hello, i'm ray anderson . free hello, i'm ray anderson. free speech nation is coming up. the first. here are the headlines. well, the match is about to get underway between england and senegal at the world cup in qatar . the africa cup of nations qatar. the africa cup of nations holders were runners up in group a while in group b, the three lions beat wales and iran. but could any draw with the usa .7 could any draw with the usa.7 england are could any draw with the usa? england are playing without raheem sterling, who is dealing with family matter. the with a family matter. the winners of this game will take on france in the quarter final . on france in the quarter final. the health secretary is being

urged to stop grandstanding and make a deal with unions ahead of nhs strikes this month. the call by former health secretary steven doyle comes as military personnel prepare to cover striking public sector workers . striking public sector workers. around 2000 troops, civil servants and other government volunteers are being trained to help limit disruption during the festive period. mr. dorrell says demands for a 90% pay rise may not be possible , but the current not be possible, but the current offer isn't good enough. most people remembering this, the applause that we all gave to the nhs during the pandemic would think that 3% isn't. doesn't properly respond. in particular for low paid nhs workers . for low paid nhs workers. doesn't properly respond to the challenges of the moment and i would hope that steve barclay would hope that steve barclay would come out of the grandstands and engage with the people who he relies on. he can't deliver health care, starting the secretary of state's office . well, meanwhile state's office. well, meanwhile , the rail delivery group says

it hopes to prevent further train strikes by offering members of the rmt t union an 8% pay members of the rmt t union an 8% pay rise. the deal would be spread over two years and includes a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies until april . 20, 24. the head of the april. 20, 24. the head of the police watchdog has been forced to resign over an historical allegation . it's now emerged allegation. it's now emerged that michael lockwood, who has been the director general of the independent office for police conduct since 2018, is facing a criminal investigation . the home criminal investigation. the home secretary suella braverman , says secretary suella braverman, says she told him to quit or face immediate suspension after learning about that probe . when learning about that probe. when he announced his resignation on friday. he said it was for personal and domestic reasons. well, preparation and is well and truly under way for king charles's coronation, which takes place in just 150 days. the st edward's crown has now been removed from the tower of london to be resized. it's

relocation was kept secret until it was safely delivered. the ceremony on may the sixth is expected to be much smaller than the late queen's coronation. around 2000 guests are expected instead of 8000. we're on tv, onune instead of 8000. we're on tv, online and on dab+ radio. this is gb news, the people's channel. now let's get back to free speech nation . free speech nation. an 83 year old royal aide is sacked for asking a guest where they're from . fashion house. but they're from. fashion house. but now he apologises for a dodgy ad campaign . and elon musk releases campaign. and elon musk releases details of collusion between twitter and politicians . this is twitter and politicians. this is free speech nation . welcome to free speech nation. welcome to the show . so on tonight's show, the show. so on tonight's show, i'm going to be talking to

professor of criminology joe phoenix, who is suing the open university after she was harassed and hounded out of her job her gender critical job due to her gender critical beliefs. also going to be beliefs. i'm also going to be joined femi joined by the writer femi nylander and historian rafe nylander and the historian rafe hederman, going to hederman, who are going to debate royal debate the sacking of royal aide, lazy lady susan hussey after she asked a visitor about her heritage . and i'm also going her heritage. and i'm also going to be talking to academic and writer williams about writer johanna williams about the by the wellcome the decision by the wellcome collection cancel own collection to cancel its own flagship exhibition because they fear it might cause offence and also later on, we've got the lawyer, michael phillips. he's going to be in the studio to discuss the claim by the crown prosecution service that it is no longer appropriate it to quote passages from the quote certain passages from the bible public. but quote certain passages from the bible public . but first, bible in public. but first, let's welcome my panellists for tonight. i've got louis schaefer and dixon . and he's the and nick dixon. and he's the wonderful we've got an audience here tonight because this is some sort of football game going on. right. and apparently is going on right now like between seven and 9:00. i mean, it's deliberate. so didn't they

deliberate. so why didn't they let this is going to be let me know this is going to be happen? want to know happen? do you want to know something? people in something? lots of gay people in this love football. this this country love football. this is gayest friendly country, is the gayest friendly country, not you not even before qatar, that you actually but what's his actually have. but what's his name? the elton john ? yes, name? the elton john? yes, i struggle for that. but whatever he loves paul, he loves stephen fry at norwich . yeah. i don't fry at norwich. yeah. i don't know what the gays like. it used to be that we were unanimous in our condemnation of football, or at least fan at this point. yes yeah. do you find it was it just to just say something? yeah, it was. the whole point of being gay was you don't have to like. right, exactly. oh, you like football, nick? so i was just checking score. i'm to great checking the score. i'm to great be here. this was booked a long time in advance . yeah, i. i love time in advance. yeah, i. i love football and i've followed it. my football and i've followed it. my whole life, but i've managed to miss almost all of this world cup because i work so hard, guys. and tonight's game in portland? yeah, because it's the first knockouts age first of the knockouts age following group. what does following the group. what does that going that again explain? we're going to long time guys. sorry to be here long time guys. sorry about think all football

about this. i think all football there's a group stage where you have win this best. there's a group stage where you have win this best . each have to win this the best. each team plays three matches. they will play each other four will play each other for four teams. you get to the teams. then you get to the knockout we win, knockout stage. so if we win, we're through. if lose, we're through. and if we lose, where totally interest where i totally lost interest after the first word, i'll be honest, but thank you for the audience because audience for turning out because i thought we wouldn't i honestly thought we wouldn't have they're have anyone. but they're all here. me, nothing here. you, like me, have nothing to with football. we're not to say with football. we're not interested right now. they're not interested football. why interested right now. they're notyouzrested football. why interested right now. they're notyou 3rest< down ootball. why interested right now. they're notyouzresttdown to tball. why interested right now. they're notyouzresttdown to the .. why do you talk down to the audience? talking to audience? i'm talking up to it and i'm saying discerning. and i'm saying they discerning. no, they could love no, you could. they could love football, but are football, amazingly, but are doing you, andrew, a favour. maybe they just maybe be funny if they just realised was all in realised it was all in all walked. okay we'll walked. yeah. okay well we'll find they've got be find out. they've got to be checking phones the checking their phones for the score as it has already started. yeah, yeah. seven. what's yeah, yeah, yeah. seven. what's the well on tends the score now. well i'm on tends to like i was was to look like i was it was a joke. i wasn't actually looking. we're to some we're going to get some questions from our lovely audience. and first one is audience. and the first one is from where is lyle? are from lyle, where is lyle? are you lyle? yeah, here. andrea i really your show. thank really love your show. thank you. this question about you. so this question is about balancing you think an balancing ego. do you think an apology from

apology is enough from them? yeah. balenciaga who? big yeah. yes. a balenciaga who? big fashion and, know, fashion house and, you know, they this controversial they released this controversial set adverts . basically, if set of adverts. basically, if you didn't see the adverts, i mean, they're pretty incredible toddlers holding teddy bears dressed in bondage gear. there was another advert which had a back like a balenciaga bag on top of court documents about a child case. all of this is very dodgy and the company's creative director has now apologised , director has now apologised, saying it was quote, the wrong artistic choice . that's an artistic choice. that's an understatement. and what do you think, nick? i mean, what's going on here? it's incredibly sick. and actually, the rabbit going on here? it's incredibly sick. keeps :tually, the rabbit going on here? it's incredibly sick. keeps going, the rabbit going on here? it's incredibly sick. keeps going deep. abbit going on here? it's incredibly sick. keeps going deep. there was hole keeps going deep. there was a document, wasn't a weird court document, wasn't there? there was the there? then there was the photographer who seemed to have a dodgy then of a dodgy history and then of taking similar photos. and taking very similar photos. and then called then the parent company called caring, weird like caring, they produced weird like sexual, disgusting mannequins. so basically as this unravels, we're going to get to that sort of part of the satanic elite running everything. this is all going to start with this ad campaign, hoping more . going to start with this ad campaign, hoping more. i'm campaign, hoping for more. i'm just being objective. the more you it, you'll you look into it, you'll eventually get to eventually you'll get to epstein's and on on

epstein's island and on and on like that. though? why like that. why, though? why would company, would a company, a fashion house, that connection house, think that the connection of bondage is of childhood and bondage is going to sell clothes because they're sickos and they're just testing what can get away testing what they can get away with arrogant with because they're arrogant sickos lewis you're going to be sickos? lewis you're going to be contrarian. it now. contrarian. i can sense it now. i agree with him completely. okay. that's contrarian okay. even that's contrarian because just because you're just contradicting said. yeah, because you're just c don'tiicting said. yeah, because you're just c don't i:ting said. yeah, because you're just cdon't i don't said. yeah, because you're just cdon't i don't i said. yeah, because you're just cdon't i don't i don'taid. yeah, because you're just cdon't i don't i don't id. yeah, because you're just cdon't i don't i don't i don'tih, i don't i don't i don't i don't agree with them. no, i think it's i think it's just the end result of this idea that things have to be pushed to the limit. we artists, no comedians and we as artists, no comedians and different guys put me in this that look there's a picture by the way of the go with doesn't bearin the way of the go with doesn't bear in bondage keep but look lewis i wouldn't care if you had a teddy bear with bondage gear dunng a teddy bear with bondage gear during a stand up show. i think i haven't. i think you've i haven't. you? i think you've worn bondage it's. it's worn bondage gear, so it's. it's where after was. that's where we get after was. that's the the no, but the that's the issue. no, but that's the thing like an adult show marked it as adult show show marked it as an adult show is thing but connecting it is one thing but connecting it with like i don't with children like this i don't understand they're thinking with children like this i don't underthani they're thinking with children like this i don't underthan to they're thinking with children like this i don't underthan to causezy're thinking with children like this i don't underthan to cause are thinking with children like this i don't underthan to cause a stir.1inking other than to cause a stir. i think what they're thinking is

to cause stir their fashion to cause a stir in their fashion thing. and fashion is about change. you know, the change. and, you know, the miniskirt wild. miniskirt was once wild. you know, these different things know, all these different things that step of the that people do every step of the way. i think forgive way. i don't i think forgive this. i don't think big this. i don't think it's a big it's really a big deal if they're caught, actually, like nick says, doing something with children organisation. children as an organisation. well, should well, of course they should be. they this. they shouldn't be put in this. this is like the miniskirt. this is not like the miniskirt. this is not like the miniskirt. this is not a testing of boundaries. and they're going to progress this being. progress to like this being. okay. not that's not okay. this is not that's not what saying, is it? yeah, what you're saying, is it? yeah, that what saying. i'll that is what i'm saying. i'll try i was like alex jones try to say i was like alex jones and i saved kanye the other night. yeah. and you're like, i know that what i'm saying. know that is what i'm saying. why you advocating why are you advocating that? i wasn't listening to what wasn't even listening to what you saying. exactly you were saying. exactly that. i would you would say it's probably you listen agreeing with listen before agreeing with child's play the game on tv, you're to end just you're going to end up just agreeing really horrible agreeing with really horrible things don't listen. things because you don't listen. yeah. he say? yeah. what did he just say? well, the well, it doesn't matter. the damage been done. your damage has been done. your career has been destroyed as a fine your analogy fine appliance. your own analogy in horrific. yeah, in saying it was horrific. yeah, it is horrific. i think it's horrific. we're going to be talking don't don't

talking about i don't i don't think concept of it think i think the concept of it is bad. but i with they were is bad. but i was with they were they actually weren't going to do horrible things to children. i the i don't know. that's not the point. haven't done that. point. they haven't done that. but the is that they're but the point is that they're still of endorsing this still sort of endorsing this sort imagery, which sort of imagery, which is which is dodgy and more to is very, very dodgy and more to the point, why are the celebrities not backing out kim kardashian? she's kardashian? she says she's standing wonder standing by them. i wonder if it's the millions of it's to do with the millions of dollars she gets well, dollars she gets from. well, exactly, she's she exactly, exactly. she's what she said she's waiting to see like l, said she's waiting to see like i, too, was horrified. but i'm waiting to see if they up my offer that's basically offer before. that's basically what was so horrified. what it is. i was so horrified. guys, totally with but guys, i'm totally with you, but i way they've responded i like the way they've responded to just to see. to it. i'm just waiting to see. just gauging money versus public. you need these extra minutes. understand minutes. i don't understand what i this either. i said about this either. they're doing child, in which case away. oh, they case you walk away. oh, they have judgement that have such poorjudgement that they've exploit, they've allowed child exploit, you and you know, stuff through and that's bad. going that's just as bad. we're going to move on a question now that's just as bad. we're going to m

he's now banned from he's now been banned from twitter. for a second twitter. this is for a second time. and was do with an time. and this was to do with an appearance alex jones's appearance on alex jones's infowars where said infowars podcast, where he said he and the. so he admired hitler and the. so use that actually use the phrase i like hitler. and then he tweeted, a star of david with a swastika in the centre and elon musk said that this is overstepping the boundaries, that this is now incitement to violence. lewis should kanye west be have been banned from twitter? well, we are i am a free speech absolutist. and every time something like this happens, you have it really pushes your limits. you think to yourself, no, that's going a bit too far. yeah. the fact is, no, he shouldn't be kicked off. i think what kanye said was think him what kanye said was the absolute best thing for the jews. be co—sign because it was so extreme that even democrats would have to speak out against it. so this is this is an interesting point, isn't it? you know, everyone is in agreement that the things he has said are terrible, anti—semitic. and the idea , like praising hitler is idea, like praising hitler is just beyond that. obviously

