time for a look at the weather. here's ben rich. another stormy night and we have seen some pretty strong gusts already. strongest gusts was on the west coast of wales, 76 mph. but just in the last little while, a gustin just in the last little while, a gust in the outer hebrides of 7a mph, so those wins picking up thanks to storm jocelyn. we have this met office amber warning, could see gusts up to 80 mph through the night and is the first part of the morning. and some really big showers and thunderstorms right now across north—west scotland, some flashes of lightning, some very squally winds, so not at night particularly conducive to sleeping. but as you can see, it is windy forjust about all of us, some very gusty conditions. temperatures overnight won't drop too far, partly because of the strength of the winter. we

start tomorrow with storm jocelyn still very much in charge of our weather. the centre of this area of low pressure tracking to the north of the uk. lots of izabela squeezing together on this chart. still very windy, particularly in scotland and northern england. they will spread time. the wind is slowly easing through the day but to the eastern side of the pennines, we could keep some really gusty conditions right into the afternoon. bear that in mind if you are travelling. however, the winds will slowly ease. not a bad day, some spells of sunshine, showers in the north—west, some cloud gathering in the south later as a frontal system starts to push its way in. this front will work northwards and it brings a lot of cloud with it. some outbreaks of patchy rain. but with that extra cloud, we will see some really mild weather on thursday. this is what logan's life would have been, what our life would have been like. except it would have been even

better because logan would have lived. and been living even more full of life and more himself. this is what you have taken away from me. a bereaved father opens grenfell testimony week. six and half years after the fire, the families of the victims tell of their enduring grief, and demand lasting change in memory of those who died.

before the testimonies, the names of the dead were read out, and then a 72 second silence, one for each of them. we'll speak to two bereaved families and ask whether they feel they've been failed byjustice so far. a breaking story... the mp who was rishi sunak�*s number two at the treasury tries to take him down warning that with sunak at the helm extinction for the tories is a very real possibility. sir simon clarke moves tonight. plenty of bark. but does he have any bite? we have a special investigation into targeted killings in yemen directed by the uae, and carried out on political targets in the country by former us navy seals, now acting as mercenaries. and in the new hampshire primary,

will it be one more step for donald trump towards the white house? we are in manchester new hampshire work nikki haley saying she is not dropping out of the race whatever the result tonight even though it seems the republican nomination is moving in favour of donald trump. good evening. it's almost six and a half years since the grenfell disaster. the building still stands in west london shrouded from view, but for the families who lost loved ones, 72 in all, the pain and loss of that fire is ever present. this week the bereaved have an opportunity to speak directly to the organisations that many hold responsible for the fire and the deaths. in a moment we'll hear from two bereaved family members, paulos, who was in grenfell tower that night and lost his son — and nabil who lost six members of his family in the tragedy. first, kate's here. and kate, it s more than six

years on from the fire. where are we when it comes to justice? there is no clear vision of what justice looks like but three processes are ongoing, the public inquiry trying to understand what happened and make recommendations to government to make sure it does not happen again for that that began in 2018 and is meant to bring a final report around may of this year and then criminal charges whatever they may be, perhaps health and safety breaches, perhaps corporate manslaughter. the metropolitan police have done an investigation alongside the inquiry but agreed not to bring charges until the final report. and then this testimony that is part of the civil case, £150 million of compensation involved but there was also an agreement that the brief families would have a chance to be heard and put that to the defending organisations in this case. and today that started, sandra

talking about her 12—year—old niece who died on the top floor of grenfell tower. in grenfell's case, decisions were made, as i said earlier, for profit, speed, efficiency, greed and almost every other reason but for the benefit of the people these services were intended. and the results were disastrous. if you do not go back to your boardrooms to inspire them to change and make a commitment to memorialise grenfell by making fundamental changes in your business models, by putting people ahead of profits, then this would've all been worthless. you talked about the defendants but who is being addressed by the testimonies this week? fix,

