home for the rest of their back home for the rest of their sentence . the uk has also agreed sentence. the uk has also agreed to help modernise albania's prison system. the overall deal is expected to cost around £8 million, which the government says will save money for britain's prisons. as a ceremony was held at the cenotaph in london today, commemorate the 102nd anniversary of the first wreath laying by jewish veterans , us service people and families of the fallen marched together down whitehall to honour those who fought and served for freedom. since the first world war. the first are of david wreath was laid in 1921 by a group of jewish ex—soldiers. this year's parade also marked the 80th anniversary of the warsaw ghetto uprising and 70 years since the end of fighting in the korean war. now, finally, a hat once worn by napoleon has gone under the hammer in paris. its new owner paid £2.1 million for the hat, called a bicorne, which was worn by napoleon

dunng which was worn by napoleon during his rule over the french empire in the 19th century. napo euanne empire in the 19th century. napo elianne owned about 120 hats, though the one worn by joaquin phoenix in ridley scott's epic new film is just a replica . this new film is just a replica. this is gb news across the uk on tv, in your car, on digital radio and now on your smart speaker by simply saying play gb news now it's over to . cancel culture it's over to. cancel culture strikes again in the music industry. >> more anti—semitism on the streets of the uk and a politician in received her verdict in court after being prosecuted for quoting the bible. this is free speech nafion bible. this is free speech nation . welcome to free speech nation. welcome to free speech nafion nation. welcome to free speech nation with me , andrew doyle. nation with me, andrew doyle. this is the show where we take a look at culture, current affairs and politics. and of course, we'll have the latest from those lovable culture warriors. unless they manage cancelled

they manage to get cancelled before coming up on the before 9 pm. coming up on the show tonight, finnish politician paivi trial paivi rasanen has been on trial in which has major in a case which has major implications for free speech. the is in. she'll be the verdict is in. she'll be here tell us what happened here to tell us what happened and i'll to the band who and i'll speak to the band who lost gig because of an lost out on a gig because of an interview they to this show interview they gave to this show . and they've been accused of trans phobia. usual thing. anyway we'll be speaking to dr. peter hughes, who has been writing about how excessive kindness s to one group can mean cruelty to another. and of course , me and my fantastic course, me and my fantastic panel will be answering questions delightful questions from our delightful studio so my comedian studio audience. so my comedian panellist are the panellist tonight are the wonderful jojo sutherland and paul cox, who . welcome both . paul cox, who. welcome both. come down from scotland. jojo, i have well, no, i came from liverpool so you've been liverpool. you're always you're all over the globe. >> trotter i am globe trotter. so what's this? >> what's going on in edinburgh? you told me there something you told me there was something to be parking. you told me there was something to lso3arking. you told me there was something to [so edinburgh >> so edinburgh council apparently make apparently are going to make parking pavements illegal. parking on pavements illegal. and scotland phoned me

and so bbc scotland phoned me and asked me what my opinion on it and i thought parking it was, and i thought parking and already and pavements was already illegal. opinion illegal. so my opinion is that until becomes illegal, until it becomes illegal, i'm going stop on pavements. >> you really should because it's tricky to park around there. >> it's also really expensive. >> it's also really expensive. >> expensive. >> really expensive. >> really expensive. >> illegal >> in edinburgh it is illegal to park on pavements in london. that's place it is illegal. >> is that right? i did not know that. me either. you've been that. me either. no you've been to edinburgh? >> to edinburgh. yeah. >> you didn't know about the parking? >> didn't know. but never taken a car to anywhere? actually, no. >> would you? it's >> why would you? it's a beautiful place, by way. yes beautiful place, by the way. yes let's some questions from beautiful place, by the way. yes let' audience. 3 questions from beautiful place, by the way. yes let' audience. we've tions from beautiful place, by the way. yes let' audience. we've got; from the audience. we've got a question from armin. where's armin? evening. armin? good evening. hello. >> evening. the civil >> good evening. are the civil servants running the show? >> well, i mean, we've been talking a while talking about this for a while on show. there was on this show. there was a whistleblower this week. this was and a civil was in the telegraph and a civil servant the home office who servant at the home office who claims that colleague, his claims that the colleague, his colleagues really colleagues are really, really happy because the happy this week because of the supreme against the supreme court ruling against the rwanda departure of rwanda plan, the departure of suella this suella braverman. but this whistleblower saying whistleblower is also saying that whatever the government tried regarding ring tried to do regarding ring migration, office, migration, the home office, the staff at the home office will

scupper i suppose scupper it. now, i suppose i should say i can't verify the whistleblower. it was published in hope they've in the telegraph. i hope they've done basic done their sort of basic verification checks. i presume they have. but if it's the case, irrespective stand irrespective of where you stand on issue, isn't it on the migration issue, isn't it a dodgy the government a bit dodgy that the government would elected government would say the elected government would say the elected government would need this would say, we need to do this and the members of staff would say, well, we're just going to find isn't find a way not to. isn't that kind anti—democratic? oh kind of anti—democratic? oh completely anti —democratic. >> to think completely anti—democratic. >> to think i mean, >> but then to think i mean, when you people being put when you see people being put into government, when you see people being put into know, government, when you see people being put into know, your government, when you see people being put into know, your home'nment, when you see people being put into know, your home secretary you know, your home secretary one your health one day and then your health secretary then your secretary and then your transport. yes. i mean, they can't that knowledge can't have that knowledge of everything. be a everything. so there has to be a bafis everything. so there has to be a basis of staff that do have the sort workings of that sort of workings of that department. that's right. department. no, that's right. >> the staff should be able >> and the staff should be able to for whoever's in power. to work for whoever's in power. yeah, the point. yeah, that's sort of the point. >> the decision should >> yes. so the decision should come from the elected representatives representation rather presume rather than because i presume that staff there that the staff are there regardless election. regardless of an election. >> exactly what >> well, no, that's exactly what it so that's that's way it is. so that's that's the way they're not to be they're not allowed to be partisan. yeah, but this is a weird thing because we can't vote we can't. that's vote them out. we can't. that's what about how

what troubles me about this. how do know? what troubles me about this. how do maybew? what troubles me about this. how do maybe we should like the >> maybe we should like the european union, though. that's what can't vote what exactly? you can't vote them exactly. what exactly? you can't vote the this exactly. what exactly? you can't vote the this the exactly. what exactly? you can't vote the this the problem.xactly. what exactly? you can't vote the this the problem.xacthe >> this is the problem. or the house lords or any of these house of lords or any of these things. you know, there's an issue, this issue, isn't there? this is a huge issue. >> know, there is place >> we you know, there is a place for civil servants. i've for civil servants. and i've been a civil servant myself in the you? yes, yes, the past. were you? yes, yes, exactly. not not exactly. yeah. not for not not for long time. but you for a very long time. but you are taught should are taught or told, should i say, to be apolitical and largely in the past. in my experience, what experience, people were what they not now is apolitical. they are not now is apolitical. they take own with they take their own views with them they're them and they make sure they're perpetuated that strange? system. isn't that strange? >> mean, do you have any views >> i mean, do you have any views on you asked the question? >> i just think people should learn what they're told. >> the job. yeah >> the job. yeah >> oh, maybe. maybe. commercial dictatorship. just do. i am half german . german. >> i've been trying that policy at home for a long time and it's not working. >> all right, well, let's get a question from amelia. where is amelia? oh, hello. hello. >> the propeller marches >> are the propeller marches getting of control ? getting out of control? >> well, this is a question because there bunch of because there are a bunch of marches . stormed the bull ring. marches. stormed the bull ring. yeah, which , you know. well,

