all strike me as heroes of the twentieth century i wonder if their lives stories as inspiring as they are still valid today when the nature of conflict and the nature of politics have changed so dramatically i agree with you that the nature of conflict has changed dramatically but if you take the qualities of somebody like mandela they're enduring and i can give you a very clear example of that i think it was the second time that i met monella and he started speaking to a room of about sixty people and he's not an orator here's a rugby voice but does he started speaking i got to shivers on my skin thirty minutes later i still had what we call an english goose bumps and i asked myself why what is this and eventually i figured out it was the sheer energy of his integrity and i received that bodily so this was clearly a man that you couldn't push around and who would not back down on what he believed

but all of that were standing up to institutional violence an individual against the a process machinery of the state which still happens today but i think the most cruel forms of violence these day. associated with non-state actors who not only rely on violence for practical purposes they faddish eyes it do you really think that the approach of mahatma gandhi could be a fact of with groups like the islamic state i believe that any group one can talk to it's a question of finding the right moment in their campaigns and finding the right people to do that because what matters is the approach of the individuals will the group who are conducting that dialogue what i'm telling you is that when you want to open a dialogue row. other than a monologue rather than

a lecture with somebody that you feel formidably disagree with you have to treat them as a human being with the same concerns fears and so forth as everybody up first we found this when we started a dialogue with nuclear weapons policy makers and those were people from the then soviet union from china from france the united states and the united kingdom all of whom had never met before and all of whom fundamentally disagree with one idea but you know one particular feature of groups like isis is that again violence is not just a means to an and for them it is part of that doctrine they simply don see certain people like b.z.'s as humans and. i'm sure you've heard of some of the horrors they perpetrated on the women and children maybe there are some gravel answers that

are driving their behavior but rather than analyzing those grievances don't you think that we have to stop them first i don't think that the methods for using at the moment to stop them are working. if you if you look at the way that we have ourselves fetish eyes them by putting there any time that a suicide bomber succeeds in paris or brussels or wherever we put their their faces on the front page of the newspaper they become martyrs they become heroes to their own society and it's high time that we stopped doing that that we for beda media to give them the oxygen of publicity i covered syria a lot they weren't there and i met people you know mothers who were raped in the view of their children some mothers who saw their children being killed in front of them just would be for the enjoyment of it without any purpose. how would you personally start a conversation with such

a person who enjoys who revel in seeing human suffering they have been such people throughout history and terrible terrible inflicts if you think of the grief and trauma inflicted not just on the mothers and fathers but the children as well it's on forgivable and nobody can condone that but what i'm saying is it's not new i think it's time now in this century to move out of twentieth century methods of using force against force and find out how to use an advanced consciousness to deal with people who are clearly working from a very base consciousness. well i'm not sure their consciousness is even based one because they're very deliberate very deliberate in their intention to harm i just again i'm sorry to be revolving around around the same question but. if you

consider the experiences of some of these even we women they're just mind boggling you can't imagine that they feel in being for whatever purpose would be capable of that. what's the point of talking to people like that who again kill two three year old children do you think you can bring them back into society that i don't know that i don't know what i do know is that a person like mandela went into jail in one hundred sixty three believing in violence twenty seven years later after the incredible experiences he had in jail he came out believing that only nonviolence would work in negotiating with the most one of the most brutal governments the world has ever seen i lived in south africa for ten years i saw it at first and i know what that kind of violence is and mandela developed the qualities the inner qualities the courage and the ability to bring his colleagues with him. because they wanted to have

a civil war weapons were being thrown at them to have a civil war he managed to convey to his colleagues the need to avert a civil war by negotiating by mediating between those incredibly violent people but you know one difference between institutional violence and these non-state violence that we've been seeing over the last couple of years is that states even the most repressive of them they need some domestic or international legitimacy and this is the average you can use against them they can't afford to. use unjustified cruelty these groups can and they also do that for the for the very purpose of promoting that so i wonder if that example really applies here because the south african regime has repressed as it was was part of the international community and it was trying to still yeah i'm aware of about the apartheid but

