b.b. year old died alongside b.b. king and elsie dot stancombe dunng king and elsie dot stancombe during a mass stabbing at a dance class. meanwhile, the justice minister says the fallout from recent riots across the country is, she says, going to be felt for years . shabana to be felt for years. shabana mahmood says it will hold back the labour government's efforts to fix the justice system, which was already facing a massive backlog of court cases and dwindling space in prisons. well, it comes as today , a 15 well, it comes as today, a 15 year old boy has become the first child to be convicted for his part in violent disorder in sunderland . meanwhile, the sunderland. meanwhile, the education secretary says children will be taught how to spot extremist content and fake news online in the wake of those protests . bridget phillipson protests. bridget phillipson said that she's launching a review of the curriculum in both primary and in secondary schools to arm children against what she's called putrid conspiracy theories. it comes as sir keir starmer suggested the government will review social media laws as more sentences for online offences linked to the riots are expected in the coming days.

we've heard today that two migrants have died while attempting to cross the english channel. around 50 people were rescued from the same boat after that vessel sent a distress signal to coastguards in france. rescuers say they pulled many of them out of the water with fuel burn injuries. them out of the water with fuel burn injuries . president burn injuries. president zelenskyy has for the first time acknowledged that ukraine is conducting a military offensive inside russia's western kursk region. the operation, which began now five days ago, has taken russia by surprise and prompted massive accusations across both sides of the border . across both sides of the border. ukraine says it has destroyed 53 russian drones during an overnight strike here. people in northern parts of the uk are being warned to expect heavy downpours and possible flash flooding tomorrow. a yellow weather warning for thunderstorms covers northern ireland from midnight tonight until 7:00 in the morning, while an alert for scotland and the north of england is in place from 2 am. meanwhile, though, there's a sunnier picture

further south, with warmer weather predicted for london and the south—east, where temperatures could reach up to 34 c. in paris, there's been an unexpected security scare as a man was spotted climbing the eiffel tower just hours before the olympic closing ceremony . the olympic closing ceremony. tonight, the shirtless climber scaled the iconic landmark some 1000ft in the air, prompting french police to evacuate the area. some visitors were briefly trapped on the second floor, but were safely escorted out shortly after that incident unfolded. as paris was ramping up security ahead of tonight's closing ceremony, with 30,000 officers deployed across the streets , and deployed across the streets, and the king has congratulated athletes at the close of that paris olympic games, calling them an inspiration tonight. in his statement, king charles has praised team gb and commonwealth competitors for their outstanding success and sportsmanship. well, great britain finished with 65 medals, including 14 golds, placing

seventh in the medal table, though that is their lowest since 2004. traditional sports like rowing and athletics returned medals, while newer disciplines like sport climbing saw first time success. those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm sam francis. your next update from the newsroom just after 8:00 for the newsroom just after 8:00 for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code, or go to gb news. >> .com forward slash alerts . >> .com forward slash alerts. >> .com forward slash alerts. >> riots in the uk continue. elon musk takes on the government and women with male chromosomes win two olympic gold medals. this is free speech nafion medals. this is free speech nation . welcome to free speech nation. welcome to free speech nafion 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 lovable culture warriors. although it looks like most of them are in the government,

these days. coming up on the show tonight, the metropolitan police commissioner, sir mark rowley, has dismissed accusations of two tier policing in the wake of the riots across the uk. but barrister sarah phillimore says different. she'll be joining me later to discuss that. and how does the government go about tackling the root causes of the disorder? i'm going to be speaking to academic matt goodwin, comedy writer graham linehan will be joining me to discuss whether or not we have reached a tipping point in the gender wars and of course, myself and my fantastic panel will be answering questions from our wonderful studio audience, my comedian guests this evening are paul cox and lewis schaffer. sarah carter . the true test of sarah carter. the true test of a government's commitment to freedom comes in times of crisis. the riots that have erupted throughout the united kingdom are to be condemned unequivocally. the perpetrators prosecuted, and the safety of the affected communities restored. this ought to be followed by serious discussions about why such widespread resentment has been generated, and how best to address the

legitimate grievances that in some cases have translated into illegitimate behaviour . some cases have translated into illegitimate behaviour. in some cases have translated into illegitimate behaviour . in the illegitimate behaviour. in the meantime, we need to be vigilant. the current labour government comprises of culture warriors who mistrust freedom of speech and will take any opportunity to impose restrictions. don't believe me? look at what our government posted on x this week. think before you post. well that would before you post. well that would be good advice if it was coming from a friend, but this is coming from a government that has the power to imprison people for exercising their right to free speech, whereas many perpetrators of violence in the recent riots have rightly been arrested and prosecuted, increasingly we're seeing police knocking on people's doors for social media posts that contain disinformation or the potential to stir up hatred . here's some to stir up hatred. here's some footage posted on x of a man being arrested for writing something on facebook that caused offence. >> i'm actually being arrested .

>> i'm actually being arrested. i'll be arrested. >> okay? right. and up to police station, right? okay. this is in relation to some comments that you've made on a facebook page. >> oh, oh, see a facebook crime. is it okay. >> right. so we need to ask you some questions about that. right >> so what is happening here is that words and violence are being casually conflated. and this is where the real danger begins. consider what happened after the murder of conservative mp sir david amess in october 2021. rather than debate how best to tackle the growing problem of islamist terror, mps instead used this atrocity as a springboard from which to launch a campaign for further online censorship. now unpleasant tweets had nothing to do with this murder. and yet the actual problem violent religious extremism, was completely overlooked. this was political opportunism disguised as compassion in situations of this

kind, it's always best to consider how short term solutions can jeopardise our long term goals. we're all disturbed when we read social media posts that display animosity towards minority ethnic groups, but empowering the to state set the limits of permissible thought and speech is an even greater danger. and thatis is an even greater danger. and that is what's happening right now. so while we should vehemently criticise the man who posted the phrase filthy bastards on facebook along with emojis of a gun and an ethnic minority person, we're also right to express concern that he has been jailed for 12 weeks because defending free speech means defending the rights of those we find most abhorrent. there are larger principles at stake. once a precedent has been set that enables the government to control the speech of its citizens, the pathway for future tyranny has been cleared. and this is why we should also be troubled that stephen parkinson, the director of public prosecutions , has said that

prosecutions, has said that police officers are scouring social media for anyone sharing details of the riots that might, quote, incite racial hatred. he's even claimed he'll be seeking extradition of offending social media influencers from overseas, saying that they must know that they are not safe and there is nowhere to hide. it's a direct quotation, and these are not merely idle threats. police in cheshire have arrested a woman for sharing misinformation about the perpetrator of the horrific stabbing of children in southport, who was wrongly identified in this case as a muslim asylum seeker. now, of course, it goes without saying that anyone deliberately sharing false information to promote their own cause or ideology deserves nothing but contempt. but once we accept that misinformation is sufficient to warrant prosecution, where does that end? after all, many elements of the mainstream media have been guilty of precisely the same thing. will the police be dispatching forces to the offices of the guardian? the metro or the bbc any time soon?

all of the evidence would suggest that the police in the united kingdom have fully bought into the notion that words lead directly to violence, in spite of the fact that six decades of research into media effects theory has provided no evidence whatsoever for such a correlation, this is an ideological position to justify censorship, one that the labour government is fully behind. the labour government has already jettisoned the higher education freedom of speech act, which was approved by parliament back in may 2023. education secretary bridget phillipson announced her intention to see the act repealed just one day before parliament went into recess , parliament went into recess, thereby avoiding any debate on thereby avoiding any debate on the subject. the whole affair was grimly surreptitious . our was grimly surreptitious. our politicians seem to believe that cracking down on freedom of speech will resolve the tensions that have fomented this current crisis. but of course, much of the resentment has come about because those who have attempted to raise their concerns have been silenced or smeared. now, i

don't think that violent protests are ever justifiable, but unless we attempt to understand why people have resorted to such measures, we cannot possibly hope to prevent the same sort of thing happening in the future. now, this is something that the labour government ought to understand. given that keir starmer was an open advocate of the black lives matter movement, even as its supporters were rioting and committing acts of violence on the streets of america. he tweeted out we kneel with all those opposing anti—black racism, and he was observing the activist decree there that the b of black must be capitalised. now while i have no doubt that starmer would have opposed the violence and the murders that took place under the auspices of blm, he was also aware that the riots were a symptom of a broader cultural malaise that required attention. so why should the same principles not apply to the recent unrest in the uk? now, there are certainly far right agitators exploiting the current situation , but there the current situation, but there were also violent far left

agitators exploiting the blm movement . in both cases, it agitators exploiting the blm movement. in both cases, it is perfectly possible to address the concerns that have led to civil unrest. whilst simultaneously condemning illegal misconduct. now, inevitably, social media companies are now under pressure to censor posts that our politicians find objectionable. in scotland, the first minister, john swinney, has appealed to tech giants to quote , make sure tech giants to quote, make sure that individuals in our society are not subjected to this speculation, this alarm, this unease which i recognise is taking place today . journalist taking place today. journalist paul mason has demanded that the government, quote, enact the full online safety act now and summon the executives of x in the uk to explain why their ceo is personally boosting hate speech, incitement and disinformation and pull the plug on this service until it stops. so mason is not the only media commentator now openly declaring war on free speech. edward luce, who's the associate editor of the financial times, has railed against elon musk's menace to

democracy and accused him of attempting to stoke racial conflict and civil breakdown. of course, journalists will be calling for x to be shut down because by eliminating the de facto public square, they will be better placed to control the narrative because for many in the media, truth is only a secondary priority to what is politically expedient, and some of the most important reporting on the riots that we've seen in recent days has come about through posts on x, and better still, elon musk has his community notes, and this means that facts can be verified for accuracy in real time. and up until relatively recently, the mainstream media has been able to distort reality with impunity . to distort reality with impunity. so elon musk's x represents a direct threat to the dominance of the mainstream media, because the public can now bypass the gatekeepers and seek out the truth for themselves. in the case of the recent riots in the uk, it is clear that preventing the free exchange of views has been a major catalyst. we have

an ideologically captured media that can no longer be trusted. we have a police force that appues we have a police force that applies its standards according to the principles of the intersectional cult, and we have a government that is hell bent on controlling the speech of its citizens to impose further restrictions on speech will only exacerbate the very thing that caused the problem. in the first place. it would be like getting drunk to cure a hangover. the solution to all of this, of course , is to drive out this course, is to drive out this authoritarian and identity obsessed ideology from our major institutions . we need to open up institutions. we need to open up discussions that have previously been stifled. above all, we must reassert the primacy of free speech in a liberal democracy. without this foundational principle, our civilisation is lost . now i have this rather lost. now i have this rather beautiful panel of two comedians. i say beautiful, you more than this one, but, i'm. thank you for coming, lewis schaffer, do you have any

