Notting Hill Carnival is Europe’s biggest street festival
The future of the Notting Hill Carnival could be in doubt without “urgent funding” from the government, its organisers said in a letter leaked to the BBC.
Carnival chair Ian Comfort has written to Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy to request the funding, which he said was “essential to safeguarding the future and public safety of this iconic event”.
It follows a review of the festival, which attracts about two million people over the August Bank Holiday weekend, that identified “critical public safety concerns” that will need additional funding to address, the letter said.
The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has been contacted for a response.
The independent safety review was commissioned by the carnival’s organisers and paid for at a cost of £100,000 by the Greater London Authority (GLA), Kensington and Chelsea Council and Westminster Council.
In the leaked letter, Mr Comfort said: “The April 2025 London Assembly report highlights the increasing strain placed on the Metropolitan Police during large-scale public events.
“Limited resourcing has restricted the police service’s ability to respond to growing operational pressures.”
The carnival chair said that increased investment in stewarding and crowd management was “now essential to allow the police to focus on their primary role of crime prevention and public protection”.
Mr Comfort added that a failure to secure “immediate” additional funding “risks compromising public safety and jeopardising the future of the carnival”.
He did not put a number on the level of funding needed.
The safety review’s full findings and recommendations have not been made public.
Reuters
The safety review raised concerns over crowd management
Mr Comfort said that while the GLA and the two councils had provided “substantial support” for stewarding during past festivals, they could no longer “meet the growing operational requirements identified in the review”.
The government has supported Carnival through bodies such as Arts Council England.
However, it is understood that if the organisers’ request is granted, it would mark the first time direct government funding has been provided.
Mr Comfort added: “A co-ordinated, well-resourced safety approach is essential to protect attendees and meet the operational demands of this major national event.”
As part of its policing operation for the 2024 carnival, the Met had about 7,000 officers on duty, drawn from local policing teams as well as specialist units, with a total of around 14,000 officer shifts across the whole event.
Giving evidence to the London Assembly Police and Crime Committee in September, Mr Twist said: “While we acknowledge that crime often gets the headlines, the thing that worries me most is the crowd density and the potential for a mass casualty event.”
The committee’s report – separate to the safety review commissioned by Carnival organisers – found that while the force was being put under increasing strain by Carnival, “this has not been matched with an increase in funding from the government”.
Speaking in April at the report’s publication, committee chair Susan Hall said: “It is absolutely essential that the Met is on hand to carry out its duties, and not fill in for a lack of stewarding from the organisers.”
In early April, prominent National Institutes of Health nutrition scientist Kevin Hall took early retirement at the age of 54, citing administrative censorship as the main reason.
Why? One of his recent publications did not support claims that ultra-processed food is addictive, which went against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s narratives about the dangers of ultra-processed food. Hall shared that he had been “banned from speaking freely with reporters” about this study.
Whether or not food is truly addictive is still an area of controversy.
Whereas there are a growing number of professionals, including myself, that believe that certain foods have addictive properties, and that “ultra-processed food addiction” needs to be recognized and treated within mainstream medicine, others, such as eating disorders treatment professionals who believe that labeling food addictive could make eating disorders worse, are disbelieving of and/or afraid to embrace the food addiction construct.
The ambiguity causes much suffering for people who have an addictive relationship with foods, who get nothing but mixed messages when they seek help.
However, the last thing we need is the government to step in and muddy the waters. What we need is more unbiased research — such as what Hall’s group has been doing — because it is by seeking the truth that we will figure out how to help people break free from cravings and obsessions.
Hall is now unlikely to return to the NIH, and his early retirement is a loss to the field.
Although some of Hall’s previous work bolstered food addiction narratives — one tightly controlled study showed that ultra-processed food triggers its own overconsumption — his latest finding was less supportive.
Specifically, the study failed to show that consumption of an ultra-processed food beverage acted on the brain like other addictive drugs and did not trigger a measurable amount of dopamine release from brain regions involved in reward, habit formation, and addiction.
Hall’s group also did not find a positive correlation between dopamine release in striatum and body weight. Stimulants, alcohol and opioids, by contrast, do cause large surges of dopamine in this brain region.
At the end of his paper, Hall and his colleagues concluded, appropriately, that “the narrative that ultra-processed foods high in fat and sugar can be as addictive as drugs of abuse based on their potential to elicit an outsized dopamine response in brain reward regions was not supported by our data.”
They also concluded that the unexpected results “suggest that previous findings of post ingestive striatal dopamine responses in studies with substantially smaller numbers of subjects may have been due to type 1 statistical error.”
This, too, is an appropriate conclusion since his study was the largest of its kind at 50 participants; previous results showing shake-induced dopamine surges might have been spurious, or by chance.
But did these findings shut the door on the possibility that ultra-processed foods are addictive? Not at all.
