remark

TV presenter’s apology slammed after ‘insensitive’ Ann Widdecombe remark on air

Carole Malone has hit out at Adam Boulton after the former Sky News presenter described Ann Widdecombe as a ‘spinster’ and ‘old maid’ on live television.

A former Sky News star has been criticised for comments he made about Ann Widdecombe by broadcaster Carole Malone.

The former Conservative politician and Reform UK spokesperson’s death aged 78 was announced on Friday, July 10. It was confirmed she was found dead at her Devon home the day before after sustaining serious injuries.

While her agents released a statement paying tribute, no cause of death has been given, and a police investigation has been ongoing. In the days that have followed her death, headlines have been focused on the investigation across all major news outlets.

However, one presenter has been slammed for his comments, and later issued an apology. Adam Boulton had described Strictly Come Dancing star Ann as a “spinster” and an “old maid”.

He said on Sky News: “She was very much a spinster, by the end I think you’d probably describe her as an old maid. Reportedly, she claimed that she was a virgin.”

After his comments on live TV, Boulton issued an apology, saying: “I was seriously wrong and insensitive in one of the several media appearances I made yesterday in reaction to the death of Ann Widdecombe. I got the timing and tone of my initial word portrait of her wrong.

“Of course I shared, and share, the horror at her murder and the respect for her remarkable and feisty political career. I also know that many people loved her for her subsequent showbiz stardom. Her untimely death is a horrible thing.

“My mistaken view was that in the context of rolling news coverage, I was being asked to contribute as an obituarist who has known her and interacted with her since the 1980s. This approach was premature.

“At no point was I expressing my personal feelings about her, that’s not what I do. I was discussing her life in the round, based on the record of known facts and what she has said about herself, along with some recollections of our personal interactions. My choice of words on the spur of the moment was clumsy. I did not intend to offend though obviously I did.”

Boulton went on to call himself a freelance contributor, and said he was “freely” issuing the apology after confessing “I got this badly wrong”. He also apologised to Sky News and Times Radio for the “unwarranted” criticism the outlets received over his “mistake”.

Among the criticism he has received, Carole Malone lashed out, writing on X: “You’re a very clever man. How could you not have known what you were saying as it was coming out of your mouth. Or are you really so lacking in compassion and sensitivity? Your apology is not so much about Ann but more about you saving your various work contracts.”

Malone elsewhere wrote on X, unrelated to Boulton’s apology: “All those cretinous savages gleefully celebrating the brutal murder of Ann Widdecombe – a 78 year old lady who spent her last moments on this earth in abject terror – there’s a special place in Hell for you all. The universe has a way of coming for morons like you!”

Mirror has approached Boulton’s representative for a comment. The latest from the investigation into Ann Widdecombe’s death has seen the police arrest a 28-year-old white British man in Rotherham, South Yorkshire.

Counter Terrorism Policing South East has said “new information and evidence has come to light” as they are leading the investigation. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood also issued a statement saying: “The police are pursuing multiple lines of enquiry to establish the motivation for this attack. I will be updating the House further this afternoon.”

Source link

U.S. analyst’s missed remark surfaced in Iran school strike inquiry

An analyst’s missed remarks and U.S. intelligence systems that weren’t connected to one another are among the missteps that investigators have surfaced while probing the cause of a missile strike on an Iranian school that killed an estimated 120 children, people familiar with the matter said.

Years before the U.S. attacked Iran at the end of February, an intelligence analyst examining information about potential future strike targets in Iran noticed changes at a site the U.S. had previously characterized as a naval facility belonging to the elite wing of the Iranian military in Minab city in the southeast of the country. It was, in fact, now an elementary school.

The analyst remarked on changes at the site in a digital intelligence tool, but that tool wasn’t linked up to the official intelligence database that the U.S. uses to develop strike targets and the information was never conveyed to military commanders, according to people familiar with the matter who declined to be named discussing sensitive topics.

On Feb. 28, when President Trump announced the start of major combat operations against Iran, a missile struck the school. The attack killed an estimated 120 children, and nearly 200 people in all, representing the worst incident of civilian harm resulting from U.S. operations in decades.

The analyst’s remarks, which one of the people familiar with the matter said were submitted in 2019, were never heeded, and the same building was reviewed several more times over the following years without anyone updating the targeting database. These discoveries are among the issues explored in a Pentagon investigation into the school strike, the people said. The results of the probe have not been publicly released.

