Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Politics

BBC Expert Delivers Grim Assessment Of Iran Peace Deal Hopes

Published

on

BBC Expert Delivers Grim Assessment Of Iran Peace Deal Hopes

A peace deal to end the Iran war “will take a long time” to be reached, the BBC’a chief international correspondent has declared.

In a gloomy assessment, Lyse Doucet said “neither side wants to back down”.

Her comments came after Donald Trump said American officials would not take part in planned negotiations with their Iranian counterparts in Pakistan.

The US president has declared victory on several occasions since the conflict began with Israel and America’s began bombing Iran two months ago.

Advertisement

An indefinite ceasefire is currently in place, but with the key waterway the Strait of Hormuz still blocked and America blockading Iranian ports, Doucet said hopes of a perman end to the war seem remote.

She told Radio 4′s Today programme: “Neither side wants a ‘no war, no peace’ situation. Neither side wants to back down.

“Both sides are saying they won the war. President Trump has his own political and economic pressures at home, the Iranians have their pressures at home. So a deal may be in reach but a reach is not days, it will take a long time.

“Does President Trump want to make that time? How long does Iran want to drag it out and thrash out every day? It’s within the realm of possibility, but right now they’re just not there.”

Advertisement

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.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Fox News cuts off reporter describing Trumpian foreknowledge of shooting attack

Published

on

White House Correspondents Dinner

White House Correspondents Dinner

The US Fox News channel cut off one of its own reporters just as she seemed about to give away what people are saying is foreknowledge among Donald Trump’s inner circle about the ‘assassination attempt’ at this year’s White House Correspondents Dinner.

White House Correspondents Dinner ‘shooter’

Trump had said, for the first time ever, that he would attend. An alleged shooter then tried to rush past guards before being detained.

View on Threads

But many people on social media are wondering if Trump knew about it beforehand. This is because Fox correspondent Aishah Hasnie was seated with Nicholas Riccio, the husband of Trump’s press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

Riccio, she said, told her “You do a good job… you need to be safe tonight” then looked around the room suggestively. But Fox stopped Hasnie even finishing the sentence:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Canary (@thecanaryuk)

That was far from the only weird aspect of the event. Several journalists talked about the lack of security at the event. Bags were not even being checked, and at least two correspondents said they left almost as soon as they arrived because it “felt wrong”:

Advertisement

Trump looked entirely unconcerned, even smirking, as the White House Correspondents Dinner ‘attack’ happened:

The lack of urgency among bodyguards to remove Trump was clear, with vice-president JD Vance rushed out relatively quickly – before anyone went to remove Trump:

Advertisement

Pro-Israel Trump figures seemed to know the identity of the alleged shooter before the name had been announced:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Daily Rumble (@daily_rumble)

A photo of Allen, face down and handcuffed, was given to Trump within moments so he could post it on his ‘Truth Social’ platform, as political commentator Tom Santos observed:

Trump later took the opportunity to say the attempted shooting justified his ridiculous new White House ballroom – and was amplified by dozens of MAGA accounts in a clearly coordinated campaign.

Santos found it all a bit too much to swallow:

He’s surely not the only one.

Featured image via the Canary

Advertisement

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Why You Should Always Pack A Tennis Ball In Hand Luggage

Published

on

Why You Should Always Pack A Tennis Ball In Hand Luggage

Some experts think we should avoid using wheeled suitcases where possible, both because they can make slightly annoying rattling sounds when rolled across certain cities’ cobblestones and because, e.g., a duffel bag is usually suitable to bring in your carry-on.

But any luggage you’re bringing on board should contain a bright green tennis ball, sleep therapist Tracy Hannigan told Metro.

The trick is beloved on Reddit and TikTok, too.

Why should I bring a tennis ball in my carry-on?

Advertisement

Hannigan recommended using a tennis ball as a massage roller to help with any muscle aches as you travel.

“A tennis ball is small and light and can help you to apply soothing pressure to points you might otherwise not be able to reach,” she advised.

If you like, you can place it in a rolled-up hand towel to prevent it from slipping away.

Healthline writes that lacrosse balls can help to ease sore muscles, too.

Advertisement

They reccomend a variety of exercises, like placing a ball between your shoulders and a solid surface (like a wall or the back of a chair) and moving your body so the ball massages a selected area.

On Instagram, personal trainer Laura Coleman added that “Two tennis balls in a sock make driving and aeroplane travel better,” explaining that they can be used as a makeshift foam roller when you’re seated for a long period of time.

Holidaymakers seem to love the trick

In a Reddit post about the tennis ball travel advice, jetsettrader2 said: “Being a frequent flyer, I always do this. One of the best hacks hands down.”

