germany expelled russian. nato. member states. we need to. protect the

women. international. story. made to russian embassy in. connection with the murder of a georgian national in august. general has said there's evidence. russia. denies picking up the story. 2 employees of the russian embassy are to be expelled and over there cleared a person or non grata after this new general tourney of germany is taking

over the investigation of the murder of a chechen in berlin allows august with seemed to be an asylum seeker in the country germany has taken this action against the russian employees and war to russia because they believe that russia has not done any to help the authorities in germany looking into this investigation and they also say that berlin is taking this stance because they say that there is some sort of russian state level and foment in this murder the federal foreign office today declared to employees of the russian embassy in berlin to be persona non grata with the step of the federal government reacts to the fact that the russian authorities despite repeated high ranking and in fact it requests did not sufficiently participate in the investigation of the murder of tony k.k. in berlin zoo there are sufficient real indications that the killing is either on commission well done by state agencies of the russian federation or such of the

autonomy's chechen republic as part of the russian federation germany's prosecutor say or they have enough evidence linking the murder to moscow in article recently posted by the investigative group in the pointing finger is on law school that there is a link between the kremlin and the murder of the chechen ethnic last august here in berlin but let's talk about a little bit of what this group the what we know about them so far is that they are have coast eyes to western secret services and they have played a major role in major cases that involve the moscow case and the delany of an h 17 in ukraine russia has a come out with their own statement about the reaction from berlin saying that this is groundless this is absolutely groundless speculation this topic is being somehow whipped up by german media but it does not mean it this is how things are. the present also been a reaction by e. german politician from the free democratic party alexandre graf alam store who

spoke to the news agency a.f.p. he's asking for more information to be clearer shown to people why it is doing this we all i would like to point out here that next week in france the president of russia vladimir putin and the german chancellor angela merkel will be meeting in the normandy summit earlier from london today the chancellor angela merkel said that this would not effect in any way the talks between the countries since this house to do with ukraine but what she did leave open of that it's possible that the bailout of bilateral relations between the 2 countries get affected somehow. when the key are in joined me earlier in the studio to discuss the victims boxer and what we know about. 40 year on saloon car he was killed in what was described as an execution style killing he was shot twice in the head and this is a murder case that quickly became highly politicized in the media with headlines

pointing the finger at russia drawing comparisons to describe things in the u.k. calling it the script pal 2.0 in fact the media were less interested however in delving into the history of the victim which makes quite an interesting read his c.v. is quite it shows a quite a checkered history let's say he's an ethnic chechen georgian citizen he was an islamist a former soldier he fought against russia in the 2nd chechen war he has connections to some very high profile terrorists many of the fighters he fought alongside went on to move to syria and join islamist groups there he sought asylum in germany in 2015 that was after a failed assassination attempt was that the 1st time someone tried to kill him. he was actually on a terror watch list for quite some time here he was described as a person who potentially posed a threat to the public safety he was taken off start terror list only last year in

just this right in 28 he was removed from that list now needless to say is past however interesting have a check it may be does not justify his killing and the perpetrator must be brought to justice but perhaps to give a fuller picture it's worth highlighting that this guy was not joe bloggs you know he was not your average everyday guy he was a man with connections to some very questionable individuals with some very extreme ideological tendencies. leaders of nato member states of been meeting for a 2nd day in london to mark the military alliances 70th anniversary on the spot attempts to put on the shore of unity divisions within the crisis stricken organization have been somewhat. this summit is going to be defined by the road. on the surface not least by all the leaders but by all the very very clear and apparent cracks between many of those coming into this summit perhaps one

thing all leaders regularly seem to be agreed on is that russia is always the bad guy however the nato generally general secretary himself saying that what was needed was a more confrontation but dialogue with the major eastern neighbor nato essentially ruled out of the shop because russia is our. closest neighbor our biggest neighbor we need to strive for a better relationship with russia. on even if we are heading the table to. get a better relationship with russia in the near term we need to manage a difficult relationship and elsewhere as well we've also been hearing from manuel macron who's been saying that russia too does need to be dialogue on that fronts now while they advocate more dialogue with russia the reality is of course that war games continue to take place on russia's borders with those eastern member states and of course that expansion of nato to the east continues to be

