:00:09. > :00:12.In the end it was physicists not search missions that extinguished
:00:13. > :00:16.the final hopes of relatives. Complex calculation of satellite
:00:17. > :00:23.pings confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt that flight MH370 crashed into
:00:24. > :00:29.the Southern Indian Ocean. The Malaysian authorities with the
:00:30. > :00:35.deftness we have now come to expect informed some relatives by text
:00:36. > :00:40.message. We now know the where but not the how or the why. The black
:00:41. > :00:46.box flight recorder has two weeks of battery power left. An oceanographer
:00:47. > :00:53.who knows the roaring 40s says it won't be easy to find in that time.
:00:54. > :00:57.This one-time radical Islamist brought a storm down on his head by
:00:58. > :01:04.not being offended by cartoons. He asks what's life like for Muslims
:01:05. > :01:08.who go outside the mainstream? We all ourselves an ex-Muslim, it is
:01:09. > :01:10.not enough to call myself an atheist, because the atheist in
:01:11. > :01:14.Britain doesn't face the same problems I do, getting death threats
:01:15. > :01:20.for leaving Islam. We will ask if this kind of portrayal is fair to
:01:21. > :01:27.Islam? And the art and poetry of the young John Lennon. As you all know,
:01:28. > :01:31.Harris won the general election with a very maul Marjorie over the
:01:32. > :01:36.torture, putting the Labour partly back into power after a large
:01:37. > :01:50.abscess, he couldn't have done that without the barking of the trade
:01:51. > :01:53.onions! The many relatives of the 239 people on board the missing
:01:54. > :01:57.millation airlines plane heard the news they never wanted to today,
:01:58. > :02:00.that the aircraft has definitely crashed into the Southern Indian
:02:01. > :02:03.Ocean. No wreckage has been recovered, but the end to hope does
:02:04. > :02:15.not mean an end to questions. Some of which may now never be answered.
:02:16. > :02:20.We have this report. Being told the worst this Chinese woman screams an
:02:21. > :02:25.anguished prayer to her Government to help mind MH370. This was the
:02:26. > :02:33.moment that the plane went from being officially missing to
:02:34. > :02:35.officially lost. Shortly after the families were told in private the
:02:36. > :02:51.Malaysian Prime Minister made the news public. Imnmauset has been able
:02:52. > :03:04.to shed more light on MH370's flight path, according to this new data,
:03:05. > :03:09.flight MH370 ended in the Southern Indian Ocean. The new information
:03:10. > :03:15.came from here in London at the headquarters of the British
:03:16. > :03:19.satellite company Inmarsat. What was the new information that you were
:03:20. > :03:24.able to give to the Malaysian authorities? It was a refinement on
:03:25. > :03:28.what we submitted on the 11th of March to the investigation. On the
:03:29. > :03:31.11th of March we were only able to give a direction of travel and then
:03:32. > :03:34.we had to whittle down the information to the north and south.
:03:35. > :03:39.What we did in the intervening time was to look at the network
:03:40. > :03:43.information, compare it with other Malaysian 777s that had flown and
:03:44. > :03:48.been connected to our network, and compare the northern route pattern
:03:49. > :03:51.with the southern route pattern. We discovered the southern route
:03:52. > :03:55.matched the signals we got over the intervening six or seven hours that
:03:56. > :04:04.we reported on the 11th and that narrowed down which direction you
:04:05. > :04:08.should be looking. The frequency of a signal will move whether or not
:04:09. > :04:12.you are moving towards the signal. This confirmed to Inmarsat that the
:04:13. > :04:16.plane could only have gone south. Given the capabilities of satellite
:04:17. > :04:21.technology, is it reasonable that planes don't routinely and regularly
:04:22. > :04:28.broadcast their exact position. You could have it tomorrow, an aircraft
:04:29. > :04:33.travelling at 470, 500 knots should be reporting every 15-minutes to
:04:34. > :04:36.half an hour. They had there would be no question where the aircraft
:04:37. > :04:39.was, even before it ran out of fuel. The sun is rising in western
:04:40. > :04:43.Australia, search aircraft will set out again looking for wreckage.
:04:44. > :04:47.Yesterday both Australian and Chinese planes reported multiple
:04:48. > :04:55.large objects in the sea. Surface vessels are on route. If wreckage is
:04:56. > :05:01.confirmed there is a long way to go to find out what happened. When Air
:05:02. > :05:04.France flight 447 crashed in 2009, the wreckage was found after five
:05:05. > :05:08.days. The flight recorders weren't located for nearly another two
:05:09. > :05:12.years. One factor in everyone's minds now, the sonar pingers
:05:13. > :05:19.attached to the voice and flight data recorders only have around 30
:05:20. > :05:22.days of battery life. In the case of the Malaysian Airlines flight it is
:05:23. > :05:30.18 days since it disappeared. Time is voning out. There are multiple
:05:31. > :05:36.phases to the search. It is finding the debris and tracking back to the
:05:37. > :05:40.impact point. The 477 flight gave us a broad area that was the area where
:05:41. > :05:44.the undersea search started. That involved using different types of
:05:45. > :05:49.equipment to listen to the pingers attached to the black box. And to
:05:50. > :05:54.stand the ocean bottom to finally find the debris field. Having been
:05:55. > :05:58.told what happened, the relatives of the passengers then could be years
:05:59. > :06:06.of finding out why they have lost so much. That is if they ever find out
:06:07. > :06:11.for sure. We have with us someone who worked on the recovery of the
:06:12. > :06:16.Air France wreckage in 2011. We have Steven Trimable from Flight
:06:17. > :06:20.International magazine also. What are the chances of finding why this
:06:21. > :06:26.plane came down? They are not good. Because first we have to find this
:06:27. > :06:32.wreckage, that will be a monumental task. It will be far more difficult
:06:33. > :06:36.than what we experienced with the Air France plane which up until that
:06:37. > :06:41.time was one of the most difficult challenges in turn for solving why
:06:42. > :06:47.an airliner crashed in the ocean. And this line that David Grossman
:06:48. > :06:51.was mentioning there about the black box which isn't black at all, it is
:06:52. > :06:57.orange. That's correct. Having only a couple of weeks battery life left
:06:58. > :07:02.on its transmitter, does that make it almost impossible to find or
:07:03. > :07:08.what? Virtually. We would have to be incredibly lucky to be able to
:07:09. > :07:11.detect that black box with, it is actually an acoustic pinger attached
:07:12. > :07:15.to the black box that is pinging, once a second for 30 days, nominally
:07:16. > :07:20.before that runs out. And the problem is, you need to be virtually
:07:21. > :07:25.right over the top of it, the detection range for a listening
:07:26. > :07:30.device to hear the pinger is less than 2,000 ms. We have been talking
:07:31. > :07:39.about searches of 10s of thousands of square nautical miles in the past
:07:40. > :07:46.four to five days. To think we go from that level of uncertainty to a
:07:47. > :07:50.spot in the ocean is improbable. The only thing that could come out is a
:07:51. > :07:53.miraculous piece of detective work that no-one has ever known about
:07:54. > :07:59.before. We had that today with Inmarsat. The techniques they tried
:08:00. > :08:03.today to at least confirm the southern Hemisphere had never been
:08:04. > :08:09.done before. So you know, we would need a miracle like that I think in
:08:10. > :08:28.terms of detecting the blacks box. What's your estimate of the chances
:08:29. > :08:32.of finding out what caused this tragedy?tragedy? This tragedy? Ed
:08:33. > :08:40.Not good at all if we don't find the black box. What has come out is how
:08:41. > :08:44.primitive communication devices are to locate plane in the sky, are you
:08:45. > :08:48.surprised by that, you are probably not surprised, you are an expert. I
:08:49. > :08:55.think a lot of passengers would be? You are asking me? Yeah? Yes. Well
:08:56. > :09:00.I'm not surprised and we have known this has been an issue for a long
:09:01. > :09:05.time. Air France 447 highlighted the issue. This particular one is sort
:09:06. > :09:11.of extreme, it is the extreme case. We have never seen anything like it.
