1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:04,640 Part of the reason why Bob Villain and also NICAP feel so 2 00:00:04,760 --> 00:00:08,760 strongly a sense of solidarity to Palestine is that they relate 3 00:00:08,760 --> 00:00:12,040 it to their own experience of colonialism and racism. 4 00:00:12,120 --> 00:00:16,079 Is it always wrong to go on stage at any kind of event and 5 00:00:16,079 --> 00:00:19,440 call for the death of anyone or any institution? 6 00:00:19,520 --> 00:00:21,520 I don't think he should be prosecuted to be clear, but 7 00:00:21,600 --> 00:00:24,520 nevertheless I think it was pretty unsavoury and had it been 8 00:00:24,520 --> 00:00:26,720 another ethnic group he was attacking I think the BBC would 9 00:00:26,720 --> 00:00:32,439 have pulled the blood. Welcome to the forecast. 10 00:00:32,520 --> 00:00:35,120 It's the controversial performance that's dominated the 11 00:00:35,120 --> 00:00:38,160 headlines and sparked massive debate and controversy. 12 00:00:38,440 --> 00:00:42,400 Puncture Bobville enchanted death to the IDF to a crowd of 13 00:00:42,400 --> 00:00:46,440 thousands and crucially, an audience of millions as their 14 00:00:46,440 --> 00:00:49,520 Glastonbury performance was aired live on the BBC. 15 00:00:49,840 --> 00:00:53,760 The backlash was immediate, with some calling it an essential act 16 00:00:53,760 --> 00:00:58,080 of artistic protest while others saw it as crossing a line, a 17 00:00:58,080 --> 00:01:02,000 deeply offensive and anti-Semitic sentiment on 18 00:01:02,000 --> 00:01:04,400 screen. Warnings issued by the BBC about 19 00:01:04,400 --> 00:01:07,760 discriminatory language during the set were not good enough. 20 00:01:07,960 --> 00:01:10,200 That's what one minister said today. 21 00:01:10,200 --> 00:01:13,200 We're joined by Toby Young, a journalist and commentator, and 22 00:01:13,200 --> 00:01:16,040 Ash Sarkar, who was at the performance, a political 23 00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:19,440 activist and writer to discuss the reaction to the performance, 24 00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:23,240 the BB CS decision to broadcast it, and what this all means for 25 00:01:23,240 --> 00:01:25,200 free speech and creative freedom. 26 00:01:25,440 --> 00:01:26,920 Welcome to you both. Thanks for coming on the 27 00:01:26,920 --> 00:01:29,360 forecast. So let's start with this. 28 00:01:29,760 --> 00:01:34,280 First of all, an assertion. Is it always wrong to go on 29 00:01:34,280 --> 00:01:38,480 stage at any kind of event and call for the death of anyone or 30 00:01:38,480 --> 00:01:40,360 any institution? First you, Ash. 31 00:01:40,800 --> 00:01:44,160 Well, first thing I would say is that saying death to the IDF 32 00:01:44,160 --> 00:01:47,240 when that army is currently committing A genocide, when 33 00:01:47,240 --> 00:01:50,880 there are recorded and verified instances of them firing on 34 00:01:50,880 --> 00:01:54,240 unarmed civilians while they're waiting for A to be distributed, 35 00:01:54,440 --> 00:01:58,280 recorded instances of gang rape, children being admitted to 36 00:01:58,280 --> 00:02:01,120 hospital with sniper wounds to the skull. 37 00:02:01,360 --> 00:02:05,480 I think it is an appropriate impression of rage and disgust. 38 00:02:05,960 --> 00:02:08,600 So, so in this particular instance, you say because of 39 00:02:08,600 --> 00:02:12,880 what the IDF has done in Gaza, you would say shouting or 40 00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:16,800 leading a chorus, death to the IDF is legit. 41 00:02:17,160 --> 00:02:20,120 That's what you're saying. Absolutely. 