A Pentagon official said the incident remains under investigation and that the agency has no updates to provide. On Wednesday, Trump said it may not ever be possible to determine fault and that he doesn’t think the U.S. was to blame.

The details unearthed as part of the Pentagon investigation underscore long-standing weaknesses in the U.S. military’s targeting system, one that was supposed to be improved years ago. Upgrades have instead been beset by delays, and yet they’ve grown all the more urgent with the spread of AI. Some tout the technology as a possible solution to targeting woes while others worry it could scale and accelerate the harms of war.

The investigation into the school strike was submitted in April but remains under review at U.S. Central Command, the military theater and combatant command known as Centcom that is responsible for carrying out combat operations against Iran, according to one of the people familiar with the matter.

Centcom commander Brad Cooper, a four-star Navy admiral, ordered the investigation and appointed an Air Force general from outside the command with the intention of ensuring a thorough, independent review, the person said.

The analyst’s written remarks about the school, the fact that they were entered into a digital system in 2019 that wasn’t connected to the official intelligence database and the current status of the investigation into the strike have not been previously reported. The New York Times had previously reported that an analyst noticed the building appeared to be a school several years ago and informed one other person. Targeting officials were using imagery that hadn’t been updated in seven years, according to the Times.

There are significant and long-standing gaps in how the Pentagon analyzes potential strike targets, according to former senior intelligence officials and others familiar with the matter. They declined to be named to discuss sensitive matters.

At least two intelligence database systems used for inputting remarks based on imagery, for example, have historically not been connected to the official and authoritative targeting database, people familiar with the platforms said, creating a coordination challenge that continues today.

In some cases during the mid-2010s, targeting data for historically low-priority locations where the U.S. had little historical battle experience, such as Syria, proved to be 10 or 20 years old, according to one of the former senior intelligence officials. Some intelligence staff worked double shifts and weekends at that time to manually update the system.

Starting in 2017, the intelligence enterprise undertook a similar effort to update several thousands of outdated targets in North Korea after relations between Washington and Pyongyang rapidly deteriorated, people familiar with the matter said, calling in satellites and other efforts to capture new, clear imagery as well as other types of intelligence. It took more than a year to update critical targeting information.

A legacy database known as MIDB was created in the 1980s and often relies on manual input. The Pentagon plans to replace MIDB with a machine-assisted version known as MARS that will introduce more automation.

A recently revised Pentagon doctrine outlined the challenges of integrating the many systems used to identify military targets: “The process of targeting occurs on many levels and in many locations simultaneously, yet no single interoperable solution has emerged or been established,” according to the non-public targeting document revised in April and reviewed by Bloomberg. “The entire joint targeting enterprise should seamlessly share well-understood, standardized representations of target intelligence and data and not rely on local databases.”

The MIDB and MARS systems are now both in use, but the effort to shift entirely to MARS is years behind schedule, and authoritative targeting data still relies on MIDB, according to the targeting doctrine.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office in 2020, during Trump’s first term, described MIDB as having “long-standing deficiencies” and said it’s “unable to meet current needs.” And yet six years later, the Pentagon’s targeting doctrine still describes the system as the authoritative, all-source repository of worldwide general military and target intelligence, serving as the national database for all target lists and no-strike lists and a baseline source of intelligence on installations, facilities, military forces and population concentrations.

The characterizations of MIDB in the Pentagon’s latest targeting doctrine haven’t been previously reported.

The hope of some targeting experts is that linking digital systems and more AI will bring down targeting errors in future. An automated check against public sites such as Google Maps, for example, may help flag an anomaly for human review. The Pentagon introduced an agentic AI effort along these lines Thursday.

The Defense Intelligence Agency, an agency responsible for both MIDB and MARS didn’t directly address a request from Bloomberg for comment on MIDB’s deficiencies, delays in the MARS transition or the mislabeled school site. An agency spokesperson said its foundational military intelligence analysts conduct comprehensive analysis of infrastructure and the operational environment, drawing on all intelligence sources to produce expert intelligence analysis and produce and maintain foundational military intelligence.

Such sources can span not only satellite pictures and other imagery analysis, but also signals intelligence, human intelligence and more, the spokesperson said. Combatant commands rely on expert analytic support from these all-source analysts for operational planning and execution, including intelligence for targeting, the spokesperson said.

“DIA works in close coordination with combatant commands and Intelligence Community partners to ensure decisionmakers have the best available intelligence for our national security,” the spokesperson said in a written comment.

Under the latest U.S. targeting doctrine, military commanders are responsible for the decision to prioritize and strike a target. Along with planners, commanders are also required to distinguish between military objectives and civilian ones that are not lawful military objectives for lethal targeting.

