of president assad's forces in syria, where the caliphate declared by the extremist group that calls itself islamic state is crumbling. assad forces, backed by russia and iran, are slowly re—taking more territory that's been ruled for years by is. dutch authorities have ordered the last minute cancellation of a rock show in rotterdam. they were acting on a tip—off from anti—terror police in spain. the city's mayor said they'd been warned an attack was planned on a gig by the american band the allah—las. australia's deputy prime minister barnabyjoyce is among at least five senior government figures fighting a legal battle that's threatening to topple the conservative government. australia's top court has begun examining an obscure law that bars dual citizens from sitting in parliament. now on bbc news, it's time for hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. neo—nazism and race hate are alive

and kicking in the united states. the violence in charlottesville was shocking notjust because a life was taken but also because of the polarising impact of president trump's responds, fault lines that almost broke the us in the civil war have not been erased. my guest is richard cohen, president of the southern poverty law center, a group devoted to civil rights activism. how fanciful is the notion of a 21st—century american civil war? richard cohen in montgomery, alabama, welcome to hardtalk.

thank you, looking forward to speaking with you. of course you join us after all of the discussion of what happened in charlottesville just a few days ago. in your opinion, what we're seeing in the united states today, all of the heated debate, the anger, the passion, the hatred, is it a blip or is it part of a much deeper trend? it's both. it's both part of a longer term trend and it's also something that has been energised at this particular moment in our country. let me explain both halves if i can. you know, in our country we've seen a backlash to our changing demographics. you know, we've documented about 100% rise in the number

of hate groups since the late ‘90s and they‘ re responding to the changing demographics. that response to our changing demographics is something that you're also seeing on your side of the atlantic, when you see the response to the increase in immigration in england and in other countries in western europe. so this phenomenon is not peculiar to the united states. what is peculiar to the united states is mr trump. during the campaign he was really playing with fire, he ran a really very xenophobic and racist campaign in my view and that xenophobia and racism has really energised the radical right in an ugly way in our country and we saw that in full display in charlottesville a week ago. so to be clear about this, you are the boss of one of the highest profile civil rights organisations in the united states today, are you saying that president donald trump is an out and out racist? i don't know mr trump...

i don't know what's in his heart. all i do know is his actions have been racist. they've been racist for quite some time. as some of your viewers may know, mr trumpjumped on the birther bandwagon, claiming perhaps president obama wasn't born in this country. that was a true racist canard. not only did hejump on it but he lied about it repeatedly, saying things like he had sent investigators to hawaii and we were going to be amazed at what they saw and what they found. none of it was true. the whole birther controversy was an effort to delegitimise the first black president of our country. it seems to me while your organisation, the southern poverty law center, spends an awful lot of time on research and claims to be an objective observer

of what is happening on the ground in the united states, the things that you are saying to me sound so deeply political and, if i may say so, partisan, and also notjust your words to me right now, but things you've written. for example you wrote recently, "the combination of trump's racist campaign and the attacks on political correctness told many people that the gloves were off and they could unfortunately vote and act with their worst instincts." you seem to be frankly saying that tens of millions of people who voted for trump in the presidential election are racist. i didn't say that and you misquoted what i said. i didn't say anything about the word vote in what you just read. let me say quite frankly, we are partisan, we are partisan against hate.

we're not an organisation that intervenes in political campaigns, we don't endorse candidates, but we do feel we have an obligation to speak out against hateful rhetoric whenever and especially when it enters into the mainstream. and so i make no apologies for some of the... for condemning the nature of mrtrump‘s campaign. it was shameful. and because he energised the right, the radical right, and because he engaged in quite frankly a shameful campaign, he really has lost his moral legitimacy in our country when it comes to condemning hate, and that's a terrific, terrific problem. so to get to the background of charlottesville specifically, do people who take to the streets in defence, for example, of these symbols of the old confederacy, they say they're simply expressing their sympathy for america's cultural and political heritage, when they take to the streets and say the statue of general robert e lee for example shouldn't come down

in charlottesville, virginia, are they in your opinion behaving in a way that is inflammatory and that incites hatred? look, public statues, statues in public places that are erected by the government are... send a message of who it is that we should be honouring. now, the statues of so—called confederate heroes in our country were raised at a time when people were doing one of two things, celebrating white supremacy or acting in defiance of federal law. what i mean by that is the statues came up in two periods in our history, from 1890 to 1920, whenjim crow was... had been re—established in the deep south, and after the supreme court's decision in 1954 calling for the desegregation of public schools. so those statues were put up to... and frankly in the name

