Donald Trump has accused Benjamin Netanyahu of having “no fucking judgment” as he launched another foul-mouthed attack on the Israeli prime minister.

The US president said an Israel’s attack on Beirut on Sunday had “pissed me off very much”.

He was speaking amid fears that the Israeli strikes could scupper a deal to end the Iran war at the last minute.

Speaking to Axios, Trump insisted the bombing had only delayed the agreement “by a few hours” and that it was still due to be signed on Sunday.

Trump said: “Why did Bibi have to do a fucking attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no fucking judgement. I let him know that.”

Lebanese officials said three people had been killed in Sunday’s attack, which Israel said was on a command centre run by the Iran-backed terror group Hezbollah.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said it was in retaliation for “Hezbollah’s launch of aerial targets toward Israeli territory” earlier on Sunday.

The latest Trump-Netanyahu spat comes less than a fortnight after the president reportedly called the Israeli leader “fucking crazy” in a phone call.

It came after Israel resumed its aerial bombardment of Lebanon.

A source told Axios that Trump told Netanyahu: “You’re fucking crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this.”

Another source said Trump was “pissed” on the phone call and at one point shouted at Netanyahu: “What the fuck are you doing?”

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

The Italian beach of Punta Molentis in Villasimìus has introduced a controversial new ban on beach umbrellas for some.

The sandy spot, located on Sardinia’s South-East coast, costs €10 (£8.64, as of the time of writing) to enter.

Once you’re in, only people older than 65 or with a child under 10 can pitch a beach umbrella at the site – and there’s a max limit of one per eligible person or group, The Guardian reports.

It comes alongside a slew of other changes which are designed to protect the area’s ecosystem.

In 2025, the site faced wildfires that left cars burnt out and forced beachgoers to flee by boat, per the BBC.

“The ecosystem of Punta Molentis is among the most precious in our territory, but also among the most fragile,” the council explained.

“The fires of 2025 and exceptional marine weather events have reduced the capacity of the sandy shore and put habitat and biodiversity to a severe test.

“Because of this, it is necessary to limit human impact and ensure the protection of this heritage for future generations.”

As a result of the disaster and the risk for future fires, authorities have decided to limit the number of beach visitors to 150 at a time (pre-booking is needed to secure a spot). You can’t park more than 70 cars a day nearby, either.

Opening hours run from 8am-9pm, and you aren’t allowed to leave towels, umbrellas, tents, or chairs overnight.

The official notice also asks people to check the beach’s fire risk level before visiting, too.

Under the governing body’s Facebook post addressing these changes, one person wrote: “I advise the mayor and the entire council that voted for this outrage to visit a dermatologist to learn about the risks of skin cancer to which they are exposing us to profit from those who want to enjoy the sea at Punta Molentis”.

Another commented, “If [we] pay 20 euros for entry and parking, who are you to ban umbrellas?”

And on a separate post on the same page, yet another site user said: “To protect the beach, the only solution is to close it and make it inaccessible for a few years, to allow flora and fauna to reclaim their place. This is just a sneaky way to hand it over to the rich”.

They joked, “Do we need a black market to rent out children and the elderly?”

Apologies in advance, but there’s a pretty gross reason our pillowcases turn yellow.

The colour change is usually due to a buildup of our sweat, skin oils, hair oils, and drool – and parts of these deposits, like proteins and fats, yellow with age. (Rarely, clear sweat changes hue after contact with bacteria in a process called pseudochromhidrosis.)

Depending on how discoloured your pillowcase has become, a regular wash might not cut through this residue.

Luckily, though, some experts say there’s a two-ingredient solution to the problem.

Panda London said that a “mixture of baking soda and water” can help to banish stubborn stains.

They reccomend turning it into a paste and applying it to your case before washing. Begin with a small patch to test whether it works on your material.

Southern Living recommended a similar method.

Baking soda, they explained, can help to lift stains and boost the effectiveness of your detergent later on.

Spot-treat affected areas with a baking soda and water paste, they suggest, before rubbing off the mixture before washing.

