Politics
Emma Best: Wets, nutters and everything in between
Emma Best is a London wide London Assembly Member and a councillor in Waltham Forest.
I have always been amused by the left’s obsession with ideological purity. Momentum at war with Labour more often than with their opposition, Keir Starmer dismissed as a right-wing plant and Jeremy Corbyn accosted at the Your Party Conference for being too pro-Israel. All symptoms of a mindset which allows for zero compromise and rationalisation.
It is these instances of intolerance of thought that have always made me proud, and somewhat relieved, to be a Conservative. I enjoy being a part of a City Hall and Council group that are representative of a broad church of centre-right opinion. I want to campaign for candidates even if they have fundamental differences to me on some policy areas as I (and the vast majority of Conservatives) understand that we agree on 80-90 per cent of life’s core questions and are not each other’s enemy.
We’ve watched the left tear each other apart time and time again; fighting in factions with a more visceral hatred for those in their own circles than outside.
It frustrates me therefore that we are falling into this trap. Increasingly I see good Tories dismissed as ‘wets’ or ‘nutters’. Not in a jovial way, but in a concerted bid to distance ourselves from each other. This attitude might fulfil left wing ideals of political purity but it won’t win elections. If some on the right want this approach fine; but let it not come from us.
These assessments are also flawed. We are humans after all, with a complex myriad of evolving and sometimes conflicting opinions. Without long and personal discussions assertions of others political compass are a stab in the dark.
The fact of the matter is when you look at our recent successes the political personalities are diverse. In Scotland success came through the charisma of Ruth Davidson, in shires and rural villages we owe much to those that espouse traditional values like Jacob Rees-Mogg and in the West Midlands the pragmatism of Andy Street. Of course, the first-time Tory voter of 2019 was often successfully attracted by stoic Brexiteers like Mark Francois, Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Steve Baker, David Davis (and yes, Boris Johnson).
Do not dismiss these politicians as wet liberals or right-wing nutters. They are all pillars of conservatism.
It is easy to acknowledge where scepticism of broad church values arises from though. In the 2015 General Election a key pledge of the Conservative manifesto (against the backdrop of overwhelming euro scepticism) was a Brexit referendum. To stand as a Tory at that election without realising you may have to enact a decision to leave the EU would have been idiotic. The alternative, willingly standing knowing you wouldn’t, is much, much worse. This is a mistake Kemi Badenoch has certainly learned from by making it clear that any candidate at the next election will have to agree to leaving the ECHR. Clearly on key manifesto pledges, with substantial public mandate, there are red lines of agreement.
As Badenoch gradually makes inroads in both popularity and the polls many would do well to remember TikTok likes don’t win elections. Vibes or radical opinions court engagement but there are no prizes for proving an undying allegiance to one nation conservatism, Thatcherism or popularism. The only prize is winning elections and serving the people of Britain. We can only do that together.
What do you call a government that cancels elections, cracks down on free speech and curtails the right to trial by jury? Illiberal? Authoritarian? Autocratic, even? Because until a screeching u-turn yesterday, Keir Starmer’s Labour government was hell-bent on all of the above.
The UK prime minister has now conceded that local elections in 30 English councils will actually have to go ahead in May, reversing an earlier decision to delay them to 2027. Had the elections been cancelled, 4.6million people would have been deprived of their right to vote for their local councillors. Elections in five county councils – West Sussex, East Sussex, Suffolk, Norfolk and Surrey – would have been delayed twice, with councillors there serving seven-year terms. Such a denial of democracy would have been unprecedented in peacetime.
The ‘official’ reason given by the government for delaying local elections was that many of the seats up for grabs will soon be abolished. Under a planned shake-up of English local government, new unitary authorities will replace the current two-tier system of district and county councils. But this was never a compelling reason to cancel elections. As the Electoral Commission warned, the bar for postponing elections needs to be ‘very high’ and that Labour’s excuses were nowhere near ‘sufficient’.