:09:12. > :09:15.It was in a place where we thought it was being tracked. Then it
:09:16. > :09:22.diverted off that path unseen after it turned off its transponder. And
:09:23. > :09:28.that is, that sequence of events just has never happened. What do you
:09:29. > :09:33.make of what we have learned about the technology? In terms of tracking
:09:34. > :09:38.planes and in terms of detecting black boxes on the bottom of the
:09:39. > :09:41.ocean it is wanting. It hasn't changed in my entire career. It
:09:42. > :09:47.would give us a much better chance of finding it. And that's, we have
:09:48. > :09:50.been lucky in the past. We have been very fortunate, most major air
:09:51. > :09:54.disasters have been involved in terms of what actually happened and
:09:55. > :09:57.we have been able to find the wreckage and find the black boxes,
:09:58. > :10:03.we have been able to recover the data and hand it over to the
:10:04. > :10:07.investigators for them to say what happened. But in this instance there
:10:08. > :10:15.is a very real chance that this plane will never be located. What
:10:16. > :10:22.are the technological advances ought to be incorporated as standard? For
:10:23. > :10:27.this particular issue I think the thing that the regulators are going
:10:28. > :10:31.to look at is what happened to cause those, all the systems on the
:10:32. > :10:35.aeroplane to stop speaking to us and stop transmitting. If there is any
:10:36. > :10:38.way to foolproof those systems, while still enabling the pilot to
:10:39. > :10:42.have authority over any malfunctions in case they overheat or something
:10:43. > :10:46.like that, that was the first line of defence that failed us. The
:10:47. > :10:50.second thing is to get perhaps a system on board the aircraft that
:10:51. > :10:54.can continuously transmit or at least transmit in short bursts if
:10:55. > :10:57.something bad is happening to let us know where it is, and give us a
:10:58. > :11:01.better idea of its location and what's happening on board the
:11:02. > :11:08.aircraft so we can narrow the search zone to something within a few miles
:11:09. > :11:12.of where the aircraft was crashed. Thank you both very much indeed
:11:13. > :11:15.thank you. A spokesman for the Muslim community, how many times
:11:16. > :11:20.have we heard those words and what do they mean? How do you get the
:11:21. > :11:24.job? What exactly is the Muslim community and is there just one of
:11:25. > :11:27.them? These questions arise every time there is a certain kind of
:11:28. > :11:30.incident. Most recently reporters were sent scurrying to dig out
:11:31. > :11:36.individuals who could be tagged this way in the latest row over cartoons
:11:37. > :11:41.of the Prophet Mohammed. Such depictions are deeply offensive to
:11:42. > :11:46.Muslims, but not to others. When a former Islamist radical Mr Nawaz,
:11:47. > :11:50.who chairs the Quilliam Foundation and is standing as a Liberal
:11:51. > :11:54.Democrat now. When he tweeted this apparently innocuous picture to the
:11:55. > :11:58.world saying that it didn't offend him, he brought a storm down on his
:11:59. > :12:11.head. We asked him to explain what it is about. Throughout my life
:12:12. > :12:17.being a Muslim has been part of my identity, for a period it was the
:12:18. > :12:22.defining part. I used to be an Islamist and a member of extremist
:12:23. > :12:27.group. Islam is the religion of 80 million
:12:28. > :12:34.Pakistanis and 40 million Indians and it is great world brotherhood.
:12:35. > :12:39.Times have changed since the big wave of post-war immigration to the
:12:40. > :12:44.UK, when my grandfather arrived here and so Muslims in Britain.
:12:45. > :12:47.Traditionally Muslim communities voices have been relatively opaque
:12:48. > :12:52.for the media. After 9/11 the question of who speaks for Muslims
:12:53. > :12:57.became crucial. The media sought to hear from the Muslim voice, that
:12:58. > :13:02.tended to be male, middle-aged and relatively conservative. This is the
:13:03. > :13:07.star and writer of the comedy Citizen Khan. So you are a community
:13:08. > :13:12.leader, what exactly do you do? Lead the community. Right, but what does
:13:13. > :13:18.that entail? Community leading. The idea of Mr Khan initial it was a
:13:19. > :13:22.satirical character, and there I was watching local news, it was post
:13:23. > :13:26.9/11 watching local news and there was a habit of finding the guy with
:13:27. > :13:30.the longest beard, placing him in front of the mosque and asking him
:13:31. > :13:36.about something that's happening 5,000 miles away. It was funny. It
:13:37. > :13:40.was funny but it is also quite a scary proposition, I kept looking
:13:41. > :13:46.and thinking who is this guy. I insecured the wrath of some -- I
:13:47. > :13:51.incurred the wrath of some of those claiming to speak for the community
:13:52. > :13:53.when I retweeted a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed claiming I wasn't
:13:54. > :13:57.offended, it prompted a huge reaction from some people, who
:13:58. > :14:00.rejected the idea of a debate on the subject, and who seemed to think
:14:01. > :14:04.they were speaking on behalf of all Muslims. This mosque was established
:14:05. > :14:10.more than 16 years ago, we invite Muslims from any sect. This is an
:14:11. > :14:13.Iman at south Woodford mosque, he recognises that those who shout
:14:14. > :14:17.loudest can dominate the debate. The Muslims are used to discussing or to
:14:18. > :14:21.respect the other opinion. It is either my way or the highway.