yeah, which, you know. well, isn't there harvey nicks there or something? yeah. so presumably were after presumably they were just after some do some accessories. yeah. what do you. think about you. what do you think about this stuff? well, is this sort of stuff? well, is again, sort of, you again, is this sort of, you know, into the bull ring know, going into the bull ring in birmingham and saying, you know, in birmingham and saying, you knoright in birmingham and saying, you kno right now stop, ceasefire. >> right now stop, ceasefire. it's like, ceasefire in it's like, what ceasefire in birmingham? i don't know what where just shouting. there's parts of birmingham where that would apply. but you're just going, are you trying to going, what are you trying to achieve? no, but that's it. >> some mps are getting >> just and some mps are getting nervous this. know nervous about this. i know one of of the shadow of the members of the shadow cabinet look , as mps cabinet was saying, look, as mps were a bit worried now because cabinet was saying, look, as mps we|ofa bit worried now because cabinet was saying, look, as mps we|of them/orried now because cabinet was saying, look, as mps we|of them are ed now because cabinet was saying, look, as mps we|of them are gathering cause cabinet was saying, look, as mps we|of them are gathering around lot of them are gathering around parliamentary and parliamentary constituents and sort shouting and screaming sort of shouting and screaming and can be bit intimidating. and can be a bit intimidating. >> and that's problem and can be a bit intimidating. >> anythingthat's problem and can be a bit intimidating. >> anything regardless)roblem and can be a bit intimidating. >> anything regardless of:)lem with anything regardless of gain. the subject matter gain. what the subject matter is, large of is, just having large groups of people en masse being a mob is of course it's threatening. so i mean , they're not going out mean, they're not going out handing out candles and back massages, are they? no, they're not. >> i would be all for that. >> i would be all for that. >> i would be all for that. >> i would be great if i could just be mobbed by a sort of reflexologist. loads of them.

just be mobbed by a sort of reflezwouldt. loads of them. just be mobbed by a sort of reflezwould have ds of them. just be mobbed by a sort of reflezwould have a; of them. just be mobbed by a sort of reflezwould have a back1em. just be mobbed by a sort of reflezwould have a back massage >> i would have a back massage for peace. >> i would have a back massage for quite. small mob, though, >> quite a small mob, though, wasn't >> quite a small mob, though, waswell, there was 100, 100 >> well, there was 100, 100 people in a shopping centre. >> no. well that's true. >> oh no. well that's true. i think were saying think what people were saying though it was though was that it was disruptive. protests disruptive. but then protests are mean, a are disruptive. i mean, it's a difficult because difficult one, isn't it? because you right to free you do want the right to free protest, think absolutely protest, i think is absolutely sacrosanct. yes. >> think and that's >> but i also think and that's what we're there is a nervousness because of all the protests you protests with just all, you know, kind of protests know, all the kind of protests going psyche going on, the psyche of the pubuc going on, the psyche of the public going, god, can public are going, oh, god, can we protesting? so we just stop protesting? so we're of basically walking we're kind of basically walking into know, of then into, you know, kind of then let's protest. but just stop. >> oil was smashing up paintings with that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal . that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal . so, that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal . so, so that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal . so, so that's that's >> oil was smashing up paintings witilegal . so, so that's athat's not legal. so, so that's a different kind . different kind. >> if we get so sickened by >> but if we get so sickened by protests that we then actually vote to ban protests, then that's going to be wrong. >> but then there's maybe it's about the police just applying the law. i mean, there are a number of the protests where you see anti—semitic see openly anti—semitic declarations. you see people chanting killing jewish chanting about killing jewish people. can't the police people. why can't the police just intervene people just intervene when people overstep let overstep the mark and let everyone get on with it? everyone else get on with it? why doing why aren't they doing that? >> that's a great

>> well, that's a great question, andrew. >> it's the question of >> i think it's the question of the i'm honest. i mean, the week, if i'm honest. i mean, l, the week, if i'm honest. i mean, i, believe that protesting is i, i believe that protesting is sacrosanct however i think sacrosanct also. however i think it's almost redundant now in the sense in the era, we're in sense we're in the era, we're in the of social media. one of the age of social media. one of the age of social media. one of the protesters leading this leading this march in the bullring was saying, we just want to heard. you think, want to be heard. and you think, are taking the whatsit? are you taking the whatsit? >> we really hear you. >> because we really hear you. >> because we really hear you. >> we hear you lot . there's >> we hear you a lot. there's nothing we hear. and it's nothing else we hear. and it's the same just stop oil. it the same for just stop oil. it feels a little bit attention seeking, particularly when it comes stop i mean, comes to just stop oil. i mean, they done some absolutely they have done some absolutely atrocious things that set atrocious things that have set their way . their course way. >> what do you think, jojo, about juxtapose works >> what do you think, jojo, ab art? uxtapose works of art? >> do you any thoughts >> do you have any thoughts about that? >> depends the isn't >> depends what the art isn't it? does really. i mean it? yeah, it does really. i mean there's some you on. yeah. >> get rid of it. i mean they did interrupt a production of les miz. >> i mean, again, i'm not bothered, if it had been, bothered, but if it had been, i don't know, sweeney todd or don't know, like sweeney todd or fiddler roof, know, absolutely. >> better musical. >> it'd be a better musical. >> it'd be a better musical. >> so again, it's down your >> so again, it's down to your own isn't it? no, own taste, isn't it? no, absolutely. think it's all

own taste, isn't it? no, abs�*sortely. think it's all own taste, isn't it? no, abs�*sort of think it's all own taste, isn't it? no, abs�*sort of the think it's all own taste, isn't it? no, abs�* sort of the protestsit's all own taste, isn't it? no, abs�* sort of the protests and|ll the sort of the protests and it's i mean, it's like the football terraces, isn't it? chanting you know, football chanting in, you know, football teams chanting songs . teams and chanting songs. >> think the interruption >> and i think the interruption of like i was went to of theatre like i was i went to see sunset boulevard other of theatre like i was i went to see suchet boulevard other of theatre like i was i went to see such a boulevard other of theatre like i was i went to see such a good evard other of theatre like i was i went to see such a good production. her it's such a good production. and i my head, if i was thinking in my head, if it's one of those just stop oil people, them interrupts people, one of them interrupts is i take a flamethrower to is i will take a flamethrower to everyone. is i will take a flamethrower to evewe1e. is i will take a flamethrower to evewe would have seen l for >> we would have seen l for andrew it would have pretty andrew it would have been pretty horrendous . horrendous. >> okay. let's get to a question from carl. where's hello, from carl. where's carl? hello, guys. from carl. where's carl? hello, guyis it acceptable for bullying >> is it acceptable for bullying on women's hour now? >> 100% every day of the week? yeah bullying a woman. that's what you want. >> women's hour, of course. is a radio four. i think it's the radio four show and so this is listen to it you would i'm the demographic clearly. well, actually there is a point to this because the recent guest is a biological male who identifies as female, who is now running. i'm going to get this wrong. and endometriosis . dimitrios and endometriosis. dimitrios and endometriosis. dimitrios and endometriosis charity, which is a condition of the uterus. right

and have you suffered with that? no, i haven't. and have you suffered with that? no, i haven't . but because the no, i haven't. but because the individual who runs it now identifies as female, i suppose they don't grow a uterus though do they? but the point is that that emma barnett was saying to this person, well, look, because because this individual, steph richards , was saying people richards, was saying people assigned female at birth and kept talking about people assigned female at birth. and emma the interviewer emma barnett, the interviewer said, is the word you're looking for. now people are for. woman and now people are saying barnett was saying that emma barnett was bullying person. bullying a trans person. >> well, nonsense . >> yeah, well, it's nonsense. >> yeah, well, it's nonsense. >> it's okay. well, just end the story. >> end of conversation. let's move on. >> but why are public representatives for groups saying they can't have tough questions on radio? exactly >> and that's that's the issue that we're it's a tough question. no, what we're again, we're sleepwalking into being in a disagreement with somebody or asking, you know, because you don't disagree doesn't mean you're bullying somebody. no. do you're bullying somebody. no. do you so? i mean, point you mean so? i mean, the point whether having a trans woman as a of an endometriosis a ceo of an endometriosis