A combatant command should establish guidance to mitigate civilian injuries and consider criteria for positive identification of a target, according to an updated section of the Pentagon’s targeting doctrine. A spokesperson for the Joint Staff, the Pentagon’s senior military staff, described that section as a “key update.”

Once a combatant command such as Centcom has assembled a target list, the joint-force commander may also initiate an additional “optional process” called target vetting to assess the accuracy of the intelligence behind the targeting, according to joint targeting doctrine reviewed by Bloomberg. As part of this process, officials would review any potential disagreements about the characterization of a target and any new imagery, the former senior intelligence officials familiar with the process said.

It would be “unthinkable” for a commander not to undertake this target vetting process for attacks planned on the opening day of a new military campaign, one of the former senior intelligence officials said. Centcom vetted targets leading up to the operations against Iran, according to the person familiar with the matter. It wasn’t clear, however, whether Centcom initiated the optional vetting process that would’ve required coordination across intelligence community agencies and a recheck of the underlying information and possibly any new imagery.

Centcom didn’t respond to Bloomberg’s request for comment on the target vetting. A spokesperson for the Joint Staff declined to comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

Jack Shanahan, a former Pentagon director for defense intelligence and retired three-star Air Force general, said there is no excuse for a combatant command to not review and validate the accuracy of information provided for every targeting package. Combatant commanders have the ultimate responsibility for validating the accuracy of targets, he said.

Shanahan described targeting in an interview as a “moribund career field” that had atrophied over two decades while the U.S. military focused on counterterrorism and counterinsurgency in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks instead of traditional combat operations. In 2017, he said, he struggled to recruit and fill targeting roles. “We knew there was a dangerous shortage in the number of trained and experienced targeting personnel and weapons effects experts,” he said. “We also knew this would become a major problem in future conventional operations.”

In the days following the Iran school strike, Trump accused Iran of conducting the attack, though he has offered no evidence. Last week, Trump said “mistakes are made and war is nasty” when asked about the strike, committed to releasing the findings of the investigation and added that he’ll accept the results.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in mid-March that the investigation “will take as long as necessary to address all the matters surrounding the incident” and that his department would “share it when we have it, absolutely.”

Dozens of members of Congress have since demanded answers about what happened. The group Human Rights Activists in Iran said it’s documented the killings of more than 1,700 civilians in the first month of the war.

Emily Tripp, director of the nonprofit group Airwars, a watchdog that logs civilian harm in conflict zones, said that her group had tracked 300 incidents of civilian harm in Iran but that it was difficult to untangle whether the U.S. or Israel was responsible for them. Trump’s own claims on social media about the U.S. being behind some attacks has made it easier for Airwars to pursue accountability, she said.

Tripp said her group refers each incident to Centcom for review. The Defense Department is behind on “every single one of their commitments when it comes to civilian protection,” she said. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment on this specific allegation.

Bob Ashley, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the first Trump administration, is among those calling on the Pentagon to publish the results of the investigation.

“Americans know that over 100 children were killed in this strike. We need to talk to them about what happened, because their trust and confidence in us, as the Department of Defense, and as an intelligence community, matters,” Ashley said in an interview.

In a military career spanning 36 years, Ashley helped train generals, was a former commander and senior intelligence officer at the Joint Special Operations Command and Central Command and currently sits on several advisory boards for companies focused on national security.

“We have an obligation to explain the targeting process, how we apply the criteria of the laws of armed conflict and review targets to be transparent to sustain that level of trust and understanding with the American people,” Ashley said.

He said the intelligence community needs to look at what happened, scrutinize their process and ask itself: “What can we do better? What did we miss?”

Manson writes for Bloomberg.

Source link

Good Morning Britain hit with 500 Ofcom complaints after Susanna’s World Cup remark

The ITV daytime programme has been hit with hundreds of Ofcom complaints from fuming viewers.

Good Morning Britain has been hit with hundreds of Ofcom complaints after comments made by Susanna Reid were slammed by viewers.

The programme has received 508 complaints about the show that aired on June 9, the watchdog reported.

In a statement sent to The Daily Mirror, Ofcom confirmed the “complaints related to comments made during a discussion about the Scottish World Cup Bank Holiday”.

Good Morning Britain that day had seen Ed Balls and co-host Susanna discuss the news that Scotland would receive a Bank Holiday for qualifying for the World Cup.

