Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Kemi Badenoch clearly decided that it would be difficult to call for calm around the Henry Nowak case, and then to spend Prime Minister's Questions talking about it at length. The format of the session rarely lends itself to calm, and she had rightly judged that others – including...

spectator's profile picture

The Spectator

291,361 subscribers

38,477 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Keir Starmer had an appalling performance at Prime Minister’s Questions today. It was summarised very well later in the session by Conservative MP Andrew Snowden. Starmer had indeed spent his exchanges with Kemi Badenoch largely lashing out at the Tory leader rather than answering her repeated questions about Mandelson. She had rightly decided to just keep pushing with the same question until the Prime Minister’s answers became increasingly ludicrous and irrelevant. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |
1:23

Keir Starmer had an appalling performance at Prime Minister’s Questions today. It was summarised very well later in the session by Conservative MP Andrew Snowden. Starmer had indeed spent his exchanges with Kemi Badenoch largely lashing out at the Tory leader rather than answering her repeated questions about Mandelson. She had rightly decided to just keep pushing with the same question until the Prime Minister’s answers became increasingly ludicrous and irrelevant. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |

The Spectator

37,491 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Prime Minister’s Questions today saw a leader under repeated attack for a ‘screeching U-turn’ and their suitability to be Prime Minister called into question. Unusually, though, Keir Starmer was the one making that accusation, rather than being on the receiving end of it. He came to the chamber determined to tell Kemi Badenoch that she had made the wrong call on whether to join the US-Israeli action in Iran and that he, therefore, didn’t need to take lectures from her. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |
2:10

Prime Minister’s Questions today saw a leader under repeated attack for a ‘screeching U-turn’ and their suitability to be Prime Minister called into question. Unusually, though, Keir Starmer was the one making that accusation, rather than being on the receiving end of it. He came to the chamber determined to tell Kemi Badenoch that she had made the wrong call on whether to join the US-Israeli action in Iran and that he, therefore, didn’t need to take lectures from her. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |

The Spectator

11,385 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

The Tory leader had plenty of material to use, and she did a good job with it: running through why the UK wasn’t allowing the RAF to attack Iranian missile sites, defence spending, the spring statement and Starmer’s own weak position as Prime Minister. Starmer dug out some of his favourite lines about Tory defence spending, and ended up offering one of his rather pompous lectures on how to be a good leader of the opposition – a lecture he always produces when his back is up against the wall. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |
3:07

The Tory leader had plenty of material to use, and she did a good job with it: running through why the UK wasn’t allowing the RAF to attack Iranian missile sites, defence spending, the spring statement and Starmer’s own weak position as Prime Minister. Starmer dug out some of his favourite lines about Tory defence spending, and ended up offering one of his rather pompous lectures on how to be a good leader of the opposition – a lecture he always produces when his back is up against the wall. ✍️ Isabel Hardman Article |

The Spectator

22,248 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

My direct message to Nigel Farage on GB News just now: Restrain your language and use your platform as Leader of Reform UK to call for calm. It is time to lower the temperature and your voice carries weight. As one father to another, there is still time to do the right thing.
0:30

My direct message to Nigel Farage on GB News just now: Restrain your language and use your platform as Leader of Reform UK to call for calm. It is time to lower the temperature and your voice carries weight. As one father to another, there is still time to do the right thing.

Luke Charters MP

93,755 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

This woman had purchased something for her young daughter on Amazon, when they checked the app, it had said the driver was going to be there soon so they wait at the window to see it being delivered. Right as the driver was pulling up to deliver the package, he sideswiped the whole side of her van in the process, then he just kept going. She only stayed calm because her young child was there, would you have been this calm or would you be out that door chasing the driver?
0:28

This woman had purchased something for her young daughter on Amazon, when they checked the app, it had said the driver was going to be there soon so they wait at the window to see it being delivered. Right as the driver was pulling up to deliver the package, he sideswiped the whole side of her van in the process, then he just kept going. She only stayed calm because her young child was there, would you have been this calm or would you be out that door chasing the driver?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