who is being addressed by the testimonies this week? a range of organisations. _ testimonies this week? a range of organisations, some _ testimonies this week? a range ofl organisations, some manufacturers and some construction companies involved in the refurbishment which fitted the cladding. the owners of the building the royal borough of kensington and chelsea, government departments and the london fire brigade but one key organisation is not there, the manufacturers of the cladding which has already been found to be the main cause of the spreading fire. staff from that company chose not to appear and could not be compelled because they are based abroad. joining me now in the studio is paulos tekle, who lost his 5—year—old son isaac in the disaster. and nabil choucair, who lost six family members, including his three young nieces. thank you for coming in. on the night of rain fell when you finally decided to try to get out, what happened to your son isaac? the

neiuhbour happened to your son isaac? tue: neighbour was happened to your son isaac? tte: neighbour was holding him by the hand. and we let them go first when we escaped. the other family left and we were the second last to leave. and after a long time i asked the neighbour to get information from the police. and after a long time we got a statement that he gave to the police and he said that he slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped _ slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped out _ slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped out of— slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped out of his? - slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped out of his? yes - slipped from his hand. so isaac's hand slipped out of his? yes but| hand slipped out of his? yes but that is not _ hand slipped out of his? yes but that is not the _ hand slipped out of his? yes but that is not the important - hand slipped out of his? yes but that is not the important thing, l that is not the important thing, what shocked me and i stilljean don't have an answer, the neighbour said the hand i was holding, hand

holding the firefighter and the other hand holding my son. i not understand why the firefighter that go a five—year—old rather than a grown man. go a five-year-old rather than a grown man-— go a five-year-old rather than a crown man. ~ .,, ., , grown man. and isaac was a trusting little boy who _ grown man. and isaac was a trusting little boy who would _ grown man. and isaac was a trusting little boy who would give _ grown man. and isaac was a trusting little boy who would give his - grown man. and isaac was a trusting little boy who would give his hand i little boy who would give his hand to someone? in little boy who would give his hand to someone?— to someone? in the first place he meant him _ to someone? in the first place he meant him to _ to someone? in the first place he meant him to go _ to someone? in the first place he meant him to go with _ to someone? in the first place he meant him to go with a _ to someone? in the first place he| meant him to go with a neighbour to someone? in the first place he - meant him to go with a neighbour and i was planning to take our younger son but he refused to go with him. he had been crying and was emotional so i did not have a choice, it was a last minute. t so i did not have a choice, it was a last minute-— so i did not have a choice, it was a last minute. i understand you have not read the _ last minute. i understand you have not read the post _ last minute. i understand you have not read the post motion _ last minute. i understand you have not read the post motion because l last minute. i understand you have| not read the post motion because it is just too painful.

not read the post motion because it isjust too painful. t not read the post motion because it isjust too painful.— is just too painful. i don't want to know. tomorrow _ is just too painful. i don't want to know. tomorrow he _ is just too painful. i don't want to know. tomorrow he will - is just too painful. i don't want to know. tomorrow he will face - isjust too painful. i don't want to l know. tomorrow he will face many isjust too painful. i don't want to - know. tomorrow he will face many of the companies _ know. tomorrow he will face many of the companies and _ know. tomorrow he will face many of the companies and organisations - know. tomorrow he will face many ofj the companies and organisations that you believe have responsibility for the death of isaac, what would you say to them? t’m the death of isaac, what would you say to them?— the death of isaac, what would you sa to them? �* ., ., ., say to them? i'm going to say how we are still suffering. _ say to them? i'm going to say how we are still suffering. that _ say to them? i'm going to say how we are still suffering. that is _ say to them? i'm going to say how we are still suffering. that is not - are still suffering. that is not over yet. the money means nothing, it will not bring my son back. still we did not get answers orjustice from the police interviews. and you coming here does not mean you are free. you still have to take responsibility.— free. you still have to take resonsibili . , ., ., responsibility. they are coming to hear our responsibility. they are coming to hear your testimony _ responsibility. they are coming to hear your testimony and - responsibility. they are coming to hear your testimony and we - responsibility. they are coming to hear your testimony and we have | hear your testimony and we have still to have the criminal