charity is an issue that i've seen lots of debates online. >> a lot of women are not happy about that. >> but equally, they did >> no. but equally, they did point know, the point out that, you know, the ceo of prostate cancer is females. so something the females. so something the females . so it's as if you're females. so it's as if you're best kind of, you know , best kind of, you know, talented. do the job. you get the best person that makes regardless of gender. remember? yeah. so but i think the problem is that the particular person in charge has got some kind of history of being quite a trans activist and, well, even not using the word woman for that particular charity . particular charity. >> she strikes me as something that would disqualify you from working for that charity. i take your point. >> annoys me. >> annoys me. >> i know, but i take your >> no, i know, but i take your point female. point about male. female. i suppose if you're qualified. >> yes, course. >> yes, of course. >> if you're qualified. doesn't matter. is not irrespective >> but this is not irrespective of gender, is it? >> because this is someone who started journey started out their life journey as now as one gender and is now transitioned to another? this is all about gender for the lady that's head of the prostate

charity me. it's great. you know, we probably have more women as ceos , but she is women as ceos, but she is a biological woman who has remained a biological woman . remained a biological woman. this is a biological man who has become a woman and is assisting on people, calling her on other people, calling her a woman and this is what happens when remove bullying from when you remove bullying from schools, way, because schools, by the way, because we've now lost. wow. we've now we've now lost. wow. we've now we've we've now not we're now no longer able to identify what bullying is asking a question that you might not like is not bullying is it not, paul, it. not >> yes. i feel very bullied right now . right now. >> legs ogoun flamethrowers. oh come on. i feel very bullied. yeah paul? >> emma barnum. she was just doing a job, wasn't she? >> yeah. >> yeah. >> and i thought. i mean, i listened to the. to the item and. yeah, i think she was a really good interviewer. she asked really good questions. yeah. >> did come across as aggressive? >> no, not all. not at all. >> no, not at all. not at all. and i mean, i do like play and i mean, i do like to play devil's advocate and it's devil's advocate and, and it's that sort thing a that sort of thing going as a woman, i have no problem with a

trans being the head if woman, i have no problem with a t|suffer being the head if woman, i have no problem with a t|suffer endometriosis,| if i suffer from endometriosis, i wouldn't mind. i don't care who's in charge as long as they know how the condition know how to treat the condition and can help. >> does bother you if they >> does it bother you if they can't use the word woman? >> does it bother you if they canit use the word woman? >> does it bother you if they canit is.e the word woman? >> does it bother you if they canit is. it1e word woman? >> does it bother you if they canit is. it can't rd woman? >> does it bother you if they canit is. it can't though an? >> does it bother you if they canit is. it can't though of’ >> it is. it can't though of course it does bother me. can't use the word woman. but won't they? are we saying they can't use the word woman? they're just using different terminology to a degree, yes. but if we're getting rid of women. yeah, of course i'm going to. i'm going to start a protest and go and go in the bull ring with my uterus. >> i don't think we're i don't think we're quite getting rid of the word woman, but oh, my goodness me. the imagery has gone very graphic all a gone very graphic all of a sudden. a question sudden. let's get a question from shirley. >> where's shirley? shirley. >> where's shirley? hi shirley. >> where's shirley? hi shirley. >> the supreme court got >> has the supreme court got a problem with rwanda? >> yeah. no, this was interesting because obviously we've had all these developments with supreme court, now with the supreme court, but now a the rwandan a spokesperson for the rwandan government is saying the government is saying that the supreme is insulting supreme court is insulting rwanda by saying, you know, this is an unsafe country to send

people to the rwandan government is furious because they say, no, no, we have incredible facilities . facilities. >> we know what we're doing. we're doing this for ages. paul, have point? is this racist? >> they do. okay. >> they do. okay. >> if we start, are we >> so if we start, are we starting first principles here? the not the supreme court, it's not their the their opinion they're using the british available to british law that's available to them. they them. fair enough. and they can't different decision can't make a different decision whether or whether i agree with that or not, don't happen to agree not, and i don't happen to agree with it. i think we need third party immigration and countries to load to help us out with the load that moment. that we've got at the moment. however if this was a left leaning policy without a doubt we as racist , we would see this as as racist, without a doubt. but this is coming as a right leaning policy . we're saying, you know, we want certain want to remove certain immigrants and take them to a third party country and therefore, they're quite happy to it's not on the list. to say it's not on the list. >> but this difficult because >> but this is difficult because left activists now will left wing activists now will say that lived that it's about the lived experience perception of the experience and perception of the individual. if person of individual. so if a person of colour says that they feel it's racist, then is. the racist, then it is. if so, the rwandan is saying, rwandan government is saying, well, so why aren't the left marching about this? >> i'm just really uncomfortable

with experience with the term lived experience because all got lived because we've all got a lived experience. thing experience. but the only thing that the base line that anchors us, the base line that anchors us, the base line that us has to be the that anchors us has to be the truth. only one truth. so there is only one version the truth, and you version of the truth, and you really met any of these really haven't met any of these actors? them. i'm actors? i have met them. i'm speaking truth. >> exactly. just the >> yeah, well, exactly. just the truth. truth. >> just. that's >> it's not. we just. that's what out. laws rules what we set out. laws and rules and debate, and boundaries of debate, don't we? oh, you're so old fashioned. >> listen, isn't it? >> listen, jojo, isn't it? i mean , it does put some of mean, it does put the some of the activists in a bind. >> know, they the >> you know, they hate the tories and hate their tories and they hate their rwanda policy. they rwanda policy. and they say they're by sending they're being racist by sending them rwanda them to rwanda. but now rwanda is telling they're being is telling them they're being racist them to rwanda. >> so you're kind of it's a tncky >> so you're kind of it's a tricky we all have a drink and calm down. i mean, that's probably. >> is that thing. but >> but it is that thing. but when gets into letter of when it gets into the letter of the law. yeah, it's again, it's regardless of principle, law regardless of principle, the law is law. exactly. you is the law. yeah, exactly. you know, mean, law black know, i mean, the law is black and emotion in and white. there's no emotion in law, seem to law, unfortunately, we seem to be to change the be using emotion to change the laws people's feelings. >> yeah, and look, you can't please in this please everyone. or in this case, anyone. anyone. well, okay. the okay. anyway next on the program, politician program, finnish politician paivi involved paivi rasanen has been involved in case which major

in a court case which has major implications free speech. implications for free speech. that's the one where she quoted the in court. the bible and landed in court. stay find out what stay tuned to find out what happened.

welcome back to free speech nafion welcome back to free speech nation with me andrew doyle finnish politician paivi racine went on trial in august after hate speech after publicly expressing christian beliefs , expressing christian beliefs, piv was charged with agitation against a minority group back in 2021 for sharing her beliefs on marriage and sexual ethics. in a tweet two years earlier, as well as a live radio debate and 2004 church pamphlet . so the verdict church pamphlet. so the verdict is now in. i'm joined by lorcan price legal counsel for adf uk, and hopefully piv will be joining us down the line in a moment. but in the meantime, welcome to the show. >> lorcan thank andrew. so >> lorcan thank you, andrew. so could you explain to us, for those of us who have no idea

about what's going on here, what is the background to this case? >> well, as you say, in 2019, a pithy tweeted criticism of the decision of her church, which is the finnish lutheran church, to sponsor the helsinki pride parade . and she said that parade. and she said that essentially why would they use church funds to do that? and she included in her tweet a picture of scripture and as a result of this, somebody made a criminal complaint to the police. they then opened an investigation into her. they went into things she had written in 2004. so nearly 15 years prior to that, where she talked about the purpose marriage in the purpose of marriage in the christian between man christian context between a man and that would not and a woman that would not include marriage. again, and a woman that would not incleas marriage. again, and a woman that would not incleas in marriage. again, and a woman that would not incleas in the rriage. again, and a woman that would not incleas in the contextlgain, that was in the context of a debate that going on in the debate that was going on in the finnish lutheran church at the time. because those two time. and because of those two things, brought things, they brought criminal charges her. things, they brought criminal chajust her. things, they brought criminal chajust forzr. things, they brought criminal chajust for everyone, >> just clarify for everyone, because the accusation one because the accusation was one of that's right. of hate speech. that's right. what bible quotation what was the bible quotation that why was it that she included and why was it so was from so hateful? well it was from romans and what essentially what she was the bible quotation uses strong language about a man