there is still a need for them to explain themselves i says doesn't need to explain it's up to anyone let me ask you a question do you think the methods for using at the moment are working i think that they may not be. effective in the medium term but when i think about many women that i met in syria war got the bodies of that you're going to have iris a mother certainly in-doors the killing of the people who did that i think the world would be a better place without them. yes but the method three using at the moment are not minimizing this kind of fighting and one thing i love to bring in here is the work you work at the return of a woman in saving many of the years the women and children and the extraordinary courage that they used in going into that area and bringing them out i think those are the kind of issues we should be highlighting and very few people have talked about that now one of the reasons i wanted to talk to you is because the calls for

nonviolence have this very noble connotation in the west but on the other hand there are also a very often used for geo political reasons for example this country the united kingdom condemned the use of force by the governments of leiby in syria while also supporting armed groups who are openly challenging the those governments don't you think that sometimes it is more honest to discuss the forms of violence that can be used to compel the states to comply with the laws of war rather than calling for nonviolence especially one nonviolence disadvantages your enemies think if you go back to the beginning of what happened in syria you remember that the initial resistance to the assad regime was no violence i'm not sure that was the case

because i think by now there have already been documents documented evidence from the very beginning saudi arabia interfere into into that conflict that not only starts out every bit. of it that was in iraq. its operatives into syria very quickly i think you know and i know that the conflict in syria was a proxy war. and we know that the different sides the sunni and shia forces in the world were really playing out their game and syria and do you think in this situation of proxy wars and i think every work these is a proxy war do you think the violence can really be applied across the board because this to me that you what even if one side tries it the other side would certainly take advantage of it. i think we have to look of course it doesn't always work and of course many people many very brave people are killed using nonviolence but the key thing that i've learned from people like gandhi and mandela is that

the quality of the nonviolence depends on the way that the individual has confronted their own fear and this is what i mean by using at a heightened intelligence a heightened consciousness and there are countless examples of this. recently for example i was talking to a lens in the dunce cap and if you look at the film footage of him confronting the then or thora to you in poland you can see that he was unstoppable he was not afraid and so there was very little they could do with him but negotiate getting such stories is still possible today can you think of any country apart from. rio what that example would be this is going on everywhere my organization that i started off to the oxford research group is called peace direct to in order to set up that organization we identified how many nonviolent locally

led initiatives there are worldwide this was in one thousand nine hundred nine we were able through thirty two criteria to identify three hundred fifty initiatives we did the same thing last year and there are now fifteen hundred now these are people many many of them women who are. lead. methodology to. dispel violence through their encourage let me give you an example. my own. was fifteen in the swat valley of northwestern pakistan probably one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a woman and she decided to get young girls into school with hopefully the use of a tie and milo got shot in the head for doing it completely under turd went on she has now set out a training scheme for young men and young women two hundred fifty of them to go into them addresses and talk to the young men who are being trained for jihad. and

then go home with them to their families and discuss why the court would not approve of suicide bombing they have to sway did two hundred and three suicide bombers from carrying out their mission now we are aware of fifteen hundred examples of what is going on completely below the radar of the media all over the world war three we have to take a very short break now but we will be back in just a few moments. hello my name's peter and i've been living in bushnell for about seven years and

this is a film about just some of the crazy things i've gotten through in the time. when you could get yeah. i'm going to run their store due to the pirates are gonna be there but i still did not get the signal. through the cracks because there. are.

welcome back to worlds apart but still left out where it takes place advocate and founder of oxford research group. where they let me ask you about one more woman who inspired millions of people around the world i'm talking about. myanmar civilian leader she used to be and i kind of for peaceful resistance when she was a poet opposing on mars military who went to bed she's now presented particular and western media almost as a ruthless villain has your own view or her changed my empathy for her has not changed when you think what that woman went through she was challenge to by the then bernie's government that if she wanted to leave the country to be. with her family she could do so not come back she chose