thoughts on what i just said, >> i think i think you're totally right, but wrong at the same time that, first of all, the police are not captured. >> i mean, many policemen . it's >> i mean, many policemen. it's hard to get an a, have an opinion. means that they have to have that. they just they're told what they're being told to what believe in and they believe in it there. and you see the woman who you pointed out was giving the guy a ticket for what, a ticket? >> well, it was actually an actual arrest. >> an actual arrest, right? do you think she had a thought in her head about what she was doing? no, she was just told, you go down there wrestling guy. >> that is a very good point, isn't it? that the police necessarily don't necessarily, they're not in the right position to actually challenge this stuff because they're told what to do. no. >> so you can't really get mad at the police. you've got to get mad. and the second thing you said, which was wrong, which was you said things that are wrong, which which is, which is that we need to investigate why these riots are happening. whatever they know why the riots are happening, why are they happening? they're happening because the people down there at the bottom feel that they that

their voices haven't been that they haven't been noticed and they haven't been noticed and they haven't been elected. >> and i'm gonna have to bring you in on this, lewis, they're saying i've got two things wrong. although he didn't really explain why, but that's that's pretty typical for lewis schaffer. what do you make of it? >> from my perspective, and as the guy that employs me, i've never known you to be wrong. oh come on, paul. but one one thing i would say is that it's without that monologue and, and gb news and maybe even reform, we wouldn't have any understanding of why the riots were happening, because it's probably the biggest story in my adult lifetime that i can think of thatis lifetime that i can think of that is continually reported on without saying why it's happening. yes. so continuously we see these riots and we see the we do see thugs throwing rocks . yes. but we but behind rocks. yes. but we but behind these thugs throwing rocks, there are thousands and thousands of people that are concerned about something, but no one is illuminating what they're concerned about. >> at the same time, you know, a lot of the people who've been arrested, they have charge sheets that are a mile long. there are some thugs who are

jumping on board. absolutely right. so all of this, you know, so i totally agree with that. >> and there are people saying overtly racist things and committing acts of racial violence. >> they should be prosecuted. >> they should be prosecuted. >> totally agree. what they do in doing so is they entirely undermine what the problem is. the problem has been buried again, because what's happened is there have been a minority of far right thugs that have that have overtaken the situation. but i still stand by what i say. there are thousands of people stood behind them with genuine concerns that aren't being heard. >> well, this is why i made the comparison with the black lives matter movement. there were a lot of people who were protesting peacefully, and their cause was entirely undermined. the people who were committing acts of violence, looting shops, evenin acts of violence, looting shops, even in some cases murdering people, know that is that is that's not i mean, i'm sorry they weren't undermined. >> the black lives matter thing continues and it grows and it made people p it did work. >> it did, it did work. i think things have got a lot worse people in that movement. >> i don't for this movement. yes, but for the black lives matter, no. is like what? well, a lot of people got rich. >> i will say that, but i don't i don't think anyone could

honestly say that racial tensions have been lessened in the wake of the black lives. >> well, that wasn't what the purpose of the black lives matter. well, we know that now because they were over mark white. >> it wasn't the right. i know, i know, but anyway, that's a different that's a different. >> this thing is so definite is that people know. everyone knows. it's like that. what's the leonard cohen song? >> everybody knows don't start singing, louis. yeah. let's get a question from gavin. where's gavin? hi, gavin. yeah. >> good evening, my question is, should there be a new definition of islamophobia? >> wow. yeah. this is labour's idea, isn't it? it's a labour say they basically they've been debating about whether they should adopt this new definition of islamophobia, which is actually based on the cross party sort of agreement on what the term could be. they said it was, a hate crimes against muslimness or perceived muslimness don't know quite what that means, but this came from both labour and the tories. i think we shouldn't put this. my worry about this is what happens with that term. islamophobia is you get really horrible behaviour, like the kind of people who, you know, throw rocks at mosques or pull people's hijabs off in the streets, like just thuggish, awful behaviour. and you get

that sort of conflated, sort of blended in with people who just want to criticise the religion of islam. and of course, every religion in a free society should be open to criticism. yeah >> otherwise you've got blasphemy laws right by the back door. doon >> that's what people are worried about with this new labour initiative. >> of course, there's a couple of things there. cross party is great, but i don't feel like there's any opposition at the moment. so there's no one challenging labour. the tories, in an absolute turmoil and going to spend the next three months arguing about who should be the leader and in doing so, have totally neglected the fact that they're in opposition and they are no voice at the moment, no voice whatsoever to challenge sir keir starmer. no. >> okay. what do you think, lewis? any thoughts on this one? >> i think we're in a very difficult situation. we're sitting here in the past, you've had people talk, you know, you've especially brought it up, which is the, you know, between the left and the right and here comes this growing possible threat from some other country, another continent, another religion that is going to destroy, possibly destroy both

both of these. >> well, i think if you're talking about extremists, i would agree. but of course, i would agree. but of course, i would say the majority of british muslims aren't on board with extremism or or that kind of thing. >> and, and we've seen the huge demonstrations against now we haven't seen the, you know, demonstration against it. >> you know, we could go on about this for a long time, and i'm sure we'll come back to this, but we don't have time at the moment. but next on free speech nation, are we experiencing two tier policing in the uk? i'm going to be discussing this with barrister sarah phillimore right here in studio. please do not go

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me . andrew doyle. nation with me. andrew doyle. the metropolitan police commissioner, sir mark rowley, has dismissed accusations of two tier policing in the wake of riots across the uk, calling it complete nonsense. >> it's complete nonsense. we

have, commentators from either end of the political spectrum who like to throw accusations of bias at the police because we stand in the middle, we operate independently under the law without fear or favour. >> this comes as criticism came from figures including nigel farage and elon musk , who have farage and elon musk, who have slammed the prime minister, keir starmer, and argued that last week's disorder was handled more severely than it would have been if ethnic minorities were involved. so joining me now is author and family law barrister sarah phillimore . welcome to the sarah phillimore. welcome to the show, sarah. >> thank you . >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so can i ask you, you obviously as your t—shirt reveals, you are associated with fair cop, which is a group that sort of keeps an eye on the police and the way that they are behaving. is it true that we have two tier policing in this country? >> i think it is. and i think the discussion that's arisen is very interesting, because now it's in the context of what is undoubtedly, indisputably criminal behaviour threatening to cut people's throats or burning down hotels where people are sleeping is indisputably

criminal. and those people should be arrested, charged and imprisoned for the safety of us all. the problem is, however, the context in which discussions are now taking place. we all agree that that is criminal. but we see then, as i think you alluded to earlier on social media, the attorney general account on x, the cps account are saying if you are hateful, if you don't think before you post, we're coming to get you. >> that's the crown prosecution service. yeah. >> of course. yeah. and fair cop has been warning for a very long time about the use of the word hate, because its definition includes words like unfriendliness and dislike . and unfriendliness and dislike. and we've been pointing out also for a very long time that if the police show that they are partial, then they are going to corrode public trust and confidence in their operations. and we think that's undoubtedly what has happened, certainly in the gender critical arena. >> i mean, well, that's a good example, isn't it? because so many times gender critical feminists have been smeared as hateful, fascist, even, you know, far right the very words

that are being thrown around so casually, even though sometimes those words are correct, but just not in those contexts . so just not in those contexts. so if no one can agree on these definitions or if those those words are weaponized against people's ideological opponents, how can we trust the crown prosecution service to know what the difference between someone who hates someone who is hateful and someone who's simply been smeared as hateful? >> well, this is the difficulty because as fair cop also been saying you cannot ring fence your idiocy if you're prepared to sacrifice truth in one area. we can't trust you in any. so while we can all agree that threats to violence inciting violence are obviously criminal, when that is then put back to us in these broader terms of if you are hateful, we're coming for you. that worries us a great deal you. that worries us a great deal, because from the gender critical perspective, and i appreciate when the police are out there dealing with angry mobs, there are operational decisions which prioritise de—escalation. so i appreciate there are different decisions that are made. i'm not necessarily going to say, oh, the police didn't jump in and arrest all these angry men . but

arrest all these angry men. but when you have videos of police liaison officers telling certain groups, just leave your weapons at the mosque, it's okay, we won't arrest you. and then a man who emailed the fair cop website say on the 31st of july, he and 100 others were arrested, handcuffed and held for 20 hours. the police, using section 14 of the public order act. but they weren't given any warning or they weren't told to disperse or they weren't told to disperse or be arrested. so this is why i think a lot of people are very concerned, because you have what looks like pretty obvious examples of the police behaving differently towards groups of which they are afraid, or which they consider to be morally reprehensible. now, i think you've got a photograph of one of our brave, fair cop undercover operatives at northumbria pride, and i think people need to see this. >> okay, well, let's see if we can have a look at that image, because he's posing with a police officer that that's the first image. >> the second, i think, is the more frightening because it's

equating terfs with racists. >> the sign that you're undercover operative is holding. >> yes, he's next to a smiley police officer under some sort of sign, which the police have set up to allow you to come and take pictures with your smiling police officers. yes. so equating terfs with racists and saying both must be afraid. it's supporting the lgb with the t, which as we know is a highly political ideology which is not supported by all gay people and not supported by a lot of women. >> so that's very interesting because a terfs meaning trans exclusionary radical feminists, which has become a kind of synonym for which effectively. but those signs seem to be, i mean, almost implying that violence against women is okay, or certainly saying that we're certainly taking an ideological stance . stance. >> i don't think it's implying, andrew. i think it's saying explicitly that those of us who are slurred as trans exclusionary radical feminists must be afraid , and it is a must be afraid, and it is a police officer standing next to that sign and smiling. >> we've seen the police with their rainbow coloured cars,

wearing rainbow lanyards, dancing the macarena at pride for goodness sake. i mean, they may perhaps think they're just all about inclusivity and being pro lgbt. a lot of gay people see those symbols as actually homophobic. a lot of women see those symbols as anti as misogynistic. >> i mean , i think it's really >> i mean, i think it's really wrong that the reaction to some people saying there are concerns about two tier policing is to , about two tier policing is to, to smear them as, as irresponsible or unlawful. and that's certainly where i think keir starmer and the metropolitan commissioner are going. i mean, i think we are neither . we've been warning neither. we've been warning about this. we've been sounding the alarm for a long time now. if the police abandon their fundamental ethical obligations, which is to act without fear or favour, to be impartial, then this corruption will spread. and even when they're talking about obvious examples of thuggery and violence, there'll be those such as me going, well, can i trust you?i as me going, well, can i trust you? i mean, just give you another example. hope not. hate smeared fair cop as dangerous and far right extremists. by extension, they smeared me as as