42 00:02:20,120 --> 00:02:23,640 The same way it is completely legitimate to, say, destroy 43 00:02:23,640 --> 00:02:27,280 ISIS. These are organisations founded 44 00:02:27,280 --> 00:02:32,320 on violence terrorizing innocent civilians and it is always 45 00:02:32,320 --> 00:02:35,440 appropriate to express 1's opposition to that. 46 00:02:35,680 --> 00:02:39,080 I don't think that it was anti-Semitic and nor do I think 47 00:02:39,080 --> 00:02:42,200 it was inappropriate for a punk band when this is a genre 48 00:02:42,200 --> 00:02:45,680 associated with pushing the boundaries to lead a chant at 49 00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:49,480 what's effectively a concert. OK, Toby, what's your reaction? 50 00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:53,200 Well, I think Ash and I profoundly disagree about the 51 00:02:54,160 --> 00:02:58,600 military operation in Gaza, Which I believe is a legitimate 52 00:02:58,600 --> 00:03:00,880 act of self defence on Israel's part. 53 00:03:01,440 --> 00:03:05,160 And I thought it was particularly insensitive to 54 00:03:05,160 --> 00:03:09,160 chant death death to the IDF at a music festival given that 55 00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:13,880 something like 350 people were killed at the Nova music 56 00:03:13,880 --> 00:03:17,280 festival on October 7th, 2 years ago. 57 00:03:18,280 --> 00:03:24,040 But I think parking the question about whether we think Israel's 58 00:03:24,120 --> 00:03:29,640 military response to that massacre is legitimate or not, I 59 00:03:29,640 --> 00:03:33,920 think it's it's helpful to distinguish between two things. 60 00:03:33,960 --> 00:03:40,960 First of all, whether we think Bob Villain should be prosecuted 61 00:03:41,160 --> 00:03:46,560 for leading that chant and whether it's actually unlawful 62 00:03:46,760 --> 00:03:47,880 for them to have led that chance. 63 00:03:47,880 --> 00:03:52,560 So whether in fact they could be prosecuted under UK law, On the 64 00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:55,080 first question, I think Ash and I agree. 65 00:03:56,080 --> 00:03:59,400 I don't think they should be prosecuted any more than I think 66 00:03:59,400 --> 00:04:02,720 Lucy Connolly should have been prosecuted for the tweet she 67 00:04:02,720 --> 00:04:05,240 posted in the immediate aftermath of the Southport 68 00:04:05,240 --> 00:04:07,800 attacks. I think the test to apply here, 69 00:04:08,120 --> 00:04:11,400 the test we should be applying, is the Brandenburg test, which 70 00:04:11,400 --> 00:04:13,760 was established in a Supreme Court case called Brandenburg 71 00:04:13,760 --> 00:04:15,760 versus Ohio. And the Brandenburg test 72 00:04:15,760 --> 00:04:20,160 essentially says that if, unless what you've said is going to 73 00:04:20,160 --> 00:04:23,880 lead to imminent lawless action, then it should be protected 74 00:04:23,880 --> 00:04:25,800 speech protected by the 1st Amendment. 75 00:04:26,240 --> 00:04:30,720 And I don't think chanting death, death to the IDF is going 76 00:04:30,720 --> 00:04:32,960 to lead to imminent lawless action. 77 00:04:32,960 --> 00:04:35,600 So I think that speech should be protected and we should have 78 00:04:35,600 --> 00:04:38,040 something like the First Amendment in the UK to protect 79 00:04:38,040 --> 00:04:39,800 it. There's a separate question 80 00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:43,200 which is, well, is it nonetheless prosecutable under 81 00:04:43,200 --> 00:04:44,560 UK law? And that's I think quite a 82 00:04:44,560 --> 00:04:48,320 complicated question and I've been trying to kind of get my 83 00:04:48,320 --> 00:04:50,280 head around that today and we can get into that. 84 00:04:50,280 --> 00:04:51,400 And if you want to get into it, Matt? 85 00:04:51,480 --> 00:04:55,400 As we've heard that the police is now investigating the band to 86 00:04:55,400 --> 00:04:57,520 see if they're going to file criminal charges. 