Advertisement

Another commented that they prefer the Healthline-approved lacrosse version for “something stronger”. One Redditor explained that they cut the end off of a pool “noodle” float: “that way it still rolls, but less likely to roll away under a seat”.

And u/nader0903 added: “I do a golf ball to roll-massage my feet after a long day of walking.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

After WHCD shooting, Republicans blame Dems for political rhetoric

Published

on

After WHCD shooting, Republicans blame Dems for political rhetoric

It’s becoming a pattern: A possible threat to President Donald Trump’s life. Calls from both sides to turn down the temperature. And then, a pivot.

Republicans on Sunday rushed to turn the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner into a campaign cudgel, accusing Democrats of opening the door to political violence with “dangerous and inflammatory rhetoric” against the president. And they’re leveraging the attempted security breach to try and break the congressional stalemate over Department of Homeland Security funding.

Less than 24 hours after calling on Americans to “resolve our differences,” Trump said in an interview with CBS’ “60 Minutes” that “I do think that the hate speech of the Democrats … is very dangerous.” Republican National Committee Chair Joe Gruters cast Saturday’s incident as “the inevitable result of a radicalized left that has normalized political violence.”

Official GOP social media accounts accused prominent battleground candidates of stoking political tensions. “Democrats like Abdul El Sayed fuel this hate,” Republicans’ Senate campaign arm wrote of the progressive candidate in the Michigan Senate race. In Maine, the group posted that Graham Platner, the Democratic primary polling leader, “said that violence with a gun was a necessary means to achieving social change.” It’s a reference to since-deleted Reddit posts from 2018; Platner has disavowed the violent rhetoric in them. And in North Carolina, an RNC account criticized Senate candidate and former Gov. Roy Cooper for not publicly condemning the attack while previously calling Trump “a significant threat to our democracy.”

Advertisement

It’s a playbook Republicans forged in the aftermath of the two assassination attempts against Trump in 2024, when early calls for unity gave way to accusations that Democrats had spent years stoking threats of violence against the president by casting him as a threat to democracy. They’ve deployed it amid a surge in high-profile incidents of political violence, including last year’s killing of Charlie Kirk, when top Republicans from Trump down blamed the “radical left” for inciting political violence.

There’s no evidence Democrats’ rhetoric was behind either of the 2024 assassination attempts on Trump. The motive behind the shooting in Butler, Pennsylvania, in July 2024 remains a mystery; the gunman, Thomas Crooks, was killed by federal agents. Ryan Routh, who was convicted of trying to assassinate a major presidential candidate after he hid in the bushes at one of Trump’s Florida golf courses with a semiautomatic rifle that September, was reportedly concerned about the war in Ukraine.

Democrats on Sunday broadly condemned political violence. They offered gratitude to the Secret Service, including the agent who took shots to his protective vest during the scuffle and was released from the hospital Sunday. They rejected Republicans’ attempts to assign blame and reiterated their calls to pass a bill that cleared the Senate last month that would fund most of DHS, except for immigration enforcement.

“Here in America, we can have strong disagreements. But it’s important for us to agree to strongly disagree without being disagreeable with each other,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on “Fox News Sunday.” “And it is certainly the case that violence is never the answer, whether it’s targeted at the right, the left, or the center.”

Advertisement

It was not immediately clear what motivated Saturday’s attack, though the man being held in connection with the incident reportedly criticized Trump administration policies in writings sent to family members shortly before he rushed a security checkpoint while armed with guns and knives. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday morning that it appeared the suspect “did in fact set out to target folks that work in the administration, likely including the president.”

Some battleground Republicans — including in top races for Senate, House and governor — moved quickly to fill the void.

In the heated Michigan Senate race, former GOP Rep. Mike Rogers said in a statement that Democrats “know exactly what they’re doing and continue to inspire violent acts. Why else would they continue to block funding for DHS, the very agency meant to keep us safe?”

He referenced a clip of El-Sayed, one of his Democratic rivals, urging Democrats at a “fighting oligarchy” rally last year to do more to push back against Republicans. “When they go low, we don’t go high — we take them to the ground and choke them out,” El-Sayed said at the time.

Advertisement

Senate Republicans’ campaign arm circulated the clip Sunday morning.

In a statement Sunday, El-Sayed criticized Republicans’ attacks, saying there is “never any excuse for political violence” and calling on everyone, “regardless of party, to bring the rhetoric down.”

“It’s sad to see the NRSC shamelessly politicize this awful act so quickly,” El-Sayed said. “Needless to say it strains credulity to believe that these acts had more to do with what a candidate in Michigan said in 2025 than what the MAGA movement has done to normalize violence through Jan 6, endless war, and violent rhetoric.”

