in >> sorry, the labour run nhs in wales to have treatment in england . england. >> former immigration minister robert jenrick is calling for a cap on net migration, saying it's the only way to restore voters trust. mr jenrick says he wants a far more restrictive system allowing less than 100,000 people a year, writing in the sunday telegraph, he said the government's recently passed rwanda bill will join the graveyard of policies that failed to tackle illegal migration last 30 years. >> politicians of all stripes have promised controlled and reduced immigration only to deliver the opposite and the pubuc deliver the opposite and the public are rightly furious at what's happened. it's placed immense strain on housing, on pubuc immense strain on housing, on public services, on community cohesion. >> well, meanwhile, labour says rishi sunak needs to wake up and realise that his migration plan isn't working. that's after home office figures show that more than 7000 people have arrived illegally by small boats so far this year. labour's shadow immigration minister, stephen

kinnock, says his party will crush the smuggling gangs and make sure that those with no right to be in the united kingdom are swiftly returned. the alba party has been placed on an election footing as motions of no confidence in scotland's first minister make a general election. there look increasingly likely. their only msp , ash regan, hasn't confirmed msp, ash regan, hasn't confirmed if she'll support humza yousaf , if she'll support humza yousaf, but it's thought that her vote could be crucial. mr yousaf is asking leaders of rival parties to find common ground after the collapse of the snp's power sharing deal with the greens . sharing deal with the greens. well, for the latest stories you can sign up to gb news alerts by scanning the qr code. it's on the right hand side of your screen right now or go to gb news. com slash alerts. now let's go to free speech nation. >> students occupy buildings at columbia university. humza yousaf is teetering on the brink

and the nhs says that it will use the word woman once more. this is free speech nation . this is free speech nation. welcome to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle. this is the show where we take a look at culture, current affairs and politics. and of course, we'll have the latest from those culture warriors who claim to be on the right side of history and who will ruin your life and reputation in the name of compassion and love. coming up on the show tonight, i'm going to be talking to two visiting speakers at king's college london who had to cancel their event due to death threats and homophobia is making a comeback. i'm going to be joined by the author, gareth roberts to talk about his new book, gay shame the rise of gender ideology and the new homophobia , and we'll be the new homophobia, and we'll be discussing why all your favourite sitcoms are racist . favourite sitcoms are racist. plus, you're going to see the moment when i met the world's oldest living land animal, jonathan the tortoise, who is 192 years old. that's right. i'm

going full david attenborough tonight. and of course, myself and my fantastic panel will be answering questions from our lovely studio audience and my comedian panellists this evening are paul cox and nick dixon, who . welcome back. >> sorry , i should have >> sorry, i should have introduced you as your other names. >> the big dog and the people's gammon. >> thank you, thank you. i just i didn't know who paul cox was exactly , exactly. yeah, that is exactly, exactly. yeah, that is in my contract. >> it is. >> it is. >> when you said the oldest land mammal, i thought you meant lewis schaffer from it. it's tortoise. >> and lewis schaffer is going to be very upset because that tortoise only eats vegetables. and he claims that the only way to fight for longevity is to eat meat when he's wrong, isn't he.7 >> meat when he's wrong, isn't he? >> but he also says that science con. he also says that exercise is bad for you and tortoise does not exercise and that water dehydration. >> why are we making it about lewis? >> yeah, straight away, not about him. >> he's not here tonight. a lot of the people watching won't even know who the hell we're talking about. so let's get some questions from the audience. we're going to start with our first question from jill. jill,

hello. hi hi, given his almost unbroken record of failure. can hamster you. i'm sorry. hamza humza yousaf survive. >> did you call him hamster? >> did you call him hamster? >> i nearly did, i'm sorry. >> i nearly did, i'm sorry. >> that's quite a nickname. i mean, it's difficult one, isn't it? jill? are you a fan of humza yousaf at all? no, no. given that you don't know his name. well, that's not. i mean, he hasn't done the. he hasn't had the best track record as he. let's be honest about it. no. and i think ultimately nick, it is the case now he is clinging on. he's tenacious . you've got on. he's tenacious. you've got to give him that. but surely it's all over at this point? >> i think so firstly, i want to know how long hamster yusuf can last because like liz truss with the lettuce, i want to see a hamster to show how long humza could last. that's actually not a bad idea. we know that tortoises last a long time. how long is that? it'll probably last less time than a hamster. >> i think a hamster is, what, two years? three years max. >> it'll probably last less time than a hamster in the hands of lenny from mice and men. that's how long he's got. >> he's got literary reference. >> he's got literary reference. >> thank you. i'm very clever. he's got. he's got very little time. i mean, one thing that's

not helping him is that ash regan may have the deciding vote, and he's said about her that she was no great loss when she went to alba and those kind of things i have heard the phrase andrew about, i don't remember it quite correctly, but it's something to do with hell hath no fury, and i don't know the rest. but the point is, don't mess with ash regan. >> there's also a revenge is a dish best served cold. there you go. is a klingon proverb. of course. so you know that as well. i mean, this is the thing, ash regan. of course, has been described as a terf, left the snp because of these disastrous gender recognition reform changes. so she's and she's going to have the deciding vote. yes. she's going to be toast. >> is she going to be king? he is toast. that's regan, by the way. her only ever crime was being a christian and talking in tune with her faith. so all she all she really did was show that she had a moral backbone and she would have been there, i think. and i don't like the snp, so i'm glad that she didn't become the leader. i think she would have made a great leader for the snp, so i was quite glad she didn't. the what about humza yousaf? >> humza yousaf is the problem here. he's now broken with the greens. that entire accord he is toast. >> absolutely he is toast. the snp are reaping exactly what they have sown now and they, you know, they are getting everything. they're plundering

everything. they're plundering everything they were granted. yeah, scotland are going to get much . they deserve much better. much. they deserve much better. they're going to get much better. the one thing i would say to all the people that are calling for humza yousaf, he's going to go, don't call for it. just enjoy the show. many of us have waited a long time for this to happen, so this is tricky in it because ultimately scotland, the snp seem to get away with an awful lot because of this groundswell of support for independence, which means a lot of the scottish people will tolerate all the nonsense about, you know, male rapists in women's jails. >> they'll tolerate the record levels of drug use and, and the nanny state nonsense about banning two for one pizzas and minimum pricing on alcohol. they don't mind any of that so long as they get independence. but actually it looks like support for independence is going down because of the snp. >> yeah, interesting . i mean, >> yeah, interesting. i mean, one possible theory or hypothesis is that someone like kate forbes gets in is actually better for independence because she's not completely incompetent and an idiot and therefore actually , it might be actually, it might be counterintuitive that we might want humza to stay. if you really want scotland to stay in. l, really want scotland to stay in. i, however, still want him to

90, i, however, still want him to go, even if it means independence. just because i can't stand him that much, it's still worth it. especially after his white speech where he went through and explained why he hated what that was. did everyone see the white speech they all saw? but i'll explain for the people at home. he did a speech famously. it's like a viral clip now where he goes through all the positions of power in scotland and how they're all white. then he lists another thing and he goes white, white. and he goes on for ages. it's just venomous hatred of white people. so i put a post when i thought it was going, i was like, his eyes widening in shock as he realised it was oven shock as he realised it was over. white. the flag that he raised. but he left white so there would be loads of memes like this. most people said the p45 but mine was better. but the point is, he hates white people. apparently. i don't want legally allowed to say that, but remind me how just watching the speech, what percentage of the scottish population are white? again, it's something like 90 something percent, 96, 96. so that might explain it's a bold election winning strategy, i've got to say. >> isn't it just alienate 97% of your electorate? it's a it's a funny idea . funny idea. >> yeah. by the way, when i was talking about ash regan, i meant kate forbes. >> oh, right. okay. >> oh, right. okay. >> i didn't want to say you should have done it. you should

have saved me the reason i've got to do this now is because there are a lot of people tweeting me this kate forbes, ash regan. is absolutely fascinating that ash regan is now going to become kingmaker, potentially for humza yousaf. >> we'll find out when we okay. we're going to move on to another question now. and this one is coming from paul. paul, hello. >> hi. in the nhs hospital of my choice, am i still going to be able to do my chest feeding ? able to do my chest feeding? >> yes. paul, your chest feeding. i know it means a lot to you, doesn't it? you're right. >> absolutely. yeah. i was enjoying the hamster , yusuf, but enjoying the hamster, yusuf, but the chest feeding is my lane. >> it's actually quite a big deal because we now have victoria atkins, who's the health secretary. she's saying that she's going to announce this series of changes, because we all know that over the past few years, the nhs has started using strange words like chest feeder or you know, birthing parent instead of mother. they don't want to use the word woman . so they say people with ovanes . so they say people with ovaries and quite a lot of sort of demented , misogynistic, of demented, misogynistic, frankly phrases , to avoid saying frankly phrases, to avoid saying words like woman. well, since the cass review, things are

slightly shifting, aren't they? nick, i want to ask you about this because if the nhs, they're making a good start, let's stop referring to chest feeders, which sounds like some kind of auen which sounds like some kind of alien species. anyway and they're going to start using words like woman again. so is this because of the cass review? is that why is this going to sort itself out eventually? finally? >> it seems that way, andrew. and it's a huge achievement after 14 years of conservative government that we finally get back to something like normal and admitting that women exist again, this is where we are. we're hailing. this is a great victory that our national health service is admitting that women are real. i thought i was a misogynist. i came across the nhs. it's unbelievable. i mean, it's a victory , but you sort of it's a victory, but you sort of step back and go, it's insane that this is a victory and but i do think it's good. i do think it's changing. i think the gender thing is over. it'll take a while to dissipate. but we basically won the cass review, as you say, etc. all these things are happening. it's over for the gender thing. it'll just take a while to fully. >> i don't think we should be complacent, by the way. not complacent. >> but another thing is going to come along. that's what i was going to say as well. look how covid comes on. another nonsense

cult will come along. not that covid was entirely a cult, but you know what i mean. the hysterical and that sounds terrible. the hysterical elements of it, you know what i mean? but yeah, ofcom don't. the point is, something else will come along. i'm worried it's going to be euthanasia, because that's the big thing. starmer is obsessed with euthanasia and people think, oh yeah, it's caring, which we were told with covid and things like that. but actually if you look at the stats in canada, it's going to be an absolute disaster. >> yes, some horrific stories about really young people, perfectly physically healthy, who are depressed, being told by their doctors, well, it's not going to get any better. you may as well kill yourself and in scotland, a 16 year old, they're saying 16 year old anorexics could possibly do that through a new loophole in a bill. >> there are things like this. you've got to be very careful. there's another thing coming around the corner after this gender madness. you've got to be alert. >> and it's also worth remembering, isn't it? because people often misunderstand the culture war as being left versus right, and they've completely got that completely wrong. and the reason we know this is because most of the worst, most egregious elements of the culture war over the past 15 years have come about because of the tory government. it's the tories that have allowed this to happen. so it's just not true, is it? now, finally, at the end