87 00:04:57,520 --> 00:05:00,880 We also just heard that the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio 88 00:05:00,880 --> 00:05:03,040 in the US has cancelled their visas. 89 00:05:03,280 --> 00:05:04,720 They were going to go to the US on tour. 90 00:05:04,720 --> 00:05:06,840 They're now, they're not going to be able to do that because 91 00:05:06,840 --> 00:05:09,720 their visas have been cancelled. And of course, inevitably this 92 00:05:09,720 --> 00:05:12,840 discussion will lead to what the IDF is actually doing in Gaza, 93 00:05:13,800 --> 00:05:16,200 which is a, you know, hugely controversial subject that we've 94 00:05:16,200 --> 00:05:19,080 been dealing with on our programme and our podcast, you 95 00:05:19,080 --> 00:05:22,200 know, almost on a daily basis. But before we go to that, just 96 00:05:22,200 --> 00:05:27,640 on the specific issue of the BBC, if I may, I mean, they, 97 00:05:27,760 --> 00:05:30,720 they didn't broadcast kneecap. They did broadcast this. 98 00:05:30,720 --> 00:05:33,320 They put out a health warning that clearly wasn't strong 99 00:05:33,320 --> 00:05:35,600 enough. Was this just an example of the 100 00:05:35,600 --> 00:05:40,440 BBC kind of not knowing what its own policy is, of being perhaps 101 00:05:40,440 --> 00:05:42,640 incompetent, or did they do the right thing? 102 00:05:42,640 --> 00:05:47,200 First you, Ash. I think the BBC has on repeated 103 00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:52,520 instances displayed an appalling lack of moral fortitude when it 104 00:05:52,520 --> 00:05:55,680 comes to freedom of expression, whether that's artistic or 105 00:05:55,680 --> 00:05:58,480 journalistic. There is a documentary which I 106 00:05:58,480 --> 00:06:02,280 believe Channel 4 is now going to where about the experiences 107 00:06:02,280 --> 00:06:04,200 of medics in Gaza who are under attack. 108 00:06:04,200 --> 00:06:07,680 The BBC for some reason decided they didn't want to show it 109 00:06:07,680 --> 00:06:10,800 despite it being a factual documentary. 110 00:06:11,120 --> 00:06:13,760 And when you look at their coverage, there was a recent 111 00:06:13,760 --> 00:06:17,120 study released by the Centre for Media Monitoring which showed 112 00:06:17,120 --> 00:06:22,000 that the coverage of Israeli deaths gets 33 times more 113 00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:25,440 attention on the BBC than coverage of Palestinian deaths, 114 00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:28,640 despite Palestinian deaths outnumbering Israeli deaths by 115 00:06:28,720 --> 00:06:32,640 about 30-4 times. Similarly, when reporting on 116 00:06:32,640 --> 00:06:38,040 what I believe is a genocidal war in Gaza, only nought .5% of 117 00:06:38,040 --> 00:06:42,880 the reports intention that there was violence and occupation by 118 00:06:42,880 --> 00:06:45,920 the IDF, by the Israeli government before October 7th. 119 00:06:46,120 --> 00:06:49,520 Compared to the fact that in these reports 40% of them start 120 00:06:49,520 --> 00:06:52,320 by talking about October 7th. So I think that this is an 121 00:06:52,320 --> 00:06:55,760 extension of that cowardice and and that political bias of the 122 00:06:55,760 --> 00:06:57,760 BBC I mean. You