Republicans have yet to put any significant cash behind a line of attack that was still taking shape on Sunday and playing out largely on social media and in public statements.

Advertisement

Still, Democrats called for them to back down.

“Instead of politicizing the shooting, Republicans should look in the mirror first. If they were actually serious about public safety, they should allow a vote on the bipartisan legislation the Senate passed to re-open DHS,” Viet Shelton, a spokesperson for House Democrats’ campaign arm, said in a statement.

Democratic operatives working on battleground campaigns argued that Republicans were being hypocritical, pointing to Trump and GOP lawmakers who’ve mocked acts of political violence against Democrats and worked to rewrite the history of the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol riot. They also cited Trump’s suggestion last year that the actions of a half-dozen Democratic lawmakers who encouraged servicemembers not to follow illegal orders were “punishable by death.”

“Last time this many top government leaders were in one place and facing [the] threat of violence was [Jan. 6, 2021],” Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson said in a text message. “Hopefully they don’t give anyone pardons this time.”

Advertisement

Mark Longabaugh, another veteran Democratic strategist working on midterm races, said: “To any Republican making those accusations, my response is two words: January Sixth.”

But Republicans weren’t letting up.

Shawn Roderick, a spokesperson for GOP Sen. Susan Collins in battleground Maine, issued a statement slamming her Democratic rivals, Gov. Janet Mills and newcomer Graham Platner, for criticizing efforts to fund DHS.

“The Secret Service is funded through the Department of Homeland Security, the very department responsible for protecting our country and employing the officers who put their lives on the line every day,” Roderick said. “Yet some, like Graham Platner and Janet Mills, have criticized efforts to fund DHS, including Senator Collins’ vote to keep it operating, as part of a broader political agenda.”

Advertisement

That, he added, “has real consequences.”

Platner and Mills’ campaigns did not respond to a request for comment.

“Democrats have spent years pouring fuel on the fire, attacking law enforcement and stoking division, and now they want to pretend they’re the party of public safety,” said Mike Marinella, spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “We’re going to make sure voters see the full picture and hold every one of them accountable for the rhetoric they’ve embraced and the chaos it’s helped create.”

Erin Doherty and Jessica Piper contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Britain’s charity rules reward size, not need

Published

on

Britain’s charity rules reward size, not need

British charity law presents itself as fair. In practice, it tends to favour organisations with the resources to navigate an increasingly complex system. What larger charities absorb as routine compliance often becomes a barrier for grassroots groups.

The Fundraising Regulator, set up in 2016, operates as an independent self-regulatory body. But like many such systems, influence tends to follow resources. While registration is voluntary for most, charities spending over £100,000 on fundraising are expected to register and pay a levy, a threshold that can feel less like a clear line and more like a shifting one for smaller organisations.

Charity fundraising law protects big players

The most significant recent change arrived in November 2025, when a revised Code of Fundraising Practice came into effect. Framed as a modernisation effort, it stripped back prescriptive rules in favour of broader principles, described by its architects as “future-proofing” the sector for innovations like AI-driven donor outreach.

What it also did, less discussed, was change responsibility for interpreting detailed compliance rules onto individual organisations. This includes cross-references to bodies like the ICO and HMRC, adding layers of administrative complexity.

Advertisement

According to the updated Code of Practice, charities must now justify fundraising decisions at senior governance levels and maintain robust internal processes, including whistleblowing mechanisms.

That kind of infrastructure is standard at large, well-staffed charities. For a community group run mostly by volunteers, it’s a significant operational burden. The new principles-based approach sounds progressive, but flexibility tends to work best for those who can afford professional interpretation.

Small groups navigate a compliance minefield

Smaller operators don’t just face higher relative compliance costs; they also find the most lucrative fundraising channels blocked off by structural advantage. Major donor programmes and corporate partnerships require networks and credibility that take decades to build.

Commission-based fundraising models, already controversial for their incentive structures, are now less prescriptively regulated under the new Code, which in practice benefits wealthier organisations that can construct compliant arrangements. The switch to principles means charities bear greater responsibility for demonstrating compliance, a burden that falls unevenly across the sector.

Advertisement

This is where accessible formats become essential survival tools for grassroots groups. Online platforms offering prize draws competitions have given smaller campaigns a competitive entry point. These sites remove the need for scale, infrastructure, and existing donor networks.

Instead of building long-term relationships or funding complex campaigns, organisations can offer a simple, low-cost incentive that encourages immediate participation.