a member. we weren't asked about this. we weren't given any right to reply yet. their director , to reply yet. their director, nick lowles, in august published a really serious piece of misinformation on social media that a muslim woman had been a victim of an acid attack. now that was without doubt inflammatory and inciting violence. and it did. and it wasn't true . well, it was it was wasn't true. well, it was it was completely untrue. but he gets off scot free because he is parroting the narrative and the views which are acceptable to the police and the government. now, this is going to do nothing but make people fear and distrust those in authority, even more. >> well, also, i mean, the police did at one point admit to two tier policing during the grooming gang scandal. they said that they weren't applying the law equally because they were afraid of being accused of racism. that was openly admitted . racism. that was openly admitted. >> rotherham has cast such a long shadow. i think it was only on the 24th of june. some men were convicted of their involvement in that. so this is still casting a very long shadow. and i could hear that in the cries of some of the people

in the protests, stop them raping our kids. i mean, obviously illogical in one sense that what they were protesting was, was the murder of three children in horrific circumstances. but you can see the fear and the anger that it stirs up and the response is not to say, shut up, you scum. we're going to come and arrest you all because we have legitimate concerns about the ability and the willingness of the police to act impartially, and they have to address this, not simply by wagging their fingers and providing all stick, no carrot. you think before you post or we're coming to get you. yes. it's not helping. it's petrol on the flames. >> and we have had police in recent days admitting that they've had instructions from above. you know, we just when there are muslim protesters, even if they're breaking the law, just leave them well alone. we've had that police officer talking about how he met with community leaders and of course that was to do with weaponry. and, you know, people are nervous about this. but on the other hand, as you say, there is a strategic thing they have to follow, isn't there? if there's a large crowd that they won't be able to control, perhaps they do have to take.

>> absolutely. i can't blame the police, and i don't blame the police. and it's a fantastically difficult and terrifying job. they literally put their lives on the line for us. so the policemen on the ground, this isn't about criticising them. it's those at the college of policing. it's those at the top of the tree who are sending them out against this backdrop of growing public distrust and not doing anything to calm it. yes. i mean, i'm being told on social media i'm irresponsible for even raising the phrase two tier policing, but i've been in it. i was at bristol, a bristol event standing for women in 2021. the police did nothing to keep the two groups apart. a group of women just peacefully chatting, a group of young men entirely in black, in balaclavas, chanting that they wanted to kill us. a man was crouched at my feet , man was crouched at my feet, scrawling on the ground. colston turfs next, i.e. he wanted to throw me in the bristol harbour, but that's an example of where there's no chance that the police intervention there would have caused a riot or something. >> there's no reason why the police couldn't. the police could quite easily have arrested

the men who were threatening us. >> not only did they fail to do that, they failed to keep any distance between the two groups. now that was an advanced decision. that wasn't just on the day they decided to do nothing. they had obviously discussed this and thought , discussed this and thought, well, we don't really care, do we? because they're these nasty , we? because they're these nasty, bigoted, hateful women. and luckily i then left the event. but probably everyone saw on social media a group of women then went down to a local pub and were followed and chased by these men and the police did nothing. so i've been in the middle of two tier policing and it is terrifying. so it definitely happens. >> so is this just a matter of pr? maybe just finally, is it the case that maybe the police should just own up when? examples of two obvious examples of two tier policing occur, but say at the same time that they're going to strive to improve on that? is it just a pr thing or is it systemic? >> i think it's more it's deeper andifs >> i think it's more it's deeper and it's more frightening than that, because to admit what they are doing would be to admit that the ideology that they've been protecting and pursuing is dangerous. and that is the ideology, for example, whereby a

man become a woman if he declares it to be such and anyone who objects is hateful. so if they admit what they're doing, they have to admit that the ideology that they're protecting is wrong. yes. and their lack of partiality is also wrong. so i think this has gone very deep now, and i'm worried they're not going to be able to dig themselves out of the hole that they have merrily dug for themselves. okay. >> well, it's very disturbing, but i really appreciate you coming on to explain this to us. sarah phillimore, thanks ever so much for joining sarah phillimore, thanks ever so much forjoining me. and next on free speech nation. so what is the root cause of the uk riots ? the root cause of the uk riots? i'm going to be joined by academic and author matt goodwin to explain. please don't go

>> welcome back to free speech nation. >> so later in the show, i'll be turning agony uncle with the help of my panel, paul cox and

lewis schaffer. and we'll help you deal with your unfiltered dilemmas. so just send us a message. gb news.com/your say. we will sort your life out . we will sort your life out. seven of the ten most deprived areas of england witnessed riots in the past two weeks. the prime minister's polling ratings have plummeted since the outbreak of the riots in the uk , according the riots in the uk, according to telegraph. poles and sir keir starmer has been criticised for his response, including the decision to not hold a cobra meeting until a week after the outbreak. but how does the government go about tackling the root causes of the disorder? well, joining me now is academic and author matt goodwin. welcome to the show. thank you for having me. now, matt, you've been writing about this on your substack. you're very much involved. you understand what's going on here. help us through it, because a lot of people are really confused. why has all this happened? well, i think firstly, there's an element of criminality and disorder that we've all seen on the television screens. >> but i think behind that ultimately are widespread public concerns over mass immigration, over a broken model of

multiculturalism, that we might come back to talk about . and come back to talk about. and also, just to be blunt, the feeling among many british people that they're no longer safe in their own country . now, safe in their own country. now, i've received a lot of criticism for pointing this out over the last week, but one of the points i make is in response to both the riots in 2011, in england, and also in response to the black lives matter protests. everybody out there was more than to happy say, look, there are wider grievances here. there are wider grievances here. there are some underlying issues we need to talk about. but now in 2024, we're seemingly not really allowed to discuss those issues. and i'm trying to get those issues onto the table so we can have an honest conversation. >> is that a partisan issue politically, insofar as a lot of the people causing violence on the people causing violence on the black lives matter protests were far left and we have had some far right elements to these riots. i mean, there are people who've been arrested who have been arrested multiple times over many years. looks very much like they're just a piggybacking on this for a bit of thuggery. right? there's an element of it. >> there's definitely an element of criminality. but i would have personally liked to have seen

keir starmer come out and say, i condemn violence on all sides, but behind that, as we've even seen in the polling, we have somewhere between 40 and 60% of british people also saying, look, i don't i don't want anything to do with this violence. but when it comes to the peaceful protesters, i either have sympathy for them. i think peaceful protests is justifiable, or i even openly support what these people are doing, because i think everybody can sense that what this is really about, it is about our broken borders. it is about the policy of mass migration. it is about multiculturalism and segregation, and many people have said to me, look, what you're doing is you're taking the southport issue and you're trying to turn it into something else. i think actually, no. if you look at the average person in this country, it wasn't just about southport. it was about what happened to those police officers in manchester. it was about the stabbing of the british army officer. it was about the machete gangs in southend on sea. people don't just look at one incident and say, i'm now only going to focus on that. what i think this is aboutis on that. what i think this is about is a general sense of

concern about the breakdown of our country and what is contributing to that. and keir starmer and labour have so far shown no real interest in discussing those underlying issues. >> it's part of the problem that we are seeing this in terms of left and right, whereas actually a lot of the problems with mass migration happened under the tories. and perhaps this is the wrong way to look at it. a lot of the riots, i'd say most of the riots are happening in labour strongholds. >> well, i think ultimately this is about public opposition to an elite consensus in this country that we've had for 30 years. i don't think it's a left or right issue.i don't think it's a left or right issue. i think many people are utterly frustrated with both the conservatives and the labour party, and how they failed to tell us about that. >> what's this elite consensus? i know you talk about this in your book. yeah. do you want to explain what you mean? >> i think we're in the midst of a of a political and cultural revolution in this country, which is basically organised around mass migration, the erosion of our national borders, the imposition of radical progressivism or woke ideology, and a broken model of multiculturalism that basically prioritises differences among groups rather than what draws them together. and all of that

has found its expression through these disturbances. we've seen how segregated our communities really are. we've seen minority communities not waving the union jack, but shouting, you know , jack, but shouting, you know, allahu akbar as an example, or waving palestinian flags . that's waving palestinian flags. that's a pretty good sign that they're not really prioritising their british identity or their engush british identity or their english identity. but we've got sectarianism in our country. english identity. but we've got sectarianism in our country . we sectarianism in our country. we know the borders are broken. we know the borders are broken. we know that many people are saying, well, why have we got 130,000 people in the country illegally? why can't we seem to control who comes in and out of the country? and this has become really a lightning rod for this opposition to that elite consensus. and many people are saying, look, if i can't express my voice in, you know, now on social media or i can't express my voice in the national conversation, you know, i think actually many people have looked at things like black lives matter or they've looked at protests on other issues and they've said, well, look, those guys are getting things done by marching and protesting in the streets. maybe we should do that

as well. and it's difficult for us to have this conversation. right. but that, i think, is what many people in the working class have concluded. no one's listening to me about grooming and the scandals in northern towns like rotherham. why was the rioting so severe in rotherham? i would argue because that's where the most severe case of sexual exploitation and grooming was in rotherham. and i think that's where people are feeling as though they don't have a voice in this conversation. so they're now, you know, unfortunately, however sometimes incoherently, they're taking to the streets to try and express that. >> now, of course, the word racism is thrown around an awful lot, and maybe it comes down to a misunderstanding of multiculturalism. and i would argue that the very philosophy of multiculturalism that various groups should live in parallel societies sealed off, that that's a kind of form of soft racism. but is there is it just to do with the misunderstanding of what multiculturalism means? >> yeah. well i think we have this rather ridiculous debate among columnists and elites in this country, which is multiculturalism is a success story. how dare you question it? it's very visible to anybody who lives outside the m25 that it's

not really working. what multiculturalism, the policy of multiculturalism, the policy of multiculturalism does. is it prioritises minority minority groups. their history, their identity, their culture and their values. it says you can keep all of those things. you can stay distinctive from the wider national community. but at the same time, it says to the majority group you cannot really defend and celebrate your identity, your history and your values. and if anything, what we want you to do is reshape those things around universal liberal values like diversity and multiculturalism. there's lots of british people and english people are saying, well, hang on, how come these groups are allowed to prioritise who they are and celebrate it and defend it? but we're now being told that we have to reshape our entire identity around these universal liberal themes . universal liberal themes. because, look, andrew, to say that a country is welcoming of diversity is fine, right ? diversity is fine, right? whatever. but it's actually not the basis of an identity, because it's like saying you have no identity of your own . if have no identity of your own. if the only thing that really unhes the only thing that really unites you is that you're