of their tenure, the tories step in and say, actually, we're going to deal with this institutional misogyny that we've embedded into the nhs. too little, too late. >> yes . i little, too late. >> yes. i mean, it's not going to save them. if that's the question, the tories are toast. no, of course, absolutely toast. and we're going to get a labour government sometime before the end of january 2025. >> may very well make all this worse . although wes streeting worse. although wes streeting has said they are committed to the findings of the cass review. right. >> so i think the cass review changed everything . yeah, yeah. changed everything. yeah, yeah. i mean, i know you do, andrew. and you know, and people like you have championed the cass review, and it's just not found its way into the mainstream media. so there will be people out there that maybe are tuning in for the first time to gb news who really don't understand what the cass review does, but it essentially stops child mutilation. okay. because because what it's done is it said there is no positive benefit for it. and what that's meant is it's starting to really change the way we talk about this. i've always been fascinated by the fact that women in particular, have spent a lot of their time over history, particularly in the last 100 years, fighting for

their space in this world. and their space in this world. and the minute they get some ground, we start referring to them as chest feeders and owners of ovaries. yeah. so it's just been completely retrograded. >> it's really interesting, though, that you mentioned this about the cass review because it's all very well saying, okay, the nhs is going to stop using the nhs is going to stop using the lexicon of activists in their literature . but on the their literature. but on the other hand, if you go on the nhs website, they're still talking about gender identity. and the concept of gender identity is the equivalent of a soul . it concept of gender identity is the equivalent of a soul. it is a fundamentally religious belief and their wording is lifted straight from stonewall, who, as far as i'm concerned, are completely discredited and are now effectively a charity that works against the interests of gay people, even though it once was for gay people. so how do we deal with that? how do we? you know, you're right that i think the cass review ultimately will have a knock on effect, but they're still using the language, the magical language of gender identity, the idea that we have a misaligned soul and body, and that's what's caused all the problem. >> yeah. just want to pick up on one earlier thing. the tories are presiding over a lot of this doesn't mean that it's not a left wing phenomenon, because of

course, they're a far left party. so i had to point that out. i agree with you. i agree with you. woke and left are not synonymous. there's lots of smart people on the left like you. many other people we know, but they're the thick ones who go along with wokeness. but there's a lot of right wingers go along with it. >> that's the problem. there really is, is there? maybe there are. there are. i mean, not as many. i admit to you that the conservatives are not as captured as labour, but we've seen a lot of people alicia kearns for instance, conservative mp wants to put an amendment to the criminal justice bill. >> she's just in the conservative party, which is a left wing party. i mean, i know, i know, you might think that's a get out clause, but clearly the tories and labour are both two extremely left wing parties. >> but anyway, theresa may i mean, she was the one who was responsible largely for the reforms to the gender recognition. >> she's another lefty. they're all the same. there's only about five conservative people in the conservative party, like at the back somewhere, and they're being told to shut up. >> you should know with theresa may, because she dresses too well to be on the right. >> they're all fakes. but, why do you think the parties destroyed them? we've got, you know, reform and other ones anyway. but on your other question, it is bizarre, isn't it? you talk about this sexthe soul, i believe, is the phrase. it is a metaphysical belief, ultimately, that you're you're born somehow in the wrong body. and one thing that's

particularly egregious is the accepting with children saying that to you, when obviously a child will do what it can to fit in with the social mores of the time. that's how they're adapted. that's completely normal. you don't listen to them. people have said this a lot. they oh, it's a phase. my child thinks he's a dragon . it's child thinks he's a dragon. it's a phase. there's the phase argument, but there's also the argument. they will do things to appease adults so you don't listen to the child. it's obscene. >> absolutely. and by the way, i think people should be allowed their metaphysical beliefs. i think if you believe in a sexed soul and you believe that your bodyis soul and you believe that your body is misaligned, fine. but i don't think you should operate on children or put them on drugs because of that metaphysical belief that they cannot possibly understand or hold. anyway, let's get another question now. this one's from john. where is john? >> hi. good evening. my john? >> hi. good evening . my question >> hi. good evening. my question is a change question. can tory mps change into socialists overnight? i mean, this is very magical thinking as well, isn't it? >> so this i presume is dan poulter. indeed. yes. dan poulter, who is defected to laboun do poulter, who is defected to labour. do you have any. my understanding is he's done this because he thinks the tories have failed on the nhs. do you think that's it, or is he just running because he knows that

he's on the losing team at the moment. >> what do you think? i wonder whether he's running because he's on the losing team. but it begs a bigger question about other tories. and as you say, how left wing they are, right? what other parties they might change to. >> yeah, i mean it's kind of reminiscent. do you remember change uk . yes. do you remember change uk. yes. do you remember that. yeah. >> oh yeah. >> oh yeah. >> just sort of ran over to this imaginary party and then they all just well, well then the imaginary party died in the 2019 election because nobody voted for them . for them. >> and i, dan poulter, isn't it? yes. i just don't i when i see anything like this, i think what do his constituents think the people that elected him in the first place, who voted it in a local council, conservative mp and now he's gone? well i'm not that anymore. i'm this and i truly believe that it's because he sees that he's got a burgeoning political career that's about to turn to toast, and he's trying to find a way to keep it going. >> yes, but it does lend credence to nick's argument that actually, effectively, there is no real difference between the tories and labour. do you think that's right? >> that is right. and because it's my point and i'm sort of used up my point on this

already, dan poulter described the tories as a nationalist party of the right, where everything about that sentence is completely false. maybe arve is completely false. maybe arve is correct, but it's, or the. but they're not nationalist. i've already said they're not on the right. i think we've shown that they're not nationalist ehheni that they're not nationalist either. i mean, rishi is the ultimate globalist. everything about him screams globalism. okay? he was a pro—brexit because he thought that was a winning side. because he thought that was a winning side . that's about the winning side. that's about the only thing vaguely nationalist about him. the tories. you can look at any metric immigration, their obsession with diversity . their obsession with diversity. with cameron's a—list onwards. you can look at. >> that's what i mean about the woke policies. >> yeah, you can look at any number of policies and but they're not a nationalist party of the right. so maybe he moved for cynical reasons because they're about to lose, i don't know, he said it was due to their lack of funding for the nhs. and therefore, you say that the tories have not properly funded the nhs. my question is the nhs is a labour idea in origin, isn't it just flawed at its conception? that's a much bigger question because there's never been enough funding for it. it's never enough , no, i it. it's never enough, no, i think there should be more, but it's a black hole. >> but anyway , we haven't got >> but anyway, we haven't got time for that because we've got one final question from mary. >> hi, terry and june offensive.

>> hi, terry and june offensive. >> what have you seen terry and june? >>i june? >> ihaventi june? >> i haven't i wasn't even born when the series started that doesn't mean you can't watch it. i will start watching them. well you should. >> it's on britbox. but britbox, of course, have put this, trigger warning on, on on terry and june, which you all know is the june whitfield and terry scott sitcom of the late 1970s and early 1980s. the most inoffensive, i think, sitcom that could be imagined , but they that could be imagined, but they have put a trigger warning saying it contains discriminatory language of its time. but of course, it has language of its time . yeah. what language of its time. yeah. what other language would it have? i mean, how would this work ? mean, how would this work? >> it's like these people still need their mums to wipe their bums. i don't understand how you can become an adult and watch watch something and be offended by, you know, don't watch it for a start. >> yeah , this isn't that. >> yeah, this isn't that. >> yeah, this isn't that. >> but this programme is just inane. it's relative . it's kind inane. it's relative. it's kind of funny. it's of its time. there was a scene where the boss of one of the main characters was kind of against homosexuality. well, it was

1977. >> it was. everyone was. >> it was. everyone was. >> yeah, that was the fashion , andrew. >> it was fashion. >> it was fashion. >> some people still are. >> some people still are. >> nick. >> nick. >> simpler times, yeah. i mean , >> simpler times, yeah. i mean, it couldn't be more absurd. you thought sort of a lower low or fawlty towers was the zenith or the apotheosis of this absurdity? i'd say it's terry and june being offensive is so discriminatory. language of the period, as you say. of course it does. that was the period. just like when we watched things from 2024, a few years from now, you'll be like, why did they all hate white people and thought that men could be women? it'll be it'll look absurd because it'll be discriminatory language of the period. >> of course it is. you know, we just know, don't we? we don't need to be patronised like this by being warned about it. >> it's this year zero ideology. you know, the past must be erased and everything must be in line with our current prevailing ideology. insane. >> so weird. and one of the people who's often a panellist on this show, scott capurro , on this show, scott capurro, who's a stand—up, he's just had the police called on him for a show that he did in london. i'm not kidding. the police turned up to let the club know that he was a vicious homophobe . scott

was a vicious homophobe. scott capurro, one of the gays people i've ever met. anyway, next on free speech nation, we've got former idf soldier eli lassman , former idf soldier eli lassman, who was informed by king's college london's israel society that due to death threats and concerns for his own safety, he could no longer speak on a panel discussing the current war. we're going to be talking about that in just one moment. please don't go anywhere

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle, charity boss and former soldier eli lassman was informed by king's college london's israel society that due to death threats and concerns for his own safety, he could no longer speak on a panel discussing the current war. another of the panellists was political activist keir willis, and along with eli, she was also subjected to threats if she were to speak at the university's event. so i'm glad to say that they both join me now and here in the

studio i have eli, welcome to the show. so before i go to kaya, i want to ask you first about what was the event about and what was what was going to be said. >> so first of all, thank you very much for having me on the show. i, as you mentioned, run a charity called prometheus on campus. and one of the things that we do in terms of our operations is we hold events on different campuses in this country talking about many different topics, but primarily centred around philosophy. and i was reached by the israel society of king's college london to discuss israel and palestine in the recent conflict from different perspectives. i myself as a philosopher and a former idf soldier and kyrees, a political activist in the united states who now engage in intellectual work surrounding war and specifically the israeli palestinian conflict. >> so it was a discussion of ideas or surrounding the conflict. yeah, exactly. it wasn't a sort of a propagandistic or sort of taking a particular stance on anything . a particular stance on anything. >> well, we both have our

stances, but it was more of a, a discussion rather than a talk of us just delivery our particular positions. >> and then what? when did it start to go wrong ? start to go wrong? >> so a few days before the event, we received an email from the king's college london, israel society informing us that the event has been picked up by several students who have decided that they're going to demonstrate against the talk. and they sent a formal letter to the dean asking the event to be banned. now that got picked up by some quite powerful influencers on social media, twitter and instagram. and i woke up the next morning, turned my phone on, and found myself subject to hundreds of death threats and calls to jihad and the most hateful, vindictive messages anti—semitic filth that you can imagine. and a lot of this i understand , came about this i understand, came about because you were in the idf as all people are conscripted to the idf in israel, and they were

claiming they were lying and claiming they were lying and claiming that you were currently in the idf . well, the in the idf. well, the interesting thing is that not a single fact that they stated about me was true. they made up that i currently serve in the idf. they made up that i'm a zionist. they made up that i just came back from gaza fighting and committing supposed to war crimes give this talk. >> but in fact, in fact, you were in the idf in, what, 2017? >> i think i hadn't served in about six years. yeah, right. >> but they were saying you were currently serving and that this was just a platform for someone committing war atrocities. that's what they're arguing. >> yeah. they made up all these blatant lies about me. and within a few hours it was circulating across all social media. and the problem is that most people who follow or most people who are interested in these type of accounts, they don't check their facts , so don't check their facts, so they'll just blindly follow. and if some twitter influencer says this is the guy, this is his face and this is his name, reach out to him and send whatever messages you can. messages you can. >> messages you can. >> well, i'd like to bring in