Hall’s main findings were no doubt disappointing to Kennedy and his team because, at face value, they imply that these foods actually don’t act on the brain like drugs. But censorship was absolutely unnecessary (not to mention unethical).
Hall’s group also reported in this paper that higher dopamine surges to shake consumption predicted more cookie-eating after the brain scans, and higher ratings of shake pleasantness and wanting.
The people who did have large dopamine surges had more wanting, liking and consumption of ultra-processed food. This is in line with the possibility that dopamine-related addictive processes were at play for some, if not all, individuals in the study.
Also, in the discussion section of the paper, Hall and his team stated that the shake-induced dopamine responses “may be closer in magnitude to that of nicotine — a drug widely acknowledged to promote addiction.” They then go on to cite several similar studies showing small or negligible dopamine responses to nicotine exposure in smokers.
Does anyone question that nicotine is addictive just because nicotine didn’t show the same degree of dopamine surge that illicit drugs and alcohol did? No. Then why should these findings affect our belief about food addiction, either?
I still strongly believe that high-sugar ultra-processed foods are addictive for some people. This is because addiction is not defined by the neurobiological underpinnings, but rather, by a set of behavioral criteria, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
So, to resolve the controversies about whether food addiction is a true construct, and whether abstinence-based treatment paradigms will help or hurt, factual, well-designed, fair, non-industry funded, non-politically influenced, uncensored science is what we need to move the field forward.
And without the meddling, please.
Claire Wilcox, MD, is an addiction psychiatrist, writer and academic. She is the author of the textbook “Food Addiction, Obesity and Disorders of Overeating” and the forthcoming self-help book “Rewire Your Food Addicted Brain.”
PARIS (Reuters) -Visibility for aviation suppliers is improving, helped by Airbus’ measures to overcome supply chain snags that hit demand in the past year, aluminium products maker Constellium said on Wednesday.
Bottlenecks in the supply chain, notably for engines, have hampered Airbus’ efforts to ramp up output, though the jet maker has maintained a 2025 delivery target.
Constellium, one of the world’s largest suppliers of aluminium for planes, has felt the knock-on effect with lower volumes for its aerospace business since last year.
“Things are more reassuring, we are a little less in the mist at an industrial level,” Philippe Hoffmann, president of aerospace and transportation at Constellium, told Reuters at the Paris Airshow.
Boeing, meanwhile, is also expected to accelerate deliveries once it has integrated Spirit AeroSystems, Hoffman said.
Increased deliveries by the two global planemakers, along with a clearing of current inventory levels, should lift demand along the supply chain within the next two years, he added.
The longer-term demand outlook for aluminium in aerospace remains healthy, with Airbus boasting orders going out over a decade for aluminium-intensive models like its A320 single-aisle jet, Hoffmann added.
(Reporting by Gus Trompiz. Editing by Mark Potter)
AI tools are flooding the culture ecosystem — and no corner of the arts space is immune. In this series, we’re looking at the ways artists are embracing AI, pushing back on it, or trying their best to find an equilibrium with a new technology that’s both sweeping and destabilizing. We talk to perfumers questioning the looming automation of scent creation, fanfic writers pushing back on archive scrapers, and illustrators replacing the AI that once replaced them. The tech isn’t going away. Here’s how artists are starting to deal with it.
SUNRISE, Fla. — The Florida Panthers had to win the Stanley Cup, and then they had to win another one, because it’s the ultimate way to infuriate everyone who isn’t the Florida Panthers.
They’re the most antagonistic trash-talking bullies in the National Hockey League. Opponents decry their actions and fans of other teams outright loathe them. It took 29 years, but the franchise made famous for having rats thrown on the ice also now has the most famous rat on the ice in winger Brad Marchand — a label he has accepted. Being the last team standing isn’t just a tribute to their elite preparation, execution and talent. It’s delivering on the promise of their endless taunting.
“It’s the bad-boy mentality. They embody it. They hit you and then they stand over you and tell you how much better they are than you. And then they tell you that you’re going to be beaten, by any means necessary,” one current NHL player told ESPN. “They’re going to do everything they can to embarrass you, not only physically but on the scoreboard.”
It’s the provocation from players such as Marchand and Matthew Tkachuk. It’s their ability to dish it out and gleefully take it, such as when big-bearded Jonah Gadjovich stuck out his tongue at the Edmonton Oilers after having been bloodied in a fight with Darnell Nurse.
It’s the opposing goalies with whom center Sam Bennett has collided with a plausible deniability of guilt. It’s their ability to draw penalties but not take them. “They seem to get away with it more than we do. It’s tough to find the line,” Oilers winger Evander Kane lamented during the Stanley Cup Final.
Marchand responded to Kane: “Sometimes we get away with things. You can’t call everything all the time.”