147,949 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Warren Buffett on the single best thing an investor could have done in 1942: At a recent shareholder meeting, Buffett explains that he normally goes straight into questions and answers. But this time he opened differently, because he felt the usual format was teaching the wrong lesson. As he puts it, "all the questions would naturally tend toward current events." So he went back to 1942, the year he bought his first stock, to make a point about everything that has happened since. "We've had 14 presidents, seven Republicans, seven Democrats. We've had world wars. We had 911. We had the Cuban missile crisis. We have all kinds of things." His lesson? None of it should have changed what you did with your money. "The best single thing you could have done on March 11th, 1942 when I bought my first stock was just buy an index fund and never look at a headline, never think about stocks anymore. Just like you would do if you bought a farm. You just buy the farm and let the tenant farmer run it for you." Then he gives the number. Buffett describes putting $10,000 into an index fund that reinvested dividends, and he pauses to let the audience guess what it would be worth. The answer: "it would come to $51 million now." The only belief required back then was simple: "The only thing you had to really believe in then is that America would win the war and that America would progress as it has ever since 1776. And that American business, if America moved forward, American business would move forward." Notice what he says you did NOT need: "You didn't have to worry about what stock to buy. You didn't have to worry what day to get in and out. You didn't know the Federal Reserve would exist."
1:45

Warren Buffett on the single best thing an investor could have done in 1942: At a recent shareholder meeting, Buffett explains that he normally goes straight into questions and answers. But this time he opened differently, because he felt the usual format was teaching the wrong lesson. As he puts it, "all the questions would naturally tend toward current events." So he went back to 1942, the year he bought his first stock, to make a point about everything that has happened since. "We've had 14 presidents, seven Republicans, seven Democrats. We've had world wars. We had 911. We had the Cuban missile crisis. We have all kinds of things." His lesson? None of it should have changed what you did with your money. "The best single thing you could have done on March 11th, 1942 when I bought my first stock was just buy an index fund and never look at a headline, never think about stocks anymore. Just like you would do if you bought a farm. You just buy the farm and let the tenant farmer run it for you." Then he gives the number. Buffett describes putting $10,000 into an index fund that reinvested dividends, and he pauses to let the audience guess what it would be worth. The answer: "it would come to $51 million now." The only belief required back then was simple: "The only thing you had to really believe in then is that America would win the war and that America would progress as it has ever since 1776. And that American business, if America moved forward, American business would move forward." Notice what he says you did NOT need: "You didn't have to worry about what stock to buy. You didn't have to worry what day to get in and out. You didn't know the Federal Reserve would exist."

Black Edge

16,436 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

'Manchester is not the United Kingdom and all he did at Manchester was spend money which the Government had given him' Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch told #BBCBreakfast Andy Burnham, the former Mayor of Greater Manchester, has questions to answer if he succeeds Keir Starmer as Prime Minister
0:42

'Manchester is not the United Kingdom and all he did at Manchester was spend money which the Government had given him' Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch told #BBCBreakfast Andy Burnham, the former Mayor of Greater Manchester, has questions to answer if he succeeds Keir Starmer as Prime Minister

BBC Breakfast

515,707 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Victoria Derbyshire, "Keir Starmer telling Nigel Farage he has exploited the Henry Nowak case, is he right?" Telegraphs' Annabel Denham, "Err, no, I don't think the PM is right" Labour's Tom Hayes, "I'm just shocked by that, you've got a grieving family going through some of the worst experience anyone can ever know, and they've called on Nigel Farage not to exploit the death of their boy; and he literally did that in the House of Commons" "Nigel Farage was given the opportunity to condemn the violence, which he himself incited, by calling for protests. He could have condemned the violence" Annabel Denham, "Do you truly believe that the people in Southampton would have not taken to the streets in response to that sickening footage?" Tom Hayes, "I spoke to the Southampton MP, the vast majority of people in their city protesting, came from outside Southampton" "On top of that, Nigel Farage said this evening that there will be more to come"
3:12