kyle willis, who was also scheduled to speak at the event. hello, kyle. thanks forjoining us. you're a fellow at the objective standard institute . objective standard institute. we've just had a sort of rac of what happened there from eli, but you also received death threats as a result of your scheduled appearance. do you want to tell us a bit about that ? >> 7- >> yes. so, 7_ >> yes. so, yeah, 7 >> yes. so, yeah, thank you ? >> yes. so, yeah, thank you for having me, eli said, and yeah, i was also subject to death threats because of lies that were spread about me in regards to this panel, one of the first posters that i saw when the people started planning to protest, they sent a bunch of posters on social media where to organise, where they were going to, protest our event. and, one of the posters had said that i had tweeted something like, all muslims are terrorists or, all muslims are terrorists or, all muslims need to be killed. and, it was this there was a blatant lie. these tweets don't exist

that i've ever said. all muslims are terrible. but that was when the death threats for me started . was this belief that i was calling for harm against all muslims who lived anywhere, anywhere in the world. so? so yeah, that was, for me, the beginning. >> we know that activists online do often lie to try and stir up trouble, but these were big accounts, weren't they? and there's a certain degree of responsibility that comes with having a big account like that. how did it feel from your perspective once you realised that people were lying about you and then openly threatening your life ? life? >> unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened. in the past. i've been very, very , outspoken against very, very, outspoken against wokeness and kind of the political left. and so when you're outspoken against people who hold, or maybe who react to things very emotionally as kind of the political left tends to do, you tend to deal with these things a lot. so i definitely did not feel good for people to be threatening me and spreading lies about me, but i'm used to

it, especially coming from university students who are very emotional with their views . emotional with their views. >> but eli, i mean, isn't this very depressing? insofaras you know , i'm all for peaceful know, i'm all for peaceful protest. i think people should be able to protest your event, but i think once they start sending death threats, they are crossing. they're crossing a line. they're breaking the law. i mean, from your perspective, how does it feel to be the target of such, such rage ? target of such, such rage? >> well, i have been the target of rage in the past. >> well, i have been the target of rage in the past . when you of rage in the past. when you promote ideas that are counter culture and seem controversial, it's just the inevitable consequence . but what was really consequence. but what was really frustrating about this particular incident is that not one single thing that i was being attacked for was true. yes, every single thing was a blatant lie. >> it's difficult to defend against that, isn't it, because they're attacking an imaginary version of you, and you shouldn't have to defend that imaginary version . imaginary version. >> and the truth is, i didn't even want to. i wasn't interested in defending myself because i don't need to defend myself to these people. >> so what about, surely, you know, they've sent death threats. all of these people. surely the police would have got involved. >> the police did get involved. the police reached out to me and

they set up a meeting with me . i they set up a meeting with me. i met with the police. we had a great conversation. they told me that it's absolutely abominable that it's absolutely abominable that i've received so many death threats and calls to jihad, and that they're going to track individual people who have sent these messages. some of them were stupid enough to do it from their personal accounts. right? >> they normally are anonymous, aren't they? >> you'd think. yeah, yeah. >> you'd think. yeah, yeah. >> not the brightest. >> not the brightest. >> yeah. not these mindless thugs. and what they what the police said is that not only are they going to track them, but they going to track them, but they might prosecute some of these people and i left that meeting feeling a little hopeful. and then the next day, i received an email from the same police officers that visited me informing me that after speaking to the chief of police, they were informed that the british police will protect your right to threaten other people with violence under supposed free speech. but that can't be right. >> i mean, i know the law and i know that death threats are not legal. how can how can the police have got it so wrong? >> i don't know, i mean, that's

astonishing. >> kaya, can i ask you, did you have any contact with the police? once the threats started coming in? >> i did not, i mean, i was, you know, i'm based in the us, so the police did not call me. i don't think they had my contact information at all, but . don't think they had my contact information at all, but. right. so i didn't have any contact with the police. >> but but surely. >> but but surely. >> i mean, you mentioned earlier that you're used to this kind of onune that you're used to this kind of online attention, but does this not disturb you very deeply that that particularly a lot of people within the, the younger generation or the online space feel that this is their go to? what they will do is instead of trying to argue with you , they trying to argue with you, they will threaten and abuse. i mean, what do you think is going on there? >> yes, i it definitely is disturbing. and i think that for a lot of these young people, because a lot of what they support isn't it i think a lot of for a lot of these college students, and i was one of them, iused students, and i was one of them, i used to be a, a dumb college student who, believed a lot of things because other people told me to believe them and not because i actually had my own

views. but when you don't have any reason for believing what you believe, whether it's the correct view or not, if you don't have any reason for why you're believing it, then the only way that you can support it is with your emotions , with is with your emotions, with threats of violence, because you don't have any arguments to support it. and i think that's what's happening is a lot of students are, embracing ideas. yeah. just for the sake of embracing them without having the arguments to be able to have those conversations and finally, i just want to bring you in on that. >> do you think that that is the explanation for this? obviously, you've been through this horrible experience. it obviously takes a personal toll. but on the broader question, is this symptomatic of a of a greater problem that exists? >> oh, it certainly is. there is a huge lack of independent thinking in our country, and there is a very significant rise in anti—semitism. and one of the key lessons that i learned from this whole ordeal is that it doesn't really matter how i view myself, because i don't consider myself, because i don't consider myself jewish. it'sjust myself, because i don't consider myself jewish. it's just not an interesting part of my identity, i don't think. but it doesn't .

i don't think. but it doesn't. that doesn't matter to people who are anti—semites. they see me as a jew, and that's how i'm branded, and that's what they'll attack me on. and my grandmother always used to say that hitler wouldn't ask whether i consider myself jewish. and now i understand the meaning behind that very disturbing stuff, finally, can you tell us, eli, where people can find out more about your charity, for instance? sure. >> so if you go on prometheus on campus. org and you can find more about myself on my youtube channel. >> eli lassman well, eli and kai, thank you both ever so much for joining me. really appreciate forjoining me. really appreciate it . so next on free appreciate it. so next on free speech nation pro—palestine protests at columbia university in the united states have turned ugly . and i'm going to be joined ugly. and i'm going to be joined by the deputy editor of spiked online. fraser myers, to talk all about it. please do not go anywhere

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation . later in the show, i'm nation. later in the show, i'm going to be turning agony uncle. with the help of my wonderful panel with the help of my wonderful panel, paul cox and nick dixon. and we're going to help you deal with your unfiltered dilemmas. so if you've got any problems at all, just email us @gbnews for.com. and we will help to deal with all of your issues . deal with all of your issues. pro—palestine protests at columbia university in new york have turned ugly this week. 100 protesters were arrested , the protesters were arrested, the first time mass arrests have been made on columbia's campus since the vietnam war. while joining me to discuss this now is the deputy editor of spiked online, fraser myers , brazier.

online, fraser myers, brazier. welcome back to the show. >> thanks for having me. some people may not be aware of what's been going on at columbia university and indeed, more broadly across the university campuses. >> could you tell us a bit about this? >> yes. >> yes. >> so starting over a week ago, students at columbia university in new york set up a kind of camp in the middle of campus, calling it the gaza solidarity encampment . encampment. >> there's been a bit of a temptation, i think, to compare these to the kind of anti—vietnam war sit ins of the past. but i think that's unfair. i think that's a wrong comparison, because some of these protests, some of the things they've been chanting , things they've been chanting, have been quite overtly anti—semitic. can you give us some examples? yes. so jewish students have been told to go back to poland, go back to europe . we have heard students europe. we have heard students praising hamas, saying we love hamas. we've heard students saying burn tel aviv to the ground. now that sounds like a very aggressive, pro—war stance to me. >> might they say, though, that that's just a few bad apples? i think they could. >> they would say that. but there has been a reluctance to

condemn those. i think you've seen that. similarly, there's been a similar dynamic in the uk where we have, you know, the weekly pro—palestine marches. and sure, it might well be the case that it's only a small percentage who might be islamist or anti—semitic , but the or anti—semitic, but the organisers don't really condemn it. they don't even like to acknowledge it. and there has been a tendency to downplay the anti—semitism on display on these protests. it has been condemned by outsiders. in fact, even president biden has condemned these protests as anti—semitic . there has been anti—semitic. there has been quite a forceful response from some universities and from the police. but actually, what's slightly worrying is that many faculty members have agreed with the students. so at columbia, you know, several hundred faculty members, several professors, you know, came out and protested in solidarity with the students, rather than saying, you know, it should be the easiest thing in the world, i would have thought to be able to condemn hamas, to condemn anti—semitism while still feeling sympathy for people in gaza. well, exactly. >> that's the thing that i find very confusing, because if you genuinely care about the people

in gaza, the palestinians , and in gaza, the palestinians, and the horrors that they are experiencing, then surely the first thing you do is condemn the people that caused it all you would. >> but i think the way that people have come to understand this issue has become, you know, so oversimplified and actually in universities, it's been seen through the lens of diversity , through the lens of diversity, equity, inclusion, which sounds very bizarre. how so ? i'll give very bizarre. how so? i'll give you an example. so essentially zionism or the israeli state has come to be equated with white supremacy. so you will hear protesters saying, you know, this is we want to stop white supremacy. one protest has been suspended from college because he wanted to kill zionists, who he wanted to kill zionists, who he considered to be white supremacists. >> do they not understand how ethnically diverse israel is? >> well , clearly not. i ethnically diverse israel is? >> well, clearly not. i think it's just not based on a kind of as i say, it's not based on a sort of factual understanding of things going on on the ground. it seems to just be the narrative that's in the aether that students are picking up. now, this doesn't say much for, you know, these are supposed to be intelligent students. there are columbia is an extremely elite university, and yet they

just seem to have imbibed a kind of simplistic narrative and are repeating it and are, you know, going to some lengths to protest it. >> but, you know, on campuses it is important that we maintain free speech. isn't it? slightly disturbing, though, however horrific some of the things that are being said when the police come in and try to prevent this. >> i think that's right. so there's a few different things to consider here. free speech is absolutely critical. no one should ever be shut down for the content of the words they say. the right to protest is slightly less absolute because you know, you don't have a right to occupy a space indefinitely. in columbia, the protests have got so bad that they are , leading to so bad that they are, leading to the cancellation of classes. lots of now , online learning is lots of now, online learning is having to replace in—person classes . it's uncertain whether classes. it's uncertain whether graduation ceremonies can go ahead because those are coming up in the next few weeks because of these encampments. so that clearly is, you know, that's infringing on other people's rights . yes. but equally, at the rights. yes. but equally, at the same time, you know, it's not wise or, you know, it's not wise to then send in the police to sendin to then send in the police to send in the heavies. now, these

protests have spread well beyond new york. and in texas. there's been a really quite harsh police response where you've seen, you know , essentially students being know, essentially students being met with police violence, some professors being met with police violence, and where this is, you know, where this is especially a problem for free speech is the texas governor greg abbott, has said that this is about cracking down on anti—semitism . now, we down on anti—semitism. now, we are all opposed to anti—semitism, but there isn't a law against anti—semitism in the us. racist speech is protected under the first amendment. right. >> so the free speech argument, it's a delicate balance, isn't it? a delicate balance, you can't say, because you support free speech. you therefore support people's right to break the law. >> yes. yeah, exactly the right to free speech isn't a right to break other laws like trespassing and things like that. now we as free speech advocates, we should be wary when those things are used as an excuse to crack down on on free speech, of course. but yeah, as i said, it's not it's not a right to. you don't have a carte blanche to, occupy a space indefinitely. they're also just practical reasons not to crack down too hard on these protests, because certainly that's actually encouraged them. at columbia, when the police first

came in, i think the size of the encampment tripled overnight. so, you know, it's a it's a police crackdowns are a really good recruiting sergeant for the cause. you're trying to crack down on. >> absolutely. well, fraser myers, thank you ever so much for joining me. really appreciate forjoining me. really appreciate it. and next on free speech nation i had the honour of interviewing the oldest land animal alive, jonathan the giant tortoise. come back and see that in just a moment