beyond pale. right. it goes beyond the pale. right. it goes without the fact without saying. but the fact that he said it, the fact that he's had a platform do this he's had a platform to do this means he's out there. we means that he's out there. we know he about this. know what he thinks about this. it's exposed a lot other it's also exposed a lot of other people who are sort of supporting him in doing this. so, know, censorship isn't so, you know, censorship isn't really to deal with really the way to deal with this. because he so this. no because he was so extreme . these beliefs that extreme. and these beliefs that they they were exposed as being distasteful for people. yeah. so that it can't see. everybody hates the jews. i hate the jews. everybody hates this. i should just add to here that lewis. lewis jewish . there is lewis is jewish. there is a jewish. yeah and it's not true. lewis but everyone hates jews. i don't hate the jews. well, there's something the matter with you . i mean, lewis is doing with you. i mean, lewis is doing it to get counsel. you are not kanye west, lewis . i'm to. it to get counsel. you are not kanye west, lewis. i'm to. i'm telling you what this is. you just see his success and his minions and you're trying to replicate. you think this the replicate. you think this is the way going i'm an way i'm going to do. i'm an attention so he's an attention seeker, so he's an attention seeker, so he's an attention but the thing attention seeker. but the thing about kanye west from a jewish person's of view, is person's point of view, this is the jews think. this the way jews always think. this

is i as i believe with is the way i as i believe with think a group, i can make think as a group, i can make this statement that we're this statement is that we're always is it best for always thinking is it best for the jews? is good for the the jews? is it good for the jews? it bad the jews jews? is it bad for the jews when kanye west said, i like hitler was okay, that was bad for the jews . when kanye says, for the jews. when kanye says, sorry . when kanye said that the sorry. when kanye said that the jews control hollywood . yes, jews control hollywood. yes, every jew knows that jews control hollywood like myself . control hollywood like myself. okay. well, i know the jews control hollywood because they don't call me right now. but but again, lewis being very contrarian. no, you could say it's contrarian. i think it's a decent point because the jews won control. hollywood they do control hollywood. they totally do. they don't control . i got to do. they don't control. i got to put a stop to this, nick. no no, i think you're being a bit too sensitive here. let's say the jews don't control hollywood. yeah, that's hyperbole . leverage yeah, that's hyperbole. leverage that they control hollywood , that they control hollywood, right? you said the jews control hollywood. the jews think this is bad for the jews. they're coming out of it. but when he

and he went a step further, everyone said, let him say what he wants to say because no one respects. okay, can you respects. okay, nick can you talk subject without talk about this subject without sort making things without sort of making things without doing any of that? yeah. yeah. this was lewis not wearing a mask over his head, like, kind of. well a of things to of. well a couple of things to answer question directly. answer the question directly. he shouldn't twitter shouldn't be banned from twitter because there's no care in policy for musk. the symbol someone sent me a saying, someone sent me a thing saying, actually, it's ancient symbol actually, it's an ancient symbol and what you think. and doesn't mean what you think. i because i'm not i don't know because i'm not trying to very distasteful. i don't know because i'm not tryi|certainly very distasteful. i don't know because i'm not tryi|certainly distasteful. ;teful. i don't know because i'm not tryi|certainly distasteful. bulil. it's certainly distasteful. but most violence most said, it incited violence and excuse for and that's his excuse for banning that's the banning him because that's the rule out. yeah, i don't rule he set out. yeah, i don't see how it incites. no, no, it probably doesn't meet the brandenburg for brandenburg threshold for the first definitely first time. it's most definitely not shouldn't be not right. he shouldn't be banned tweets. it's gross. banned from tweets. it's gross. and know, anti—semitic and you know, it's anti—semitic and it, but i don't and in favour of it, but i don't think should banned. and think it should be banned. and in general, about his comments, they were obviously they were distasteful. they were they he was trying to push was he was trying to push boundanes was he was trying to push boundaries some sort boundaries and create some sort of point, it of storm. at one point, it sounded like he was making a christian point because said, christian point because he said, i i love the

i love everyone. i love the surgeon performed surgery surgeon that performed surgery on which his on my mother, which killed his mother. like a radical mother. so it's like a radical love. then he ruined it with love. but then he ruined it with just a slew of kind of, you say standard holocaust denial stuff. you bit you don't think he's going a bit mad think like mad at? i think he's like a breakdown. don't buy into breakdown. i don't buy into that. lot of people say that. that. a lot of people say that. and i think it's a sort of concern trolling the oh, concern trolling the ecb. oh, he's just well, i he's just not. well, i personally think a lot of personally think he's a lot of us and rappers in us singers and rappers in america some of america have bought into some of this like the nation this stuff. it's like the nation of islam, louis farrakhan. so michael dodgy lyrics michael jackson had dodgy lyrics about michael jackson had dodgy lyrics ab0|said similarly, that's has said similarly, that's worse. i mean, he's pushed it further, but can't tell from further, but you can't tell from his the alex jones his behaviour. on the alex jones podcast, starts imitating podcast, he starts imitating benjamin netanyahu and fishing with milkshake. with a chocolate milkshake. and like that he's genuinely i think he's i think he's losing his mind. i think it's there is an it's all there is an exploitative to this. exploitative element to this. i mean putting him you mean in putting him on that, you know, supported know, he also supported balenciaga made a point balenciaga and he made a point that we lewis just bought him tonight, he was tonight, but he made a he was making point. nothing, lewis making a point. nothing, lewis says, seriously. says, which take seriously. you know, is a general cavalier know, this is a general cavalier look plenty know, this is a general cavalier lo

thing quick? this may be controversial, diane controversial, but when diane abbott bbc one, abbott praised mao on bbc one, now, it that differently ? now, is it that differently? it's you know, it's massive praise but in terms praise hitler, but but in terms of pure death toll, mao is actually worse. bbc one far more mainstream infowars . why is mainstream than infowars. why is that complete? it's that not complete? well, it's not she's not a competition, but she's more extreme than ying. i agree with you . and i just answer him with you. and i just answer him because think i think the because i think i think the thing about this guy, nick dixon, he's little too dixon, is he's a little too smart for own good . so he smart for his own good. so he actually says and you listen, there's these towns are intelligent, but no, he's wrong. he is quite kanye is has gone mad . yes, he's gone mad. and mad. yes, he's gone mad. and i know it because i've been there. okay. yeah when you lose your kids, you went through a horrible divorce from his wife. his wife just dumped him. he hasn't his kids. hasn't seen his four kids. it dnes hasn't seen his four kids. it dries his mind. it by that. but it's no medical, no . now that it's no medical, no. now that he's i've got to put it we've got to get more questions from the audience. i mean, i'm enjoying scrap, but do enjoying the scrap, but we do need he also in need to make also he also in august, went and went august, he went vegan and went vegan. you're start in vegan. you're going to start in the okay. well mr. the vegans now. okay. well mr.

hinduism and mental illness, i believe, is quite pro. ryan lewis , please. ryan goody lewis, please. ryan goody evening. we i just apologise so many people you know for more than moderate anyway go on the question is would you trust elon musk in your brain? no. so elon musk, this is the neuralink company. so he's trying to roll out the brain microchip , which out the brain microchip, which is going to be sort of implanted in people's brains. he says he's going to be ready in six months. and great. but look, and this is great. but look, it's to help people it's designed to help people living with paralysis to talk and again, that sort and walk again, all of that sort of but it's also of stuff. but it's also what they trans humanism. they call trans humanism. it's this that can this idea that we can effectively exacerbate our brain power through implants . a number power through implants. a number of monkeys have died during the clinical trial, so maybe that's that. but that's actually the monkeys are the least of my worries. the problem is him playing god and sending us into cyborg. well, i'm anti monkey death, he's doing death, but what he's doing is the using mouse the monkey was using the mouse with mind . and idea is with his mind. and the idea is if a quadriplegic or if you're a quadriplegic or something, be able to

something, you'll be able to operate mind, operate things with your mind, he than you have he said. better than if you have full your hands. that's full use of your hands. that's the . and the other goal, he the goal. and the other goal, he said, was, you're blind and said, was, if you're blind and have actually had sight, have never actually had sight, they able restore. they want to be able to restore. i forstall was i don't know if forstall was even because give you even right word because give you scieven even right word because give you sci even if you've never had it so goals are very noble. sci even if you've never had it so dangerals are very noble. sci even if you've never had it so danger is; are very noble. sci even if you've never had it so danger is elon very noble. sci even if you've never had it so danger is elon muskioble. up the danger is elon musk ends up controlling world his controlling the world with his mind. well, mind. that's obviously well, that's that sounds like exploitation. well mean exploitation. well yeah. i mean if a brain chip in if you have a brain or a chip in your controlled by your brain that's controlled by a is connected to a computer or is connected to a computer, you computer, what's to stop? you know, bill gates, i'd be absolutely terrified because it's like musk. it's musk, because i like musk. and has a bit free speech and he has a bit of free speech on twitter. more because i'm on twitter. i'm more because i'm controlling though . controlling my mind, though. there flag as well there is a red flag as well is if put your brain , if you put it into your brain, then this show would be improved because i think someone in the studio would be able to just, you know, control your accesses . that's what i want to happen . . that's what i want to happen. do you want it? yeah. you know what? i'd like someone to give, right? mean, it as a right? i mean, you said it as a joke, it's. i'd like someone joke, but it's. i'd like someone to control me. do you think i want to be this way? i like to have in this. i'd like

have a career in this. i'd like to but point is, is it to be. but the point is, is it is this. this what elon is about this. this is what elon musk comes up with musk does. he comes up with a kernel of an idea that kernel of idea, an idea that somebody come up with. somebody else has come up with. i mean, yes, he didn't invent this. invent this. he this. he didn't invent this. he didn't cars or the didn't invent the cars or the rocket digging rocket ships are digging tunnels, he's found way tunnels, but he's found a way loser. he's this is loser. he is the he's this is another ponzi scheme like tesla is. it's just a way of increasing the value of it to a point. and then he's just going to bail out. well, we'll see what happens. we've got more what happens. we've got one more question break. question before the break. and this who is this is from james. who is james? james. how james? hello, james. how are you? be you? so should posties be allowed to fly flags from their vans? yeah. so royal mail has banned its postman from flying england and wales flags on company vehicles during the world cup. and the firm said flags could cause vows between workers, pedestrians and road users . and they also claim that users. and they also claim that flags could blow off and become hazardous to other motorists. i mean, is a health and mean, there is a health and safety here, lewis, isn't safety issue here, lewis, isn't i just it just i mean, or is it just is it just a sort anti nationalist or a sort of anti nationalist or anti football? what what's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ball? what what's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ?ill? what what's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ? i.? what what's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ? i thinkit what's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ? i think it'shat's going a sort of anti nationalist or antthere ? i think it's just going on there? i think it's just looks stupid. i mean, you never

see like really smart, rich see like a really smart, rich person flag , but they person with a flag, but they would coming out of car would flag coming out of his car . you you'd have never . you know, you'd have never see. even of see. i can't even think of somebody like somebody who was like they epitomise this. everything that's country . that's good about this country. yep, that, but we're in that's good about this country. ye|we that, but we're in that's good about this country. ye|we have that, but we're in that's good about this country. ye|we have aniat, but we're in that's good about this country. ye|we have an audience.e're in that's good about this country. ye|we have an audience. well, it. we have an audience. well, that's only thing i hear. that's the only thing i hear. yeah. yeah yeah. salt of the earth. what postman earth. what about postman wearing? but is it not if wearing? yeah, but is it not if they flying the flags right and they flying the flags right and they deliver a house that is they deliver to a house that is anti isn't there anti nationalist, isn't there a kind conflict they're in kind of conflict then they're in the because it's the wrong country because it's the wrong country because it's the country. we've the flag of this country. we've got weird got this we've got this weird shame flag, but the shame about our flag, but the only that seems to have only country that seems to have it pretty much what western countries know countries might i don't know where we going to the worst where are we going to the worst in world for being ashamed in the world for being ashamed of it's to the point of like it's got to the point where only time you allow it where the only time you allow it is world and is during the world cup and now that's shrinking even that's shrinking to not even allowed it then they'll just get rid flag and tell you rid of the flag and tell you what. eu flag and what. just have the eu flag and then know, it's not then you know, it's not it's not that though, not that though, nick. it's not about flying the flag. it's you know, it's about flying the flag at if i, if at work. you know, if i, if i came here tonight an came here tonight draped in an england you would think england flag, you would think it was you

was weird, right? you don't really. road. i really. you're on the road. i mean, really work. i was mean, not really at work. i was just driving on the road. you don't like you're not coming in with to the office? with face paint to the office? i got the letters you know. got the letters lot, you know. i mean, not it's nonsense. mean, it's not it's nonsense. let an american let them fly. an american shouldn't be coming on this anyway. even in our anyway. why is he even in our country? say there's the country? let me say there's the point there. because. because i was to do a job that was invited in to do a job that no other british would no other british person would do. to have sex do. yes. which was to have sex with and that note, with my wife and on that note, to after the break, to the break, after the break, i'm free speech nation can we edit that record there is because it's like i've told you this before oh if that's wrong anything you say so sounds fun. you need a filter. i told you this. oh, okay . after the break, this. oh, okay. after the break, we're going to be discussing the news that a new bill aimed at preventing universities from cancelling controversial speakers has now been watered down. not good. see you in a few minutes .