of white supremacy. so those statues should come down, we shouldn't be honouring people who worked on behalf of slavery. so i think it's quite wrong for people to demonstrate... no one's trying to take away their heritage, no one's attacking them, we're simply saying that we shouldn't be honouring those folk. i understand your point about when these statues were put up and the motivations of many of the people who erected them and funded them, but nonetheless they have stood in the towns and cities particularly of the south, but notjust the south of the united states, for an awful long time. we've had democratic presidents from carter to clinton to obama who's chosen not to use their bully pulpit to make a point of saying

these statues must come down, so if we're talking about the atmosphere and the tension in america today, why is it so important to address this and perhaps fan those flames today? look, i don't know if one is fanning these flames. a lot of this goes back a couple of years. as your viewers may know, injune of 2015 a young man with hate in his heart went into an historic black church in charleston, south carolina, and killed nine parishioners. after that the state of south carolina decided to take down its confederate flag because they felt, gosh, it had no place in 21st—century america and was sending the wrong message, especially after the massacre at the black church. now, after that there were a number of demonstrations around the country in favour of the confederate flag

and i think what we're seeing now is a continuation of that. so suddenly issues that have long been dormant become salient and people then speak out. i think you're own splc website, say there are well over 1,000, something like 1,500 different confederate monuments across the united states, is your group saying they must all come down now this has been brought out into the open and is such a big national debating point, are you saying they all have to come down? there are 1,500 confederate symbols, whether that be a statue, whether that be a holiday, whether that be the name of a street, and i think in all of those instances are communities that support them ought to take a hard look and ask themselves, is that the message they want to send? in montgomery, alabama, there's a school called jefferson davis high school. it was dedicated in the late 1960s

when the citizenry or the leadership in montgomery was still resisting school desegregation. do i think it's wrong for that school to have been named afterjefferson davis, a person who fought and led a treasonous government to defend slavery? absolutely. do i think the community should change its name? yes i do. those in america who see these symbols and statues as fundamentally reprehensible, if this campaign goes on, do you not worry that it will play into the hands of the white supremacists, of the extreme right factions who want to portray america today as indulged in a culture war in which white people are the victims. do you not feel that that narrative may thrive if you continue

with this campaign? well, first, it's notjust the southern poverty law center's campaign, it's something that's been considered and talked about and waged by people all over the country and in response to your question, yes i do, i do worry about the reaction to the taking down of confederate statues. but i worry more about the message that those statues will send to future generations if they're not dealt with properly. but on this point, and you said, you know, frankly, earlier in this interview, "yeah, iam partisan," in a sense, "i have a side in this debate." let me quote to you the words of somebody on the other side, a man that you have condemned in very clear terms for a long time now, you've called for his dismissal from the white house, of course he has now gone from the white house, i'm talking, you know, about steve bannon and after his departure from the white house he said this, he said,

"if the democratic party and people who support it fall back on the politics of race and identity..." i'm paraphrasing slightly, but he said, "that's fine by me because we have economic nationalism and if that is the debate, we will win". yeah, mr bannon did say that and i worry about the dynamics in our country and the flames that mr bannon, through breitbart, through mr trump, has fuelled. so we're going through a period where the country's trying to come to terms with the racism of its past and trying to forge a new identity, an identity that welcomes all americans. again, these are not struggles that are... these are not struggles that exist only in the united states. you know, when i think about the vote at brexit, when i think about thomas maier, who killed jo cox, he too was a man

with hate in his heart, he too represented a white supremacy and the backlash against the changing demographics of the western world. let's get down to specifics now because we've talked a lot about the politics of the united states today, we haven't talked about in detail the nature of hate groups, and that in the end is at the core of your organisation's activism and campaigning. what actually constitutes a hate group to you? yeah, we label group says hate groups if they, they and their leaders vilify entire groups of people for immutable characteristics such as their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or the like.