Victoria Derbyshire, "Keir Starmer telling Nigel Farage he has exploited the Henry Nowak case, is he right?" Telegraphs' Annabel Denham, "Err, no, I don't think the PM is right" Labour's Tom Hayes, "I'm just shocked by that, you've got a grieving family going through some of the worst experience anyone can ever know, and they've called on Nigel Farage not to exploit the death of their boy; and he literally did that in the House of Commons" "Nigel Farage was given the opportunity to condemn the violence, which he himself incited, by calling for protests. He could have condemned the violence" Annabel Denham, "Do you truly believe that the people in Southampton would have not taken to the streets in response to that sickening footage?" Tom Hayes, "I spoke to the Southampton MP, the vast majority of people in their city protesting, came from outside Southampton" "On top of that, Nigel Farage said this evening that there will be more to come"

Farrukh

473,091 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Read the private email Mitt Romney sent to one of his advisers in 2018 roasting Donald Trump: "He was the last person I wanted as the Republican nominee. I made that clear...When he won, I hoped he would rise to the occasion. His call for me to potentially serve at State fueled that hope—after all, I had been a very vocal detractor. Unfortunately, President Trump did not grow to match the office. His smallness has instead diminished it. The American President has long served as a model for the nation; few would imagine holding Donald Trump up for their children to emulate. Around the world, he, and to some degree the nation that elected him, have become a laughing stock. His poverty of character has been exposed so often and in so many ways that many here have become inured to it. Not so for those who watch him from abroad. I was asked repeatedly to apologize for what I said about Donald Trump, to say that having spent more time with him, I had learned that I was wrong. I demurred. But in truth, I did not imagine that he would be so tragic as president. The incessant lying, the adulterer payoffs, the unwillingness to study and deliberate, the weakening of alliances, the elevation of autocrats, the impetuous decision, the demonizing of others, the divisiveness, the inability to hire and retain people of accomplishment — these are as stunning to me as they are to others. I did not think he would be this bad."
0:45

Read the private email Mitt Romney sent to one of his advisers in 2018 roasting Donald Trump: "He was the last person I wanted as the Republican nominee. I made that clear...When he won, I hoped he would rise to the occasion. His call for me to potentially serve at State fueled that hope—after all, I had been a very vocal detractor. Unfortunately, President Trump did not grow to match the office. His smallness has instead diminished it. The American President has long served as a model for the nation; few would imagine holding Donald Trump up for their children to emulate. Around the world, he, and to some degree the nation that elected him, have become a laughing stock. His poverty of character has been exposed so often and in so many ways that many here have become inured to it. Not so for those who watch him from abroad. I was asked repeatedly to apologize for what I said about Donald Trump, to say that having spent more time with him, I had learned that I was wrong. I demurred. But in truth, I did not imagine that he would be so tragic as president. The incessant lying, the adulterer payoffs, the unwillingness to study and deliberate, the weakening of alliances, the elevation of autocrats, the impetuous decision, the demonizing of others, the divisiveness, the inability to hire and retain people of accomplishment — these are as stunning to me as they are to others. I did not think he would be this bad."

Republicans against Trump

1,017,507 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

We now know the truth. Rachel Reeves spent the months leading up to the Budget claiming she would need to make difficult choices because of a downgrade in the economic forecasts that was not of her making. She even let it be known she was considering raising income tax rates. But as I pointed out in my letter to the Office for Budget Responsibility last week, Labour’s story did not add up. It was all a smokescreen. Labour knew all along that they did not need to raise taxes and break their promises. It was an active choice to do so, to fund a huge increase in welfare spending. The OBR have now made that very clear. It appears the country was deliberately misled to try to explain away Labour’s decision to spend billions more on welfare. Not only did the Chancellor let it be known that the OBR were forecasting lower productivity - forecasts which are meant to remain confidential until the Budget - but she failed to mention the fact that other changes to their forecasts “more than offset” the impact, in the OBR’s own words. As I raised in the House of Commons yesterday, and in my letter to the OBR, the briefings, the leaks and the Chancellor’s infamous ‘Cheerios’ press conference in Downing Street were totally unacceptable. I will also be following up my exchange of letters with the Treasury Permanent Secretary about the leaks and briefings. Some people may even have faced higher mortgage rates thanks to the impact on markets from Labour’s chaotic briefings. Rachel Reeves wanted us to believe she had no choice but to raise taxes on working people. But she did. She chose to raise taxes and break her manifesto so she could spend more on benefits. That’s the reality.
0:54

