Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Trump Says America Should “Take Back” Oil Rig Claimed by Venezuela

Former US president Donald Trump has sparked fresh controversy after declaring that the United States should reclaim an oil rig he claims is rightfully American but owned or controlled by Venezuela.

Speaking during a political appearance, Trump argued that the oil rig represents a strategic energy asset that should never have been allowed to fall under Venezuelan ownership or influence. He framed the issue as both an economic and national security concern, saying America must protect its energy resources and stop what he described as “foreign exploitation” of US-linked infrastructure.

Energy Nationalism Returns to the Forefront

Trump’s remarks revive a core theme of his political platform: energy nationalism. During his presidency, he repeatedly championed “energy independence,” expanding domestic drilling and rolling back environmental regulations. His latest comments suggest that, if returned to office, he would again pursue aggressive measures to assert US control over oil and gas assets.

According to Trump, allowing Venezuela—whose government he has long criticised—to benefit from oil infrastructure connected to the US undermines American workers and weakens the country’s negotiating power on the global stage.

Venezuela and Rising Tensions

Venezuela holds some of the world’s largest proven oil reserves, but its energy sector has been crippled by years of sanctions, mismanagement, and political instability. Any suggestion of the US reclaiming assets linked to Venezuela is likely to heighten already strained relations between Washington and Caracas.

While Trump did not outline how such a move would be carried out, critics warn that reclaiming an oil rig could raise serious legal and diplomatic issues, potentially violating international agreements and escalating regional tensions.

Mixed Reaction at Home

Supporters of Trump have praised the comments as a strong stance in defence of American resources and jobs. Opponents, however, argue that the rhetoric is inflammatory and unrealistic, saying complex ownership disputes over oil infrastructure cannot be resolved through political declarations alone.

Energy analysts also caution that reclaiming or seizing assets could disrupt global oil markets at a time when energy prices remain sensitive to geopolitical shocks.

A Signal of Future Policy?

Although Trump is not currently in office, his statement is widely seen as a signal of how he might approach foreign policy and energy strategy if he returns to the White House. The comments reinforce his “America First” message and underline his willingness to challenge international norms in pursuit of economic leverage.

Whether the oil rig in question becomes a real policy battle or remains political rhetoric, Trump’s remarks ensure that energy, sovereignty, and US–Venezuela relations are once again firmly in the spotlight.

Attached is a news article regarding trump wanting Venezuela to return oil rig that are Ken by the US 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2025/dec/17/trump-demands-venezuela-pay-seized-us-oil-assets-calling-blockade/

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Trump Signals Extra Pre-Christmas Pay for U.S. Military Members

Donald Trump has indicated plans to deliver an additional pre-Christmas salary boost for U.S. military personnel, framing the move as both a morale-builder and a recognition of service during a period of global tension.

While final details are expected to be confirmed through formal channels, the proposal has already drawn attention across Washington and among service families who often face heightened financial pressure during the holiday season.

What Is Being Proposed

According to briefings from Trump allies, the plan would see eligible active-duty service members receive a one-off additional payment before Christmas. The measure would be administered through the US Department of Defense and coordinated with military payroll systems to ensure the money reaches troops in time for the holidays.

Officials familiar with the discussions say the extra pay is designed to:

• Help cover rising living and travel costs

• Support families of deployed personnel

• Provide a tangible show of appreciation for service

No final figure or eligibility breakdown has yet been publicly confirmed.

Why the Timing Matters

The announcement comes as many members of the US Armed Forces remain deployed abroad or on heightened readiness at home. For families separated over Christmas, an additional payment can help offset costs linked to childcare, travel, and holiday expenses.

Trump has repeatedly argued that financial recognition is central to troop morale, especially during periods when military families feel the strain of extended deployments.

Political and Public Reaction

Supporters have welcomed the proposal as a clear, practical gesture rather than a symbolic one. Several veterans’ groups say extra holiday pay would be “widely appreciated,” particularly by junior enlisted personnel.

Critics, however, stress the need for transparency, noting that any additional salary must be fully funded and formally approved to avoid confusion or delays. Some lawmakers have called for clarity on whether the payment would require congressional authorization or be funded through existing defense allocations.