:14:22. > :14:27.Because if I don't agree with you you are going to hit me you are
:14:28. > :14:31.going to criticise me or belittle me or you are going to shun me
:14:32. > :14:35.completely from the community I live in. Who do you think speaks on
:14:36. > :14:43.behalf of Muslims in this country? This is a major issue that we
:14:44. > :14:49.haven't got a unified or united or well respected body which would
:14:50. > :14:59.address the concerns or the problems or the needs of the Muslims living
:15:00. > :15:04.in Britain today. There is an increasing number of Muslims who use
:15:05. > :15:06.their faith identity to advance a progressive agenda, yet we seldom
:15:07. > :15:16.hear from them. Who are the minorities within a minority. This
:15:17. > :15:20.man is a rarity in the UK, an openly gay practising Muslim, he feels his
:15:21. > :15:23.voice is not heard. We are not represented for the simple fact that
:15:24. > :15:30.we are excluded from our society because they classify us as haram,
:15:31. > :15:33.my intertation as Muslim is it is an understanding - interpretation as a
:15:34. > :15:37.Muslim is it is an understanding between me and God so I'm not a
:15:38. > :15:42.haram. He believes there are far more like him but afraid to speak
:15:43. > :15:50.out. The population is 70 million of which 2. 7 million are Muslim, on a
:15:51. > :15:57.conservative figure of any society is ranging between 6-10% who happen
:15:58. > :16:03.to be LGBT, which would make 162,000 people who are LGBT who are Muslim.
:16:04. > :16:10.Why do we not have a voice. We do count, we are a percentage of our
:16:11. > :16:15.society. Debates about veil wearing and segregation dominate discussion
:16:16. > :16:19.of women in Islam. Sara runs a human rights charity and doesn't believe
:16:20. > :16:24.feminism and Islam are incompatible. We know there were woman at the time
:16:25. > :16:29.of the prophet actively participating on the battlefield as
:16:30. > :16:34.soldiers. Throughout time women have par Ahtisaari patiented as leaders,
:16:35. > :16:39.scholars, teachers, a lot of the time that history is hidden away, it
:16:40. > :16:43.is covered up, many times by Muslim preachers who try to argue that
:16:44. > :16:51.women are confined to the private sphere. Although their faith offers
:16:52. > :16:54.protection in a new hard world, they might easily outgrow it as they
:16:55. > :16:58.begin to feel more at home. A very old fashioned way of looking
:16:59. > :17:02.at it, but some Muslims who moved to the UK did leave the faith. I
:17:03. > :17:06.believe this is more common than people realise because many who have
:17:07. > :17:16.lost their belief are too afraid to speak openly about it. Matter qualm,
:17:17. > :17:21.-- Mariam you call yourself the Council of Ex-Muslims? It is not
:17:22. > :17:26.enough to call myself an atheist, th don't face the same problems I do,
:17:27. > :17:31.getting death threats for leaving Islam, it is an important aspect of
:17:32. > :17:39.who we are, this challenge against laws that ask for apostates to face
:17:40. > :17:42.death. Insisting Muslim as only identity in countless individuals is
:17:43. > :17:48.part and parcel of the effort to hand them over to the Islamist
:17:49. > :17:52.movement. The idea that community leaders can represent all UK Muslims
:17:53. > :17:57.belongs in the past. We already have a system for representation,
:17:58. > :18:00.parliament and local councils. I want Muslims living in this country
:18:01. > :18:07.to be free to speak their mind like everyone else. And most of all to
:18:08. > :18:11.speak for themselves. A number of Muslim commentators declined to take
:18:12. > :18:14.part in this debate as they didn't want to share a platform with the
:18:15. > :18:19.author of the piece who joins me now, along with the political
:18:20. > :18:24.director of the Huffington Post UK, and the Muslim community activist Mo
:18:25. > :18:28.Ansar. You are not going to sit there and say you didn't expect
:18:29. > :18:31.people to be offended when you tweeted that cartoon? The point I
:18:32. > :18:35.was making is I wasn't offended, and that is on my personal Twitter time,
:18:36. > :18:39.I think that is a very fair point to make. But you knew people would be
:18:40. > :18:42.offended when it went out there? I think some people would be offended,
:18:43. > :18:48.I can't speak for the 2. 7 Muslims that are in the UK. Nor can I speak
:18:49. > :18:56.for the 1. 5 billion Muslims across the world. The petition set up only
:18:57. > :19:00.gained 1% of Muslims' in this country's signatures. You knew what
:19:01. > :19:05.you did was offensive to many people? Some. 1% of this country's
:19:06. > :19:09.Muslims signed a petition asking for my deselection in Hamstead and
:19:10. > :19:14.Kilburn. There are 1. 5 billion Muslims in the world, it was sent
:19:15. > :19:17.out across the world and only gained 20,000 signatures it is not a
:19:18. > :19:22.majority. Some Muslims were owe end iffed, but as Muslim I have the
:19:23. > :19:28.right to say I wasn't offended. They were offended by my lack of offence!
:19:29. > :19:33.You knew people would be offended by it? Some people, yes. What could you
:19:34. > :19:36.find anything to be offensive? I didn't find it offensive, I don't
:19:37. > :19:42.know. I think the fact that people found his lack of offence offensive
:19:43. > :19:45.I think is absurd, it is palpably absurd. He has been for many years
:19:46. > :19:49.somebody who the Government has used as a community leader and someone
:19:50. > :19:52.who speaks on behalf of Muslim commune toes the important thing is
:19:53. > :19:56.this though, although I didn't find it particularly offensive there were
:19:57. > :20:00.always gob to be lots of people who did. This is an very interesting
:20:01. > :20:03.distinction, you are saying you didn't find it offensive? Not
:20:04. > :20:08.really. But you found the identity of the tweeter offensive? No, I
:20:09. > :20:12.found the idea that a potential parliamentary candidate would take
:20:13. > :20:16.steps which he knew, either knowingly or recklessly would offend
:20:17. > :20:20.lots of people and took that risk on purpose to offend those people shows
:20:21. > :20:24.a grave lack of judgment. And we hold our parliamentary candidates to
:20:25. > :20:30.account. He said it didn't offend him? But linking to a website which
:20:31. > :20:35.depicts prophets in bed together or doing that. Sorry there was no link
:20:36. > :20:39.to a website. There was no link to any website, let's be clear. What I
:20:40. > :20:42.was attempting to do was simply speak up on principle for the
:20:43. > :20:46.minorities within the minorities, for example those we saw in this
:20:47. > :20:50.film who feel they cannot speak because they are silenced by voices
:20:51. > :20:54.that claim to speak in the name of authenticity and tradition and say
:20:55. > :20:58.you are not allowed to express a divergent opinion. It is odd to
:20:59. > :21:02.attack community leaders, I don't too many community leaders only
:21:03. > :21:06.those who work in their sphere of expertise, but to paint yourself in
:21:07. > :21:11.the guise you are attacking. You said you are speaking for them. I
:21:12. > :21:15.said I'm not. You represent the Liberal Democrats. Because I have
:21:16. > :21:20.been elected by them. As a Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate you
:21:21. > :21:27.knew tweeting things that might have been seen as gratuitously offensive.