The more nefarious parts of the Panthers’ game are a feature, not a bug. Their antagonism and swagger are the sweeteners for one of the best recipes for success the league has seen cooked up: Offensive domination, defensive suffocation and about a dozen players that always seem to rise to the occasion.
Florida has advanced to three Stanley Cup Finals under head coach Paul Maurice. They’re the first team to do so in three straight full NHL seasons since the Edmonton Oilers from 1983-85. (The Tampa Bay Lightning won two Cups and lost in their third trip to the Final during the season-altering COVID-19 pandemic.)
Like the 80s era Oilers, the Panthers lost in their first trip, getting eliminated in five games against the Vegas Golden Knights, and then won back-to-back Stanley Cups. The Panthers are the seventh team in the past 40 seasons to win consecutive Cups.
No one else in the NHL can match their depth. Aleksander Barkov and Sam Reinhart, both finalists for the Selke Trophy as best defensive forwards in the NHL, on their top line, deployed with frequency against Oilers star Connor McDavid. Bennett, leading all playoff scorers in goals, and superstar winger/agent of chaos Tkachuk on the second line. Marchand, saving the best playoff series of his life for the Stanley Cup Final, cementing an unmatchable third line with criminally underrated forwards Eetu Luostarinen and Anton Lundell.
The Panthers were the best road team in NHL playoff history, tying the record for wins (10) and obliterating the record for goals scored away from home: 61, or 12 more than Wayne Gretzky’s Los Angeles Kings scored in 1993 (49).
play
1:23
Sam Reinhart nets 4 goals in Game 6
Sam Reinhart scores four for the Panthers in Game 6 against the Oilers.
“Anybody that knows hockey is in awe of what they’ve been able to accomplish,” said Hockey Hall of Famer Mark Messier, a member of two separate back-to-back Cup winners in Edmonton, who is now an analyst for ESPN.
Messier doesn’t see the Panthers as a team defined by their villainy.
“They can play any style that you want. They have such underrated talent at many positions,” he said. “You don’t get the right players at the right stages of their careers all the time. This is a very sophisticated, talented, driven team.”
Someone else that doesn’t want the Florida Panthers defined solely as agitating bullies?
The Florida Panthers themselves.
“I just don’t see where we’re these big physical sons of b—-es,” general manager Bill Zito said.
The Panthers argue that the on-ice antics others have used to define them in these two Stanley Cup championship runs aren’t indicative of who these players are off the ice. That perceptions of their villainy shouldn’t overshadow the chemistry, culture and camaraderie that are the actual foundations for these championships.
“We don’t talk about it. That’s not our style. That’s not what we talk about before games,” Tkachuk said. “We want to play fast and physical. We want to stick up for each other when it’s there.”
Are the Florida Panthers actually the friendliest “rats” to ever to win the Stanley Cup twice?
“At the end of the day, you’re willing to do things on the ice that aren’t typical of you as a person off the ice,” Marchand said.
THERE’S PROBABLY NO GREATER indication that the Panthers frustrate opponents than the passion with which opponents swear that the Panthers do not, in fact, frustrate them.
“[Agitation] is part of their DNA. It’s what they do,” Oilers center Leon Draisaitl said during the Stanley Cup Final. “I’m not going crazy. I don’t think anybody’s going crazy. It’s an emotional time. They’re good at what they do. But no one’s going crazy here.”
Kane said the Panthers’ reputation for agitation is a bit overstated.
“You know what? I think they get a little too much credit for how crazy they drive teams. I don’t think it’s Florida driving us crazy at all. We’ve done a great job of not letting them get in our heads,” said Kane, who had more penalty minutes in the first five games of the Stanley Cup Final (20) than he had in his previous 15 playoff games combined (12).
Playing the Panthers can be exasperating. Not only in the things they do, but in how they get away with the things they do. Such as when Bennett keeps colliding with opposing goaltenders.
It happened at least four times in this playoff run, most infamously when Bennett concussed former teammate Anthony Stolarz of the Toronto Maple Leafs in Game 1 of the second round. Stolarz wouldn’t return to the playoffs. Bennett wasn’t penalized, and there were no repercussions with the NHL Department of Player Safety. But Toronto fans and media were outraged, adding this Bennett incident to a list of others in his career — including when he concussed Leafs forward Matthew Knies by throwing him to the ice in May 2023.
“I’ve seen every hit that Sam Bennett’s thrown since he was 12 years old on TV this morning,” Maurice said the day after the Stolarz incident. “There was a hit 2½ years ago that [the media has] shown 4,000 times. There was a parking ticket seven years ago that I think made the video.”
In the 2025 playoffs, Bennett would also collide with Carolina’s Frederik Andersen, and had two instances in which he toppled into Stuart Skinner‘s crease against the Oilers.
“Obviously, you don’t like when guys are purposely falling into your goaltender,” Kane said.