her country that meant that when her husband was dying of cancer she couldn't be with him it meant that she couldn't bring up her two sons so she missed a childhood completely. and she spent fifteen years in confinement in her own home with only her piano and this woman. must have been very deeply scarred by those experiences and also by the courage that she had to show to lead this revolution so i can see that her judgment. may not be accurate and the mold you are suggesting that her difficult life story may have hardened her up and i think that's a very polite way of putting it because she's now accused of essentially overseeing or playing along with what some british callers have already termed

a genocide a preplanned deliberate genocide do you agree with that characterization i think what's happened with her here is very close to a genocide and it unforgivable and it should be immediately rectified and remedied where i think her she stands at the moment is that if she were to condemn it she would be immediately she would be put on a plane and then in the hopes that people have placed in her would be lost so essentially what you're saying is the myanmar government with her is still better than the myanmar government without her. i believe so because if you look to their history. it is horrific and what they have done previously and i believe her influence has been civilizing now she's a graduate of oxford where students just voted to remove her name from the junior

common room where she used to study and it is just the latest in a number of local initiatives to strip her of her on ars having read her biography i think her character her belief system probably didn't change over the last couple of years do you think she was seen in her glory years do you think she was seen for what she was or or what people who were lavishing praise praise on her wanted to see i think we tend to day fight people who stand up against violence and i think that happened but i always perceived her but i've always perceived her as quite modest under that glare of publicity so i don't think she allowed herself to be seduced or. vanity to take of an article. she's also a recipient of nobel peace prize the word that i know you have been nominated for and the one that i assume is important for the global peace community in general

and this tension that there are now calls to strip her of that prize as well reminds me a little bit this situation of at the birth of barack obama who was given that prize early in his presidency before he made all those consequential decisions on the middle east doesn't it bother you that the noble peace prize this major global peace award. became so associated through its recipients with mass violence well i think if you look at the most recent award of the nobel peace prize that went to i can which is an empty nuclear global campaign trying to get the nuclear nations to join. one hundred twenty two of the nations round the table to plan a way to a non-nuclear world so that very different from what you've just outlined yeah absolutely but. you know the award is usually defined by a continuum of recipients and i'm just guess the question i'm asking is whether

perhaps the global community has a tendency to rush in its judgments and to construct a miss rather than see a person or judge the person though if he's or her career i think you have a point to think the board of the award to a bomber was far too early before we done anything really. and i think the award too can give for example what i mean here if anybody should have been stripped of it i think that. obviously. would scream like that makes mistakes and i think they have made them now going back to myanmar know that you've advised the group of elders before and one of them former u.n. secretary general kofi annan chaired the advisory commission on for him in the young mark which submitted its recombination is in late august and it looks like neither the myanmar military in the or the senior groups are really thrilled with

that that kind of recommendations and now formed a special agency to hopefully put some of the of the advice into practice what do you think. will need to succeed in bringing the two sides to any sort of mutually agreeable solution courage. determination and. and an effort i think the most effective way that she could use would be what people like mandela have used in similar circumstances which is to talk to each of the participants each of the protagonists individually and then attempt to bring them all round the table but if you gather people around a peace table who have never met each other and have never been listened to individually you're heading for trouble back in two thousand and seven she said

that she didn't hold no violence for more she didn't hold to nonviolence for moral reasons she thought it was a good political and pragmatic practical tactic and that's an very interesting way of putting it because i think it's a very honest formulation and one could say that political and pragmatic reasons change a lot saw change depending on the on the circumstances what's your personal approach to it do you do you think nonviolence is some kind of or moral philosophy or do you also take it as a political tactic i think there's a practical methodology if you count up at last amended that sums i think there were seventeen or eighteen changes from a violent and abusive government to more democratic governments that had been achieved with by nonviolence using the methadone or g.'s outlined in the existing literature which is now quite well known so if you count up all the eastern

european countries that where that happened but also many much lesser known examples i listed them all in in my ted talk so you can. you can see and the media doesn't really look at the examples where it has worked and and retained its efficiency in those. countries but i wonder if if you approach it as a practical sort of a pragmatic math a political math of whether its appeal would depend centrally on this circumstance because it could be argued there's an answer she now doesn't see a value nonviolence that's why she does not protect those poor we do people we we don't know what she hasn't opened her mouth on them so we don't know we could speculate that we don't know but doesn't that damage their approach that you've given your life to advocate you not at all because there are so many examples i've outlined tree that there are fifteen hundred existing at this moment across the

