,http://www.markpreston.co.uk/dp/node/2#comment-464060cheapjordanshoesfreeshipping.com/bolg,cheap authentic jordans
A man has been hailed as a hero after catching a young girl whose mother threw her from the window of Grenfell Tower as it burned.
The four-year-old is safe and uninjured after a brave man called Pat, who lives in a low-rise block next to the tower,?caught her “like a rugby ball tucked in his chest” from the fifth floor.
However,cheap jordan shoes, witnesses fear the worst for her mother,http://www.elllo.org/graphics/cheapjordanshoesfreeshipping.com/bolg, as the flat was engulfed in flames seconds after the small child was thrown out.
Resident Kadelia Woods,cheap jordans, 20,Kicksokok.com, told The Sun: “The mum had the little girl’s head wrapped in a towel and was holding her out of the window and was screaming for help. The fire was raging like crazy. It was about 2am and the flat was filled with smoke.


Boris Johnson has accused the statistics watchdog&nbsp,cheap jordans free shipping;of “wilfully distorting” his words in an extraordinary spat over the claim that Britain will gain ,cheap real jordans?350 million per week from Brexit,http://srvctl.sabrexhost.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=0cheapjordanshoesfreeshipping.com/bolg.


The Foreign Secretary engaged in a tit-for-tat public row with Sir David Norgrove,cheap retro jordans, chairman of the UK Statistics Authority, during which each man effectively accused the other of lying.


Last year Sir David rubbished claims made by Mr Johnson during the Leave campaign that Britain would be ?350m per week better off when it left the EU,cheap air jordans, pointing out that rebates and EU subsidies to the UK meant the net figure was almost ?200m lower.





In an article published for Telegraph, Mr Johnson revisited the claim, saying that: “We will take back control of roughly ?350 million per week. It would be a fine thing... if a lot of that money went on the NHS.”


A front-page article about his essay was headlined: “Boris: Yes, we will take back ?350m from EU for NHS.”


Sir David, who once worked as Margaret Thatcher's private secretary, wrote to the Foreign Secretary today saying he was “surprised and disappointed” that the claim - which was even disowned by the former Ukip leader Nigel Farage after the referendum - had been repeated by him.


He accused him of “a clear misuse of official statistics”. He wrote: “I am surprised and disappointed that you have chosen to repeat the figure of ?350 million per week, in connection with the amount that might be available for extra public spending when we leave the European Union.


“This confuses gross and net contributions. It also assumes that payments currently made to the UK by the EU, including for example for the support of agriculture and scientific research, will not be paid by the UK government when we leave.”


Mr Johnson, apparently rattled, quickly hit back, with his spokesman texting lobby journalists to say: “Boris has spoken to Norgrove and he has made clear that he was complaining about the headlines and not Boris' piece and, in fact, admitted that Boris' wording in the piece was absolutely fine."







Not so, said Sir David. Less than an hour later, a spokesman for the UK Statistics Authority said: "Sir David Norgrove does not believe the issues lie solely with the headlines. He has not changed the conclusion set out in his letter to the Foreign Secretary."


In other words, it was Mr Johnson’s words he had a problem with, not the headline. Within minutes, Mr Johnson’s spokesman was texting again.


“We stand by what we said earlier regarding the call with David Norgrove and the ?350m figure.” Journalists were briefed that Mr Johnson was “pretty angered” by what Sir David had said, “and thinks it’s wrong”.


The Foreign Secretary then fired off a 550-word letter to Sir David, accusing him of a “complete misrepresentation” of his claims about Brexit and urged him to withdraw the criticism.


Where Sir David had been “surprised and disappointed” by Mr Johnson’s claims, Mr Johnson was “surprised and disappointed by your letter”.


He said it was “based on what appeared to be a wilful distortion of the text of my article”.


He said that “taking back control” of ?350m was not the same as saying there would be an extra ?350m available for public spending “and I am amazed that you should impute such a statement to me”.


The letter ends: “If you had any concerns about my article, it would of course have been open to you to address the points with me in private rather than in this way in a public letter. As it is, if you seriously disagree with any of the above, I look forward to hearing your reasoning.”


With each man seemingly determined to have the last word, a spokesman for Sir David said the letter “doesn’t alter his view”.


Hetan Shah, the chief executive of the Royal Statistical Society, said Mr Johnson was playing a "dangerous game" in seeking to "undermine" the independent regulator of public statistics.


He added: "This will not end well."


Labour's Chuka Umunna said: "Yet again Boris's outright lying has been exposed by Britain's statistics watchdog. The ?350m figure was simply wrong during the referendum campaign, and it's wrong now.”