For many opponents, the Panthers are Team “They Just Can’t Keep Getting Away With It” in the NHL.
“It’s annoyingly frustrating,” one current NHL player said. “When you play them, you’re like, ‘They figured it out.’ They’re being smart, in quotation marks, when it comes to that kind of stuff. But it’s all within the rules.”
Defenseman Nate Schmidt hated facing the Panthers before signing with them last offseason. “I’ve got to tell you that playing against them is no fun,” he said. “I do enjoy playing with them versus being on the other side of things.”
play
1:39
Fight breaks out between Panthers, Oilers
A big brawl erupts as tensions boil over between the Panthers and the Oilers in Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final.
The Panthers weren’t always as provocative as they are now. Back in 2022, Florida won the Presidents’ Trophy with the league’s best record (122 points) and its best offense (4.11 goals per game) under interim coach Andrew Brunette, who took over after head coach Joel Quenneville’s resignation. Their leading scorer was winger Jonathan Huberdeau, who had 115 points in 80 games, tied for second overall in the NHL.
But after the Panthers were swept in the second round by the rival Tampa Bay Lightning, it was obvious that their regular-season success didn’t translate to the postseason after “an in-depth examination of all aspects of our team,” as Zito termed it at the time. On June 22, it was announced that Brunette was done and that Paul Maurice would be the new head coach.
That hiring wasn’t universally praised — Maurice had been behind NHL benches since the mid-1990s with the Hartford Whalers, with only one trip to the Stanley Cup Final in 2002 to his credit. But Zito said the Panthers’ change in attitude “starts with Paul.”
The Panthers had 842 penalty minutes in their Presidents’ Trophy season. They increased to 998 in Maurice’s first season, and then 1,116 in his second season, when Florida won the Stanley Cup.
One month after Maurice’s hiring came another landmark moment, and an even more shocking one: Huberdeau and defenseman MacKenzie Weegarwere traded to the Calgary Flames for Tkachuk.
The Panthers had now entered their Swagger Era.
“I hate Edmonton, but I hate Tampa more now,” was the declarative statement from Tkachuk at his introductory news conference. The Lightning had eliminated the Panthers in consecutive postseasons. It is perhaps no coincidence that Florida is 2-0 against Tampa Bay and Edmonton since the Tkachuk trade.
“I bring a certain swagger that will really help this team,” Tkachuk said at the time. “I have a good confidence. It’s not a cockiness. I think some of these teams in this conference that have had success have that. I have to help with that.”
A big part of that swagger comes from Tkachuk’s willingness to say anything or do anything to win, as anyone who watched the first USA vs. Canada game in the 4 Nations Face-Off no doubt recalls. But Zito said that Tkachuk is the personification of why the Panthers are misunderstood as the NHL’s current reigning bullies — their agitation simply comes from how difficult it is to play against him.
“He has a nuanced game that combines elite hands and hockey sense with a level of compete. When you look across the league at the players who have that, pretty much to a man, they’re agitating,” Zito said.
play
0:55
Matthew Tkachuk fired up after padding Panthers’ lead
Matthew Tkachuk lights the lamp to pad the Panthers’ lead in the first period.
This is where the Panthers reject the premise that they’re the king rats of the NHL.
“I think our reputation is just guys that play hard. We don’t like giving space on the ice, and that leads to a lot of confrontation and a lot of collisions and stuff like that,” defenseman Aaron Ekblad said. “And it’s not necessarily that we’re being bullies, we’re just trying to play as hard as we possibly can.”
Zito agreed.
“Bodychecking is part of the game of hockey. When you play the game the right way and pay attention to all the details, checking is going to be part of it. It’s not to intimidate. It’s not to injure. It’s literally so that you can’t get into the play if I bump into you,” Zito said. “It’s just chess, except with time and space. So it’s effective.”
Marchand has now been a part of two of the most difficult teams in the NHL to play against: The Boston Bruins, with whom he won the Stanley Cup in 2011, and the Panthers, with whom he lifted one on Tuesday.
Both teams were called “bullies” — it’s hard to forget the image of Marchand delivering a series of blows to Daniel Sedin’s head in the Stanley Cup Final against Vancouver. But both teams, according to Marchand, just played the way you need to play to survive in the postseason.
“Obviously, the high-end skill game and finesse, it gets you here, but it takes a whole different game and level to take you far,” he said. “That’s obviously what we had for a very long time in Boston. What Florida’s done a great job at is building a team that’s tough to compete against this time of year. So that’s the style of game that you want to be part of.”
Marchand has personally experienced the villainous side of the Panthers. Bennett gave him a gloved punch in last year’s playoffs that left Marchand concussed and forced him out of their series.
“I didn’t hold a grudge. I know how this game’s played. I played a similar way and it’s something that we joke about now,” said Marchand, now Bennett’s teammate. “I’ve been in positions where I’ve done things like that to guys that I end up being teammates with. Things happen on the ice and you move past it.”