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation , a new law aimed at nation, a new law aimed at preventing universities from cancelling controversial speakers has been watered down. the government has tabled amendments that mean universities would be less likely to face legal action from people who were cancelled. a study from the office for students found that nearly 200 speakers events were rejected speakers or events were rejected by english universities and other education providers other higher education providers in 2020 to 2021. so to discuss this, i'm joined by professor joe phoenix, who was driven out of her job at the open university after she was attacked by trans rights activists . she is now suing the activists. she is now suing the university, joe phoenix, welcome to the show. thank you very much. hello. we're going to start. i'd just like for you to tell happened to you at tell us what happened to you at the university what the open university and what action now taking? well action are you now taking? well it started fairly shortly after i arrived . i was made very aware i arrived. i was made very aware that my views were not suitable

to be expressed within the department and in the context in which i worked . and it all led which i worked. and it all led to a head . there were all sorts to a head. there were all sorts of things that happened along a three or four year time period , three or four year time period, but it all led to a head one myself, some john pike and a few other colleagues opened the gender critical research network at the open university and at that point it was just like big, huge red targets all over us, not just on our back, everywhere on us . and we got engulfed in on us. and we got engulfed in what can only be described as an absolute storm of harassment and, you know , you've been and, you know, you've been diagnosed with ptsd and all sorts of horrible things have happened to you. and did the university just not protect you from any of this ? no. at the from any of this? no. at the point they didn't, i had submitted a grievance. they grievance by the time i left in december. so this was like six months after i'd submitted the grievance . the university hadn't grievance. the university hadn't hadnt grievance. the university hadn't hadn't come to its conclusion , hadn't come to its conclusion, and they couldn't even give me a

date by which they would come to a conclusion. it wasn't that a conclusion. so it wasn't that they did nothing. they they they did nothing to follow. but i mean , do you know what i mean? mean, do you know what i mean? it's like i and i pled with them, quite frankly . you know, i them, quite frankly. you know, i pled because the thing that, you know, there was a whole thing going on within my you know, within the unit that i worked in. public storm that in. but that public storm that was taking down my name , you was taking down my name, you know, far and wide and straight across the university. so for me , it was really important for the university something the university to do something about letters , the about the public letters, the twitter was going twitter stuff that was going on from colleagues. to from my own colleagues. and to give me a sense what sort of give me a sense of what sort of things were happening to you. i mean, and also what it was that you said caused you had said that caused such animosity . right. what i said animosity. right. what i said that caused animosity was precisely nothing. quite literally , because i was silence literally, because i was silence that was the whole point . but that was the whole point. but what i had done, which is something slightly different, was that i had signed the two now infamous letters, the

kathleen stop and one to the guardian, one to the times. i had spoken her for wp uk , and at had spoken her for wp uk, and at that point that group was called a hate group by some of my colleagues because we know that that group is there to defend women's rights, particularly sex based rights . and i was based rights. and i was cancelled unlawfully at essex, so that was used as proof that i was indeed transphobic. and then i set up a gender critical research network and called it gender critical and that's that was that was my crimes. so basically one of these many examples of you never having said or done anything transphobic or hateful, but being accused of it nonetheless . and the accusation is taken as the proof. yeah, absolutely . the proof. yeah, absolutely. 100. now, of course, you know , i 100. now, of course, you know, i had talked, you know, in the corridors and people knew that i had a particular view about transgender prisoner placement policy. and that view is bread of a lifetime of doing work

around women and violence . so, around women and violence. so, you know, there we go. that's that's what had happened that for me. can we can we talk about this free speech, freedom of speech , bill? and i just want to speech, bill? and i just want to look a little bit to what's actually happening to me now. so as you know, as your listeners know, it's out there in the pubuc know, it's out there in the public domain . i've been public domain. i've been cancelled not once, but twice . i cancelled not once, but twice. i once unlawfully from essex. they have apologised and once not just cancelled but harassed and discriminated against them . and discriminated against them. and i'm now embroiled in an industrial and an industrial and employment tribunal as we all know. and it's a very , very know. and it's a very, very costly affair for me to take the open universe of a to a deployment tribunal. we have something like nearly 50 questions with lots of sub questions with lots of sub questions that the tribunal needs to address itself to. and that basically, like did all of these facts happen? you know, these facts happen? you know, these things that i claim happen, did they happen if they

did, were they tantamount to harassment? if they weren't harassment? if they weren't harassment and or were they tantamount to direct discrimination and if all of that happened, did this actually create an atmosphere of indirect sex discrimination , given that sex discrimination, given that more women are likely to have gender critical views and then, you know, was a victimised ? you know, was a victimised? because the one thing that i didn't mention was the grievance procedure was dropped more or less the week that i resigned from the open university. so it was a victimisation would the new government bill intended to defend the right of speakers on campus had it been inaugurated before all of this, would it have helped you know , it have helped you know, it wouldn't have helped me with essex at all. i mean, it might have.it essex at all. i mean, it might have. it might have. so i was never a fan of the free speech bill, because to me what the government did was completely fudge something they created a compliance complaints procedure by a regulator to try and strengthen the spine of

universities . but in what planet universities. but in what planet do we think that a compliance based regulator can deal with infringements of human rights? yeah, but now they're watering the bill down. they're saying, you know, unless every possible avenue is exhausted, then no one can take legal action . so this can take legal action. so this is actually quite serious. i mean , they've implemented a bill mean, they've implemented a bill and then they're taking the teeth it. yeah 100. so, teeth out of it. yeah 100. so, you know, now what situation i would be in if it happened now? well, after the bill is passed, if it happened, then i'd have to actually go through that compliance before i compliance procedure before i could get to the employment could even get to the employment tribunal . could even get to the employment tribunal. but here's the other thing you have show your thing you have to show your losses at the at the complaints complaint process rather than in a court. and i know from the experience that i've had that trying to establish that you actually need judges to hear this stuff because the law is both clear , but it also must be both clear, but it also must be implemented . and the compliance implemented. and the compliance complaints procedure of the

office for students hasn't got that expertise. it won't be able to do that. so in my mind, you know, the bill was always problematic, but taking the ability for us to go to court away from us has just made it horrendous. i mean, i'm, you know, i'm not glad i was harassed, but i'm glad i was harassed, but i'm glad i was harassed when i was and not next yeah harassed when i was and not next year. of course, it's so year. and of course, it's so important people like important that people like yourself stocker yourself and kathleen stocker drawing attention to what is actually happening it's actually happening because it's endemic , isn't it? mean, endemic, isn't it? i mean, that's problem it's that's the problem is it's everywhere. yeah, it is. and you know, really know, there's some really interesting stuff and interesting, sad stuff that's been the course been coming out over the course of year . there been coming out over the course of year. there are all of the last year. there are all sorts of minor cancellations that nobody hears about and can't be collected by the office for students. so those research grants that get you know can that ethics level i've heard that the ethics level i've heard now . of two researchers and one now. of two researchers and one phd student who following the publication of their search act to this have made complaints about ethics right now that's going to drag the academics down. they're all it does. when

i say drag it down, you get the punishment is the process, the processes, the punishment, and then all you end up with in the end of this is academics going , end of this is academics going, oh, this is way too dodgy . end of this is academics going, oh, this is way too dodgy. i'm not even going to speak about it because i don't want to become a controversial speaker and, appear on somebody else's risk all the time . you so much for all the time. you so much for coming in to talk to us about this. just quickly before you 90, this. just quickly before you go, how can people support you in terms raising money for in terms of raising money for this ? yeah, i'm a this this tribunal? yeah, i'm a long way. we've got another few more months. 11 more months. we've got 11 more legal bills . we've got 11 more legal bills. we've got 11 more legal bills. we are spending money because we have to do disclosures. all of that. if people go to that. if people could go to crowd justice and google, professor fee and acts , they'll professor fee and acts, they'll find my case . any donations find my case. any donations literally any donations make a huge difference, even if it's just £1. well it's good luck with it. and thank you very much for joining me today. with it. and thank you very much for joining me today . after the for joining me today. after the

break on free speech nation, we're going to be debating the royal racism row that saw 83 year old lady susan hussey resign. see you in 2 minutes.

welcome back to free speech nation. with me, andrew doyle . nation. with me, andrew doyle. later on in the show, i'm going to be turning agony uncle with the help of panel, to be turning agony uncle with the help of panel , schaefer the help of my panel, schaefer and nick dixon to help deal and nick dixon to help you deal with dilemmas so with your unfiltered dilemmas so please at please do email us at gbviews@gbnews.uk. we're going to do our best to answer your questions now. it's been another turbulent week for the royal family, a day before the trailer for meghan's new for harry and meghan's new netflix was released netflix documentary was released , a woman who worked for the royals. more 60 years royals. for more than 60 years resigned after she was accused of racism . lady susan hussey, of racism. lady susan hussey, who was lady in waiting for the late queen, quit after making

comments to ngozi fulani. we found it a domestic abuse charity for women and girls of african and caribbean heritage. lady hussey, who was 83 years old, has apologised. a spokesman for her godson, prince william, said racism has no place in our society. to discuss this , i'm society. to discuss this, i'm joined now by the actor and writer famine islander and the historian rafe edelman. welcome both . and . i want to come to you both. and. i want to come to you first. obviously, the statement , racism has no place in our society. we will all agree with. but was lady hussey being racist? i think that that would definitely in into it. if you ask someone where do they come from? if you asked me where i come response would be come from? my response would be straight i grew up the straight away. i grew up in the uk my parents from nigeria. uk. my parents are from nigeria. but think especially but i think especially someone of background , yes. of caribbean background, yes. someone doesn't access someone who doesn't access asking someone caribbean asking someone of caribbean background part are background which part africa are you the history of you from when the history of the. reason she doesn't know the. the reason she doesn't know part of africa from is the part of africa she's from is the specific history this country specific history of this country going to africa. yes. taking to

her the caribbean and removing part of her heritage from her and not being happy with the response she gives when she says, oh, i'm from brixton, i'm a citizen. it's the insistence. yes it is not accepting the answer insisting you answer and insisting that you give response that she give the response that she wants, that is more wants, that is that is more sinister. i saw that transcript. and yes , it was asked again and and yes, it was asked again and again and again. exactly again. so would that if it so you would you feel that if it was just one question, where are you from? that would have been funny asked me where i'm funny if you asked me where i'm from. . and if you from. that's fine. and if you even if you ask me where your parents from, i can say to you, actually, i feel like i'm british. i don't need to tell you. or i can tell you, my friends nigeria. neither of friends from nigeria. neither of those inherently friends from nigeria. neither of those all inherently friends from nigeria. neither of those all and inherently friends from nigeria. neither of those all and nothing'sy racist and all and nothing's rude about that. but england is supposed be country where supposed to be a country where politeness is and cues politeness is and social cues are understood . yes. and if are understood. yes. and if someone gives you answer and someone gives you an answer and you kind of badger you continue to kind of badger them, for them to tell you no, where are your people from? what's what's your ethnicity? what's what's your ethnicity? what . and then eventually, what would. and then eventually, all going be it's going all i'm going to be it's going to be difficult to get you to

say what want you to say say what i want you to say is what said. that was the what she said. and that was the implication think that's implication feel. i think that's what expressly what she said. she expressly said, can tell it's going to said, i can tell it's going to be you to say be difficult to get you to say where from. i want to where you're from. i want to bnng where you're from. i want to bring you in on that point. so the she that, you the fact she said that, you know, i can this is going the fact she said that, you kn be i can this is going the fact she said that, you kn be difficult, this is going the fact she said that, you kn be difficult, as1is is going the fact she said that, you kn be difficult, as femi going the fact she said that, you kn be difficult, as femi points to be difficult, as femi points out, persistent questioning. do you that that you do you appreciate that that could interpret it could be reasonably interpret it as approach? if as a racist approach? if you if you want the bad faith you want to put the bad faith intention somebody has intention on to somebody who has basically served in the royal family years without ever family for 60 years without ever having accusation of having had an accusation of racism and i think it is quite racism. and i think it is quite telling, actually that first telling, actually that the first time has time that this accusation has ansen time that this accusation has arisen who we arisen is from somebody who we know full well regards the monarchy as being institutionally racist, who believes that meghan's in—laws, the , have committed the royal family, have committed domestic against her. domestic violence against her. so is a lady who's drenched so this is a lady who's drenched already of race already and the politics of race and defence. and so in that context, i can see why she would deliberately choose or why her own biases would her own biases would lead her to misinterpret perfectly misinterpret a perfectly innocuous by an innocuous statement made by an elderly person. i've been asked hundreds times by old people, elderly person. i've been asked hun know, times by old people, elderly person. i've been asked hun know, wheres by old people, elderly person. i've been asked hun know, where are old people, elderly person. i've been asked hun know, where are you people, elderly person. i've been asked hun know, where are you from? a, you know, where are you from? i've and said, i'm i've never around and said, i'm from you bigots.