Ed had said on the ITV daytime show: “This morning, in our five o’clock meeting, Susanna said, ‘I can’t believe this, the game’s on the Sunday morning, and they get bank holiday [more than] 24 hours later.’

“I said, ‘What?’ I couldn’t believe it. It never occurred to me that that was going on.”

Responding to viewers’ reactions, Susanna said, “It’s really outrageous. I mean, how long does it take Scots to get over the fact that they’ve played their first match?”

Viewers had been left fuming after hearing, with Susanna later issuing an apology.

One had seethed: “So many anti-Scottish comments from your presenters and guests this morning. Do you realise your show is shown on Scottish television? Unfortunately.”

Another blasted: “Extremely anti-Scottish. Not everyone is getting it, and not everyone wants it. I don’t even like football, but thought your comments were uncalled for!!!”

Yet another seething viewer said, “Not everyone is getting it. Jumping on the anti-Scotland bandwagon, I see.”

ITV also released a statement following the backlash, which read, as per The National Scot: “The editorial team feel discussion of the fact that some football fans would be drinking alcohol while watching the match is something that would be referenced in the discussion of any home nation’s participation in an international tournament.

“No sleight was intended toward Scottish fans in particular – it was more a reflection of football watching culture in the UK.”

It went on: “We’re aware this coverage has been distorted on social media by brief edited clips that do not represent the full four-minute discussion. Having reviewed the full segments, our feeling is that the issue of drinking and football would have been raised in a discussion of any home nation having an extra day off work following a game. We do note, however, that such discussions can play into national stereotypes. This was not the intention, and in no way was the focus of the discussion.”

The publication noted that ITV also said that the Good Morning Britain editorial team had taken on board “concerns about Ofcom’s rules relating to generally accepted standards, due accuracy and due impartiality, but taking into account the light-hearted nature of the news review discussion and the discussion that followed later in the programme, consider that the programme was in line with Ofcom’s standards”.

Susanna later issued an apology, admitting she had left fans “irate” and being accused of “jealousy”.

After welcoming two Scottish broadcasters on the programme earlier this week, who questioned Susanna on her comments, the former BBC Breakfast star said: “My Scottish ancestors would be turning in their graves, I can only apologise.

“Let me say, it’s outrageous that not everyone in Scotland has got today off as a bank holiday.”

Good Morning Britain airs weekdays from 6am on ITV1 and ITVX.

Source link

Hegseth invokes immigration and ‘invasion’ in D-day speech in France

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a D-day anniversary speech Saturday that appeared to link immigration by sea to the wartime liberation of Europe, warning that the freedom won by Allied troops could prove temporary if leaders failed to defend it against today’s “invasion.”

Hegseth, speaking at the Normandy American Cemetery in Colleville-sur-Mer overlooking Omaha Beach in northwestern France during commemorations for the 82nd anniversary of the June 6, 1944, landings, said that today, “different European beaches are stormed by different dangerous ideologies.”

“Beaches in Spain and Italy and Greece and Bulgaria. Boats and men arrive,” he said.

“When will European capitals do something about that invasion? Or is it too late?” he added. “I pray not, and I believe not.”

Hegseth did not use the word “immigration,” but his remarks echoed broader Trump administration criticism of Europe over migration, borders and what U.S. officials have described as censorship of nationalist and far-right voices.

On Saturday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office condemned Vice President JD Vance’s remarks blaming immigration for the killing of Henry Nowak, an 18-year-old British student stabbed to death in Southampton, even though both Nowak and his killer were British.

In December, the Trump administration’s national security strategy warned that Europe faced the “prospect of civilizational erasure” and could become “unrecognizable” within 20 years.

Source link

King Charles to address Congress as U.S.-British ties face rare strain

King Charles III will address a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, becoming the second British monarch in history to do so as the United States commemorates the 250th anniversary of its independence from England.

The king’s address, the centerpiece of a four-day state visit, comes at a moment of unusual strain between Washington and London. President Trump has repeatedly clashed with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer over the United States’ war with Iran, derided the British government’s refusal to commit forces to the conflict and even mocked the Royal Navy’s battleships as “toys.”

At a welcome ceremony for the king and Queen Camilla at the White House, Trump struck a more appreciative tone, describing the relationship between the two nations as a centuries-old “cherished bond.”

“Long before Americans had a nation or a Constitution, we first had a culture, a character and a creed,” the president said. “Before we ever proclaimed our independence, Americans carried within us the rarest of gifts — moral courage — and it came from a small but mighty kingdom from across the sea.”