shall not lay down with man . i'm shall not lay down with man. i'm familiar with the verse so the problem with that is that somebody took offence to it. >> yes, but it's in every bible in finland and around the world. in the world. exactly that. and you can find bibles and libraries and churches and so on. but it was the fact that she tweeted it with a criticism of her church's decision to sponsor the and the the pride parade and then the pamphlet to do with the pamphlet that was to do with the debate gay marriage. debate over gay marriage. >> it? i know not >> now, how was it? i know not that this should be relevant because i believe in free speech. you say, speech. no matter what you say, but saying her view was but was she saying her view was that not that gay marriage is not compatible christian compatible with christian thought that thought or was she saying that gays and should be, you gays are evil and should be, you know, thrown into volcano or something? >> absolutely not. no. she was saying compatible with saying it's not compatible with homosexual such or homosexual behaviour as such or within marriage. right. and so her distinction was that christians believe this is a sin, but that you should love the sinner, which is what jesus christ said when he was here preaching. and it was exactly what she said. christians believe. out her believe. and she goes out of her way pamphlet on a number way in the pamphlet on a number of and fact, the

of occasions and in fact, the prosecution to admit prosecution was forced to admit this in court, to say that every person dignity , equal person has dignity, equal dignity, be dignity, they should be respected and discrimination, unlawful discrimination is wrong. yes, but christians believe this and they believe it for these reasons. >> so this does sound like pretty standard christian beliefs. doesn't sound like beliefs. it doesn't sound like it's in it's been framed in a particularly hateful way. why would be subject to would that be subject to a criminal prosecution? i think a lot of people watching be very confused by that because you can't prosecute. we can't prosecute. would we prosecute every waterstone's because of prosecute every waterstone's bec bible of prosecute every waterstone's bec bible on of prosecute every waterstone's bec bible on sale? of prosecute every waterstone's bec bible on sale? what's of prosecute every waterstone's bec bible on sale? what's going the bible on sale? what's going on well, this is precisely what >> well, this is precisely what confused us. and it's only when you at who made the you look at who made the prosecution decision , who was prosecution decision, who was then prosecutor, then the chief prosecutor, a lady she lady called raja torfaen. she said quite publicly that as far as she was concerned, finland was suffering from an epidemic of hate speech and that while you were entitled believe you were entitled to believe what this is a quote what it says and this is a quote in the bible quran or in the bible or the quran or mein kampf, you weren't necessarily that necessarily entitled to say that out a way. out in a hateful way. >> put those >> so she actually put those three together as though three texts together as though they're comparable. >> correct. >> correct. >> mean, isn't that hate >> i mean, isn't that hate speech? it shows deep

speech? well it shows a deep ideological position on the part of the prosecution services, and that concern all of us, that should concern all of us, irrespective what european irrespective of what european country you're in what country you're in or what country you're in or what country you're in or what country you in. country you are in. >> because if you have vague laws plus an ideologically motivated service motivated prosecution service or any institution , then you come any institution, then you come with these type of outcomes. any institution, then you come witiso 1ese type of outcomes. any institution, then you come witiso 1ese wasn'tf outcomes. any institution, then you come witiso 1ese wasn't promoting. any institution, then you come witiso 1ese wasn't promoting the >> so she wasn't promoting the idea that they should change the law make homosexuality law to make homosexuality illegal. certainly not or anything that. nothing anything like that. so nothing like so like that. so this is so confusing. so it goes to court anyway, prosecuted. what's confusing. so it goes to court anyverdict? prosecuted. what's the verdict? >> well, we had it in the helsinki criminal court two years and was years ago now, and it was unanimous acquittal. the prosecution can then have the power, strangely, under finnish law, appeal a not guilty law, to appeal a not guilty verdict they appealed the verdict. so they appealed to the court and then just court of appeal. and then just there month, we another there this month, we had another unanimous guilty verdict. so unanimous not guilty verdict. so she's put through two she's been put through two rounds proceedings , two rounds of court proceedings, two years of this case dragging on over 12, 15 hours. in fact , of over 12, 15 hours. in fact, of police interrogation. yes and all to arrive at the conclusion that was obvious to anybody paying that was obvious to anybody paying attention that she wasn't

engagedin paying attention that she wasn't engaged in hate speech. so is this the end of it? >> because you say that now it's the appeal has been found that, again, guilty, unanimous. again, not guilty, unanimous. yes. try again? yes. can they try again? >> they can actually they can take they do take it. can they just do this endlessly? and that's endlessly? well, and that's that's a very interesting question. i mean, these guys will the of this will reach the end of this process appeal the process with an appeal to the supreme court and if we're acquitted there, that will be the we're found the end of it. if we're found guilty then bring guilty there, we can then bring it ourselves european it ourselves to the european court of rights. so we're court of human rights. so we're we'll wait and see. so we'll have to wait and see. so the itself is the process itself is a punishment? course, punishment? yes of course, you're message and you're sending a message and this deliberately, this is quite deliberately, i think prosecutor think what the prosecutor general here general was doing here to everyone society. everyone in finnish society. five well—known public five is a well—known public figure politician. if figure. she's a politician. if we drag her through we can drag her through the courts, can do it courts, this much we can do it to you as well. so you better stay quiet. yeah. >> now, i was in finland quite recently giving a talk and i didn't the extent that didn't realise the extent that these kind of critical social justice ideology justice woke ideology has taken hold a lot of hold in finland. and a lot of people very, very people there are very, very liberals worried. liberals are very worried. they're is they're saying this is a disaster our country, this disaster for our country, this authoritarian movement that's sweeping through, have these hate speech laws always been on

the books is this a the statute books or is this a relatively or the statute books or is this a reléthey/ or the statute books or is this a reléthey just or the statute books or is this a reléthey just being or the statute books or is this a reléthey just being applied or the statute books or is this a reléthey just being applied with are they just being applied with greater force given the ideological of those in ideological bent of those in charge? >> well, they came in in 2005. and interestingly, piv was actually a politician who voted for them when she was in parliament, but parliament, is that right? but she'd believed they'd be she'd never believed they'd be used of way. so it used in this kind of way. so it goes kind of goes to show you kind of unintended but unintended consequences. but they were introduced 2000 they were introduced in 2000 and sorry, since then sorry, 2010. and since then we've seen a new prosecutor come in who has since left, actually, and she has used them in this kind of weaponized way. i described the reason they're there is this is finland taking its obligations from international law on hate speech into domestic law. right. so and we the uk, has the same obugafionsin we the uk, has the same obligations in international law and have very concerning and we have very concerning laws in you know. in this country, as you know. >> and they're getting >> we do. and they're getting worse scotland introducing >> we do. and they're getting worsehate scotland introducing >> we do. and they're getting worsehate speech nd introducing >> we do. and they're getting worsehate speech laws, roducing >> we do. and they're getting worsehate speech laws, the icing their hate speech laws, the irish speech an irish hate speech bill is an absolute disaster for free speech, that's a good speech, but that's a good example. ireland, lot example. so with ireland, a lot of critics are saying, well, this will be weaponised by activists to effectively criminalise anyone who misgenders someone who likes to use pronouns according to biological sex, not some sense

of a gendered soul. now now that's a real problem. but the irish government is saying, no, that would never happen. don't worry, just put it on the statute never statute books. it'll never happen. of piv, happen. but this case of piv, she thought it wouldn't happen. she it it did she voted for it and it did happen. the happen. doesn't this show the danger such a vague, danger of putting such a vague, nebulous terms like hate onto the statute books without any definition at all? >> absolutely. as you unless you've already guessed, i'm an irishman . i've been in dublin irishman. i've been in dublin speaking members of speaking to members of the parliament that of parliament about that piece of legislation deeply legislation. it's deeply concerning. then minister concerning. the then minister for in ireland said that forjustice in ireland said that the reason they had left kind of an open ended category around gender quote unquote gender was to quote unquote futureproof new futureproof the law so that new gender identities that are discovered the would discovered in the future would also that. also be protected by that. that's astonishing . that's astonishing. >> also say, >> it's didn't they also say, when define hatred? when asked to define hatred? well, was well, it means hatred. it was a circular definition, correct? >> yeah, right. >> yeah, right. >> this absolutely >> well, this is absolutely absurd. means that you're absurd. it means that you're left a position where you left in a position where you never know whether what you're saying in a group to your friends setting. friends is in a public setting. >> wherever or whether or not it actually crosses the threshold