Of course, by now every man and his canine companion knows the real reason Starmer was so eager to postpone these elections: he was running scared of the voters – and especially of Reform UK. Polling by JL Partners suggests Labour could now shed half of the council seats it’s defending in May, and lose majority control over around 10 councils. In the areas where elections were almost postponed, Reform is polling at 28 per cent, with the Tories on 21 per cent and Labour facing a humiliating 17 per cent.
That these elections will now go ahead is certainly a relief, but the threat to democracy from Labour is far from over. After all, it was only thanks to Reform launching a legal challenge – which government lawyers conceded they were bound to lose – that these democracy-dodging tactics have been stopped in their tracks. Starmer may have backed down, yes, but he has not suddenly discovered some hitherto-hidden democratic principles. And aside from the u-turn on local elections, Starmer’s war on the hard-won rights of British citizens is roaring ahead at pace.
Among the most egregious plans is the PM’s ‘Brexit reset’. Starmer likes to present this as a pragmatic, progressive attempt to seek closer, more amicable ties with our European neighbours. In truth, it involves the wholesale transfer of decision-making powers from the UK’s elected parliament to the unelected bureaucracy in Brussels. It is a brazen attempt to roll back the EU referendum result – the largest democratic vote in British history.
Then there is Labour’s assault on jury trials – a liberty so ancient it was enshrined in Magna Carta. That great foundational text of English liberty states with absolute clarity: ‘No free man shall be seized or imprisoned… except by the lawful judgement of his peers.’ But perhaps we are not free men in Starmer’s Britain?
Certainly, our freedom to speak has been beaten to within an inch of its life. Thirty people per day are arrested in England and Wales for saying things online that police deem ‘grossly offensive’ – that’s 12,000 arrests per year, more than America was arresting at the height of the first Red Scare. Meanwhile, the Online Safety Act – passed under the Tories, but implemented and embraced by Labour – has blocked vast swathes of the internet from British eyeballs, including social-media posts about gender ideology and asylum hotels, a speech in parliament about the rape gangs, and an irreverent article about the plummeting popularity of the Christian name ‘Keir’. Without the right to speak freely, the liberty to debate and test ideas (or simply to take the piss out of politicians), we have democracy in name only.
None of this should surprise us, of course. As Labour’s Brexit spokesperson in opposition, Starmer led the elites’ reactionary crusade to overturn the Leave vote and crush the democratic aspirations of 17.4million people. His illiberal, anti-democratic instincts even came to the fore before he even entered politics. As director of public prosecutions, between 2008 and 2013, Starmer weakened the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. He pursued ‘speech criminals’ in the courts with particular zealotry, from Paul Chambers, accused of telling a joke on Twitter, to 30 journalists who were later all found innocent, mostly from the Sun. Then as now, free speech and liberty withered on Starmer’s watch.
Luckily for us, Starmer is not nearly wily or dogged enough to make good on all of his worst, anti-democratic impulses. The local-elections u-turn reminds us that while he may be authoritarian, he is also mercifully inept. We are blessed to be lumbered with such a useless enemy.
Fraser Myers is deputy editor at spiked and host of the spiked podcast. Follow him on X: @FraserMyers.
The post Aberdeen is being ravaged by Net Zero lunacy appeared first on spiked.
Strikes by more than 200 Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) workers have ended with a pay victory, trade union Unite has announced.
The workers, who undertake vital roles including ticketing, passenger assistance and information services for the bus network, voted to accept the deal following intensive negotiations.
Pay rises across the board
The deal includes a pay uplift of at least 3.2 per cent backdated to April 2025 for all staff, plus a non-consolidated payment of up to £1,000. Workers on lower bands will see pay rise to at least £15.10 an hour. This will result in wage increases of between 6.4 and 11.1 per cent.