The format does much of the work: low ticket prices encourage micro-donations, digital promotion widens reach, and platform-managed systems handle payments, compliance, and winner selection. That combination allows smaller groups to raise funds and attract attention without the institutional backing larger charities rely on.

Prize draws offer grassroots campaigns a foothold

Prize draws occupy a practical middle ground in fundraising. They don’t require the donor relationships that underpin major gift programmes, and they don’t demand the scale that makes direct mail campaigns viable.

Advertisement

For a local community group or single-issue campaign, they represent a low-barrier route to income that sits within the Code’s broad principles without triggering complex compliance requirements. That accessibility matters enormously when your entire operation relies on a handful of committed volunteers.

The irony is that these formats succeed partly because they’ve been overlooked by the regulatory architecture that governs larger fundraising activity. Where the system has tightened around established channels, smaller organisations have adapted by finding routes that weren’t worth regulating heavily in the first place.

Regulatory reform remains stalled under both parties

Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have shown a serious appetite for reforming the structural imbalance in charity fundraising regulation. The Charity Commission periodically updates its guidance. The Fundraising Regulator consults widely before major changes, but consultation processes themselves tend to be dominated by voices from larger organisations with the staff to respond meaningfully.

According to guidance from the Chartered Institute of Fundraising, navigating UK fundraising rules requires understanding multiple regulatory bodies. This is an expectation that assumes a baseline of professional resources most grassroots groups simply don’t have.

Advertisement

The result is a regulatory environment that performs neutrality while delivering advantage. Bigger institutions adapt quickly, absorb compliance costs, and shape future consultations. Smaller campaigns work around the edges, finding what flexibility remains.

Reform conversations tend to start and stall in the same committee rooms, with the same stakeholders. Until the regulatory architecture genuinely centres smaller organisations in its design, the imbalance isn’t a bug, it’s a feature.

By Nathan Spears

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

What Actually Happened During The I’m A Celebrity Live Final

Published

on

What Actually Happened During The I'm A Celebrity Live Final

Things went a little off the rails, to say the least, during the I’m A Celebrity: South Africa live finale.

While the series itself was pre-recorded last year, the last episode aired live on ITV1 on Friday night, during which Ant and Dec announced who the public had chosen as their latest I’m A Celebrity “Legend”.

Almost the entire cast were reunited for the live special (aside from Beverley Callard, who was unable to attend on medical grounds), during which old arguments between certain campmates resurfaced.

Things first began taking a chaotic turn when David Haye called out Adam Thomas over his heated argument with Jimmy Bullard

Advertisement

Early on in the show, David Haye interrupted a segment involving Adam Thomas to question whether the Emmerdale star thought he “deserved to win this” after “calling Jimmy the c-word a couple of times” during their heated row towards the end of the season.

Ant and Dec then assured David that they would “come to this” a little bit later – and that’s when things became even more chaotic.

Jimmy Bullard then accused Adam Thomas of ‘abusive, aggressive and intimidating’ behaviour when the argument broke out between them

Later, Jimmy Bullard brought up the row again, criticising ITV for editing out the C-bombs dropped by Adam during their argument.

Advertisement

Ant McPartlin pointed out that Adam’s language had been “unbroadcastable”, which Jimmy agreed, but referred to the soap star’s conduct as “abusive, aggressive and intimidating”.

“I was there, I didn’t think it was intimidating,” Ant responded, before inviting Adam to share his side of the story.

The Waterloo Road actor then insisted he takes “full responsibility” for his conduct during his row, and had “nothing but love for Jimmy”, at which point David interjected, retorting: “Funny way of showing it…”

That was the craziest 5 minutes of #ImACeleb in 25 years. I absolutely love the drama of live TV but David and Jimmy are EMBARRASSING themselves. To have Ant & Dec, the unbiased hosts, telling you you’re chatting shit? Pathetic. David is just a massive high school bully pic.twitter.com/85yFfBCS52

— sᴜᴘᴇʀ ᴛᴠ (@superTV247) April 24, 2026

Advertisement

Ant and Dec then struggled to keep things on track as David Haye waded into the row between Adam Thomas and Jimmy Bullard – with Sinitta and Gemma Collins then leaving the set

Declan Donnelly then pointed out David wasn’t “even there” for the row, having already been eliminated, with the former heavyweight champion going on to accuse the show of “a lot of editing to make this poor guy look like a victim”, referring to Adam.

Following this, Gemma Collins and Sinitta disagreed about who was in the right, with the So Macho singer going on to walk off set completely.

“You weren’t there, I was there, it was aggressive and abusive,” she insisted, as Gemma left the sofa to join her off stage.

Advertisement

At the end of the turbulent episode, Adam was voted as the public’s winner, over runner-up Mo Farah, and had something of a muted reaction to the news.