We now know the truth. Rachel Reeves spent the months leading up to the Budget claiming she would need to make difficult choices because of a downgrade in the economic forecasts that was not of her making. She even let it be known she was considering raising income tax rates. But as I pointed out in my letter to the Office for Budget Responsibility last week, Labour’s story did not add up. It was all a smokescreen. Labour knew all along that they did not need to raise taxes and break their promises. It was an active choice to do so, to fund a huge increase in welfare spending. The OBR have now made that very clear. It appears the country was deliberately misled to try to explain away Labour’s decision to spend billions more on welfare. Not only did the Chancellor let it be known that the OBR were forecasting lower productivity - forecasts which are meant to remain confidential until the Budget - but she failed to mention the fact that other changes to their forecasts “more than offset” the impact, in the OBR’s own words. As I raised in the House of Commons yesterday, and in my letter to the OBR, the briefings, the leaks and the Chancellor’s infamous ‘Cheerios’ press conference in Downing Street were totally unacceptable. I will also be following up my exchange of letters with the Treasury Permanent Secretary about the leaks and briefings. Some people may even have faced higher mortgage rates thanks to the impact on markets from Labour’s chaotic briefings. Rachel Reeves wanted us to believe she had no choice but to raise taxes on working people. But she did. She chose to raise taxes and break her manifesto so she could spend more on benefits. That’s the reality.

Mel Stride

192,072 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Emma Reynolds, "The Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, when it came to a really tough international situation, showed real judgement when he refused to be dragged into a war in Iran, that the Conservatives and reform would have had us dragged into" "Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage would have gone headfirst and said to Donald Trump, yes, okay, we'll get involved" "The Prime Minister did not cave to the pressure of the President of the United States" "And we did not get involved in that war" "But now we are concentrating on how it's not our war, but we're concentrating on how we protect people from the impact of that war back home" Fiona Brcue, "And you're all united in cabinet behind Keir Starmer?" Emma Reynolds, "Well, I look around the cabinet table and I see a group of people who are united behind him"
0:46

Emma Reynolds, "The Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, when it came to a really tough international situation, showed real judgement when he refused to be dragged into a war in Iran, that the Conservatives and reform would have had us dragged into" "Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage would have gone headfirst and said to Donald Trump, yes, okay, we'll get involved" "The Prime Minister did not cave to the pressure of the President of the United States" "And we did not get involved in that war" "But now we are concentrating on how it's not our war, but we're concentrating on how we protect people from the impact of that war back home" Fiona Brcue, "And you're all united in cabinet behind Keir Starmer?" Emma Reynolds, "Well, I look around the cabinet table and I see a group of people who are united behind him"

Farrukh

23,886 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Unbelievable. If the Speaker signed off on Chloe Swarbrick using the debating chamber to film a political attack ad for the Green Party, it would represent a serious lapse in judgment, allowing all manner of partisan campaign ads to be filmed inside the House. If Brownlee did not approve it, then Swarbrick, as a long-serving MP and party co-leader - would have been fully aware of the Standing Orders and filming protocols. She would have known that the Speaker’s explicit permission is required for such a shoot. That would make it a deliberate breach of the rules.
0:48

Unbelievable. If the Speaker signed off on Chloe Swarbrick using the debating chamber to film a political attack ad for the Green Party, it would represent a serious lapse in judgment, allowing all manner of partisan campaign ads to be filmed inside the House. If Brownlee did not approve it, then Swarbrick, as a long-serving MP and party co-leader - would have been fully aware of the Standing Orders and filming protocols. She would have known that the Speaker’s explicit permission is required for such a shoot. That would make it a deliberate breach of the rules.