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation . now then, i had the nation. now then, i had the pleasure of meeting jonathan, the giant tortoise on saint helena. he is the oldest living land animal. at the ripe old age of 192. let's take a look. i'm andrew doyle. i'm here at plantation house on the island of saint helena to meet the world's oldest living land animal. his name is jonathan. he's a tortoise. he's 191 years old. let's go meet him . hello, old. let's go meet him. hello, joe. hi, this is jonathan. was right? >> he's 191. right? >> he's191. did i get that right? well, we say 192 now. oh. do we? we don't know, of course, exactly when he hatched, but, we've got some nice documentation, which means he was landed in 1882, fully grown,

which is about 50 years of age. right. so for all we know, he could be of 200 years old. >> he's looking great on it. >> he's looking great on it. >> it's really amazing. and he's blind. he's lost his sense of smell. and these are meant to have a good sense of smell, but his hearing is fantastic. he's blind with cataracts. that's all right. he's still eating very well as you can see. yeah. he's hungry. carrots. >> so my understanding is jonathan recently met the duke of edinburgh. yes, but he also met queen elizabeth. and he met george vi , i believe so, yes. george vi, i believe so, yes. >> i wasn't around, but he was. yeah the most extraordinary thing about him, i think, is every animal or insect that crawls on the surface of the earth was born after him, including us. it's remarkable when you think of it like that. it's amazing. and he's approaching his third century. when you think of it like that, it's just crazy . how's when you think of it like that, it's just crazy. how's his temperament? he's lovely. actually. i mean, you can see that he loves his food. he's got a very sharp bite, but he wouldn't bite out of aggression. right? he just loves his grub . right? he just loves his grub. hence the gloves. hence the gloves. yeah, but also we like to feed carrots. we were

recommended to feed very good vitamin a. you don't want the whole carrot going down. they're pretty indigestible. so we can with gloves we can be bolder because we don't mind being bitten and give him small bites instead of, you know, half a carrot at a time. >> so he's originally from the seychelles, is that right? >> yes. so there's two main, groups, or cohorts of giant tortoises, as you know, the galapagos tortoises, there could be a lot bigger , actually, up to be a lot bigger, actually, up to 400 kilos, you know what? that's more or less £900, and then the indian ocean giant tortoises, now the commonest tortoise in the world is the dabra, which the world is the dabra, which the other ones are from the aldabra atoll, the second largest atoll in the world, and there are 100,000 of them. there on the atoll because it's a conservation site and probably another 100,000 roughly around the world. but we've established that he's a seychelles giant tortoise, not an aldabra . and tortoise, not an aldabra. and they were considered extinct until relatively recently. really yes. well, as you probably know, tortoises were eaten by us. mariners of old were stuck with salted pork and full of maggots and biscuits full of maggots and biscuits

full of maggots and biscuits full of weevils, and tortoises were easy to hurt. they don't have to be fed or watered for weeks on end, and they could be stacked in the hole, and they provided a source of fresh meat. and it was darwin, as usual, who basically rescued them and said they would be extinct by the end of the 1800s if something wasn't done. of the 1800s if something wasn't done . so he rescued both the done. so he rescued both the aldabra atoll in the indian ocean and also the galapagos in that respect, and they were considered extinct . and then the considered extinct. and then the seychelles nature trust had this brilliant idea because they knew that they were sort of given as diplomatic gifts around the world or even bought, for private collections and maybe a seychelles giant tortoise wasn't extinct at all. and when they, researched, collections around the world, they rediscovered or de—extincted two species, the seychelles and the arnold's giant tortoise, which is fantastic. >> and how old is he expected to live? what's the life expectancy? >> well, it's a good question . >> well, it's a good question. so, you know, they're believed to be quasi immortal. okay. and that's not just fantasy. it's a subject of a lot of very expensive research because they're resilient to cancer.

they repair their genes better than we do, which is how we age. we start damaging our genes, and then we develop cancers and metabolic diseases. they tend to wear out . and when i came, he wear out. and when i came, he was wearing out. his cataracts meant he couldn't graze properly, which meant he got nutritional deficiencies, which meant that his beak, we call it a beak here went blunt and he was getting thinner and thinner, and i thought he was going to die. but from 2010, we started to hand feed him just to boost his calories. not, not not, of course , clocking the fact that course, clocking the fact that what he really needed as well was the minerals. vitamins and trace elements. and he rejuvenated right ? superpower. rejuvenated right? superpower. so not only was he de—extincted and he's rejuvenated, he has he has superpowers. >> so he's a supernatural being. he is effectively . he is effectively. >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> so joe, how can we be sure about his history ? is there any about his history? is there any documentation about him? anything that we know for sure in terms of when he arrived, what sort of how old he was when he arrived, that kind of thing? >> yeah. well, fortunately,

governor greg wilson in about 1896 wrote a letter to a, a captain who was here inquiring about jonathan and saying he was landed in 1882, fully grown . and landed in 1882, fully grown. and if we didn't have that, we wouldn't have, you know, the real basis for when he landed. and to give an approximate age , and to give an approximate age, well, fully grown. what would that be? fully grown is about 50. and the life expectancy is about 150 and the best circumstances. so we're doing really well . really well. with him. yeah, so we tried to be very fair by just calling that 50 years of age. but he could have been 70, could have been 80. he might have reached 300 years, a 200 years of age already his third century. we just don't know. we don't know, but thank goodness for that document that we've got, and furthermore, rather nicely there is a lovely black and white photograph of him from the late 1800s with some saints and a colonial police officer, which was originally called a picture of him with boer prisoners of war. when i saw the picture, though, i knew they were saints. they could see they were. >> by saints you mean locals?

>> by saints you mean locals? >> local saints, right? sorry. yeah, yeah, yeah. islanders, islanders and, funnily enough, with certain publicity, this very old lady, very bright, sharp old lady came forward called rosemary rees and she had the very same photograph from the very same photograph from the photographic studio from her grandfather collection, who used to be a doctor on the ships that called in, and on the back. can you believe it? it said good types of saints, islanders, at plantation house. and that confirmed they weren't boer prisoners of war because the boers were here in about 1900 1901, and further went on to give the dementia of the tortoise. oh, brilliant. can you believe it? and his dimensions, if anything, are slightly smaller than they measured then. but i think they measured very roughly in a circle round like this. but it confirmed that he was an adult in that year. if his dimensions were bigger now, he's grown since then, but actually they were slightly smaller, so it was just their inaccuracy. but what a gift was that? yeah it's almost like she knew. yes, exactly. yeah. yeah. it was quite extraordinary . it was quite extraordinary. we're very proud of him. he's a very special chap. he's a very important zoological specimen

i >> -- >> it's quite an astonishing creature . and of course, he was creature. and of course, he was 100 when hitler came to power , 100 when hitler came to power, and he did nothing about it. he did . did. >> you would have thought he would have done. he wouldn't. he was no one else for wanted of those. do you remember the electric adverts where they had the plasticine tortoises? yeah, yeah, yeah, they had the sweatband on the glasses. apparently looked a little bit like me, but i was, i was reminded of that. it is fascinating though. and, i mean, a fabulous beast. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> i'm slightly shocked at the intellectual decline of your content, andrew. i mean, this mark dolan stuff, but it was very impressive, i would say. and, the palette is quasi immortal. yes. this creature could be the secret to eternal life. >> no, they're actually now scientists looking at tortoises

specifically because they regenerate, because they can't get cancer. they are actually seeing how they how they could harvest some of that power for human beings so we could live forever as half human, half tortoise . tortoise. >> the tortoise vaccine. >> the tortoise vaccine. >> a tortoise vaccine is coming up. exactly. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> take your tortoise boosters very soon. >> there . >> there. >> there. >> but there is something profound about it anyway. listen, that's what we've got. time for in this first hour. don't go away. there's a lot more to come between now and 9:00. see you in a moment. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on . gb news. >> hello. here's your latest weather update from the met office for gb news. we hold on to rather mixed weather conditions across the uk during the week ahead. rain at times, but temperatures will also be on the rise. at the moment low pressure is in charge, sitting out towards the east of the uk, this weather front bringing outbreaks of rain towards the north—east of the uk, coupled with fairly brisk winds too , and with fairly brisk winds too, and certainly as we head through the evening, a pretty wet end to the

day across the far north—east of scotland. and we do hold on to outbreaks of rain across the northern isles through the night. elsewhere there will be some clear spells, but notice showers moving in from the west, starting to give way to some more persistent rain across the far west of the uk by the morning on monday, temperatures will turn quite chilly under the clear slots towards the north and east because the a touch of frost briefly, but elsewhere it's a relatively mild night. as we go into monday, we'll see an east west split , outbreaks of east west split, outbreaks of rain in the west moving in across northern areas during the day to, whereas out towards the east and southeast we'll see the best of the dry and often fairly sunny weather. and in the sunshine it will be warmer than in recent days. up to 16 or 17 degrees held back a little bit towards the north and northwest with those showers at 12 or 13 celsius on tuesday, we'll see further outbreaks of rain out towards the west. again, some of that could be quite hefty in nature . further east there'll be nature. further east there'll be some sunshine and just 1 or 2 showers, particularly across the east and southeast of england. and again, those temperatures will be a little bit higher still could see high teens in a few spots. it does stay quite changeable weather wise for the rest of the week, but notice those temperatures hold up to could see 19 or 20 degrees in a

few spots. certainly from wednesday onwards. that's it for me. i'll see you soon. bye bye . me. i'll see you soon. bye bye. >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers, sponsors of weather on gb news