welcoming difference, well, okay. but it's also like saying there's nothing unique about you. and many british and engush you. and many british and english people feel there is something really unique about being british and english. it's not a race thing. it's just we've got a remarkable set of values. we've got a great culture, we've got a great history. but we're told time and time again that we should be ashamed of, that we should be embarrassed about that. >> okay. well, finally, final question. you know what can keir starmer actually do? isn't he in quite a difficult position? you know, the labour party are saying that they're trying to resolve all of this issue. but is it clear to you that they are failing or are they trying their best? >> i think this has been a complete failure for keir starmer. the labour party we've seen in the newspapers this weekend that they've admitted they're frightened and they're scared to talk about the underlying causes because they're worried that will be seen to be justifying the unrest and the disturbances. so, you know , what they've done instead know, what they've done instead is they've had this bizarre conversation about social media and clamping down on free speech and clamping down on free speech and free expression, which you've been talking about with other guests. but unless we actually get into this much more meaningful conversation about how are we going to control our

borders, what do we need to do? we need to leave the echr and reform the human rights act. how are we going to end the policy of mass immigration? nobody really wants it. nobody really voted for it. it's dividing and weakening our country and how are we going to replace this broken policy of multiculturalism with a more assertive, assimilationist model that says to people, look, we're not going to tolerate people who hate who we are anymore. we're going to change our country. we're going to give us a sense of confidence, a sense of hope in the future. we're not going to allow this disorder and chaos to allow this disorder and chaos to continue. we need to get into that conversation. keir starmer will not get into that conversation, which means i think inevitably we're going to have a lot of people looking for a different kind of politics going forward. >> matt goodwin, thanks very much for joining >> matt goodwin, thanks very much forjoining me. really appreciate it . and if you want appreciate it. and if you want to hear more from matt, i would highly recommend his substack, which is at matthew goodwin.org. it is brilliant. check it out . it is brilliant. check it out. and next on free speech nation is civilisation under siege. we'll be addressing that with jacob reynolds. don't go

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me. andrew doyle. so what is civilisation? how does it emerge? is it under attack ? it emerge? is it under attack? these are very big questions. well, jacob reynolds is the convenor of the academy, which is a forthcoming weekend for free thinkers to discuss these very issues . and jacob joins me very issues. and jacob joins me now. welcome to the show. thanks a lot . jacob, tell us, what is a lot. jacob, tell us, what is the academy? yeah, well, the academy is a weekend residential, kind of intellectual getaway , if you intellectual getaway, if you like, where people of various different backgrounds and intellectual persuasions come, >> we have a weekend of lectures, of debates, of seminars. we kind of try and educate ourselves. we sometimes say it's university as it should be. and. yeah, and this year's theme is, as you suggested , is theme is, as you suggested, is civilisation under siege? touching on this idea that kind of wherever we look, it seems

that the questions we're faced with are kind of big, deep civilizational ones, not just normal kind of political day to day ones. >> and this is this is a big theme at the moment. a lot of people are talking about this. is our civilisation under threat? what type of discussions are you having? what kind of speakers have you got? yeah. >> so i mean, we're looking at this from a variety of angles. i mean, as as matt goodwin was saying, maybe in the uk there's a question about kind of do we have different civilisations living alongside each other now, or do we have a big question to answer about what it means to be british or what is western civilisation mean today? but also internationally? there's kind of increasing kind of suggestion that say at stake in the war in ukraine is a kind of civilizational battle between the west and the east, if you like, or similar questions in israel. so we're tackling all of those themes. we've got some great speakers. i mean, most importantly for us tonight, yourself, of course. and, and but also some really great speakers like lord frost, david frost, frank freud, who might have been on this show before. and it's filled with academics , and it's filled with academics, authors, kind of public intellectuals, and most importantly, a really great

audience that have read and thought about these issues. >> and that's one of the key things about the way the academy is run, i think, is that i've, you know, you are bringing the audience to in discuss. you dedicate a lot of time not just to people standing there giving speeches, but to have responses from the crowd. is that right? yeah. >> so i mean, the event which is next weekend, i mean, we've published a reading list for that for several months, and we hope that lots of the people over there would have really kind of dug into this. read some of the interesting books we've got on the reading list. and in addition to that, as you say, we've got loads of time, so there'll be lectures, but there's also plenty of time for debate and discussion. and of course, that continues over dinner and a glass of wine or a been dinner and a glass of wine or a beer. yeah. >> well, that's the other thing, because it's a weekend away. people get together and they talk. and these are really, really important discussions to be having, aren't they? i mean, and do you think in a sense that we are failing to have these discussions that we need more events like this so that these things are broached? well, yeah. >> and especially with regard to the our topic on civilisation. right so, it sometimes seems

that it's just something that's happening out there that are we under attack and really, if we think that there's something kind of missing in our in our culture, in our civilisation that's worth defending, we have to be out there understanding. well, how did the west emerge? what kind of ideas makes the west distinct or different? and from that we in conversation with other people, we might have a better chance of actually standing up for them. >> and are you hoping to get some dissent here, or do you think everyone will be singing from the same hymn sheet? >> well, certainly. especially on like these questions of especially when it becomes international, there are lots of people i know who i'm friends with or have conversations with, who maybe. they're certainly on my side on the culture for war example. but when it comes to the war in ukraine, or what's happening in israel, we suddenly find ourselves on very different kind of points of view. and i think this, this shows how difficult and often kind of murky this whole concept of civilisation, of western civilisation, of western civilisation, what the west is, etc. that's why it's so difficult and we kind of need to come together and have some of these debates. >> so how do people go about finding more about this and what's the format of the weekend? yeah. >> so i mean, first off, go to ideas matter website. ideas matter. org uk slash academy. the format of the weekend is as i say, weekend residential. you

can come for the day. there are day tickets available but the best experience come. there are still a few rooms left. grab yourself a room. you'll have kind of a full board. there's great food, a chance to have a glass of wine afterwards, but head to the website and it's quite a full on weekend. lots of lectures, but plenty of time for debate and discussion too. >> yeah, one of the things that interested me is i'll be speaking about shakespeare, for instance. that's that's kind of it's not a culture war thing. you know, this is a much bigger question than just. well, yeah. >> i mean, the reason we invited you to speak on a topic like that and we have a few other ones, is that i mean, some people have come across as culture warriors saying, oh, we have to stand up for the west or the west is under attack or something. actually, it seems sometimes they don't really have a good grasp on, well, what is western culture you ask them? kind of. who is your favourite author or what makes shakespeare so great? and they seem to have kind of bad answers to that. you. i know we'll have a better one, but we need to go and get better at understanding what our culture actually is. >> i hope so. so it's not just about what is civilisation? what is worth defending about our civilisation? yeah, precisely. >> and these are kind of big, meaty topics, especially, as i say, when it becomes

internationalised. we need to have really good answers because there are certainly competing civilisations out there who do have the answers. >> thanks very much, jacob. finally, what's the website ' 7 m. again? >> ideas matter. >> ideas matter. >> org .uk academy jacob reynolds, thanks so much for joining me. that's the end of the first hour on free speech nation. but don't go anywhere. there's loads more to come. >> a brighter outlook with boxt solar sponsors of weather on gb news >> hello! welcome to your gb news. weather update from the met office as we go through monday, it's going to be turning increasingly hot and humid for some of us, with the risk of thunderstorms in the northwest, but it will be turning fresher later. looking at the bigger picture, we've got an area of high pressure across the uk further towards the west, a deep area of low pressure and that's helping drive south easterly winds. so through the rest of this evening many places staying largely dry. but as we go through the night we'll see the risk of thunderstorms developing. firstly, in the west , developing. firstly, in the west, but then across northern ireland

and parts of scotland later, and we have got some weather warnings in force . so expect warnings in force. so expect frequent lightning, torrential downpours and some gusty winds and temperatures overnight. well, it's going to be feeling quite uncomfortable, some places not dipping below 20 degrees. now as we start monday morning we have this band of heavy, thundery, showery rain across western parts of scotland moving its way north and eastwards so there could be some difficult driving conditions in this. with frequent lightning as well and some torrential downpours . some torrential downpours. northern ireland turning drier as the day progresses and across much of england largely dry but cloudy further towards the west and already feeling quite warm by 8 am. so as the day progresses, that band of rain will continue to push its way north and eastwards. some thunderstorms even ahead of that as well, so they can't be ruled out completely across the south. but many places should largely miss these many places. seeing some hot sunshine, especially across the southeast. it's going to be feeling very hot and humid

with highs of up to 34 degrees, but fresher further towards the west. as we go through tuesday. still warm start in the south and east, but bright elsewhere. then we have another band of rain moving in from the west, so turning increasingly cloudy with outbreaks of rain for many across western areas. sunshine and showers behind that. and that sets the scene through wednesday and thursday with unsettled weather on the way. but turning fresher as well. by that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb. >> there's plenty more still to

come on free speech nation this week, but let's get a news update first with sam francis . update first with sam francis. >> andrew, thank you very much and good evening to you. it's

just after 8:00. we'll start this hour with news from the olympics. team gb has been hailed as an inspiration by the prince and the princess of wales, following their impressive performance at the paris games . impressive performance at the paris games. in a video featuring snoop dogg and david beckham, the royals have praised the athletes, with william and kate offering their congratulations. take a listen. >> greetings loved ones from all of us watching at home. congratulations to team gb. >> well done on all you've achieved. you've been an inspiration to us all. >> short and sweet, great britain secured 65 medals in their second best haul ever at an olympic games, but fell seventh in the medal tables. that's their lowest since athens in 2004. well, while traditional sports like athletics and cycling delivered new disciplines like skateboarding and sport climbing also shone and sport climbing also shone and as team gb now look ahead to los angeles 2028, preparations are already underway at stanford university. in other news tonight, hundreds of people have attended the funeral service of alice dasilva aguiar, one of the

three girls killed in the attack in southport two weeks ago. two white horses wearing pink and white horses wearing pink and white feathers carried her coffin in a carriage to that service in saint patrick's church in the town. during the service, a tribute to the nine year old from her parents was read out by her uncle. the nine year old died alongside bebe king and elsie dot stancombe dunng king and elsie dot stancombe during a mass stabbing at a dance class . meanwhile, the dance class. meanwhile, the justice minister says the fallout from recent riots sparked by that stabbing in southport is going to be felt for years. shabana mahmood says it will hold back the labour government's efforts to fix the justice system, which was already facing a massive backlog of court cases and dwindling space in prisons. it comes as today a 15 year old boy has become the first child to be convicted for his part in violent disorder in sunderland . violent disorder in sunderland. the housing secretary has dropped conservative plans to prevent recently arrived migrants from applying for a council house in england. the

previous government had planned to introduce a uk connection test, which would have restricted social housing to those who had been a resident in the uk for at least ten years. but angela rayner has scrapped that plan and vowed to ramp up the provision of new social homes as part of a wider planning reform to boost housebuilding. and it comes as almost 1.3 million households are on local authority waiting lists for social housing. president zelenskyy has today, for the first time acknowledged that ukraine is conducting a military offensive inside russia's western kursk region. that operation, which began now five days ago, has taken russia by surprise and prompted mass evacuations across both sides of the border . ukraine says it the border. ukraine says it destroyed more than 50 drones dunng destroyed more than 50 drones during an overnight strike from russia. meanwhile, the justice minister says the fallout from recent riots that is not the correct story. we will move on. >> britain's got a very long border with apologies for that. >> they're the wrong script in the autocue for you. banksy's confirmed that he is behind new

fish artwork, which has appeared on a police box in central london. it's the seventh animal themed piece, the elusive street artist has claimed so far. this week . he's artist has claimed so far. this week. he's used artist has claimed so far. this week . he's used translucent week. he's used translucent spray paint on the glass windows to create the design, turning the sentry box into what looks like a giant fish tank. experts say that people will have to decide for themselves just what they think it represents . i've they think it represents. i've read that about four times. i still don't have a clue. those are the latest gb news headlines. for now, i'm sam francis. more in an hour for the very latest gb news direct to your smartphone , sign up to news your smartphone, sign up to news alerts by scanning the qr code, or go to gbnews.com >> forward slash alerts . >> forward slash alerts. >> forward slash alerts. >> welcome back to free speech nafion >> welcome back to free speech nation with me andrew doyle. >> that was sam francis with the news. sam is a pescatarian. do you know that louis?

