Michelet exemplified something the astringent Wilson wished he possessed in greater measure than was actually the case, a generous expansiveness, the vast almost lyrical poetic faculty, vast imaginative faculty, the intuitive earthiness, the constant connection with actually lived lives, whether of an individual or of a mass of people. Without all those things, history becomes a mere series of analytical propositions, at which point, which is I think the lesson for today, when it becomes a series of analytical propositions, it loses the common reader. Instead of being part of our cultural mainstream, trickles in ever diminishing form into the self-evaporating pond of the pure academy. So Wilson painted, but it was Michelet who in effect handed him the brushes. And Michelet corresponded to what Wilson thought, and I certainly, when I read him, imagined the historian was and did, above all, writer as lightning conductor, transmitter of the past in that housing sense, rather than as a comparative political scientist. In other words, paying as much attention to the effect of history on those who read it, see it, hear it, and as simply someone who actually makes available the documents of the dead, to sway us to enlarge our time horizon, to deepen our understanding of what the human animal is, how we behave, how we conduct ourselves. If we're going to do this, Michelet thought, Wilson thought, I still think, history needs to look and sound less like newspaper editorials and more like poetry or even a novel. The condition of history's persuasiveness is the union of the intellect with the literary imagination. Thus, for Michelet who assumed that what he was going to write must matter to the political and moral world of the French, must help them recognize usurpation, particularly bonapartist usurpation, and its second iteration under Napoleon III, the purchase that history could have on the public, how it could shape our own ways of living with each other in a political community, depended crucially on the form of his writing itself, on the persuasiveness of the imaginative reconstruction of lost worlds, and finally on that tricky negotiation between the alien and the familiar, the alien as the irrecoverable strangeness of the past on the one hand, and its shocking closeness, the sense in which everybody who's gone before in some way are lost to us and in some way feel the same grief, the same desire, the same rage, the same joy that we do. When Wilson wrote of the pains that Michelet took to make this trick using the word trick at the highest level of creative and moral quality, moved me a lot and sent me to Michelet. As the revolution in France gathers momentum, Michelet makes the decision to write shorter and shorter paragraphs which eventually turn into one sentence paragraphs and shorter sentences inside those paragraphs, and remember the tradition in the 19th century and indeed as they imagine was the case with Herodotus and Thucydides was a verbal performance that actually children would sit around, listen to history being read to them and it would not be dull. So that the here for example I've got lots of, well I'll give you two very quite short sense of the way Michelet works. How many of you are as okay with French, with French as you are with English? Okay I'll translate it there, not all of you, okay. But you need to listen to the kind of staccato music a little bit, okay. So here's Michelet and I'll read it and I'll translate it into English, should really be translated into Dutch but I haven't had enough coffee for that. Here is that weird moment between the end of the national assembly still living in but guarded, it's before the fall of the Bastille, before the big uprising in Paris and it's sitting in Versailles and it doesn't quite know whether it's safe, you know, the National Assembly which has been the estates general. Here's how Michelet, you have to listen to it almost like chamber music except with a very bad musical instrument my voice. La situation était étrange visablement provisoire. The assembly n'avait pas obéi, it hasn't obeyed, mais le roi n'avait rien révoqué. Le roi avait appelé Néker, the French minister, mais il tenait l'assemblée qu'en prisonnière au milieu des troupes. Mais il avait exclu le public des séances, Michelet's image is coming in. La grande porte restait fermée. L'assemblée entrait par l'arpétite et discutait un week-low. The situation was odd, visibly provisional. The assembly had not been obedient, but the king had not revoked anything, had not retreated. The king had recalled Néker, the minister he swore had started the revolution, but he held the assembly as a prisoner in the middle of his troops. He had avoided, but he had excluded the public, the general public in Versailles from the sessions of the National Assembly, and here this wonderful image that Michelet has, classic Michelet, the great gate to the assembly stayed shut. The assembly had to get into its debating wall by the little door, so that its debates were behind closed doors. Week-low has his sense, of course, of absolutely sealed shut. Here's another little, again, short, lovely piece from just before, again, even further on, when Paris is about to explode, before it's about to explode. Du vingt-trois juillet, de la Manastruois, à l'explosion du peuple, il y eut une halte étrange, une alt étrange, une alt étrange. C'était dit, observateur, c'était un ton orageur, sombre, comme un songe agité, é pénible, plein d'illusions, de troubles, fausses alarmes, fausses nouvelles, faables, inventions de toutes sortes. On savait, on savait pas. On va tout expliquer, tout deviner. From the 23rd of June to the 12th of July, from the threats made by the king to the explosion of the people, there was a weird hiatus, a weird haute. It was like, one observer said, the lull before the storm, it was dark and sombre, like an agitated dream, heavy, full of trouble, fausses alarmes, fausses news, rumors, inventions of all sorts. One knew something, and it's almost impossible to translate this last lovely kind of cadence. On savait, on savait pas. One knew something, oh, you don't know it. One wanted everything explained, one had to guess everything, to devine. The same care with which the web, and this is on with the lecture now, not Michelet, with the web of memory as spun, the illusion of being there, of the overflow between past and present through an intense, acute attention to literary form, to rhythm, rhythm and rhythm, no graduate student should be allowed to get anywhere near a PhD unless he understands the rhythm of historical writing. Now this was the kind of history I wanted to be. The only kind I thought stood a chance of mattering. And I got a long section here, I'm not going to read it, but I just want to say that I grew up very kindly and accurately referred to how important my father as a kind of reader out loud. We not only read all the parts of Shakespeare together over many, many years, but he was used to read Dickens to us out