a cause of national security concern for russia while any of the nato members such as take you for example who do wish to engage with russia even buy weapons from them will find themselves soon be out cost by other members russian air defense system s. $400.00 would never be integrated into nato it will never be part of the nato integrated air missile defense system it was already tenchi in contentious going into this summit and it would appear that things got even worse last night many of the leaders of the leaders were invited to buckingham palace for a reception with the queen and some of the courts on the microphone on the hot mike . please. listen. if you feel.

this is more he's a great politician as it were not here she was going. to face today i find him to be a very nice guy but you know the truth is that i pulled him out of the fact that he's not paying 2 percent and i guess you don't really have to be happy he had. scheduled a press conference it was due to be held at the end of this and will be leaving the summit early in fact he has been meeting with other leaders 8 plus one who he says countries other than the u.s. who have met the 2 percent spending targets for military targets and so mr trump making it very clear that certain countries canada and particular are not welcome

not impressed with what he had so overall a very very divisive conference here in london. from the u.k. to the u.s. for the trump and pitchman saga has stepped up a gear and washington with the u.s. heise intelligence committee delivering what some are calling a damning report it claims that the american president abused his office for personal gain artie's came up and i was being examined the document in a little more detail. well the report from the house intelligence committee democrats essentially alleges 2 things about donald trump 1st it alleges that he conditioned military aid to ukraine on an announcement that would have been beneficial to his reelection campaign and secondly it alleges that he obstructed the house of representatives impeachment inquiry investigation now adam schiff representing democrats came forward and painted a pretty grim pricks here donald trump and his activities this is adam schiff this

report chronicles a scheme by the president i'd states to coerce an ally ukraine that is at war with an adversary russia into doing the pleasure of the president's political dirty work and he was willing to sacrifice the national security of the united states by withholding military aid and diplomatic recognition in the form of that white house meeting in order to get what he wanted now before departing the country on monday donald trump dismissed the allegations that were expected to be leveled in this report this is what donald trump said prior to leaving the country before the report was released by the radical. democrats decide what i'm going to set up a year ago when i'm going that was. one of the most important. thing. for them to be doing saying putting the feet of the table which.

i grew up with in a recent interview the ukrainian leaders the lenski also dismissed these allegations about president trump behavior and interactions with him look i never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo that's not my thing i don't want us to look like bagus now many witnesses testified during the impeachment inquiry hearings but observers wondered if they really. you made a strong case that donald trump had been inappropriate in his dealings with ukraine this is some of the testimony that was heard there was no mention of withholding aid on the call correct that's correct and there was no quid pro quo correct correct was there any reference to withholding aid you know there was not any reference to bribery no there was not any reference to quid pro quo no there was no you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the united states has been involved with paddle. now before this report was

released on monday we had a report from the republicans that was released it was 123 pages long and it defended the actions of u.s. president donald trump saying that his dealings with ukraine had not been inappropriate and had not violated the law fact that donald trump is out of the country celebrating the 70th anniversary of nato the north atlantic treaty organization that many have pointed to the timing of the report as being somewhat suspicious however while some are looking at the report and saying it shows very very damning evidence against donald trump others are looking at the report and saying it's simply a rehash of long discredited allegations different views from different sides of the political spectrum here in the united states. you know there are indeed many concerned about the papers for us to be so weak but the motor on for this question florida democratic party chair is convinced by the report while media analyst

lionel thinks the police meaning. what we have here is unprecedented and no one knows what it means because it means nothing why do we call it an impeachment inquiry be cause if it was an impeachment hearing or an impeachment proceeding the president would have been allowed to invite and to subpoena witnesses but since they didn't do that and didn't want him to do that they call that and the impeachment inquiry and they have not changed one i ota from what they said when they began the inquiry that and i will paraphrase it the president used to his position his authority under article 2 of the constitution for personal and or political benefits and the last time i checked every president since george washington as done this

