they are causing deformation in an environment where their money printing is increasing. their own announces it will of further roll back its compliance with the trying to 15 nuclear deal steps are not taken within the next 10 days to shield it from us. a report about alleged u.s. cyber attacks on russia's power grid it raises questions about whether donald trump is being briefed by his intelligence services on their operations. and 2 sisters in saudi arabia pleaded to the international community for asylum after reports of the suffering years of abuse at the hands of their parents in the kingdom they join a growing number of women looking for a way out of the gulf. it's

midnight here in moscow and you're watching our international live from austin just uranium supporting the stockpile limit set by the 2015 nuclear agreement and it's happening soon. time on june the 27th we will exceed the 300 kilogram limit on reached uranium loans under the nuclear deal after that we will continue to increase the speed of production drastically. a white house representative has responded to that statement by claiming tehran is blackmailing the international community and calling for increased pressure on iran you know nail was joined by. to discuss where the latest developments leave the 2015 agreement. the deal is falling apart so it is pretty much as big as it gets because iran is giving a final warning in 10 days they will start enriching uranium beyond the limits set by the deal and i'm not talking just

a civilian sort of levels they could easily reach those levels of enrichment that would constitute a weapons grade level of enrichment and which could lead to iran obtaining a nuclear weapon and i mean iran is saying that it is a tit for tat measure they're saying that if the united states if they had dropped out of the deal a year ago last year. this whole year iran has been very patient but they're saying well if one side is not you know not following the deal then why should. relations between the u.s. and russia have been on this dying words spiral i think it's safe to say for quite some time but it did come in the renewed focus didn't it this month totally i mean just last week to oil tankers were attacked in the word explosions basically in the gulf of oman and the united states for instance they were very very quick to pin the blame on iran for doing so some middle eastern allies they jumped on that bargain as well have a listen we are confident that we can take

a set of actions that can restore deterrence which is our mission so you say a full range of options does that include a military response force. sometimes even obvious things must be. interim does it in his current firm stance against iran's aggression in the gulf of amman in the persian gulf as well as in the region in general. regime did not respect the japanese prime minister's visit to iran it replied to the foot by attacking one of the. which was japanese one thing all those clips we just saw have in common they're all u.s. allies what about other global reaction what's europe saying oh well interesting thing about that video is that those are pretty much the only u.s. allies that are with washington on you know on this whole thing of pointing the finger of blame at iran and saying yeah tehran had something to do with it when it comes to europe they're not as

a trust the not as trusting i should say as saudi arabia and israel and we call upon sober assessments and wait for some credible evidence to be presented which it is ridiculous to cite secret data in this case ready in the last days we called for the maximum restraint the world cannot afford another crisis especially in an area like that 1st of all we need to investigate who is responsible for the attacks so we can say this or that country was responsible without providing any evidence run by the way they said that if the indeed wanted to have something going on in the gulf of oman if they wanted to block trade to block this trade route they wouldn't have needed a diversion to do so they would have done it openly saying yeah we're blocking it they're saying that iranian military is strong enough to do it out in the open you know when they play by the rules so we can clearly see that there are a lot of there's a lot of distrust when it comes to washington's claims and there are not many

people are on board and some inside the u.s. government blaming trump for ceding this distrust the problem is that we are struggling even in the midst of this solid evidence to persuade our allies to join us in any kind of a response and it shows just how isolated the united states has become so it does seem that trump has backed himself into a corner somewhat he has been so vehement in this stance in the election campaign. tehran. nest of evil this cradle of evil now europe doesn't doesn't want this happening europe doesn't it is not engaging in this sort of rhetoric i mean people inside the u.s. government people in washington not on board they are blaming trump for that and so really trump has quite a lot in front of him quite a lot to do if he wants his policy to succeed. we have from political analysts and

commentators. who police america has proven it's no longer a reliable partner. there is no fairness in the discussion that america wants and everyone needs to understand that america is the one that broke the c.p.o. 8 america is the one who said we reject this mr trump came along very soon after of course at the behest of the persuasion of the hawks like bolton him of course mr netanyahu trump you know it is his wisdom so we say decided that this deal was not a good deal and he was going to walk away from it without any real excuse and now you know they have put draconian sanctions are going to run for quite some time now even one of the c.p.o. it was around the sanctions were not completely removed you know sort of sanctions were removed by america but a new sense of unilateral sanctions were added by america at the time to see you

know it was sorry so the whole thing was somewhat farcical unfortunately. a big question mark hanging over washington is donald trump being kept out of the loop on aspects of foreign policy that is being stolen by a new york times article on cyber warfare which claims u.s. hackers attacked russia's power and. claims whatever actually happened it appears to be a no win situation for everyone. one of the big stories of the weekend america is in the midst of a real cyber war on russia's energy grid at least as the new york times puts it they say a number of current and former u.s. officials told them an american computer code had been deployed inside the grid the grid of the biggest country on this planet was it russian hackers we kept hearing about all the time make no mistake the west government has. plenty of cyber