Imagine being named an I’m A Celebrity Legend & not being able to raise a smile. That is someone who is struggling with mental health & needs help. Thoughts are with Adam Thomas & there will be a time when the bullies go silent #ImACeleb pic.twitter.com/uQm58iWRsO

— David Patterson (@DPatz13) April 25, 2026

David Haye and Jimmy Bullard later claimed they’d been ejected from the I’m A Celebrity studio

The Sun has since published a report claiming that Jimmy and David were “kicked out” of the studio between the live final and the recording of the companion podcast I’m A Celebrity: Unpacked.

Advertisement

In footage shared by the tabloid, David was heard saying: “We’ve been kicked out the show. What’s that about? Genuinely?”

Jimmy then agreed: “We got kicked out.”

“For trying to tell the truth,” David added.

A show source said: “Some campmates were uncomfortable being on stage with David and Jimmy, so we sent them home during Unpacked.”

Advertisement

HuffPost UK has contacted ITV for comment.

What has Adam Thomas said since his I’m A Celebrity win?

Writing on Instagram over the weekend, Adam claimed: “I walked through this journey with my heart first, no matter what came my way. It was not always easy, there were moments that could have broken me, but I stayed true to myself and that is something I will always be proud of.

“I have realised that when people try to dim your light, it says more about them than it ever will about you. This experience has shown me my strength in ways I never imagined. Not because of any title or recognition, but because I stayed kind, I stayed grounded and I stayed real.”

Advertisement

“Those who doubted me or tried to bring me down, I carry no negativity towards you,” he added. “I have already won in the ways that matter most.

“I have love, I have happiness and I have stayed true to myself, and that is something no one can ever take away from me. I hope one day you can do the same.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia Symptoms: Why The Lumps On My Scalp Were Not A ‘Scalp Infection

Published

on

Lizzie with her parents

You know your body better than anyone – but what happens when no one listens? Welcome to Ms Diagnosed: a HuffPost UK series uncovering the reality of medical gaslighting. With new stats showing that 8 in 10 of women have felt unheard by medical professionals, we’re sharing the stories of seven whose lives were nearly lost to the gap between their symptoms and a system that refused to listen. As the UK introduces Jess’s Rule – a new mandate for GPs to ‘rethink’ after a third visit – we’re exploring why the medical system is still failing women and how we can start to fix it.

“Have you tried Head & Shoulders shampoo?,” asked my GP. ‘We think you might have a scalp infection.’

I stared at her, gobsmacked. I had between 20 and 50 hard, pea-sized lumps that kept appearing on my scalp, as well as horrible flaking. I knew it was more than a scalp infection.

“I’ve had a dry scalp all my life,” I said, eventually, “I use Head & Shoulders all the time.”

Advertisement

“Hmmm,” mused the GP. “Well, we’ll prescribe you some shampoo that will hopefully get rid of the lumps.”

I didn’t have a scalp infection. I had Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (ALL); and this was diagnosed following a trip to A&E, after I’d gone to my GP surgery every week for ten weeks to no avail.

My symptoms started in July 2021, when I was 26. I’d had Covid for two weeks – then, things only got worse.

For a start, there were those lumps developing on my scalp; as well as down the back of my ear, down my neck and in my armpits.

Advertisement

I was losing a lot of hair; I had terrible night sweats; I was sick a lot; and I was very fatigued, to the point where my boyfriend was having to help dress me. Even walking 100 metres to my office from the carpark, I’d have to stop and catch my breath.

I first visited my GP that summer. ‘We’ve seen a lot of people come in with exactly what you’re saying,’ she said. ‘We think it could be Long Covid.’

That initially made sense; I’d had Covid, after all. But over the course of the following ten weeks, I went back to the GP again and again and she’d make me walk up and down the corridor to test my blood oxygen levels and my pulse. “You’re fine; you’re fine,” she’d say.

“Well…I’m obviously not fine, because I’m out of breath all the time,” I said, utterly bewildered. Once, I was just sitting on the grass watching my boyfriend playing sports when my watch notified me that my heart rate was too high.

Advertisement

But the GP kept saying, “No, no, you’re fine.” As it later turned out, I had a tumour the size of a melon on my chest.

I went back to the surgery again and again with the same symptoms. I’d be told things like, “You’ve got a history with asthma; we’ll give you an inhaler.”

I was prescribed the same shampoo again for the lumps on my scalp. Another time, they suggested the lumps were an allergic reaction to my hair dye.

I had blood test after blood test, but I kept hearing, “They’re fine, they’re fine, all your bloods are fine.”