into prudent into hate. so the prudent decision would be then say nothing. exactly. don't get into controversy. and course, you controversy. and of course, you don't the views of a don't know what the views of a future government might be, how they might choose to interpret hate. >> they could interpret criticism of the government as hate. do you do i hate. what do you do then? i mean, be an mean, this seems to be an obvious problem me , but it's obvious problem to me, but it's not one that people i mean, not one that people are. i mean, a of the people who are a lot of the people who are would supportive the would be supportive of what the government aren't government did to pivi aren't really of how really thinking in terms of how the legislation might be used against them. one day. the legislation might be used aga exactly. n. one day. the legislation might be used aga exactly. i. one day. the legislation might be used agaexactly. i mean,iay. the legislation might be used agaexactly. i mean, you can >> exactly. i mean, you can totally disagree with what pivi said, you you have said, but if you you have to take the risk then a future take the risk then that a future government take government may not take a very different about own different view about your own position decide to position and then decide to prosecute giving prosecute you. giving institutional to institutional power to ideological prosecutors with vague, open ended laws is a recipe for disaster for everybody, irrespective of where they stand on different issues. >> lorcan price , thanks so much >> lorcan price, thanks so much for joining me. really appreciate you forjoining me. really appreciate you . appreciate you. thank you. >> afraid we couldn't get >> so i'm afraid we couldn't get piper down the line due to technical difficulties, but i think lorcan fills in quite adequately. >> but next on free speech nation, i'm going be speaking

nation, i'm going to be speaking to whom by fire, who to the band whom by fire, who found that one of their gigs was cancelled for the heinous crime of appearing on this programme. i feel very bad about that. see you shortly . who is it? you shortly. who is it? >> we're here for the show . >> we're here for the show. welcome to the dinosaur hour with me. john cleese . haha, that with me. john cleese. haha, that was married to a therapist and you survived. i thought we were getting hugh laurie second best. i'm bellissima. you interviewed saddam hussein. what's that like ? i was terrified. i'm playing strip poker with these three. oh no, thank you. >> my cds need to be put in alphabetical order. >> oh, are you going to be problematic again ? problematic again? >> the dinosaur hour , sundays at >> the dinosaur hour, sundays at 9:00 on gb news. choose

radio show.

>> welcome back to free speech nation. >> so later in the show, i'll be turning agony uncle with the help of my panel, jojo's sutherland and paul cox. and we're going to help you deal with unfiltered dilemmas. with your unfiltered dilemmas. so any problems at so if you've got any problems at all, to answer them. all, trust us to answer them. really at really do. just email us at gbviews@gbnews.uk . com and we'll gbviews@gbnews.uk. com and we'll do very best to not destroy do our very best to not destroy your life. so end based band whom by fire first appeared on this show back in july to discuss how they were cancelled from folk festival, from the lee folk festival, apparently questioning the apparently for questioning the sexualisation of children in school online. that appearance itself has had repercussions, though , and the band then found though, and the band then found themselves cancelled by a church where they were due to perform an evening of music. so here to tell more, i'm joined by band tell me more, i'm joined by band members eliza mills and dan salamandras and their friend and promoter nathan dukette . so i'm promoter nathan dukette. so i'm going to come to whom by fire first. now you were on the show

in july and you explained what happened, but maybe just explain again, you were supposed to perform at the lee folk festival. yeah. >> yeah, we were. were >> yeah, we were. and we were informed that due to social media comments that we were weren't going to be welcomed there. and they weren't specific. >> you were you were raising concerns about the sexualization of children in schools, right? >> it was . i raised >> yeah, it was. i raised a particular concern about a certain book reading that's in pride were promoting, certain book reading that's in pride were promoting , which pride were promoting, which advocated for paedophilia . it advocated for paedophilia. it wasn't an over 18 event. i thought it was a fair enough thing to question . yes. and thing to question. yes. and nobody's denied that. that's what it was about . what it was about. >> my understanding is that you would you would seen some previous posts by one of the organisers users which suggested a kind of tolerance that a kind of tolerance for that kind of thing. and you were criticising right. kind of thing. and you were crit and|g right. kind of thing. and you were critand|g rigessentially that. kind of thing. and you were crityeahg rigessentially that. kind of thing. and you were crityeah . rigessentially that. kind of thing. and you were crit yeah . yeah.ssentially that. kind of thing. and you were crityeah . yeah. so, itially that. kind of thing. and you were crityeah . yeah. so, solly that. kind of thing. and you were crityeah . yeah. so, so what's. >> yeah. yeah. so, so what's wrong with that would be the first no love to know that if anyone knows. but did they and then they just cancelled the gig right? they tell you that they give a reason. no. give you a solid reason. no. >> went their

>> just went against their ethics. how >> i'm not sure how. >> i'm not sure how. >> yeah, i think it was because they were inclusive. >> they were being inclusive. so it sounds to me like the kind of situation where they don't really understand what you were tweeting about and thought tweeting about and they thought you just that you were just attacking that particular something like that. >> but even if you were, do >> but even if you were, we do live society where we do live in a society where we do have speech. we express have free speech. we can express views disagree with. views that people disagree with. that shouldn't that should be okay, shouldn't it okay? it should be okay? >> so. definitely. >> i think so. definitely. >> i think so. definitely. >> so you weren't able play >> so you weren't able to play then came this show and then you came onto this show and then you came onto this show and then were about then they were annoyed about that. cancelled you this time? >> a church. a church? a local church we've played at church that we've played at before have welcomed us with before who have welcomed us with open and yeah, what am i, open arms and yeah, what am i, the antichrist or something? >> what's going on here? the antichrist or something? >> thist's going on here? the antichrist or something? >> this is going on here? the antichrist or something? >> this is ridiculous. iere? >> this is ridiculous. >> this is ridiculous. >> so, nathan, you were involved in tried to. in this? well, they tried to. you're. singer you're. you're a singer songwriter you've songwriter as well. you've performed together but were performed together, but you were organising event, and these organising an event, and these same contacted you , is same activists contacted you, is that right? >> so i a few messages back >> so i had a few messages back and which chose to and forth, which i chose to ignore. basically saying ignore. yes. basically saying either cancel the gig or remove my friends from the line—up. it

was us two us guys. you were sharing the bill? yeah. so i put the night on and i asked him by far as to come and play because they're amazing. um and the pressure put on to say, pressure was put on to say, either remove them and do either remove them and just do the light on your own or cancel the light on your own or cancel the i chose to ignore. they the gig i chose to ignore. they went venue. venue went to the venue. the venue said as they should. said nothing as they should. >> did they come to >> so did they come to you because feel because you're >> so did they come to you b> so did they come to you b> so did they come to you b> think were probably >> i think they were probably trying again in trying to put me again in a position their pride. i might fit into one of their letters. and so as such, they wanted to share the same views as me. and that's not i mean, i felt was right. >> that's kind of the problem that i you i'm that i feel. you know, i'm constantly part this constantly told i'm part of this lgbtqia community, so therefore i agree everything lgbtqia community, so therefore i everyone everything lgbtqia community, so therefore i everyone else everything lgbtqia community, so therefore i everyone else averytibut that everyone else says. but we're within we're all individuals within that and disagree on that and we all disagree on stuff. that's fine. right? that and we all disagree on stu�*exactly. hat's fine. right? that and we all disagree on stu�*exactly. it's; fine. right? that and we all disagree on stu�*exactly. it's like a. right? that and we all disagree on stu�*exactly. it's like a. we're’ >> exactly. it's like if we're going everyone with an going to cancel everyone with an opposing would opposing view, all of us would be cancelled. well, of course, so. but also in terms of artistry, i mean, you're all musicians now. >> i know quite a lot about the

history the and music, history of the arts and music, and really and there are a lot of really bad people, really bad artists who produced incredible work . who produced incredible work. should we really be policing the moral views of the people who produce art? >> no . >> no. >> no. >> well, it's a simple question and a simple answer. >> yes. sorry but that's. >> yes. sorry but that's. >> but why do you think this has happened? why is this going on at moment? any thoughts ? at the moment? any thoughts? it's a big question. >> it's a big question. >> it's a big question. >> nathan, do you have any ideas? >>i ideas? >> ihave ideas? >> i have a feeling social media might play a little role. really? that's my opinion . yeah, really? that's my opinion. yeah, well, it does seem to get people riled up, doesn't it? >> yeah. have you had any problems with social media? people since this people gone after you since this thing ? thing happened? >> i was . compared to >> i think i was. compared to hitler. yeah >> you're compared to hitler? yeah >> dan, that's nothing. i mean, i get that every day. >> it doesn't mean anything, but did they you any sense of did they give you any sense of why by appearing on show in particular? >> yeah. would disqualify you from performing at a church? well, we've heard a few a few things this week, actually.