warriors at their disposal within hours of the story circulating the tromp twitter rant began an act of treason that's how he called the n.y.t. piece and after the usual metaphorical flushing of the paper down the toilet the president called the report a lie but the new york times is adamant they're saying you are wrong mr president. and the press of treason is dangerous we describe the article to the government before publication so story notes president trump own national security officials said there were no concerns so we've been left guessing if the massive hack actually ever took place that's a tough one blood lot of our putin's press secretary doesn't rule out this could have been the case. in this president trump as far as i know denies the information about cyber attacks on russia if indeed some are doing it without informing the president then this indicates

a hypothetical cyber war with russia because we have previously said that our strategic and essentially konami spears have been on the cyber attacks from growing many times and our agencies are countering these attacks you know order to prevent any harm to our economy russia has consistently tried to initiate international coalition to find any type of cyber crime unfortunately our american partners have never taken a stop on this option to do so this time in the past to mr peskov has fallen short of blaming washington for the attacks but they've been out there and there's no doubt some kind of cyber war is on again the new york times was citing government officials without naming them though and so the question is who the hell is making decisions about this potentially enormous operation if the president is really unaware of the whole thing by the way not that long ago the american media was going nuts about russian hackers allegedly trying to screw up the u.s. power. system some feared or true disaster was being plotted by the russians what

are they saying this time around it's very clear that president trump isn't even asking to be briefed on the most pressing issues facing our country intelligence officials are not comfortable sharing intelligence information with the president of the united states apparently pentagon and military officials who are taking the series actions against russia without briefing the president in full see how no one's using the word harker's when it's not america that's being hacked anyway this could really prove to be a great mass or another dirty game but with both scenarios in this story be it the president knows or the president doesn't rock bottom moscow d.c. ties won't get any better. he says describing themselves as refugees have had their twitter account suspended after using the platform to ask the international community for help the past who say they've been subjected to

sustained abuse at the hands of their father used one of their 30 years to plead for asylum a brought. my father took a live and. he is looking for. trace. so on. the only activity to help us move to a safe. shortly after this is a pension reinstated the sister's accounts as well as that of the human rights activists who had been supporting them the social media giant has not offered any comment on its actions in line with company policy the 2 girls have been detailing on the site how their parents allegedly abused them physically and verbally sometimes even causing injuries that warranted medical attention they're now in turkey having escaped while on a family holiday that a human rights advocate we spoke to says social media played a crucial role in helping the girls get their story that. is very important so. anyone who's potentially at risk to publish their case it's going to help them find

asylum loosing in other instances we girls have just waited too long to get their story out there and that's allowed the family to track them down and essentially take them back to saudi against their will we need to be using social media more often it's revolution what allies the way that we can deal with human rights situations like this but at the same time it's hugely risky because when we see accounts being suspended by swiss we have to question them and what their protocols are to protect people who are in the situation obviously they need to install more safeguards for situations the case of the sisters is not unique either it's estimated that around $1000.00 women attempt to flee the kingdom each year one recent high profile case with that of conan who tried to flee to australia via thailand after barricading himself in a hotel room she lost a twitter campaign and was eventually granted asylum in canada

a saudi diplomat later joked to that denying her access to technology might have been more effective than taking her passport. when she arrived in new twitter account and her followers grew to 45000 in one day it would have been better if they'd confiscated her mobile phone instead of her passport. and now the challenge faced by girls fleeing saudi arabia is a new government created smartphone app it can be used in mundane things like new passports and paying parking fines but also allows male family members to track female relatives and even prevent them from traveling but a sterling again says that as the numbers of such cases rises everything must be done to give oppressed women a voice. over the past year we've seen cases such as security for we've seen a house mama done we've seen hints from the u.a.e. and we're seeing more and more and i think as i say each case is why public and in fact. case was published and broadcast inside saudi arabia is

a step to sort of promoting those more secure a secular belief system and the fact that it was since it is quite surprising and therefore that it's going to inspire more and more girls who are suffering abuse to really try to escape in and risk their lives to secure the kind of freedom from abuse that of course everybody wants i mean often these women would like to report the kind of abuse they have suffered to also receives within the countries to the u.a.e. authorities to saudi but they're not taken seriously and in fact it could lead to the increase of mental punishment or even does by way of articulating. now a controversial ban on wearing religious symbols has been passed in canada's quebec province for those working in the public sector now makers have called the move that the right to have a secular public services and separate state and religion the legislation will affect government employees police and teachers for example and will apply it to