Advertisement

Obviously, my blood was not fine.

Lizzie with her parents

Every time I left the GP’s office, I felt so let down. It seemed there was no end in sight; I’d just been pushed away again with an inhaler or some scalp treatment.

It was incredibly frustrating and very upsetting – all the more so because I knew, deep down, there was something very wrong. Once, when I was really struggling at work, I said to my manager: “Something’s not right. I know it.”

Another time, I messaged my mum: “What if it’s cancer?”. She replied: “If it was going to be cancer, it would have come back on your blood tests. Try not to worry.”

Those texts will always stick with me. Clearly, on some level, I knew.

Advertisement

In October 2021, I got a migraine at work. I do get migraines, but this was the worst head pain I’ve ever had. I couldn’t even open my eyes. I rang 111 and explained the migraine and all the symptoms I’d had since July; and they sent an ambulance.

I was taken to A&E, where I had a blood test, an ultrasound and a CT scan.

Then, because of Covid restrictions, I was left on my own in a little side room. After about four hours, a doctor came to see me. “We think you’ve got Hodgkin’s lymphoma,” he said.

“I’m sorry…I don’t know what that is,” I said, helplessly.

Advertisement

“It’s a type of cancer,” he said; and then he left. I was on my own trying to process that news; and I burst into floods of tears.

I was taken to the cancer ward, where I stayed for seven days while they did various tests. Eventually, I was diagnosed – not with Hodgkin’s lymphoma, but with ALL.

My treatment lasted for nearly three years, because I had a high percentage of leukaemia in my bone marrow as well as my blood. I had regular chemo, and a lumbar puncture every four weeks to take out spinal fluid and check for cancer in my brain. I also had a Hickman line – which was inserted into a vein in my neck and poked out of little valves in my chest – to administer chemotherapy and take regular blood samples. I never got used to that.

Eventually, I finished my treatment in June 2024 – and I’ve now been in remission for 21 months.

Advertisement

I visit my consultant every six months for blood tests and a check-up, and I have to take antibiotics if I get a cold because my immune system isn’t 100%. But with each month that passes, I get stronger. I’m going to the gym three or four times a week and my hair is so long, which feels amazing.

But while I’m a lot better physically, I still struggle mentally.

Even though my consultant told me my treatment would have been the same whether I’d been diagnosed on Day 1 or Day 100, I’m horrified when I think of how many times I was told by a GP that I was fine, when I unequivocally wasn’t – and, thanks to being misdiagnosed repeatedly, I’m left with health anxiety.

Every time I get a bruise on my leg, I automatically think: ‘The cancer’s back.’ If I ever get hot in the night, I worry that I’m getting night sweats again.

Advertisement

In November, a few symptoms were making me extremely anxious – night sweats, bruising, aching muscles and bones. I couldn’t wait for my next scheduled appointment, so I arranged an emergency appointment with my consultant. After reviewing some blood tests, he reassured me that I was a ‘picture of health’ and had nothing to worry about.

I think I’ll always have this anxiety – I went through such a tough journey, the thought of going back to that is incredibly scary – but feeling my strength returning has helped.

And my advice to anyone else struggling to get answers for certain symptoms is: Trust your instincts, and keep on pushing. Try to get a second opinion; if necessary, go to A&E and tell them about all your symptoms.

I’m so glad I kept pushing. I knew something was very wrong; and it turned out I was absolutely right.

Advertisement

ALL is a rare type of blood cancer, with just 790 new people diagnosed in the UK every year, according to Leukaemia UK. The most common symptoms are fatigue, frequent infections and bruising.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Politics Home Article | The North East’s 6GW offshore wind opportunity

Published

on

The North East’s 6GW offshore wind opportunity
The North East’s 6GW offshore wind opportunity

Wind Orca, a Cadeler vessel working on Hornsea 3, April 2026

Matt Beeton, Chief Executive



Matt Beeton, Chief Executive
| Port of Tyne

Advertisement

A new wave of offshore wind investment promises jobs and industrial growth for the North East’s rapidly growing clean energy sector

The UK’s clean energy transition is entering a decisive new phase.

Advertisement

The recent announcement by The Crown Estate to launch Round 6 of offshore wind leasing off the coast of the North East of England marks a pivotal moment for our region’s industrial future.

This new leasing round will unlock six gigawatts of offshore wind capacity, enough to power six million homes.

For ports, this translates into the delivery of around 400 turbines, over a million tonnes of steel and 5,000 kilometres of cabling – illustrating the scale of the supply chain opportunity.

It is a scale of ambition that demands an equally ambitious response from industry.