>> yes, i heard that. it's quite amazing. he hates fish, hates fish specifically and wants them dead. yeah. and he's willing to kill them. he's willing to eat them with his own mouth . that's them with his own mouth. that's how much he. >> it's so extreme, isn't it? i work with such extremists. anyway, let's get some more questions from this lovely audience. first question is coming from sarah. where's sarah? hi, sarah. hello. hi >> should imani khalife be allowed to participate in any more women's sporting events? >> yeah, this is the big one, isn't it? amani khalife, of course. just won gold, in spite of the fact that the gender test taken last year for the international boxing association came up as x—y likelihood. paul, is that amani khalife is male, but has a dsd different sex development condition, an intersex condition, which means that khalife didn't know about his sex until later in life. i think you should have compassion for that, right? there is compassion. >> of course there is . however, >> of course there is. however, sport is about fairness and she

has an unfair advantage over a competitors through xy chromosomes. it gives her a different biology, a different muscle structure, probably a different bone structure. certainly different strength. so as a result, she has an unfair advantage. and also the taiwanese competitor. yeah. which they were both in the final weren't they. yeah. both finalists had had had previously tested for xy chromosomes . tested for xy chromosomes. >> so this is a problem. i don't think anyone's suggesting that that we don't understand that obviously people with people have intersex conditions, but this is not a trans issue . i this is not a trans issue. i think that's the thing that's not really understood. this isn't a trans issue. these are individuals who have been through male puberty and therefore have a huge competitive advantage over women. and there's also a safety issue, isn't there, because, you know, if male people are punching women in the face, that i mean, surely there's someone should intervene now? >> well, absolutely. there's a reason that boxing for all genders has weight limits, right? so for that very fairness, the queensberry rules of boxing, you know, you're not as i could win the under nines

boxing championships. yes. almost certainly especially in the girls division. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> and you know there are reasons that i can't compete in it, but i think this is something that would be really clear about because we've had situations where men have identified as women and like people like leah thomas and won all the awards in swimming. >> but that's just fraudulent, isn't it? this is a slightly more complicated issue, because these are people who suffer from intersex conditions and therefore were raised and socialised as as if they were girls did not realise they were male. so it's a totally different thing. but ultimately their hurt feelings shouldn't be prioritised over the safety of female athletes, am i right? >> well , maybe, but i female athletes, am i right? >> well, maybe, but i think we should care about people's feelings. i'm not totally anti other people's feelings. >> you could have fooled me , louis. >> well, i try to go out of my way to care. i try. it doesn't work. the truth is , is that, you work. the truth is, is that, you know, what about people with big feet or tall girls or whatever, and nobody wants this whole thing is . thing is. >> but there's a difference, isn't there, between the difference is between different women and the whole category of women's sports . i mean, are you

women's sports. i mean, are you suggesting we just get rid of women's sports? >> i think i was about to go there, yes. >> yeah, i knew you were. i knew you were. that's going to go down. >> well, nobody wants to see women getting hit. can we? people don't want to. they don't want to see. they don't want to see that. >> we just remind the audience that louis schaefer asked, what about people with big feet, andrew? >> what about people with big feet? >> that's the next civil rights issue, apparently. okay, let's move on. >> has big feet. you can say, you know what? or big hands or the woman. the woman's length is too big. >> louis, the reason why women's sport was invented as a category so they could win some things. yeah. >> so that women's sports could be a thing. >> no, you can't you can't say you have a separate category for people with big feet. >> well, okay, i'm not dignifying this anymore. i know it's free speech nation, but i'm going to shut up. all right. let's move on to a question from brian. where's brian? hi, brian. hi >> is it right that richard dawkins has lost his facebook account? >> did you did you read about this online? did you see it? >> no. >> no. >> but it's incredible, isn't it? the richard dawkins simply put out a tweet and it was about this, this question that we've

been discussing. and it was , you been discussing. and it was, you know, in his very, you know, polite way, just saying, you know, asking the question, should genetically male boxers such as himars khalife. and he actually said it's an x , y actually said it's an x, y undisputed. no one's disputing that these are x y chromosomes. should khalife fight women in the olympics? that's a reasonable question. had the facebook account completely nuked right now, you you're quite careful actually, online, aren't you, louis? you don't say controversial. >> well, because i think horrible thoughts. >> yes, i know you do. but i wish you had that kind of filter on this show. yeah. >> well, because because it's not going to you're not going to win by having nice thoughts. i was always against you because i thought free speech is not such an important thing, but it is really important. the truth is, is that i've actually met richard dawkins. he's a lovely guy. he's the kind of guy that he never said anything that anybody would ever disagree with, because he was on the side of the evil of the nice people. so for him, this is like a shock to him. it's like, it's like the same thing with the with, miss, what's the one the, the you know who i'm talking about. >> you could be talking about absolutely anyone, lewis, and i wouldn't have a clue.

>> it's, miss miss turf lady jk rowling. rowling. when she came out and said, you know what she said? she was like people were. she was like, shocked that people, because she had never heard anybody say . heard anybody say. >> so let me just do a quick translation here. so what lewis is talking about is people who have been traditionally on the left, who suddenly find that they're making a totally reasonable point about women's rights, and they're suddenly treated as though they're fascist. and that must be a shock, right? >> well, yeah, because we're so tribalized and binarized now, i don't know if binarized is a word, but i'm going go with it. >> i like it. so dawkins i mean, it's but to have your entire facebook account. >> oh, well that's ridiculous, isn't it? it is. it is free speech. it's cancelling out. i mean, you can argue that facebook is a private company. everyone does that. but do you know, some people would disagree with richard dawkins in the sense that if you were a staunch christian, you might have a few problems with richard dawkins, but the idea of debate being taken away. >> but but the people who are as his people are not christians. >> no. exactly however, the idea that you take away free debate is absolutely crazy. it's a really worrying time in the sense that the people that run this country want to take away

free debate. so when you see these little isolated incidents , these little isolated incidents, you sometimes dismiss them. and then when the government that's in control of what we do are saying, you can't have free debate and then someone's just shut down like that, there's no recourse for him. >> well, also, social media is the de facto public square. and we have seen how governments are colluding with social media to censor things they don't like. but we saw the fbi do it in america with twitter, with the twitter varne. >> yes, yes. so it's dangerous. that's just the government. the fact is, is that even if there was no government that facebook, if it if it persisted in letting people express those beliefs that it's a man would be shut down, their advertising would be cut as what's happened, what's wrong? >> what's so wrong with just letting people say what they want to say? even if it's objectionable, even if you don't like it, you can disagree. you can turn them off. you don't have to read it. i mean, i don't get this obsession with, like, let's just make sure that everyone has the identical opinion. i don't get it pointed out that, she took a gender test that came back x y, right. >> that's it, that's it. and that was the truth. it's like saying, you know, i got a b in

gcse drama. yeah. if richard dawkins had said paul cox got a b in gcse drama. yeah. he shouldn't have his account shut down. they're two different things. but the truth is the same. >> yeah, but i don't understand the sort of militancy of this. like like so richard dawkins expresses that view. and i agree with richard dawkins on this. but if someone writes online, i think it's disgusting that people are trying to suggest that this athlete shouldn't be able to compete in the women's sports, etc. i'm not going to say, oh, well, because you disagree, i'd like that. shut down. i'd like your account removed. it's like, that's someone who thinks about the world differently from me. that's called a plural society. >> nothing wrong with that to you. go on. i will explain it to you. go on. i will explain it to you. is that is that there are two sides and one side is the left side. the team world side, which is the side that, you know, if someone wants to say that they're a woman, you've got to let them go with go with it. self—identity and people are fighting for that because they have nothing else in. >> what you're saying is that one side of this is authoritarian and the other side is for open debate. >> no, because you're being authoritarian by saying that that's a man when. >> no, that's an expression of a

that's actually an expression of biological fact. >> you would say, what fact is? but if you ask somebody on the other side, they might question that, okay, well , they're free that, okay, well, they're free to question facts if they want to. >> good luck with that. we're going to move on to a question from jane. hi, jane. hi. hi >> should people be allowed to wear what they want or like at work? >> jane , i wonder what you're >> jane, i wonder what you're alluding to there. i think there was there was a story this week about a civil servant, from the department for work and pensions, who wore this is a transgender civil servant called cersei, i think. amethea tweeddale , who wore fetish gear tweeddale, who wore fetish gear to work, i mean, proper it was like fishnet tights and sort of a kind of choker, a choker with a kind of choker, a choker with a pentagram on it. and you look at the images and you kind of think, there has to be a dress code, right? i don't care, i don't care what people wear in their own private life. but if i decided to come on this show in fetish gear and present the show, i think my boss might say, could you not do that? i think that would. and that would be reasonable. that wouldn't be an