muslim headscarves in jewish skullcaps and other various symbols last minute changes to the bill also included the introduction of inspectors who will be tasked with in showing people abide by the new law but some in quebec have criticized the move for violating a basic rights. the prime minister has once again suggested that quebec's values are incompatible with fundamental rights the 16th of june 21000 is the very said date that has just entered the history books of quebec a date that will forever mark a vision of quebec that divides rather than brings together that excludes rather than includes that stigmatizes rather than reconciles. will there be police officers going after people to check if they have religious signs we don't know it's not clear we didn't even have time to analyze this modification clearly they did it in a very undemocratic way to discuss this and we have government who is against the ban canadian writer and political commentator lionel. media and legal analyst and

we also have antonio rossini the head of languages literature and culture at windsor university you're kind of in the middle there thank you gentlemen for coming on to the program to discuss this and it's caused quite a lot of controversy this this law canada considers self the secular state and its public servants and represent the nation to an extent. how do you think i will start with you gavin the other nations will view this you know i don't think they'll be too thrilled but i got to say i mean sikhs should be able to wear their turbans and carry their daggers and the idea of banning a yarmulke is absurd even in any environment whatsoever including policing but i kind of agree with them on the burka i mean if you can't see the person that you're speaking to it that's just not compatible with western culture. yeah i mean

lionel how do you feel about this you know i'm gavin's given his opinion there as a canadian as a fellow canadian how do you feel about it well this is what i want you know trying to apply kind of the universality of human rights and using american law which i'm a lawyer i know a little bit about maybe as a matter expert in canadian law but the 1st thing i would want to know is what was the intent of the statute what is the reason for these alleged bans and prohibitions what is being a numerated even example we had a case in new york city where there was a fellow who was working on subway he was a sikh and he wanted to way or his turban under osha and safety rules he said you have to wear a hard hat he thought they were being unfair in that particular case you could make a point but if somebody says you cannot wear a yarmulke kippa koofi because it might be antagonistic that i think we do look and see where there is fish possible to allow people to enjoy the free exercise of

their religion and to be serving the public at the same time to make sure that this is not some attempt just to thwart your religion using so that of a pretextual reason well as quite interesting i'll ask you about this one tony busy in our answer line of questions if we look at the the controversy we've had. the liberal critic on the bill saying that we have been proud of the progress we've made on discrimination since he passed our bill of rights unanimously in 1975 to include religious liberty she said it's a sad day the justification that we've seen is that mr legality is saying he's protecting social cohesion total contradiction there so that there are 2 sides to this debate aren't there on 10 years as you clearly see what are your thoughts on this yes when i was asked to provide them are you. sincerely kind of divided. the more i think about. the more i feel. especially in an

environment like canada and of course taking aside the case of physical recognizability gavin was saying very wisely that aside in my experience especially in a city like windsor where we have a significant amount of people who exhibit exterior signs of religious belief i have come to discover to my big surprise that sometimes even symbols of religiosity whether they are or and or a way of dressing can actually reflect only just belief more and dentity statement this came up in many conversations i had with my students and i wonder. if this mind run the risk of opening up some sort of a pandora's box that is then what can be construed as

a religious symbol i mean it seems to me it's kind of a slippery slope and i also appreciate very much what law unit was saying one also needs concrete cases to praise the issue and to see it all the look at all the aspects of the issue so in general i would say that in canada such a measure seems frankly other place i don't think i can in my heart of hearts i agree with it yeah i mean gavin you know. antennas come up with quite a few interesting points there and having been to windsor myself you see full diversity in windsor denny and tenure and all here seem to rub along quite nicely there and that doesn't seem to probably average and the rest of the world i think views canada in a similar way they've been open to migrants and they spent decades integrating immigrants from all walks of life and in the statement i've read before and in that law that was passed in 175. reflects that so isn't this new legislation and i'm

sure you've read it gavin it does specify the face veil but it also talks about religious symbols which could be anything how can this law. be passed in a country that has embraced immigrants. i think we have to differentiate between quebec and canada i lived there for 10 years and it's not canadian in fact in quebec they call canada kak canada because there's so much animosity they had a referendum where they almost voted to separate it and then come back they talk about poulain pure wool chemical and it's not an open province you can't to emigrate if you don't speak french your children have to go to french schools if you have a sign that says joe's shoes bigger than show still do joe they have actual language police they come by with polaroid cameras and you get

a fine now they've managed to maintain a culture where their accent is 100 years old and they're nothing like the rest of the country they're nothing like france french people can't understand them so they've managed to maintain this bubble and i can i find it kind of impressive sometimes like the jews in williamsburg and in montreal for that matter huge population 0 up there. but on the other hand if you keep creating this bubble eventually you're going to come across as a fascist you can't have it both ways so yeah i think you just drop it at the facial veils i have to be able to see your face but you're right if you if you start banning sikhs turbans then you ban the cross around the neck then you start banning that little fish bumper sticker that christians have it's a slippery slope that that start to begin and end at facial recognition no matter how obsessed you are with you elaine yeah how are they going to differentiate lionel you know between what is what signifies a religious symbol i mean you know that there were even discussions about wedding