What Happens Next?

The Department of Defense is expected to clarify:

• Eligibility criteria

• Payment size

• Exact timing before Christmas

If approved, the measure would mark one of the most direct holiday-focused financial incentives offered to U.S. troops in recent years.

For now, military families are watching closely, hopeful that the promised boost becomes reality before the festive season begins.

Attached is a News article regarding military members to receive extra money before Christmas 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/military-troops-get-special-christmas-gift-president-says-warrior-dividend.amp

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear smileband viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Get out of my pub’: Why Keir Starmer was thrown out of a Bath pub

A widely shared video of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer being told to leave a pub in Bath captured a moment that quickly went viral online — sometimes misrepresented as a current protest or about unrelated issues. In fact, the incident dates back to April 19, 2021, when Starmer was then leader of the Labour Party and campaigning ahead of local elections.  

What happened — the basic facts

During a campaign visit to the city of Bath, Starmer and his team stopped outside The Raven, a traditional pub in the city centre. Local landlord Rod Humphris came out of the pub, visibly angry, and began shouting at the Labour leader. He repeatedly told Starmer “that man is not allowed in my pub — get out of my pub!” before the politician and his team withdrew.  

Security personnel quickly intervened to de-escalate the situation.  

Key reason: anger over lockdown policy

The central cause of the incident was frustration over coronavirus lockdown measures. Humphris openly criticised Starmer for what he saw as Labour’s failure to robustly challenge the UK government’s handling of pandemic restrictions.  

According to comments made by Humphris after the incident:

• He felt “incandescent” about how lockdowns had affected his business.  

• He accused Starmer of failing to hold the government to account over restrictive measures that he believed were unnecessary.  

Humphris later said that he believed lockdowns — including compulsory closures for pubs — were over-reaching and that the focus on protecting only older people indicated to him that the wider damage wasn’t justified.  

A misunderstanding over the visit

Some reporting suggested there was confusion over whether Starmer was actually welcomed into the pub by its owners. One co-owner later indicated to reporters that Humphris’s views did not reflect the entire business and that miscommunication between the Labour team and pub staff played a part in the heated moment.  

Starmer’s response

Starmer later told journalists he disagreed profoundly with the landlord’s views and defended the use of lockdown restrictions as necessary for public health.  

The Labour Party press office also described the footage as showing someone “spreading dangerous misinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic.”  

Online misinformation and context

In 2025 and later years, the 2021 clip resurfaced on social media with false claims — including unrelated political or cultural accusations — but fact-checks confirm the original confrontation was purely about COVID-19 policies during the pandemic, not other issues attributed to it online.  

Why this story endured

Even years after the event, the clip remains shareable because:

• It’s visually striking — a public figure being forcefully ejected from a pub.

• It speaks to pandemic frustrations felt by some pub owners and the public.

• It has been reused, misused, and re-framed to fit different narratives online, often with inaccurate claims detached from the original context.  

In summary: Sir Keir Starmer’s removal from a Bath pub was the result of a heated confrontation in 2021 with a landlord furious about pandemic lockdown policies and what he saw as weak political opposition to those rules. The episode was contextual, specific to that moment, and has occasionally been misrepresented when recirculated online without context.  

Attached is a news article regarding kier starmer kicked out of a pub in bath 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56805144.amp

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Netflix Loses Billions After Elon Musk Urges Followers to Cancel Subscriptions

In early October 2025, a social media storm triggered by Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk sent shockwaves through Wall Street and the entertainment industry, wiping billions off Netflix’s market value as calls to cancel the streaming service went viral.  

Over the span of just a few days in late September and early October, Musk used his vast platform — with more than 220 million followers on X — to amplify a campaign urging parents and subscribers to ditch Netflix “for the health of your kids.” The comments came amid a culture-war backlash over Netflix’s programming, especially children’s shows that critics said featured what they described as “woke” or “transgender agenda” content.  

What Sparked the Boycott Call

The controversy began when a clip from the animated series Dead End: Paranormal Park (a Netflix kids’ show that included a transgender character) was shared online and criticised by conservative social-media accounts. Musk reposted these posts, adding his own strong language and urging followers to cancel their Netflix memberships.  