Suit and tie

31,740 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen

“STOP POLICING LANGUAGE!” Robert Jenrick was visibly frustrated on GMB this morning as he hit out at the host for obsessing over Nigel Farage’s words instead of focusing on Henry Nowak’s murder and the shocking police bodycam scandal.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ After being relentlessly harangued about Nigel Farage’s “cold rage” comments following the murder of Henry Nowak, Jenrick hit back: “I felt rage watching that video, and so did millions of people across this country.” He was clearly sick of the deflection: “I’m sick of people policing language and using that to obfuscate and not get to the heart of the issues and actually do something about it.” Every time he tried to talk about the scandalous police response, the bodycam footage, the two-tier policing concerns, the failure to protect, the presenter dragged it straight back to what Farage said. Solutions? Barely mentioned. It was painful to watch. The host wasn’t interested in the shocking treatment of Henry Nowak or fixing the serious problems that led to it. Just another gotcha on Farage. Jenrick is right. Too many seem far more outraged by Nigel Farage’s words than by a young man being stabbed to death and the disturbing way the police handled it. It’s infuriating, and they still don’t get it.
1:27

“STOP POLICING LANGUAGE!” Robert Jenrick was visibly frustrated on GMB this morning as he hit out at the host for obsessing over Nigel Farage’s words instead of focusing on Henry Nowak’s murder and the shocking police bodycam scandal.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ After being relentlessly harangued about Nigel Farage’s “cold rage” comments following the murder of Henry Nowak, Jenrick hit back: “I felt rage watching that video, and so did millions of people across this country.” He was clearly sick of the deflection: “I’m sick of people policing language and using that to obfuscate and not get to the heart of the issues and actually do something about it.” Every time he tried to talk about the scandalous police response, the bodycam footage, the two-tier policing concerns, the failure to protect, the presenter dragged it straight back to what Farage said. Solutions? Barely mentioned. It was painful to watch. The host wasn’t interested in the shocking treatment of Henry Nowak or fixing the serious problems that led to it. Just another gotcha on Farage. Jenrick is right. Too many seem far more outraged by Nigel Farage’s words than by a young man being stabbed to death and the disturbing way the police handled it. It’s infuriating, and they still don’t get it.

J Stewart

70,146 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

#WATCH | Delhi: Speaking on retired Indian Army Major Vikrant Jaitly's case, Vikrant's wife Charul Jaitly's lawyer, Major Sudhanshu Pandey, says, "Vikrant was an ex-army officer... In 2016-17, due to family circumstances, he took premature retirement, and since then, he has set up his own work and has been settled in Dubai, where he is working... What we have been told is that there were some national security issues and cyber issues in respect of some different companies with whom Vikrant may have had some dealings... His wife was trying to find out what exactly had happened... She got in contact with the Ministry of External Affairs; everything was explained to them; Vikrant was given counsellor access; and thereafter, it was said that there are some investigations going on in respect of the case against different people, and during that investigation, it would be necessary for Vikrant to be there... Celina was the one whom she contacted first when she got to know about this, and she did not, at that point in time, come forward in any manner to help—at least, any visible help did not come from them. The case happened on the 6th of September 2023... She followed the protocol... and went about the case the way she was advised... She decided to wait for the case to get over... While Charul was never informed by Celina that she had decided to take any legal recourse in this matter, it would have been better if she had consulted Charul and discussed that this is what she was going to do about this. Charul would have come forward, and they could have taken steps that were in the best interest of Vikrant... The reason for filing the case is that if this was something that was motivated by her genuine concern for her brother, she should have consulted us... But to say that she is not being given information or that his wife is not giving her information, we actually strongly rebut because there are absolutely no such reasons. Charul was going to everybody whom she had a hope would be able to help Vikrant... We have been told that some investigation is in the process for which he is required, and when it is over, we will be able to have a better insight into the disposal of Vikrant." (06.12)
9:52