>> there's plenty more still to come on. free speech nation this week. but let's get a news

update first. >> good evening. i'm ray addison in the newsroom. our top stories this hour. more human remains have been found in two locations in greater manchester. weeks after the discovery of a torso in a salford nature reserve. the new body parts were found by officers at blackleach reservoir and a dog walker at linnyshaw colliery wood, both in salford. police say they believe the victim was a man in his 60s. two men were arrested on suspicion of murder on thursday and they remain in custody. we'll bring you more on that as we get it now, the shadow health secretary says doctor dan poulter has not been offered a peerage to defect from the tory party to labour. wes streeting is defending doctor poulters decision , saying doctor poulters decision, saying it shows only sir keir starmer can be trusted with the nhs , as can be trusted with the nhs, as doctor poulter says he'll sit on the labour benches until the next general election and then

stand down. it comes just days before local elections across england and wales , and the pm is england and wales, and the pm is refusing to rule out a general election in july. refusing to rule out a general election in july . wes streeting election in july. wes streeting says doctor poulter defected to save the nhs so there would be millions of people disaffected conservative voters like dan porter out there who can see the chaos, and the conservative party see the failure to deliver and are looking at the alternative. >> and i'd ask those people to trust the doctor who's seen the conservative party up close. >> former immigration minister robert jenrick is calling for a cap on net migration , saying cap on net migration, saying it's the only way to restore voters trust. jenrick says he wants a far more restrictive system allowing less than 100,000 people a year. writing in the sunday telegraph, he said the government's recently passed rwanda bill will join the graveyard of policies that failed to tackle illegal migration last 30 years. >> politicians of all stripes have promised controlled and

reduced immigration only to deliver the opposite. and the pubuc deliver the opposite. and the public are rightly furious at what's happened. it's placed immense strain on housing, on pubuc immense strain on housing, on public services, on community cohesion . cohesion. >> well, meanwhile, labour says rishi sunak needs to wake up and realise that his migration plan is not working . that's after is not working. that's after home office figures showed that more than 7000 people have arrived illegally by small boats, so far this year. labour's shadow immigration minister stephen kinnock, says his party will crush the smuggling gangs and make sure that those with no right to be in the uk are swiftly returned. the alba party has been placed on an election footing as motions of no confidence in scotland's first minister make a general election there look increasingly likely. their only msp , ash regan, hasn't confirmed msp, ash regan, hasn't confirmed if she'll support humza yousaf , if she'll support humza yousaf, but it's thought that her vote could be crucial . mr yousaf is could be crucial. mr yousaf is asking leaders of rival parties to find so—called common ground after the collapse of the snp's

power sharing deal with the greens. good morning . for the greens. good morning. for the latest stories, sign up to gb news alerts by scanning the qr code on your screen or go to gb news. common shirts back now to free speech nation. >> welcome back to free speech nafion >> welcome back to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle. we've got a wonderful live studio audience right here, so let's not waste them. let's get some questions. let's get one from jane. where is jane? hi, jane. >> hi . thanks for having me tonight. >> no worries at all. >> no worries at all. >> i'd like to ask the audience and yourselves, does saying back in your day count as age harassment? >> it's such a dramatic question, jane . and i know question, jane. and i know because there was this basically that phrase back in your day saying that to an older colleague, apparently , according colleague, apparently, according to an employment judge this week

who's presided over this case, paul who's presided over this case, paul, you know about this that is apparently now age discrimination. is that a fair point? >> so the person wasn't convicted, however, it was it was, he judged that it was unwanted conduct to say back in your day now, unwanted . your day now, unwanted. >> it's ageism. right? >> it's ageism. right? >> yeah. exactly as it's ageism. so i'm wanting contact to such a sort of spurious , non—committal sort of spurious, non—committal term that it is obviously open to, like many things at the moment, vexatious claims. so anybody can anybody can be accused of racism , sorry. not accused of racism, sorry. not racism. they all are. anyway. you're all racist . ageism. but, you're all racist. ageism. but, i don't know. i mean , the idea i don't know. i mean, the idea of talking down to people because of their age, i'm not comfortable with anyway, but it's common parlance , isn't it? it's common parlance, isn't it? >> that's what i thought, like, you know, i mean, you say things to me all the time, like your lot, and i could interpret i could interpret that in all sorts of horrific meant as hateful. i know it is. >> i know unwanted conduct.

>> i know unwanted conduct. >> is that the phrase because unwanted conduct. that's what i'm every time i work with lewis, there's a lot of mitochondria. but yeah, this thing about what was it your your back in your day. >> yeah. yeah. >> yeah. yeah. >> it is a bit annoying when zoomers are sort of ages. they've even tried to do it to me, andrew and i'm very young, but it is sort of weird to it's not very pleasant, but we are in this absurd hr culture, this kind of we used to be a kind of organic culture where we knew what was acceptable. banter was slightly different in the north and south, but we basically knew now in this weird globalist neoliberal thing, it's all very policed . and basically i'm policed. and basically i'm saying this would never have happened back in my day. >> that's right. are you saying, okay, very funny. >> let's get another question. >> let's get another question. >> now, who is it? >> now, who is it? >> solomon. solomon. hello. yeah. >> hi there, my question is based on the particular person called elon musk. and my question i'd like to ask about him is, should elon musk be censoring footage, which is considered to be not correct in some terms, or violent in terms of his work purpose he does for his career, he does in showbiz in that aspect. yeah. >> yes. because this has been a huge story this week, because elon musk, who i think actually

is a pretty good job with twitter insofar as he's, you know, he has opened up the free speech on the platform, but he's been told by the australian government that he he must censor , must remove this censor, must remove this horrible clip of a terror attack in sydney at a church. i'm i'm sure you all read about this and he's saying he's not going to do that. now, this is tricky because i hate seeing violence online. violent clips online. i will just block accounts that put them up. but the thing is, this is arguably in the public interest. the man who was stabbed has said it should be seen. so what's going on here, nick? well like you, i don't love to see it when you're scrolling through and you see some, like, horrific trans surgery or some sort of horrific vile like i'm trying to eat here and you don't necessarily want to see it because people just put it up. >> so what they should do is sort of give a warning, which they do in a lot of they do in many cases. yeah. and so and you have that thing where you click to view if you want to view it to view if you want to view it to me that's the right compromise because the danger of getting rid of it completely is we don't find out the real narrative. if christians are

being stabbed, i want to know about it. and, you know, if people are being killed, like daniel shaver, who was shot by a police officer, or october seventh, we want to see what hamas are doing and we want to see what israel are doing as well. so we want to see otherwise we'll get the distorted narrative. same with george floyd or something. he was actually saying, i can't breathe before he went on the ground. i kind of want to know that. and the danger is you end up with these little kind of nonh up with these little kind of north korea's where maybe canada can't see it, maybe we can't see it, maybe the eu can't see it, but america can. so it's just a very strange world. so i think they already had the compromise, which is have the description. then you click it if you want. yes. and then i can look at it and go, maybe not today. >> there's a dodgy precedent here as well. well because the thing is the australian government is saying it's not enough that elon musk removes it from australia on users accounts, which is what has happened, but that he needs to do it worldwide because australians could use a vpn. in other words , the australian other words, the australian government wants to police the internet in every country . so internet in every country. so that's a dangerous precedent. >> that question alone, that is unacceptable entirely. you can't have one government from one country across, dictating what the rest of the world can see. it's just not it's just not what

the world needs to be about in terms of sharing of information . terms of sharing of information. yeah, it's such a tricky one. like nick says, you know, i've seen some of the video and it was a young man who stabbed the cat. he was a catholic. he was a priest. he was a priest, a catholic priest, supposedly because he's got some anti—lgbtq views. he doesn't really. he just happens to be an orthodox christian. yeah. who upholds what he sees the bible to be and one of the reasons he wants this video to be out there is to see how, how these things can manifest and to stop it happening. now, sometimes that's very difficult to see, but it might it might do the community some good to see it. right. >> you know, it's a very interesting question anyway, particularly in that the free speech area and, and those sort of grey lines. let's move on now to gavin, gavin . hello. to gavin, gavin. hello. >> yeah. good evening, my question or whatever is, shall be proud of british children being the best boozer in the world. >> what a way to put it. yeah.

just because the who has said that we in great britain have the worst rate of child alcohol consumption ? should we be proud consumption? should we be proud of that? >> well, you know , it's good >> well, you know, it's good news, isn't it? >> why don't why can't we. well, we are the best in the world at something. >> something really horrible . >> something really horrible. >> something really horrible. >> i mean, it's underage drinking. we've all done it, didn't we? we all. we all. did you buy a chair? >> i know. oh, not many . i you buy a chair? >> i know. oh, not many. i did get drunk when i was two. >> and that's. >> and that's. >> did you mean two? >> did you mean two? >> no, no. what had happened was that i used to complain when my parents had wine. so they used to put a little bit of wine in a beaker and fill it up with water. but my aunt saw that and didn't realise. and when i asked her a subsequent cup, she gave me a full on glass of shabli shabli as well. they had to walk me up and down the beach because i couldn't stand up properly. >> you like oblix now you can never get drunk because you fell in. >> that's right, that's exactly right. >> good reference obelix and asterix. yes, he fell in the magic potion as a baby. >> but then he was invincible.

he had it. he didn't need to take it. andrew, just. you can never get drunk now. no, you're. or you're always drunk. i'm not sure. it's a bit of both, if i'm honest. >> but what do you think about that, nick? i mean , do you think that, nick? i mean, do you think that. i mean, it's actually horrible news. really. >> it is a long tradition, though. in england. i was looking at some posts my friend carl put up . england has had carl put up. england has had this long tradition, so the french accuse the english engush french accuse the english english of being drunken and perfidious. this was in the late 18th and 19th centuries. it was la perfide albion , and they were la perfide albion, and they were known as aloof as in us, phlegmatic, insensitive to their own suffering and the sufferings of others. they were not afraid of others. they were not afraid of death. i'm like absolute legends. yeah. was that we drank a lot . nothing changes there. a lot. nothing changes there. also, we were known to have tales as well. the greeks of sicily and the scots in the 13th century thought we had tales. so don't tell them about the tales thing. no, no. yeah. the drinking has always been part of our culture. >> we've learned to hide the tales. so the french don't know. i mean, what do you. so if any french people are watching, we don't have tales, so. yeah, i mean, i think we need to do something about it, right? jordan >> yeah. i mean, you know, you bnng >> yeah. i mean, you know, you bring me on here as a comedian,

i try and make a few jokes, and all of a sudden i'm in hot water for encouraging children to drink. yeah but which, you know, i'm not entirely against. however it's not good, is it? no. >> it's not. no. and i don't even drink really badly at all, so not as much as some of the kids do now, mate, and i don't need to. >> so there we go. okay, let's move on to this final question from aunt. hello, aunt. hello >> hi. good evening guys, faith schools should should faith schools should should faith schools accept more heathens or should the government stop funding faith schools altogether ? >> well, 7- >> well, i ? >> well, i mean, and 7 >> well, i mean, and where do you stand on faith schools? >> i, i don't faith schools are fine. >> but the state shouldn't be funding faith schools. in my view . right. funding faith schools. in my view. right. if funding faith schools. in my view . right. if faith schools view. right. if faith schools want to exist and have their own admission policy, fine . but admission policy, fine. but don't do it with public money. i think it causes divisiveness . think it causes divisiveness. >> and this is, of course, the education secretary has said that she's going to scrap the cap that restricts academies from only taking in pupils of the same religion. so she wants to axe this idea of 50% cap on faith schools and end this policy, where do you stand on

this? well, i found this really interesting because all the faith schools i'm aware of are they take they take money from they take they take money from the government, like all schools do, but not not not over the top or no more. >> yes. and they they are funded largely by the local churches and quite often, particularly in the area i grew up . all the the area i grew up. all the faith schools were the best schools in the area. if you if you could get it. >> parents often lie about their faith to try and get their kids into the faith schools. >> i just i think we're in danger of taking the baby out with the bathwater here. i think faith schools have their place and that they should be supported by the people of that faith as well. so what is happening here is people are trying to get into these faith schools and at the moment there's a cap of 50. i remember growing up and it was it was nothing like that. it wasn't 50, however, what we're talking about now is access to good education. i think now these schools are often the best in terms of local education, or they certainly are in, in, in my experience, and therefore it's a much more of a question about who gets the best access to the best education. and that's a

much wider question. that's about how we fund education in the uk. and i think we need probably need to take the faith school element out of it to some degree, 50% seems a lot. >> i went to a catholic school. i don't remember it being 50. i remember there being one atheist and we were encouraged to spit on him as he entered. what do you think about the times? >> yeah, well, i think it's absurd to have a cap on it. why should the state, particularly in a normally christian country, although, you know, church of england rather than catholic, but why should the state be putting a cap on the number of christians you can have in a christians you can have in a christian school? >> did you go to a christian school? >> no, i didn't, i went to a rubbish comprehensive, but there should be. i would like to have gone to one. there should be no cap on it. we should be encouraging christian schools. i mean, i would say that, but that's what i think. >> but not just christian schools, of course it could be jewish schools. could be muslim schools. >> no, i think we should just encourage christian ones. that's that's probably a christian country. if you went to saudi arabia, you wouldn't say, i want all my christian schools. you understand that the rules are different. it's a christian country. we should have loads of christian schools. sorry. okay. sorry, guys. >> well, nick, you don't have to apologise for your opinion. >> that's perfect, i wasn't sincere, thank you very much.