loud, which was, but my father had this sense in which Jewish history and British history had come together during the war and in the person of Churchill. And all I would say is that Churchill really does sort of belong. Whatever you think of Churchill as an historian, Churchill famously said, not altogether comically, that I know that history will be kind to me because I shall write it myself. He did. But of course actually when, there was a very specific moment that Churchill as the writing historian, that's why I'm alive actually, mattered. And it's the third week of May 1940 and there's a revolt brewing in the war cabinet. Churchill has only pretty recently become Prime Minister. And there's a rebellion of the old Chamberlainites, particularly led by the very brilliant Lord Halifax's foreign secretary to do a deal through Mussolini by which the British Empire would be preserved by the Axis powers on condition that Britain made peace with Germany and permitted the total domination of the continent. And Halifax thought it's not such a bad deal because no one, the troops were stranded at Dunkirk. It looks as though they'd all be a quarter of a million of them would be annihilated. Britain stood no chance of surviving the war against this monstrous war apparatus of Hitler. Why not take the deal? Churchill of course was absolutely never going to do this. And he, the two of them, Halifax and Churchill went and had their own kind of historical reveries. Halifax fatally for his own, and luckily for all the rest of us. Halifax went off and walked over his estate in Yorkshire. And he rode rather than walk, he rode over his estate in Yorkshire. And he said, I could not imagine the jackboot striding and violating the landscape I loved. In other words, he didn't have any problem with the jackboot in Holland or anywhere else, but he did have a problem with it in Yorkshire. Churchill of course went back to Chartwell, and he thought about his own writing of the English-speaking peoples. He thought in not entirely sentimental terms about Magna Carta, about the Protestant Reformation, the Civil War, the tradition, call it Wiggish or not, the tradition by which liberty had been, had been protected against absolutism and autocracy. And he did a brilliant thing. He summoned not just the inner core of the war cabinet, which Halifax influenced. John Lukatch, by the way, it's called Five Days in May. It's an absolutely brilliant, short, thrilling book. Very much of the Michelin kind records this. And we have Hugh Dalton's record of this, because the cabinet minutes didn't entirely record it. He brings the entire war cabinet and he makes a speech rather like the famous speeches he'd made to Britain, but this is just the cabinet.  And that point, Hugh Dalton tells us, the whole war cabinet really funded their fists in determined approval on, I mean, that is the point where, historian does change history. It's both the writer of history and the an actor of history. And the next day he sends Halifax off to be ambassador in Washington.  It's an immense throw of the dice, but it meant that, you know, my own Jewish community were not going to end up in smoke. Then the one figure who some of you may know, some of you may not, again, a rather long quotation, but I hope you'll enjoy it, was an extraordinary figure who was really a kind of outrider in this group, because he certainly wasn't particularly left wing. I'm not sure he was any kind of wing. But it was a poetically charged methodological anarchism. A professor called Richard Cobb at Oxford who certainly, if not the greatest, was the most unorthodox historian I ever had the good luck to encounter. I was a young historian at his seminars because there were no seminars on French history at Cambridge University. I used to drive through the sprout fields of Bedfordshire to sit at Cobb's peculiar, in his peculiar presence. Cobb had gone through the penal servitude of the French Dr. Adita, and with a very stony Marxist, Georges Lefebvre, at the end of it, he produced a book called Les Armées Revolutionaires, The Revolutionary Armies, which were not, in fact, soldiers. They were the armies of the Sankulat who were enforcing prices and political orthodoxy out in France. Once Cobb got out from under that ox yoke of ferocious ideology and relentless documentary extraction, he was often running, and the figures towards whom he was sprinting were all dancing on the wild ashore as a French writing. Raymond Cano, above all others, but the demonic Céline too, Michel was a kind of monster to Cobb, but he understood that he was almost as strange as Cobb was himself. Anybody who spat scorned in the eye of lapidary history. So Cobb wrote about the underclass as E.P. Thompson did, but not as heroes, but as petty crooks, scapegraces, people are talking opportunistic ride on a revolutionary rollercoaster to get even with their enemies. He wrote about monsters of cruelty, geniuses of evasion, pregnant girls throwing themselves into the sand, leaving their infants in a basket with a note asking for baptism. The dysfunctional, the unclassifiable, the soiled, the stained, the hopeless. And Cobb did this with a freedom of literary expression that was just breathtaking. Everything he did, he was Monsieur Les Archives, but it was translated into a kind of poetic intensity that burned itself into the imagination. It made Cobb totally impervious, in fact wildly hostile to any grand discussions, probably of this kind of historical thought or to any theoretical framework for shaping the past. But it made him a kind of brilliant ventriloquist for the dead, a resurrectionist. So forgive me for this slightly long reading, but this occurs, and this is the last of my exemplary readings. It occurs at the end of a book, which is a tough book to read. I wouldn't force it on you, called The Police and the People, which is really about the attempt to provide food during the worst years of the revolution for the mass of people, but at the cost of political surrender to whoever was in power, particularly the revolutionary government of the Jacobin. And at the end of it all, I don't know when Richard wrote this late at night, I suspect, in one of his increasingly more infrequent sober moments. And it just is the kind of writing, we all do it, where we don't need to look at our books or our footnotes or anything, we've internalised everything we've been reading, both in the archive and in secondary sources. And you just let Michelin did this all the time, you let the past out. So here is how he ends his book on The Police, the Food and the Revolution. It's the very last page. It's about hunger. I'll take it slowly, because it is in itself an extraordinary piece of writing, in my view. Hunger employs its own outriders. Those who have already experienced it can see it announced, not only in the sky, but in the fields, scrutinised each year with increasing anxiety, week by week, during hot summer months, by 30 million anxious eyes. Questions whether they'll be a