大象传媒

you can have all the resolve you want but if you don't have funds nothing can happen. its called the triangle of conflict ie money, means, motivation. break anyone of those and conflict cannot last.

Sue Lloyd Roberts...spot on journo, top of her class...worth a watch....

There are PLENTY of Saudi Arabian femae doctors/nurses/technicians etc and there are mixed gender hospitals too!
57% of university graduates in Saudi Arabia are women.....
Is this just propoganda to justify invading Saudi Arabia for "equal rights?"

RULE BRITANNIA! - MAKES YOU PROUD - DOES IT?

Britain is run by small-minded politicians; for proof run your mind over the last election campaigning. The MOST small-minded rise to high office where they apply the 'psychology of the child' in self-protection and advancement. Boys (and wannabe boys) play with guns - always us and them, where 'them' are cheap lives, expendable. Why do we 'buy' this, again and again? (This time with money we don't have!)

WE ALWAYS GET OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE WHO WANTS TO PLAY WITH GUNS.

medialens on the Libya "humanitarian intervention':





rory has been particularly good in his opposition to this war, on QT and elsewhere, and i wish our journalists could show a montage of UK/Western leaders in previous 'liberal interventionalist' speeches, and the truth as revealed later.

who will come after ghaddafi? Considering ALL the movements our corrupt leaders support in the region are murderous, torturing dictators, i have the unhappy feeling that the Libyan rebels will go the same way.


#4: it is highly striking to those of us who do not rely upon the corporate media for 'facts' about the region, that it is the most socially liberal and pro-development regimes that are the ones that have been clobbered. The most 'pro-Western' regimes are those that ignore basic education, health, benefits etc, all the things that Western *populations* rightly regard as our greatest achievements, and our current Govts are doing their best to dismantle.

the Mahgreb and Arabs are fighting for the same rights as the People in london did this weekend.

the "end of peaceful demonstrations"? What this Govt is doing is tantamout to a total destruction of the UK, and WILL cut short the lives of the millions they will drive into poverty. If THIS isn't violence, albeit indirect, against the People of this country, i don't know what is. Violence begets violence, the Jews who resisted the Nazis may be considered to be violent, even 'terrorists', but they did not INITIATE the violence. The rulers and abusers of our Country might like us to leave our homes, our workplaces, and ultimately our lives, quietly without a murmur or so much as a stick waved in protest, but that does not mean we have to concur with them. Despite Tory/NuLabour propaganda, non-millionaires have rights too.

Teste Teste

'KEEPING THE STATE鈥橲 MONEY IN THE STATE: AN ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION TO THE BUDGET CRISIS'

Ellen Brown

There has been debate as to weather or not Leonardo painted the London version of Virgin of the Rocks.

With people talking about geology and vegetation:



There are problems with both paintings, anatomically the right arm of the Virgin is an impossibility. The way the edges are painted in the background of the London one are problematic, nope there just plain bad or unfinished, and even though I have no knowledge of geology I dont find the formations believable. The human forms and clothes are exquisitely painted with beautiful modulation of the edges, subtle tonal transition with thin glazes taking it to the edge of almost over done - he enjoyed this and maybe didn't know when to stop - its seen in a number of other works by Leonardo.

Disgusting!

Nigel Farage, hurry up and get elected. I've had enough of the EU!

Sick beyond sick.

Education maintenance allowance:

so the LibDems have squeezed 拢100M+ for the new scheme for ALL FE stiudents in the UK.

Meanwhile, despite the crisis in pulbic spending, wer're looking at 拢100 M + in tax breaks for private education for a tiny minoirty of rich families in heavily privileged schools like Eton.

The LibDems may claim to have moderated the Tory cuts, but whichever way you cut it, private education is being subsidiised by the same amount at EMS Mk II - i.e. class war is alive and well and living in the UK.

This IMHO is the dictionary definition of hypocracy - incredibly privilieged private education untouched whilst kids wsho cannot even afford the bus fare to go to schooll are chucked on the scrapheap.