proceedings, they will not happen until the inquiry. proceedings, they will not happen untilthe inquiry. i imagine proceedings, they will not happen until the inquiry. i imagine you want to see people in court? qt want to see people in court? of course. want to see people in court? qt course. everyone want to see people in court? (ztt course. everyone who is want to see people in court? ttt course. everyone who is responsible no matter what, there's clearfrom the police. of course we want to see them in court. find the police. of course we want to see them in court-— them in court. and tell me about our them in court. and tell me about your loss? _ them in court. and tell me about your loss? i _ them in court. and tell me about your loss? i can't, _ them in court. and tell me about your loss? i can't, it— them in court. and tell me about your loss? i can't, it is— them in court. and tell me about your loss? i can't, it is too - them in court. and tell me about your loss? i can't, it is too much| your loss? i can't, it is too much to sa . your loss? i can't, it is too much to say- six _ your loss? i can't, it is too much to say. six family _ your loss? i can't, it is too much to say. six family members - your loss? i can't, it is too much| to say. six family members from your loss? i can't, it is too much - to say. six family members from one family— to say. six family members from one family is— to say. six family members from one family is too — to say. six family members from one family is too much. i wish it had never_ family is too much. i wish it had never happened to any of us. you lost three — never happened to any of us. you lost three of— never happened to any of us. you lost three of your _ never happened to any of us. tm. lost three of your nieces and your own children are alive but what impact hasn't on them? tt own children are alive but what impact hasn't on them?- own children are alive but what impact hasn't on them? it has had a trauic impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect — impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect on _ impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect on them. _ impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect on them. and -

impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect on them. and on - impact hasn't on them? it has had a tragic effect on them. and on us, i impact hasn't on them? it has had a | tragic effect on them. and on us, we wish we _ tragic effect on them. and on us, we wish we had — tragic effect on them. and on us, we wish we had not lived and died with them _ wish we had not lived and died with them all— wish we had not lived and died with them. all of us. the cost to did go through— them. all of us. the cost to did go through what we are going through i would _ through what we are going through i would not _ through what we are going through i would not wish on anyone. find through what we are going through i would not wish on anyone. andi would not wish on anyone. and i understand _ would not wish on anyone. and i understand your _ would not wish on anyone. and i understand your marriage - would not wish on anyone. and i understand your marriage has i would not wish on anyone. jim t understand your marriage has broken down as a direct result of this so every day there are reminders obviously of what happened at grenfell tower. but i wonder with so much in here how you decided not to give your testimony this week? t give your testimony this week? i believe that it should be going towards — believe that it should be going towards helping, supporting the families — towards helping, supporting the families. they still need help and ongoing _ families. they still need help and ongoing support. and they have not really— ongoing support. and they have not really asked to see what the immediate family once and need, it hasiust_ immediate family once and need, it hasjust been immediate family once and need, it has just been orchestrated and immediate family once and need, it hasjust been orchestrated and done the way— hasjust been orchestrated and done the way they want and what they think_ the way they want and what they think is— the way they want and what they think is best and they do not know

what's _ think is best and they do not know what's best. think is best and they do not know what's best-— what's best. interesting that you reall feel what's best. interesting that you really feel you — what's best. interesting that you really feel you have _ what's best. interesting that you really feel you have not - what's best. interesting that you really feel you have not been i what's best. interesting that you i really feel you have not been heard since that night, properly heard? tote since that night, properly heard? we have not been heard from the very beginning. — have not been heard from the very beginning, just the same way as our families— beginning, just the same way as our families whenever never listen to and that— families whenever never listen to and that is— families whenever never listen to and that is the reason why grenfell tower— and that is the reason why grenfell tower happened. other things will happen, _ tower happened. other things will happen, hopefully they never will but it _ happen, hopefully they never will but it can — happen, hopefully they never will but it can easily happen. earl}r happen, hopefully they never will but it can easily happen.- but it can easily happen. early on within the year— but it can easily happen. early on within the year of _ but it can easily happen. early on within the year of the _ but it can easily happen. early on within the year of the grenfell i within the year of the grenfell tower fire i think all the families were asked to provide short pen portraits of what happened to them that night and how you had responded. what did you feel about those pen portraits? the responded. what did you feel about those pen portraits?— those pen portraits? the ten ortrait those pen portraits? the ten portrait was _ those pen portraits? the ten portrait was the _ those pen portraits? the ten portrait was the biggest i those pen portraits? the ten portrait was the biggest let i those pen portraits? the ten i portrait was the biggest let down i have ever— portrait was the biggest let down i have ever come across. because it did not— have ever come across. because it did not allow us to say what we wanted — did not allow us to say what we wanted to — did not allow us to say what we wanted to say. it was cut and edited and we _ wanted to say. it was cut and edited and we were — wanted to say. it was cut and edited and we were not allowed to say

