and mail has been coming nation and mail has been coming in. peter says given that the envy driven labourites are set on booting out the last 92 hereditary peers, would it not be appropriate to remove all the trappings of history from the second chamber? no ranks, no robes, no processions, and no more history. well, they wouldn't like that. the labour left love dressing up a bit more than old fashioned tories. i think an academic at the heart of a controversial , unfair of a controversial, unfair dismissal case has been vindicated after a tribunal ruled his anti—zionist comments dunng ruled his anti—zionist comments during a university lecture were worthy of respect. while the court took his side, it raises a bigger question should courts really be deciding which opinions we should be respecting and which we shouldn't? well, i'm joined now by the man at the centre of the story, the former professor of sociology, david miller. professor, thank you very much for joining miller. professor, thank you very much forjoining me. miller. professor, thank you very much forjoining me . and very much forjoining me. and the question really here is, are you anti—semitic? >> well, the question that the court was asked to determine was in part , was i anti—semitic? and

in part, was i anti—semitic? and the court determined that i was not anti—semitic. and indeed, the university had itself had three separate investigations, two by an external qc, all of which determined i was not anti—semitic. they include included rather that my views were anti—zionist and the courts concluded that the reason i was sacked was because my views were anti—zionist. the university was so freaked out by the idea of an anti—zionist that they had to sack me . and if i had said sack me. and if i had said everything else that i had said absent the anti—zionist views, i would not have been sacked. so that's what the court thought. >> so when you said last year, august last year, that judeophobia barely exists, these days, and the fact one jews are not discriminated against, two they are overrepresented in europe, north america and latin america in positions of cultural, economic and political power. three they are therefore in a position to discriminate against actually marginalised groups that wasn't classic anti—semitic commentary on twitter. >> that's correct. correct. it's not classic anti—semitism. it's actually a reflection. >> so jews are overrepresented in positions of power. is the

classic conspiracy theory against the jews? >> well , the evidence that >> well, the evidence that i quoted in the thread were all came from the equality and human rights commission, from government funded research. this is well known. it's well known that jews are the most advantaged section of the population, economically speaking. and of course, there are overrepresented in positions of power in parliament, in journalism, in finance, in many other places. whether you think that's anti—semitic or not, it is. >> this ties this ties in with what you were saying about the bristol j—soc , which is all bristol j—soc, which is all reported in the in the judgement that you say it's part of a zionist , that you say it's part of a zionist, pro—israel, well—funded organisation. again . absolutely. organisation. again. absolutely. the classic anti—jewish tropes that the jews are well—funded, international conspiracy working against our interests isn't that classic anti—semitism? >> well, no, there's no mention of an international there. it's simply factual. i mean , i've simply factual. i mean, i've been doing research on the zionist movement for many years. it's simply factually the case that the university's jewish society, which is formerly zionist, and the union of jewish

students, formerly zionist, were attacking me. and so also simply the case, as al jazeera showed in its documentary, they're funded by the israeli embassy, and they're dedicated to pursuing zionism on campus. that's these are facts. whether you think that's anti—semitic or not is maybe down to down to you, but they are factual statements. >> what i point out to you is when you say this is a direct member of the world zionist organisation for a university jewish society, you are basically going back to the classic anti—semitism of saying that jews are organised globally and they are using this for reasons of power, and that ties in with your tweet of last august. so you use zionism as cover for anti—semitism. >> no we don't it's not called the world jewish organisation. it's called the world zionist organisation. they're not members of it as jews. they're members. >> they are called the they are called the british bristol jewish society, aren't they? they're not called the bristol british bristol zionist society. >> they're not a member of any

world jewish organisation. they're a member of a world zionist organisation, which of course does what it says on the tin. it promotes zionism. >> so you're saying that the bristol jewish society is promoting zionism because they're jewish, and then you're saying that's not anti—semitic? i just don't get how you get out of the antisemitic position. >> no, this is absurd. they're promoting zionism because they are zionists. not not all jews are zionists. not not all jews are zionists. not not all jews are zionists. not all zionists are zionists. not all zionists are jews. but the jewish society on campus is a zionist society. it's formerly zionist. it could tomorrow, as i wish it would resign from the zionist movement and pledge to represent all jews. it doesn't do that at present. it excludes anti—zionist or non—zionist jews from membership and from participation in its activities . participation in its activities. so i wish that they would represent all jews, but they don't. >> but wouldn't that be fine if you hadn't said, in addition, that jews are not discriminated against, which we know is not true? we've seen a lot of discrimination against jews in recent times. >> we don't know that the only way in which you can show that there is discrimination against jews. they're not discriminated

against at an economic level. they are overrepresented in, in in public life. >> no. just because they're overrepresented doesn't mean they're not discriminated against. they could be even more overrepresented if they weren't discriminated against. they may be overrepresented because they're brilliant. >> oh, because they're brilliant. well, you can make the argument. and that is an argument which is made by people who believe in race science. i don't particularly believe in that stuff. but, but but yes, they are overrepresented. and they are overrepresented. and the question is how one deals with that in a society which is supposed to be egalitarian. now, my view is that is that that it's not just a question of the status of jews in the society, it's a question of how that links to the genocide in gaza . links to the genocide in gaza. so the fact is that the zionist organisations, every zionist organisations, every zionist organisation in this country is engagedin organisation in this country is engaged in supporting the genocide in gaza in one way or another. and that's the problem. >> when you say when you say that jews are overrepresented in positions of power, political power in europe, how much more or less represented would you like them to be? >> well, what i'm trying to do here is explain why it is the case that jews are in an

advantageous situation to be able to pursue zionist policies, and that now you're linking judaism and zionism, which is exactly what you were trying to get away from by pretending that you were anti—zionist. >> views aren't anti—semitic. >> views aren't anti—semitic. >> i am linking them to that. they they are more advantage which allows some jews, the ones who are the most senior, tend to be more zionist than the others , be more zionist than the others, and they are able to use that power. >> you've just admitted that the jews, because they're powerful, promote zionism. so you have been using zionism as cover for your anti—semitic views ? your anti—semitic views? >> well, it was it's a nice try, jacob, but it's not the case. >> it seems to have worked. actually, you said it. >> no. look, the reason that we have the israelis are able to dominate certain elements of our politics in parliament, in terms of counter—extremism in, in terms of counterterrorism is because, yes, of the israel lobby , which is important, but lobby, which is important, but also because jews are overrepresented and the jews who are overrepresented in the

senior levels of business and politics tend to be zionists. there's hardly any anti—zionists who are jewish billionaires, for example, and so that that actually gives them an advantage in discriminating against others, including in particular, of course, the group in society who are the least advantaged, who are the least advantaged, who are the most disadvantaged and the most discriminated against, which is, of course, muslims, not jews . muslims, not jews. >> well, i think you have by your own words, made quite clear what your position is and have unked what your position is and have linked zionism to judaism , and linked zionism to judaism, and that must be fundamentally anti—semitic . your right to free anti—semitic. your right to free speech must be upheld. but by your own words, i think you've made your position very, very clear. so i'm now going to go to my panel. i've given you great opportunity to speak, but i do now want to go to my panel. the author and journalist michael crick and the editor of the sun , crick and the editor of the sun, kelvin mackenzie. michael, i'm all in favour of freedom of speech, as are you and i believe he's ent