THIS IS OBSCENE,

Neat post #13 richard bunning and perhaps it is no surprise that the new EMS is yet another underhand increment in the welfare state for the stock market parasites ?

Face-masks and balaclavas ?????

First steps to banning the burqa ?????

Hip, hip ....... !


And then a piece about the misogynistic and anti-social practices of an ancient religion in North Africa!

Can it happen here?

Or is it already too late?

But wait the reporter appears to be adhering to the local 鈥榬equirements鈥� !

Oh well!

When in Rome ........

NN: please do not gloat too much about "U-Turns", its tedious. Better to use the time to question Govt ministers about poverty and lack of opportunity in the UK.


change in laws? Absolue BS. The problems were also seen in the student protests, and in the large scale civil disorders under the last Tory regime in the 80s. This Govt was merely waiting for the chance to bring in such legislation, and they KNEW their policies were going to create this very situation. The Tories hate us, absolutely hate us. Instead of changing their dangerous experiemental policies, they would prefer to end the right of civil disorder. There is absolutely NO chance fully peaceful marches will change their minds at all - indeed, Vince Cable set that out clearly. They don't give a sht about us, they want the right to control our behaviour, effectively a totalitarian state, using the high technology we have all known could be used against the population. The police have become the front-line, yet again, between the British People and the incredibly bad Govt in London. It is a shame the police seem not to understand that these high stores attacked are the reason their pensions, and even careers being dramatically reduced - and the protestors have to understand that it is the Police's job to defend these shops and banks. Its the GOVT that is fully at fault, and now they want to ensure the hatred of a few will become the hatred of the many - and THE POLICE will be in the front-line.

we need to change the Govt. Not the laws. And this was foreseen a long time ago.

The report by Sue Lloyd-Roberts in itself was good. However, asking a woman of Somali origin known to have claimed asylum in the Netherlands on debatable grounds as if she serves as the torchbearer for emancipation of Saudi women was not very convincing.

Heavens above! that 'spokesperson for myself' (alledgedly from UK Uncut) was a spoof, wasn't she? No?
She hammered ball after ball into her own net, making silly, loony-left statements but standing by none of them. Yes but no, I'm only speaking for myself, tax the rich, etc.
I'll bet she's got a rainbow crayoned on her fridge.

MEN BEHAVING BADLY: POLITICIANS START WARS, SQUADDIES GET BRUTAL (#12)

Slugs and snails and puppy-dogs tails 76. The fog of war is nothing to the unrestrained brutality of war. Removed from all cultural and retributional constraint, many men are cruel boys. And cruel boys will DO ANYTHING.

Do read Zimbardo's 'Lucifer Effect'. It will get you part way. But REALLY nasty men are beyond the wit on most women. This is one very good reason why decent, honourable WISE leaders are slow to war. Juvenile cipher-ninnies are a different matter.

Emily Maitlis was absolutely shown up on tonight's newsnight by the intelligent,articulate and thoughtful representative of UK UNCUT. The interview served to illustrate that the establishment really don't know what to do with peaceful but effective protesters who are running effective campaigns to out the liars, tax dodgers and thieves who run major british businesses. Increasing hysteria on behalf of the media ,police and CONDEM coalition cannot stop the growing coalition of resistance to the decimation of our welfare state.It was clear from the video footage shown that the police acknowledged the fortnum and mason protest was peaceful and no arrests would be made,why weren't they hauled over the coals about this?I thought the fear of 'the mob' belonged in the last century...
Oh yes-that's where this government want to take us back to!

CRASS, GAUCHE, AND WHOOPS A DAISY (#15)

The display dummy with her boobs out - to be re-draped by SL-R - was about as pathetic a piece of sexual carp as one could imagine. Clearly Sue travels with a producer who knows EDGY from a hole in the road (probably made by a British weapon worth half a mil.)