When you do chuck the offending item in your machine, make sure to add 110-135g of baking soda in your drum alongside your usual detergents.

The Spruce said you should wait until your paste is completely dry before removing it and putting it in the wash.

They also point out that baking soda “softens clothes and boosts the detergent’s power,” and can even help to keep your washing machine drum clean.

Lastly, speaking to Ideal Homes, Petya Holevich, a cleaning expert at Fantastic Services, said it could help to improve the smell of your pillowcase, too: “Baking soda acts as a natural deodoriser and mild pillow stain remover”.

For more severe stains, oxygen bleach may be needed.

This is a “safer alternative to chlorine bleach for whitening,” Holevitch said.

Soak your clothes in a mixture containing the product for at least an hour before washing.

However, there are exceptions: silk, wool, and fabric with leather strips or wooden buttons can suffer in the solution.

Make sure you check the care label on your pillowcase first.

Keir Starmer will announce that under-16s will be banned from accessing the biggest social media platforms as part of plans to “keep children safe online”.

The prime minister, who had previously been opposed to such a ban, will use a Downing Street press conference on Monday morning to unveil the plans.

He is expected to say that the UK will follow Australia’s example in raising the minimum age to 16 for sites including TikTok, Instagram, Threads, Facebook, X, YouTube, Snapchat and Reddit.

More than 90% of parents backed the move in a government consultation.

Starmer said: “How we keep kids safe online is one of the biggest debates of our time. As a dad, I know every parent wants their child to grow up safe and happy.

“This is a choice about whose side we’re on: families across the country, or a status quo that isn’t working.

“People rightly expect action, and this government will always stand up for parents and put children first.

“That’s why we will call time on a system that’s failing our kids and take bold action to give every child the best possible start in life.”

But the father of a teenager who took her own life after viewing harmful content online accused the prime minister of “playing politics” by rushing the announcement amid speculation about his future.

Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly died in 2017 aged just 14, said the PM’s behaviour was “deplorable”.

Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, he said: “In opposition, Keir Starmer promised to tighten up the online safety world by regulating better.

“Early last year, father to father, I met with him briefly and he was very concerned – and he promised me he would look into effective solutions to deal with this problem.

“But as we sit here on the verge of this announcement, it seems that he’s not kept either of those promises.”

He said the prime minister had “promised a group of bereaved parents” an announcement could be expected by the summer recess, which falls in mid-July, “so he’s rushed that forward for some reason”.

“I can’t think of a reason other than a political reason… if he’s playing politics, what he’s doing is gambling with young people’s lives – and I find that deplorable,” he said.

Starmer is also expected to announce a social media curfew for 16 and 17-year-olds after 8.30pm.

Critics pointed out that Labour also want to lower the voting age to 16.

Liberal Democrat education, children and families spokesperson Munira Wilson said: “The government appears to have cobbled together a hodgepodge of social media restrictions which don’t keep children safe, nor hold big tech’s feet to the fire.

“The government must heed the lessons from Australia and stand up to big tech with a credible set of measures that genuinely protects our children, rather than rushing through a half-baked policy just to secure a political legacy.”

Tory shadow education secretary Laura Trott said: “It’s shameful that it’s taken the Prime Minister’s job to be on the line for the government to finally U-turn and ban social media for under 16s.

“Three times Labour voted against a ban, failing to stand up to Big Tech and protect children from the extreme content they are exposed to every day.”

Subscribe to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

President Donald Trump announced on Sunday that his administration has reached a peace deal with Iran more than three months after the US and Israel launched a disastrous war that has put intense strain on the world’s energy supply, and left the Iranian regime strengthened and emboldened.

The agreement constitutes the most notable diplomatic development since the strikes on Iran began on February 28.

American and Israeli forces decapitated the Iranian government by reportedly acting on information that many of the country’s top leaders would be in the same place at the same time.

The Iranian regime, however, has managed to sustain its grip on power, even in the wake of mass protests that were put down with ruthless violence earlier this year.

After some initial confusion among Trump’s own Republican Party as to what the US military action was ultimately meant to accomplish, the president began repeating that Iran could not be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, and that the Strait of Hormuz needed to be reopened to commercial shipping, as it was before the war began.