>> just that gb news is far right. far right? yes. >> i mean, that's news to me. and i work here. yeah >> yeah. so we have to disassociate ourselves from gb news as a result. >> i think sporting anti—trans anti—woke , which i support anti—woke, which i support actually . actually. >> but i mean, that's just a misunderstanding of what i mean. this is often the case that a lot of activists make a decision about what's going on on the channel and then they just say that, it doesn't bear any that, but it doesn't bear any relation to actually relation to what actually happens on the channel. we have discussions and open debate and i that's they're i think that's what they're probably afraid of, isn't it? when emailed did you when they emailed you, did you what of tone did they take? what sort of tone did they take? was it a kind of was it was it a kind of demanding tone or it just demanding tone or was it a just a polite request? >> i'd say was >> i'd say it was quite demanding. yeah. >> i'd say it was quite derand ing. yeah. >> i'd say it was quite derand what yeah. >> i'd say it was quite derand what would yeah. >> i'd say it was quite derand what would they yeah. >> i'd say it was quite derand what would they have. >> i'd say it was quite derand what would they have been >> and what would they have been happy with then? just. just for you capitulate , i suppose. you to capitulate, i suppose. >> do they were >> just to do what they were asking do, which again asking me to do, which again is making me man. yes. kind making me a yes man. yes. kind of happy to and do that. of not happy to sit and do that. and so you just your, your strategy was ignore . strategy was to ignore. >> yeah. than do anything >> yeah. rather than do anything

else. very else. okay. that's very interesting. that's the interesting. that's probably the way isn't it? yeah way to do it, isn't it? yeah that's great. >> that's . dup. >> that's. dup. >> that's. dup. >> do you have any recourse ? >> do you have any recourse? because presumably this is a private venue . you know, they private venue. you know, they i suppose they get to decide who performs venue . is performs at their venue. is there anything you can do? can you is there anyone you can complain to? >> yeah , we, we are making >> yeah, we, we are making complaints we're to complaints and we're talking to the church as well. >> yes. we're going to be in communication them quite communication with them quite heavily on this matter because i think the whole church thing for me personally has cut deeper than the lee folk festival . than the lee folk festival. really? why is that? yeah, i was brought up in a christian household. i've i've been a christian for many years. yes and so the fact that this has happened from , you know, a happened from, you know, a church. yes it's not the god that i'm kind of used to that i understand is doing this. it's. yeah but it doesn't sound very inclusive. >> if i may say. if i may use their word. yeah yeah. i mean be interesting if you want me to talk to them, it'd be

interesting to see what they what they think is far right about me or the station, given i've tory. i've never even voted tory. i don't how they would. don't know how they would. i don't know how they would. i don't know how they would square don't know how they would. i don' really? how they would square don't know how they would. i don' really? how they 'any d square that really? have you any thoughts they've got this thoughts of why they've got this this their of it this sense in their head of it angers me . angers me. >> that's that's the truth . >> that's the that's the truth. exactly what you said about inclusion right now, excluding people under this guise of including people . yeah. and for including people. yeah. and for the church to do that says a lot. >> have you found any as this has happened to you before or has happened to you before or has it have you had any sense that this is happening more in the industry because it did happen to roisin murphy, for instance, posted instance, when she posted something on her private facebook ? it wasn't even facebook page? it wasn't even for public consumption , and then for public consumption, and then it largely attacked it was largely attacked and misinterpreted and all rest misinterpreted and all the rest of it. this a broader problem of it. is this a broader problem within music? >> it is going to become >> i think it is going to become more more of a problem. it more of a more of a problem. it seems like the on the on seems like it's on the on the on the and not in a good way. the up and not in a good way. >> right. okay. okay. well, i do hope get through hope you're able to get through it. something more. tell it. and do something more. tell me your music and me a bit about your music and what do. what you do. >> yeah, well, it it's obviously

very >> yeah, well, it it's obviously veryeah , not in the slightest. >> yeah, not in the slightest. >> yeah, not in the slightest. >> it's all about love, redemption, yeah redemption, freedom. yeah >> um, that sounds quite controversial to me. >> yeah, yeah, yeah. all of our gigs, everyone is actually welcome as well. yeah and, you know , nobody's normally injured know, nobody's normally injured or hurt at them, but that's the strange idea, isn't it? >> this idea that if someone doesn't agree with you about something, it's essentially harmful to even be in their presence . yeah, that's the odd presence. yeah, that's the odd thing. that's awful , presence. yeah, that's the odd thing. that's awful, isn't presence. yeah, that's the odd thing. that's awful , isn't it? thing. that's awful, isn't it? yeah. and is this a i mean, the church got a great church hasn't got a great track record. if you go back centuries, know, we could centuries, you know, we could potentially cancel them. you know, saying , i don't know, i'm just saying, i don't want anyone ideas, but want to give anyone ideas, but i think that's possible. think that's that's possible. and would love to is and what i would love to get is a representative the church a representative of the church to come on the show and have a chat about. chat with with you about. >> incredible. >> it's incredible. >> it's incredible. >> well, i'm going extend >> well, i'm going to extend that now. i'm not that invitation now. i'm not going breath, but if going to hold my breath, but if you come on to the you do want to come on to the show, do. it won't be show, please do. it won't be combative. we'll have combative. we'll just have a chat because i'd chat about that because i'd be very to know what chat about that because i'd be very thought to know what chat about that because i'd be very thought aboutw what chat about that because i'd be very thought about it.vhat chat about that because i'd be

very thought about it. sot people thought about it. so anyway, what? nathan, what about you? music? you? what about your music? what's what's your style? >> well, would say it can be >> well, i would say it can be a little bit sad, but with nice >> well, i would say it can be a little glimmer)ut with nice >> well, i would say it can be a little glimmer of with nice >> well, i would say it can be a little glimmer of hope. nice little glimmer of hope. >> well, that's good. >> yeah, well, that's good. >> yeah, well, that's good. >> we. nothing >> well, we. nothing controversial, nothing controversial. okay, look, really >> okay, well, look, i really appreciate you coming on and discussing think discussing this, because i think this too often this this is happening too often now. mean, final question. now. and i mean, final question. what is the way out of this? because it does seem like to what is the way out of this? becathe it does seem like to what is the way out of this? becathe example aem like to what is the way out of this? becathe example ofn like to what is the way out of this? becathe example of rocketman give the example of rocketman murphy cancelled, murphy when she was cancelled, very people within the very few people within the industry lot industry said anything. a lot of people a bit as in, people felt a bit scared, as in, if happens to that people felt a bit scared, as in, if happen s to that people felt a bit scared, as in, if happen too that people felt a bit scared, as in, if happen to us. that people felt a bit scared, as in, if happen to us. that's might happen to us. that's understandable, isn't it ? understandable, isn't it? >> absolutely. >> absolutely. >> so then how do you break through that and get people to talk more about it? >> i think you need to, first of all, support people that don't necessarily . necessarily. >> lily, you don't necessarily agree with everything they say, but are speaking out and, you know, agree to disagree with them and just definitely don't apologise if you haven't done anything wrong . anything wrong. >> i think that's a really key idea .