Mad mad world - the joy of artistic reporting.

good report on Saudi women, it is not "Islam" that these problems come from, it is regional cultural Patriarchy, nevermind the Islam-phobia of the interviewed woman.

It would be interesting to do a comparison report on poor sub-Saharan African women's lives, which communities can be Muslim, Cristian or Traditional. The common point is Patriarchal power, NOT Shariah law - it is PATRIARCHAL cultural elements that reduce Women's Rights, and Islam is only one of them, and not the worst by any means, - was ahead of Christianity for millenia for instance, and probably still is! I had the feeling Emily understood more about this topic but was unable to say it directly because of Journalistic Ethics*. It is often amusing when the interviewer understands more than the interviewed..! ;) ) The Patriarchal 'problems' within Islamic Culture therefore come from the "Hadiths", NOT the Qoran, - if that isn't clear from the discussion tonight, which was occasionally quite technical.

if not Shariah - then what? Which secular judicial system will be used? Not that i am against it!, in principle that can be progressive, with theoretical advances in Human Rights Globally and Nationally, with greater rights given than Islam, Rights to economic justice, Rights to individual Equality, rights to 'Not Be Exploited', Rights to give high Freedoms such as Speech and Religious Tolerance to All. So far, i am afraid, and this goes for Religious as well as Secular, Humanity has shown a woeful history in the history of such Constitutions and Legal systems. But we improve, imho.


*a bit like Politician's Ethics - in today's world they are very cheap to purchase - so it is a pleasant surprise when you encounter them. ;)


--MOHAMMAD DID NOT TAKE A FORCED WIFE!!! Nor was his wedding consummated until years later!! This was absolute slander. But hatred based largely on ignorance, which is a shame, but also a relief. She didn't seem like a bad person to me.


---Camoron has banned "non-violent extremism"!!?!! My god, i wish our Govts would follow that!!!! This is insane, as insane as their Economic issues. Has anyone else ever seen the violence of the US towards the peaceful demonstrators of the Vietnam era?

So now peaceful demonstrations can also be called "extremist"?!? Jeez, it all fits. Tom Sharpe, 'Indecent Exposure'. Yet much of the weekend's violence was genuine - and against property, not people, remember that. The occupation of the 'Fortnum and Mason' was peaceful, as the Police said.


Lucy from ukuncut was wonderful, turning against UKUncut because of a minority, is like hating Britain because our govt is being violent towards human Rights in their own Country. The undercover Police and Anarchists smashed up a few windows and daubed some walls, UKUncut occupied buildings imaginatively, and entertained not a few members of the Public, the Tories are closing buildings that house our Libraries, and reducing access to entertainment for the poorest. Which from them do we need extra Laws to protect us?

the frothing of the Home Secretary could not have been more contrived, she knew full well what would happen this weekend, not only because of the anger generated by Tory policies, but also because even if not organisers in eh meetings, there was definitely secret police embedded in these groups, watching, listening, and reporting back as a minimum - she completely knew what was intended. All he previous night she had planned that Commons appearance afterwards, not quite Oscar level, but pretty good, wasn't it? ;)

"Instead of addressing the issues the rioters were concerned about, the Ghaddafi Regime upped the internal Police Powers Laws, utilizing the "Terrorist" legislation of recent years, crushing internal dissent instead of changing its policies regarding citizen participation and ending of corruption.".

From which much unnecessary bloodshed has come about. I once again urge this Govt to change course. Please.

Emily nearly got angry...i was impressed. The young woman (well, early 30ish then) from that nice uncut group (which they are) but as Paul Mason suggested in his own report, how they can all be lumped together; a representation of all them from the Marxist Commie Unionised public sector libby hate-filled-leftists and the world-owes-them-a-living - and on easy street - mob.