:21:28. > :21:33.But racism is offensive to some people. Telling people to F-off on
:21:34. > :21:41.your Twitter timeline. I'm standing for parliament and you are. Is it
:21:42. > :21:46.offensive to you that I tweeted the cartoon? I did. I find cartoons
:21:47. > :21:50.about the Prophet Mohammed offensive. Please explain what is
:21:51. > :21:54.offensive? Let me speak you have had a six-minute film can I speak. I
:21:55. > :21:58.don't care about the cartoons. You just said you do. They were
:21:59. > :22:02.attention-seeking provocative whatever it is, can I finish the
:22:03. > :22:06.point. My point is as Mo pointed out and a lot of journalists don't point
:22:07. > :22:11.out, you have a long history of upsetting people in the Muslim
:22:12. > :22:15.community in a gratuitous manner. What do you find the offensive?
:22:16. > :22:20.Because in Islam you don't depict the prophet and you don't depict him
:22:21. > :22:23.in bed with another prophet. You depicted a cartoon from a series.
:22:24. > :22:29.What was offensive about the one that people saw? If you tweet one
:22:30. > :22:33.cartoon (all speak at once) You two are in the same boat, I was going to
:22:34. > :22:37.say bed, but that would I offend you. You don't object to the cartoon
:22:38. > :22:41.but the identity of the tweeter? I do object to the cartoon, I have a
:22:42. > :22:45.right to be offended just as he has the right to be offensive, he has a
:22:46. > :22:54.right to tweet the cartoon, I defend his right to do, violent threats are
:22:55. > :22:57.outrageous. The point is it wasn't a/another tweeting it. What was
:22:58. > :23:00.offensive about the cartoon I tweeted? It was one of a series of
:23:01. > :23:05.cartoon. What was offensive about that particular one? Just because I
:23:06. > :23:10.have a page of the book doesn't mean I don't represent the whole book. Do
:23:11. > :23:15.you believe in every single view of everyone you ever quote? I'm not
:23:16. > :23:19.here to debate the cartoon I don't care about it. You clearly do you
:23:20. > :23:24.find it offensive. I do find it offensive, I think it was a mistake
:23:25. > :23:31.for them to go after you for the cartoons. Its because your
:23:32. > :23:35.organisation has demonised and tried to descredit Islam organisations.
:23:36. > :23:39.Let me finish the point, he talks about community leaders in the film.
:23:40. > :23:43.There was an important point he made about community leaders? He says
:23:44. > :23:50.they don't speak on behalf of Muslims, I agree. You think I have a
:23:51. > :23:55.right to tweet the cartoon and the agreeing with the film, what is the
:23:56. > :23:58.debate? It is straw men, saying you are a dissenter and speaking out for
:23:59. > :24:02.Muslims. The reason Newsnight invited you on to give that
:24:03. > :24:07.impression. There are people with grassroots support in the Muslim
:24:08. > :24:11.communities, fighting against gender rights and extremism, he doesn't
:24:12. > :24:15.speak for them. He has zero credibility in the Muslim commune
:24:16. > :24:19.tie and is loathed by many Muslims because he demoniseds mainstream
:24:20. > :24:24.organisations as supporters of Al-Qaeda, he goes around promoting
:24:25. > :24:27.the Government line on extremism and the EDL, that is the problem. You
:24:28. > :24:32.are one of these community leaders aren't you? I don't know, am I, I
:24:33. > :24:37.have never professed to be a community leader or bought or sold a
:24:38. > :24:43.community leader, I won't parrot George Galloway, I never said I'm a
:24:44. > :24:50.community leader, than him and his group of sycophants like painting it
:24:51. > :24:54.in black and white. He has always had extremist standpoint and never
:24:55. > :24:58.moved away from it. The electorate will be looking towards someone who
:24:59. > :25:02.is saying I'm the Gate Keeper of Islam in this country and defining
:25:03. > :25:05.it. And you are? I have never said I am, and I'm not standing for
:25:06. > :25:09.parliament. However somebody who has been rejected by every mainstream
:25:10. > :25:13.Muslim civil society organisation and has no credibility and issues
:25:14. > :25:18.threats and harassment to other people, I think people will, you
:25:19. > :25:22.want to make yourself a martyr of free speech, having had a six-minute
:25:23. > :25:26.film you want to make yourself a martyr of free speech and you are
:25:27. > :25:30.not. Neither of you have a problem with me tweeting the cartoon. (All
:25:31. > :25:35.speaking at once) Both of you agree I have the right to, and neither of
:25:36. > :25:42.you have a problem with the film. I have many problems with the film.
:25:43. > :25:47.There is sweeping generalisations about Muslims. Should you be
:25:48. > :25:50.depending. Can I speak? As a political candidate should you be
:25:51. > :25:54.defending large parts of the community. This is playing the man
:25:55. > :26:00.and not the ball, it is what this film is about was the idea that I
:26:01. > :26:04.don't sit here to claim... You are invited on to make these films. I
:26:05. > :26:09.don't claim I'm speaking here for everybody. You do. You said you have
:26:10. > :26:12.speaking for minorities. People who are actually fighting for
:26:13. > :26:16.minorities. Why is it we don't see a broader range of Muslim spokesmen?