know, what you're referring 123 00:06:57,760 --> 00:07:00,440 to are these very substantive points that, again, we've been, 124 00:07:00,560 --> 00:07:03,200 you know, debating, you know, really ad nauseam since the 125 00:07:03,200 --> 00:07:06,120 beginning of this latest war and after October the 7th. 126 00:07:06,640 --> 00:07:10,600 But I, you know, did the band undermine their serious 127 00:07:10,600 --> 00:07:13,600 arguments, if they have any, about what's going on with that 128 00:07:13,600 --> 00:07:15,400 particular chant? Because what people are talking 129 00:07:15,400 --> 00:07:18,360 about is the chant and not the actual substantive issues. 130 00:07:19,000 --> 00:07:21,520 Ash. Understandable. 131 00:07:21,520 --> 00:07:24,040 I think if you're looking for a substantive political 132 00:07:24,040 --> 00:07:27,440 engagement, don't go looking to a band called Bob Villain or 133 00:07:27,440 --> 00:07:29,480 another band called Nika. All right? 134 00:07:29,480 --> 00:07:32,560 I think that this is part of this long tradition of punk 135 00:07:32,560 --> 00:07:37,560 bands who, like I said, are outrageous and do present their 136 00:07:37,560 --> 00:07:40,520 politics and their worldview in a way which is sometimes tongue 137 00:07:40,520 --> 00:07:41,960 in cheek. I mean, you can go back to the 138 00:07:41,960 --> 00:07:45,080 Sex Pistols for that. Johnny Rotten, Sid Vicious, Rage 139 00:07:45,080 --> 00:07:47,960 Against the Machine, where the chorus of their most famous song 140 00:07:47,960 --> 00:07:50,320 is F You, I Won't do What You Tell Me. 141 00:07:50,520 --> 00:07:54,320 So I think that they can be sincere in their politics, but 142 00:07:54,320 --> 00:07:58,120 not necessarily sincere in the presentation of that politics, 143 00:07:58,120 --> 00:07:59,840 the language and the imagery that's used. 144 00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:01,960 And we shouldn't expect that of artists. 145 00:08:01,960 --> 00:08:04,680 We should expect that politicians and journalists, but 146 00:08:04,680 --> 00:08:08,200 not musicians. Toby I mean, obviously people 147 00:08:08,200 --> 00:08:11,520 are very upset, many people are upset about death to the IDF. 148 00:08:11,520 --> 00:08:15,320 But had they shouted, had someone shouted death to Hamas 149 00:08:15,680 --> 00:08:18,040 or death to the Russian army, would we be having this 150 00:08:18,040 --> 00:08:21,800 conversation, do you think? Well, we might not because we 151 00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:24,920 are allied to the Ukraine and to Israel. 152 00:08:25,800 --> 00:08:31,720 I think that the pertinent hypothetical is let's suppose 153 00:08:32,520 --> 00:08:37,360 they've been a far right Skinhead band and started 154 00:08:37,360 --> 00:08:40,039 throwing around the P word and the N word. 155 00:08:40,400 --> 00:08:43,280 I think the BBC in those circumstances would have pulled 156 00:08:43,280 --> 00:08:45,920 the plug on the broadcast pretty promptly. 157 00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:51,800 It still sounds to me as though what he chanted and what he said 158 00:08:53,440 --> 00:08:57,560 it was borderline if not straightforwardly anti-Semitic. 159 00:08:58,040 --> 00:09:02,200 And I think it's just generally true that expressions of 160 00:09:02,200 --> 00:09:07,160 anti-Semitism, certainly anti Zionism, are not considered as 161 00:09:07,280 --> 00:09:10,800 egregious as other forms of racism. 162 00:09:11,400 --> 00:09:14,560 And I do think that had he had he said something about another 163 00:09:14,560 --> 00:09:18,520 ethnic group, let's not forget, Ash, that the majority of the 164 00:09:18,520 --> 00:09:23,520 population of Israel are in the IDF, including teenagers. 