Pay for all staff will increase again from April 2026 by at least three per cent.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said:
A huge well done to Unite’s members at TfGM. They know that collective action works and by standing together and taking strike action they achieved this excellent pay deal.
This is yet another example of Unite’s unrelenting focus on improving jobs, pay and conditions paying dividends for our members.
The deal also sees increases in standby payments, shift pattern improvements and new union recognition and facility time agreements. ‘Facility time’ is where staff get paid time away from their normal role to carry out union work.
The workers began striking in October 2025 and took 18 days of industrial action in total.
Unite regional officer Samantha Marshall said:
This deal could not have been achieved without the hard work and dedication of our reps and members. As this result shows, those wanting better wages and working conditions should join Unite and get their colleagues to join as well.
Featured image via the Canary
Nigel Farage announced the Reform UK shadow cabinet today, with former Tories taking front and centre. This is despite the fact that Reform UK has just eight MPs, so is in no need of a shadow cabinet.
As the racist party are not the official opposition, so they don’t get to name a shadow cabinet. But, why would the facts stop Farage? At a flashy event reminiscent of an American election campaign, Farage announced the first members of his “shadow cabinet”.
New Tory cabinet for Reform
And surprise, surprise, it’s full of Tories
Robert Jenrick has been named as their shadow chancellor. Jenrick defected from the Tory party last month and has stolen the role from both Richard Tice and Zia Yusuf.
Jenrick, who lost the Tory leadership to its current leader, Kemi Badenoch, is expected to give a speech outlining his economic plan sometime this week. By that point, he might’ve actually come up with one.
The most recent Tory defector, Suella Braverman, will take on more than one role. As well as education and skills, she will also handle equalities. Though this is Reform, so that means she’ll be hellbent on destroying any sort of equality. Namely, she wants to get rid of the Equality Act.
Richard Tice isn’t too glum about being sidelined as Chancellor. As well as deputy leader, he’ll now be ‘in charge of’ (and we use that term loosely) business, trade, and energy. His biggest focus is on getting rid of net-zero targets to focus on oil and gas.
And then finally, we have Zia Yusuf as Reform’s ‘home secretary’. Again, there’s a heavy use of quotation marks here, because they aren’t the shadow cabinet or opposition.
Definitely not a one-man band
One person noticeably missing was Reform laughing stock Lee Anderson. Ol’ 30p will apparently remain as “chief whip”, but it’s interesting he wasn’t announced for a welfare role when he’s apparently been their “welfare spokesperson” for months now.
Presumably it’s because he can’t so much as move without making a fool of himself. Most recently, he was mocked for campaigning in the wrong place,
As well as no DWP “shadow” minister, there was no health secretary announced. This surely shows what Reform’s priorities are. You can only assume this is because Reform are so snugly in private healthcare’s pockets.
Farage said a big reason for naming a “cabinet” was so the world didn’t see Reform as a “one man band”. Which would be more believable if he wasn’t constantly fucking everywhere. But then it’s not like he’s got many people to sub in is it?
Despite apparently not wanting to be the star of the show, Farage announced each member of his cabinet in the centre of a big stand at a podium. Instead of letting them speak at his podium, they all had their own smaller podiums. These were also, naturally, slightly further back.
Reform are not to be taken seriously
The naming of Reform’s shadow cabinet confused a lot of people, but probably none more so than 30p Lee Anderson. Just three weeks ago, Anderson rebuffed rumours of an almost correctly predicted shadow cabinet.
When a Tory, Luke Robert Black, remarked that this was “savage” towards Anderson, he replied
Thicko alert. We cannot possibly have a shadow cabinet, we have spokespersons. I was made DWP Spokesperson last year. Carry on being a useful idiot for the Tory party, but you won’t get that safe seat you want. They’re laughing at you.
This tweet is currently still up, but let’s see how long it lasts. Instead of addressing this, Anderson tweeted this afternoon that the new cabinet was “the Beginnings of a World Class Team.”