this is not impeachable i do believe that the democratic report was factual and obviously the republican response was perhaps a fairy tale that people do want to read perhaps to put someone to bed specifically you have very different responses be on the lookout for this one we have to look at is different order was given that are going to come out that will be pretty straightforward there's going to be an abuse of power because as you say in the quote he took his interests above the national interest there's also going to be obstruction some as obstruction of congress not letting people cooperate dating apps are in the focus we tell you why in 90 seconds.

join me every thursday on the alex salmond show and i'll be speaking to guests of the world of politics or business i'm show business i'll see you then.

17 minutes into the program welcome back popular free dating app such as tender and others owned by the company much group are not protecting their users from sex offenders on their platforms a new investigation claimed let's take a look at out the probe took a look at data at more than 150 instance of sexual assault over the past decade it find that the majority of victims were women who met their attackers through much in 10 percent of cases they were purged with men who had already been accused or convicted all of sex crimes well much group which owns over 40 of the most popular they do conduct background checks on their members but only for pay cuts furthermore the company claims that they do not agree with the investigations

findings. the implication that we know about such offenders on our side and don't fight to keep them off is as outrageous as it is falls and stick knowledge evolves we will continue to aggressively deploy new tools to eradicate bad actors including users of our free products where we are not able to obtain sufficient and reliable information to make meaningful bank ground checks possible chadwick a spectator usa magazine journalist and reese everson women's rights give us their thoughts on dating platforms and more pertinently their screaming policies. the magic group is a $1000000000.00 company there's no reason why they couldn't allocate just a small portion of their revenue to screen the people on their ab just so that there's just a smaller since of increased safety it's a precaution it's a measure but it's deserved if they if they're suddenly saying that we want in

order to join the service we want to perform background checks on everyone who joins 1st of all that would kill the business and they know it there's a moral responsibility on these companies that are making billions of dollars 1700000000 dollars from women looking for love to say oh you know what it's too expensive for us to do a little bit to protect you nobody's going to want to join these apps with these kind of 1 if they're doing that they're being this invasive about background checks with that said people maybe shouldn't be on them especially women and not only are these dangerous for women but it's destroying women so just get off the dating apps if you don't perform your own background checks in your own time with your own money get off we're not going to restrict women from using the internet because there are predators we do desire for these companies to at least take the step into

the right direction why do you want to put that kind of power on these monolithic tech companies and up saying you know ban women from dating apps i'm simply saying you shouldn't rely on this and you can't trust these companies to tell you who's good and who's bad you need to take that into your own hands so if you meet someone do a background check before you do good for you go out on a date if they work in tandem with the courts to get the names at least of the 1st and last names in the location of where these people are and perhaps create some type of monitor of their internet that's a step in the right direction it's going to be a mess i think no matter what and there's always going to be people who perhaps squeak through or don't get picked up who then commit assaults and crimes get a gun ladies. protect yourselves and we don't we're and by the way these incidences are obviously extremely rare and you know by and large the vast majority of men are not sexual predators one woman is enough we need the companies to take a moral stance or at least have some sort of responsibility to protect the women

that utilize their ad and then what happens you know it's it's never going to be a perfect system. the u.k. government is facing massive budget much of the release of a heavily redacted report on the franking industry british authorities never intended it to see the light of day but greenpeace won a lengthy legal battle against london under the freedom of information that all of the $48.00 pages $37.00 were totally blocked out and what remains of the one secret document shows a concerted plan to develop a positive image for the controversial gallus extraction method amongst the general public the conservatives have taken money from oil executives dress the rise of communities and enabled frightening companies to threaten their local environment the fact they have tried to cover the sub by rejecting pages of critical information for the illustrates this government's contempt for the public this is the conservatives idea being open about the franken experiment forced to release

their report they've heavily censored it these heavily redacted government report shows reference to secret plans to run a promotional campaign used by the weight of scientific evidence and strength of public opinion against franken i dread to think what we haven't been allowed to see whether any of the trend has been digging a little bit deeper in the fight against fracking in the u k. they high tech god knows what sticking out of the ground that earns some people cash and literally shakes other people's homes those other people for years have been teaming up with green activists to win a war against fracking in broad. areas from believable if you can believe.