Trump said that some may think it is “ironic” to honor the British king during celebrations of America’s independence, but argued the tribute “could not be more appropriate.”

“Americans have had no closer friends than the British,” Trump said. “We share the same root. We speak the same language. We hold the same values. And together, our warriors have defended the same extraordinary civilization under twin banners of red, white and blue.”

Trump said he will not be attending the king’s remarks at the Capitol due to security protocols, but said he planned to watch from afar. He did not elaborate on any security concerns, but the decision comes in the aftermath of a shooting at the White House correspondents’ dinner in which authorities said Trump was a likely target.

Following the welcome ceremony, the king joined Trump in the Oval Office for a closed-door bilateral meeting.

The president appeared to be enjoying the visit. He told the crowd at the White House that his late mother “loved” the royal family and watched their events on television. The president even joked his mother had a “crush” on the king when he was younger.

“I wonder what’s she’s thinking right now,” he said.

Earlier in the day, Trump posted on Truth Social that he planned to raise with the king and queen a media report suggesting his family roots may be tied to the royal family, a prospect he appeared to find amusing.

“I’ve always wanted to live in Buckingham Palace!!!” the president said in the post.

The king is scheduled to address Congress at 3 p.m. EDT. He is expected to delivered prepared remarks about the two nations’ shared history and their enduring diplomatic ties, while offering measured acknowledgment to the tensions defining the current moment.

The only precedent for an address by a British monarch was 35 years ago, when Queen Elizabeth II addressed a joint session of Congress in 1991. The timing of her address came after the end of the Gulf War.

How the king will address the current geopolitical tensions, including the Iran war and Trump’s threats to leave the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, remains to be seen.

But hanging over the king’s visit is the shadow of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), one of the most vocal lawmakers pushing for the release of the Epstein files, last month requested that the king privately meet with some of the women who were sexually abused by the late financier.

The request was made in a letter to Buckingham Palace. In it, Khanna noted that the Epstein scandal extended to Britain, where the king’s brother, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, was tied to the alleged misconduct.

In February, the former Prince Andrew was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office related to his links to Epstein, marking the first time in nearly four centuries that a senior British royal was criminally apprehended.

But the king declined to meet directly with the survivors, Khanna said in an MS NOW interview on Tuesday morning. The California Democrat said he expects the king to address the issue during his remarks to Congress.

Source link

India denounces ‘hellhole’ remark shared by Trump | Donald Trump News

India’s Foreign Ministry says comments by US radio host Michael Savage, circulated by Trump, are ‘uninformed’.

Comments shared by United States President Donald Trump referring to India as a “hellhole” were “in poor taste” and at odds with the countries’ relationship, an Indian official has said.

Trump did not make the remark himself, but reposted it without comment on his Truth Social account on Thursday. The statement came from conservative radio host Michael Savage.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Criticising US birthright citizenship – which Trump has sought to restrict – Savage said, “A baby here becomes an instant citizen, and then they bring the entire family in from China or India or some other hellhole on the planet.”

Reacting late on Thursday, India’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said the remark was “obviously uninformed, inappropriate and in poor taste”.

The comments “certainly do not ⁠reflect the reality of the India-US relationship, which has long been based on mutual respect and shared interests”, Jaiswal added.

The US Embassy in New Delhi said, “The president has said ‘India is a great country with a very good friend of mine at the top’.”

China’s Foreign Ministry did not immediately comment on the matter.

‘Hurts every Indian’

India’s main opposition Congress party called the “hellhole” remark “extremely insulting and anti-India. It hurts every Indian”.

“Prime Minister ⁠Narendra Modi should take up this matter with the US President ⁠and register a strong objection,” the party said on X.

Indian government data shows nearly 5.5 million people of Indian origin live in the US. Indian Americans and Chinese Americans are the biggest groups of Asian origin in the US.

Savage’s comment, shared by Trump, continued: “There’s almost no loyalty to this country amongst the immigrant class coming in today, ‌which was not always the case. No, they’re not like the European Americans of today and their ancestors.”

Trump and Modi enjoyed ‌warm ties during Trump’s first term, but relations cooled after India was hit last year with some of the highest US tariffs, many of which were rolled back this year.

India and the US are ‌now ‌working on a trade deal aimed at preventing any renewed tariff increases and boosting sales to each other.

Trump has repeatedly used insulting language to refer to foreign nations and immigrant communities, including recently calling Somali immigrants “garbage”.

In 2018, Trump made global headlines for referring to El Salvador, Haiti and African nations as “s**thole countries”.

Source link