Advertisement

The need for scalable capacity, operational flexibility and infrastructure that can respond to increasingly complex, long-term programmes.

At the Port of Tyne, we welcome this announcement as a catalyst for further growth.

Positioned as the closest deep-water port to the North East leasing area, we are uniquely placed to support developers as they bring forward the next generation of offshore wind projects.

But proximity alone is not enough – experience and the ability to scale are everything.

Advertisement

That is why we are investing significantly in infrastructure, skills and innovation.

Our 230-acre Tyne Clean Energy Park is a cornerstone of this ambition, providing a platform for manufacturing, assembly and operations linked to offshore renewables.

Alongside this, our deep-water 24-hour access and extensive quayside facilities ensure we can accommodate the increasing size and scale of offshore wind components.

Advertisement

Crucially, our 5G connectivity and Investment Zone site status – now known as an Industrial Strategy Zone – further strengthens our ability to support future projects, providing additional confidence for developers and investors looking to commit at scale.

We have seen first-hand what success looks like. 

Projects such as Dogger Bank, Sofia and Hornsea 3 have demonstrated our capability to deliver world-class offshore wind developments.

Round 6 builds on this strong foundation, accelerating the growth of a regional offshore wind cluster that is already gaining international recognition.

Advertisement

But the opportunity goes far beyond energy generation. This is about economic transformation.

The development of the North East seabed leasing area will drive regional growth, strengthen domestic supply chains and create high-quality, long-term jobs.

In doing so, it aligns closely with the ambitions of the North East Mayor’s Green Energy Jobs Plan and her wider vision for a more resilient economy.

Ports sit at the centre of this transformation. They are more than just gateways for goods – they are industrial hubs where global supply chains meet local capability.

Advertisement

For regions like ours, with significant quayside-adjacent land and established maritime expertise, ports are natural locations for port-centric industrial development.

The government’s Industrial Strategy presents a crucial opportunity to build on this momentum.

By aligning policy with the needs of foundational sectors such as offshore renewables, it can provide the long-term certainty required for ports and developers to commit to major investment.

This is essential if we are to scale up capacity at the pace required.

Advertisement

Collaboration will also be key.

Through partnerships with the North East Combined Authority and initiatives such as the North East Ports Partnership, we are working to unlock further opportunities along the River Tyne.

Together, we can ensure that the benefits of offshore wind are felt across the region, from skills development to the growth of supply chains.

At the Port of Tyne, our long-term vision is clear.

Advertisement

The next decade will see us expand into new growth areas while strengthening our position in core markets such as automotive and offshore wind.

Major projects, including our £150 million Northside redevelopment, will enhance our capabilities and support the creation of jobs in the years ahead.

Round 6 provides a focal point for this activity.

A clear indication that the UK is serious about leading the global offshore wind market.

Advertisement

For the North East, it is an opportunity to cement our position at the forefront of that ambition.

We stand ready to play our part.

With sustained investment, collaboration and policy support, ports like ours will continue to enable the energy transition and help define the UK’s industrial future.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Gladiators’ Giant Alleges He Was ‘Sacked’ Over OnlyFans Model Relationship

Published

on

The cast of Gladiators

Former Gladiators star Jamie Bigg – better known to viewers as Giant – has alleged that he was sacked from the show because of his relationship.

Last week, Giant made headlines when he announced he was stepping away from Gladiators after three seasons on the cast of the rebooted game show.

“What I do want to make clear is this wasn’t a decision I made to step away,” he said at the time.

“I was faced with a choice that didn’t align with my values. And if you know me, you know this… I stand by my people and I stand by what I believe in. That’s what being a role model means to me.”

Advertisement

He has since alleged that he was dropped by Gladiators because he wanted to go public with his relationship with his girlfriend Taylor Ryan, who is an OnlyFans model.

“I had to choose between dating Taylor and keeping my job,” he told The Sun over the weekend, noting that he was “shocked and very saddened about their choice to sack me”.

The firefighter and former professional bodybuilder alleged that he was told by Gladiators producers that by going public with his romance, he could be “providing an access to adult content for children”, something he branded “absurd”.

“One of the most disappointing things is that all I’ve tried to do is be a good person and a good role model, and the BBC haven’t been either of those things,” he lamented.

Advertisement

“Essentially, I don’t want to work for people like that either.”

The cast of Gladiators

In a statement to the Daily Mail last week, Giant said: “I made it clear that I was planning to go public with my relationship, including the fact my partner works as an OnlyFans creator, and shortly after that I was told I wouldn’t be continuing on Gladiators.

“It wasn’t something I expected, especially given the commitment I’ve shown to the role. I’ve always taken being in the public eye seriously, and I believe being a role model is about honesty as well as professionalism. For me, that means not hiding parts of who I am or the people I care about.