:26:17. > :26:19.Let me answer that question for you, let's talk about the role of the
:26:20. > :26:24.media, tonight you have a Muslim debate with three male Muslim
:26:25. > :26:27.panellists where is the woman, where is the Muslim woman, she was dropped
:26:28. > :26:31.before the show began. So your viewers at home think there are no
:26:32. > :26:35.women who can speak within the British community. As Sara said
:26:36. > :26:39.women are active in the Muslim community for centuries, where are
:26:40. > :26:43.they tonight, this is the media's discussion. There were two women in
:26:44. > :26:50.that film? One of them was an ex-Muslim. The woman was dropped. I
:26:51. > :26:55.think that was a mistake to not have a Muslim woman on the panel. It
:26:56. > :26:59.speaks volume about the media role. I would be happy to see a more
:27:00. > :27:07.diverse section of Muslims and opinions. You ask a very important
:27:08. > :27:11.question a mainstream media commentator attacked me this weekend
:27:12. > :27:14.on Twitter because he believed me to have homophobic views without
:27:15. > :27:18.checking that I have been standing for gay rights and working with the
:27:19. > :27:22.transgender community for over 15 years, I wonder had he seen my
:27:23. > :27:28.profile picture and when I complained about it he insulted me.
:27:29. > :27:32.You can't get away with this. And he said I would never come on his show
:27:33. > :27:37.again. If that is how we abuse the Muslim voice in this country.
:27:38. > :27:42.Answering the main question Muslims speak for Muslims. I wish the media
:27:43. > :27:46.would understand that rather than picking to people on their behalf.
:27:47. > :27:49.Western political leaders arranged to meet tonight and in the
:27:50. > :27:54.Netherlands to discuss nuclear matters, all that is put to one side
:27:55. > :27:58.as they try to find further ways of showing their disapproval of Russia.
:27:59. > :28:04.They know for all their huffing and puffing over the Russian seizure of
:28:05. > :28:08.Crimea, President Putin has got what he wanted and there is precious
:28:09. > :28:11.little anyone can do about it. We will talk about where the crisis
:28:12. > :28:20.goes from here in a moment. First we're in the Hague. . Me, as you
:28:21. > :28:23.say, a big -- Jeremy, as you say, a big diplomatic occasion, all sorts
:28:24. > :28:27.of things on the margins. Earlier this evening a meeting between the
:28:28. > :28:31.Russian and Ukrainian foreign ministers very interesting. But what
:28:32. > :28:35.does it represent, a first crack in Moscow's rejection of that interim
:28:36. > :28:42.Government in the Ukraine, perhaps. That a cunning ploy to take the
:28:43. > :28:45.Ukrainians, to confuse them, if you like, before some further move, or a
:28:46. > :28:49.response to western sanctions. In the old days we would have said
:28:50. > :28:55.let's get a Kremlinologist to try to analyse this. And the fact that
:28:56. > :28:58.Kremlinology seems to be back in fashion is a measure of how changed
:28:59. > :29:04.these times are, and how we are once again at a moment of east-west
:29:05. > :29:08.tension. It wasn't meant to be like this, the Dutch summit is a
:29:09. > :29:13.long-arranged event on nuclear security. But instead of peddling
:29:14. > :29:19.sedately towards a safer future, it has become a telling lesson in how
:29:20. > :29:22.things are going backwards. The crisis in relations with Russia has
:29:23. > :29:28.produced clear threats of what lies in store if they go further in
:29:29. > :29:31.Ukraine. These reports are concerning and we need to send a
:29:32. > :29:35.very clear message to the Russian Government and to President Putin,
:29:36. > :29:39.that it will be completely unacceptable to go further into
:29:40. > :29:43.Ukraine and that would trigger a sanction from the EU, from the US,
:29:44. > :29:47.from other countries as well and we need to be very, very clear about
:29:48. > :29:51.that. So when the G7 leaders met this evening, in a hastily arranged
:29:52. > :29:56.session on the margins of this summit, it was to snub Russia and to
:29:57. > :30:02.agree concerted action. The sanctions they will take to hurt
:30:03. > :30:07.Russia's economy if President Putin goes further. Faced with this, the
:30:08. > :30:11.Russian leader side-stepped any humiliation, sending his Foreign
:30:12. > :30:18.Minister instead, to talk about nuclear, and to insist that the west
:30:19. > :30:25.turning what was G8 into G7 didn't matter any way. TRANSLATION: G8 is
:30:26. > :30:31.an informal club, nobody can oust anyone out of there. G8 has played
:30:32. > :30:35.its part, G20 makes all the significant decision. By and large
:30:36. > :30:39.there are other platforms to discuss the big issues. If western partners
:30:40. > :30:47.believe the format has defeated itself, we don't cling to it. But
:30:48. > :30:52.this is serious for Russia, because it emerged tonight that the leaders
:30:53. > :30:57.will now use the G7 forum to pile further pressure on the Kremlin. We
:30:58. > :31:03.are going to have officials and ministers meeting in the weeks to
:31:04. > :31:06.come to examine not just how we can continue to co-ordinate our
:31:07. > :31:11.sanctions but how we can look at options to increase those if
:31:12. > :31:15.necessary in particular we're task our energy ministers to meet, so
:31:16. > :31:20.they can, that's a very sensitive area as you know. But we can example
:31:21. > :31:25.with the options are available to use long-term to continue the
:31:26. > :31:28.pressure on the Putin Government. With that warning brandished,
:31:29. > :31:34.President Obama and the others returned as it were to the scheduled
:31:35. > :31:37.programme. Dinner with the King and Queen of the Netherland. A message
:31:38. > :31:43.has been sent of a western willingness to damage Russia and of
:31:44. > :31:47.the Kremlin's defiance over Crimea. These mark this summit out as a
:31:48. > :31:51.milestone in the deterioration of the east-west relationship. There
:31:52. > :31:57.have been ructions before, of course, like after Russia's brief
:31:58. > :32:02.war with Georgia in 2008 but it is different this time. Russian actions
:32:03. > :32:06.in Crimea call into question the whole basis upon which European
:32:07. > :32:11.peace has been kept since 1945, and it is very hard to see quite how
:32:12. > :32:16.things can go right back to normal. There are still questions about
:32:17. > :32:25.western resolve, and their willingness to take economic Payne.