idea. >> i mean, we were just talking about a finished politician who's been prosecuted for quoting the bible because she believes that she doesn't believes that she doesn't believe in gay marriage. >> , i disagree her, >> well, i disagree with her, but i know that if i don't fight for her right to say that, it will come back on all right. >> exactly. >> exactly. >> it is kind of the same thing, isn't it? a broader problem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrstake a broader problem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrstake here, broader problem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrstake here, isn'tier problem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrstake here, isn't there?)lem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrsta well re, isn't there?)lem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrsta well look,1't there?)lem >> it is kind of the same thing, isrsta well look, thankre?)lem yeah. well look, thank you all so for coming on. it's been so much for coming on. it's been really fascinating about so much for coming on. it's been reall' story. nating about so much for coming on. it's been reall' story. whom about so much for coming on. it's been reall' story. whom by about so much for coming on. it's been reall'story. whom by fire?about your story. whom by fire? everyone . anas sarwar everyone who. anas sarwar fryston station . we're joined by fryston station. we're joined by dr. peter hughes , a philosopher dr. peter hughes, a philosopher and author who's written a book about how excessive kindness to one group can mean cruelty to another. see you in a moment.

welcome back to free speech nation. how is kindness become

cruel and divisive? well, that's a theory. being advanced by dr. peter hughes, a philosopher and author who has written this week about how acting with extreme kindness to one group can lead to acts cruelty towards to acts of cruelty towards another . and to acts of cruelty towards another. and i'm delighted to say that dr. peter hughes joins me now. welcome to show . me now. welcome to the show. >> you much for >> thank you very much for inviting so peter, where inviting me. so peter, where does theory of yours come does this theory of yours come from? >> w comes from? >> comes originally >> well, it comes originally from the work of a polish psychiatry ist called andrew lobachevsky. wrote a book lobachevsky. he wrote a book when poland was under communist occupation called political ponerology. that's p o n e r ology. and that means the theory of the origin of evil. ology. and that means the theory of the origin of evil . and what of the origin of evil. and what really fascinated him was how a what he called a pathological minority, a minority of people who narcissistic, grandiose , who are narcissistic, grandiose, but mediocre and believed in themselves way beyond what their competence would dictate, took it upon themselves. >> i know a few people like, but. >> but nobody but they took it upon themselves to decide what people could think, what people could what people could could do. yes. what people could say . and he was fascinated by

say. and he was fascinated by this . and he wrote this book in this. and he wrote this book in collaboration other collaboration with other psychiater originally psychiater trysts. it originally they copy of it on the they threw one copy of it on the fire when secret police came fire when the secret police came around they around just in time, they smuggled another out to the smuggled another one out to the vatican, lost . and vatican, which got lost. and eventually recovered it eventually he he recovered it from memory and rewrote it from memory. missing a lost a lot of the statistical data. but the bafic the statistical data. but the basic points he made were true. and what i'm fascinated in is how pathological minority can how a pathological minority can come power , can hold power come to power, can hold power when the majority of the people do believe in what they're do not believe in what they're saying. and in our case, what we've pathologized in our society kindness. society is kindness. >> there's something very >> so there's something very interesting of interesting about this idea of i've seen kindness and being a victim. weaponized. yeah so that effectively the assertion of victimhood becomes a means to bully others and to cudgel others, which sounds counterintuitive, of course, but we see it all the time. so we see it among activists. we've seen it on the streets of london. we've seen people chanting more effectively chanting for more effectively genocide death of jewish genocide and death of jewish people. and saying that they are

victims. and that's why they're doing it. what's going on there? >> well, because you >> yeah, well, because what you do have a strong do is you have a strong allegiance your in—group and allegiance to your in—group and that strong allegiance to your in—group and that to strong allegiance to your in—group and that to your strong allegiance to your in—group and that to your outgroup. and aversion to your outgroup. and the more the more depth and virulence your virulence you support your in—group, likely you in—group, the more likely you are violent to your are to be violent to your outgroup. me give you outgroup. so let me give you some examples. we a case some examples. we had a case recently, obviously the wake recently, obviously in the wake of atrocities in in of the hamas atrocities in in israel. people tearing israel. we've had people tearing down posters of children who've been who've been taken hostage. we've had universal ortiz making statements condemning israel with no mention of hamas whatsoever . and we had yesterday whatsoever. and we had yesterday a student in, i think a canadian college called durham college saying that she supports hamas fully and believes they should do it in her words, again and again. and again and again. and it's all done in the name of kindness for the oppressed. so once you divide the world into oppressor and oppressed, the righteous and unrighteous, righteous and the unrighteous, the sinful and the blameless, then you can unleash unlimited cruelty. >> but is it just because they have sort of these things have become abstractions to these

people ? you know, they're not people? you know, they're not there the seeing the people? you know, they're not therknow,1e seeing the people? you know, they're not therknow, children seeing the people? you know, they're not therknow, children being|g the you know, children being burnt alive, people being raped alive, seeing people being raped and tortured murdered. and and tortured and murdered. and so, see this and tortured and murdered. and so,something see this and tortured and murdered. and so,something that's see this and tortured and murdered. and so,something that's happening as something that's happening far away and they sort of, far away and they can sort of, i suppose, romanticise it and change into something that it isn't. >> e- isn't. >> slightly different >> but it's slightly different from psychology >> but it's slightly different fronwhat psychology >> but it's slightly different fronwhat makes psychology >> but it's slightly different fronwhat makes it psychology >> but it's slightly different fronwhat makes it such sychology and what makes it such a catastrophe really is that the psychology is very is very psychology of it is very is very robust because we're really talking themselves . yes. talking only to themselves. yes. and what they're doing is that one person who believes in this type of pathological kindness will connect very with will connect very well with somebody doesn't . somebody else who doesn't. whereas of ordinary whereas for the mass of ordinary people, they have a very different understanding of kindness. kindness kindness. we understand kindness as being giving someone who as being giving to someone who has a need, who might be in trouble, might be struggling has a need, who might be in t|regardless might be struggling has a need, who might be in t|regardless ofiight be struggling has a need, who might be in t|regardless of what)e struggling has a need, who might be in t|regardless of what theiruggling , regardless of what their belief of belief is. one of the foundational stories for own foundational stories for our own civilisation good civilisation is the good samaritan and course, the samaritan. and of course, the good is someone who good samaritan is someone who who and helps who comes along and helps someone who's been robbed and attacked, even though they come from different social groups . from different social groups. and the samaritan is the exile . and the samaritan is the exile. the other, if you want. and this

these acts of kindness which ordinary engaged are ordinary people engaged in are being demonised because they're not using the correct language or that. >> but it is baffling to me. or that. >> but it is baffling to me . you >> but it is baffling to me. you know, that activist at know, we saw that activist at the trans pride rally calling basically to punch basically the crowd to punch women who disagreed with them and getting a cheer and getting a big cheer right now . what's going on there? now. what's going on there? because are a group of because these are a group of people who saying they are people who are saying they are demonised and victimised, but they are the bullies quite clearly situation. clearly in that situation. >> well, lobachevsky estimated about 5 6% a population about 5 to 6% of a population charleton, called it. the charleton, he called it. the pathological underbelly will drive these right. drive these ideas. right. but what pathologies. what they do is the pathologies. then pathologize normal then they pathologize normal people else gets people and everybody else gets pulled this catastrophic pulled into this catastrophic world in which that's interesting . interesting. >> so it's a minority. it's a minority that drives this. >> it's not a majority. well, i was going to say, because with all threats rape all the death threats and rape threats that towards j.k. threats that go towards j.k. rowling for having an rowling simply for having an opinion people opinion that most people hold and a very compassionate and for a very compassionate opinion, as it happens now, it would never occur me. would never occur to me. >> think of any scenario >> i can't think of any scenario where would behave like that. where i would behave like that. and these thousands and yet, you see these thousands and people doing