from west london, you bigots. i just understood just automatically understood that people naturally that people are naturally cunous. that people are naturally curious . the role of the lady in curious. the role of the lady in waiting lady household waiting a lady the household is actually obtain information actually to obtain information on who are there . so when on people who are there. so when the member of the royal family attends, introduce attends, they can then introduce them information . now, them with that information. now, this headley, is this lady, marlene headley, is her birth name. she has chosen to identify as african. she has engaged in, i say , some engaged in, i would say, some degree of cultural appropriation by taking a name that wasn't hers a culture which hers from a culture which she doesn't she comes doesn't know where she comes from and occasion where from and is an occasion where you are allowed wear you actually are allowed to wear national you arrive national dress. so if you arrive in african wearing wearing in african dress wearing wearing a name, that's what africa is obviously , most people that you obviously, most people that you are of that heritage are very proud of that heritage and naturally be and that would naturally be something royal something given the royal family's africa , family's connections to africa, something a nation which would want can i put want to know about. can i put that so, do you that to femi? so, femi, do you accept you know, accept that? you know, apparently she was wearing a traditional african dress. and, apparently she was wearing a tracourse, african dress. and, apparently she was wearing a tracourse, as rican dress. and, apparently she was wearing a tracourse, as then dress. and, apparently she was wearing a tracourse, as the right;s. and, apparently she was wearing a tracourse, as the right points, of course, as the right points out, she has a very clear interest in her heritage and that if the lady in waiting job is to find information for the royals, is that not a fair thing

to be a bit more persistent in the this persistence? and then there's like if i were to ask you now, where are you from? i mean, i'm at you and you mean, i'm looking at you and you don't like like all don't look like you're like all of necessarily of your heritage is necessarily anglo—saxon. i could away anglo—saxon. i could ask away from i'm the from you could say i'm from the uk , i probably would say you uk, i probably would say you said say brooke when did said do you say brooke when did you west you say west london. west london. happy with london. okay, i'm not happy with that. me where you that. please tell me where you parents from. tell me parents are from. please tell me what from . what your ancestors are from. great. you can say this is the lady made who's lady who made me who? who's happy discuss africa at the happy to discuss africa at the drop normally. and the drop of a hat normally. and the one she's become one occasion when she's become as bashful has been in this one scenario. we don't want to start to somebody who to wonder why somebody who actually the royal actually regards the royal family and who family is being racist and who runs domestic charity runs a domestic abuse charity and has accused royal family and has accused the royal family have reasons for that. why would they would go they actually why would she go to palace if she to buckingham palace if she regards i don't regards this place? i don't watch any of i mean , there's not watch any of i mean, there's not a stretch of the imagination . i a stretch of the imagination. i mean, philip went to mean, prince philip went to papua and asked papua new guinea and asked people , you're happy to have not people, you're happy to have not been you've not been eaten yet . been you've not been eaten yet. he has a load of students. he

went to china and he said, if you here too long, will you stay here too long, you will go slitty eyes . he go back with slitty eyes. he went to australia and asked people, aboriginal people, are they spears they still through spears based on mother ? official on the queen's mother? official diarist not to do with lady hussey. i'm just. i'm to go. you said the royal and the said the royal family and the idea of in the royal family the queen's mother known to have queen's mother was known to have gone official gone to africa. her official diarists roger sir diarists, roger stone, sir roy stone , said that when she had to stone, said that when she had to hide of what she said hide bits of what she said because were because they were too controversial , she the controversial, she went to the people papua new country to people of papua new country to prince philip it was prince philip as a god. it was king george. the third actually wrote essay condemning wrote an essay condemning slavery. think that the slavery. do you think that the institution goes institution which goes around the of invading is really the world of invading is really poor venerate them as a poor to venerate them as a i think it's high time we weren't here. you very here. can i just ask you very quickly, it the case, though, quickly, is it the case, though, that generational that there is a generational aspect mentioned aspect here? you've mentioned some prince some examples and say prince philip, the queen mother, and now common now lady hussey, the common feature here is that they're older precisely. older people. precisely. but i don't buy argument of the don't buy this argument of the old racist grandma gets off because she's old. i think you've they come from a period when britain actively an empire

and where racism was more prominent. so if someone comes from a time where racism is more prominent, that doesn't mean that they can't educate themselves as as as times will and as times change. what do you make? i mean, how can you call this lady racist? i mean, people are acting as if she's just written the forward to a new edition mein kampf or edition of mein kampf or something, you know, or that's she's act for kanye she's the warm up act for kanye west. this is a lady who west. she is. this is a lady who is trying to do her job. is simply trying to do herjob. and just think it's very and i just think it's very interesting after is the interesting that after 60 is the only person called only person who has called racism. somebody who racism. here is somebody who regards family as regards the royal family as institutionally there's regards the royal family as inclearernally there's regards the royal family as inclearer gender there's regards the royal family as inclearer gender here. here's regards the royal family as inclearer gender here. and's regards the royal family as inclearer gender here. and it a clearer gender here. and it happens on the very week , the happens on the very week, at the very the and very moment that the prince and princess in america princess of wales are in america . in the very week that we have a netflix for and a netflix trailer for harry and meghan, it's all very convenient and you think and very neat. but do you think the family shouldn't have the royal family shouldn't have put resign put pressure on her to resign then? think can understand then? i think i can understand why that, because, why they did that, because, of course the political implications were huge. this overshadowed trip to overshadowed much of the trip to boston of the prince and boston of the of the prince and princess of wales. i think princess of wales. yes. i think it wrong decision, but

it was the wrong decision, but i can fully understand was. can fully understand why it was. do for me that, do ever worry that for me that, you these you know, sometimes with these sort cancellations, sort of cancellations, when people feel obliged to resign or push that there's push to resign, that there's a lack know, lack of forgiveness, you know, that do mistakes, that people do make mistakes, people that people do misspeak, and that there bit more there should be a bit more tolerance i mean, i'm tolerance for that i mean, i'm pretty she herself pretty sure that she herself said didn't she didn't said that she didn't she didn't feel that the lady who was he needed to resign and no one asked her to resign . the royal asked her to resign. the royal family, the royals. this has come family, but come from the royal family, but this from royal this has come from the royal family, been family, as has just been said for because within for a reason because it's within a wider context of a lot of other stuff coming out about the royal family, a member of the royal family basically leaving the family , saying that a the royal family, saying that a large part of reason he's large part of the reason he's leaving his his wife leaving is because his his wife was suffering racism at the hands of the and we can all deny that and say it didn't happen. but i mean, if prince harry is saying member the saying that a member of the central royal family is expressing the expressing concerns over the skin colour of his daughter, then provides an then that provides an environment in which when another thing pops up, someone feels like they might have to resign. we do have to go to a

break. but very quickly, final thought to on meghan's thought to you on this? meghan's no parks more jussie no rosa parks is more jussie smollett anything else, smollett than anything else, i would that would say. okay. well, on that note, going have to go note, we're going to have to go to and going to be to a break and we're going to be discussing museum that discussing later the museum that has flagship has closed its flagship exhibition it exhibition over claims that it was and ablest. was racist, sexist and ablest. don't go away .

welcome back to free speech nation. a museum has closed its flagship exhibition after bosses decided it was racist, sexist and ablest. the medicine man exhibition at the wellcome trust in london was opened in two thousand and seven and showed off items collected by the pharmaceutical entrepreneur sir henry . but a pharmaceutical entrepreneur sir henry. but a display pharmaceutical entrepreneur sir henry . but a display that henry. but a display that included items such as napoleon's toothbrush and florence nightingale slippers has now been shut. joining me to

discuss this is dr. joanna williams, who's the head of education and culture at policy exchange. during our thanks for joining me tonight. exchange. during our thanks for joining me tonight . can i ask joining me tonight. can i ask you about this ? the wellcome you about this? the wellcome collection, i've seen this collection. an impressive collection. it's an impressive it's impressive collection it's an impressive collection and an that perhaps and a an exhibit that perhaps people be able see. people should be able to see. isn't strange? we've isn't it strange? i mean, we've heard of cancellations in the past, isn't it odd for past, but isn't it odd for a museum cancel itself ? yeah, museum to cancel itself? yeah, absolutely. and anybody who followed the twitter prelude , followed the twitter prelude, the cancellation will, know that they kicked off the announcement and that they were going to close down the exhibition by saying , we've been asking saying, we've been asking ourselves what the point you just can't think of a more kind of philistine or nihilistic question for museum curators to be asking themselves as teachers talking about education, asking themselves, what's the point ? themselves, what's the point? you think if you haven't got an instinct that you think the past is worth preserving, that there's some thing interesting that you think might inspire or

fascinate people who come to see the exhibition . then, you know, the exhibition. then, you know, that's what you're left with asking yourself, what's the point. but i think it just really shows that complete ignorance and a real kind of dangerous level of philistinism for the future of humanity, really , it's not in safe hands really, it's not in safe hands with the likes of them. why is it always the case that it seems to be these custodians knowledge and tradition and history that are the first to sort of decry it? i mean, you think they go into another profession, right ? into another profession, right? yeah, absolutely. i mean, i think there's a couple of things that lie behind it. one that strikes me is, is actually not just content, but the first is contempt for past, just content, but the first is contempt for past , that they contempt for the past, that they judge the past by the standards of they find it's of today and they find it's wanting . i mean, funnily enough, wanting. i mean, funnily enough, people woke in the people weren't as woke in the past they now . and the past as they are now. and the museum curator is. they can't cope with that fact . and so they cope with that fact. and so they close it down. but i think the other side of that coin is that this contempt this complete contempt for people the present day with people in the present day with the people be going to the people who might be going to

museums . i the people who might be going to museums. i that's the museums. and i think that's the kind of cancellation, the south cancellation , if you like, is cancellation, if you like, is dnven cancellation, if you like, is driven by this real fear that members the public might go members of the public might go and exhibition and and see this exhibition and actually draw their own conclusion and in so doing, draw the wrong conclusions . i mean, i the wrong conclusions. i mean, i think we've all got used to going around museums and art galleries nowadays and seeing kind acres and acres of text kind of acres and acres of text that you're expected to plough your way through these kind of explanations that tell us everything that's bad and wrong and racist and sexist and ableist and all the rest of it about what we're about to say. and i think they just kind of worry that if the general public are let loose on looking at florence nightingale slippers or these exhibits from the past that we're going come away with the wrong conclusions and become kind of racist and sexist people. so it's basically two issues.i people. so it's basically two issues. i mean, for one thing, they they seem to think that they they seem to think that they seem to have an issue with things from the which is things from the past, which is odd for who are running odd for people who are running a museum you some some

museum that, you know, some some of the artefacts will be old. but as you this but as you say, this this paternalistic the paternalistic idea that the public, along they public, they come along and they will what sort of will be sort of what sort of suddenly radicalised into extreme 19th century racism if they see toothbrush . i mean, they see a toothbrush. i mean, is what they say ? it seems is that what they say? it seems to me that that's the only conclusion you can draw from this, that there is contempt for the public . and like i say, the public. and like i say, they've tried to contextualise things and i think i think if this was just the trust, you know, you would perhaps shrug our shoulders and say, well, this is perhaps just just just a one off. but the fact is, we're this museums up down the this in museums up and down the country, just museums as country, not just museums as well, but but statues in public square in art galleries, in theatres and everywhere where there's something that comes from the past that is this kind of real problem monetising of it. and like i said, this is this is just this inability to be able to say, well, they did things differently in the past and it still interest and this is stuff we can learn from it

today. and it's not just museum curators , it's also librarians. curators, it's also librarians. you know, we've had the working colonies in group at the british library castigating itself for all these texts by people who have tenuous connections the have tenuous connections to the slave even that slave trade, even saying that the shape of the main building is problematic it is problematic because it resembles a battleship and therefore militaristic. is therefore is militaristic. is it? can we not anything about it? can we not do anything about this thing? i mean, this kind of thing? i mean, this strikes very infantile. it strikes me as very infantile. it strikes me as very infantile. it strikes me as very infantile. it strikes me that these people shouldn't jobs . strikes me that these people shouldn't jobs. is shouldn't be in these jobs. is there way to sort of i don't there no way to sort of i don't want to use the word, but yeah, i purge. the museums and i will purge. the museums and libraries ideologues , libraries of these ideologues, well, you would hope so. i mean, unfortunately , these are the unfortunately, these are the people who are in charge of our cultural institutions nowadays . cultural institutions nowadays. i mean, i've termed the vandals in the article i wrote about this on spike, that they are cultural vandals and they shouldn't be let within a mile of a museum, far as i'm of a museum, as far as i'm concerned , because show concerned, because they show absolutely no respect for the exhibits. mean , the opposite. exhibits. i mean, the opposite. they they show up to disdain for the exhibits and the books, the artefacts that they're expected to preserve. you know,

to be preserve. and you know, i would love to you to completely have an overhaul, a page , as you have an overhaul, a page, as you say, and put people in charge who actually do have a modicum of avarice backed for the exhibits. this supposed to be displaying, but, you exhibits. this supposed to be displaying, but , you know, exhibits. this supposed to be displaying, but, you know, i think so tragic for think this is so tragic for humanity. it's all of our loss that this is taking place because we could learn from these exhibits . i don't think these exhibits. i don't think people look at objects in the past and come away thinking racist thoughts . you know, we're racist thoughts. you know, we're not that stupid . people are far not that stupid. people are far more intelligent than curators. give us credit for. and i do worry about what is the potential loss of knowledge of humanity's collective knowledge that we've built up over thousands of years , that we're thousands of years, that we're now depriving future generations of having access to what what might people learn and take away from these exhibits that were not being able to do anymore ? not being able to do anymore? yeah, it does sound very much like it's a hopeless situation , like it's a hopeless situation, but with any luck, things will begin to change. joanna williams, thank much for

williams, thank you so much for joining appreciate joining me tonight. i appreciate my . and there's lots more to my. and there's lots more to come between now and 9:00. by the way, you should check out joanna williams's book, how woke won. it will give you a fascinating background into how all of this started. but in a few minutes, i'm going to be giving my view on elon musk's decision to private documents from twitter , which apparently from twitter, which apparently show collusion , politicians and show collusion, politicians and the social media giant and we'll also be speaking later on to a lawyer who is here to discuss free speech issues in the uk. so we'll see you straight after this break .