exactly — and we were not allowed to say exactly what we wanted to say. and there _ exactly what we wanted to say. and there was _ exactly what we wanted to say. and there was a — exactly what we wanted to say. and there was a lot of things that we needed — there was a lot of things that we needed to— there was a lot of things that we needed to say.— there was a lot of things that we needed to say. there was a lot of things that we needed to sa . ., ., ., , ., ., needed to say. you mean that you are told that there _ needed to say. you mean that you are told that there were _ needed to say. you mean that you are told that there were certain _ needed to say. you mean that you are told that there were certain things i told that there were certain things they did not want you to put in it? they have a look at what we were going _ they have a look at what we were going to — they have a look at what we were going to put in it and i had a poem and they— going to put in it and i had a poem and they cut — going to put in it and i had a poem and they cut that out. and they said you cannot — and they cut that out. and they said you cannot put this in. we knew who was to— you cannot put this in. we knew who was to blame but they refuse the lot. was to blame but they refuse the lot and — was to blame but they refuse the lot. and who is this about? is it not about— lot. and who is this about? is it not about me, voicing our voices for our families— not about me, voicing our voices for our families or is it about then? who— our families or is it about then? who is— our families or is it about then? who is it — our families or is it about then? who is it about?— our families or is it about then? who is it about? you did the ten ortrait who is it about? you did the ten portrait as _ who is it about? you did the ten portrait as well? _ who is it about? you did the ten portrait as well? i _ who is it about? you did the ten portrait as well? i did. _ you did the pen portrait as well? and then they said we need to have a

look at these because they did not edit yours? tla look at these because they did not edit ours? ., ., ., look at these because they did not edit yours?— look at these because they did not edit ours? ., ., ., . ., , edit yours? no one had dictated my one. what edit yours? no one had dictated my one- what do _ edit yours? no one had dictated my one. what do you _ edit yours? no one had dictated my one. what do you think _ edit yours? no one had dictated my one. what do you think it _ edit yours? no one had dictated my one. what do you think it would i edit yours? no one had dictated my| one. what do you think it would take to believe that _ one. what do you think it would take to believe that you _ one. what do you think it would take to believe that you have _ one. what do you think it would take to believe that you have family i one. what do you think it would take to believe that you have family is i to believe that you have family is going to see justice done? t to believe that you have family is going to seejustice done? t do to believe that you have family is going to see justice done? going to see 'ustice done? i do not think that going to see justice done? i do not think that there _ going to see justice done? i do not think that there will _ going to see justice done? i do not think that there will be _ going to see justice done? i do not think that there will be justice i think that there will be justice because — think that there will be justice because they're not listening to what _ because they're not listening to what the — because they're not listening to what the families are saying as to what _ what the families are saying as to what needs to be done. we are being controlled _ what needs to be done. we are being controlled or manipulated. and being cut and _ controlled or manipulated. and being cut and edited. and not allowed to say what _ cut and edited. and not allowed to say what we want to say. they are controlling — say what we want to say. they are controlling us and from the inquiry, from _ controlling us and from the inquiry, from the _ controlling us and from the inquiry, from the pen portraits to whatever there _ from the pen portraits to whatever there is, _ from the pen portraits to whatever there is, i— from the pen portraits to whatever there is, i don't know. god knows how much— there is, i don't know. god knows how much more there is to come.