He has also said that Iran’s nuclear “dust” — or the remnants of nuclear materials that were targeted in US airstrikes last summer — must also be destroyed. The issue of how the country will dispose of its highly enriched uranium has long been a point of contention.

Fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz is expected to alleviate some of the pressure on global fuel markets, which have seen major spikes in oil and gas prices due to the closure of the waterway.

Prior to the Iran war, 20% of the global oil and gas supply moved through the Strait.

Iran effectively shut it down by threatening to attack ships that attempted to cross, leaving some crews stranded on ships waiting for the conflict to resolve.

Casualty estimates from the war vary, with the Israel Defense Forces estimating some 6,000 Iranians have been killed. The US officially counts 13 deaths on its side.

News of a previous possible deal between the US and Iran drew pushback in May from some Senate Republicans, who favored a harsher approach toward Iran.

Trump had signalled he would not be rushed into an agreement. He repeatedly pushed back on the idea that the upcoming midterms were putting political pressure on him, due to rising prices that could be directly tied back to his decision to launch the war.

“I don’t care about the midterms,” Trump said bluntly at one point. At another, when asked whether he shared Americans’ concerns over the high cost of living, he was even more abrasive.

“The only thing that matters when I’m talking about Iran — they can’t have a nuclear weapon. I don’t think about Americans’ financial situation. I don’t think about anybody. I think about one thing — we cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That’s all,” he said.

He doubled down on that sentiment last week, saying, “I love the inflation.”

Justin Trudeau has responded to his critics after watching his girlfriend Katy Perry performing at the opening ceremony of the World Cup in the USA, rather than supporting his native Canada during their first match.

The former Canadian prime minister and Grammy-nominated pop singer have been an item for the better part of a year now, with Trudeau in the audience as she performed her 143 album cut Wonder on the pitch on Friday.

However, not everyone was happy that Canada’s former leader didn’t turn up to support his home country.

On Sunday, he responded to a post on X pointing out that “on a day that Canada and the United States both opened their campaigns at the World Cup, Justin Trudeau opted to watch Team USA, where his girlfriend Katy Perry was performing in the opening ceremony”.

“Sometimes supportive boyfriend duties call,” he claimed, but insisted: “You know who I’m rooting for to take the Cup.”

The couple had jaws dropping the world over last summer, when it was first reported in the press that they were in the early stages of dating.

More recently, he was pictured looking loved-up with Katy on the red carpet at the premiere of her upcoming concert film during the Tribeca Film Festival.

Katy was previously married to the comedian Russell Brand, and shares a five-year-old daughter, Daisy, with her former long-term partner Orlando Bloom.

Justin, meanwhile, had been single for around two and a half years before he and his new famous girlfriend began going out, following the announcement in August 2023 that he and his wife of 18 years, Sophie Grégoire, had separated.

He and his ex share three children, sons 18-year-old Xavier, 16-year-old Ella-Grace and 11-year-old Hadrien.

For the second year in a row, President Donald Trump commemorated his birthday with a bizarre spectacle in Washington DC.

After an inclement weather delay, Trump’s UFC extravaganza – which also marked America’s 250th birthday – kicked off on Sunday evening with a bout between two featherweight fighters who made their entrances from the White House.

The opening underscored the strangeness of the gathering, which marked the rare use of the White House for a professional sports competition and for a function hosted by a private company.

Trump has faced criticism for promoting such events at the White House and for backing an exhibition that’s expected to benefit numerous commercial interests, including the UFC and Paramount.

Additionally, the fight has drawn scrutiny, given the emphasis Trump placed on it while grappling with other major issues, including a struggling economy and the effort to finalise a deal to end the US war on Iran.

Just hours before the main card of “UFC Freedom 250” was set to begin, Trump said that an agreement with Iran was “now complete,” though it isn’t expected to be formally signed until Friday.

According to a Reuters report, France also pushed back the G7 summit to allow Trump to attend the cage fight on the White House lawn.