:32:26. > :32:50.Pain, that very debate has shown how par things have gone over the past
:32:51. > :32:53.few weeks. We have our guests. How genuinely dangerous do you judge
:32:54. > :32:57.this occupation to be? It is extremely dangerous, on a number of
:32:58. > :33:04.levels, it shows that Russia now intends to defy and undermine the
:33:05. > :33:20.system of the, the legal system and the political system created in
:33:21. > :33:25.Europe after the war. They have reached a new level of challenging
:33:26. > :33:30.the norms of truth and honesty and diplomacy. It is signalling a change
:33:31. > :33:38.and a watershed moment. Putin read pretty accurately precisely how far
:33:39. > :33:44.or how not very far western opinion was prepared to go He read the fact
:33:45. > :33:48.that if he took over Crimea nobody would do anything about it. I don't
:33:49. > :33:53.agree that it is a real watershed moment. Russia's breaking all the
:33:54. > :33:58.stable rules of European order. I think Russia is doing something
:33:59. > :34:02.which it usually does reacting to a situation in a fairly improvised
:34:03. > :34:06.way. Although the actual takeover plans were contingent ones taken off
:34:07. > :34:10.the shelf and worked very well. It is trying to prevent what it sees as
:34:11. > :34:22.the creeping influence of both EU and NATO together eroding its core
:34:23. > :34:26.of its notional your racial Eurasian union. There will have to be a
:34:27. > :34:35.recalibration between west and east and their relationship, how do you
:34:36. > :34:39.suggest it is done? We have gone from having someone we thought was a
:34:40. > :34:45.partner and we now have an adversary. That means that we have
:34:46. > :34:48.got to give some pretty clear, unequivocal guarantees to NATO
:34:49. > :34:54.members who border Russia. If you are in the Baltics you are scared
:34:55. > :34:59.and anxious. We have got to reassure them, we have got to make sure that
:35:00. > :35:04.the Ukrainian transition to democracy gets sustained with some
:35:05. > :35:11.serious economic help, and if we do that and we adopt, I think, a cool
:35:12. > :35:15.judicious temperament that makes clear that Russia cannot proceed a
:35:16. > :35:22.step further, I think we're going to be OK. But, I agree with Anne, I
:35:23. > :35:29.think it really is one of the first moments in the new world that's
:35:30. > :35:34.begun with 2014. There is no question this is a new moment. He
:35:35. > :35:37.sound a little more sanguine than you doesn't he? He's using nicer
:35:38. > :35:45.language, maybe because he's Canadian. May I comment on the
:35:46. > :35:48.language. I do think it is unhelpful, although not so
:35:49. > :35:53.inaccurate to use zero sum game language. Too many of us on all
:35:54. > :35:57.sides are saying what our loss is your gain, your gain is our loss. I
:35:58. > :36:03.don't think we need to use zero sum language. I actually agree with
:36:04. > :36:09.Michael that the need to be calm and cool and to begin to think long-term
:36:10. > :36:12.is really important at this point. Sanctions might make people feel
:36:13. > :36:16.better and maybe there will be some bad guys who should have been
:36:17. > :36:20.excluded from the international banking system any way who will be
:36:21. > :36:24.chucked out so I'm not worried about them. I think in the long-term we
:36:25. > :36:28.need to think very stragically about what is our relationship with
:36:29. > :36:31.Russia, as Michael says, it has been changed. There have to be at least
:36:32. > :36:36.three parts of it, we mentioned one part. Which is the re-thinking of
:36:37. > :36:40.the role of NATO, probably repositioning NATO bases and forces
:36:41. > :36:44.which are almost entirely concentrated in western Europe now,
:36:45. > :36:52.in order to reassure the eastern countries. But there is also a
:36:53. > :36:58.re-thinking its energy structure of Europe. Perhaps allowing the US
:36:59. > :37:03.really to allow the shipping of gas to Europe. Re-thinking, and
:37:04. > :37:06.re-thinking the role of Russian finance and Russian money in
:37:07. > :37:11.European politics and in Europe. We have to understand that Russia uses
:37:12. > :37:15.money and it uses its western, its companies, which are not fully
:37:16. > :37:18.private companies, in order to affect and change and corrupt
:37:19. > :37:22.European politics. And we need to have some reaction to. That we need
:37:23. > :37:27.to be thinking about that. Alex you are sitting next to her and shaking
:37:28. > :37:30.your head? We need strategic vision and a long-term plan, but the
:37:31. > :37:34.long-term plan you laid out is basically about creating a new
:37:35. > :37:40.divide between Russia and a slightly bigger Europe. No? Yes. Extending
:37:41. > :37:45.NATO bases reassuring, the reassurance is already there for the
:37:46. > :37:48.Baltic states. Russia knows what would happen if it struck against a
:37:49. > :37:52.NATO country. We have to think about fashioning a new political
:37:53. > :37:55.relationship with Russia, which is part of a greater Europe, the
:37:56. > :37:58.mistake made all along for the last 20 years, we haven't been
:37:59. > :38:02.imaginative enough to have led a process by which we reconfigure the
:38:03. > :38:06.security structure of Europe to make Russia feel it is at least a
:38:07. > :38:12.co-author of that system rather than just a subject or object of it. Do
:38:13. > :38:17.you think if that is an ambition worth having? I would like to
:38:18. > :38:26.believe that Alex is right, but I think it was a mistake all along to
:38:27. > :38:30.think that a KGB-led Russia could really be a partner here. I
:38:31. > :38:36.understand the point that Alex is making about not wanting everything
:38:37. > :38:41.to be zero sum. I definitely don't want to go out to the Cold War, I
:38:42. > :38:49.don't want Cold War language. Going back to his actions in Georgia, the
:38:50. > :38:54.constant provocation of ethnic Russians in post-soviet states, the
:38:55. > :39:01.constant acts of provocation here are not things that can really, that
:39:02. > :39:05.we can deal with. I think we are dealing with an adversary here, not
:39:06. > :39:10.a partner. It doesn't require us to set our hair on fire or to take
:39:11. > :39:15.provocative steps backwards, but I think we're dealing with someone who
:39:16. > :39:18.has a very different structural strategic vision of order and of
:39:19. > :39:24.Russia's place in the international system. I think Alex wants to
:39:25. > :39:29.integrate Russia into a system and I don't think that's the game Putin is
:39:30. > :39:34.playing. The key point I would just add is on two issues, we actually
:39:35. > :39:38.need Russia. We need them in relation to Iran, to a possible
:39:39. > :39:42.nuclear deal there and eventually we are going to need them on Syria. So
:39:43. > :39:47.we are dealing with an adversary with whom we have to maintain a
:39:48. > :39:50.disciplined strategic relationship. But we have lost a partnership, and
:39:51. > :39:55.I think any possibility of rebuilding one is gone. OK thank you
:39:56. > :40:00.all very much indeed thank you. Now there are no indications y how
:40:01. > :40:05.many pensioners are hoping to be able to blow their savings on a
:40:06. > :40:08.Lambourghini, and anyone the changes won't come into effect next year.