infringement on my rights. >> no, it wouldn't be an infringement on your rights. and that's a really good question, because this whole thing emanated from one question, which was, are people that practice bdsm a protected group? they're not. and it was an unanswered question. >> obviously not. >> obviously not. >> no, they're not, they're not. >> no, they're not, they're not. >> it could be a protected group. are people who like bestiality protected? >> where do you stop? >> where do you stop? >> do you remember that canadian woodwork teacher that wore these huge prosthetic breasts, these rubber breasts that were , like, rubber breasts that were, like, absolutely massive? i know you found it arousing. that's a different question, but i won't go into it. but but that was a man who thought he was a woman with massive fake breasts. and of course, the school was saying no, but that's, that's that's his identity. or they said her, her identity. that's that's who she is inside. no one know. that's just fetish gear, right? and you should be able to say at a school you can't wear fetish gean >> of course you should be able to. but remember what happens when you believe a small little lie you've got to play along with it. and that's that's what this team world left is doing. they got you. you got to play. play along with your audience. >> it's very confused by the

team world stuff, but believe me, something that lewis goes on about, you should get that on a t shirt. that's like your slogan, isn't it? >> i possibly should, yeah. you need more merch, my friend lucy did some fantastic work on that at. >> yeah, because you've got a calendar already. >> i've got a calendar for this. if you want to buy a calendar for the last two months of this yean for the last two months of this year, you could. >> yeah. not worth it, is it? you should at least give him a discount if it's a two month calendar. all right, let's let's move on. i've got a question now from illinois, >> are universities really at their tipping point, >> yeah. there's been a few articles about this this week because there's basically a financial crisis and a lot of universities saying they can't they can't afford it anymore. i think part of this, paul, is of course, they because of the last government attempts to cut down on migration, it actually has affected students. and of course, international students pay a course, international students pay a lot more in student fees than domestic students. and of course, there has been a drop and universities are struggling now. right? >> i'd be interested to know, and i don't know the answer to this. how many how many universities there are now compared to 20, maybe 30 years ago, particularly during tony blair's labour years when this was pushed.

>> yeah. well, tony blair was always saying he wants to. he recently said he wanted up to 70% of young people to go to university. but i kind of think what's what's the point? there are other things you can and we now know what's the point. >> yeah. and what's happened is these students are lewis. you will have to let me finish. >> wow. it's getting frosty. go on. paul the students are being treated as sort of commodities because they're. >> there are not enough students to go around for the universities. it's not a problem for students. they're framing it in a way that universities are going to crumble and students are going to fail. that's not true. students are going to be fine. there's more. there is more universities. they can shake a stick at. what we've got is too many universities. >> yeah, maybe that's what i mean. i always felt that there was a kind of snobbishness about this. it's like, let's successive governments say we want to get as many people in university as possible. what's wrong? if you're not academically minded but you're talented at other things, going into an apprenticeship for a trade or something like that, it's really snobbish. i think it's really snobbish. i think it's this idea that, oh, unless you're studying something at university, you're somehow lesser. and i think that's nonsense. >> i agree with you. and at the end of the day, what is what is the university system in britain

or america? it's basically tourism. it's basically getting money from people to come to. >> did you go to university? >> did you go to university? >> of course i went to university. look what do you mean, of course what? >> what did you study? >> what did you study? >> because i'm a certain age, i'm not going to tell you what i studied. wow. >> was it theatre studies or drama? >> was in theatre studies. but i got to be interpretative dance, a ba. i got a b, got to be interpretative dance, aba.igotab,i got to be interpretative dance, a ba. i got a b, i went to a very good university. it was very good university. it was very expensive and. and at the end. here's the problem. wasn't that expensive compared to what it is now? no, because what is the university system? it's basically a welfare we would say in america benefits program for, for the left. yeah. >> but the kids now they're getting like £50,000 debt. i mean, when i went to when i went to university, i had a full maintenance grant because it was means tested and my family didn't have any money. >> but you deserved it because you were smart and you're old. yeah, but that wasn't that wasn't even to do with academia. >> it was just to do with means testing. so it meant that you could go to university even if you didn't have much money. >> people back then who weren't you, they they weren't even means tested because they

thought to themselves, i don't want i'm not going to go to university. but now every they can't go. >> it is a waste of money. you're spending 40 grand on my kids, on a gender studies degree, only to find out when he got to the end. there aren't two. there are 58 of them. you've got to do the whole course again. >> tell your kids not to do university. >> well, one of my kids did and he seemed suited for it because he's a nerd. and the other one who's who's had a bit fat and the other one and the other, he sits there just writing papers and talking about stuff. and i think he's meant to do it. but the other one is just too good looking to waste his time. >> okay, i really, really hope that lewis's children don't watch this show. >> they do, they do. >> they do, they do. >> they do it well. i can't take responsibility. >> the one who was not that good looking, he knows it and he's right. >> lewis, i'm going to cut you off for your own sake. we're going to move on. now to a question from audrey. audrey hi, audrey. hello. >> was, celine dion justified, >> was, celine dion justified, >> this was interesting. so ceune >> this was interesting. so celine dion, who i think is very talented, you know, and she criticised the fact that her song my heart will go on, from titanic. you all know, it was

used as part of donald trump's presidential campaign event. but we've seen this quite a lot. you know, there's always been a situation where politicians use p0p situation where politicians use pop stars, stuff like the rolling stones or whatever, and the pop stars complain because they don't support the politician, what do you think? i mean, does celine dion, i mean, she also said something like, but that song, why choose that song? >> oh, and it's a good point. and that film, titanic, you know, it's a weird one to choose is an interesting choice, but it's donald trump, i think, you know, he doesn't care. for a start. let's have it. let's have it. right, and it's not about whether she gave him permission or not. it's because it's donald trump and she has to come out and say that she doesn't support the use of the song because she doesn't support donald trump. >> you'd think, though, she could quite like the fact that the song is getting out there. mind you, she's she's fine. she's got enough money, she's done absolutely wonderfully. >> when i last spoke to her, things were rosy. >> oh, really? >> oh, really? >> and she's very sick. she's actually sickly. if you've been following. >> she hasn't been well, but she did perform at the paris olympics. she seemed to be doing very well then. so she's getting through it? >> yeah, he's the point. the point about this thing is that is that nobody, if you're somebody you don't want you you don't want to be associated with

something that's going to make 50% of the population hates you for having them use it. and that's what happened. people who who don't like donald trump, they're going to think to themselves, i'm not going to i'm not going to. >> on the other hand, you know, when you make a song, it's sort of out there then. yeah, it's like a public domain, like anyone can play it. anyone >> you can't. you can't do it according to this, because they sent a because her people sent a letter to donald trump's people saying, i don't want because it was her image on a screen. supposedly he was it. yeah. >> because famously, you know, court proceedings have stopped donald trump doing some things, so he's he's going to be really concerned making a joke. >> these people don't understand . >> these people don't understand. >> these people don't understand. >> okay, well, look, we've got to move on now. for lewis's sake, but next on free speech nafion sake, but next on free speech nation , doctor ahmed ghaddar nation, doctor ahmed ghaddar will be joining me. she was dismissed from the open university for questioning an edi diktat. so please don't go anywhere

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle. now, doctor ahmed gadau was dismissed from the open university for questioning a di diktat that criminal law tutors must liberate the curriculum by introducing diverse gender identities and teaching students to use offender's preferred pronouns . managers have claimed pronouns. managers have claimed she'd created environment, which quote isn't inclusive, trans friendly or respectful? well, i'm now joined by doctor al muqaddar. welcome to the show . muqaddar. welcome to the show. so i've given their just a brief so i've given theirjust a brief summary, but perhaps you could tell us more about the background to this. you're a law lecturer, right? >> i am a law lecturer, yes. >> so i taught various law modules in the open university's law school. and then around the start of the decade, a lot more of the critical social justice theories were just generally coming into the teaching. and the undergraduate law curriculum was then rewritten completely around a core theme of liberating the curriculum, which basically means that whichever kind of law you teach, you have

to use it as a vehicle to to, convey critical social justice theories like anti—racism and decoloniality , decoloniality, >> yeah, because we've seen a similar things in english literature , decolonising the literature, decolonising the curriculum, that kind of thing. but when it comes to something like law, is that not the case? that really there isn't room there to be pushing an ideology? it should be about what is the law? >> oh, it absolutely should be. and it was more, more trying to crowbar it in somewhere where just to find a way of fitting in references to the these critical social justice themes somewhere. and i actually challenged that on various modules. so at some point i questioned the decoloniality on one module, and at another point i questioned the anti—racism on another module, which seemed to be acceptable. but when i then questions why i had to teach gender identity belief as part of teaching criminal law, that apparently was beyond the pale . apparently was beyond the pale. and when i asked questions about the teaching of gender ism as part of criminal law, the

response that i got from university management was just, we're not going to discuss it. you will teach this to your students. the subject is closed, and then they waited till the end of the academic year and then took disciplinary action and sacked me for the gross misconduct of questioning the teaching of gender identity belief as part of criminal law module. >> did they not accept that the belief that we have a gender identity is in fact a highly contested belief that actually is shared by a small minority of the population? >> well, that was actually one of the first points i made. >> it wasn't that i went out wanting to teach any particular views or share with my colleagues any particular views on gender. what i started out saying really was , can we not saying really was, can we not include this in the teaching of criminal law? because it's just a distraction. my students have enough on their plate understanding the criminal law, understanding the criminal law, understanding the criminal law, understanding the offences. i'm telling them about, understanding how to tackle a legal problem and so forth. i don't then have to be sidetracked by talking about the fact that there are over 100

gender identities out there. can i just focus on teaching criminal law in my criminal law tutorials? >> i mean, it seems quite reasonable to be honest. >> yes , but apparently the >> yes, but apparently the answer to that was no. or more specifically, the answer that i got at the time was that i had to include it in order to help achieve broader objectives of liberating the curriculum, liberating the curriculum, liberating the curriculum, liberating the curriculum. >> i mean, that's an astonishing phrase. and the thing about this is it's not just a matter of them saying, you can't say this. you can't say that. not like a free speech issue. they're actually trying to compel you to say things, to express beliefs you don't hold for whatever reason, is that if i read that right, oh, absolutely. >> yes . actually, the faculty of >> yes. actually, the faculty of business and law is kind of different from the other faculties in the open university in that it is so liberated that they tell us what to say in every single tutorials. wow. yes. the other faculties wouldn't dream of it, but because the curriculum is so liberated now, or i'm not sure why they control very closely what any tutor says in every single one of the tutorials of

every single module. so yes, in that sense, i said, well, my students might not believe in it. tutors might, might not believe in it. so in addition to it being a distraction, i think it being a distraction, i think it might be illegal because you're asking tutors and students to practice a belief that they might not hold and again, this came back to the point that there are broader ideological objectives to achieve, liberating the curriculum and so forth. and then i apparently completely set off a manager when i replied to that, that the idea of teaching something that isn't actually relevant to your topic, to the subject that you teach in order to achieve ideological objectives, is something that might be particularly familiar to those among us who hail from totalitarian regimes. >> that's absolutely right. and of course, it's not ethical for a teacher to behave in that way. >> it's not know you are abusing your position in the classroom. essentially, you are abusing your position to use your students as a captive audience. yes. who will listen to your