there _ how much more there is to come. there is— how much more there is to come. there is also _ how much more there is to come. there is also no resolution yet about what should actually happen to the tower, what would you like to see happen? we the tower, what would you like to see happen?— the tower, what would you like to see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? _ see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? to _ see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? to stay - see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? to stay as i see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? to stay as it i see happen? we want the tower... wanted to stand? to stay as it is. l wanted to stand? to stay as it is. as a memorial? _ wanted to stand? to stay as it is. as a memorial? as _ wanted to stand? to stay as it is. as a memorial? as a _ wanted to stand? to stay as it is. as a memorial? as a memorial. l wanted to stand? to stay as it is. as a memorial? as a memorial. i| as a memorial? as a memorial. i thinkthis — as a memorial? as a memorial. i think this should _ as a memorial? as a memorial. i think this should only _ as a memorial? as a memorial. i think this should only have i as a memorial? as a memorial. i think this should only have been| think this should only have been decided, — think this should only have been decided, no one should have interfered with like any other memorial. it should only have been given— memorial. it should only have been given to _ memorial. it should only have been given to the immediate families to decide _ given to the immediate families to decide and even the ownership which is very— decide and even the ownership which is very important and which they're trying _ is very important and which they're trying control and give. they are not allowing the immediate families to have _ not allowing the immediate families to have their say and i think that is very— to have their say and i think that is very important. they should only decide _ is very important. they should only decide and — is very important. they should only decide. and whatever they decide, immediate families, i'm sure they will have — immediate families, i'm sure they will have a — immediate families, i'm sure they will have a fitting memorial that

will have a fitting memorial that will he _ will have a fitting memorial that will be beautiful and respectable so everyone _ will be beautiful and respectable so everyone will enjoy it. the will be beautiful and respectable so everyone will enjoy it.— everyone will en'oy it. the other thin with everyone will en'oy it. the other thing with the _ thing with the community representative, the immediate family are not represented for the memorial commission. are not represented for the memorial commission-— commission. maybe that should be rectified. commission. maybe that should be rectified- we _ commission. maybe that should be rectified. we had _ commission. maybe that should be rectified. we had not _ commission. maybe that should be rectified. we had not been - commission. maybe that should be l rectified. we had not been involved, we have been _ rectified. we had not been involved, we have been isolated. _ rectified. we had not been involved, we have been isolated. so _ rectified. we had not been involved, we have been isolated. so we i rectified. we had not been involved, we have been isolated. so we want i rectified. we had not been involved, l we have been isolated. so we want to be involved directly.— be involved directly. thank you both very much- — tonight, simon clarke — who was sunak�*s chief secretary to treasury when he was chancellor, has redoubled his efforts to remove him from downing street — and soon. he's written an op—ed in tomorrow's telegraph saying that the tories are in denial about their impending extinction. tonight, simon clarke — who was sunak�*s chief secretary to treasury when he was chancellor, has redoubled his efforts to remove him from downing street — and soon. he's written an op—ed in tomorrow's telegraph saying

that the tories are in denial about their impending extinction. and here's theirfront page — you can see at the top there. "oust sunak or tories will go extinct warns former cabinet ally. nick is here. how serious is this for sunak? we know that simon clarke is not happy. he was one of the ii conservative mps who voted against the rule and a safety bill on its third reading which was effectively a vote to kill the bill. we spoke to him in the last year and he said unless the conservative party gets into the right voice for young voters on things like housing, we will face extinction. tonight he has gone the whole hog, article in the daily telegraph saying unless rishi sunak goes they will face a wipe—out. the key sentence, the unvarnished truth is that rishi sunak is leading the conservative party into an election where we will be mastercard. there is quite a fight back tonight, priti patel saying it is wrong as is damian green. you can see a tweet by liam fox, the former defence secretary and very close ally of rishi sunak. he says, this is not the time for self—indulgence and tribalism in the

party. those who have an agenda to destabilise the government in an election year should understand the consequences. having been on the front bench for all 13 years in opposition, it is a miserable place, be warned. who is egging him on? the big question is, is this an operation by conservative mps? possibly will we see some ministers saying we don't have any evidence of that. we do know that the right has tried to rebel against rishi sunak and only got 21t abstentions on the second reading and ii and only got 21t abstentions on the second reading and 11 votes against the third reading last week. we know that at the moment they have a lot of bark but not much bite but what we do know is there is a big operation going on behind the scenes to bring him down. there is a new group called the conservative britain alliance who have been paying for big holes in the daily

telegraph, david frost, boris johnson's former advisor has been fronting it. they had the big mrp poll which said the conservatives face wipe—out and they have another poll in which they say, who would be the better person to lead the conservative party and the united kingdom? is it keir starmer or a tory leader with core conservative values, and one pollster says that is one of the worst polling questions he has ever seen but clearly that is a big operation to bring rishi sunak down. does this indicate that the tories are ungovernable? the main election strategist rishi sunak had a meeting with conservatives the other day and he said divided parties lose elections. in other words, carry on like this and we will lose.— and we will lose. thank you very much indeed. _ yemen has been back in the spotlight since november following the iran—aligned houthi group's attacks on red sea shipping. the attacks have highlighted the continuing impact of yemen's conflict on the wider middle east and beyond.

