YouTube video by Official George Carlin

YouTube video by TYT Sports

While banning the burqa might play with the Sky After Dark audience, it is miles from a broad concern among punters

Trump Mobile has posted conflicting photos of the phone and scrubbed mention of its “Made in the USA” promise.

Cairo Takeaway has been a cherished part of our community, serving delicious food and fostering connection in our neighbourhood. They've also been outspoken in their support for Palestinians. Now, they need our support.Why We're FundraisingThe owners of Cairo Takeaway are facing a defamation lawsuit. Legal defence costs are mounting, and like many small businesses—especially those who speak out for Palestinian rights—they're facing this challenge with limited resources.If, after a successful defence, legal costs are recovered from the individual who is suing Cairo Takeaway, contributions will be applied to defence costs and administrative costs only to the extent that these costs are not otherwise paid by that individual (as agreed or ordered by the court). Any surplus funds will be donated to Palestine Australia Relief and Action.If the defence is unsuccessful and legal costs are not recovered, and there are any surplus funds after paying for defence costs and administrative costs, all surplus funds will be donated to Palestine Australia Relief and Action.Our Community, Our ValuesCairo Takeaway has always been more than just a restaurant—it's a place where community happens, where solidarity with Palestine is openly expressed and where everyone, regardless of background, is welcome if they come in good faith to support justice. The owners have served us with warmth and dedication, and they've never been afraid to stand up for what's right.

Text SIGN PVDVSY to 50409 — I am writing today with a simple and urgent request: every member of Congress, regardless of party, must publicly affirm a principle that is foundational to military discipline, American law, and the Constitution—U.S. service members must refuse illegal orders. This rule is not partisan. It is not new. It is not controversial in any professional military context. It is the law. Last week, several veterans now serving in Congress released a short video reminding service members of their oath and this long-standing legal requirement. Senator Mark Kelly—retired Navy captain, combat veteran, and former astronaut—participated in that message. His statement merely repeated what is written plainly in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Army Field Manual: following unlawful orders is not a defense, and troops are expected to refuse them. Despite this, the Pentagon announced it is “investigating” Sen. Kelly, citing the ability to recall retired service members for disciplinary action. It is extraordinary for the Department of Defense to target a sitting senator over a lawful, accurate statement of military obligations. Constitutional scholars across the political spectrum have already warned that using military recall authority in this way risks violating the separation of powers and legislative independence. Meanwhile, the President escalated the rhetoric by accusing the lawmakers of “sedition” and reposting calls for them to be put to death. These comments were so concerning that congressional leaders contacted law enforcement to ensure members’ safety. Regardless of party, this is not the direction our country should go. Sen. Kelly responded by reaffirming his lifetime of service and stating that he would not be intimidated from doing his duty. His message was not about politics—it was about the rule of law. That is why Congress must step forward now. If only one or two members defend the principle that illegal orders must be refused, they become isolated targets. But if Republicans and Democrats alike make the same statement, it becomes what it truly is: a shared commitment to lawful military conduct and constitutional government. This is not about opposing any President. It is not about second-guessing policy. It is about ensuring that our military—as an institution—remains grounded in legality, order, and discipline. Every member of the armed forces, from the newest recruit to the highest-ranking officer, benefits from clear expectations and a united message from civilian leadership. When future crises come—and they always do—the stability of our country will depend on Congress speaking with one voice on this basic point: American service members must obey lawful orders, and they must refuse unlawful ones. Supporting them in that duty is not partisan—it is patriotic. I urge you to join your colleagues in affirming this essential principle publicly and without hesitation.

The US health secretary’s ‘digital affair’ with Olivia Nuzzi doesn’t need sombre analysis. Take it from this Brit: sometimes laughter is the only option, says Guardian columnist Marina Hyde

Text SIGN PVDVSY to 50409 — I am writing today with a simple and urgent request: every member of Congress, regardless of party, must publicly affirm a principle that is foundational to military discipline, American law, and the Constitution—U.S. service members must refuse illegal orders. This rule is not partisan. It is not new. It is not controversial in any professional military context. It is the law. Last week, several veterans now serving in Congress released a short video reminding service members of their oath and this long-standing legal requirement. Senator Mark Kelly—retired Navy captain, combat veteran, and former astronaut—participated in that message. His statement merely repeated what is written plainly in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Army Field Manual: following unlawful orders is not a defense, and troops are expected to refuse them. Despite this, the Pentagon announced it is “investigating” Sen. Kelly, citing the ability to recall retired service members for disciplinary action. It is extraordinary for the Department of Defense to target a sitting senator over a lawful, accurate statement of military obligations. Constitutional scholars across the political spectrum have already warned that using military recall authority in this way risks violating the separation of powers and legislative independence. Meanwhile, the President escalated the rhetoric by accusing the lawmakers of “sedition” and reposting calls for them to be put to death. These comments were so concerning that congressional leaders contacted law enforcement to ensure members’ safety. Regardless of party, this is not the direction our country should go. Sen. Kelly responded by reaffirming his lifetime of service and stating that he would not be intimidated from doing his duty. His message was not about politics—it was about the rule of law. That is why Congress must step forward now. If only one or two members defend the principle that illegal orders must be refused, they become isolated targets. But if Republicans and Democrats alike make the same statement, it becomes what it truly is: a shared commitment to lawful military conduct and constitutional government. This is not about opposing any President. It is not about second-guessing policy. It is about ensuring that our military—as an institution—remains grounded in legality, order, and discipline. Every member of the armed forces, from the newest recruit to the highest-ranking officer, benefits from clear expectations and a united message from civilian leadership. When future crises come—and they always do—the stability of our country will depend on Congress speaking with one voice on this basic point: American service members must obey lawful orders, and they must refuse unlawful ones. Supporting them in that duty is not partisan—it is patriotic. I urge you to join your colleagues in affirming this essential principle publicly and without hesitation.