This latest announcement from Reform UK is just the latest in the long line of them assuming they have any sort of authority or power in Westminster.
More than anything, it shows how entitled they all are. But to the country it’s just another silly stunt by Farage, and even more reason to not take Reform seriously.
Featured image via the Canary
Harry Potter newcomer Johnny Flynn is addressing the backlash surrounding JK Rowling after he accepted a role in the latest adaptation of her novels.
Johnny is set to play Lucius Malfoy in HBO’s new Harry Potter TV show, which will dedicate one season to each of Rowling’s books.
Since the project was announced, several cast members have received backlash for accepting roles in the series due to the author’s involvement as an executive producer, as she has become a polarising figure in recent years due to her commentary on issues relating to transgender people.
This has included – but is not limited to – deliberately and repeatedly misgendering transgender public figures, and donating tens of thousands of pounds to the campaign group which raised the initial legal challenge that led to the UK Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling that the legal definition of a woman should include only those who were assigned female at birth.
During a recent interview with The Hollywood Reporter, Johnny was asked about the new Harry Potter series and raised the issue of Rowling himself.
“Obviously, there’s quite a lot of stuff around Jo Rowling,” he began. “I suppose that’s been quite interesting to navigate, the conversations there – but all important conversations to have.
“The people working on this are really, really great and create a really special atmosphere, [like] Francesca [Gardiner] the showrunner, and Mark Mylod and various directors. There’s such care.”
He pointed out that his character is “hardly in book one”, meaning his appearances in season one are limited, although he insisted the show has “such a welcoming environment” on set.
Among the prolific names already cast in the Harry Potter series are John Lithgow as Albus Dumbledore, Nick Frost as Rubeus Hagrid and Paapa Essiedu as Severus Snape.
Shortly after John’s casting was announced, the two-time Oscar nominee admitted he was “absolutely not” expecting the backlash he received for accepting the role of Dumbledore, pondering: “I wonder how JK Rowling has absorbed it. I suppose at a certain point I’ll meet her and I’m curious to talk to her.”
More recently, the Conclave star told The Hollywood Reporter of the controversy: “I take the subject and the issue extremely seriously.
“JK Rowling has created this amazing canon for young people, young kids’ literature that has jumped into the consciousness of society. Young and old people love Harry Potter and the Harry Potter stories. It’s so much about acceptance. It’s about good versus evil. It’s about kindness versus cruelty. It’s deeply felt.”
He added that, because of this, he found Rowling expressing “such views” on transgender people both “ironic and somewhat inexplicable”.
Meanwhile, after ruffling feathers with his own casting, Nick Frost insisted last year that his and Rowling’s views on the trans community are markedly different.
“She’s allowed her opinion and I’m allowed mine,” he insisted. “They just don’t align in any way, shape or form.”
Crisis-hit UK PM Keir Starmer is fast-tracking gigantic spikes in war spending. He says it is to defend the country. In reality, Starmer is yet again sucking up to US president Donald Trump. The UK government needs to get its head out of 1997 for all our sakes.
Starmer wants £14bn a year spent on war and the military. That is to say, £14bn more going into the pockets of arms firms and their fellow travelers.
The Guardian reported:
At the Munich Security Conference at the weekend, Starmer argued for higher and more sustained defence spending to meet the threat from Russia. “We must build our hard power because that is the currency of our age,” he said. “We must spend more, deliver more and coordinate more.”
Currently the UK spends 2.3% of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence. The increase would take that figure up to 2.6%.
But it could go higher still:
The BBC said No 10 was considering an increase to 3% of GDP by the end of this parliament in 2029 to meet Starmer’s ambition, although it is unclear if this will turn into a concrete plan given the many obstacles.
Politico explained the rate of acceleration:
Featured image via the Canary
Marvel’s latest hit TV show follows the story of Simon Williams (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), an aspiring actor struggling in the entertainment industry who’s desperate to star in a major remake of his favourite childhood superhero film, Wonder Man.