the north and west of the country, including the capital, sanaa, is controlled by the houthis, from where they have launched their recent attacks in the red sea. the uae continues to control the security apparatus in the south, including control of the port of aden. yemen does have an internationally recognised government, but many of its members are still in exile, and some have told us they are too afraid to return to the country. a joint investigation by bbc arabic investigations and newsnight has found evidence that the united arab emirates hired american mercenaries to assassinate political targets in yemen and then trained emirati officers, triggering a wave of killings that continues to this day. for the first time on camera, a former us serviceman from the mercenary group spear operations has spoken about their activities to nawal al magafi.

driving from the base down into the city was actually incredibly beautiful. there's this weird mix of excitement, fear, and also an odd serenity. we all wanted to make a statement. hence the choice to use a detonator and a bomb. would you say that it was a successful operation? yes. isaac gilmore is a former navy seal who later became second in command of a private us military firm called spear operations group. this isn't, you know, innocent until proven guilty. it's war. and so you have intelligence and then you make a decision to act on it.

in december 2015, spear group was hired by the uae to carry out assassinations in yemen. we met with the appropriate bodies within the uae government at the officers club on the emirati army base. the pitch was to put pressure on isis and al qaeda in the state of yemen and make sure that it didn't become another chaotic hub of terrorist activity, especially with the proximity to the horn of africa. in 2015, yemen was gripped by fighting on several fronts. a rebel group called the houthis had taken over the capital, sanaa. they also briefly held aden before a saudi uae led coalition backed by the us and the uk recaptured the city. al qaeda had long been a presence in the south and were now gaining territory. the us feared they might plan terrorist operations beyond yemen's borders.

the uae took over security for southern yemen and became the us's main counter—terrorism ally in the region. how much were you offered for this operation? 1.5 million per month. who gave you the targets? we received the target intelligence from the uae government. the initial operation was to go after the head of the snake, so to speak, and so it was targeting al—islah. al—islah is the yemeni branch of the muslim brotherhood.

ansaf fled yemen after the attack and now lives in exile in saudi arabia.

ansaf�*s party, al—islah, or the reform party, is one of the biggest political organisations in yemen. its policies are inspired by the muslim brotherhood, a popular international islamist movement. the muslim brotherhood is banned in several countries, including the uae, where their political activism and support for elections is seen as a threat to the rule of the royal family. but the us has never classified the muslim brotherhood as a terrorist organisation. hey, how are you? human rights organisation reprieve has been compiling a list of assassinations in southern yemen. what you see here is basically tens and tens of assassinations. between 2015 and 2018, they've counted 102. they've all followed the same pattern, placing ied bombs on doors or on cars. and then someone comes after

and starts shooting the individual. if you see then here you see a surge in assassinations that are happening throughout 2016. this happens after the arrival of spears into yemen. 25 of these assassinations took place during the months that isaac spent in yemen. how many targets did you execute? not answering. by march 2016, isaac left yemen and stopped working for spear. but the assassinations continued. it was not until 2018 when we started to pinpoint that, actually, this is part of a systematic targeting policy. you have this chaotic situation where everyone can name anyone a terrorist and start

going after them. these are extrajudicial killings. we've seen documents that appear to show that spear group continued to receive payments from the uae until 2020. a senior yemeni army officer from aden who worked directly with the uae tells us what spear were doing. in 2017, the uae set up the southern transitional council,

or stc, in yemen. one of its roles was to run security in the south. its forces included an elite counter—terrorism unit. i met the head of the stc, aidarus al—zoubaidi. he's one of the most powerful figures in yemen's government and works closely with the uae.

off camera, zoubaidi's media adviser intervened. zoubaidi denies that the uae is sponsoring assassinations of its political enemies in yemen. but after months of trying, i've managed to obtain a uae kill list. it's from 2018, and

is seven pages long. it was leaked by a source who was working with the emiratis and was horrified by the names he saw on the list. it includes this woman, huda al—sarari. huda is a lawyer who's in geneva to receive an award for her work investigating uae human rights abuses in yemen.