That’s hockey, according to Marchand.
“I can’t speak for other sports, but our culture is where you could fight a guy and meet up afterwards and laugh about everything. That’s just how it is,” he said. “You’re doing a job when you’re on the ice. That’s all.”
Which is to say that off the ice, the Panthers are different people. And that chemistry is the real reason why they’ve skated the Cup for a second straight time, according to them.
“They’re hard on the ice. They are. And most of that is driven by how they feel about each other. They don’t want to let the other guy down. There’s a caring about them,” Maurice said. “These guys are different.”
IF MARCHAND HAS learned anything with the Florida Panthers, it’s that plastic rats hurt when your teammates are slap shooting them at you.
In one of the playoffs’ most memorable new traditions, Panthers players would take turns shooting rats, tossed on the ice by fans, at Marchand after victories.
“They see my family on the ice and want us to be together,” Marchand deadpanned. “They’re just bullying me. They’re shooting to hurt now.”
Besides being their most dominant scorer in the Stanley Cup Final, Marchand was also the fulcrum for the Panthers’ merriment after coming over from the Bruins at the trade deadline.
“Marchy and I bounce off the walls quite a bit. It’s nice to have somebody else to do that with,” Schmidt said. “One bouncy ball is fun. When you bang two of them together? It’s a little bit more fun. So I’ve enjoyed his time here.”
play
0:44
Brad Marchand scores 56 seconds in to give Panthers early lead
Brad Marchand flicks it in through a crowd of defenders to give the Panthers an early lead vs. the Oilers.
The bouncing around during the pregame. The rat-shooting. The now-legendary poker games on cross-continent flights. The team field trips to Dairy Queen, and the subsequent confusion about whether Marchand was eating a Blizzard between periods of a playoff game.
(Spoiler: It was honey, something Marchand has enjoyed since he was a child feeding it to his stuffed Winnie the Pooh doll. “It’s what we do in Halifax. We feed teddy bears honey,” he said.)
“There’s a million things that happen behind the scenes that fans don’t see,” Marchand said. “Those are little things that make it a little bit easier and allow you to get your mind off some of the stress. I think you can see when we’re together, we’re just like big kids. Behind closed doors, everyone’s always joking around and having fun.”
There’s a democratization of comedy in the Panthers’ dressing room. The players say no one is spared from the punchlines, no matter their salary or ice time. It’s the byproduct of the team’s overall mindset. When Tkachuk says “nobody cares who scores,” they mean it.
“It can’t be overstated, the character and … I don’t know if it’s the right word, but the grace of each guy. If you came into the meal room, you wouldn’t … know … who’s … who,” Zito said, pounding his hands on the table for emphasis. “You didn’t know who scored the winning goal. You didn’t know who didn’t play. I think that, as much as anything, is a testament to those guys and their character.”
Every offseason, Maurice does a “culture survey” for his team. Last offseason, one of the players reported that when they walked into the Panthers’ dressing room for the first time “it felt like I’d been there for 10 years” with the team.
“That room that we have is so welcoming. Your personality fits almost no matter what it is. The more unusual your personality, the more you’re going to fit in our room,” Maurice said. “As long as you do those four or five things you need to do, everybody gets to be themselves.”
What makes that chemistry work?
“That’s all Barkov, truly,” Maurice said.
“[Barkov] is like a magnet. You just find yourself gravitating towards him,” Schmidt said. “You see what Cap does and it just kind of trickles its way all the way through the lineup. There’s just no other way to do it. It’s not like he’s not a vocally imposing person. It’s just, you need to do it because it feels like you have to do it for him.”
Zito likened Barkov to a planet with “all the energy that comes from him” as a leader.
“It starts with Sasha,” the GM said. “Paul’s talked about this. I’ve talked about it. The players have talked about it. The only person who doesn’t [get] talked about it is Sasha. How caring he is as a human and as a teammate. He makes you want to be a better person. So then it’s easy to have the positive aspects of your personality come through. It’s like he pulls it out of you.”
Barkov has learned from his teammates, too. Marchand in particular, since he arrived at the trade deadline.
“He’s obviously very old, but he still works hard and wants to be better,” said Barkov, 29, of the 37-year-old Marchand. (See? Everyone gets clowned on.) “It’s fun to see, and it’s contagious. You want to work as hard as him.”
play
0:56
Panthers go up 3-0 on Sam Reinhart’s 2nd goal
Sam Reinhart notches his second goal to give the Panthers a 3-0 lead in the second period.
Every incarnation of the Panthers during their three-year reign as Eastern Conference champions has seen turnover on the roster. Eric and Marc Staal, as well as Radko Gudas, were on the 2023 team. Brandon Montour, Ryan Lomberg, Nick Cousins, Oliver Ekman-Larsson and Vladimir Tarasenko were on the Stanley Cup winner last season. This season saw Marchand, Schmidt, Seth Jones and A.J. Greer join the roster, among others.