:40:09. > :40:12.Whether they are good for society or even necessarily the best thing for
:40:13. > :40:16.all pensioners has been rather eclipsed by, for many, by the
:40:17. > :40:20.problems the budget caused the Labour Party. Ed Miliband's response
:40:21. > :40:22.wasn't seen as electrifying, and it took a while for the party to work
:40:23. > :40:26.out whether it supported the policy at all. In the meantime the opinion
:40:27. > :40:41.polls seemed to show the Conservatives making ground. Here is
:40:42. > :40:46.our political editor. There is an old rule in politics, Ronald Regan
:40:47. > :40:49.once said. If you are explaining you are losing. There is a feeling out
:40:50. > :40:54.there in the Labour Party that perhaps the Labour leader himself is
:40:55. > :41:02.having to do a little bit too much explaining of their direction of
:41:03. > :41:06.travel. First it was the response to the budget, he looked, one MP told
:41:07. > :41:11.me, like a man in a rush to jump off a bus who couldn't wait to get out
:41:12. > :41:16.of his seat. His former best friend, they like don't to hear it. Here is
:41:17. > :41:20.what his best friend... Then there was delayed reaction to the pensions
:41:21. > :41:24.announcement, Labour seemed for a while like a party going round in
:41:25. > :41:28.circles. Then the weekend polls not one, two, three, all pointing in the
:41:29. > :41:32.same direction, and then this Monday morning present, a letter from
:41:33. > :41:36.think-tanks on all sides warning the Labour leader not to be risk-averse.
:41:37. > :41:40.It is not about the polls, but clearly you have to take some of
:41:41. > :41:44.that into consideration. And we don't want to see Labour lose, we
:41:45. > :41:47.want to see Labour win, maybe with others, and form a different kind of
:41:48. > :41:51.Government, so it is about making sure that happens. But when they win
:41:52. > :41:56.having power for a purpose. And that means transforming the way in which
:41:57. > :42:02.we think politics is now done. There is a rejection in the letter of a
:42:03. > :42:05.safety-first approach, which is pretty ironic, it is hard to think
:42:06. > :42:08.of more radical policies than some of those the Labour leader has come
:42:09. > :42:12.up with in the last six months. Whether it is about regrouping the
:42:13. > :42:17.energy markets, breaking up the banks, a good two fringers up to the
:42:18. > :42:19.Murdoch empire and other press barons, but there is a growing
:42:20. > :42:24.criticism that they shouldn't be trying to win points on the basis of
:42:25. > :42:27.the Conservatives unpopularity. And an acceptance perhaps that the
:42:28. > :42:32.Tories might not be so unpopular going into the next election. The
:42:33. > :42:35.policy on welfare, for example, has hit a nerve with the public, the
:42:36. > :42:38.vote on the welfare cap bill this Wednesday has been seen as a
:42:39. > :42:43.political trap for Labour MPs who say they will vote against it. I
:42:44. > :42:46.understand why they are, but I also make a plea for them to really
:42:47. > :42:52.engage with the wider electorate. Who are appalled by the global sum
:42:53. > :42:58.we spend and also some individual payments. But all of us should know
:42:59. > :43:01.that we can't actually win on this debate the Tories could run this
:43:02. > :43:07.lowering the cap from now until the election and we're actually going to
:43:08. > :43:10.be following them. Polls any politician will tell you only matter
:43:11. > :43:14.when they are going in the right direction. If you are Labourite now
:43:15. > :43:21.these aren't. Three polls done after the budget have shown the two top
:43:22. > :43:24.parties almost neck and neck, one poll put Labour's lead over the
:43:25. > :43:30.Conservatives at 1%. When dealing with the deficit the coalition has a
:43:31. > :43:35.13-point lead on Labour. At a more personal level fewer people think
:43:36. > :43:40.this year's budget is bad for them. Two years ago 50% of people thought
:43:41. > :43:44.George Osborne's measures would dent their living towards. This year it
:43:45. > :43:48.is just 22. It used to be said Labour could target just 35% of the
:43:49. > :43:52.voters and still win, although without a thumping defeat. But more
:43:53. > :43:58.recently it is not looking quite so cosy against a resurgent Tory Party.
:43:59. > :44:03.When we asked the British public what matters in a political leader,
:44:04. > :44:07.they said three THINLS things, understanding the problems facing
:44:08. > :44:10.Britain, score draw between Ed Miliband and David Cameron. But
:44:11. > :44:15.there are two key factor its, being good in a crisis and capable leader.
:44:16. > :44:22.On both of those Ed Miliband really has some work to do. Against David
:44:23. > :44:25.Cameron. Prime ministers look prime ministerial, Ed Miliband's advisers
:44:26. > :44:28.tell me, they travel in Jaguars and talk at EU summits, Ed Miliband
:44:29. > :44:32.doesn't have to swagger down a corridor in Whitehall to prove he's
:44:33. > :44:37.powerful. He's a politician with big ideas, they say. Tonight Ed Miliband
:44:38. > :44:41.hinted of more big ideas to come. He spoke of the need to be radical on
:44:42. > :44:46.tuition fees, making repayments more progressive. The next clear
:44:47. > :44:49.direction of travel or a few sweets to shut up the noisy kids in the
:44:50. > :44:55.back of the war on what's turning into quite a long journey? With us
:44:56. > :45:00.now is the former Labour Party chair, Hazel Blears. How widely
:45:01. > :45:03.shared is this anxiety about how the party is coming across? I think when
:45:04. > :45:07.you have got polls coming out obviously people get a big concerned
:45:08. > :45:10.about that. But we are a year out from the election. I think there is
:45:11. > :45:14.quite a long way for us to go yet, we have to get on with the job.
:45:15. > :45:18.Meaning what? Getting on with the job? Coming out with policies that
:45:19. > :45:23.are directly addressing the problems people are experiencing, talking in
:45:24. > :45:27.normal human language. I have seen the letter from the think tanks in
:45:28. > :45:33.the Guardian. Actually the sentiments they express I have to
:45:34. > :45:38.own up, I wrote a Fabian pamphlet in 2002, and a White Paper in 2009
:45:39. > :45:41.called Communities in Control with all their principles in it. The
:45:42. > :45:45.challenge for a political party is to turn the big ideas and principles
:45:46. > :45:49.into practical policies about jobs, transport, energy, you know, Ed
:45:50. > :45:52.Miliband caught the imagination of the nation last year when he talked
:45:53. > :45:55.about the energy freeze. And he didn't just talk about an energy
:45:56. > :45:58.freeze, what is interesting is that was to give space to get more
:45:59. > :46:03.competition into a market. I think there are some big themes here, but
:46:04. > :46:07.we do need to make a bit faster progress on turning them into real
:46:08. > :46:12.things people can relate to. When you go around on people's doorsteps,
:46:13. > :46:15.what do they say about Ed Miliband, do they say he has the common touch?