one clap. one, two i taken over. >> okay. next on free speech nafion >> okay. next on free speech nation equity diversity inclusion and climate training are mandatory in many of britain's workplaces. but are they making us less productive ? they making us less productive? live? we're going to find out in just one moment. don't go anywhere.

welcome back to free speech nation. according to a representative survey of british

workers equity , diversity, workers equity, diversity, inclusion and climate training has become endemic in british workplaces, with 65% of employees saying they have been put through some kind of diversity training. but 45% reported that the training they had received conflicted with their personal, religious or political views. i'm now joined by free speech campaigner steve chilcot to discuss these findings. welcome to the show . findings. welcome to the show. thank you steve, you've been looking into this. you've been looking into this. you've been looking into this. you've been looking into the extent of dei and climate change as well. what's going on here? >> sure . so we know toby young >> sure. so we know toby young started up the free speech union four years ago. i think they've got 22,000 members. they supported 2500 cases and a huge proportion of those cases have been based in the workplace. so there's an awful lot of things going on where people are being discriminated, even losing their jobs because of their views and their beliefs . so i think that their beliefs. so i think that shows us that the workplace is really at the front face of issues around free speech and cancel culture. >> i think that's so important because when toby set up the

free speech union, a lot of activists were mocking and scoffing and saying, this isn't necessary, but actually it's turned out to be very necessary. and he saved a lot of people's careers . careers. >> absolutely. yes, without any doubt. and they've recently published a report, called eddy tax . is it a, is it published a report, called eddy tax. is it a, is it equity published a report, called eddy tax . is it a, is it equity, tax. is it a, is it equity, diversity, inclusion. is it hobbung diversity, inclusion. is it hobbling british businesses. >> so what's the answer to that question. >> well, the results are frankly shocking okay. astounding. i'm just going to read out some of the stats. please do that report. and you quoted a couple of them earlier. so as you say, 65% of the people said they'd attended edi training. and actually, just to mention first that this survey was undertaken by a market research company called dynata. they are a world leading market research company. they they interview , they survey they they interview, they survey millions of people every year. they follow best practice and the reason i point that out is because i'm sure there will be detractors who will say, yeah, we can't rely on this data. we can't rely on this survey. i think we absolutely can. okay. so quoting some of the numbers. so, 62% of workers said they

felt they'd had to conceal their own personal opinions during the training , 22% felt they'd been training, 22% felt they'd been compelled to say things that they did not believe, 45% said they did not believe, 45% said the content or some of the content of the training conflicted with their own personal beliefs. 31% felt that they had , left a job because of they had, left a job because of this training or because of the woke nature of their employer. and interestingly , that 31% rose and interestingly, that 31% rose when it was minority groups . so when it was minority groups. so black asian, lgbt people , it was black asian, lgbt people, it was in their 40s. yes. and people that had left their job because that had left theirjob because of that culture. >> well, because people from minority groups are expected to or just minority groups are expected to orjust assumed minority groups are expected to or just assumed to minority groups are expected to orjust assumed to agree with or just assumed to agree with all of this stuff. well of course, and one assumes that they're the target of this training to make their life better in the workplace. >> but it's clearly it's having the opposite impact. >> this is very significant. those statistics because, you know, we often think about the way in which the free speech union defends those who are at risk of losing their jobs, being fired, demonised , harassed

fired, demonised, harassed because of their perfectly legitimate legal points of view . legitimate legal points of view. but this is actually pointing to a broader problem, which is that a broader problem, which is that a lot of people are self—censoring. they're parroting views that are against their own principles . in other their own principles. in other words, there is a kind of a groupthink , a monoculture, which groupthink, a monoculture, which they are expected to adhere to. that's terrible news for freedom, is it? >> absolutely. and the two last bits of data that i'll just quote. so 36% felt that they'd personally been penalised for speaking out against the training. and 12% said that they'd personally witnessed someone fired, now 12. so the current working population for the uk is just under 30 million. 65% of those said they'd undertaken the training. 12% of those said they'd witnessed someone being fired. that equates to 2.3 million people now. i don't personally think we can assume that genuinely , 2.3 can assume that genuinely, 2.3 million people have been fired for that. some of them may not have been fired, they may have been fired for another reason. they may have been fired because they were genuinely harassing or

bullying a colleague. but even i think even if we say if only one tenth of that number had in reality been fired because of this, that's still equates to hundreds of thousands of people. absolutely >> and, you know, there was a recent book by ricky schlott and greg lukianov called the cancelling of the american mind, talking about how on american campuses, the, the extent to which professors , academics are which professors, academics are being fired, losing their jobs, hounded, you'd have to go back to the mccarthy era to get anything close. and actually, this far exceeds, in terms of statistics, the numbers of the mccarthy era. so we have to just get real about this and address the point that actually we are living in conditions where people are self—censoring, where there is only one acceptable point of view, and the overton window is narrowing and as you say, it's actually affecting people's ability to work. absolutely and absolutely. >> and even the government, i say even the government are saying it now, you know, kemi badenoch badenoch, the secretary of state for business and trade and for women in equalities, has commissioned a report. and

again, that report came out with some very interesting conclusions. that and you know, that report, it was commissioned for a six month period. it involved many experts on that panel involved many experts on that panel. so, you know, very thorough piece of work . and thorough piece of work. and their conclusions again, were incredibly worrying that, you know, their conclusions, included things like , in the included things like, in the decision making for the creation of these projects . you know, of these projects. you know, they're not looking at what their objectives are. they're not evaluating it. they're not looking at the value for money. and like we were just saying, most importantly, they're not picking up that actually the outcome of much of this training is demoralising people. it's creating conflict. >> so is part of the problem that a lot of the people who run these kind of unconscious bias sessions or edi training sessions, that they are of the view that what they are doing is not political, is not ideological, it's just something that we all agree on. there is this kind of fabricated sense of a consensus. but of course, as we know from those who have advocated critical race theory in schools or queer theory in

the nhs or whatever, actually, this is deeply ideological and there might be a grounds to oppose it on, on, on that basis. >> well, absolutely. not only deeply ideological and politically driven, but in some cases unlawful . yeah, they are cases unlawful. yeah, they are actually breaching the letter of the law . so the equality act the law. so the equality act often criticised . and yes, there often criticised. and yes, there are aspects of the equality act that i would say are far from ideal that i would say are far from ideal, but actually it's giving us some protection in this area . us some protection in this area. so you mentioned that there have been some, great tribunal outcomes that the maya forstater case, the, many of the people that you've had on this show here, where, you know, they've used the philosophical belief aspect of the equality belief to say that their, dismissals or their detrimental treatment was unlawful, but they do have to go through the whole process. >> i mean, maya forstater, who was a tax expert who was dismissed on the grounds that she believed that sex is immutable. she the initial ruling by the judge was that that that is not acceptable in

a, in a in a civilised society that did get overturned. and now the belief that men and women are different or rather stating the fact that men and women are different is protected under law thanks to her tenacity and going through that. yeah but people, so is it a good idea, steve, to remind people if they are going through this kind of training at work, that they can stand up and oppose it, they can ask questions and they won't necessarily be demonised or fired for it. >> that is legally the case. yes it's legally the case, yes. >> but it does happen. but it does happen and i'm sure it will continue to happen. >> i have a feeling the tide is starting to turn on this. yes, but it is still a risky process. and even if someone you know has a firm legal defence, as you say, it takes a lot of time, a lot of money. you know, you may have lost your job. you don't have lost yourjob. you don't have lost yourjob. you don't have any income at the time. it takes a lot . and not not to takes a lot. and not not to mention that, you know, the emotional energy. it takes a lot of courage, doesn't it? >> absolutely. it takes a certain character to do that. and it's difficult. finally, steve, can you tell us, is there

somewhere where we can read these findings for ourself, so if i can talk about fairjob uk. so i've as well as being an advocate for free speech and not least speaker's corner. as you know, my career i've worked in hr for 30 years this year and myself and a number of hr professionals have come together and we've concluded we need to get off our buttocks and say we're going to do something about this. so we've created a new organisation called fair job uk. that's a two fold organisation, mainly aimed at small and medium sized enterprises. but anyone is welcome to come and talk to us. we're an accreditation scheme whereby employers can sign a pledge that they will not interfere in the personal and private businesses of their staff, as long as that's lawful and legitimate, they won't micromanage their staff. they won't force their staff into ideologically politically driven training, etc, and they will they will judge their staff and their potential recruits on the content of their character .

content of their character. >> so, i mean, if all companies signed up to this, this problem would kind of be over. >> it would indeed it would indeed. so that's the first aspect. and the second aspect of fair job uk is it's an aspect. and the second aspect of fairjob uk is it's an hr support service , and we're support service, and we're trying to provide what hr departments used to provide pragmatic, sensible advice and support to organisations to help them meet their business objectives. where can people find more about fairjob uk so they can find it on the web at fair jobs? co.uk. >> perfect. steve chilcott, thanks so much forjoining me. thank you to . so next on free thank you to. so next on free speech nation i'm going to be joined by author gareth roberts who's going to be discussing his new book, gay shame the rise of gender ideology and the new homophobia. please do not go anywhere

welcome back to free speech nation. only a few years ago, it seemed that the fight for gay rights was won in the uk. seemed that the fight for gay rights was won in the uk . a rights was won in the uk. a legal equality was achieved. prejudice rapidly dying out. mission accomplished. well, unfortunately not. according to gareth roberts , whose new book, gareth roberts, whose new book, gay shame the rise of gender ideology and the new homophobia, argues that gender ideology is homophobic and has captured institutions like stonewall and the gay press. and i'm delighted to say that gareth joins me now. welcome to the show. hi, andrew, and congratulations on the book. it's absolutely fantastic , as it's absolutely fantastic, as i knew it would be, because you're a brilliant writer. can you tell us a bit about this? a lot of

people watching will think, what on earth are you talking about? we've won gay rights. how can it be the case that homophobia is making a comeback? what would you say to that? >> yeah, it's hard to understand for people because, it sounds counterintuitive, you know, how come gay people be homophobic? what's going on? it doesn't make sense to them. but i think what's happened is, with the coming of what i call gender ism, gender ideology, it's kind of revived homophobia in a completely new guise. so and nobody quite understood what was going on. i certainly didn't for quite a while. and suddenly it just became apparent that, you know, this was an ideology that was saying, there's something wrong with camp little boys and tomboy little girls , and they tomboy little girls, and they need fixing. and, you know, that's crazy. you know, that's if that isn't homophobia, what is? >> and one of the really interesting things that you point out in the book or in many of the chapters, is that a lot of the chapters, is that a lot of this is being driven by gay people, the idea that all of a sudden, lesbians should be shamed for not including people