“You just try to fit in, come in and not disturb anything, not change anything. Just seamlessly trying to blend in and add a little bit of your spice, I guess you’d say,” said Greer, who signed as a free agent.
“Coming into a group who had just won the Stanley Cup, I was just trying to inject a little bit of energy. They had a long season. Sometimes that can get to you mentally and physically of course. So I come in and kind of replenish that energy, bring in a new face and just be myself, personality-wise,” he said. “The guys welcomed me very, very well. Those guys that are all around the locker room and that’s a big reason why they won.”
To hear the stories of humility and familial warmth from inside the Panthers remains in stark contrast with the team that frequently emerges on the ice. They are the epitome of “a player you love to have on your team and hate to play against,” a time-tested hockey cliché that Marchand used to describe Bennett recently. They frustrate opponents during games and push each other to play like champions behind the scenes.
“This is something about hockey culture that makes it special and unique,” one current NHL player said. “Some of the guys that are the biggest pieces of s— on the ice are the greatest people off the ice.”
Maurice was recently asked about that dichotomy.
“I’ll ask you two questions that might be personal. You don’t have to answer. Have you ever shotgunned a beer? And have you ever been to church?” he began.
“Now, would you shotgun a beer if you’re in church? No, you wouldn’t, and that doesn’t make you a hypocrite. There’s a context in that place for all things.”
Maurice hated facing Tkachuk when he was coaching in Winnipeg and Tkachuk was in Calgary. His swagger on the ice informed Maurice’s opinion about him as a person, which was quickly dispelled when the two were united in Florida.
“You meet him and you’re like, ‘Oh my god, what a wonderful human being,'” Maurice said.
Same with Marchand. Same with Bennett, who is “a dog on a bone” on the ice but raises money to help find adoptive homes for canines in his spare time.
The Panthers aren’t just what they are on the ice. They aren’t just what they are off the ice. But the sum of those parts — the harm and the harmony — combined to make them back-to-back Stanley Cup champions.
“They’re all really, really nice people,” Maurice said of his team. “Then the puck drops.”
“I’ve never been someone who’s like, ‘Thanks, bye,'” Jonathan explained to The Hollywood Reporter in an interview published June 18. “It’s not in my nature.”
Luckily, with the eldest Bridgerton getting married to Kate Sharma (Simone Ashley) in season two, the 37-year-old now plays a supporting character since the main plot centers on a different sibling’s love story each season.
“I know how much I love long-running series,” he noted. “I know how important familiarity of character and story and consistency is in these long-running series.”
With younger brothers Colin Bridgerton (Luke Newton) marrying Penelope Featherington (Nicola Coughlan) in season three, and Benedict Bridgerton (Luke Thompson) searching for love in the upcoming installment, they’ve developed a deep bond through filming.
The dilemma of whether the US should join Israel in attacking Iran, or stay out of the offensive altogether, has exposed divisions among US President Donald Trump’s supporters.
The Republican president is considering helping target the Islamic Republic’s nuclear facilities, following a meeting with his national security advisers in the White House Situation Room on Tuesday.
On the campaign trail, Trump often railed against “stupid endless wars” in the Middle East, but also maintained that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon”.
The possibility that he might draw the US into another foreign entanglement has pitted the isolationist and hawkish wings of his party bitterly against one another.
Among those that have expressed doubt about Iran’s nuclear plans are Trump’s Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, who in March testified before Congress that while Iran’s enriched uranium was at an all-time high, experts did not believe it was working on a nuclear weapon.
On 10 June – just three days before Israeli strikes on Iran began – Gabbard also posted a video in which she warned that “political elite and warmongers” were “carelessly fomenting fear and tensions” that risked putting the world “on the brink of nuclear annihilation”.
Gabbard’s video and prior comments reportedly opened a rift between her and Trump, who US news outlet Politico reported “became incensed” at the video.
“I don’t care what she said,” Trump told reporters when asked about her earlier comments before Congress. “I think they were very close to having a weapon.”
Gabbard was not alone among Republicans in criticising potential US involvement in the conflict.
On Tuesday, conservative Republican congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky sided with Democrats to introduce a bill that would block Trump from engaging US forces in “unauthorised hostilities” with Iran without congressional approval.
“This is not our war. Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution,” Massie posted on X.
Several proponents of Trump’s “America First” doctrine pointed out that he vowed to keep the US out of “forever wars” such as those that led to the deaths of thousands of US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has called for the US to stay out of the conflict with Iran.
On his podcast, he lambasted Republican “warmongers”, provoking a rebuke from Trump, who called Carlson “kooky”.