In one widely circulated message, he wrote:

“Cancel Netflix for the health of your kids.”  

This was followed by a flurry of reposts, comments, and further calls to action from Musk and some of his followers, which turned the issue into a trending boycott social media theme.  

The Financial Impact

Investors responded quickly to the online controversy. Over the course of several trading sessions, Netflix’s stock fell sharply, dragging its market value down by approximately $25 billion amid the sell-off.  

Analysts said the sell-off was partly triggered by Musk’s influence amplifying broader concerns about content direction and subscriber trends — though they cautioned that Netflix’s fundamentals remained strong.  

The company’s share price dropped around 5 % during the week following Musk’s posts — its biggest weekly fall in months — and although Netflix remains one of the world’s most valuable media companies, the short-term loss underscored how quickly social media campaigns can ripple through markets.  

What Netflix Says (and Doesn’t Say)

Netflix has not publicly responded to Musk’s boycott campaign. Since the company stopped reporting subscriber count routinely, the direct effect on subscriber numbers is unclear.  

Despite the market dip, Netflix continues to invest in new content and expansion efforts, and many analysts stress that a brief social-media-driven boycott is unlikely to affect its long-term trajectory if overall viewer demand remains strong.  

A Broader Cultural Moment

The incident illustrates how influential figures can shape public discourse — and market outcomes — with a single message on social media. Musk’s involvement turned what might have been a minor online disagreement into a global talking point, with news outlets and investors alike weighing in on both the cultural and financial consequences.  

As digital platforms continue to play an outsized role in shaping public perception, companies like Netflix may face intensified scrutiny over programming choices, while investors remain sensitive to sentiment-driven volatility.

Attached is a news article regarding Netflix losing 25 billion due to Elon musk telling people to cancel there subscription to the health of there children 

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/economy/netflix-loses-over-15b-in-market-value-after-elon-musk-calls-for-subscription-cancellation/3705953

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Asteroid Passes Over Antarctica — Detected Only Hours After Flyby

A small asteroid made an unannounced close pass over Antarctica, with astronomers confirming its trajectory only hours after it had already swept past Earth. The near miss has reignited debate about how effectively humanity tracks space rocks that approach from hard-to-monitor regions of the sky.

According to preliminary analyses from space agencies and observatories, the object was modest in size—likely no larger than a house—and posed no danger to people or infrastructure. Its path carried it over the remote Antarctic region, far from population centres, which partly explains why the flyby went unnoticed in real time.

Why it wasn’t seen sooner

The asteroid approached Earth from a direction close to the Sun’s glare, a known blind spot for ground-based telescopes. Objects arriving from this angle are difficult to detect until they have already passed the planet. While monitoring networks run by NASA and European Space Agency scan the skies nightly, coverage is not yet complete—especially for smaller bodies on sunward trajectories.

“This is a reminder that our detection systems are very good, but not perfect,” one astronomer noted. “Small asteroids can still slip through, particularly when they come from directions we can’t easily observe.”

No impact risk — but a timely warning

Experts stressed that the asteroid burned no trail through the atmosphere and did not enter Earth’s airspace. Objects of this size typically disintegrate harmlessly if they do, and this one passed safely at altitude. Still, the delayed detection highlights a vulnerability in planetary defence: even harmless flybys can arrive unannounced.

What’s being done

Space agencies are expanding their toolkits. New infrared telescopes, some planned for space rather than Earth’s surface, aim to spot asteroids by their heat signatures—even when sunlight blinds optical instruments. Data-sharing agreements between observatories worldwide are also improving, helping astronomers reconstruct orbits quickly after detection.

The bigger picture

Earth experiences close asteroid flybys far more often than many realise—sometimes several per month—most involving small, non-threatening objects. The Antarctic flyover adds to a growing list of examples showing why earlier warning matters, not just for impact prevention but for scientific understanding of near-Earth space.

For now, scientists say there is no cause for alarm—only a renewed push to ensure the next visitor from the cosmos is spotted before it slips past unnoticed.