As for the twitter ipod Anarchy mob..them lot in black. Why can't Officer Dibble just give them a slap. they're only young kids of student age -and therefore weak due to their poor diet and lifestyles; getting out of bed mid-afternoon etc.
Whats with the big ooh aahhhg reaction from tbe usual handwringers over these idealistic but misguided kids with back-packs; getting away with scaring people and smashing-up property...just get them slapped...they'll soon run home to mummy and daddy..or go crying to some Journalist from the Guardian with a Lawyer in tow...and that could only happen in England by the way. The rest of the world must look on in amusement with the way we deal with things..that and the Donkey sanctuaries.

One good thing with that smashed-up weekend was we didn't get many repeats on our screens of that moribund speech from Comrade Ed Milliband...which was a good thing really because every time I see him, I chew on my knuckles. Whats that all about?

When Mr Urban starts playing war games I switch off.

--------------------------

Here is some importance for you -



"The U.S. futures regulator said on Monday it has canceled its latest rule-making meeting scheduled on March 30.

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission did not give a reason for the cancellation. The agency had planned to introduce at its 13th rule-making session a measure for data recordkeeping and reporting requirements for swaps prior to implementation of the rule, as well as transition swaps.

The CFTC is writing dozens of regulations to implement the Dodd-Frank law, which was enacted last July and gives the agency oversight of the $600 trillion global swaps market.

The agency also has scheduled a meeting on April 7 to introduce another batch of proposals. Measures including capital and margin requirements for non-bank companies, and a definition for the types of swaps that will be required to clear and trade have yet to be introduced"

'Have we seen the end of the peaceful protest?'
-------

I'd be interested in knowing up to what point 'we' enjoyed such a thing in the pervasive manner suggested.

But in the spirit of the carefully selected topic, and carefully selected guests to 'discuss' it all, I'd hazard not any time soon if the media see more ratings in following the antics of and giving undue voice to less than credible minorities in the 'free speech' process.

Especially those who seem confused between words and deeds, who none the less do get invited onto our screens an awful lot over more sober and intelligent guests.

23 kevseywevsey

"One good thing with that smashed-up weekend was we didn't get many repeats on our screens of that moribund speech from Comrade Ed Milliband..."

大象传媒 News 24 made up for it yesterday. After Cameron gave an update to the House yesterday on the Libya campaign, Ed got up and asked a series of questions that didn't seem to have much to do with Libya. 大象传媒 News 24 rebroadcast Ed's questions but not Cameron's statement or his reply to Ed's questions - just Ed standing up asking a load of questions.

Enjoy Newsnight - but have to ask why last night the presenter wasted the brief interview slot with the UKUncut representative.
All we got was pointless badgering to try to get her to answer a Yes/No question about condemning the actions of people who are not part of UKUncut.
What was the point of that.
I can understand it for some interviews with politicians etc, especially if they are being questioned about broken promises/pleges, but in this case there seemed no merit in taking up almost the entire interview with the line of questioning used.

Well done to the UKUncut rep, neatly answered the interviewer & questioned the entire premise of why she was being asked that point at all (though little good it did her in trying to get something slightly more illuminating or informative aired).

Save your bullying interview style for the few occasions where it's merited please

liberal interventionism was invented in the 1960s by 'ex' marxists and maoists.

riots

i did tell both boris and the met about how wellington designed central london like a napoleonic fort that can be held by a small number of forces. They do not use it. The only reason for not using it is to give the media good images of 'riots'?

One must wonder why shopkeepers do not lock down their shopfronts? is it greed that they remain open?

ooh gosh I missed the fight between Kirsty and the uncut person...must watch now on iPlayer....any blood on the floor?

LEFT BRAIN RIGHT BRAIN (#29)

Excuse the Left Brain 'shorthand' stevie. Five-languaged Emily was firing LB questions for yes/no answers and Ms Uncut was giving Right Brain answers which (as every illiterate knows) cannot be put PROPERLY into words. No blood.

Wisdom it weren't.