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me, andrew doyle. plenty more still to come , 9:00.

plenty more still to come, 9:00. but let's get a news update first from ray edison . thanks, first from ray edison. thanks, andrew . first from ray edison. thanks, andrew. here's first from ray edison. thanks, andrew . here's the latest from andrew. here's the latest from the gb newsroom. england is currently beating senegal two nil in their world cup knockout game in qatar. midfielderjordan henderson scored the first goal in the 38th minute with an assist from jude bellingham. captain harry kane then knocked in one in the second in the dying minutes. the first half, his first of the tournament, senegal will be keen to make better use of some decent chances as the second half gets underway. the winners will take on quarterfinal on france in the quarter final on france in the quarter final on saturday. the rmt union rejected an 8% pay offer aimed at preventing further strikes this month. the rail delivery group had also offered to guarantee there would be no compose three redundancies before april 20, 24. however, the uk's biggest rail workers union said the deal wouldn't have protected its members working conditions and would lead to unsafe practises the

health secretary is being urged to stop grandstand , dig and make to stop grandstand, dig and make a deal with unions ahead of nhs strikes this month . call by strikes this month. call by former health secretary steven doyle comes as military personnel prepare to cover striking public sector workers around 2000 troops, civil servants and other government volunteers are being trained to help limit disruption during the festive period , the head of the festive period, the head of the police watchdog has been forced to resign over an historical allegation . it's now emerged allegation. it's now emerged that michael lockwood , who has that michael lockwood, who has been the director general of the independent office for police conduct since 2018, is facing a criminal investigation . the home criminal investigation. the home secretary says she told him to quit or face immediate suspense even after learning about the probe . when he announced his probe. when he announced his resignation on friday, he said it was the personal and domestic reasons and preparations are well underway now for king charles's current mission, which takes place in just 150 days. the st edward's has now been removed from the tower of london

to be resized . its relocation to be resized. its relocation was kept secret until it was safely delivered. the ceremony on may the sixth is expected to be much smaller than the late queen's coronation. around 2000 guests are expected. instead of 8000 on tv, online and on disney plus radio, this is gb news. back now to free speech nation . back now to free speech nation. one of the biggest news stories of the year has gone unreported in most major media outlets . a in most major media outlets. a couple of days ago, elon musk released files from twitter via the journalist matt taibbi, which detailed the way in which the company had censored an article by the new york post in the run up to the last election. hunter biden's laptop had been left at a computer shop and its owner had never returned to collect it. the contents were

leaked to the new york post and it contained materials, which suggested that joe biden may have been involved in his son hunter's various dealings with foreign businessmen. this was potentially catastrophic, of course, for joe potentially catastrophic, of course, forjoe biden's course, for joe biden's presidential campaign. what presidential campaign. and what did do ? it locked the presidential campaign. and what did york do ? it locked the presidential campaign. and what did york post? it locked the presidential campaign. and what did york post out locked the presidential campaign. and what did york post out of:ked the presidential campaign. and what did york post out of its! the presidential campaign. and what did york post out of its account new york post out of its account and prevented any users on the platform from sharing the article, even in private messages. twitter claimed . it messages. twitter claimed. it was doing this because the story might have been using hacked material, but that was pure speculation. turned out to be false. the twitter files released by elon musk are significant because they show that not only did senior staff at twitter understand that they had no grounds to censor the story, but that they were routinely since hearing accounts on the instructions of the democratic party. so here's an example of a leaked email in which one twitter executive lists tweets that have been flagged by the democrats . and flagged by the democrats. and then underneath, as you can see , another executive simply writes, handle these . this is

writes, handle these. this is chilling stuff . apparently, both chilling stuff. apparently, both the trump and biden campaign teams were contacting to have tweets deleted at their behest. but as the staff at twitter were overwhelmingly in support of the democrats, it meant that it was tweets that were critical of biden that were most commonly deleted . of course, we've all deleted. of course, we've all known for a long time that big tech has a clear political bias and that this has manifested in its censorship practises but this clear evidence collusion between politicians and twitter is shocking to see . surely this is shocking to see. surely this should be front page news in all papers . it should be the lead papers. it should be the lead story on the bbc , the new york story on the bbc, the new york times, the washington post, msnbc and all the other major media outlets. but go the websites. see for yourself . it's websites. see for yourself. it's just not that . almost as though just not that. almost as though it never happened. they tried to make the hunter biden laptop story go away and now they want to stop you finding out how they did it . so we to stop you finding out how they did it. so we need to ask some questions. why would journalists ignore one of the biggest

stories of the week ? and the stories of the week? and the answer is that many media outlets been totally outlets have been totally captured that captured by an ideology that prioritises what is convenient over what is true . they see over what is true. they see themselves not as journalists who must details world who must convey details of world events to the public in an impartial manner. events to the public in an impartial manner . but they see impartial manner. but they see themselves activists who must themselves as activists who must release only if the release information only if the pubuc release information only if the public can be trusted to hear it. as the journalist barry weiss put it in her resignation letter the new times, letter from the new york times, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps a specially at this paper that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else . this new inform everyone else. this new religion that now predominates in our media is a tricky one to resist, because, like the mediaeval church that punished anyone who tried to translate the bible into the vernacular, the bible into the vernacular, the disciples of this new religion play language games in order to conceal the truth from the we don't even know the people. we don't even know what call this ideology. we what to call this ideology. we can accurately describe it as an

identity obsessed , anti—liberal, identity obsessed, anti—liberal, authoritarian post modernist movement that rejects evidence, led and demands led analysis and demands censorship of those who dissent. that's of a mouthful. many that's a bit of a mouthful. many of call it woke for short, of us call it woke for short, but they've done a very good job of problematise term too, of problematise that term too, and it's just a and pretending that it's just a snarl word invented the right snarl word invented by the right . but whatever we want to call it, the media is largely in its thrall. they've become more interested promoting their interested in promoting their own narratives. and if the truth contradicts those narratives , contradicts those narratives, then the truth either then the truth is either misrepresent it or ignored . and misrepresent it or ignored. and those branches of the mainstream media that are now activists in all but name they're absolutely furious with the musk. they're even trying to suggest that the revelations twitter's revelations about twitter's collusion the democrats is collusion with the democrats is not newsworthy to one not newsworthy. to give one example many here, senior example out of many here, senior reporter at nbc news ben collins, he says imagine throwing it all away to do pr work for the richest person in the world. that's right. nothing to see here. should we shouldn't be publishing this leaked information because elon musk is

rich. so why is it that these journalists are afraid of the pubuc journalists are afraid of the public knowing the truth? only the other day, the new york times reported on researchers claim that there has been an unprecedented rise in hate speech on twitter. but that's not true . the stats released not true. the stats released from twitter itself shows that this is not the case. i mean, perhaps part of the problem is no one can agree on what hate speech means. as many people have pointed out before, have pointed out here before, what really means is what hate speech really means is speech.i what hate speech really means is speech. i hate and it's just a term that is used to justify censorship. mean , we've even censorship. i mean, we've even had feminists who believe in biological accused of biological sex, accused of committing stochastic terrorism for expressing a view that vast majority of people share . so in majority of people share. so in this new culture war, we have to develop the skill of being able to see through these word games that commentators in the media like to play. it's not as easy as it sounds because the biggest overreaction to date since in a mask took over twitter was probably this one from the independent. ran with r.i.p. twitter dead at the hands of

elon musk. i mean, they really are starting to sound like old testament prophets of doom. they may as well have . the end is may as well have. the end is nigh their headlines. may as well have. the end is nigh their headlines . when nigh in their headlines. when they elon musk is they claim that elon musk is allowing hateful and bigoted content thrive . twitter. but content to thrive. twitter. but all happened is that musk all that's happened is that musk has numerous accounts. has restored numerous accounts. he did not break any laws , he did not break any laws, merely expressed opinions that silicon valley disapprove of. he's trying, in other words, to recreate what twitter was originally meant to be a public square free speech was the square where free speech was the guiding principle. when you see celebrities and commentators bleating about how twitter has a hateful cesspit or dramatically deleting their accounts making sure to announce it first, of course, just to get that final dopamine hit of like tweets and validation from their fans , it's validation from their fans, it's quite clear that they're angry because musk won't censor their political opponents any more . political opponents any more. they liked the old twitter where conversations about sensitive issues were stifled, where feminists were censored for pointing out that there are differences between men and women. where satirical accounts were suspended if they mocked

wrong targets. and where politics fans could send a few emails and get the tweets they didn't like. delete it. always remember that the culture war isn't about left versus right. it's about those support liberty versus , those who support versus, those who support authoritarianism . and so musk is authoritarianism. and so musk is to be praised for his efforts to create a politically neutral site where everyone gets to have a voice. those authorities , a voice. those authorities, koreans who work in the media, want to control the narrative, to control off very understanding of reality . so we understanding of reality. so we can expect a lot more of these hit pieces against musk and the new twitter. we can expect them to lie and smear and ignore inconvenient facts . but while inconvenient facts. but while musk is in charge , at least musk is in charge, at least there's a chance that the truth will out . and after the break on will out. and after the break on free speech nation, i'm going to whether the bbc should be producing content to appeal to working class people. see you in 3 minutes .

oh, i'm simon evans. oh, i'm simon evans . join me on oh, i'm simon evans. join me on gb news for headliners 11 pm, where i'll be joined by two of the country's top comedians as we take a look at tomorrow's newspapers tonight. if it's a big we'll be covering it, i guarantee . but we'll also have guarantee. but we'll also have some fun along the way. that's gb news headliners 11 pm. we won't put you to sleep. unlike some of the other people review shows out there to join us. 11 pm. seven nights a week . p.m. seven nights a week. welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation . and so i was speaking nation. and so i was speaking before the break about elon musk releasing the twitter files, which to implicate various politicians as colluding with the social media giant in order to have certain tweets censored

. nick it's pretty shocking stuff, more shocking, stuff, but what's more shocking, surely, one's surely, is that no one's reporting that is that is reporting on it. that is that is a part of it. and musk has a big part of it. and musk has pointed out that the mainstream media irrelevant of how media is irrelevant of how slowly they move apart from the fact they deliberately ignore certain stories they're just wanting. story. wanting. today, the apple story. elon with apple. elon musk at war with apple. he's already been he's like, that's already been resolved. behind. so resolved. you're way behind. so it's going make it's what is going to make mainstream media perhaps irrelevant. they mainstream media perhaps irrelet01t. they mainstream media perhaps irreleto ignore they mainstream media perhaps irreleto ignore him? they he want to ignore him? because he is a massive threat. and it's funny that matt taibbi was being accused doing for richest accused of doing for the richest man world and. he hit man in the world and. he hit back. well, you've all been too pr fbiand back. well, you've all been too pr fbi and all these, pr for the fbi and all these, you richest you know, the richest authorities yeah authorities and so on. so, yeah , well, the one that disturbed me most was the caylee mcenany. obviously, the press obviously, she was the press secretary the white at secretary of the white house at a retweeted the a time. and she retweeted the new post and they said, oh, new york post and they said, oh, we're take this down. we're going to take this down. we're going to call hacked we're going to call it hacked materials, made materials, completely made up. and all scrambling in and they were all scrambling in the for the emails, looking for a reason. looked for a reason reason. they looked for a reason to one. to cancel and they find one. they say, oh, it's safety something, it's hacked videos. they it and they they want to censor it and they find justified. now we find that justified. so now we know leaked emails know from these leaked emails that at the time

that they knew at the time they had just they knew at the had no just if they knew at the time. gets some time. and then it gets to some of the higher up people not going bit of a problem guys going bit of a problem this guys and on from the and even so on from the democrats messaged said democrats messaged them and said isn't speech here isn't there a speech issue here and even really know and they didn't even really know what meant because so what she meant because that's so in talk this vigilante in talk to this vigilante person who's like no who's just like she's like oh no it's terms it's gets under our terms conditions i'm conditions like no, no, i'm talking about free speech in america. y lewis i mean, you're an have explain an american. you have to explain to americans are to me, so many americans are afraid speech. i mean, afraid of free speech. i mean, got a first amendment of something. i don't think americans free americans are afraid of free speech. the left wing speech. a lot of the left wing journalists who have about journalists who have been about elon terrified elon musk seem to be terrified that people that he's allowing people of different speak different opinions to speak because you said because of and i know you said it than i say it differently than i would say it differently than i would say it there two camps and it is. there are two camps and they can't they don't mix they they can't they don't mix anymore. like oil anymore. this like oil, like oil and water and have to be banned. the of left to be the ideas of left have to be protected. situation is bad protected. this situation is bad it not as bad as you're it is not as bad as you're making it. really bad. it making it. it is really bad. it is pretty bad. now, it would be worse united states worse if the united states government that law enforcement organisations colluded with joe biden. well the dnc to get well let's wait and see because