Georgia congresswoman and Trump loyalist Marjorie Taylor Greene leapt to Carlson’s defence in a highly unusual break with the president.
She said anyone who supported such an intervention was not “America First”.
The tensions exploded into a shouting match on Tuesday during an interview between Carlson and hawkish Texas Senator Ted Cruz. Cruz became defensive when asked if he knew the population and ethnic mix of Iran.
Carlson said: “You’re a senator who’s calling for the overthrow of the government and you don’t know anything about the country!”
Cruz retorted: “No, you don’t know anything about the country!”
Steve Bannon, Trump’s former political strategist, argued on Carlson’s podcast that allowing the “deep state” to drive the US into a war with Iran would “blow up” the coalition of Trump supporters.
“If we get sucked into this war, which inexorably looks like it’s going to happen on the combat side, it’s going to not just blow up the coalition, it’s also going to thwart the most important thing, which is the deportation of the illegal alien invaders who are here,” he said.
What do we know about the Fordo nuclear site?
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell said it had “been kind of a bad week for the isolationists” in the party.
“What’s happening here is some of the isolationist movement led by Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon are distressed we may be helping the Israelis defeat the Iranians,” McConnell told CNN.
Other warhawks in the party are egging on Trump to target Iran.
South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said it was in the national security interests of the US to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb. Tehran maintains its nuclear programme is for peaceful, civilian purposes such as energy.
“President Trump understands the threat the ayatollah [Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei] presents to us, not just Israel, and that he will, at the end of the day, help Israel finish the job,” Graham told Fox News.
Vice-President JD Vance, seeking to bridge the divide, said in a social media post that Trump “may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment”.
“That decision ultimately belongs to the president,” he added. “And of course, people are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy.”
An opinion poll in recent days indicates Trump voters would broadly support the US in helping Israel to attack Iran.
The survey by Gray House found that 79% of respondents would back the US providing offensive weapons for Israel to strike Iranian military targets. Some 89% were concerned about Iran obtaining atomic bombs.
On Trump’s Truth Social social media platform, however, many expressed concern that the US could again find itself embroiled in a Middle Eastern conflict thousands of miles away.
“No war with Iran. No more foreign wars,” one user wrote. “America first!”
Another user warned that US involvement in Israeli operations could cost the Republicans politically in the years ahead.
“Don’t do this,” the user wrote. “Republicans will never win again if you do this.”
While campaigning for the White House in September, Trump said: “We will quickly restore stability in the Middle East. And we will return the world to peace.”
With the Iran-Israel conflict on a knife-edge, the question of whether the US president is an isolationist or an interventionist may be answered sooner rather than later.
It is a bad time for thousands of Afghans who risked their lives helping the U.S. over the past two decades.
On June 2, it was announced that the office that helps with relocation of Afghans who helped America will close on July 1.
Last month, the Department of Homeland Security formally ended Temporary Protected Status for roughly 10,000 Afghans who fled their country after the Taliban’s return to power in 2021. Under the new directive, Afghan nationals currently residing in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status have just under six weeks to leave, setting a deadline of July 14. Most of these Afghans are waiting for the backlog to clear to get the Special Immigrant Visa that was promised to them because of the help they provided the U.S. since its 2001 invasion.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated that “Afghanistan has had an improved security situation, and its stabilizing economy no longer prevent them from returning to their home country.” Yet, only days later, the State Department included Afghan citizens on a new “travel ban” list due to deteriorating security situation and threat of terrorism from that country, contradicting what Noem and her department had claimed.
Anyone paying attention to Afghanistan since the Taliban’s return knows that it is not safe. The country has collapsed into an economic and humanitarian crisis. Al Qaeda has reestablished its position, operating training camps and safe houses across the country. According to a recent U.N. report, Afghanistan is now a “permissive environment” for al Qaeda consolidation. Meanwhile, the Afghan branch of the so-called Islamic State has never been stronger.
Girls cannot attend school beyond grade six. Women cannot work or even leave their homes without permission from a male relative. Ethnic and religious minorities continue to face persecution. The Taliban are hunting down Afghans who worked with the U.S. and its allies — often with deadly consequences. The claim that Afghanistan is now “safe” is false.
This issue is tricky for the Trump administration. In February 2020, President Trump reached a deal with the Taliban that planted the seed for the withdrawal of U.S. forces by May 2021. That agreement set in motion the Taliban’s return to power.
When President Joe Biden took office in 2021, he had the chance to cancel the deal, but he did not. By July, most U.S. and allied troops had left. On August 15, the Taliban seized Kabul. By Sept. 11, 2021 — the 20th anniversary of 9/11 — they controlled more of Afghanistan than they had on that tragic day in 2001. Both presidents share the blame.
In the chaotic withdrawal, the U.S. left behind an estimated $7 billion in military equipment — most of which is now in Taliban hands or circulating on the regional black market.