Simon meets fellow actor Trevor Slattery (Sir Ben Kingsley), and the pair strike up a friendship as they attempt to bag themselves life-changing roles in the new film.
The pair get into a few scrapes throughout the series, and we see Simon struggling with anxiety, his racing thoughts and emotions getting the better of him.
In one scene, Trevor teaches Simon about the art of “box breathing” to regulate himself, which the actor then continues to utilise throughout the series.
While it’s not a new technique, viewers who weren’t previously familiar with this breathing exercise have now adopted it in their own lives, with positive results – especially when they’re feeling anxious.
What is box breathing?
As the exercise involves holding your breath, Medical News Today notes that people with high blood pressure or who are pregnant should consult a doctor before trying it.
To give it a go, draw a box in your mind – or in the air in front of you with your finger:
- Breathe in for four seconds, while drawing along one side.
- Hold your breath for four seconds, while drawing along the next.
- Breathe out for four seconds, while drawing along the third side.
- Leave your lungs empty while you draw along the fourth side.
Mental health pros are big fans of this breathing technique.
Counselling Directory member Donna Morgan tells HuffPost UK: “Box breathing is one of the simplest and most effective tools I use in my work as an anxiety therapist.
“I smile when clients mention they first saw it on Wonder Man, because popular culture sometimes introduces people to techniques that are genuinely powerful.”
Breathing properly (that is, utilising your lung’s full capacity) has many benefits –it can reduce stress and anxiety levels, slow heart rate, lower blood pressure, and sharpen focus.
Morgan explains that box breathing is effective because it creates balance and predictability, “which is incredibly reassuring for an anxious nervous system”.
“What makes it so effective is not just that it distracts the mind, but that it directly influences physiology. Slow, controlled breathing stimulates the vagus nerve and supports the parasympathetic nervous system, which is responsible for rest and repair,” she shares.
Counselling Directory member Sabah Moran agrees it’s an effective strategy to help regulate stress hormones and activate the parasympathetic nervous system, taking our body back to its ‘rest’ state.
When we are anxious, our fight or flight response is activated leaving us with those classic symptoms: raised heart rate, shallow breathing, sweaty palms and that nauseating feeling in the pit of your stomach.
“The controlling of the breath both in and out, allows the levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide to be back in balance. Adrenaline and cortisol can leave the system,” Moran adds.
Donna Morgan noted that when we consciously slow the breath and create even counts, “we send a clear message to the brain that we are safe”.
“We have the power to do this. Over time, clients learn that they can influence their own state rather than feeling hijacked by it,” she added.
Love box breathing? Try the ‘5,4,3,2,1 method’
In addition to box breathing, both therapists love grounding techniques such as the 5,4,3,2,1 method, which is designed to bring someone out of anxious thinking and back into the present moment by using the senses.
5. Name five things you can see.
4. Notice four things you can feel or touch.
3. Identify three things you can hear.
2. Notice two things you can smell.
1. Name one thing you can taste or one thing you appreciate.
Explaining why it works, Morgan says: “When someone is anxious, the amygdala is activated and the brain is scanning for threat.”
This method redirects attention to neutral sensory data, however. “That shift reduces cognitive spiralling and signals safety to the nervous system. It also engages the prefrontal cortex which supports rational thinking and emotional regulation,” she adds.
“Like box breathing it is simple. We may not be superheroes on screen, but we all have the capacity to influence our own mind and calm our nervous system when we understand how it works.”
Clearly, Trevor is onto something…
All eight episodes of Wonder Man are available to watch on Disney+ now.
Workers at a Cumbria packaging firm will vote on strike action after rejecting an ‘insulting’ pay offer.
Pay offer = pay cut
More than 100 workers at Futamura, in Wigton, turned down the company’s 1.2 per cent pay offer by a majority of 94 per cent. Trade union GMB is demanding a 3.8 per cent pay increase, in line with inflation. This is to ensure members do not suffer yet another real-terms pay cut.