in the end, it wasn't huda who was attacked. it was her son. after a month in intensive care, mohsen died. he was 18. eyewitnesses told the prosecutor that they recognised the gunman as a member of a counterterrorism unit funded by the uae. but nobody was charged.

huda now lives in exile. the us laws governing mercenaries are unclear. no—one from spear group has faced any criminal proceedings from their actions in yemen. did you feel like the operation you took part in was legal? yes. is that because there was some sort of nod from washington? no, it's because we were in line with the us mission and the region and we were participating with an ally of the us. did you know that after you left, the emirati forces that you trained, then trained yemenis to conduct assassinations?

you train people, you give people a tool, and how they choose to use it is really not your responsibility. many of the names, if not most of the names, are people who have no terrorist connections whatsoever. what was the intel that you were provided with about ansaf mayo that made you think he was connected to terrorist organisations? i cannot go into the details of the intel. but he isn't a terrorist, is he? i mean, i've met him since. he is living in saudi arabia. he has taken part in the un peace process for yemen. which is fantastic. the very nature of intelligence gathering is that it's never 100% absolute. i had one more question for isaac. ansaf had told me he wanted to meet him. would you ever be open to meeting ansaf mayo? absolutely. it'd be intriguing.

we waited, hoping isaac would turn up. he's on line, but he's not answering my call. the families of

the victims of the us the victims of the uae assassination programme have yet to receive justice and the targeted killings continue until this day. that film by our international correspondent nawal al—maghafi. the director of photography was jack garland and the director, jess kelly. we put the allegations in this film to the uae who said they were false. we put questions about spear group s activities in yemen to the us state department and the department of defence, who declined to comment. a cia spokesman said the idea the cia signed off on such activity is false. it'sjust past 6pm in new hampshire. the straight fight between donald trump and nikki haley for the republican primary will be over in two hours — and the outcome could propel trump onto the republican ticket. joe joins us from manchester, the most populous city in the state.

voters are continuing to come out to this community centre here. and turnout seems to have been strong across the city. kari lake some people say could be a vip pick. with a chump victory in the end of the road for nikki haley? she has planned a rally tomorrow night in south carolina which is the next stop on this primary season circus. but people are being cautious to manage expectations. a week ago it was thought that she could win in new hampshire because it had a lot

of moderates. she has raised support money since ron desantis pulled out of the race. every day that passes it seems more likely that donald trump could win. we want to to find out what people thought of him and went to speak to one of his close allies. our border should not be linked to ukraine's border. he is the apprentice to the man who used to star in it. us first, and you know, if folks want to have a big debate about sending tens of billions of dollars over to which guy in a sweatsuit gets to run crimea, let's have that debate. but it shouldn't be linked to your sovereignty. an ally and possible heir who could take over from trump. representative matt gaetz brought down speaker kevin mccarthy and now wants to end the us military support for ukraine. after he was done with

the photos and protesters... i asked him to explain america first foreign policy. what would that mean in practice? more realism, more of an understanding that america is not the world's police force and not the world's piggy bank. we can do the most to impact the world by being the best version of ourselves, not by trying to be the arbiter of every regional dispute on the planet earth. you have strong views on ukraine. your critics might say that cutting funding for ukraine would be giving in to vladimir putin. what's your response? i guess they could always say that, because there's always going to be a group of people for forever wars in this country. and i think oftentimes that's not in the best interest of american taxpayers. when we look at the end use monitoring of material that we've sent to ukraine, the record is abysmal. yet on what his candidate could achieve in the middle east, he was light on detail. what can donald trump do to try and solve the problems there? there would be more peace.

look, president trump is not as predictable as president biden or president obama and that kept a lot of the despots and dictators on their best behaviour. we can get to those days again. i think he can end the war in ukraine and i think he can end the war in israel. and why do you think the war in ukraine should end? too many people are dying and no—one's going to win. we're in this huge crisis. if something doesn't happen, if he doesn't get back- in there and do what he did before, i mean, i don't know- where we're going to be. it's going to be only america first. from the moment he took the oath of office donald trump was different. we're closing the border. limiting immigration was and remains a priority. i am going to issue our notification of intent to withdraw from the trans—pacific partnership. he talked and acted tough on trade, provided strong support for israel —