it's not that you're saying you don't have a right to express hate in the united states in 2017, because surely under the first amendment you do have that right? absolutely. you have a right to express hate and we have a right to call it out in the exercise of our first amendment rights. but then when you lump together the white supremacists, the neo—nazis and other groups who appear to the outside observer, for example the center for immigration studies, to be a very conservative anti—immigration think tank, some people are left confused. you know, is there really a strand that unites the neo—nazi groups in the united states today with the center for immigration studies? i think there is. if you look at the words of the centre for immigration studies and its leaders, i think you hear racism. they are not simply opposing immigration because of some view of how it will affect the united states economically. it also appears to us that there is — that their views

are tinged with racism. let me give you an example. after the devastating earthquake in haiti, the head of the centre for immigration studies, mr krikorian, said that maybe the reason haiti was having so many problems was because it wasn't colonised long enough. and mr krikorian responds by saying that the idea that we, a think—tank on k street, which is of course that street in washington where all the lobbyists sit, that we as a think—tank are comparable to a skinhead group is simply laughable. and he points out that dozens and dozens of times, his think—tank, his centre, has been invited to testify before congress. you know, if you use this very blunt instrument of lumping them in the same category... that's the problem —

that sometimes the groups that spew racism, or have racism tainting their message, the fact that they get into the mainstream makes them more dangerous, perhaps, than the skinhead group that everyone recognises as something marginal. you know, mr krikorian‘s organisation has published scores and scores of articles, reprinted scores and scores or republished scores and scores of articles, from racists. we have documented this. so again, the fact that they have testified in congress, in our view, that's the problem. they shouldn't. they are an example of hate in the mainstream. it's always easy to tell the haters if they have swastikas or white sheets. it's harder to recognise the haters who are in business suits. that's why we think it's so important to point it out when we see them.

it is harder, and sometimes you get it wrong. for example, dr ben carson, who currently sits in the trump administration, but was this a candidate for president himself back during the campaign, you put him on a list of people peddling hate, and then you had to apologise. what happened there? can you explain to me how you can make that kind of mistake, to put it bluntly? well, look, we acknowledged it was a mistake, and publicly apologised to dr carson. we did not call him a hater. we had him on a list of extremists, and that was a mistake. i think anyone who googles mr carson can see that he made some — what i would say, you know, odd, peculiar, extreme statements. but we shouldn't have listed him in the way that we did. we make mistakes sometimes, and we own up to them. do you think it is dangerous, this polarisation, which you are a part of? and i understand why you feel it is so important to stand up to hate, but in a sense,

you are part of the polarisation. well, look, i don't think... i don't think hate and calling out hate are morally equivalent. i think that is a false equivalency, and so i think they are quite different things, so i would reject the premise of your question entirely. let's get, then, to the critique that comes your way from the other side, if you like. and that is from those young people, in particular, who look at what is happening on the streets of charlottesville and elsewhere today, and they say that the only way to confront the neo—nazis, white supremacists, the ku klux klan, the only way is to confront them with direct action. and if they are violent, if the extremists from the right are violent, then these groups, they call themselves antifa, the anti—fascist action groupings, they say they will be violent themselves.

you have ruled out that kind of response. why? well, we think that no group with... the antifa, we think, are absolutely part of the problem. the idea that they decide themselves that they can stop another group from speaking is antithetical to the values in the first amendment in our country, and horribly counter—productive. so, you know, we have been consistent in saying that, and condemning the antifa. they‘ re completely misguided, and i think their tactics are quite dangerous. here is a quote from one, 20—year—old emily rose, on the streets of charlottesville. she said, people are starting to understand that neo—nazis don't care if you are quiet and if you are peaceful. you need violence in order

to protect non—violence. yes, well, look, you saw what happened in charlottesville. you know, just a terrible situation. and then you contrast it with what happened in boston, where thousands and thousands of people came and marched in peace against hate. i think the message that the good people of boston sent peacefully was certainly much more powerful than the message that the antifa sent in cha rlottesville, with their clubs. so, if the klansmen or the white supremacists or the neo—nazis want to march, you say we have got to let the march? absolutely. they have a right to... they have a right to their speech, and i think any effort to suppress them only plays into their hands, by allowing them to portray themselves as martyrs. before we end, i want to ask you about one different aspect of your activism and campaigning. that is your concern about the rising tide in islamophobia in the united states, and all the figures show that it is spiking,

and has done for the last few years. you have chosen to aim some of your fire at people who actually have made it their life's work to campaign against extremist islamists. i'm thinking for example of the head of the quilliam 0rganisation here in the united kingdom, maajid nawaz. he is so angry with the fact you have put him on a list of extremists that he is threatening to sue you. why did you do that? well, look, what we've said about mr nawaz is a matter of public record, and given that he has said he's going to sue us, i don't really think it's appropriate for me to comment any further at this time. alright. ayaan hirsi ali, then. another inveterate campaign against jihadis, radical islamists, you've also had her in your line of fire, as well.