The union has engaged with the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) to help bring the company back to the table.
Futamura makes cellulose film for packaging.
The dispute mirrors other situations where pay has failed to keep pace with inflation. And it comes against a backdrop of long-term “pay depression” going back 20 years.
Michael Hall, GMB Regional Organiser, said:
This 1.2 per cent offer is nothing short of an insult. GMB members have spoken loudly and clearly. Enough is enough. Futamura workers deserve a fair pay rise that simply keeps up with the cost of living.
The company should be listening, not digging in. GMB has been patient and our members have been patient. But Futamura has refused to make a fair and reasonable pay offer.
Featured image via the Canary
Nigel Farage tried to belittle a female journalist during his press conference on Tuesday, instructing her to “write some silly story”.
After announcing the briefs for his spokespeople, the Reform UK took questions from more than two dozen reporters in the room.
The Financial Times’ Anna Gross asked two questions, both of which seemed to rile the MP for Clacton.
She asked about Reform Home Office spokesperson Zia Yusuf’s plans to introduce mass deportations with a US-style ICE force in the UK, and then began a second question by pointing out education spokesperson Suella Braverman went to a school which charges £17,000 a year.
But Farage cut her off to mock the question, saying: “Oh dear, what a terrible human being she must be!”
Gross said, “Not at all” – but pointed out Richard Tice, Yusuf, Robert Jenrick and Farage also went to expensive private schools.
She asked how Reform would respond to voters who fear how committed they are to state education.
Farage said: “I love the FT. It’s fantastic. The day after the big Mandelson story broke, your front story was about a Reform council in Kent, so we’ll leave it at that.”
Actually, the FT has been credited as one of the primary driving forces looking into ex-ambassador to the US Peter Mandelson’s friendship with the dead convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Mandelson once described it as an “FT obsession”.
But Farage pressed on: “We’ll leave it there. There’s no point, just write some silly story tomorrow and have fun with it, we won’t bother to read it. ”
The Reform supporters laughed and applauded at that.
That’s not the first time Farage has hit out at a female journalist.
Farage previously accused Camilla Tominey, from The Telegraph, of playing a “silly little game” back in November when she asked about the make-up of his top team.
She asked Farage: “You say you expect an election in 2027. The fact that Zia Yusuf is here – does that mean he is your preferred candidate for chancellor, not Richard Tice?”
Farage told the reporter that was a good try and it is no wonder she is well-paid, adding: “I’m just not playing your silly little game.”
He also called Bloomberg’s Mishal Husain “love” in an interview last October.
When Farage said any Russian airspaces being flown into Nato airspaces should be shot down, she asks if he is concerned that could “inflame tensions”.
He replied: “Listen love, you’re trying ever so hard. Listen love, you’re trying ever so hard.”
Booker Prize-winning author Arundhati Roy has announced her withdrawal from the Berlin International Film Festival (Berlinale) because of filmmaker Wim Wenders’ “jaw-dropping” comments on Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Roy described Wenders’ comments as “a way of shutting down a conversation about a crime against humanity even as it unfolds before us in real time”. Wenders said at a press conference on 12 February 2026 that the art world should “stay out of politics“:
We have to stay out of politics because if we make movies that are dedicatedly political, we enter the field of politics. [Filmmakers should be] the counterweight of politics, we are the opposite of politics. We have to do the work of people, not the work of politicians.
Arundhati Roy speaks out
The “shocked and disgusted” Roy was unequivocal in her opposition to Wenders’s nonsense:
To hear them say that art should not be political is jaw-dropping,” said Roy in a statement announcing she would be exiting the Berlinale jury. “It is a way of shutting down a conversation about a crime against humanity even as it unfolds before us in real time – when artists, writers and film makers should be doing everything in their power to stop it.