But the greater cost has been moral: the abandonment of tens of thousands of Afghans who served alongside American forces. Many of these men and women risked their lives for U.S. forces as interpreters, engineers, medics and contractors. For them, the Taliban’s return is not just a change of government — it’s a death sentence.
Given the chaos the Biden administration allowed at America’s southern border, it might be tempting to fold the Afghan resettlement issue into the broader immigration debate. But that approach would be both lazy and strategically short-sighted. Afghanistan and the broader regions of Central and South Asia will remain central to U.S. counterterrorism and foreign policy for the foreseeable future, and pretending otherwise is naive.
There are four clear strategic reasons why helping Afghans who aided the U.S. is not only just but smart.
First, honoring our commitment to Afghan partners sends a powerful message to future allies. In every modern conflict, American forces have relied on local partners for on-the-ground support. That pattern will almost certainly continue. If local partners believe the U.S. won’t protect them when the fight is over, they will be far less willing to take that risk, which would weaken America’s global reach and credibility.
Second, Afghans already in the U.S. represent a critical talent pool. Many are trained linguists and cultural experts. During the two-decade U.S. mission in Afghanistan, they filled roles that no one else could. Yet in November 2023, Defense Language Institute ceased instruction in Pashto, one of Afghanistan’s national languages. Should the U.S. again need Pashto speakers or regional experts, the Afghan American community will be indispensable.
Third, these Afghans could help shape a post-Taliban Afghanistan. After 2001, the Afghan American diaspora was key to rebuilding the country. The current Taliban regime is fractured and unlikely to maintain control indefinitely. Offering refuge to educated, professionally trained Afghans bolsters U.S. capacity now and supports future stabilization efforts.
Fourth, Afghan immigrants provide indirect humanitarian aid via remittances. In 2019, remittances made up 4.4 percent of Afghanistan’s GDP. Since late 2021, the U.S. Treasury has allowed Afghans here to send money home despite sanctions. These remittances reduce the burden on American taxpayers and support Afghan families in crisis.
Beyond these strategic benefits, there is the moral argument. Doing right by those who stood with America is a matter of national honor. The way a nation treats its allies — especially when they are vulnerable — says everything about its values. These Afghans risked everything for us. Abandoning them now is a betrayal.
Trump began the withdrawal process. Biden finished it. Now, Trump has a rare second chance to do the right thing. His administration can correct a serious moral and strategic failure by reversing the decision to revoke Temporary Protected Status for Afghan nationals and instead prioritizing their protection.
Rather than forcing them to leave, the U.S. should expedite visa processing and safe relocation for Afghan allies. This isn’t just about compassion — it’s about keeping our word, protecting our interests and preparing for the future.
Luke Coffey is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute.
Choosing a budget Android phone typically means wading through a ton of product pages and doing spec comparisons. Of course, a simpler way through the noise is to use The Verge’s handy guide to the best cheap phones. But we’re going to make it even easier for you today with a great discounted option. The 128GB version of Samsung’s Galaxy A36 5G is currently on sale for $349.99 at Amazon, Best Buy, and Walmart. This $50 discount is enough to bring the smartphone, which launched in early 2025, down to its lowest price ever. Importantly, this phone comes unlocked, so you can activate it on your carrier of choice.
The A36 5G is the follow-up to the A35 5G. It’s largely the same, but with some minor tweaks. For instance, its OLED screen is slightly larger at 6.7 inches (versus 6.6 inches), although it has the same FHD plus resolution (1080 x 2340) and smooth 120Hz refresh rate. The A36 5G has the Snapdragon 6 Gen 3 processor, which should deliver improved performance compared to the last-gen model. The smartphone maintains the A35 5G’s IP67 durability rating, which means it’s resistant to dust and water, and should be able to withstand being submerged in up to a meter of water for 30 minutes. One divisive change is that the A36 5G dropped the microSD slot of its predecessor for a second SIM card slot, so you won’t be able to expand its storage. Samsung offers the smartphone with either 128GB or 256GB of internal storage, but only the entry-level model is currently on sale.
One of the biggest perks of this affordable phone is its software; Samsung has committed to delivering new operating system and security updates for six years, which should hopefully go a long way in helping the A36 5G feel like a modern phone long after you buy it.
The A36 5G features a three-lens rear camera system, which consists of a 50-megapixel main sensor that can record 4K video at up to 30 frames per second. The phone’s 12-megapixel front-facing camera can also record 4K video at the same frame rate. In terms of biometrics, the A36 5G supports face unlock and has an under-display fingerprint reader. The A36 5G doesn’t support wireless charging, but its maximum wired charging speed is an impressive 45W.
Samsung has packed a lot of features into this smartphone, some of which you won’t find in Apple’s budget smartphone, the iPhone 16E.
Getty Images
Reuters