Attached is a News article regarding an asteroid passed over Antarctica 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/articles/cgl1rdn6064o.amp

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Imran Khan’s Prison Cell Conditions and the Consequences of His Incarceration

Imran Khan, Pakistan’s former prime minister and one of the country’s most polarising political figures, has been held in prison since 2023 following a series of court rulings against him. His detention has triggered intense debate at home and abroad—over the conditions of his confinement, the legal basis for his imprisonment, and the wider impact on Pakistan’s fragile political landscape.

Inside Imran Khan’s Prison Cell

Imran Khan is incarcerated at Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi, a high-security facility that houses many high-profile detainees. According to statements from his legal team and party officials, his cell is modest and tightly controlled. They describe limited space, basic bedding, and restricted access to personal items. Security measures are stringent, with surveillance and controlled movement reflecting his status as a former head of government.

Authorities maintain that he receives treatment consistent with prison regulations, including access to medical care, reading materials such as religious texts, and limited outdoor time. However, Khan’s supporters argue that restrictions on visits, communication, and access to legal counsel amount to punitive conditions designed to isolate him politically.

Why Imran Khan Is in Jail

Imran Khan’s imprisonment stems from multiple legal cases that unfolded after his removal from office in April 2022. The most significant include:

• Corruption convictions linked to the sale and retention of state gifts (the Toshakhana case), in which courts ruled he improperly benefited from items received during his premiership.

• Charges under Pakistan’s Official Secrets Act, relating to the handling of a confidential diplomatic cable—often referred to as the “cipher case.”

• Additional cases involving allegations of misuse of authority and contempt of court.

Khan and his Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party deny wrongdoing, insisting the cases are politically motivated and aimed at preventing his return to power. Pakistan’s government and judiciary, however, argue that the convictions followed due legal process.

Political and Personal Consequences

The consequences of Imran Khan’s imprisonment have been far-reaching:

• Political impact: His detention has weakened PTI’s ability to campaign freely, reshaping Pakistan’s electoral landscape and intensifying claims of political suppression.

• Public unrest: Protests and clashes between supporters and security forces have erupted periodically, highlighting deep divisions within society.

• Personal toll: Khan’s lawyers have raised concerns about his health and wellbeing, citing stress, isolation, and the strain of prolonged incarceration.

International Reaction

Human rights groups and international observers have expressed concern about the fairness of proceedings and the conditions under which Khan is held. Some foreign governments have urged Pakistan to uphold democratic norms and judicial independence, while Islamabad insists the cases are strictly legal, not political.

A Symbol Beyond the Cell

Whether viewed as accountability or persecution, Imran Khan’s prison cell has become a symbol of Pakistan’s broader struggle between civilian politics, the judiciary, and powerful state institutions. As appeals continue and political tensions remain high, his detention is likely to shape Pakistan’s future long after the prison doors eventually open.

Attached is a news article regarding imran khan prison conditions 

https://news.sky.com/story/imran-khans-sons-fear-they-may-never-see-him-again-as-former-pakistan-pm-held-in-death-cell-13484410

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Kieran Hayler Denies Rape and Sexual Assault Charges Involving 13-Year-Old Girl

Kieran Hayler, the 38-year-old former husband of TV personality Katie Price, has formally denied charges that he raped and sexually assaulted a 13-year-old girl. 

Hayler appeared at Lewes Crown Court in East Sussex on Wednesday, where he entered not guilty pleas to three counts of rape and one count of sexual assault.  The alleged offences are said to have taken place at an address in West Sussex in 2016, when the girl was 13 and Hayler was married to Katie Price.  

At the court hearing, Hayler was dressed in a navy coat and grey tie, and confirmed his identity before entering his pleas.  He is currently out on bail, with conditions including that he does not contact the alleged victim.  

Upcoming Trial and Court Dates

A trial has been set for October 6, 2026, where the case will be heard over an estimated one-week period.  Before that, Hayler is due back in court for a pre-trial review on April 23 next year.  

His Denial and Legal Position

Hayler’s legal team has issued a statement saying he “strongly denies the allegations made against him in their entirety.”  They added that he is fully cooperating with the police investigation and believes his name will be cleared through the judicial process.  

Under UK law, individuals charged with criminal offences are presumed innocent until proven guilty in court. The trial will examine all evidence before any verdict is reached.