165 00:09:24,440 --> 00:09:26,880 So when he was chanting death, death to the IDF, you were 166 00:09:26,880 --> 00:09:31,240 essentially calling for the genocide of Jews living in 167 00:09:31,240 --> 00:09:34,080 Israel. So it's, it's, it's quite hard 168 00:09:34,080 --> 00:09:35,840 to defend it. I think on, on, on. 169 00:09:35,920 --> 00:09:38,120 I mean, I don't think he should be prosecuted, to be clear. 170 00:09:38,120 --> 00:09:40,240 But I nevertheless, I think it was pretty unsavory. 171 00:09:40,520 --> 00:09:42,960 And had it been another ethnic group he was attacking, I think 172 00:09:42,960 --> 00:09:44,000 the BBC would have pulled the plug. 173 00:09:44,080 --> 00:09:46,280 I completely disagree with you, Tobia, which is a shame because 174 00:09:46,280 --> 00:09:48,400 I find you normally to be a very, very rigorous thinker. 175 00:09:48,560 --> 00:09:52,880 The IDF is an organization, it is an institution, it is an army 176 00:09:52,880 --> 00:09:56,920 which is currently carrying out absolutely egregious war crimes 177 00:09:56,920 --> 00:09:59,000 and massacres. So agree just that even where 178 00:09:59,000 --> 00:10:01,880 streeting who is, you know, generally very supportive of 179 00:10:01,880 --> 00:10:03,760 Israel said get your house in order. 180 00:10:04,120 --> 00:10:07,680 And I don't think that I think it's possible to object and to 181 00:10:07,680 --> 00:10:10,600 find distasteful what Bob? Villain or anyone? 182 00:10:10,600 --> 00:10:14,080 Else said that's that's entirely your right without changing 183 00:10:14,080 --> 00:10:17,320 substantively what was said, not talking about an ethnic group, 184 00:10:17,520 --> 00:10:21,960 talking about an army, a military currently engaged in an 185 00:10:21,960 --> 00:10:24,760 absolutely brutal war. The second thing, and this is 186 00:10:25,080 --> 00:10:29,720 important for coming back to the points made by Bob Villain and 187 00:10:29,720 --> 00:10:34,360 also by Kneecap, which is part of the reason why Bob Villain 188 00:10:34,360 --> 00:10:38,000 and also Kneecap feel so strongly a sense of solidarity 189 00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:42,000 to Palestine is that they relate it to their own experience of 190 00:10:42,000 --> 00:10:46,000 colonialism and racism. Obviously Bob Villain, this, you 191 00:10:46,000 --> 00:10:49,360 know, punk duo, both of them are black Kneecap. 192 00:10:49,360 --> 00:10:53,520 They say we consider the north of Ireland to be an occupied 193 00:10:53,520 --> 00:10:55,760 territory. And they make the connections 194 00:10:55,760 --> 00:10:58,760 between the history of, say, the black and Tans who are operating 195 00:10:59,320 --> 00:11:03,040 in Ireland, you know, enacting horrific violence. 196 00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,880 And the same individuals were were involved in, you know, 197 00:11:06,880 --> 00:11:10,960 1930s and and 1940s, what was then the mandate of British 198 00:11:10,960 --> 00:11:14,280 Palestine. So all of these things they have 199 00:11:14,280 --> 00:11:16,680 answers for. They have a set of politics 200 00:11:16,680 --> 00:11:18,520 around. And it's not about singling out 201 00:11:18,520 --> 00:11:20,720 Jews. They've put it in their own 202 00:11:20,720 --> 00:11:24,080 words about what it's about, and I think that there is something 203 00:11:24,080 --> 00:11:29,120 so pernicious and underhand about when someone's telling you 204 00:11:29,120 --> 00:11:31,320 what their politics are and saying This is why I believe 205 00:11:31,320 --> 00:11:34,160 what I believe. Instead, you're saying no, I can 206 00:11:34,160 --> 00:11:36,840 see into your heart, I can read your mind, and this is what I 207 00:11:36,840 --> 00:11:40,160 think is really going on because it's completely unfalsifiable. 