:46:16. > :46:19.I think what they say is the things he's talking about are the things
:46:20. > :46:23.that matter to emthis, which is cost of living, it is energy prices and
:46:24. > :46:26.getting young people into work. It is also about trying to have an
:46:27. > :46:30.economy that isn't just about London but the rest of the country as well.
:46:31. > :46:34.Do they think he speaks their language? I think they do. I think
:46:35. > :46:38.they think the Labour Party speaks their language, it is tough and neck
:46:39. > :46:41.and neck out there. What about Ed Miliband that is who we are talking
:46:42. > :46:46.about here? When he talks about freezing energy prices, taking on
:46:47. > :46:49.vested interests, getting more competition, the people out there
:46:50. > :46:53.see it reflects their lives. He doesn't do that enough? We have to
:46:54. > :46:59.do an awful lot more. 12 months from an election, you need a good long
:47:00. > :47:03.period to campaign on your pledge card, the five promises you want to
:47:04. > :47:08.talk to the nation about and we need to make faster programme. You should
:47:09. > :47:11.already have a clear sense of the policies you are going into the
:47:12. > :47:14.election with and that you will win with? They are starting to emerge,
:47:15. > :47:18.whether we have energy prices with a good offer on child cautious we have
:47:19. > :47:21.talked about building more homes for people. And young people getting
:47:22. > :47:24.into work. We need to turn that into a narrative that says the Labour
:47:25. > :47:27.Party understands your life, we are on your side and we will have
:47:28. > :47:30.practical policies that will make a difference. Why don't people
:47:31. > :47:34.understand that already? You have to go out there and face-to-face, dare
:47:35. > :47:37.I say it the media have never done the Labour Party's job. The way the
:47:38. > :47:40.Labour Party does its job is it knocks on doors, it does
:47:41. > :47:47.face-to-face talking to the public. Thank you very much. Just as
:47:48. > :47:55.hobbyists with metal detogetherers continue to stumble on Roman
:47:56. > :48:02.coinage, it seems the John Lennon hoard is never exhausted. Now a pile
:48:03. > :48:06.of his drawings and skits from hissout will be going under the
:48:07. > :48:14.hammer in -- his youth will be going under the hammer in south bees. --
:48:15. > :48:20.Sothebys. There is hope the former Beatle will be appreciated for his
:48:21. > :48:24.art. Smilie Hello, this is John speaking with his voice. As you all
:48:25. > :48:31.know Harris won the general erection with a very small Marjorie over the
:48:32. > :48:34.tortures, thus putting the partly back into power after a large
:48:35. > :48:40.abscess, he couldn't have done that without span the barking of trade
:48:41. > :48:44.onions. That is S I call a late night current affairs show. Tonight
:48:45. > :48:53.with John Lennon, and his nonsense people about the 1964 general
:48:54. > :48:58.erection, election! How did it come out that you wanted to be a poet and
:48:59. > :49:02.your first book was published? Some American was called Michael Brown, I
:49:03. > :49:06.showed him the stuff and he took it to the publisher and they published
:49:07. > :49:11.it, that was it. One day he came in with a whole lot of pieces of paper.
:49:12. > :49:20.They were many handwritten things, and there were drawings and there
:49:21. > :49:27.were peoples and Poems and letters. I said what I think they are
:49:28. > :49:39.wonderful and brilliant, I said who are they by, he said John Lennon.
:49:40. > :49:44.Fainting teeny boppers and police escorts, these were things the
:49:45. > :49:48.London book scene hadn't previously thrown at Tom on the left here with
:49:49. > :49:53.writers Elizabeth Jane Howard and Kingsley Amos and Lennon himself now
:49:54. > :49:57.he found himself working with a Beatle in the flat where the Fab
:49:58. > :50:02.Four all seemed to live. There was the odd bed or mattress, I got the
:50:03. > :50:09.feeling that they slept there. This is pretty weird. And outside which
:50:10. > :50:16.is even weirder we have 100 or 200 fans clamouring trying to get in. He
:50:17. > :50:20.liked typing didn't he? He liked typing and he had his own
:50:21. > :50:24.typewriter. He did it in his spare time. He said to me, I just did this
:50:25. > :50:28.for my own amusement. I never thought it might be published. He
:50:29. > :50:32.loved drawing. He started drawing when he was about seven or eight as
:50:33. > :50:37.a kid. And he loved writing. And he had always done it, and I suppose he
:50:38. > :50:46.just went into a corner and, he wrote quite quickly and he drew
:50:47. > :50:58.quickly too. And now another poem, Good Dog Nigel "nice dog, good boy,
:50:59. > :51:02.wage tail, we're putting you to sleep Nigel". Lennon's verse owns
:51:03. > :51:10.something to the Goons, in his lifetime it was compared to Edward
:51:11. > :51:14.Lear and Hillar Belock. The longest thing I have written is in this book
:51:15. > :51:20.about Sherlock Holmes, it seemed like a novel to me, it was only six
:51:21. > :51:31.pages. I couldn't do it now, I get fed up, I brought so many characters
:51:32. > :51:34.in I forgot who they were. With these original sketches going under
:51:35. > :51:39.the hammer later in New York this year, at estimates ranging from ?300
:51:40. > :51:45.to more than ?40,000, Lennon's publisher said it is time John's art
:51:46. > :51:50.was appreciated. The artwork nobody talked about or reviewed it. It is
:51:51. > :51:55.very difficult to pinpoint it. I think he's a serious artist. I think
:51:56. > :51:59.he's a really good artist. And if he hadn't been a Beatle I'm suspecting
:52:00. > :52:03.he would have had an art show. But it is some how it was actually a
:52:04. > :52:09.disadvantage being a Beatle in terms of being taken seriously. If you
:52:10. > :52:13.really look at them you get an idea about John that even if you knew him
:52:14. > :52:19.very well you might not have. Reading him, so to speak, from the
:52:20. > :52:25.drawings, is pleasurable and fascinating. This here he surpassed
:52:26. > :52:31.himself by getting a wrestling dog. But who would fight this wonderous
:52:32. > :52:35.beast, I wouldn't for a kick-off, you wouldn't get me past Dudley.
:52:36. > :53:01.That's all for tonight. I will be back tomorrow until then good night.
:53:02. > :53:02.Not as cold out there tonight, there is more cloud around,