apparently elon musk is releasing more the fact they suppressed, as you probably know, the they suppressed the hunter biden laptop influence people voting and that's indication that they would have voted and we would voted the other way and we would have different have a different president because that because they suppressed that story election story potentially election interference. and interference. and that's and that's well, it's not election interference unless it's a private organisation working with the dnc and that's to suppress stories that might be unfavourable to. why not. yes, i'm against that. i think that's horrific. but at the same time, it's not illegal. horrific. but at the same time, it's not illegal . and it's it's not illegal. and it's basically it's and we've all been read pel. no, no, no. elon musk has pointed that it's not illegal for them to censor whatever they want. he's pointing out that the collusion actually the collusion actually is. yeah, the collusion will, is. anyway, will, be that it is. anyway, we've move to get some we've got to move to get some questions from audience. we questions from the audience. we got here from where got a question here from where is andre. can poor is guy. hi, andre. can poor people content on people handle heavy content on the bbc thinks is a bbc is going to change its television budget to change its television budget to try and make light to dramas and comedies in the belief

they're going to appeal to more people from poorer. and the bbc also said that it would try to attract from socio attract viewers from lower socio economic sports economic groups by making sports documentaries show . so documentaries and crime show. so are poor people just a bit stupid then ? it's just it's so stupid then? it's just it's so offensive. is it because if go back to the grammar schools, which were cruelly taken away from us, people like my dad was from us, people like my dad was from a poor background, but he was to to grammar was able to go to a grammar school. look at school. and if you look at historically, people from grammar schools did than grammar schools did better than people posh paying people at the posh paying schools. poor schools. this idea that poor people or people less money, i just it's completely wrong just think it's completely wrong . being patronising . it's the bbc being patronising because don't appeal because they they don't appeal to parts of the country to large parts of the country because and because they despise them and all yeah is the all their views. yeah is the problem louis. i mean problem isn't it louis. i mean the basically looking the bbc basically looking down on need to on poor people. oh, we need to cater them because they're cater to them because they're then they then the plebs, you know, they can't handle any sophisticated ideas. but bbc and as i've ideas. no but bbc and as i've said before on this platform form is the greatest source of evil in this country. form is the greatest source of evil in this country . and and, evil in this country. and and, and you're on the right. it shouldn't be up to the state

broadcaster to sitting there saying, how can we get more people watch our programme? it should be the programme it should be the programme it should be. instead actually based on what the people it shouldn't be successful guys up top looking down on the people and you never disappoint you know when comes to hyperbole you're always they said the most hyperbole is to say that the biggest source of evil. well, maybe the queen royal maybe the queen maybe the royal family as, say, let's family is as big as, say, let's move that's another question move on. that's another question from don't from cameron. but you don't think something . what think you know something. what do you know, think is do you mean? you know, think is . know you have to . i think i know you have to run, there's a lot of fools. run, but there's a lot of fools. people have live with the people have to live with the bbc, royal every bbc, the royal family every single think single day. you don't think there out don't like there are people out don't like if my louis news if they watch my st louis news is the mainstream is right that the mainstream media is incredibly dangerous for right on that is for society is right on that is okay helping okay well that's helping you out but think you know the but no i think you know the question. from question. another question from cameron tied is max cameron. cameron tied is max clears. he talks in is masculinity a toxin? okay. well, we've all heard that phrase. i mean, masculinity. i was accused of being a toxic male. it's quite really. yeah not proud of

that. i mean, understand, lewis, it's. yeah so this is the filmmaker james cameron, you know, he did titanic and aliens, all sorts of stuff. and he says that earlier in his career, his work his films effectively were poisoned by testosterone . he poisoned by testosterone. he claims that it's a toxin that men have to work out of their system. and he's talking because he's promoting a new avatar film. and you'll remember that the first avatar film was absolutely terrible. oh, and this this new one is going to be even worse. i mean, know, even worse. i mean, you know, the masculinity of aliens the toxic masculinity of aliens and terminator two, that's sort of what made them , isn't it? of what made them, isn't it? well, i don't know. i saw that movie, and luckily i've forgotten every single bit of it. so you can watch it again and enjoy all over and then enjoy it all over again. the is that again. but the point is that yes, are toxic and we do yes, men are toxic and we do talks. i'm going to stand up for the male toxicity toxicity is what protects our family it is what protects our family it is what makes james cameron go out and spend $200 million on a movie that at that time was the most expensive movie ever made in the history the world. yeah. and just have the whatever the

cajones to make that thing. yeah. think can a i think yeah. i think can a i think that's about so he so he did he he's own masculinity i'm not saying women can't do that but they don't . nick do you think they don't. nick do you think that you were a toxic male ? i that you were a toxic male? i think so. see, normally this story really annoyed me because when i saw the quote, it did really annoy me because there is a war on men, there's a war on testosterone, even even though it's necessary health. the it's necessary for health. the guardian against guardian of articles against it says testosterone. says war on men's testosterone. yeah to yeah yeah yeah. they want to destroy men . it's there's war destroy men. it's there's a war on man. agree on that. on man. we all agree on that. but well, i've got an idea, but the point is on this, if i'm being really fair i like being really fair because i like to here cameron to be and objective here cameron is really using a figure of is really just using a figure of speech. says a lot. things i speech. he says a lot. things i did earlier i wouldn't do careerwise. just that careerwise. i just risk that you take while vostro poison take a while test vostro poison young think of young man. i always think of testosterone you testosterone as a toxin that you have slowly of your have to slowly work out of your system. so it is silly, but it's basically you're saying get basically you're saying you get a risk averse and a bit more risk averse and moderate older. and moderate as you get older. and he's excusing he's sort of excusing probably some probably jerk like behaviour in behaviour that he did in hollywood, which lots of

hollywood, which lots of hollywood directors do he talking it talking about that or is it about films because he says about his films because he says that wouldn't make the that he wouldn't make the artistic i say well, i think i'll him his early i'll cut him that his early films much, better than films are much, much better than the there that the stuff because there is that yeah completely he's yeah he's completely he's completely just not completely wrong. it's just not quite you think quite as annoying as you think when see quote when you just see the quote know. get to the know. yeah. let's get to the question catherine question now from catherine where hello is where is catherine? hello is there to the phrase there any truth to the phrase go work, won't go work, go broke, go, won't go broke? interesting it broke? well, it's interesting it disney their new disney have got their new children's movie. it's called strange world, which features a gay character in the main role talking about his crush and that is bombed at the box is completely bombed at the box office. it's going to lose about £120 million. i mean, look , this £120 million. i mean, look, this is what i find very weird is that, you know, all of these this woke messaging that comes through hollywood films basically means it's no longer entertainment. it's just a sermon preached at. sermon you're being preached at. you is why i don't you know, this is why i don't bother watching these films anymore, to be anymore, because i want to be lectured. to go to lectured. if i wanted to go to a church, a cinema. but church, not a cinema. right. but i point is it loses i mean, the point is it loses again and again. they make these films loses money. films and it just loses money. the i think the answer is yes, i don't think i ask question . well, but

i ask the question. well, but but do you think do you think that maybe they should start films that people rather films that people enjoy rather than for them? can than what is good for them? can i something? very i tell you something? it's very to know, that it's to make art, you know, that it's very to art. they very hard to make art. and they thought were so successful. thought they were so successful. they let's just they just thought, let's just sneak i think that's sneak in. and i think that's what problem were what the problem was. they were so successful so long so successful for so long and the weren't born the initial artists weren't born a part of it walt disney wasn't there the great artists he's not that he's frozen in the mountains exactly so somebody comes in and they think you know what i never made these films, but i think they could be. is there a for nick, you there a place, for nick, you know, moral messages in films, particularly children's films, you know, where what you're you know, where you what you're teaching there about the difference between right and wrong, place wrong, of course, has a place for moral, ideological for moral, but ideological messages are , not moral. they're messages are, not moral. they're immoral. they're just immoral. so they're just ideological but of ideological nonsense. but of course, actual course, as a case for actual morals, what see, the claim is people that go won't go broke, exist and they sort of provoke. people say, well , they wouldn't people say, well, they wouldn't do because to do that because they want to make what's make money. what's actually surprising even surprising is they're not even that bothered about making money anymore this

anymore because they want this kind post—capitalist kind of weird post—capitalist chinese they chinese corporatist system. they want the whole chinese corporatist system. they want is the whole chinese corporatist system. they want is what the whole chinese corporatist system. they want is what they're the whole chinese corporatist system. they want is what they're aimingole chinese corporatist system. they want is what they're aiming for thing is what they're aiming for . of post . so it's kind of post capitalism. they care capitalism. they actually care about than the about the ideology more than the money and can there's money and you can and there's sometimes cases where might sometimes cases where that might be like adidas have be justified, like adidas have lost a huge amount of money from dropping. say, well, dropping. you might say, well, it's just justified. what you said companies said was terrible. so companies lose pr reasons. said was terrible. so companies lose pr reasons . they lose money for pr reasons. they will money for ideological will lose money for ideological reasons to reasons that not to a calculation. i mean , they might calculation. i mean, they might think, in long term, think, well, in the long term, we'll if we we'll lose more if we if we retain . who says hitler was retain. who says that hitler was right? is and a bit right? that is and it's a bit more complicated case . more complicated in this case. go broke some people go won't go broke some people say that people at the say it's that people at the creative level want make creative level want to make these decisions. and these work decisions. yeah and these work decisions. yeah and the aren't really the money people aren't really involved. hang. involved. then they go hang. what done? that involved. then they go hang. what also done? that involved. then they go hang. what also be done? that involved. then they go hang. what also be the 1e? that involved. then they go hang. what also be the case that involved. then they go hang. what also be the case sohat might also be the case so tricky. and going to move tricky. and we're going to move on now to a final question before from before the break. this is from leo. leo? just to him. leo. where is leo? just to him. hello is it time to stop watching? actually okay, so love, so this is love, actually. so this is actually question actually similar question because curtis, you because richard curtis, who you remember made actually remember made love, actually says feels stupid over the says he feels stupid over the film's of the films are film's lack of the films are these 2003. of course it grossed

almost 250,000,000 million around the world. but curtis says, quote, the film is bound in some moments to feel out of date . yeah, because it's an old date. yeah, because it's an old film . i mean, this is an all the film. i mean, this is an all the things that are that a lot of people are slapping warnings of various old films saying this film have of date film might have out of date ideas. not ideas. but yeah, we're not stupid. yeah well i'm not sleeping . lewis, what do you sleeping. lewis, what do you think? i think people are stupid and need they need and they need you need they need to be told, you know what? even if tell them too if you tell them they're too stupid to understand what they're so and it's they're being told. so and it's just stupid like you just people are stupid like you ask are poor ask a northerners are poor people . yeah, they're people stupid. yeah, they're stupid . stupid. they're poor. stupid. stupid. they're poor. they're poor. they're living in the north. unless he pointed me and insulted my identity , that's and insulted my identity, that's not illegal under the equality act 2012 and the northerners. but i'm going to write an email to talk about lewis. that's way i'm going to deal with it. you won't see him again. look, this love actually thing i hate to be the straight man i always i'm a straight man and on straight man and lewis is on and i to so serious, but

i hate to be so serious, but look, this love actually thing was so annoying because why does jane curtis jane why does richard curtis hate much? you hate white people so much? you know, 2003. blair know, it was 2003. tony blair spiked immigration in spiked immigration massively in 1997. so by 2003, the demographic makeup of the country not quite what it is country was not quite what it is now. so it was reflective more of the but what's wrong of the time. but what's wrong with white people ? richard with white people? richard curtis thank god society's curtis says, thank god society's i feel so stupid then jeremy vine talked about it on channel five and he said he was going through the red flags of love. actually, said white people actually, he said white people flag straight people red flag. they like chubby people . they don't like chubby people. and meanwhile, and he's meanwhile, he's a straight white man saying this and like, why that hate and i'm like, why is that hate speech channel five? but you speech on channel five? but you must people must have it straight. people have caused all sorts of problems throughout you problems throughout history, you know, hitler's parents were know, like hitler's parents were straight. now getting straight. see, now i'm getting it for being straight, for being northern i'm the victim northern again. i'm the victim on this show, you know, what was what they about? what are they on about? these people , they live today and people, they live today and today a business today they're in a business situation people care situation where people care about stuff. if you about that stuff. if you say something , accuse something differently, accuse you a misogynist you of being a misogynist or a racist or something, he racist or something, and he wants like, that's the wants to be like, that's the problem. with the problem. like with the with the

thing, he to thing, you know, he wants to be like wants be like that's like he wants to be like that's the

prime welcome back to free speech nation. a christian man who is accused of verbally two women because their relationship went against the teachings of the bible has had his public order charges against him dropped when john dunn was charged the crown prosecution service said there were references in the bible which are simply no longer appropriate modern society and which would be deemed offensive if stated in public after the case was discontinued . john dunn case was discontinued. john dunn said, when i preach , i only ever said, when i preach, i only ever say what is in the bible when they told me they were in a same sex, i was concerned for them. i had communicate the had to communicate the consequences actions consequences of their actions based the bible says . so based on what the bible says. so to this, i'm joined by to discuss this, i'm joined by michael lawyer michael phillips, a lawyer who worked behalf john dunn. worked on behalf of john dunn. thanks for coming on the show, michael . so talk thanks for coming on the show, michael. so talk us through this case. it's now the charges have