political speech? and that is not what universities should ever be about. you can cover, of course, in the university course you can cover controversial issues, but if you're covering a controversial issue, it's your role, really your responsibility as a tutor to introduce your students to the full range of ideas that are out there on the subject that you're teaching, and then to equip your students with the critical thinking skills to grapple with all those different ideas and to develop their own thoughts on on it, to learn how to articulate their own thoughts on it . that's what own thoughts on it. that's what what universities have traditionally done when they taught controversial theories, not pick one side in a political debate and then teach that as the right one. >> so the open university's defence is that they say, well, you know, it's not trans inclusive unless you are saying that you personally also believe in this and everyone else must believe in it. what do you make of that criticism, >> well, i mean, that particular dismissal ground just seemed particularly ridiculous. i mean, i mean, what this comes back to is the fact that, well, they gave for dismissal grounds,

essentially all for the same actions as in questioning the teaching of gender ism as part of criminal law module. and one of criminal law module. and one of them was that i had violated the transgender staff policy. now the transgender staff policy is a policy that deals with how the university responds. if a member of staff comes out as trans, which is fair enough to have a policy like that . now, of have a policy like that. now, of course, that was my situation because i wasn't in a situation where any member of staff or any student or anybody at all had come out as trans. but there's a sort of preamble at the start of the transgender staff policy, which says something along the lines of the open university is committed to being an inclusive and trans friendly and respectful space. right? and from that, they then draw the silly conclusion that apparently, in questioning the teaching of genderism as part of criminal law, i had created an environment that wasn't trans friendly and i had therefore violently violated the trans staff policy, and that was a sacking offence. >> now, a lot of people will be

shocked to hear this, particularly because, you know, i've had joe phoenix on this show before who face similar problems at the oh, you set up a gender critical research network, was harassed and bullied to the point where she ended up being diagnosed with ptsd for holding those legal beliefs. these are these are beliefs. these are these are beliefs that are protected in law. why don't people who are involved in the teaching of law know the law? >> yes , i think that's a very >> yes, i think that's a very good question. yes. at least i mean , joe phoenix was in social mean, joe phoenix was in social sciences, and you might forgive social scientists for not understanding the law. but but i think you're quite, quite right, because i spent a number of months trying to explain to my colleagues and to my managers why what we were being asked to do was illegal, in my view. and yes, i think you're quite right. you'd think that any senior law academic worth their salt should be able to identify vi academic worth their salt should be able to identify v! or recognise a violation of equality law , when it is pointed equality law, when it is pointed out to them, should be able to recognise a violation of human rights law when it is spelled out to them. yes so i think

there are two possible conclusions here. either they're not very good at understanding the law, or they don't have any intention of respecting the law. >> and of course, you mentioned the way it is in totalitarian regimes. you know, it's funny that everyone who's come from countries which have that kind of background, they don't take this stuff for granted, and they're quite surprised when they're quite surprised when they see people in this country trying to impose ideology at, you know, at the cost of being sacked. >> i think you're probably more attuned to that kind of thing. if you've grown up with totalitarianism, which i personally haven't. i haven't grown up in a totalitarian regimes, but reem ibrahim. but i have grown up with the family memory of it. i've even grown up with the sort of east german books on the bookshelf where you had this experience of look up any subject in the encyclopaedia, and it's sort of related back then to marxist ideology. and any time you look up ultimately ends with an explanation of how this particular concept confirms that marx was right. wow >> so those are books that have been passed down to you from family members. >> oh, well, i mean, i was ten

years old when the berlin wall came down. >> my parents had east german books as well as west german books as well as west german books on their bookshelf. yes, yes. so it was quite natural for me, for me growing up to sort of read east german books and compare them to west german books in that sense, i just developed a particular sensitivity. i suppose, to this habit of just using any subject as and turning it into a vehicle to convey the dominant political ideology. so you've seen all this before? i have absolutely seen all this before. i've had family members for several generations being punished for not going along with teaching the ideology jul. i wasn't going to be the first generation in my family sort of further career by just blindly going along with it. absolutely not. >> well, i'm really pleased that you've come in and told this story because i think a lot of people will be shocked by can people will be shocked by can people help in any way? i think you've got a crowdfunder at the moment. >> i do have a crowdfunder, so if people google my name and crowdjustice alamogordo and crowdjustice, or if you follow the free speech union on twitter, they have been regularly tweeting about my

case. so that will take you to my crowdfunder. >> so the free speech union are helping you at the moment with all of this? >> absolutely are. >> absolutely are. >> because you've been they sacked you right. >> they yes they have sacked me and hopefully will. we're trying to create a precedent and a test case that tests some of the points about the protections in employment law for academic freedom. so yes, it is as far as the free speech union are concerned, also an important case more widely and beyond just me or me winning a just outcome, it will hopefully create a precedent for protecting academic freedom in employment law . law. >> absolutely. well, doctor mckenna, thanks so much for joining me tonight. really appreciate it. thank you. thank you . so a spokesman for the open you. so a spokesman for the open university said the following said it would vigorously defend itself against doctor gado's charges. we strongly dispute the account, which we understand alamogordo, to have given to the media about the circumstances of and reasons for her dismissal. the university's criminal law curriculum and modules, and its

equality , diversity and equality, diversity and inclusion policies . okay. well, inclusion policies. okay. well, next on free speech nation, have we reached a tipping point in the gender wars? i'm going to be speaking to comedy writer graham linehan. please don't go anywhere

welcome back to free speech nation. have we reached a tipping point in the gender wars? so six years ago, comedy writer graham linehan, the man who created hit sitcoms such as father ted and black books, was cancelled for standing up for the rights of women. but if things actually got any better , things actually got any better, well, i'm delighted to say that graham linehan joins me now. welcome to the show. thank you very much, graham. you've obviously been on the show before and your case has been very well publicised. but just in case anyone's watching who doesn't know what happened to you, what happened? >> well, i just noticed women being bullied online and in and in, you know , physical space as

in, you know, physical space as well, and i started objecting to it. i immediately started losing work. >> and this was just on twitter or social media. yeah. just making that point. >> yeah. yeah exactly. and then, and then, you know, i had what i thought was a bit of a kind of safety net in the father ted musical, which which i saw as my pension. yes. and finally that was taken away too , by the my was taken away too, by the my spineless colleagues, i'm afraid. i mean, that's incredible, isn't it? >> because, you know, father ted, one of the most famous sitcoms of all time, the musical, a sure fire hit. yep. still hasn't been produced. yeah still hasn't been produced. yeah still being held hostage by hat trick productions. who are the people who have the rights? >> yeah, yeah, it's because they're. i mean, it's a combination of things. it's because they're terrified of activists . they have activists activists. they have activists within the company, and, and they they don't have enough interest in the women in their lives to investigate the issue. it's an insane situation. >> and one of the things that's been so surprising in your case, i mean, obviously, i've read

your book, tough crowd, which is brilliant. what i love about it, it's mostly about comedy, about the craft of comedy. you also talk about what ultimately happenedis talk about what ultimately happened is that people within the comedy industry, the supposedly the most creative people in the world, didn't come out and defend you, or even suggest any or give any signs that they were curious about these issues. >> yeah, yeah, it's an extraordinary thing. i mean, i've seen armando iannucci this week , who i was a colleague of week, who i was a colleague of mine. i worked on a couple of shows he did, and i appeared on the alan partridge show and, you know , i've said many times to know, i've said many times to him that i've been counsel. i've lost my livelihood, you know , lost my livelihood, you know, why do you why do you ignore all this? you know, because he's one of these people who seems to think that cancel culture doesn't exist. but i'm kind of like a living example of it. and he just kind of breezes over it. and it's because that he's. it's hard to explain, but they simply do not want to address this issue. and if they acknowledge that i exist, they acknowledge that i exist, they acknowledge that the issue exists and they are pretending. people like

armando , people like rufus hound armando, people like rufus hound today, they are all pretending that this isn't an issue. >> are they just afraid that it might happen to them as well? >> i don't know, i think it's a combination of things. yeah, i think it's a combination of fear. i don't i genuinely don't think they have enough curiosity or empathy with women to actually look into the issue. they seem to think that women's rights, as people like alastair campbell often say, are a culture war issue, and, you know , culture war issue, and, you know, we've seen it reach its apex, really, in that this week and for ten days, i think it is. we've seen men hitting, women punching women in the boxing ring. yeah. and so yeah, that's kind of what i'm curious about now is this, is this as far as it goes or is it going to get worse? >> so that's a really good question, isn't it. you know, with with a male individual winning gold in the boxing at women's. oh yeah. >> well there's two silver. did he. >> yeah. so there's two medallists who have an intersex condition which is not the same as a trans issue. >> they don't necessarily have

an intersex condition. they've just said they have. >> we don't know do we. >> we don't know do we. >> because no test results have been released or anything like that. >> this is a this is something i spoke about today with doctor emma hilton, who i know you know, who is a biologist, and she's worked with a lot of people with dsd conditions and, and the whole dsd question has actually been brought up to further muddy the issue, to confuse people, to make people think that, you know, this, this poor woman is being so terribly hard done by and all it is, is a smokescreen to cover up that a number of women were punched in the face over the last ten days by men in the boxing ring, and an audience of millions just watched it happen. >> well, it's interesting you mentioned rufus hound, who just tweeted out, this is a woman. stop complaining. yeah. if this is a woman, why does this individual have x y chromosomes? has he even asked that question? is he interested? >> that's a really good question . >> that's a really good question. no, i think there's a lot of people and i have a word for them, and i think it's shared by a few other people, npcs, which is the name for when you're playing a computer game, all the

people you meet who aren't human beings. yes. now, that's not to say i don't want to take away rufus humanity, but he is behaving from a set script . he behaving from a set script. he is. he is just reciting things he has heard from other people. he is trusting that his fellow non—player characters are telling him the truth. and of course, they're all. they're all either lying or they simply don't know. >> so. but as you say, the spectacle of someone actually being punched a physical, a matter of physical safety. now can this be the tipping point? i mean, judging from this week, it looks like not. yes, but but i think there's some things to be cheered up about. >> first of all, i just wanted to make sure people know a man punches a woman, 100. it's something like 146% times harder than a woman. can you know? so a woman could actually be killed in the ring and the great thing about this week, even though you see the usual obfuscation, the usual, you know, useful idiots like hound and laurie penny and people like this seb coe , he may