#WATCH | Delhi: Speaking on retired Indian Army Major Vikrant Jaitly's case, Vikrant's wife Charul Jaitly's lawyer, Major Sudhanshu Pandey, says, "Vikrant was an ex-army officer... In 2016-17, due to family circumstances, he took premature retirement, and since then, he has set up his own work and has been settled in Dubai, where he is working... What we have been told is that there were some national security issues and cyber issues in respect of some different companies with whom Vikrant may have had some dealings... His wife was trying to find out what exactly had happened... She got in contact with the Ministry of External Affairs; everything was explained to them; Vikrant was given counsellor access; and thereafter, it was said that there are some investigations going on in respect of the case against different people, and during that investigation, it would be necessary for Vikrant to be there... Celina was the one whom she contacted first when she got to know about this, and she did not, at that point in time, come forward in any manner to help—at least, any visible help did not come from them. The case happened on the 6th of September 2023... She followed the protocol... and went about the case the way she was advised... She decided to wait for the case to get over... While Charul was never informed by Celina that she had decided to take any legal recourse in this matter, it would have been better if she had consulted Charul and discussed that this is what she was going to do about this. Charul would have come forward, and they could have taken steps that were in the best interest of Vikrant... The reason for filing the case is that if this was something that was motivated by her genuine concern for her brother, she should have consulted us... But to say that she is not being given information or that his wife is not giving her information, we actually strongly rebut because there are absolutely no such reasons. Charul was going to everybody whom she had a hope would be able to help Vikrant... We have been told that some investigation is in the process for which he is required, and when it is over, we will be able to have a better insight into the disposal of Vikrant." (06.12)

ANI

41,692 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Can any of my friends from the Boomer Generation answer this for me? Why are the Boomers so offended when ask to see their ID? This bank teller was explaining how she goes through this all the time. They always tell her that they’ve been banking there longer than she’s been alive. Showing an ID is just a simple measure to prevent fraud and theft, yet they yell at her for it. I ask because this happens to me all the time, even on the phone. Back at the pizza shop I would have an elderly man call in an order for food and most of the time he picks it up himself, no problem at all. However he started sending other people to pick it up as well as have other people calling the order. When the person picking up shows me his card which I recognize his name which had his photo on it, I won’t accept it without and ID as well, just a precaution. He then had to come all the way down there just to yell at me because obviously it’s for him and I shouldn’t have hassled him. I tried to explain to him when he calls it in and picks it up I know it’s him. However when others call it in and pick it up, I can’t verify if it’s actually legit or not, what if somebody stole his card and tried to use it. He still had an issue with it and explains that his grandkids should be able to use his card, I tell him that’s not how it works and if he kept giving my staff a hard time I would ban him from the store. I don’t need anybody threatening the workers over something meant to protect him. Should I just have let anybody use his card without verification at the shop? What if somebody did steal his card and spent his money, then he would have been mad at me for letting them do it.
1:00

Can any of my friends from the Boomer Generation answer this for me? Why are the Boomers so offended when ask to see their ID? This bank teller was explaining how she goes through this all the time. They always tell her that they’ve been banking there longer than she’s been alive. Showing an ID is just a simple measure to prevent fraud and theft, yet they yell at her for it. I ask because this happens to me all the time, even on the phone. Back at the pizza shop I would have an elderly man call in an order for food and most of the time he picks it up himself, no problem at all. However he started sending other people to pick it up as well as have other people calling the order. When the person picking up shows me his card which I recognize his name which had his photo on it, I won’t accept it without and ID as well, just a precaution. He then had to come all the way down there just to yell at me because obviously it’s for him and I shouldn’t have hassled him. I tried to explain to him when he calls it in and picks it up I know it’s him. However when others call it in and pick it up, I can’t verify if it’s actually legit or not, what if somebody stole his card and tried to use it. He still had an issue with it and explains that his grandkids should be able to use his card, I tell him that’s not how it works and if he kept giving my staff a hard time I would ban him from the store. I don’t need anybody threatening the workers over something meant to protect him. Should I just have let anybody use his card without verification at the shop? What if somebody did steal his card and spent his money, then he would have been mad at me for letting them do it.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