and thousands of people doing that. i can't think of any scenario would scenario where i would attempt to like people to defend terrorists like people are is it just it's are doing. so is it just it's not that we've suddenly got socio widespread socio apathy on a widespread level . no, it's that. level. no, it's not that. >> no, it's not. i think it >> no, no, it's not. i think it spreads and people can ally themselves to this pathological minority. but a minority that drives it. so if you look at the situation with hamas, for example, hamas went into the i we don't need to go into all the details about what they did, but we know horrific and we know how horrific and horrendous it was. and that is the pathological minority. these are people are jihadists who are people who are jihadists who will nothing to erase will stop at nothing to erase jews from the face of the i don't believe their supporters would could do that. but not only could they not do it, they couldn't even watch but yet couldn't even watch it. but yet they cheer. they will say, they will cheer. they will say, yes again and yes, let's do it again and again. okay, then here's a cudgel. an axe , here's cudgel. here's an axe, here's a knife. it. well, i couldn't knife. do it. well, i couldn't do so to counter do that. so the way to counter these people , if there is a way these people, if there is a way to counter because they've to counter them because they've got so deep in our society into the bureaucracies that govern our institutions and our corporations. you have

corporations. but you have to isolate the pathic rats, because most people want get on. most people just want to get on. most understand and most people understand and empathy. most people are capable of at other people and of looking at other people and seeing them as a fellow human being a fellow sufferer, being, as a fellow sufferer, it's reclaiming . it's about reclaiming. >> humanity. >> it's about humanity. >> it's about humanity. >> reclaiming humanity and >> reclaiming one's humanity and one's collective humanity from the so finally, because don't >> so finally, because we don't have but is have much time, but there is nothing about this insofar nothing new about this insofar as if you go back the as if you go back to the inquisition, people were inquisition, the people who were strapping those those individuals to the rack and torturing think torturing them, they did think they were doing it for god. they did were the side did think they were on the side of it's perfectly of the angels. it's perfectly possible throughout human history for good people to do the horrendous things, the most horrendous things, horrendous things. >> what makes >> but what makes what makes a tyranny so dangerous tyranny of kindness so dangerous is can punish other is that people can punish other people. the outgroup endlessly take great pleasure in it and still remain virtuous. take great pleasure in it and still remain virtuous . yes. and still remain virtuous. yes. and thatis still remain virtuous. yes. and that is truly terrifying . yeah. that is truly terrifying. yeah. and that and that is where we're at. and we have to understand the tyranny of kindness is also a tyranny of virtue, which, interestingly enough, we remember virtue remember the republic of virtue at french at the end of the french revolution, what revolution, which is what robespierre and is is, is

robespierre and is and is, is fellow revolutionaries saw as the end point of the french revolution. and where did that end? ended in bloodshed end? it ended in bloodshed and the guillotine. is the guillotine. and that is where headed. unless we where we're headed. unless we isolate pathic rats, isolate these pathic rats, reclaim some normal kindness from pathological from from its pathological underbelly and reclaim words like love, hate and kindness for the mass of people of normal people. one final point is that and lobachevsky makes this really well , he said the only really well, he said the only crime that normal people commit, which makes them punished. so much for their views, is that they're and they're not psychopaths and normal ordinary normal people aren't ordinary people are well, they people are decent. well, they might . might. >> very quickly , i believe >> just very quickly, i believe in the in the decency of humanity. >> i absolutely do. but then i see these marches and i see most of them are not chanting anti—semitic chants or engaging in that kind of thing, but they are turning a blind eye when other people are. that's what disturbs makes me think disturbs me. that makes me think that become so normalised that it's become so normalised in that movement. do in that movement. how do you reach people? i couldn't reach those people? i couldn't walk past someone calling for genocide i don't genocide and ignore it. i don't know. how you reach know. i don't know how you reach that . and once

that point. and once you've reached point, it reached that point, isn't it a question of de—radicalisation rather persuasion? is. rather than persuasion? it is. >> is process of >> it is a process of de—radicalisation, but de—radicalisation, but de—radicalisation one de—radicalisation is simply one form realigning form of psychological realigning point. when ready, what point. when you're ready, what you're doing is you're enabling people to see that they've people to see that they they've got virus in their heads got this virus in their heads which is driving behaviour which is driving their behaviour , is against their , which is against their interests it's against interests and it's against the interests and it's against the interests fellow interests of all their fellow human including human beings, including those closest to them. nobody wins in this . nobody at all wins. this game. nobody at all wins. because ends is in because where it ends is in chaos bloodshed and who's because where it ends is in chaos to bloodshed and who's because where it ends is in chaos to gain»odshed and who's because where it ends is in chaos to gain fromed and who's because where it ends is in chaos to gain from that?i who's because where it ends is in chaos to gain from that? noro's because where it ends is in chaos to gain from that? no one. going to gain from that? no one. >> well, i think it's absolutely chilling stuff. dr. peter hughes, you so for hughes, thank you so much for joining me tonight. really appreciate . it. appreciate. it. >> well , that was a fascinating conversation. >> there is a lot to think about and a lot to reflect on in terms of what's going on in our world at the moment. but there's a lot more to come tonight on free speech going speech nation. we're going to be exploring themes exploring some of the themes that were raised in that last interview. going to be interview. we're going to be asking left wingers asking why young left wingers have osama bin have started praising osama bin laden, of people . and we're

laden, of all people. and we're going to be doing our cultural round up with david aldridge, bolt and me and my panel are going be getting some more going to be getting some more questions from absolutely questions from this absolutely delightful audience. delightful studio audience. please anywhere . please don't go anywhere. >> hello there . welcome to your >> hello there. welcome to your latest gb news weather forecast. we're looking ahead to the new working week. it's going to be a bit of a grey and start out there. for some of us it will turn drier during the middle part week, then part of the week, but then a good deal colder as we head towards next weekend. back to the now. we've still the here and now. we've still got area low pressure got this area of low pressure close still got some close by. it's still got some tightly packed isobars down towards so in case in towards the south. so in case in another blustery night, also keep eye this area of rain keep an eye on this area of rain as across parts of as it moves across parts of south southwest south wales and southwest england squally england could turn quite squally for a time as that moves through elsewhere . good of cloud elsewhere. a good deal of cloud around of the skies around clearest of the skies over the east. but for over towards the east. but for most , as we over towards the east. but for most, as we monday most, as we start monday morning, on morning, we start off on a fairly note so that band of fairly mild note so that band of rain will continue to clear towards france as we go in course of morning. maybe

course of the morning. so maybe a a commute some a bit of a wet commute for some of for many it's going of us, but for many it's going to be a bit of a grey day with some further outbreaks of rain. it turn briefly sunnier it may well turn briefly sunnier for across parts of for a time across parts of the midlands the east anglia. midlands and the east anglia. but us it's not going but a lot of us it's not going to be the most inspiring of starts new but it starts to the new week, but it will be fairly mild, a will still be fairly mild, a little cooler it has little bit cooler than it has been over weekend. thanks to been over the weekend. thanks to a of a northerly wind . a bit more of a northerly wind. and then going into tuesday, still on the cloudy across still on the cloudy side across a chunk of england a good chunk of england and wales further wales with some further outbreaks rain across the outbreaks of rain across the east. it does cheer up for a time across ireland and time across northern ireland and scotland some sunnier scotland with some sunnier spells but then later on spells here. but then later on some cloud and outbreaks some further cloud and outbreaks of rain moves in across the far northwest of scotland. middle of the brighter the week, dry and brighter in the

south there's plenty more still to come on free speech nation this week, including some questions from the audience for me and my

panel from the audience for me and my panel, jojo sutherland and paul cox . cox. >> but let's get a news update first from tatiana sanchez . first from tatiana sanchez. >> andrew, thank you. good evening. this is the latest from the newsroom. the israeli military has released video footage of what they say are hostages being kept in al—shifa hospital . hostages being kept in al—shifa hospital. idf hostages being kept in al—shifa hospital . idf spokesman hostages being kept in al—shifa hospital. idf spokesman rear admiral daniel hagari gave his nightly presser this evening in which he alleges hamas have hostages trapped inside of the hospital . he hostages trapped inside of the hospital. he said one is from nepal hospital. he said one is from nepal, one is from thailand. they were allegedly taken from israel on october 7th. it comes as israel's ambassador to the us told abc news he's hopeful that a significant number of hostages will be released in the coming days. will be released in the coming days . what will gb news days. what will gb news understands that russell brand has been interviewed by police. a man in his 40s believed to be the actor and comedian, an attended a police station in

south