people like this seb coe, he may be the next olympics . he may be the next olympics. he may take over from the lunatics who were running it this year. if he does, he said something like, i have daughters. of course, this is an interesting subject to me. and i think he was actually very, very shocked by what happened over the last ten days. >> well, and we've also had, for instance, wes streeting saying he's going to implement the cass review is another good example. yes. so, you know, although there's a lot of resistance within labour, they still haven't apologised to rosie duffield, but do you do you are you optimistic now that this kind of with the cass review even though so many people are denying that it even matters ultimately some time in the distance, the truth has to win out . out. >> yes it does, but but i think the major problem at the moment is that the bbc has so little authority. it used to be the gold standard in terms of news. we look to the bbc to for, kind of make sense of the world and the bbc possibly the only the

guardian is as dishonest as the bbc in reporting on this issue. sorry, the guardian and pink news, you know, they pink news goes without saying. >> yeah, but like the bbc is actively trying to suppress the information around this issue. >> they're actively trying to confuse the public and they are . confuse the public and they are. i genuinely think that when this is all over and there is a is a, what do you call it, an investigation? i can't remember the word, but an investigation into the whole affair. i think the bbc has to be, investigated too, because they have let this all happen. well, i mean, they claim i mean, i actually contacted the bbc to ask why they why they hadn't covered the w path files, for instance. >> you know, and they just came back with some boilerplate about how well we can't cover every story was effectively, what do you make of that defence? do you think that's fair? >> well, i'll tell you what that defence might make sense if the w path files didn't reveal that the entire , edifice of trans

the entire, edifice of trans health care is built on sand. you know, these are a bunch of ideological lunatics. the head of w path wasn't even a doctor. and most of all. and i know i go on about this, but it's one of those things that i still can't believe isn't a massive scandal. yes, w path linked to a page full of child pornography about castration. >> yeah, this was the eunuch files. >> the eunuch archive. yeah, it was something like 5000, erotic short stories about castration. and 40% of them were marked minor. yes. so that's 40% of them are about castrating children . so the organisation children. so the organisation that's saying we should castrate children is also linking to a website for men who are turned on by the idea of castrating children. >> and because that sounds so , >> and because that sounds so, is that not news? and people will say that's incredible. can't be true. so i would just alert them to w path version eight, standards of care. yes, the draft version which they uploaded had that link in it. yes. and this was all reported by redux magazine. >> and it also included eunuch

as a gender identity. yes. and when the w path files came out and redux reported on this, they removed all this from the website immediately. >> so they knew there was a there was an issue there. yeah. all right. well, graham, thanks so much forjoining us. i want to just finally mention your book, tough crowd. just how's that been going already did it. i know, but i think you should mention it again. >> it's going okay. it's going okay. it's again, it's hard to find a bookshops because book, book, you know, the people who run bookshops don't want it to do well. so if you do want it, i would say go to amazon or any kind of online dealership. >> fantastic. graham linehan, thanks so much forjoining me. thank you . and next up on free thank you. and next up on free speech nation it'll be this week's social sensations. don't go anywhere

welcome back to free speech

nation. and it's time for social sensations. that's the part of the show where we look at what's been going viral this week on social media. so we're going to start with the royals. let's have a look. >> greetings loved ones from all of us watching at home. >> congratulations to team gb. >> congratulations to team gb. >> well done on all you've achieved. you've been an inspiration to us all. >> okay. snoop dogg is not a member of the royal family. i should point that out, but yeah, william's got a beard. looking a bit beardy. >> he didn't have a shave, did he? >> now, is it just that he hasn't shaved or is he growing a beard? what do you think? >> well, he's in that in—between stage and, you know, a big willy, as i call him. seems a bit inappropriate. >> it does. >> it does. >> but, you know, we're close. we're like that. and. and snoop me, celine dion, snoop, big willy. yeah. we. yeah, i think we went to mcdonald's once. it might have been wimpy, i can't remember, but anyway. yeah yeah, i am losing my mind. >> so the beard thing. because if you start growing a beard, there is that moment where it just looks like you're a tramp. yeah but then eventually it starts to look. >> or, you know, the second in line to the throne. >> well, or either he can dress as he likes, or a policeman

trying to, like, be good with the local community. is that right? >> yeah, that's what it is. i think he's he i think also he's bald right now. >> he looks all right to me. >> he looks all right to me. >> he looks all right to me. >> he looks all right. >> he looks all right. >> he's a good looking man, isn't he? >> he's a good. but he's bald. >> he's a good. but he's bald. >> so i can understand that if you're bald, you should be allowed to grow a beard just to balance your head out. you should be allowed to do that anyway you like. >> you don't get to make the rules about facial hair. >> the truth. >> the truth. >> the truth is, it's not just a beard. now because. because it's beards now have political. >> it starts with redefining islamophobia and then it's all about, yeah, when you can win, when you can wear a beard. >> and i'm going to end it there too. >> we're going to move on to this next one. this is, an unexpected security scare in paris. so, let's have a look . paris. so, let's have a look. oh, that's someone climbing up the. i think that's the eiffel tower. yeah, someone's climbing up there. that was a security breach, apparently. do we know what happened there? paul, do you have any ideas? >> not really. no. which is just why we're not on live tv . why we're not on live tv. >> just as well. >> just as well. >> but i would say the only security risk is to his personal safety, isn't it? i mean,

climbing up. we don't know what he was going to do. we have no idea what he was going to do, but it was considered a safety risk. and they stamped on it straight away. >> well, apparently people are stuck up there because of this person climbing up there. but you know, what you need is grace jones. do you remember a view to a kill? grace jones has a fight with james bond up there. if you had grace jones up there, that'd be pretty. >> as in, pull up to my bumper. you know? yeah, yeah, yeah, she's she's pretty tough in that film. >> well, i think it's amazing. nothing really bad happened at the paris. >> nothing bad happened. >> nothing bad happened. >> there were threats, but no, there beginning there was something that was bad. >> there was a naked smurf at the beginning. >> yeah, there was two men fought for the women's championship, but there was also that incident where they. >> where they blew up the boxes or something, and the trains didn't run, but nothing really bad. no >> that's good. >> that's good. >> bad happened. >> bad happened. >> well, let's go something a bit lighter. now. this is a very excited cow . excited cow. >> here, try this . >> here, try this. >> here, try this. >> do you want to try it ? well, >> do you want to try it? well, i didn't know if they were going to eat cooked pumpkin or not, but guess what? they are. rocco

yeah? you really like taking oven yeah? you really like taking over, don't you? quick, sunny, put it in your mouth . right, put it in your mouth. right, rocco? i'm going to throw you some over there. go get that . some over there. go get that. >> i think it's a cow eating a pumpkin. i don't think there's much to say about that. i do want to get some unfiltered dilemmas. >> so let's start with this one from sofia. >> no, because i know you're going to say stuff. >> louis, this is a dilemma from sofia. >> she says, my friend's birthday is coming up, but they don't celebrate it. do i get them a card? still, what do you think of that, paul? >> well, i don't celebrate it. >> well, i don't celebrate it. >> i wouldn't get them a card. it's like going against their wishes, isn't it? >> yeah, exactly. >> yeah, exactly. >> so don't get them a card. >> so don't get them a card. >> not much of a dilemma. what do you think, >> i think getting a card is one of those things that's like. here's some garbage. throw it out. yeah. it's like nobody wants a card. they don't want men don't want flowers. you give a guy a flowers, it's like it's not going to make him happy. >> oh, well, unfortunately we are at the end of the show. we normally have a bit more time for unfiltered dilemmas. we don't this week. thank you so much for joining

don't this week. thank you so much forjoining us for free much for joining us for free speech nation, this was, of course, the week when labour were accused of starting a war on free speech. we'll see how that pans out. but thanks to my panel that pans out. but thanks to my panel, paul cox and lewis schaffer to all of my brilliant guests this evening. and if you want to join us, by the way, go to sro audiences.com. you can come and join us in the studio. thanks so much forjoining us for free speech nation. see you next week. >> that warm feeling inside from boxt boilers sponsors of weather on gb news. >> hello! welcome to your gb news weather update from the met office as we go through monday , office as we go through monday, it's going to be turning increasingly hot and humid for some of us with the risk of thunderstorms in the northwest, but it will be turning fresher later. looking at the bigger picture, we've got an area of high pressure across the uk. further towards the west, a deep area of low pressure and that's helping drive south easterly winds. so through the rest of this evening, many places staying largely dry. but as we go through the night we'll see the risk of thunderstorms developing. firstly, in the

west, but then across northern ireland and parts of scotland later, and we have got some weather warnings in force. so expect frequent lightning, torrential downpours and some gusty winds and temperatures overnight. well, it's going to be feeling quite uncomfortable some places not dipping below 20 degrees now as we start monday morning we have this band of heavy thundery showery rain across western parts of scotland, moving its way north and eastwards so there could be some difficult driving conditions in this, with frequent lightning as well and some torrential downpours. northern ireland turning drier as the day progresses and across much of england largely dry but cloudy further towards the west and already feeling quite warm by 8 am. so as the day progresses that band of rain will continue to push its way north and eastwards . some north and eastwards. some thunderstorms even ahead of that as well, so they can't be ruled out completely across the south. but many places should largely miss these many places. seeing some hot sunshine, especially across the south east. it's

going to be feeling very hot and humid with highs of up to 34 degrees, but fresher further towards the west. as we go through tuesday. still warm start in the south and east, but bright elsewhere. then we have another band of rain moving in from the west, so turning increasingly cloudy with outbreaks of rain for many across western areas. sunshine and showers behind that, and that sets the scene through wednesday and thursday with unsettled weather on the way but turning fresher as well. by looks like things are heating up. >> boxt boilers sponsors

>> good evening. welcome to ben leo tonight with me josh howie ben leo. tonight is temporarily covering mark dolan tonight throughout august, but as both mark dolan and ben leo are off having well—deserved breaks, ben leo tonight covering mark dolan tonight is tonight being covered by me . josh howie coming up on

by me. josh howie coming up on ben leo tonight with me. josh howie a tale of two cities, but both have men doing nazi salutes. why is there such unequal outrage? because of the protests. they were on. as the police brace themselves for another week of unrest, britain's top prosecutor warns rioters they could be facing ten years in prison is the consensus now that prisons work, the government seems to be on the bnnk government seems to be on the brink of adopting an official definition of islamophobia following this week's horrific rioting . but would such a ruling rioting. but would such a ruling be a necessary legal protection or a way of quashing any criticism of an ideology under the guise of racism ? as the the guise of racism? as the paris olympics draw to a close today, after successive controversies and stunning victories, has this round of the global sporting phenomenon been a bop or a flop? political unrest in bangladesh leads to targeted attacks on hindus, leaving two dead. but where is the outrage from the media? and i'll be asking political firebrand ann widdecombe about the pm's slump in