with penises in their dating pool with penises in their dating pool, you know, and a lot of this is coming from a lot of particularly gay male celebrities. do you want to talk a bit about that? >> yeah. i mean, yes, i think they're all just terrified, i think particularly in the, the media world, which is kind of where i come from, you know, the tv cultural world, there's a kind of blanket, tv cultural world, there's a kind of blanket , take up of kind of blanket, take up of genderism of gender ideology , genderism of gender ideology, andifs genderism of gender ideology, and it's become, so unquestioned . and it happened so rapidly that people feel, they have to go along with it. they don't even think about it. they just kind of take it as one of the new progressive opinions that they just grab off the shelf. yes and, and what's happened is, those people, you know, because they think it's what a good person does, they just enforce it. and quite , quite, forcefully it. and quite, quite, forcefully at times. >> well, one of the things that you point out in the book, which i think is really interesting,

is, is that the comparisons that are often made to section 28, people will say that, you know, if you're if you're not being , if you're if you're not being, if you're if you're not being, if you're if you're not being, if you're not being pro trans identity pro, non—binary or pro lgbtqia, you're effectively enforcing the equivalent of section 28. but that's a poor comparison, isn't it? >> yeah. i mean, it's a very poor comparison. the two things don't really align at all. i think it's just a very handy thing that people sort of grab off the shelf to say often it's very young people that have no memory of section 28. and as i say in the book, you know, the situation. then was completely different in this country. we forget what section 28 was about and how it came about, a lot of that was due to quite crazy behaviour of, gay activists, now section 28 was a bad thing and it should not have happened. and the government shouldn't have done it. and it was bad legislation, but at the same time, it's not as bad as, as genderism. yeah. you know, section 28 wasn't doing half the

things that genderism is doing. well that's that's a very important point, isn't it, because you didn't have people in authority suggesting to young gay people that they were in the wrong body and needed to be surgically corrected, which, as you say , just sounds incredibly. you say, just sounds incredibly. >> that's the very definition of homophobia , surely. homophobia, surely. >> i mean, when this first started happening, i thought, well , started happening, i thought, well, somebody's going to say something because, you know, somebody usually does this, you know, and things happen, you know, and things happen, you know, bad things happen. somebody steps in and this time they just didn't. and i kept waiting . you know, i'm still waiting. you know, i'm still looking at my watch. and we, you know , we've just had a four year know, we've just had a four year pubuc know, we've just had a four year public inquiry which has taken four years to tell us that telling kids they can change their sex is bad. you know , i their sex is bad. you know, i mean, good. fine. thanks, doctor. cass but, you know, did it really take. >> we really need four years and it all happened so quickly . i it all happened so quickly. i mean, i know you you make the analogy of when you're walking every day past a building being constructed, and you just get used to the scaffolding and the rest. and then one day, it's

suddenly there, towering over you. it did seem to come out of nowhere, didn't it? and why do you think it took hold of the of the gay community so quickly ? the gay community so quickly? >> i think what it was was around the time 2012, 2013 when, gay marriage was legalised in this country. a lot of the western world, gay rights had sort of been won. and what you had was big organisations like stonewall, the lgbt plus consortium, whatever. and suddenly, you know, they had huge staffs, big machinery, lots of campaigning stuff going on and no campaigns to fight, at least on their own ground, and trans was coming along at the same time and gender was coming along and saying, we want to be along and saying, we want to be a part of you now. stonewall with under ruth hunt took that decision in 20 1415. and immediately that changed everything really quickly, i say in the book how once i remember writing the initials lgb and a tweet or something, and i thought, oh, well, i better add thought, oh, well, i better add t just thought, oh, well, i better add tjust because everyone else is. and i thought, well, hold on, i

haven't thought about that . haven't thought about that. nobody's asked me. nobody's disgusted. it'sjust nobody's asked me. nobody's disgusted. it's just suddenly there . and is this right? and there. and is this right? and i didn't know half of what i know now. but still, at the same time, i was thinking, there's something very odd about this, but yeah, i mean, it sort of happened gradually, but also the actual turning point in 2014, which i think is when you can narrow it to down seem to take about two weeks, you know, it was like suddenly it was like, oh, we've got the transgender, the t and the q and the plus with us now and. okay, and it happened before anyone could react, but it's also it seems quite counterintuitive if you stop and think about it for a moment, because a lot of the people who identify as q as, as queer are just straight people with a kink, aren't they? >> as far as i can see. yeah. or asexuals, people who've never been oppressed , you know, no been oppressed, you know, no one's been oppressed for having a low libido, as far as i'm aware. so so why is it that they were able to attach themselves limpet like to people who have actually faced oppression?

>> i think they wanted a bit of the oppression pie. and as we know, you know, that's what people that's what brings you status. now, you know , if you're status. now, you know, if you're a sort of middle class spud from you know, somewhere, and you haven't got any oppression status, well, you know, dye your hair purple and call yourself queen hair purple and call yourself queer. great. come on in. you know, queer energy, queer joy. you know, sort of. >> sorry, i mean, that's that's i understand your frustration there. but one of the things you also go into is what the gay community used to be like. and there is a sense in which, there's been a loss of sense of humour among that community. now i mean, do you want to tell us a bit about that? >> well, i mean, a very good example. today i saw, a tweet, a little video by the comedian scott capurro, who i know you've had on the show. i think , and he had on the show. i think, and he was saying how i think he was in he was doing a show and the islington police said he was homophobic . and this is scott homophobic. and this is scott capurro. you know, he's like a truth telling, very naughty, very push the boundaries. gay

comedian, you know, one of the first, probably the first very openly gay stand up that was ever around. yes, and it sort of it's sort of percolated across that whole scene that, you know, suddenly everyone was sort of robotically repeating the mantras, you know, love is love, transgender women are women and all that sort of thing , and the all that sort of thing, and the sort of the questioning aspect, the sort of, hey, hang on, just vanished. >> yes . and i think one of the >> yes. and i think one of the great things about your book is it's really funny. i mean, that's the first and foremost, it's a really great read, and i'd love people to read it because it reminds us of a kind of a, dare i say, a kind of waspishness , a kind of a kind of waspishness, a kind of a kind of subversive quality that the gay community used to have. and you mentioned the royal vauxhall tavern, which i've seen some of the most subversive performances there. but then a few years ago, they put a sign up saying which things comedians shouldn't joke about. things comedians shouldn't joke about . so yeah, isn't that a about. so yeah, isn't that a good example of what's going on here? >> oh yeah . completely. i think >> oh yeah. completely. i think i was, somebody in the audience once wrote into the vauxhall tavern and said, i should decide what you show and what people

should say. and they went, yeah, great. yeah i remember looking on their facebook page and it was them saying, we've got this person in now that can tell us exactly where we've been going wrong. i was like, what are you talking about? this is the vauxhall tavern . yeah. you know, vauxhall tavern. yeah. you know, come on. >> it's that idea that suddenly the most subversive in society have all become conformists overnight. it's very depressing, but one of the things you do to, if i but one of the things you do to, ifi hope but one of the things you do to, if i hope it's not a spoiler, gareth, but towards the end of the book, you do offer two potential futures. two paths that we might go down. do you want to tell us what you mean by that? >> well, one in future is the one which, hopefully with doctor cass , and all that's happened cass, and all that's happened recently, with kemi badenoch making sort of reproving noises about maybe a statutory public inquiry into gender is the fact that we all sort of come to our senses. >> but there have been so many times over the past few years where i've thought, well, this is it now. you know, when jk rowling first came out and said

something, when maya forstater won her case, but i thought, well, that's it, that's it. now that's the end of gender. and it's just rolled on, you know , it's just rolled on, you know, like a steamroller. nothing's really changed. the second feature is where it just triumphs like it has in canada. and you've got like, you know, where it's where it's very actually illegal to say anything. against genderism. so i think we have that, that possibility of going down one of one of those two paths. >> and as you say, it's very bad for news gay rights if we do get down the path of gender ism, because it is it is directly in conflict, isn't it? so do you think that hopefully that that second future won't happen, that actually we will end up in a world where people understand that gay rights needs to be secured on the basis that there is such a thing as biological sex. that's the whole point. >> well, you'd hope so, yeah. i mean, i really hope so. i mean, seeing people like wes streeting and shabana mahmood, i mean, you know, on the one hand you're thinking, well,

know, on the one hand you're thinking, well , thank you, where thinking, well, thank you, where were you? but at the same time, it's great, you know, that these people can feel they can say this stuff, particularly as we're probably about to have a labour government. >> yes. and on that, gareth, just very finally, you know, you do make the point that we do need to build a golden bridge. it's very frustrating for those of us who've been sounding this alarm for many years to see a lot of people suddenly say, oh, yeah, actually they're right. there is a problem. but actually, this isn't about ego . actually, this isn't about ego. we have to bring those people along, don't we? >> yeah, we have to just, you know, it's sticks in the craw and, you know, you want to scream, but at the same time, you have to go. great. thank you . just as people did with gay rights. and in the original days of stonewall, you know, when suddenly people like edwina currie were fighting for gay rights, it was actually, you have to say , great. thank you, have to say, great. thank you, edwina. thank you. you know, and that's what you've got to do now. >> well, i think your book will be a big part of waking people up to the problem. it's called gay shame . i hope people buy it. gay shame. i hope people buy it. it's fantastic. gareth roberts, thanks so much forjoining me. thank mark steyn luke littler .

thank mark steyn luke littler. and next on free speech nation we've got social sensations. we're going to take a look at what has gone viral this week. and also we're going to be solving all of your personal problems in unfiltered dilemmas. don't go