Background

Hayler became known publicly through his past relationship with television personality Katie Price, whom he married in 2013. The couple later divorced in 2021 after separating in 2018.  They share children together, and their high-profile relationship has frequently attracted media attention.  

The identity of the alleged victim is protected by law due to her age, and Sussex Police have confirmed she has been offered support from specially trained officers as enquiries continue.  

Attached is a News article regarding Kieran hayler pleads not guilty to raping a 13 year old girl 

https://www.northwaleschronicle.co.uk/news/national/25704913.katie-prices-ex-husband-denies-rape-charges/

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Tragic Death of Macclesfield FC Forward Ethan McLeod in Car Crash

Football in England has been struck by a devastating loss with the death of 21-year-old forward Ethan McLeod, who was killed in a car accident while returning from a match on Tuesday night. 

McLeod, who had recently signed for Macclesfield FC, died after his vehicle collided with a metal barrier on the M1 motorway near Junction 15, Northamptonshire, late on the evening of 16 December 2025. Emergency services and members of the public attended the scene, but he was pronounced dead at the roadside.  

A Promising Career Cut Short

A product of the Wolverhampton Wanderers academy, where he joined at just seven years old, McLeod was regarded as a talented and hard-working forward. After spending a decade at Wolves, he played for non-league sides including Alvechurch, Rushall Olympic and Stourbridge before joining Macclesfield in July 2025.  

During his time with Macclesfield, he made several appearances and scored goals that drew admiration from teammates, coaches and supporters alike. His infectious personality, professionalism, and dedication made him a respected figure in the dressing room.  

Club and Community Reaction

Macclesfield FC issued a heartfelt tribute, describing McLeod as “an incredibly talented and well-respected member of our first-team squad who had his whole life ahead of him.” The club’s statement reflected the profound sadness felt throughout the organisation, saying his “unique smile that mesmerised us all will never be forgotten”.  

The Wolves, where McLeod began his football journey, said they were “heartbroken” at the tragic news and announced that a minute’s silence would be held at their upcoming Premier League fixture in his honour.  

Tributes have also poured in from former clubs, teammates, and supporters across English football, recognising not only his ability on the pitch but the positive impact he had on those around him.  

Remembering Ethan McLeod

The tragic death of Ethan McLeod has left a deep void in the hearts of the Macclesfield community and the wider football family. At just 21, his rising career was brutally cut short, and the loss resonates far beyond the clubs he represented.

As investigations into the crash continue, friends, family, teammates and fans are coming together to mourn and celebrate a young life and career full of potential — a reminder of the fragile and precious nature of life itself.  

Attached is a News article regarding Macclesfield football Players dies in car crash 

https://news.sky.com/story/ethan-mcleod-macclesfield-footballer-dies-in-car-accident-on-way-back-from-game-13484810

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Viral Claim About Adele’s Drinking Sparks Health Debate — But Where’s the Proof?

Recent online chatter has circulated a dramatic claim that Adele once drank 25 bottles of wine in a single night and remained “sober,” with some posts going further by suggesting this proves alcoholism and inevitable long-term health damage. The story is attention-grabbing — but it collapses under basic scrutiny.

An Extraordinary Claim Without Evidence

There is no verified interview, medical record, or credible reporting to support the idea that Adele consumed anything close to 25 bottles of wine in one night. To put the number in context, that amount would equate to dozens of standard drinks — a level that would almost certainly cause acute alcohol poisoning, medical emergency, or death for nearly anyone. Claims that someone could do this and remain “sober” contradict established medical science.

In short: the claim lacks evidence and plausibility.

Why “Staying Sober” After Extreme Drinking Is a Myth

Alcohol affects the central nervous system in predictable ways. Even people with high tolerance cannot bypass alcohol’s physiological impact. At extreme levels, alcohol depresses breathing, disrupts heart rhythm, and overwhelms the liver’s ability to metabolize toxins. The notion of drinking enormous quantities without impairment is often a misunderstanding of tolerance — or pure exaggeration.