It is, of course, inherently political to say that art should not be political, because silence aids the oppressor. The Israel lobby always attempts to cow politicians, news media, and artists into either silence or active collaboration. All too often it succeeds.
The festival previously marketed itself as the most political major film festival, but capitulated to the Israel lobby after the start of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Humanitarian campaigners called for a boycott of the 2024 festival for its refusal to denounce the genocide and Israel’s other crimes against the Palestinian people.
Roy’s full statement reads:
In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones, a whimsical film that I wrote 38 years ago, was selected to be screened under the Classics section at the Berlinale 2026. There was something sweet and wonderful about this for me.
Although I have been profoundly disturbed by the positions taken by the German government and various German cultural institutions on Palestine, I have always received political solidarity when I have spoken to German audiences about my views on the genocide in Gaza. This is what made it possible for me to think of attending the screening of Annie at the Berlinale.
This morning, like millions of people across the world, I heard the unconscionable statements made by members of the jury of the Berlin film festival when they were asked to comment about the genocide in Gaza. To hear them say that art should not be political is jaw-dropping. It is a way of shutting down a conversation about a crime against humanity even as it unfolds before us in real time – when artists, writers and film makers should be doing everything in their power to stop it.
Let me say this clearly: what has happened in Gaza, what continues to happen, is a genocide of the Palestinian people by the State of Israel. It is supported and funded by the governments of the United States and Germany, as well as several other countries in Europe, which makes them complicit in the crime.
If the greatest film makers and artists of our time cannot stand up and say so, they should know that history will judge them. I am shocked and disgusted.
With deep regret, I must say that I will not be attending the Berlinale.
Arundhati Roy
Featured image via the Canary
Man rushed to hospital after ‘serious assault’ on busy Glasgow street
How Professionals Are Turning TEFL Into a Flexible Freelance Business in 2026
$202 Million Solana Selling Sparks First Capitulation Since 2022
-
Sports6 days agoBig Tech enters cricket ecosystem as ICC partners Google ahead of T20 WC | T20 World Cup 2026
-
Tech7 days agoSpaceX’s mighty Starship rocket enters final testing for 12th flight
-
Video1 day agoBitcoin: We’re Entering The Most Dangerous Phase
-
Tech3 days agoLuxman Enters Its Second Century with the D-100 SACD Player and L-100 Integrated Amplifier
-
Video4 days agoThe Final Warning: XRP Is Entering The Chaos Zone
-
Tech15 hours agoThe Music Industry Enters Its Less-Is-More Era
-
Video10 hours agoFinancial Statement Analysis | Complete Chapter Revision in 10 Minutes | Class 12 Board exam 2026
-
Crypto World6 days agoPippin (PIPPIN) Enters Crypto’s Top 100 Club After Soaring 30% in a Day: More Room for Growth?
-
Crypto World4 days agoBhutan’s Bitcoin sales enter third straight week with $6.7M BTC offload
-
Video6 days agoPrepare: We Are Entering Phase 3 Of The Investing Cycle
-
Crypto World9 hours agoCan XRP Price Successfully Register a 33% Breakout Past $2?
-
Sports16 hours agoGB's semi-final hopes hang by thread after loss to Switzerland
-
NewsBeat2 days agoThe strange Cambridgeshire cemetery that forbade church rectors from entering
-
Business5 days agoBarbeques Galore Enters Voluntary Administration
-
Crypto World7 days agoCrypto Speculation Era Ending As Institutions Enter Market
-
Crypto World5 days agoEthereum Price Struggles Below $2,000 Despite Entering Buy Zone
-
NewsBeat2 days agoMan dies after entering floodwater during police pursuit
-
Politics7 days agoWhy was a dog-humping paedo treated like a saint?
-
NewsBeat3 days agoUK construction company enters administration, records show
-
Crypto World4 days agoBlackRock Enters DeFi Via UniSwap, Bitcoin Stages Modest Recovery