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle. it's time for social sensations. that's the part of the show where we look at what has been going viral in the turbid waters of social media this week. and first up is this video. i'm sure you saw it, policing minister chris philp. let's have a look . chris philp. let's have a look. >> right now in goma, there's a genocide going on and there's such a big conflict going on with people from rwanda. so i had my family members come from goma on on a crossing right now. they then be sent back to the country that they're supposedly wore in rwanda. does that make

any sense to you? >> no. i think there's an exclusion on people from rwanda being sent, not from rwanda. >> they're from congo, from congo , and they're supposedly congo, and they're supposedly from congo. they're supposedly war in these people, from rwanda. are they then going to be sent to rwanda if they came here on a crossing from from congo? yeah >> would people be sent from. well, miranda is a different country. congo isn't it? it's a different country. yes it is, yes, definitely . yes, definitely. >> you're saying if they. >> you're saying if they. >> so that looked from wes streeting said it all. the thing is geography is hard. and you know knowing not some people don't know african geography . don't know african geography. >> that is why i haven't done question time. the fact that i've not been invited is really a side issue. yeah, yeah , that's a side issue. yeah, yeah, that's my main fear because i haven't even i've not even seen these clips. so i'm going to kind of micro version of that. i've not seen these clips, i'm reacting. but imagine like i didn't know anything. yeah. but. well exactly. no, but i was on the bbc so you would probably know that rwanda and congo are different. yeah, i would, i would but but but i actually have sympathy for people who don't because you know, we don't all know everything. but maybe he's getting confused because

that's the next plan is to send him to congo and he can't remember maybe. >> what do you think, paul? it's tncky. tricky. >> it's definitely a gotcha moment. and who doesn't admire a politician being got? yeah. i mean, you have to understand some of the geopolitics as well. goma being in congo, congo being at war with rwanda, somebody trying to come from goma in congo across the english channel would then in theory, be sent back to rwanda. and he's saying, well, that can't happen. and it wouldn't. that's the point. it wouldn't. that's the point. it would never happen. but he probably should have got a grip a bit quicker on that. there was a bit quicker on that. there was a difference between congo and rwanda didn't get it even when it was sort of explained to him, no, he hasn't got a decade of stand up comedy experience. >> and you know what, though it does. the bbc always said the panellists don't know the questions, and it does prove thatis questions, and it does prove that is one of the rare times the bbc was telling the truth. >> yeah, because he definitely didn't know the he definitely didn't know the he definitely didn't know the he definitely didn't know . didn't know the he definitely didn't know. oh didn't know the he definitely didn't know . oh look at that. didn't know. oh look at that. >> yeah. unbelievable. >> yeah. unbelievable. >> not big bbc fans. yeah >> not big bbc fans. yeah >> you get a round of applause here by just knocking the bbc okay, let's move on now to this one. what happens when you mix

the free palestine movement with drag queens? it's called story time for palestine. let's have a look . look. >> today what we're going to do is we're gonna shout free palestine. can i hear that? free time. if you're a drag queen and you know it, shout free, free palestine. if you're a drag queen and you know it and you really want to show it. you're a drag queen and you know it. shout free. >> i mean, you you could ask children to chant anything. yeah. and they would chant it, not knowing what it meant. so i don't have any issue with anything that's going on there, other than the fact that they are trying to indoctrinate children. >> right? >> right? >> so this big, big issue. >> so this big, big issue. >> no. but you know, a lot of people would say drag queens in schools and all that sort of stuff. well, you know, i've come to i've come to terms with it and it's, you know, things happen. but the idea that you can control children in any way, whether that was in something i agreed with or disagree with, i'm totally against. >> well, it's, you know, there are all sorts of issues going on there. there's the drag element with drag, as far as i'm concerned, is an adult form of

entertainment. >> so that was a bit more danish, wasn't it? >> i mean, yeah, that was to be fair, that wasn't sexualised. and you do see these clips of sort of very hyper sexualised drag acts in front of children. i just think, no, don't do drag acts in front of children. ijust think, no, don't do it. i just think, no, don't do it. and it's really bad for the gay community because people start associating that and gay people are dead against it. that's the thing. but it's not. you're right, that wasn't a sexualised performance. but getting children to chant free palestine. do they know what palestine. do they know what palestine means? no they don't. do they know where it is? do they know about the complications of this conflict? probably not. no. >> of course, you know, they used to make us sing baa. sing baa baa, black sheep. we didn't know that that was bad. >> yeah, it was very racist. >> yeah, it was very racist. >> so, you know, we had no idea. we just repeating the words that were sung to us. >> i mean, it is slightly disturbing, isn't it, nick? >> yeah, well, like paul, i had no problem with that clip except for everything in it. i mean, i mean, yeah, why are they in a school doing a sexualised thing? yeah. that wasn't the most sexualised . but most of these sexualised. but most of these performances are absolutely disgusting. they shouldn't be in schools or performing with the children. number two, the idea of free palestine when you're a drag queen, how do drag queens get on in palestine? one has to wonder. >> there's a big drag, big drag circuit in palestine, like the queers for palestine, which was

the ultimate absurdity. >> a bit like my group christians for satan . so it's christians for satan. so it's like, that's a fundamental absurdity as you say, there's no way the kids can know. so it's brainwashing. yeah, highly partisan brainwashing of children. absurd. even if you like palestine, even if you don't, you know, even if you're sympathetic to palestine. none of that . of that. >> i mean, as a teacher of young children, you keep your politics out of the classroom. apparently, if the actual teacher. no, it's not. but you know, it's not like if i, if i when i was a teacher, if i'd put on a frock, it would have been okay for me to just be really politicised. that's not how it works, surely. i mean, it's an absolute nonsense. anyway, we've got to move on because we want to take some of your unfiltered dilemmas. thanks ever so much for emailing in with all of your personal problems. you do it every week and you never really get a good answer. so let's see if we can solve something this week. we've got a dilemma now from andy. andy says, should i grow a mullet now? was it pat sharp? i used to have a yes. >> it's one of many people. >> it's one of many people. >> it's one of many people. >> it was. yeah, it wasn't just him. it wasn't like it was limited to him. >> it was ice hockey players in america, pat sharp, i've seen it come back. i didn't justin bieber have one at one point?

really? he's pretty cool. >> so should i mean, the trouble is, the trouble is, andy, we don't know anything about you. we don't know what your framing is like. we don't know whether you've got a square jaw, whether it's going to suit you. yeah. >> all we know is he's got good taste in news channels . yeah, taste in news channels. yeah, because he watches this. shows. exactly. that's about it. so yeah, i think he should. i think he should more gb because they're not expecting it from gb viewers. like like we find out most of them vote labour the other day which we did didn't we. now we're finding out most of them have mullets. yeah. no one saw that coming. >> so we're finding out that some of them want fashion tips from us three. yeah. which i think questions their mental health i dare you, we should just clarify because a lot of people won't know what nick is alluding to there. >> there was a poll, a poll of gb news viewers. it turns out more of them support the labour party at the moment than the tories. i mean, that's kind of astonishing. but then i guess it's what you said earlier, nick. >> it's always it's a uni party. >> it's always it's a uni party. >> it's always it's a uni party. >> i think it's what you said. so anyway, would should they, should he grow a mullet? i mean, you know, if you want to guess. >> well, you know, we're advocates for free speech. why not? free hairstyle. do what you like, mate, i don't care. >> do it. do it. okay do it and send us a photo, and then we'll tell you what we think of it.

then let's move on to this dilemma from angela. angela says, my girlfriend has started drinking diet coke instead of full fat. i know it doesn't sound like a big deal, but what kind of weirdo drinks diet coke? how do i get over this inhibition? it's really starting to affect our relationship . this to affect our relationship. this is a big misnomer. by the way, angela, they say full fat. there isn't really fat in coke. there's sugar. there's a hell of a lot of sugar. so it's actually a lot of sugar. so it's actually a sugary drink, right? anyway, that's just my bugbear, but okay. should, should. what's wrong with drinking diet coke? >> well, nothing. i mean, what a question. yeah, well, what a question. yeah, well, what a question. i mean, my girlfriend started drinking a different drink. should i leave her? it's basically the question. basically, i would like his girlfriend to get in touch , and, girlfriend to get in touch, and, we should advise to her leave him. >> it's actually. it's a gay relationship. i was a gay. >> oh, i did, sorry. i don't set that. >> and what you didn't realise is that diet coke in the lesbian community is a big no no. is it? yeah. they. absolutely. >> how would i know that? >> how would i know that? >> well, because i made it up. >> well, because i made it up. >> all right. enough but you can't like, are there certain things, nick, that with your partner . partner. >> yeah. when it comes to matters of taste, you would draw the line asking the most single

man in the country. >> i mean, look , by choice, for >> i mean, look, by choice, for a start, how fragile is the relationship? if that's the line? >> yeah. diet coke . >> yeah. diet coke. >> yeah. diet coke. >> also, i feel personally attacked because i drink diet coke. i drank coke zero, but i gave it up for lent, which was so hard i had to start drinking the odd diet coke. >> so you'll never loophole. >> so you'll never loophole. >> you'll never be in a lesbian relationship. >> as a result of my. >> as a result of my. >> as a result of my. >> a lot of people have said that about me. >> that's right. >> that's right. >> but it sounds more like she's looking for an excuse to dump her, if that's. honestly, if that's it, is it supposed to be, like, fussy? >> like, oh, you care about calories? what's the what's the accusation? i think that might be it. >> as simple as that. >> as simple as that. >> like, i think that's a good thing. you know, not to drink so much sugar. >> well, look, we've got time for one. we're never going to solve that one. let's be honest, we'll get one more dilemma from diane. diane says my partner has recently gone to a no sugar all meat diet. he watched a few youtube videos , and he now youtube videos, and he now thinks just eating meat is the answer to everything. i'm worried he's becoming a bit of a youtube conspiracy weirdo. what do i do? well, now , the thing do i do? well, now, the thing is, louis schaefer, who's often on this channel, has precisely that diet , and he is a that diet, and he is a conspiracy theory weirdo. >> yes, try working with that

every week. that's all i'm going to say. you know, you can't smell people on the. >> i'm just kidding. >> i'm just kidding. >> no, he does meat diet. >> no, he does meat diet. >> i mean , it's extreme, isn't >> i mean, it's extreme, isn't it? it is extreme. i think i'm very pro meat, but just not pro solely meat. okay. exclusion of everything else . everything else. >> all right, paul, you're on pro meat too. >> yeah, you're pro meat. >> yeah, you're pro meat. >> yeah. why wouldn't i be? but i mean, the what. >> yeah. i mean, what is the only really so . only really so. >> okay, why do people how old are these people. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> well, okay, look, we're not going to solve any of this , and going to solve any of this, and we are out of time, unfortunately. but thank you for joining us for free speech nation. this was the week when the snp broke with the greens. elon musk took on the australian government and i met a giant tortoise thanks to my guests and my panel. and if you want to join us live, do apply. go to sro audiences.com. we'll see you next week. thanks very much for joining . us.

joining. us. >> that warm feeling inside and from boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb news. >> hello. here's your latest weather update from the met office for gb news. we hold on to rather mixed weather conditions across the uk during the week ahead. rain at times, but temperatures will also be on the rise. at the moment. low pressure is in charge . sitting pressure is in charge. sitting out towards the east of the uk, this weather front bringing outbreaks of rain towards the north—east of the uk, coupled with fairly brisk winds to and certainly as we head through the evening, a pretty wet end to the day across the far north—east of scotland. and we do hold on to outbreaks of rain across the northern isles through the night. elsewhere there'll be some clear spells, but notice showers moving in from the west, starting to give way to some more persistent rain across the far west of the uk by the morning on monday, temperatures will turn quite chilly under the clear slots towards the north and east because the a touch of frost briefly, but elsewhere it's a relatively mild night. as we go into monday, we'll see an east west split outbreaks of rain in the west moving in across northern areas during the day to , whereas out towards the day to, whereas out towards the east and southeast we'll see the

best of the dry and often fairly sunny weather. and in the sunshine it will be warmer than in recent days. up to 16 or 17 degrees held back a little bit towards the north and northwest with those showers at 12 or 13 celsius on tuesday, we'll see further outbreaks of rain out towards the west. again, some of that could be quite hefty in nature . further east there will nature. further east there will be some sunshine and just 1 or 2 showers, particularly across the east and southeast of england. and again, those temperatures will be a little bit higher still could see high teens in a few spots. it does stay quite changeable weather wise for the rest of the week, but notice those temperatures hold up to could see 19 or 20 degrees in a few spots. certainly from wednesday onwards. that's it for me. i'll see you soon. bye bye . me. i'll see you soon. bye bye. >> looks like things are heating up . boxt boilers sponsors of up. boxt boilers sponsors of weather on

gb news. >> good evening. the cheeky trio we call our headliners is up

next. but first, the news headunes next. but first, the news headlines with me, ray addison