Alcoholism: A Medical Diagnosis, Not a Headline

Labeling someone an “alcoholic” based on a rumor is misleading and harmful. Alcohol use disorder is a clinical diagnosis that depends on patterns over time, loss of control, dependence, and negative consequences — not viral anecdotes. Publicly available interviews show Adele has spoken candidly in the past about lifestyle changes, including periods of drinking less or abstaining, which directly undermines claims of unchecked dependency.

Real Health Risks — Explained Responsibly

While the story itself appears unfounded, it does open the door to a legitimate discussion about alcohol’s health risks when consumption is excessive:

• Liver disease (fatty liver, hepatitis, cirrhosis)

• Cardiovascular problems, including high blood pressure and stroke

• Cognitive impairment and increased anxiety or depression

• Higher cancer risk, particularly breast and digestive cancers

These outcomes are tied to sustained heavy drinking, not a single sensationalized night — and certainly not an unverified tale about a specific individual.

The Cost of Viral Misinformation

Celebrities often become targets of exaggerated or fabricated stories that spread quickly online. When such claims blur the line between fact and fiction, they can stigmatize individuals and trivialize serious health issues. Discussing alcohol harm is important — but it should be done accurately, ethically, and without scapegoating.

Bottom Line

There is no credible evidence that Adele drank 25 bottles of wine in one night, stayed sober, or suffers from alcoholism. The story appears to be a viral exaggeration rather than reality. Conversations about alcohol and health matter — but they should be grounded in facts, not rumors.

Attached is a news article regarding alcoholism 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c26x122kmwyt

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561

Smileband News

Dear 222 News viewers, sponsored by smileband, 

Abramovich Seeks to Release £2.5bn Chelsea Proceeds for Ukraine Support

Roman Abramovich has renewed efforts to unlock £2.5 billion from the sale of Chelsea FC, pledging the money to support Ukraine following Russia’s full-scale invasion.

The funds have been frozen in the UK since 2022, when Abramovich sold Chelsea under a special government licence after being sanctioned over alleged links to the Kremlin. From the outset, the billionaire committed to placing the entire net proceeds into a foundation dedicated to humanitarian assistance connected to the war in Ukraine.

A Deal Trapped by Sanctions

Abramovich sold Chelsea in May 2022 to a consortium led by Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital. While the club changed hands, the proceeds were locked in a UK bank account, pending approval from UK government regulators. Officials have insisted that any release must comply strictly with sanctions and ensure the money is used exclusively for humanitarian purposes—such as aid for refugees, medical relief, and reconstruction—rather than any military activity.

Renewed Push to Free the Funds

Sources close to the process say Abramovich has intensified discussions with UK authorities to resolve legal and technical hurdles delaying the transfer. His representatives argue that prolonged freezing undermines the original pledge to help civilians affected by the conflict and that a clear governance structure can guarantee transparent, humanitarian-only spending.

Political and Legal Sensitivities

The case remains politically sensitive. Critics question whether Abramovich should retain any influence over how the funds are distributed, given the sanctions regime and the broader context of Russia’s war against Ukraine. The UK government has signalled it will not authorise a release unless there are watertight assurances on oversight and compliance.

What Happens Next?

If approved, the £2.5bn would represent one of the largest private humanitarian commitments linked to the war, potentially funding long-term relief and rebuilding efforts. Until an agreement is reached, however, the money will remain frozen—symbolising the complex intersection of sport, geopolitics, and sanctions that followed Russia’s invasion from Russia.

For now, the world watches to see whether a breakthrough can finally turn the Chelsea sale proceeds into tangible support for those suffering from the war’s devastation.

Attached is a news article regarding abramovich being told to give out 2.5 billion to support the war in Ukraine 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2e64lr3zeo.amp

Article written and configured by Christopher Stanley 

In-- Google tag (gtag.js) --> <script async src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?id=G-XDGJVZXVQ4"></script> <script> window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-XDGJVZXVQ4'); </script>

<script src="https://cdn-eu.pagesense.io/js/smilebandltd/45e5a7e3cddc4e92ba91fba8dc

894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36

https://www.legalentityidentifier.co.uk/leicert/894500L65WEHZ4XKDX36/

https://www.zoominfo.com/c/smileband/541441561