A very interesting news item reported by Sue LLoyd Roberts. Her emphasis was placed on the rights of women in Saudi Arabia as being very limited by the enforcement of having to wear the full burqa, not being allowed education or to drive and only able to work with the permission of a male guardian. The points raised by LLoyd Roberts and the Saudi women whom she quoted and interviewed were thought provoking but perhaps not entirely comprehensive.

One of the key points missed in the report was that Islam itself promotes the equality of men and women. Throughout the report men were asked whether women were equal to men, their response was uniformly that women are indeed equal to men but that they have their lives in the home, that they can go out but are provided with a driver. The mentality of the general male citizen in Saudi Arabia was not that women were lower class citizens; they merely felt that women had differing roles to men. This is something that is found in many of the world religions.

The fact that women are not allowed education and that women are held back in the workplace is what can be described as cultural male domination. There is no verse in the Quran that prohibits the education of women. This is something that is engrained in the culture of Saudi Arabia and is not coming from the teaching of Islam. There are millions of Muslim women in the west and indeed the east, who are educated and do go out to work, simply because they are living within the culture of that particular country and not within the culture of Saudi Arabia.

The views expressed after the report by Ayaan Hirsi Ali were quite inconsistent and also not entirely accurate. She herself wants to see the separation of Sharia from politics and human rights. Hirsi Ali has failed to understand the true meaning of what Sharia law is and misses the crucial point that Sharia Law is not universal law in Islam. There are differing schools of jurisprudence within Islam. Saudi Arabia鈥檚 sharia religious laws are based on the doctrine of Wahabism. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia calls its law Sharia Law as many other Muslim countries do just as in the west many call their law common law or civil law but this does not mean that the law itself is the same within all those countries, it is just the system that is the same.

Saudi Arabia has their own Sharia Law and this is not necessarily the laws laid down by the Quran. Hirsi Ali would have made a more sustainable argument had she been able to separate the laws of religion from the law of land. Let us not forget that the Quran itself has already laid down basic human rights such as the right to life, the right to freedom and the right to justice.

鈥淥 ye who believe! Be steadfast in the cause of Allah, bearing witness in equity; and let not a people鈥檚 enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice.鈥� (Holy Quran Chapter 5, verse 9)

Just because Saudi Arabia chose to call its legal system Sharia Law does not mean that it is condoned by the core scriptures of the religion of Islam.

Qur'an gives women independence of mind and body, while giving them a framework for self-protection.

Islam is a comprehensive religion that gives women right to inheritance, education, total control of their earnings. Islamic teachings give a woman a very high status at home as a respected mother, a loved wife and a cherished daughter.

Islam does not impose any unreasonable restrictions on women.

I found that many of Ayaan Hirsi Ali's comments, although interesting, were also flawed on many levels. I found that the comment on Sharia Law did not have a solid standing, because Sharia Law is fundamentally derived from the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet of Islam, however it is not a universal law, mainly because different schools of jurisprudence have their own interpretations of it and thus derive their own understanding of Sharia.
Secondly, I found her comment on the marriage of the Prophet to a "nine year old" girl inaccurate. Had she done further research she would have known that, although a marriage agreement did take place when Ayesha was nine the actual marriage did not take place until she was twelve/thirteen years of age.
Finally, I would like to add a comment on Islam's teachings on women's rights. Islam says that, men and women are different and have different roles; however, Islam is unique in that it promotes the equality of both men and women. Through the religion of Islam woman have been liberated and have been given many rights such as; the right to an education, the right to inherit, the right to seek employment etc. Note that most of these rights were only given to women in the Western world 100/200 years ago, compared to the fact that Islam gave women these rights over 1400 years ago.

A really interesting report has been given by Sue Lloyd-Roberts. Although Sue has portrayed Islam is the root cause of the limited life of Muslim Women in Saudi Arabia, I must emphasise that this has nothing to do with the teachings of Islam. These are merely the limits imposed by the State itself.