“My partner is an incredible person, and I have huge respect for everything she does – I’m proud to stand by her.”

Giant then added: “I’m grateful to the BBC and everyone involved in the show for the opportunity and the experiences I’ve had. Now, my focus is on the future.”

Advertisement

A BBC spokesperson previously said: “After three formidable series, Giant is leaving Gladiators. We’d like to thank him for everything he has contributed to the show and wish him well for the future.”

HuffPost UK has contacted the BBC for additional comment.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Trump Says He’s ‘Honored’ By The Assassination Attempts Against Him After Latest Shooting

Published

on

Trump Says He’s ‘Honored’ By The Assassination Attempts Against Him After Latest Shooting

Fox News’ senior White House correspondent Peter Doocy had a frank question for President Donald Trump following the shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner on Saturday night.

During a press conference at the White House shortly after the shooting, Doocy brought up a New York Post report that said that the suspect, identified as 31-year-old Cole Tomas Allen, assembled a “long” weapon at the Washington Hilton Hotel.

“Why do you think this keeps happening to you?” Doocy directly asked the president in regards to the shooting.

“Well, you know, I’ve studied assassinations and I must tell you the most impactful people, the people that do the most, you take a look at the people — Abraham Lincoln — I mean, you go through the people that have gone through this where they got ’em. But the people that do the most [and] the people that make the biggest impact are the ones that they go after,” Trump replied.

Advertisement

The president has faced at least five major security breaches and assassination attempts since 2024, according to LiveNOW from FOX.

“They don’t go after the ones that don’t do much because they like it that way,” Trump continued. “And when you look at the people – whether it was an attempt or a successful attempt, they were very impactful people. Just take a look at the names here. The big names, and I hate to say I’m honored by that, but I’ve done a lot.”

Trump went on to say that there are many people that are “not happy” that his administration has “changed this country.”

“We’ve done a lot. We have taken this country and we were a laughingstock for years and now we are the hottest country anywhere in the world,” he added. “We’ve changed this country, and there are a lot of people that are not happy about that. So I think that’s the answer, Peter.”

Advertisement

Watch Trump’s response below. Skip to the 14:10 mark to hear the president’s remarks.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

‘I’m Not A Paedophile’: Trump Snaps At CBS Reporter Over Reading Of Suspected Shooter’s Alleged Manifesto

Published

on

President Donald Trump sat down with CBS reporter Norah O'Donnell for an interview aired on "60 Minutes."

President Donald Trump slammed CBS reporter Norah O’Donnell during a ’60 Minutes’ interview on Sunday after she read part of an alleged manifesto written by a suspect in the shooting that took place outside the White House Correspondents Association Dinner on Saturday.

“The so-called manifesto is a stunning thing to read, Mr. President. He appears to reference a motive in it,” O’Donnell said. “He writes this quote: ‘Administration officials, they are targets.’ And he also wrote this: ‘I am no longer willing to permit a paedophile, rapist and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.’ What’s your reaction to that?”

“Well, I was waiting for you to read that because I knew you would, because you’re horrible people, horrible people. Yeah, he did write that. I’m not a rapist. I didn’t rape anybody. I’m not a paedophile,” Trump said.

“Do you think he was referring to you?” O’Donnell asked.

Advertisement

“I’m not a paedophile. You read that crap from some sick person. I got associated with stuff that has nothing to do with me. I was totally exonerated,” Trump said. “Your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones that were involved with, let’s say, Epstein or other things. …You should be ashamed of yourself reading that because I’m not any of those things.”

“Mr. President, these are the gunman’s words,” O’Donnell said.

“Excuse me. You shouldn’t be reading that on ‘60 Minutes.’ You’re a disgrace,” Trump said.

The White House and CBS News did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement
President Donald Trump sat down with CBS reporter Norah O'Donnell for an interview aired on "60 Minutes."
President Donald Trump sat down with CBS reporter Norah O’Donnell for an interview aired on “60 Minutes.”

CBS News and The Associated Press have reported that the suspected shooter referenced administration officials in his writings as well as critiques of the administration. Trump has also said he read the manifesto and claimed that the suspect espoused “anti-Christian” views.

“The writings, sent shortly before shots were fired on Saturday night at the Washington Hilton, made repeated references to President Donald Trump without naming him directly and alluded to grievances over a range of administration actions,” The AP reported.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Sunday that it appeared that the shooter had “set out to target folks who work in the administration, likely including the president.”

HuffPost has not independently reviewed any writings purported to be from the suspect in Saturday night’s attack.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025