good harvester, of course. In the figures for grain prices on the markets, these are the clues. These are all the clues. There's always an element of detection in good hysterical writing. We are crime writers of the past often. Go on with Richard now. So you're looking for the clues about how bad things are going to get. In the amount of movement on the rivers and roads, in the traffic of the barrière, the little area on the periphery of Paris before you pay your customs duty to get in, in the conversation of visiting countrymen, in the letters of country relatives, or in the discrete decrees of government and the unspectacular efforts of municipalities to extend the limits of their cemeteries. In the number of times two men carrying a covered object emerge from a hospital by night in unusually massive orders of quick climb. In the dispatch of a commissioner to Janowa, Geneva, Hamburg, Bown, Tunis, Copenhagen, buying expeditions of grain. In the prayers of the pious, in the secret sermons of barn priests, in the cards of desers de Bonaventure, fortune tellers, for whom famine was a better customer than marriage, violent death, war, or success in money, or in love.  In a sword worn by an imprudent mare, in the shadow thrown at a certain hour of day, seen from a certain angle of a certain statue in a certain town. It, hunger, is something that comes with stealth, without fanfare, yet preceded by a thousand imperceptible signs that the 18th century marginal man could pick out. Just as those who were in the know, the mare, the borough engineer, and the members of the rat killer department, knew that Gaston, with his broad brown and black back, the size of a largeish mastiff, was just one of a race of invaders, a new race of giant rats already in possession of the city, waiting only for the single signal to come up from the sewers and take over. That's the way historians are supposed to write. It's not easy. If young, our young graduate students are not aiming to write like that, they need to find a different job, in my view. Cobb clearly did not give a hoot for any pretense at narrative self-effacement. In this, he was a figure of the 19th century, almost. He thought the objective voice, either apathetic, the sense in which you bring history to life from nowhere, that there's a kind of point of view that is nowhere, that is disembodied, you are just a kind of transparent recorder of documents, the re-presenter of documents. He didn't believe, he thought that was either self-delusion or professional fraud. There was a still small voice that banked to differ from this basis in which the historical profession was built, particularly the phenomenological philosopher R.G. Collingwood. Again, I was going to talk a lot about Collingwood, I'm not going to do this, but Collingwood made in his remarkable book, I think, The Idea of History, which again had a big influence on me. Collingwood, who was not a moral relativist, who did not take the view that there is no fundamental historical truth, it was just that we had always to take account of how we reached it and how we reconstructed it, and we should be unembarrassed about what the work of reconstruction was. Essentially, Collingwood made a crucial distinction between the empirical side of our brain, which goes hunting and gathering with honesty and expansiveness for the evidence, and then the imaginative literary side of our brain, which builds it into something different. He described it as, yeah, he says something beautiful. He's very adamant about the historical imagination, and he quotes Macaulay. Macaulay, in a fine Macaulay truism, said, this is Macaulay now. A perfect historian must possess an imagination sufficiently powerful to make his narrative affecting and picturesque, and Collingwood said, well, that's fine, but he said Macaulay's comment is to underestimate the part played by the historical imagination, which is properly not ornamental but structural. The historian's picture of his subject, whether that subject be a sequence of events or a past state of things, this is all Collingwood, thus appears as a web of imaginative construction stretched between certain fixed points provided by the statements of authorities. It's almost like a beautiful gossip attempt, and you have to stretch the web of your imagination between fixed points of verifiable rock-solid evidence, but the web is the web, the roof is the roof. If those points are frequent and the threads spun from one to the next are constructed with due care, and never merely by arbitrary fancy, the whole picture is constantly verified by appeal to data, to evidence, and runs, this is all Collingwood, runs very little risk of losing touch with the reality it represents. So that is, for me, the job description of the working historian. And now, the end of my lecture, the dismal part of what Nietzsche called the gay science.  What has happened to those legions of writers, to the unapologetic public historians of the servants of Cleo? Well, you can find the qualities of the job description, but for the most part in the pages of historical fiction, which in terms of the audience reading history are in the pages of Hilary Mantel, or Peter Carey, or Rose Tremaine, or Colom Toibin, just the English, David Mitchell, you can even find this care to think about the relationship between evidence and imagination in some films in 12 Years a Slave, even, I think, in Spielberg's wonderful film, so it seemed to me, Lincoln, just concentrating on that one moment, the Emancipation Edict, but those are all, of course, in the last resort, fictions, that Hilary Mantel has claimed some sort of non-literal truth unavailable to historians. I don't agree with Hilary Mantel, either it's the truth or it's not the truth. The issue is where the truth historians who embody all the qualities I've been characterizing are to be found. They are there. One thinks of Christopher Clarke's wonderful book on the beginnings of the First World War, The Sleepwalkers. There are plenty of them there, but they are not, as Rob in his Nietzschean mode said, altogether massively populating the groves of academe. They're the obligation to uphold the paradigm of anti-writing, of counter-writing, of inhabiting a purely academic language world that's made entirely for scholars prevails, to the point that if our young graduate students wanted to write, like Mattingly, for example, or Cobb, they would have no clue about where to start, and often in the way in which Nietzsche had a very short career as a professor, everything works against a graduate student liberating her or himself from the kind of writing which will get you a job. Pierre Biodot was right. Academia is overwhelmed by the need for collective self-reproduction. Professors recoup graduate students who then become his or her team, are trained as much as possible to resemble their mentor with occasional allowances for argument and variation, sometimes the edible gesture of wounding the Dr. Vata so as to make a splash with a thin squirt of academic blood, tolerated prophesied under strictly controlled conditions. The other rituals of the reproductive process, the academic paper with its mandatory positioning against whatever is defined as the reigning orthodoxy, the differentiation, right, somewhat akin to Antler display among aspiring stags, the conference paper at which daring is advertised to the gathered profession, the nicely calculated job talk, fresh but not combative, you all know it, and it goes on and on. The crown PhD becomes junior faculty member, goes through the motions, dons the mask of respectability, becomes in turn the arbitrator and operator of the same routine. Thus another terrible word really mentioned, the integrity of the field. Let us now henceforth call it the fences of the containing paddock are duly protected and shored up. In the meantime, within the academy, not many people care about the challenge of strong, vivid, imaginative, forceful writing. The occasional gesture is made when an otherwise dutiful writer opens their account with a story, but usually it's abandoned for the pie chart, the bar graph, the positioning of your particular point. It doesn't arise organically from the body of the narration. And there are plenty of examples to the contrary, I have to say, but they're not enough and they're only by established professors. David Kiniston's great epic of British life in the 1950s and another great example of how it should be done. But mostly it's all content and no form and the academic, the academy circles the wagons. The public, however, will view go begging and the public does beg. Every time I do a signing at a literary festival or on book tours, parents come along with their children and ask why there isn't more for their children to get stuck into, or very kindly, and I'm sorry, sounds horribly self-serving. I get thanked much more than I deserve for doing this kind of thing at television. There are lots of opportunities now in Britain particularly for young, for school children to engage and for historians to engage with this avid, extra-academic audience. It's a terrific history festival at Draught Valley in England, if you have one here. But I'd love to hear that in the Netherlands, perhaps some of you will be kind enough to tell me when I'm finishing, which is very soon, I promise, that history in the Netherlands has not become a sinkhole, that's not become something from which people flee, that it's not something which, if you take it seriously, it's likely to reduce your credentials for employment.  So instead of actually getting in the kind of history that I've been reading to you and trying to characterise, kids, of course, who are wired for epic and chronology, where do they get it? They get it from the person whom Wilson despised, from Lord of the Rings, from Harry Potter, from Game of Thrones, in a fantasy realm of myth, rather than in the equally thrilling realm of truth. And the failure of the profession to think that any of this is their business, let history be down to nabby, let it be a stroll down memory lane, comes, I believe, at a cost to our shared civic life. Wherever you look at the fate of nations in the globalising world, the return of a kind of tribal nationalism in the epoch of corporate bureaucracies, in the rise of fundamentalist intolerance, the collapse, the surrender, really, of the Enlightenment project of pluralist toleration, in the blowback of post-colonialism in the heart of the European urban world, in the return of anti-Semitism, something giving me, particular grief, notwithstanding Holocaust education, in the fate of the planet itself, where there are great historical environmental books with beautiful writing in the hands of people like Stephen Pine, for example. In issues of epidemiology, the tragic dynamics of revolution, the social distribution of the rewards and penalties of the capitalist market, all these things, understanding is conditioned by informed action, a proper consideration of the dominant matter shaping our own world and that of our children, is impoverished by what David Armitage in his recent History Manifesto has called short-terminism. I go further than that and say that the free world, and I don't sneer at the characterization of the free world, is actually impaired and weakened by its indifference to history, seeing it as harmless costume escapism, or else, on the one hand, Downton Abbey, on the other hand, the impenetrable, endless PhD dissertation. We are weakened because we face the adversaries of our freedom, are those for whom history is manipulated in the interests of imposed subservience. Theocracies of the kind enthroned in Iran, in which law is made by revelation, are definitively ahistorical. They brook no dispute against the Word of God. Tyrannies or despotisms of the kind prevailing in Russia manipulate history to narrow the definitions of allegiance, pledge allegiance to our version of the national past, or be deemed a traitor to it. That, Thucydides, is screaming in his tomb when he contemplates what becomes of history and those circumstances. There are curriculum committees in the United States that have been caught deleting subjects, deemed critical of what they define as patriotic American authenticity, substituting instead feel-good histories with the wrinkles smoothed out and the warts removed, and it was against that that the honor of European history was first flown from the master. Thucydides is masterpiece. The whole honor of history, our moral self-respect, is to be a gadfly and irritant to the complacent, a criminal nuisance to the official version. It's what Mishle was, it's what Richard Cobb was. To do something about this, we can't just write extended newspaper columns or editorials or even, much as I've loved doing so and have inflicted this on you, we can't even just give lectures for the Nexus Institute, we can support the flourishing of the Nexus Institute. We need to go on the offensive against oblivion and our proper weapon of attack is that brilliantly told story, the web of construction over the fixed posts of evidence. We need to tell stories out of which emerge organically all the questions that need to be asked about whichever particular predicament we are grappling with. And lots of academics, I'm sure, here have probably taken terrible offense. We need to leave the campus, everybody. We need to march out of the gates of the monastery and into the world with our inconvenient stories. So, here, in the Nexus Institute, I'm proposing something, a radical rethinking, so radical it verges a bit on the Maoist of what should qualify a student for a PhD in history. Yes, the dissertation based on primary research should be the jewel, the essential treasure. But along with it, no one should receive a doctoral degree unless they spend a semester, a third or a half of a year teaching in a high school. I'll do it myself. I'll start. Absolutely fine. I go into schools a lot in America, but I'm happy to do that. And even in other