦机构甄别并公开相关文件，称这是为了回应公众对地外文明的浓厚兴趣。

解密文件显示，最早的官方目击报告可追溯至1947年12月。近年的一份报告则记录了2023年发生的数起异常事件，包含七名联邦雇员的证词。在其中一起事件中，三个联邦执法特工小组成员分别描述天空出现橙色光球，并发射出较小的红色光球。

延伸阅读

特朗普：将公布外星人和不明飞行物相关文件

专家：证实“现象”存在 未证实“外星人”

尽管解密文件包含一些已知目击事件的从未公开视频，但科学界态度依然审慎。专家说，这些档案没有提供外星技术或外星生命存在的确凿证据。

哈佛大学天体物理学家勒布指出，政府公开记录说明这些现象并非凭空猜测，而是具有实证基础的课题。

不明空中现象调查员韦斯特说，此次披露的信息与拜登政府时期大体一致。

独立记者基恩表示，此次公布表明，特朗普政府仍有很多关于不明空中现象的信息应该公开。

《纽约时报》2017年刊登基恩与他人联合采访的一篇报道，揭露五角大楼的不明空中现象秘密项目。这篇报道后来促使国会推动给不明飞行物体档案解密。

基恩说：“我想，我们已证明不明空中现象的存在，但这并不意味我们已经证明它们是外星人或地外生命，或者我们知道它们是什么。”

舆论质疑特朗普为转移焦点

有批评者认为，这是美国政府为了转移人们对特朗普政治困境的注意力，包括美伊战事，以及民众要求公布更多与已故性罪犯爱泼斯坦相关文件的压力。

两名众议员伯切特和卢娜对政府公开文件表示欢迎，他们都是解密不明飞行物档案的支持者。卢娜说，预计约30天后还将有一批新的资料公布。

墨美加轮办世界杯开幕式三部曲 国际巨星云集助阵

2026年5月9日 15:15 / 联合早报

Blackpink成员之一Lisa，将在美国洛杉矶举办的世界杯开幕式上献唱。图为她日前出席被称为“时尚奥斯卡”的纽约大都会博物馆慈善晚宴（Met Gala）。 （法新社）

（墨西哥城法新电）2026年世界杯足球赛将上演“开幕式三部曲”，墨西哥、美国及加拿大三个东道国将轮流举办星光熠熠的盛大庆典。

国际足球联合会星期五（5月8日）确认，凯蒂·佩里（Katy Perry）、Future、艾拉妮丝·莫莉塞特（Alanis Morissette）、迈克尔·布雷（Michael Buble）、J·巴尔文（J Balvin），以及Lisa等全球乐坛巨星都将参与演出。

墨西哥将率先拉开狂欢序幕，在当地时间6月11日墨西哥对阵南非的揭幕战开球前90分钟，于阿兹特克体育场（赛时更名为墨西哥城体育场）举行首场开幕式庆典。演出阵容包括哥伦比亚巨星J·巴尔文、曾获多项格莱美奖的墨西哥摇滚乐队Mana，以及流行歌手亚历杭德罗·费尔南德斯（Alejandro Fernandez）。

国际足联主席因凡蒂诺在声明中说：“全世界将共同分享这一时刻，这项赛事也将由此开启。从墨西哥城开始，随后几天在多伦多和洛杉矶接力，这些仪式将音乐、文化与足球融为一体，既展现各国的独特性，也体现定义本届赛事的团结精神。这是开启这场全球庆典的强有力方式。”

加拿大将于6月12日在多伦多迎来首场对阵波黑的比赛，艾拉妮丝、布雷、阿莱西亚·卡拉（Alessia Cara）、Elyanna、洁西·雷耶兹（Jessie Reyez），以及诺拉·法泰希（Nora Fatehi）等歌手将参与这场开幕演出。

主办方承诺，这不仅是一场“穿越加拿大的旅程”，更是在倒计时中展现该国从东岸到西岸风情的时刻。

同日晚些时候，美国队将在洛杉矶开启对阵巴拉圭的征程，这也将是流行天后凯蒂·佩里于2015年领衔超级碗中场秀后的又一个重大体育跨界时刻。

与她同台的还包括饶舌歌手Future以及韩国女团Blackpink成员Lisa，其余艺人名单稍后公布。

因凡蒂诺说：“洛杉矶的这场开幕式展现2026年世界杯即将达到的非凡规模。

“演艺阵容反映美国的文化多样性及其各族群的活力，突显这个国家在音乐、娱乐和流行文化方面的深远影响，同时也展示音乐将全美人民团结在一起的力量。”

No English content available