20,521 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

In an interview on Tuesday’s Newsnight about the murder of 18-year-old Henry Nowak, we mistakenly quoted the Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, as saying people should respond to his death with a “white, cold rage”. To be clear, Mr Farage actually said “pure, cold rage”, as had been stated earlier in the programme, and we apologise to him for this error.
0:29

In an interview on Tuesday’s Newsnight about the murder of 18-year-old Henry Nowak, we mistakenly quoted the Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, as saying people should respond to his death with a “white, cold rage”. To be clear, Mr Farage actually said “pure, cold rage”, as had been stated earlier in the programme, and we apologise to him for this error.

BBC Newsnight

204,740 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

#WATCH | Delhi: On the murder of a UPSC aspirant, Special CP Law & Order Delhi Police, Ravindra Singh Yadav says, "...When this case was discussed with the officers, the facts did not seem correct... During the investigation, it was found that three people had come to his house before the blast, and after finding them, it was found that the accused girl and the deceased had been friends earlier... She took the hard disk, which she thought contained her videos or pictures... The hard disc contained videos of more than 15 women... The accused girl had studied forensic science earlier, as she already had an interest in it. She used to watch Crime Patrol and similar movies, so she had the idea of ​​the perfect crime in her mind... They thought of the blast so that their fingerprints would not be left and the police would not be able to reach them. The accused had been asking for her pictures from the deceased for the last 1-2 months, but he did not give them, and then she thought of doing this..."
3:47

#WATCH | Delhi: On the murder of a UPSC aspirant, Special CP Law & Order Delhi Police, Ravindra Singh Yadav says, "...When this case was discussed with the officers, the facts did not seem correct... During the investigation, it was found that three people had come to his house before the blast, and after finding them, it was found that the accused girl and the deceased had been friends earlier... She took the hard disk, which she thought contained her videos or pictures... The hard disc contained videos of more than 15 women... The accused girl had studied forensic science earlier, as she already had an interest in it. She used to watch Crime Patrol and similar movies, so she had the idea of ​​the perfect crime in her mind... They thought of the blast so that their fingerprints would not be left and the police would not be able to reach them. The accused had been asking for her pictures from the deceased for the last 1-2 months, but he did not give them, and then she thought of doing this..."

ANI

24,173 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Handbags at noon! It’s always nice to watch Sir Keir Starmer descend into the sort of incandescent fury that living under his government induces from most people on a daily basis. The absolute standout moment of today’s PMQs was one not caught by the cameras but a behind-the-scenes bit of piggy rage from the PM. Sir Keir Starmer’s anger when Lindsay Hoyle told him that it wasn’t ‘leader of the opposition’s questions’ was visible. But it was after the session, when a puce-coloured Starmer had an argument with Hoyle that the real joy was to be had, culminating in his flouncing out of the chamber. As he did so, he shot the Speaker an absolutely filthy look. Get her! ✍️ Madeline Grant Article |
0:30

Handbags at noon! It’s always nice to watch Sir Keir Starmer descend into the sort of incandescent fury that living under his government induces from most people on a daily basis. The absolute standout moment of today’s PMQs was one not caught by the cameras but a behind-the-scenes bit of piggy rage from the PM. Sir Keir Starmer’s anger when Lindsay Hoyle told him that it wasn’t ‘leader of the opposition’s questions’ was visible. But it was after the session, when a puce-coloured Starmer had an argument with Hoyle that the real joy was to be had, culminating in his flouncing out of the chamber. As he did so, he shot the Speaker an absolutely filthy look. Get her! ✍️ Madeline Grant Article |

The Spectator

139,219 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten