Obituary of Muhammad Ali

Muhammad Ali, who has died aged 74, was acclaimed by may as the greatest world heavyweight boxing champion the world has ever seen. He was certainly the most charismatic boxer. The courage of Ali inside and outside the ring and his verbal taunting of opponents was legendary.

Ali was first known as Cassius Clay but the astonishing 3 time world champion #was a convert to Islam. He anticipated the anti-Vietnam war movement of the 1960s by refusing to join the armed forces. Furthermore,  Ali was banned from the ring for three years but this didn’t shatter Ali’s dream of becoming the greatest boxer of all time, it just postponed his dream.

By 2005, the worlds greatest boxer received his country’s highest civilian honour. A medal from George Bush. Throughout his boxing career, the remarkable boxer reset the marks. Four years after winning the gold medal at the 1960s Olympic, Muhammad Ali won the professional world heavyweight championship. Still to this day, he remains the only boxer to retain the heavyweight title three times. However, the greatest years of Ali’s boxing career were arguably stolen when he was banned for 3 years.

This phenomenal boxer sadly passed away in early June 2016as his health became worse day by day. Ali made a rare appearance the London 2012 Olympics where he could only walk a few steps but he received rapturous reception from a 100,000 strong crowd.

Context of Russell Brand giving evidence to a select committee

This evidence that is given to a select committee from  Russell Brand was given in April 2012. The context of this is Russell Brand giving evidence to the home affairs select committee into the use of drugs and drug policies.

Select Committees are committees that work in both Houses. They check and report on areas ranging from the work of government departments to economic affairs. The results of these inquiries are public and many require a response from the government. Russell Brand is  an English comedian, actor, radio host, author, and activist. However, in this case he is a witness and providing evidence regarding drugs to a select committee as he used to be a drug addicts.

The audience to this hearing of Russell Brand providing evidence  to the select committee could be the people interested in policts and politicians. also people who are interested in the use of drugs and would like a bit of an insight. Lastly, maybe some of Russell Brand fans who would want to see him give evidence.

context of Russell Brand giving evidence to a select committee

This evidence that is given to a select committee from  Russell Brand was given in April 2012. The context of this is Russell Brand giving evidence to the home affairs select committee into the use of drugs and drug policies. Select Committees are committees that work in both Houses. They check and report on areas ranging from the work of government departments to economic affairs. The results of these inquiries are public and many require a response from the government. Russell Brand is  an English comedian, actor, radio host, author, and activist. However, in this case he is a witness and providing evidence regarding drugs to a select committee as he used to be a drug addicts. The audience to this hearing of Russell Brand providing evidence  to the select committee could be the people interested in policts and politicians. also people who are interested in the use of drugs and would like a bit of an insight. Lastly, maybe some of Russell Brand fans who would want to see him give evidence.

acceptance speech

I am very proud to be selected as the head of the school council I congratulate all the other candidates for a well fought campaign. I think it is time for the whole school to come together and I promise to be the leader of the student council and try my best to make good changes. I am reaching out to everyone for your guidance and help so we can lead this school to greater things, and by voting for me you will have a better and brighter future in St bedes and St joseph’s catholic college. Working together we will renew our school dreams and this school has tremendous potential and every student has the opportunity to realise their full potential and no one will be forgotten.  we will call up on  the best and the brightest to leverage their tremendous talent to benefit us all and will have great relationships with other schools no dream is too big no challenge is too great and st bedes wuill not settle for anything less than the best. We will deal fairly with everyone and all students with st bedes in t6he middle of our hearts. I would like to thank everybody for the part they played in helping me to come as far as I have and be in this incredible position and worthy position for me.

Thank you everyone, Muhammad Arshad

(Donald trumps victory speech-video)

Should Hansard be edited

hansard-photo

Dear Naz shah

I am writing to you to discuss a topic that recently attracted my attention in an A-level English lesson. Hansard, which is meant to be the official report of what goes on in any parliamentary committees, but also is described as an “edited verbatim” which is an oxymoron as verbatim means the exact same words as the original and edited implies that corrections have been made or it has been modified. This leads on to the debate, should Hansard be edited or left completely in verbatim ? In this report I would like to discuss both sides of the argument.

 

 

Firstly, Hansard accounts should be edited because certain informalities such as fillers and elisions should be removed to make the report look more professional. To leave these informalities in the report is seen as improper as the accounts should be formally presented and left for later reference that could be importantly used.

In addition to this, minor altercations to the report in fact help the reader to comprehend what they are reading and these altercation don’t make a difference to the reports .Also minor altercations remove any spoken mistakes that have been said accidentally.

On the otter hand,   I believe that Hansard should be left in its original state as pauses for example, that would not be recorded in the accounts, are sometimes vital components of what the person is saying and therefore the reader may miss the overall meaning of the words. This is why I believe that Hansard should not be edited as by removing even the smallest of pauses or words the meaning can be completely changed.

Likewise, in editing verbatim important things may get lost in translation. For example, fillers (eg. like, um, uh) and false or repetitive starts. This can show that a person is nervous or is not prepared or even lacks confidence. Hansard removing features like this,  is presenting accounts as solid sets of dialogue spoken confidently which isn’t necessarily the case.

To conclude,  I would consider that Hansard should leave their verbatim unedited as it gives readers a true view of what actually happened in the court rather than painting a false image of what happened that could also be seen as misleading. . There is nothing better than an unedited verbatim as everything said in the court has been written down and unchanged. It is impossible to  rely on Hansard if it is being edited ?. It is the job of parliament to make sure that the transcript is a true version of what was being said in court, and not a false version that is seen as misleading.