in finally last month came the victory at least for the timing the controversial method of shale gas extraction was banned in the u.k. under the prime minister who once called it glorious news for humanity and now that it seems there is no more need to come out and protest the cabinet office has at the last released a secret report on the fracking industry despite these lines on the paper no parts of this report shows appendices is to be released under the freedom of information act so you want to rate something that the activists were trying to get a glance at for almost 2 years there's a little problem here's what it looks like from the 48 pages seen by the guardian 37 are entirely blacked out and only one the very front is left uncensored so if you're still keen to get to know about the skeletons in the industry's closet good

luck why would so much stuff remain hidden looking at this black wall of redacted pages people will be wondering why there's so little the government is willing to reveal about fracking and so much it wants to hide if ministers have really dropped their support for this polluting industry why not publish this report in full and come clean about what's been going on behind closed doors. for years still though there's enough to scratch your heads over after reading the uncensored bits in there here's a gist of a few ideas there are issues with the fracking industries progress the main one is public opposition to fracking it needs to be dealt with the government should develop a pro shale narrative and spread the word the department for energy and climate change is already undertaken crucial work on communications to increase public acceptability of shale for example creation of objective information material

development of pro show national and regional merits of shall champions and among other useful moves that whitehall needs to take is finding ways to speed up planning in response to operators concerns which is also sometimes an obstacle planning times need to be shortened and process needs to be predictable which all makes you wonder why would the guys in charge ban fracking at all in such a document there are always going to be sensitive parts that are embarrassing to the government that are sensitive that could harm you know the industry potentially in the future or that could show the government being too cooperative with industry that might show motives. that are the public would not see in a good light it's to protect their their image and to protect their ability to move forward and continue to do what they think they need to do for the nation which is

different from what they tell the public of course because they tell the public whatever narrative suits them in terms of getting elected and so on but typically it's for domestic political reasons that you would ban it there's no other reason that i can think of depending on how things develop geopolitically there might be a big impetus to develop u.k. shale and in which case they'll want to do it as quickly as possible. midweek stories are shipping up for no to join call in in 30 for all the latest updates life from our news page q here in moscow.

up. in this community there are people who believe that it's ok to sell fractional food on my table it's really hard there are no jobs and you see that i've got kids that ask and as a parent. i can come up with arguments there's a lot of conflict in the game between the 2 most of the conflict i would say over most rahmani and most of them is me. close one of the children mostly known each other is good business the state of california alone makes $6000000000.00 a year of prison complex just to get some point in your life where. you don't care

and one of my cares about you so you don't care might anything. facebook and google started with a great idea and great ideals unfortunately there was also a very dark side. they are constructing a profile of you and that profile is real it's detailed and it never goes away turns out that google is manipulating your opinions from the very 1st character that you type into the search bar it will always favor one dog food over another one comparative shopping service over another and one candidate over another they can suppress certain types of results on what they think you should be seen if they have this kind of power then democracy is an illusion the free and fair election doesn't exist the more we give them the sooner we are all.

i'll be doing this so they i die and i hope not i hope i'll have to spend my days going to save dogs and you know you can't save more and then you ride by barns and you look how on earth is a dog or. sad. tara loud to do this to these dogs. i mean 67 years you know they've been locked up in a cage outside you see no protection from the weather the heat you know the cold air the rain the snow the thunder nothing they have no protection yet as soon as we take the dog it's just wants the case you need to use you know wants the affection

. to get you. it's. a. mom and dad will probably live their entire lives on that facility in a pin whether it's smaller or larger sized but they're not themselves hence they are breeding stock they they typically don't come in the house.