Islam has given all the rights to women that she would need to spend a dignified life. In fact Islam has given those rights to women that no other religion claims.

It is well known that in the United Kingdom till as late as 1882, when the first Married Women鈥檚 Property Act was passed by Parliament, a married woman could hold no property of her own, independently of her husband. Any property that an unmarried woman held in her own right vested automatically in her husband on her marriage. A hundred years later traces of this are still found in certain aspects of British Law, which illustrate a married woman鈥檚 position of dependence upon her husband. Contrary to this, Islam has assigned women many rights in which she cherishes her life among which, one position is of economic independence. This independence was established from the very beginning. Such as:
- The husband has to make a settlement (dower or mahr) on the wife, in proportion to his means, at the time of marriage, which if remains unpaid until the time of husbands death, it ranks as a debt to be discharged out of his estate.
- Widow is entitled to her share in the husband鈥檚 estate, which is determined by Shariah law
- Any property that a woman might acquire by her own effort, or might inherit as an heir or receive as a legacy or gift, belongs to her independently of her husband. She may ask her husband to manage it, but if she chooses to manage or administer it herself, he cannot interfere in her management or administration of it.
- A married woman who possesses means of her own may, and in most cases does, contribute a portion or the whole of her independent means towards the upkeep of the household, but is under no obligation to do so. The upkeep of the household is the entire responsibility of the husband, even when the wife is in her own right better off than her husband
What better rights would you claim for a woman than this?

Sue has also harshly pointed the Islamic *Purdah* as 鈥楤lack Rule鈥� and the women as 鈥楤lack Shadows鈥� Unfortunately, She is ignorant of the Divine wisdom behind it. It is a modest dress code to safeguard the sanctity and chastity of women and allows her to mix in the society with confidence. This purdah or veil is not unique to Islam. Even Mary is found Covered from Head to toe. This has been prescribed for women in Islam as a precaution to stop any advancement that can be made towards her by evil minded people. Secondly black colour is not obligatory, any sober colour can be used. The black colour is a tradition in some states/countries.

Regarding the interviews that Sue has shown of few women, I would again emphasize that these represent male dominant society and could also be a few extreme individual cases and that are found in every society, religion and community and therefore it is not just to target Islam on their basis.

What better society can we think of where The Holy Prophet (saw) the founder of Islam has taught his men: 鈥淭he best of you is he who behaves best towards the members of his family.鈥� AND 鈥淗e who brings up his daughters well, and makes no distinction between them and his sons, will be close to me in Paradise.鈥�

A very thought provoking report by Sue Lloyd Roberts. However from the outset she reports on all the things that women 鈥榟ave鈥� to do or 鈥榗annot鈥� do. For example, the first thing that was mentioned was that a women has to wear a burqa, she cannot drive and she is unable to work unless permitted to do so by a male guardian. Therefore, someone who is not acquainted with the Quran will automatically assume that it is the religion of Islam which has ordered this. In actual fact in no verse has the Quran says that a women has no right to an education and no right to work. The Prophet of Islam has said that it is the duty of every man and women to seek knowledge. What we see and hear in this report can be described as cultural in a society which is dominated by males. They see women as having differing roles to men but are not judging them to be inferior.

It is important to separate what is practised culturally in a country (no matter if that country is where Islam originated from) and what is in its Holy scripture. Islam confers on woman all the political and social rights, which man enjoys. She is entitled to all the privileges bestowed upon man including the right to own property, the right to an education, the right to choose who to marry, the right to divorce, and the right to work and earn money. Beside worldly matters, women are also equal to men in the spiritual sense. These rights were not made up by the Prophet but were in the form of instruction given by God Himself in the Quran. Allah says in the Quran as stated in 33:36.

CULTURAL PRESSURE IS LIKE ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE - UNNOTICED

I suggest NewsyNighty ask a Muslim woman (not Muslim woe-man) her view of what English women CANNOT DO (because English woe-men have hi-janed their lives).

Nuff sed.