now been dropped. is it concern , the crown , however, that the crown prosecution service are effectively saying to christians, quote christians, you can't, quote your it's extremely your holy book? it's extremely concerning . i mean, bible is concerning. i mean, the bible is really what has formed in large part the basis of our society , part the basis of our society, the basis of constitutional . and the basis of constitutional. and over the years, there have been various attempts by country to outlaw it . however, over the outlaw it. however, over the years, we've had more and more freedom. and that, in turn has established the precedent that we have free speech in this country. if on the basis of, in fact the un declaration of , fact the un declaration of, human rights and it went on the european union in of that. and so we have these freedoms in the united kingdom as a result of the battles that were followed by many christians over the centuries. now i can understand why the two women in question and found offensive to be and found it offensive to be told disapproved of told that he disapproved of their makes their relationship. that makes complete think complete sense to me. i think i draw line is why that should draw the line is why that should then become a criminal matter. because we're all to be because we're all likely to be offended sorts of things offended by all sorts of things that. well, exactly. i mean, the thing this that there is thing is this is that there is this amongst police

this misnomer amongst the police and sections of the and also some sections of the crown service to crown prosecution service to offend offence . and it offend is an offence. and it just simply isn't in the case the law are allowed be the law that we are allowed be offended. well, you're not to do you know, they're allowed to threaten somebody you're not allowed to abuse. but is not the same just to offend somebody. same as just to offend somebody. but is part of the problem. some of this stuff is actually encoded you take the encoded law. if you take the 20th three communications act, it says that if someone posts material that deemed grossly offensive , they can be offensive, they can be prosecuted and sent to jail . but prosecuted and sent to jail. but how know what grossly how do we know what grossly offensive? who decides that ? i offensive? who decides that? i mean, does something so mean, really does something so ambiguous? should really be ambiguous? should that really be on the statute books? we don't think so. i mean, i think the thing is this is that there was a by parliament a a decision by parliament a little while ago to remove the word section five word insulting from section five of the public act. and of the public order act. and there statutes there are certain statutes which we simply not we would argue are simply not compliant the speech compliant with the free speech principles which embodied in principles which are embodied in our and also our own common law, and also that from the european court of human rights. so where's the cps coming then? are just coming from then? are they just sort deciding what

sort of arbitrary deciding what is and what is not is acceptable and what is not acceptable, are they acceptable, or are they grounding? everything acceptable, or are they groundirin’ everything acceptable, or are they groundirin law? everything acceptable, or are they groundirin law? i everything acceptable, or are they groundirin law? i mean, verything acceptable, or are they groundirin law? i mean, izrything acceptable, or are they groundirin law? i mean, i don't|g they do in law? i mean, i don't see what happened with this clamp prosecutor, whether they just googled something and extracted atheist extracted it from an atheist website and said, you know, website and just said, you know, the cannibalism, the bible supports cannibalism, the bible supports cannibalism, the bible supports death penalty, supports penalty, the bible supports slavery you can't those slavery. so you can't say those things it just things anymore. and it just ignorance. someone ignorance. you think someone going the well it going rogue in the cps? well it seems as though this particular person had no particular references. they they just plucked bible references completely out of context and said, can't something said, you can't say something anymore. but is not the anymore. but this is not the case all book. so did they case for all book. so did they do that with the koran? well, i mean , think thing is this, mean, i think the thing is this, that you at bible, that when you look at the bible, if look it in context, if you look at it in context, you will see that, fact, it you will see that, in fact, it is in the way in is not offensive in the way in which they it be which they deemed it to be offensive. well, think there offensive. well, i think there are bible, that are elements, the bible, that people offensive. no people will find offensive. no doubt. and i think there's elements that elements of the koran that people but people will find offensive. but these and, these are people's holy. and, you have to have you know, they have to have a right that, mean, right to say that, i mean, particularly preachers and this man done preacher. right man done was a preacher. right yes. somebody who was in yes. he was somebody who was in a forces for 15 years.

a special forces for 15 years. he's the streets in day he's been on the streets in day out. and as a result the out. and as a result of the scene, addicts, people who scene, drug addicts, people who have, to have, you know, a burden to society, set free as a result of preaching the gospel. every day. and such was also and one such person was also prosecuted in the same court and acquitted earlier on year. but do you take the point that i mean, the counterargument is if you offensive ideas you have offensive ideas promulgated throughout society, then happens is it kind of then what happens is it kind of enables those ideas to spread. it makes on gay people more likely or whatever else. do you buy that? no, i don't think so. i mean, i think the thing is that order to suppress things that in order to suppress things which bad ideas , got to have which are bad ideas, got to have more free speech, not less free speech, got speech, because you've got to have who particular have people who are particular in to that is not in order to say no, that is not the teaches . in fact, we the bible teaches. in fact, we don't believe that . isn't this don't believe that. isn't this troubling from a lawyers troubling coming from a lawyers perspective? because it's not just the judiciary, is it? it's also the police. i mean, we've seen again and again the college of instance, of policing, for instance, telling police that they should be investigating non crime. i know that recently been know that recently has been rescinded, but that was something was on for

something that was going on for many, that the many, many years that the college policing seems college of policing seems quite reluctant to actually address these issues when it is asked to do so , the high court said to do so, the high court said to them it's unlawful record non crime and they ignored it. the home secretary said it's unlawful they ignored as unlawful, they ignored her as well. is just that these well. so is just that these quangos of out of quangos are kind of out of control? think it's the whole control? i think it's the whole culture. which culture. i guise which is affecting single of our affecting every single of our society concern that you society and concern that you have to push back with the police and the crime police and with the crime prosecution service say, prosecution service and say, look just simply look you know, that just simply isn't mean with the harry isn't right. mean with the harry miller which high miller case which went the high court was a police officer court there was a police officer who around who he said called around because were concerned because they were concerned about thinking because a about his thinking because a transgender person was somebody who wrong brain and who has the wrong brain and that's out the wrong that's pushing out the wrong body and is body parts. and this is apparently something what the officer to him. now and officer said to him. now and then, you know, it's one thing to kind say that to somebody, to kind of say that to somebody, but another thing but it's another thing to have a police call at door, police officer call at door, maybe , maybe maybe arrest you, maybe put you in because you have in the cells because you have said something or hold belief said something or hold a belief , articulated belief which , articulated that belief which some people find offensive. but what happens if i mean, we're

saying the cps are saying the cps now are effectively or elements of the cps are effectively captured like they now believe like this and they now believe that being offensive should be criminalised if that criminalised. what if that seeps into courts? it doesn't into the high courts? it doesn't seem to be there at the moment, but what if that happens. well, i to i think it's going to be disastrous. it is disastrous. you know, if it is the because usually people the case, because usually people get and they released. get and then they get released. so get and then so sometimes they get and then they get acquitted. yes. you usually the judiciary say, well, hang this hang a second, you know, this isn't case . this is isn't the case. this is protected free speech. no, protected by free speech. no, you are not guilty . however, you you are not guilty. however, you know, if people get stopped , know, if people get stopped, funding be guilty by the funding will be guilty by the high court. then that would be a worry. so what is the way to tackle that? is it that the government to needs to government needs to needs to repeal hate speech repeal the current hate speech laws have which take the laws that we have which take the form the order act and form of the public order act and the act at the the communication act at the moment. have to? moment. do they just have to? yeah, i think very often it's not necessarily a problem with the themselves, but the laws themselves, but it's very sometimes the people very often sometimes the people on their on the ground and their interpretation and so interpretation of them. and so that is probably the that that is probably the biggest that the cps is biggest problem that the cps is job to interpret the law and

that's what they're there for. well are there in order to well they are there in order to act the crown, to act on behalf of the crown, to be independent at be independent and to look at this, you know, they're not to take sides. they're not somebody's they're somebody's lawyer. they're acting is the acting as the state is the independent order to independent voice in order to say, is enough say, yes, there is enough evidence prosecute evidence in order to prosecute matter. is in the matter. and also it is in the pubuc matter. and also it is in the public interest prosecute this particular unless those particular matter unless those two tests to satisfy it, then they should not prosecuting somebody. okay. well it's very somebody. okay. well it's a very fascinating phelps fascinating case. michael phelps very joining me today. very much for joining me today. after the break, on free speech nafion after the break, on free speech nation we're going to be discussing whether theatres should cater for plus size people by fitting bigger seats . people by fitting bigger seats. see you in a minute.

the welcome back to free speech

nation. with me andrew doyle. so theatres and cinemas have been criticised not doing enough to cater for plus size people who struggle to fit in their seats. an article on the entertainment website mashable quoted a number of members of the public who said they've injured at said they've been injured at shows were too shows because the seats were too small things are small for them. things are changing summer the changing this summer when the comedian sophie hagans to comedian sophie hagans next to the venue is must provide what is called fat accessibility information on their websites and to discuss this, i'm joined by charlotte fox, who is a body image focussed psychotherapist. charlotte thank you very much for joining me today. thank you for joining me today. thank you for having me. so do believe, i mean, as sophie hagan has pointed out, that there is a kind element to size of the kind of element to size of the seats in cinemas , theatres and seats in cinemas, theatres and entertainment venues generally. i do. i think it's not for everyone . but does that mean, everyone. but does that mean, for instance, we take the air flights situation where people often complain because they can't fit into the seats. but is it fair on an airline, for instance, that they have to

provide two seats for the price of one because someone is larger? i think reality that obesity is growing problem and so of the population so much of the population suffers from this. so that means. but does not mean that we have therefore changing society in order to accommodate a minority . i think that minority of people. i think that society is part of what's created the problem in the first place. and obesity comes from a range factors and there's a lot of blame on people for suffering from weight issues . actually from weight issues. actually society should be more compassionate. i mean, i agree that i don't think anyone should be shamed, insulted for the way they look , any circumstances. they look, any circumstances. but it's not the case, though, when it comes to something like that. the solution should be, you better services , you know, better services, education, provisions. so that people don't end up in this situation . they are unhealthy situation. they are unhealthy and therefore they have these problems i think that is problems arise. i think that is also possible that people should be educated and given good nutritional advice. but the reality is that there's a huge problem . well, isn't it also the

problem. well, isn't it also the problem. well, isn't it also the problem that a lot of fat activists and they call themselves fat activists they say that there are no health issues surrounding obesity then and that actually all of this is just a construct from a cis white patriarchal medical establishment. what do you think of that? i i don't actually have an opinion on that one. okay but i do think that people accept being overweight is unhealthy . being overweight is unhealthy. it certainly can be . yes. but it certainly can be. yes. but i think that people in shame and feel that they can't do ordinary andifs feel that they can't do ordinary and it's unreasonable to expect to lose weight before they can join . what about the argument join. what about the argument that if you accommodate people who are extremely obese , for who are extremely obese, for instance, by providing much larger seats at every venue , larger seats at every venue, that in a sense provides a situation where there is no incentive for people lose weight because society is accommodated them to the point where they may as well remain as large as they want to be. i don't think it's motivating if . they're

motivating to people if. they're trapped houses and they trapped in their houses and they feel too ashamed to leave. i don't think that is what gets them to lose weight. well, what is think it varies is it then? i think it varies person to person, but there has to be a kind of encouragement and integration. and what do do in your job? so your job is a you're a psychotherapist, but specifically body image. so what is that you do? well, it's is it that you do? well, it's a it's an issue that up the it's an issue that up all the time. and hear about time. and when you hear about people's for how they've people's stories for how they've become overweight, there are invariably reasons. become overweight, there are invariably reasons . and it can invariably reasons. and it can be a history of sexual abuse. it can be a response to trauma . can be a response to trauma. it's not necessarily something people choose . right. so is it people choose. right. so is it yourjob people choose. right. so is it your job to people choose. right. so is it yourjob to kind of identify your job to kind of identify what were the problems that caused this and? is it then also part of your job to find a way to rectify that situation? or is it to make people feel better about how they. i would say that it's acceptance and. it's it's about acceptance and. it's level or on a societal level. individually, i work. level or on a societal level. individually, i work . with individually, i work. with people. individually and people

who come to therapy and are overweight usually want to lose weight and struggle. yes but do you.so weight and struggle. yes but do you. so your view on the cinemas and places like that should accommodate. they should change. they should. i think they should. because i think it's just excruciating for people if they go to the cinema and they can't fit into a seat and, they don't the information don't have the information beforehand and they have to kind of make a scene. yeah. okay. understood okay. well, charlotte, thank you very much for me tonight. forjoining me tonight. thank you . now, i'm forjoining me tonight. thank you. now, i'm going to be here till 9:00. and this show is followed by mark dolan tonight. but here's what mark has got coming up for you this very evening . on mark dolan tonight. evening. on mark dolan tonight. in my big opinion, the media establishment will stop at nothing to give us brexit as it might take it. ten. i'll be deaung might take it. ten. i'll be dealing with the bbc who are planning to dumbed down their content to attract the channel which brings you pointless is getting more pointless the day my mark needs guest is legendary

ex—tory mp sir howarth and in the big question could smaller parties decide the next election? i'll be asking ann widdecombe and vince cable , plus widdecombe and vince cable, plus big sam allardyce on the we're live . at nine so every week we live. at nine so every week we dedicate this part of the show to the world of social media. first up, we've got the trailer for the new indiana jones movie. i thought they finished them anyway. here we go. let's have a look. it's hard believe . now. lewis you tend to crop up in a lot of these hollywood films, don't you? because you do, haven't you? i mean, that sounds like a make it up, but