rings and then they decided that that would never pay you know is sauce turning into a joke a bit how far does it go how and what does it mean about targeting because actually in the report the religious symbol that was mentioned was that face veil is that in quebec well 1st and foremost let's make sure we understand what this is about this. says in reference to a lot of people saying we're tired of immigration so somebody somewhere is going to say i'm going to craft the a statute a way that will satisfy a certain contingent but now i've got to figure out how do i do this and not sound and not it be a contravention look let me explain something you know not to you but to you collectively there are limitations as to height weight sometimes of sexuality sometimes religion sometimes particular physical limitations there are there have been questions about whether gays can serve in the

military here for example a great example a new jersey years ago there was a law that said how come these women are walking around with a veil you have got to have it checked can't have a driver's license and have a veil what is it you can't even cash a check until somebody looked and said excuse me there are a number of exemptions people in the military those who may opt out and never became anybody's interest until this came up and now look at this woman wear the veil wait a minute now what if it's a nun a catholic nun mother teresa wow that's a different story that's a veil look we could talk samantha exalt daylong you know now and i know what this is all about the same thing goes with freely exercise a good religion can i smoke dope if i would and from a zion coptic can i drink wine during prohibition it depends is your religion in or you would you're a catholic you can drink wine you're

a native american indian sorry you can't do it we're pretending that there is some mathematical application of fact when this is basically to address a certain faction that want something done on what they believe is the encroachment of people migrating that's it i'm trying to. support lionel's view that i mean it it no that's when you really. then you mean there it does have a bit dangerous when you start reading this doesn't it yes i guess you lionel's collaborative 1 your thinking i mean it's very difficult to establish guidelines and how you distinguish again between that man and in a person who doesn't even wear the hijab because of religiosity but because of my identity which was my discovery and and maybe even the. european person wears the pendant with a crucifix richards kind of common plays inspired of their being lapsed catholics or lapsed christians or whatever you you have. and i also think that gavin said

something very significant i have to agree with them. if feels almost like. come back is a little bit of the nile and there's a little bit of a different place in certain cases and i do believe there is a mixture of. this attempt at preserving the uniqueness of back problems with what lionel very very candidly called the. issue that we all know about and it's probably about controlling or trying to how can i say dress a certain immigration situation i doubt this will that popped up in different historical context if that makes sense yeah i mean if we look at the vote. 73 to 35 that's still quite

a substantial number of people opposing this legislation and actually there's been a lot of backlash because of it as well for people you are so totally right it is a significant number by i have to agree with. even more now that you're refreshing my memory with the actual figures that this is a little ice. going to so many friends who are from come back and there is this. more than the pure land or the pure lame more the idea of the sea so what i am kind of afraid it might have things is to ensure controlling the outwardly appear and that might be collectively religiosity as also this idea of preserving our unique culture like no one can back. it is intimately connected with this feeling that i have seen and i have heard this manifested in

clear or some sort of a feeling of being the. least fast media expression that reservation like we are kind of. and not a culture needs protection whether it is linguistic police or anything else. the feeling i received it was a very clear feeling of we want to preserve what we are but also because we are maybe on their own impression maybe that's a fact i don't know that i've never lived there but the idea that we might be a model of them made it that less we do this kind of protection of our way of life gavin gavin and it's not true i mean all these women these minority groups that. then come back i'll say a threat to the preservation of the culture that. well you have to speak french to be in quebec you cannot get a job in the public service unless you speak french without an accent so the idea

of them being overrun by these burka wearing unilingual angle phones that don't want go back culture to thrive is hard to picture but you gotta hand it to them i mean they have perfectly preserved their country in amber like some weird prehistoric dragonflies no one else has been able to do that toronto brags about their multicultural the multiculturalism they've got drive by shootings gang warfare they're multicultural utopia is a myth and we're seeing this all over canada so you know obviously our 1st instinct is let free people express themselves and the idea of banning yeah macor a christian cross seems totally fascist into radical but on the other hand you know maybe they're nipping it in the bud i mean they've been doing this for a long way longer than canada kopeck is 400 years old canada got their national anthem in 1980 their flag in 1989 maybe they should look to their elders for some

advice on line isn't it because although i am makes even more bizarre the way gavin is describing the legislation about preserving the culture obviously these minority groups to be in those positions in the public sector a role ready doing that so how big a problem is it then that these minority groups are creating for them to go this far. this is the most fascinating part about this marine le pen one time was asked about the burqini and she said that's not french and say what the hell does that mean put that in a statute people know what that means and no you don't understand it's our culture is the way we speak hos cold you're our culture write that down give me a statute that says and i know pretty sight.