itjust seems to me you are choosing to pick on people who have taken risks themselves to confront the dangers that are represented by extreme political and violent islamists. yes, no, iunderstand the point that you're making. of course, the person who you are speaking of has described, you know, islam as a death cult. i think that's painting with a very, very broad brush, and doesn't help the cause of interfaith understanding. so you have no regrets about that? you don't think that perhaps your message on islamophobia has been somewhat confused by some of the targets you have picked on? i understand the criticism. but i think the larger issue is that we know that there has been a rise in anti—muslim fever in this country, just as there's been a rise in britain, and in other places in western europe. and it's a tremendous problem, and it's something that someone like mr trump has exacerbated, through his rhetoric

during his campaign and his actions as the president. richard cohen, i want to end, if i may, with this one broad—brush question. i was very taken by a new yorker magazine article just a few days ago which talked about the possibility of a new american civil war. and they pulled a bunch of historians and leading analysts, and asked them to stay in percentage terms what they thought the possibility was. and the consensus was a 35% possibility there could be a new american civil war. where would you put it? i would put it at zero. i think those estimates are ridiculous. you know, america is a strong country, and we will get through this. sure, we'll continue to have controversy around race. that's going to happen in our country, that's going to happen in england. but our country is not going to break out into a civil war, i'd bet my life on it.

alright, well, we have to leave it there, but i thank you, richard cohen, forjoining me from montgomery, alabama. thank you. hello there. as we head towards the bank holiday weekend, there is some much quieter weather on the way, which is just as well, after all the heavy rain and flooding that we had in northern ireland, and here in north yorkshire, too. that rain, on the last of the muggy air that swept across the uk. behind it, fresher conditions followed, and we saw the cloud breaking, and some sunshine. and over the next few days there'll be some more sunshine. there'll be a few showers around, more particularly towards the north—west of the uk. now, the wet weather came on that

weather front there. that has long gone out into the north sea. still dawdling, perhaps, towards the northern isles for a while. lower pressure towards the north—west, this is where we'll see most of the showers. higher pressures towards the south. not a big high pressure, but higher pressure. hence the drier weather here. a sunny start across much of the midlands, east anglia and the south—east of england, and some sunshine further west, as well, across the south—west of england and wales. just the chance of a little bit more cloud, and maybe one or two light showers. the odd shower coming into the north—west of england, as well. much of north—east england, and indeed eastern scotland, starting dry and sunny. still some rain up towards shetland, and a few showers arriving towards the highlands. most of northern ireland starting the day dry. but i think we will see some showers, or even longer spells of rain, pushing in closer to that area of low pressure in the north—west, and turning wetter again in western fringes of scotland. a few sharp showers for the north—east of scotland, and possibly towards the north—east of england. most of england and wales in the afternoon, though, will be fine and dry, with some sunshine. pleasant enough, with light winds for the most part,

and temperatures near normal for this time of the year. it'll turn chilly quickly, though, in the evening, especially across much of england and wales, where we'll have clearer skies. up towards the north—west, a bit more of a breeze, perhaps, and still the chance of more cloud and some rain, but temperatures will be a bit lower than they have been recently. into friday, lots of sunshine, probably more sunshine on friday for southern england, midlands, east anglia and lincolnshire. bit more cloud bubbling up further north, a few showers again for scotland. some of these could be rather heavy, and perhaps some longer spells of rain arriving into northern ireland, too. so temperatures here a little bit lower, but warming up towards the south—east, with more sunshine, probably getting into the mid—20s. towards the north—west, though, we've got that area of low pressure as we head into the weekend, threatening to bring some more showery rain here. this area of low pressure in biscay could bring the risk of a shower across southern and eastern england, particularly saturday night. but on the whole, it looks like it's going to be dry again across much of england and wales. some sunshine, and feeling pleasantly warm in the sunshine, with light winds, too. further north, some showers,

most of the showers again for scotland, and also across northern ireland. goodbye. this is bbc news. i'm chris rogers. our top stories: 0n terror alert in rotterdam — a rock show is cancelled at the last minute after a tip off from police in spain. typhoon hato hits mainland china with hurricane force winds and torrential rain. it's left at least six people dead in macau and hong kong. australia's deputy prime minister barnaby joyce and other government figures battle in court to save their seats in parliament mountains of questions for the world's central bankers as they gather injackson hole wyoming for their annual meeting. plus, dying with dignity — but at what financial cost? we look at the growing bill for end—of—life care, as part of our week long series on the business of death.