captive communities, prisons, young offenders, for example, not every day of the week, let's not get carried away. And there was another job description without which you should not be able to get a PhD. The ability with software designers to create a website that can bring these stories to a mobile device, a tablet, to anyone, anywhere, working at a Thai factory in a farm in Africa, anyone with different set of beliefs, a different kind of job. We've never had such powerful means of honoring the Thucydidian vocation of being an irritant and yet assumed that it's someone else's job. It's not someone else's job. It's the scholar's job. It's working historian's job. Taking history out of the academy to the people, however, doesn't have to be a purely digital exercise. Amazingly, last week I was at the Weizmann Institute, kindly asked me there, of science in Israel. And the head of the Weizmann Institute, Daniel Zeichmann, told me that was the amazing thing. That's an extraordinary venture that's been going on for five years in which all of his senior colleagues, these are Nobel Prize-winning scientists, have been taking their science into pubs, into cafes and pubs about once a month and talking about their work to a room full of half-drunk people, essentially. He said, it's brilliant. Everybody loves doing it. That was his view. And why not have a discussion in a pub about colonialism, about the First World War, about the history of race and empire in the Netherlands.  It's time to start shouting a bit again, I think. Otherwise, my friends, the atrophy will be irreversible. It will be. Our children's children, if not our children, will just not see the point. The golden chain of memory will be broken. The practice will be ever-convined to a tinier number of scholars doing nothing but talking to each other in ever-diminishing numbers about less and less. While the world of the past will be left to the movies, the historical romances who make free with the truth, and no one, no one will expect historians to be tellers of tales. There are many, many horrors. Anybody since I began, this is my last paragraph, anyone think of where a great novel in which the honour of the past has somehow miraculously been preserved in the line of an old song? I could sing it for you, maybe that would help. Oranges and lemons, say the bells of St. Clemens. Yes, Liddy, in the third grade? Where does that come from? You know. Yes! Stand up. 1984. Exactly right. It's all well. It's all well. Thank you. You're my new girlfriend. Well, you don't have to be, you don't have to be. There are many horrors in all worlds 1984. O'Brien's rats and all the rest, but the biggest horror is Big Brother's erasure of the past. A wholly successful exercise in cultural lobotomy that dooms mankind to live in a perpetual present. Only that song whistle tune over her by Winston Smith gives him a moment of pause to grieve over the loss. In those circumstances, not perhaps a futurist fantasy, history will indeed just be history. And we will have lost that attribute of our humanity, second only to the power of language, the incomparable treasure of our shared memory. Here's all well on Winston Smith, when long after his matters have gone bad. Everything faded into mist. The past was erased. The erasure was forgotten. The lie had become truth. Thank you.


Today is Saturday the 19th of March I'm Rebecca Tete I'm the coordinator of the event of the night today so today we're just celebrating women as we know in March around the whole world we're celebrating women we're just appreciating what women's about all the title that women carry in the world my husband already told me that a woman it's a it's like a government is it in charge of health it's in charge of education even charged it's a whole government so without a woman there's really nothing so today we take in March we just take that chance that advantage to appreciate all the women starting for our little kids showing them what is about to be a woman the future was is gonna be about so we got a suitable woman and we can have our father our men will come just to support us we can have speeches that can empower women how to empower Congolese women to become greater from where they came from and where they can they're going to so we got a different speech here with a couple people that came here to do it we invite all the community we are we gonna have all different communities for all African different African communities we are American people around here people work with us friends of everybody it's about everybody or when you talk about women we seeing everybody we know determined that just the Congolese with the Congolese we kind of organizing it but it's about all the women that we celebrating we have everybody for all different community I got Asian people in the room I got American people in the room I got people for Sudan for Angola it's about everybody as it's a Congolese instead of African we are African we want to just to show our culture we want to see how we dress up we don't want to be in pain like everybody every single day so you want to show our culture that's our culture we wear we dress up we have we have scarf you're gonna see all kinds of skirt and shirt and skirt it's different so we got a we like to show them to show it to show the whole world how we dress up how as African especially Congolese people how we dress up that actually the fifth one where we're doing we started since 2012 that was our first one with our first president Patrick Campbell we started that was our first event in 2012 in March and then that's that's our fifth one but why not why not celebrating woman we can do that and you know it's a time just to relax it's America we are busy we don't see each other much we don't have time just to be together so we see the time just to be together to show each other our love again so that's is all about want to talk about to all the women around the world who's gonna be maybe seeing me I want the woman to stand up it's about us to stand up well we go in 2015 we don't have to sit and wait but we gotta stand up and see the world the same way as men are seeing the world today tag the team of the month of the year for the woman it's about you know whatever I said equality between men and women so we don't have to sit back and relax we have to push forward just to have great vision because we can accomplish much we are women and I don't know if there's a man international day I never seen that but there's a woman international day because we didn't know that we can accomplish much so wherever you are woman wherever issue you're going to stand stand up when you are you can do better than that greater than that we have great things to show the world to give to the world so woman you can do whatever place you are younger teenager older we got great things to offer on this nation especially in the 90 states or everyone in the world where you are so that's what I'm gonna tell everybody


What did you make of the game? Yeah, we needed... Miquel, a much-needed victory. What did you make of the game? Yeah, we needed that win. It's been a while since we didn't win at home, so it was really important to get the three points. We scored three fantastic goals, and we have the spells in the game. We had some brilliant spells that we could have scored many more, and then when we conceded the goal, we looked nervy. And what's your assessment of the nerviness, then, because we've seen that at different times throughout the course of the season. What did you make of the way that the players handled that? Well, we knew the necessity to win the game, and we wanted to put that right today, and the moment that they scored out of nothing, a counter-attack that we didn't defend well, and they went man-to-man, and they start to throw everything at you. Obviously, they know the situation that they are in. We struggled to play that kind of game. After we got some control and we got Thomas on the pitch, and they really scored the winner. Three amazing goals today, Miquel. Yes, they were fantastic goals, and we could have scored some more. I think we made some big chances as well. Do you understand that the Arsenal fans would be quite frustrated that you were able to score goals like that and that it didn't happen for you last Thursday? Yes, but obviously, Europe is a completely different game. It was a different context, and an inch in football decides whether you're in a final or not, and when you need a little bit of luck, it didn't happen. Obviously, there were things that we could have done much better, and it was a really tough one. But just on those goals, look, first Premier League goal for Emile, first Arsenal goal for William as well, and a beautiful finish from Pepe. There's so much quality in this side, isn't there? Is it just making the tweaks elsewhere that will make sure that... Or is it just more experience that will make sure that you don't put yourself in a difficult situation? Look what you are saying. It's the first Premier League goal for Emile. So we are demanding him a stand as here, and while he's done, still here. But he's playing at the top club, and because he's done well, now when you've got his numbers, he hasn't done that enough, and we cannot put those demands. Really, we have to, because he's done it in the past, and we have to demand much more. The same with Nico, that he can do that, and he needs to do it in a more consistent way, but with the young kids' patience. Speaking of the young kids, Saka, so impressive in that left-back position. Yes, going forward, we know he's a real threat. He gives us something unique, the same as KT. Defensively, there's a lot of things to work on him with him, but he adapts it. We knew, or we believed, that we were going to attack against them the way they set up, and to be fair, he gave us a lot of joy. Chelsea Palace and Brighton next. What's left to fight for, do you think? What we did today, trying to win every match, and see what we finished, you can see the results that are crazy, still in the Premier League in this unprecedented year. So the only thing we can do is win our games, nothing else, we cannot control anything else, because at the moment, you know, in our hands. Thank you very much, thank you. At the end of that game, you needed a win, didn't you? You needed that. I thought that it was important for us to get the win today. Obviously, coming from Thursday, it was obviously difficult for us, but I feel like, yeah, it's a well deserved three points for us today. What did you make of the team performance? I feel like we maybe started a bit slow today. Our heads have been down for a couple of days and stuff, but it was important for us to bounce back. But yeah, I feel like we got into the game, into the second half and stuff, and yeah, we're really happy with the three points. First Premier League goal for you, you've been, I presume, dreaming about that since you were a kid. Yeah, I know, man, it's a real feeling for me to be fair.   I haven't checked it yet, to be fair, but obviously, yeah, it's been a difficult week, but I'm so happy to get three points and score my first goal. How hard has it been, actually, for all of you? Mikkel said it was devastating. You guys were practically in tears at the end of that. How hard has it been and how difficult has it been to pick yourselves up? It's been really difficult for us as a team. It's not nice to lose and be out in the semi-finals of a tournament and stuff, but it's important that we keep our heads up and keep fighting until the end of the season, so that's what we're going to do. It was a good goal for you today. Good finish as well. Thank you. And look, you and the young boys have all been together for a long time. You and Saka link up really, really nicely. How much do you enjoy playing together? So much, you know. We've seen them a few times this season as well, so it was good for us to get a goal together and stuff, so we're really happy with that. How much fight is there left in this side to the end of the season now? Three more games to go? So much, you know, I feel like we're also together still and stuff, and we're all going to fight for each other until the end. Yeah, it's obviously disappointing on Thursday, but we're just going to keep going, keep playing and fighting for each other. Thank you very much. Thank you. Interesting how he talks about heads have been down for a couple of days, against Villarreal on Thursday, but looking at it in isolation tonight, I mean, he'll treasure that moment today, won't he, his first Premier League goal? We're talking about somebody that's been an Arsenal fan from a young age, lived in South London, had to take him across to Aylund five o'clock in the morning to the point where, you know, then they ended up moving over there. This means the world to him to actually play for Arsenal and score for Arsenal, but, you know, he's saying about how hard they're trying and what they're trying. They haven't got nothing to feel down about. They have literally saved this season for Arsenal, whatever there is to save. You know, I'm just pleased that they're continuing to kind of thrive and do well at a time where it's not great at the minute of the club. Yeah, he's shown his technical ability whenever he's been called upon by Miquel Arteza, and we saw that with the goal, didn't we? We did. I've been a big fan of his for a while, not just his technical ability but also his enthusiasm, his desire. His desire to make forward runs to be in dangerous positions to keep it on the move, which is very difficult to defend against. And you saw that all in the goal. He lays it off, he finds himself in a nice position, spots that there's a potential cross coming in, finds himself in a dangerous position in the penalty area. Then he has the composure and the technical ability to finish it because that's not an easy chance. So he's been a bright spark, as Ian said this evening. It's the one thing he wants to do as well, Leon. He wants to add more goals, you know? He's been playing really well and he's had chances in games, he's been saved off the line, goalkeepers making great saves and you can get a little bit down, but the only thing left for him to do for his game because he's got everything, one touch, two touch, round the corner, you know, pace is to add more goals to his game. Once he does that, we're talking about him and Saka. You're hoping that Arsenal can match their progression because if they don't, then people will try and take them off of us. Is that a serious concern? Massive concern. Massive concern that Arsenal are able to sort out whatever's going on upstairs with the manager, with players that's going to come in, whoever he's going to try and bring in to try and, you know what I mean, try to execute whatever game plan he wants to do because these guys are the major part of that. And if they can continue to play like they're playing when you're looking at how we're playing now and it's not great, you know, you saw it against Villarreal, still waiting for the youngsters to do the stuff. If we do not progress as quickly as these guys progress, then you have to be worried about their ambitions and what they want to do because they're fantastic players. And that's quite a statement and as you said earlier Leon, quite rightly, Arsenal has been seen as the perfect, you know, environment for young players to go and hone their skills, not to be a breeding ground for talent that's going to be moved on elsewhere. No, but, you know, have we or do we currently hold Arsenal to a standard that they're no longer at because there's no getting away. Arsenal were one of the best teams in the country for so many years but, you know, they're not at this moment in time, which is a shame for Arsenal but, you know, we're talking about the club and we're talking about the performances tonight. The young players were the best players. The positive ones have played against Arsenal many times and you were always worried going into the game because you knew how much quality they had, how many times they'd looked to play forward, how much you'd be on the back foot. Their imagination was incredible. They're going to create four or five, well, real opportunities, maybe squads. I don't feel that about Arsenal at the moment. They're the only players I look at the squad happy to play quite safe at times and not make forward passes and maybe it's a fearless factor that young players always have when they break into the squad. They play without fear but that's what reminds me of the old Arsenal I used to play against. I think that when you look at the new Arsenal and the way that the manager wants to play, like I've mentioned, it's kind of a regimented kind of way he's playing. It doesn't seem to be any X factor about it where players can go and express themselves. We don't score like we saw the goals today, you know, Pepe we haven't seen a goal like that for a long time for Arsenal. You know, even William with the free kick and stuff like that. We're not seeing chances and goals made apart from the way we see them. Saka or Tierney getting down the edge of the box, crossing it, somebody getting on the end of it. We're not seeing enough shots coming from the edge of the box from people because we've created something, turned it around a corner, someone's got half a chance and they take a shot. Everything seems so like we're trying to score a perfect goal like when we start the season against Arsenal, and once teams work us out you see how hard it is with passing sideways. No passes into areas where it's dangerous, where it might get cut out, but you might be able to get in and it's really hard to watch sometimes. Is that the players deciding to take that upon themselves or is that the instructions from the sidelines? No, I think it's the instructions that they're getting and the way they're trying to play. And we've seen on a lot of occasions, when you look at the amount of chances that Arsenal are not making and the chances they're not creating because it's very easy to shut Arsenal down because of the way they're trying to play out from the back. But at the same time, you know, every time a player goes on the field you always play with imagination.  I didn't expect that the message of Saka is different from the rest of the squad yet. When Saka gets in positions on the field, I mean the very first time I think the ball came into his left hand and he went on with the full back and he decided to go at it. You're seeing that from Saka and you're seeing that from Smith Rowan. They want to be imaginative. They want to be positive. They want to take their opportunities where as he said quite often a lot of the other ones that are passing their honour are thinking I'll just pass on the responsibility to you and it's becoming methodical. You know what Liam, when you watch it like you see Saka and Smith Rowan in the final third of the pitch where I'd like to see a little bit more inventiveness in and around passing out from the back, that midfielder you know, I don't think Danny Subios is that guy. I do like somebody like Martin Erdogar once you do get through those lines but that's what they need to do. They need to get the energy and the passing coming through, quicker through the team to get it to the players that can cause the damage. I don't think that happens. It doesn't happen often enough, nowhere nearer. We'll proceed the questioning on the players. I don't think that's a bias. Odegard, those low knees whether they should stick around or move on let's build on those positives from the youngsters because I suppose you more than anyone would like to see Pepe come up with more goals like this for example when he made it 2-0. Well the thing is that we know that Pepe's got a certain amount of ability about him. He's our most expensive signing. He can do his stuff but you don't see that. You would like to see him getting the ball and creating more but I think that he's had a spell in the team where this season he's been a lot better and he is getting better. You would like to see more goals like this against the top teams. Yeah definitely but the argument of is the manager not telling them to do that. I can't see that. I think the manager wants to see. I know Michael Weller and he wants to see that kind of football. He wants to see that. When times are tough for any club and times are tough when I have played you do not always want to be that guy that steps up because if you miss hit the shot and it goes over the bar people criticise you whereas the young players play without that fear. They play, they take on that responsibility, get crosses in, score goals. I get the feeling Pepe's passed responsibility on too often whereas when you see him perform like that, when you see that quality you've obviously paid an awful lot of money because he can do that. You want to see him play with a little less fear. He's got a bit of ambition and go and do that more. You say that as well with