world and that's only on counting the prevention of war doesn't mean people who are we have been taking child soldiers or whatever they're doing it no there are so many examples of it working that i campaspe agree with you that you're often argue for the empowerment of women suggesting that they're they have a more considerate approach to conflict resolution as you put it man are prone to conflict women a problem to protect do you still stand by that because you mentioned before the difficult life story of fun science a chance some would argue that you know it takes much more for women to succeed in politics to even succeed in nonviolence they may be actually more hardened then than when they said there has to anything i think the political systems that we have at the moment tend to filter to the top people who are very ambitious who are

competitive who will use their elbows to get to the top and a lot of women have found that they needed to adopt a sickening so i don't think this is a gender issue i think this is an issue of feminine intelligence and masculine intelligence know that those qualities that are available to men as they are to women. and if you look at those qualities they include things like compression the ability to listen use your intuition use inclusive a-t. and be of service those are the some of the qualities at least of feminine intelligence and then like to give you an example from the peace table as you probably know. the recent research that was done showed that around the average peace negotiating table two and a half percent of those sitting around the table offend a female result the agreements reached last no more than five years

why because the needs of the victims of war women children the injured the old people are not taken into consideration in those peace agreements whereas when you have more when you have up to ten or fifteen percent of those around the table representing those interests you get peace agreements that last up thirty five years i agree with you that women are generally believed to be a more open to compromise and again i think to some extent miss the cheese a good example because she made some peace with her former enemies the military who into and now she's being brown bit of britain for for that compromise with them and i think that's also very interesting. feature that we may see more and more the line between compromise and treason you know the the betrayal of your values is very dodgy and i think women may also be if they more and more become part of the

recall reconsideration after a day they can be accused of betraying their own where do you how do you define that line between compromise and giving too much. i believe that the answer to this lies in the stage before that and that is what i mentioned about listening because when two parties are being austin negotiate each one thinks i'm right and you're wrong i'm right and you're wrong and it's not until it's one is fully heard by the other using a mediator not a negotiator that you begin to get the ability of one side to understand the. hurt fear etc etc of the other side and vice versa so it's that ability to move from here which is my mind and says i'm right and you're wrong to here and begin to move from

a much more heart based position and that is the way to get results and that's what i've learned from all the people who've been really successful in this and used a different methodology from the normal. very combative way of trying to reach a peace agreement well dr over the thank you very much for your time i really appreciate your wisdom and to our viewers we share your comments on our twitter facebook and youtube pages and i hope to hear again same place same time here on worlds apart.

los angeles the city of luxury and fame but also an alarming number of people living in the streets. a simple fact in l.a. he's there's just not enough shelter even if people on the streets right now decided to come in there's nowhere to come in and it's been a struggle. to get this man found his own response to the problem and constructed dozens of tiny homes for people in need of shelter when you have nothing in order to go. you know having something like this may as well be a castle but do the authorities accept such solution. me house on a city parking space is not a solution your kerf someone wanted touring the site otherwise it will be a free for all the news there a better alternative to end the homelessness crisis. here's what people

have been saying about redacted in the us it is full on awesome the only show i go out of my way to punch you know what it is that really packs a punch. yeah it is the john oliver of harvey americans do the same we are apparently better than two thousand and six and see anybody who never heard of love jack tonight was president of the world bank. but it is worth it seriously send us an e-mail. i. at least at. the end.

supporters of the iranian government held a fourth day of rallies to denounce the uprising that swept across the country and left at least twenty one people dead. however the events of the last few days in iran may be they do not constitute a threat to international peace and security in the security council should not discuss the issues of any country towards human rights issues the un security council as america's request holds an emergency meeting over the situation in iran but some members think it's an internal issue for tehran. one person reportedly died on saturday as the saudi led coalition is apparently continuing its bombing campaign.