Last year, Trump held a military parade for his birthday, which featured tanks and rocket launchers rolling down the streets of the capital.

Sunday’s fight also included large displays, including the construction of a massive 92-foot, 600-ton fighting ring called “The Claw” that towered over the White House on the South Lawn.

That venue, which was covered in flashing red, white and blue lights, sat roughly 4,000 guests on Sunday evening. Service members wearing colonial attire could also be seen lining the entrance from the White House to the “Octagon,” the trademark eight-sided cage that UFC fighters use.

“The South Lawn has served as one of the most important and ceremonial spaces in American history,” a UFC commentator said as part of a streaming broadcast on Paramount+. “Now, the Octagon is part of that history.”

All told, there were seven mixed martial arts match-ups, including a face-off between Ilia Topuria and Justin Gaethje for the lightweight title.

Much of the audience was comprised of military service members and Trump allies, including Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison, comedian Tony Hinchcliffe and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who has frequented past UFC matches. Trump was also seen watching the fight alongside members of his family, Vice President JD Vance and UFC President Dana White, a longtime supporter.

The UFC exhibition has been nearly a year in the making and underscores Trump’s deep ties with the mixed martial arts company and its leadership.

Trump first floated the idea in July 2025 during a kickoff for activities commemorating America’s 250th birthday. He’s also been friends with White, who has repeatedly backed his presidential runs and welcomed him ringside at past matches, for years. According to PBS, White also played a role in influencing podcaster Joe Rogan, who was once a UFC color commentator, to throw his backing behind Trump.

More recently, Trump’s brokerage account purchased shares in TKO Holdings, UFC’s parent company, raising questions about whether he could personally see gains from holding the fight on the White House lawn. The Trump organization has said the president had no control over the transaction, and the White House has also denied any conflict of interest.

Branding for various companies was omnipresent at the fight on Sunday, with logos adorning the venue itself and one bout sponsored by Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social.

The staging of the cage match at the White House was also previously met with widespread opposition.

It recently drew a court challenge from the Public Integrity Project, which described the fight as “corrupt” and argued that the administration needed congressional approval for construction related to the UFC event. Last week, a judge ultimately ruled that the fight could proceed.

According to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, just 16% of Americans said it was appropriate for Trump to use the White House grounds for this event.

Brooklyn Peltz Beckham has once again hit out at his famous family, after reports of an attempted reconciliation between them emerged in the press.

The eldest of the Beckham siblings has been estranged from his parents, brothers and sister in recent months, and was the only member of the immediate family who didn’t attend his dad Sir David Beckham’s star unveiling on the Hollywood Walk Of Fame last week.

After the ceremony, Page Six published pictures of Brooklyn’s younger sister, 14-year-old Harper, showing up to his home to deliver what was reported to be a handwritten letter for her eldest brother.

She apparently left moments later after no one answered the door to her, but according to the US outlet, neither Brooklyn nor his wife Nicola Peltz Beckham were at the property as they’re currently out of town.

A spokesperson for Brooklyn then accused his parents, Sir David and Victoria Beckham, of “choreographing” the whole thing as a stunt.

“[The fact] that photographers were in place as the letter was hand delivered says it all – this was choreographed for the cameras,” they alleged.

HuffPost UK has contacted Sir David and Victoria Beckham’s teams for comment.

At the beginning of this year, Brooklyn sparked international headlines with a series of candid Instagram posts, in which he accused his parents of “trying to endlessly ruin” his relationship with his wife, following months of reports about a family feud.

In his statement, Brooklyn took aim at his parents for what he referred to as “performative” and “controlling” behaviour on their part over the course of his “entire life”, as well as claiming that they had tried “endlessly” to “ruin” his relationship with his now-wife.

He went on to allege that his mum “hijacked” his first dance with Nicola during their 2022 wedding ceremony.

Sir David has still not commented publicly on Brooklyn’s claims, but Victoria said in April: “We’ve always tried to be the best parents that we can be. And you know, we’ve been in the public eye for more than 30 years right now, and all we’ve ever tried to do is protect our children and love our children.

“And, you know, that’s all I really want to say about it.”