Michael and I'd like to think that Michael is not like putting shackles on people but the way Arsenal have played all through the season it doesn't seem to me that the players have that kind of freedom where they can go and express themselves otherwise why wouldn't they do it up to this point. You know even watch that game up to a certain point. They weren't expressing themselves and doing anything until they got that first goal you know what I mean? They were playing a very safe, a very slow, methodical kind of game. You know even when sometimes you see Pepe will get the ball this space behind he'd rather than go down there he'll come back and come back inside. There's a lot of safety going on with the plays like if you haven't built it up in a way Maneesh where it's how the boss maybe want it to be going then everybody stops doing that and comes back and it gets very tough to watch. Tweaking off that cautious approach is that what we've been speaking a lot already actually about Arsenal's inconsistency this season and he's touched upon it there but in a way Ian with all said and done was it not almost inevitable when you feature so many youngsters in your starting 11? At what? The inconsistency. Well now the thing is we've been very fortunate with the fact that the youngsters that we've put in have been consistent. Saka again for me Saka should have maybe started, he should have started at one Thursday instead of Saka. Absolutely absolutely should have because you saw what he's capable of doing, you see our listless we were we needed some thrust from somewhere we didn't have it anywhere and I think that was a mistake from the manager's point of view but at the same time you talk about consistency I think that he's talking about people like William like Pepe, those players we needed more from I think Pepe started to get into a little bit of form and then for some reason he was in teaming and out of the team and so it's very hard to get consistency when you're not getting the consistent game time so from that point of view that's firmly with the manager but I don't think that there's many games I've watched and I've seen Emile Smith roll and Saka not play and Tieny not play extremely well they've been very consistent and it's to a standard that you wouldn't expect it from because young players can be inconsistent because they're young players. And would you like now Arteta to look more to the youngsters maybe even the likes of Balagan to be featuring more between now and the end of the season? Yes, but it's a fine balance you've got to give the experience the young players can go through you don't want to put the whole beard on them you spoke about needing more from the senior players and being patient with the performances of younger players so if you think of next season I'm sure you'll be starting to think about how to get more minutes and more experience into these players but it's a fine line you don't want to do that and finish the season with three defeats you want to do that but finish in a positive way because that's what the club needs at the moment the club needs positivity so if Miquel Arteta can win three games after this after the Chelsea, Alice and Brighton that would seem like more of the other youngsters who've been shining Yes, we've got some good players someone like it's like Rhys Nelson he's got a cool back from being on loan abroad in Germany he's come back and kind of even makes a match based on that I know we had a big game in the under-23s maybe under-18s I'm not sure but on Friday and people like Aziz, people like Florian Balagan I'd like to see them in the match they sport now I'd like to see something like that so as it can give them a little bit of a lift for what may be coming because now you look at where's the signings going to come from is it going to have to be more youngsters and if these youngsters are coming these are the games maybe where you'd like to think that they should have been at least in the matchday squad to maybe get ten minutes of being used to this have a look at them give the fans maybe something to look forward to because at the moment there's not a lot to look forward to apart from Sackersform and Emma Smith Roseform and looking at Arsenal's up and down fortunes this season in many respects was it represented in those 90 minutes today? Yeah because like the manager said we spoke about it Leon there it started very slowly, very you know, nervy they scored a goal in all of a sudden you know they're getting a little bit more confident score another goal and you're thinking right don't finish it off now you've got a look then West Brom scored what was going on and then William came up with the free kick fantastic free kick and you know it's settled a game down but we're talking about a team that are relegated they are relegated and they're in relegation they've been in relegation positions for the whole season and we were very nervous


Heavy rains in the Gulf region have lashed the United Arabic Emirates, sweeping across major highways, leaving vehicles abandoned on roadways across the capital Dubai. The floods followed heavy rains that began overnight and disrupted flights at Dubai International Airport, the world's busiest for international travel. The schools across the Gulf country were shut before the storm and the government employees were working remotely. According to estimates, over 30 millimeters of rain fell over the morning in Dubai, with as much as 128 millimeters of rain expected throughout the day. Tanker trucks have been sent out into the streets and highways to pump away the water. Meanwhile, the death toll in flooding in neighboring Oman has reached 18, according to official statement on Tuesday. The death toll includes nine school children and the driver whose car was washed away by the floods. New people went missing in the flooding as the country prepared for the storm. Rain also fell in Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.


Hi, this is Jeannie Pan from Coloury. I'm happy to introduce our new products. So, this dual 4K display hub for MacBook Pro and MacBook Air. So, you can see here is a 2 USB Type-C and major ports. So, here this one is a PD 3.0 fast charging up to 60W. And this port supports 4K 60Hz HDMI output. This port supports 4K 30Hz HDMI output. And a 1 USB 3.0 and a 1 USB 3.0. And you can see this demonstration here. So, it supports the, we can call, Maki streaming transportation. So, you can see the screen screen here to show different content. Also, it can also support a mirroring. So, you can just change the setting on MacBook. I think that this will be very good and very useful for designers or for nice guys or maybe the pro, you can see how to say it, there are officials who need a different screen for work. So, it's very necessary for yours. So, you can buy from our expert shop or you can contact us. If you are a distributor, you can contact us for the best price for their mass production price. Or we also support small orders. Thank you.