let say, does get these role let me say, does get these role are you in this one. can you tell you're not allowed to tell us you're not allowed to say i just say that while we were watching that, lewis got very . i'm sorry. that very excited. i'm sorry. that particular moment when someone was horse . are you was riding on a horse. are you on horse ? no, no, i think on that horse? no, no, i think i was i don't think i was i don't remember being on a horse. well, then you probably weren't on a horse. it's the sort of thing you remember put to you you remember i would put to you this jones film was this the indiana jones film was so bad. is this going to be better? i think i. i think it's going i imagine by seeing going to i can imagine by seeing i'm not allowed to talk about it. that talk about it. i know now that talk about movies finally for movies is finally stumped for words. to words. he's not allowed to because presumably he's contractually obliged not to or not. know, nick, are you not. you know, nick, are you excited about indiana jones last? the first i've seen, it looks it's done by looks like think it's done by a stunt double cgi his stunt double and they of cgi his face onto it it'll it's like face onto it it'll be it's like a deep fake i think it's actually harrison ford think actually harrison ford i think he's at home. no, no, no. he was definitely doing broken definitely doing a broken gunshot there . you're going to gunshot there. you're going to get yourself in trouble . anyway, get yourself in trouble. anyway, we're to move on to this we're going to move on to this video, this is a heckler who

attacked scotland's first minister, nicholas sturgeon. this that's she this interesting that's what she did. just a minute. this interesting that's what she did. just a minute . that did. just a minute. that sculpture is going in the basement talisman in a benefit for science and also women's rights . i for science and also women's rights. i see for science and also women's rights . i see it for science and also women's rights. i see it is a very small way . see herself and those of way. see herself and those of you who are sitting here complicit keeping a lens chart. well, women have actually been raped by males of self. i hate beenin raped by males of self. i hate been in and that's got nothing to do with science race and i support race i mean i'm surprised he was called to the ground by some tartan clad bodyguard because the thing is they don't normally let that happen. i nicholas happen. i mean, nicholas sturgeon again again. so sturgeon as again and again. so for who disagrees with for anyone who disagrees with her reforms her gender recognition reforms is not to be listened to, to be dismissed. she says there's no argument she to argument there. she refuses to listen. isn't it quite listen. so isn't it quite refreshing that someone gets to stand and her, yeah, stand there and tell her, yeah, that that that was great. that person should next leader should be the next leader of scotland. can ever

scotland. yeah if it can ever get rid of our glorious, that glorious sturgeon, glorious nicholas sturgeon, which ever which i nothing will ever happen. this. isn't this happen. well, this. isn't this the scotland, it's the problem in scotland, it's effectively state. effectively a one party state. at there way at this point there is no way that anyone can counter this, so they can pretty much railroaded through they through whatever the hell they like, draconian like, including draconian hate speech criminalise speech laws which criminalise discussions own discussions within, people's own private . it's private accommodations. it's outrageous. yes, i agree. it's like china with more butter . like china with more butter. scotland and scotland. yeah that's right. i mean there's a point china with more but i mean because i just came up with that guys it's about this i think there's a lot batter in there's a lot of batter in china. is different china. i know it is different levels in it. i mean, it's very difficult for nicholas sturgeon been really, intolerant been really, really intolerant about just about this and far she's just not to discuss it, not even prepared to discuss it, to people's concerns to listen to people's concerns the people who are the dismissal of people who are worried the threat to worried about the threat to women's off the of women's rights off the back of gender reform . gender recognition reform. they're they're not they're not hateful. they're not transphobic , concerned about transphobic, concerned about women's so women's rights. why is it so difficult understand? because difficult to understand? because one know, could one person, you know, it could be considered to be hateful. i i don't consider it hateful, but she misinterprets it being she misinterprets it as being which is quite convenient for her because it means she gets

her because it means she gets her she doesn't have her own way and she doesn't have to have conversation. i think they'll come a time. there's no there's no for scotland to there's no way for scotland to go independent go except to go full independent because because that's what she wants, of course. yeah. and i think to happen. think that's going to happen. do you ask about you think nick can i ask about that, because i mean, that, though? because i mean, westminster now said, no, westminster has now said, no, you can't you can't have a second referendum vote without westminster's permission and said a once in lifetime said it was a once in a lifetime vote was what, eight vote and that was what, eight years that. years ago? yeah like that. because said an example because i said it was an example of blowback actually working of the blowback actually working in for they in our favour for once they basically it. so basically they rigged it. so we're that you can't we're deciding that you can't have we've deemed have a referendum we've deemed illegal. so who you will, whether that want whether people that don't want it but in that case, it to happen. but in that case, i think there i actually think there was a good thing because mean it's good thing because i mean it's i don't it's because don't want it's fair because they referendum they did have the referendum yeah was advertised yeah yeah. and it was advertised as in a lifetime as being once in a lifetime and it hasn't been the life to have scotland want it. i say scotland really want it. i say let mean i'm english let them go. i mean i'm english anyway don't in this anyway i don't in this british thing for and at the thing but for throat and at the end show again a last end of the show again a last ditch attempt to get myself cancelled but it looks like cancelled but. but it looks like they to they don't actually want to go to numbers already. that to numbers already. is that right? of right? so the polling sort of

suggesting wouldn't win? suggesting they wouldn't win? i don't think they would. i don't think they would. but i say that was say i say that that was a mistake say you cannot have mistake to say you cannot have a referendum. it's same way referendum. it's the same way that donald trump, referendum. it's the same way the be donald trump, referendum. it's the same way the be on donald trump, referendum. it's the same way thébe on twitter. )onald trump, referendum. it's the same way thébe on twitter. yeahd trump, referendum. it's the same way thébe on twitter. yeah if'rump, referendum. it's the same way the be on twitter. yeah if they», he be on twitter. yeah if they did have a referendum , though, did have a referendum, though, and if they won, doesn't that mean become mean that the snp become obsolete? would to obsolete? they would have to disband. yeah. then they'd have to do something to actually do something good for the people they've done, they've job, but but they've done their job, but but at the end day if they at the end of the day if they have a referendum, let them have as them as they as many referenda them as they want monday, a tuesday, let want on a monday, a tuesday, let them have a million referendum, then expensive. then we'll just do so expensive. well expensive for them well it's expensive for let them pay well it's expensive for let them pay but eventually pay for it, but eventually people will listen, we're people will say, listen, we're tired in these tired of voting in these referendum. don't want referendum. we don't want this is right. we're is probably right. anyway, we're going i was going to you just say i was right. you were right. right. i said you were right. i give i think because give you that. i think because i worry about your psychological health and i want to to health and i want to be i to have both. was humouring you. have both. he was humouring you. i be i know. i want you to be happy. i know. not but finally , we've not possible. but finally, we've got video of a walrus and got this video of a walrus and a harmonica that went viral this week . yeah

week. yeah. i mean, i suppose this is what the internet's meant to, and nick, do you have any hot takes on that? i don't really. should. should force the walrus to become bob dylan against his will. i thought it was cruel . it against his will. i thought it was cruel. it is against his will. i thought it was cruel . it is cruel to was cruel. it is cruel to cruelty to animals. there well, was cruel. it is cruel to crueyouo animals. there well, was cruel. it is cruel to crueyou say,imals. there well, was cruel. it is cruel to crueyou say, it's.s. there well, was cruel. it is cruel to crueyou say, it's whatere well, was cruel. it is cruel to crueyou say, it's what the vell, like you say, it's what the internet used to be used to be. and it was they were good times. let's, let's, let's simpler time. think should time. yeah, i think it should just is with just be walrus is with harmonicas from now on rather just yeah i think just fighting. yeah i think i think you know what this . the think you know what this. the world so bad as it is. and world is so bad as it is. and the fact the fact is , is that we the fact the fact is, is that we didn't see the beginning of didn't see the beginning part of it. what they did to it. what that what they did to that we have to train it. that world. we have to train it. exactly. exactly how how many years training. i'm surprised years of training. i'm surprised the protection agencies the child protection agencies haven't involved . why do haven't gotten involved. why do we the child , the walrus we the child, the walrus protection agency . yeah. protection agency. yeah. terrible animal cruelty and look, this is the nearing the end of the show. so we have some time now to talk through some of

your unfiltered dilemmas which, as very kindly as ever, you have very kindly sent consideration. sent for in consideration. our first week from first item of this week is from greg. has is it wrong greg. greg has said, is it wrong that i think about time that i think it's about time gary rock and roll. gary glitters rock and roll. christmas is allowed to be added to again . to christmas playlists again. louis it is a catchy tune , is it louis it is a catchy tune, is it not? i guess so. it's that big in america, but. oh yeah, no . in america, but. oh yeah, no. then america doesn't as then america doesn't have as many. as is this country. many. pete as is this country. this you sure know. yeah. a balenciaga , steve. not a whole balenciaga, steve. not a whole island. he's a man. he's american louis. is it? it goes back to this case of, you know, can we separate art from the artist? can we enjoy a gary glitter song knowing , the glitter song knowing, the terrible crimes he committed. is that ? if you about that possible? if you ask about other people, i could have an opinion. i don't. michael jackson, he seems to be around. yeah, he does. i mean when i was in america recently, they were playing every radio playing him on every radio station. doesn't seem to station. so that doesn't seem to affect it. but gary glitter is never quite ever well. won't never quite ever well. i won't be this christmas be playing him this christmas because room because it's hard to find room with kelly tracks i'm with all the r kelly tracks i'm playing, fan . i'm so

playing, but big fan. i'm so sorry i never even noticed. am i missing out . it's a huge missing out. it's a huge christmas. not for me. not in my house. i know what you're listening okay. listening to. oh okay. you almost played like. you almost played you like. you know, that. i wish it know, i like that. i wish it could christmas. that's could be christmas. that's wizard and, like, wizard. did you last christmas? the you like last christmas? the george michael? yes, i like hoffman it's cliche to hoffman biscuit. it's cliche to be christmas. shout be cynical at christmas. shout out they're nuts. bit out to they're nuts. a bit obscure. that's neat. i obscure. that's a bit neat. i get it, though. get tweets about it, though. trust in the trust me. they bombed in the room. my christmas song is dreidel, dreidel, dreidel. i've made it out of class, of course. and the hanukkah song, that's a hanukkah, so. yeah. okay i don't need correct you. know need to correct you. you know better do. nobody may, better than i do. nobody may, you had it to you know, you had to do it to the audience. there's another dilemma. now hear from keith from keith from from the world and keith from the going to the says, i'm going to have to share a room with share a hotel room with a co—worker. don't. because co—worker. i don't. because of the strikes, do the train strikes, how do i survive three nights with someone i cannot wow oh, someone i cannot stand? wow oh, that's. what do you think? very quickly. i've only few quickly. i've only a few seconds. nightmare. seconds. my worst nightmare. i call call in sick there call in sick. call in sick there is i think maybe , put on is. i think maybe, put on a little perfume and drink something. thank you for that.

there very good answer. thank you for us for free speech nafion you for us for free speech nation this was the week when elon musk continued to rattle the cages to the mainstream media. the prosecution media. the crown prosecution service the bible was service said that the bible was outdated and directorjames cameron revealed that avatar two was be even worse . the was likely to be even worse. the first one. thank you to my lovely libby schaefer and lovely panel libby schaefer and nick dixon and my guests, joe phoenix, femi newlander, rafe eidelman, dr. joanna williams, michael pedowitz and fox weber. and if you want to join us live in studio and be part of our in the studio and be part of our wonderful audience, do wonderful audience, you can do that. w w dot sro that. just go to w w w dot sro audiences .com . it's down there audiences .com. it's down there on the screen. there won't be a match to coincide with that next week's to join us. week's it to come and join us. stay for brilliant mark stay tuned for brilliant mark dolan tonight. that's next. and don't forget, headliners is on every 11 pm, but the every night at 11 pm, but the late night paper preview show where talk through where comedians talk through the next stories . thanks next day's top stories. thanks for goodnight . looking for watching. goodnight. looking to tomorrow's weather and the uk

will be similar to today. who showers feeding in on the cold northeasterly winds. here are the details . some showers are the details. some showers are likely for orkney and shetland. also, a wintry showers around the central belt. elsewhere across much of scotland , be dry across much of scotland, be dry with the clearest skies in the northwest. also dry across much of northern ireland with some clear, bright spells through the morning. a few showers around the coasts. there'll be plenty of showers feeding into north eastern england , turning wintry eastern england, turning wintry over higher ground . meanwhile, over higher ground. meanwhile, in the northwest, it'll be much dner in the northwest, it'll be much drier and mostly cloudy start for much of wales and here that could be some hill fog a showery outbreaks of rain all likely over the mountains. we could see some sleet and snow . it's also some sleet and snow. it's also going to be grey and gloomy across much of the east midlands tomorrow morning. there'll be more showers today and it will still feel cold in the winds. that's the story for east anglia, too . here, the showers anglia, too. here, the showers will be more frequent and perhaps heavy at times and it will be cloudy and cold in the

winds. a few showers are likely towards the south coast. so here it is looking largely dry , it is looking largely dry, especially for central and western. chilly, although with the brisk winds . the best of the the brisk winds. the best of the sunshine through the morning will be for western scotland. cloudy elsewhere with showers continue . bring on those brisk continue. bring on those brisk winds. that's how the weather is shaping up during tomorrow morning .