208 00:11:40,360 --> 00:11:44,440 By shouting death to the IDF, isn't, you know, Bob Villain and 209 00:11:44,440 --> 00:11:47,720 those who support what he was shouting, Aren't they also, you 210 00:11:47,720 --> 00:11:50,480 know, playing into the hands of those people, you know, who say 211 00:11:50,480 --> 00:11:52,560 that, you know, that if you criticize one, you're doing the 212 00:11:52,560 --> 00:11:54,600 other? I mean, it's it's the word death 213 00:11:54,600 --> 00:11:57,040 that is the problem here. But I'm just wondering whether, 214 00:11:57,200 --> 00:12:01,040 you know, if he's really serious about raising this issue, Bob 215 00:12:01,040 --> 00:12:04,160 Villain, then by, you know, doing it in that way from the 216 00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:08,000 stage, he's not doing himself or his cause a service. 217 00:12:08,240 --> 00:12:11,000 What I'd say is that there has been no form of criticism of the 218 00:12:11,000 --> 00:12:13,720 state of Israel that the state of Israel or its supporters have 219 00:12:13,720 --> 00:12:15,640 found acceptable. From the river to. 220 00:12:15,640 --> 00:12:17,960 The sea, they don't like that. They don't like it when you call 221 00:12:17,960 --> 00:12:20,360 them an apartheid state, despite the fact that leading 222 00:12:20,360 --> 00:12:23,840 international human rights organisations like Amnesty, like 223 00:12:23,840 --> 00:12:26,520 Human Rights Watch, have called what they're doing apartheid. 224 00:12:26,520 --> 00:12:28,800 They don't like it when you call what they're doing a genocide, 225 00:12:28,800 --> 00:12:31,640 despite the fact that South Africa and other countries have 226 00:12:31,640 --> 00:12:33,920 presented A compelling case at the ICJ. 227 00:12:34,120 --> 00:12:36,760 They don't like it when even Kissed Armour and Emmanuel 228 00:12:36,760 --> 00:12:40,800 Macron, who are hardly punk rock radicals, say hey, you've gone 229 00:12:40,800 --> 00:12:42,800 too far, you need to let in some aid. 230 00:12:43,040 --> 00:12:46,920 All of that is anti-Semitic, so I think, but while you may at 231 00:12:46,920 --> 00:12:48,840 once more think, oh, this isn't helpful. 232 00:12:48,840 --> 00:12:51,160 To the cause, and I think it's fine to have that opinion. 233 00:12:51,480 --> 00:12:54,360 I think that one shouldn't. Think there is a form of 234 00:12:54,360 --> 00:12:56,640 expression. That wouldn't be labeled. 235 00:12:56,800 --> 00:12:59,520 As anti-Semitic by supporters of Israel. 236 00:12:59,800 --> 00:13:01,240 And I. Again, would like to return to 237 00:13:01,240 --> 00:13:06,000 this point about the difference between political art and 238 00:13:06,000 --> 00:13:09,280 politics itself. Political art has always. 239 00:13:09,280 --> 00:13:12,240 Been about. Pushing boundaries, you say? 240 00:13:12,240 --> 00:13:17,320 Things in ways which are are highly emotive and punk bands. 241 00:13:17,320 --> 00:13:19,360 Especially have always, always done that. 242 00:13:19,360 --> 00:13:23,400 I mean, you only have to go back and, you know, listen to songs 243 00:13:23,400 --> 00:13:25,920 by the Clash, for instance, like Spanish bombs. 244 00:13:25,920 --> 00:13:28,200 It's all about telling an emotional story. 245 00:13:28,440 --> 00:13:32,040 And I think that Bob Villain are they see themselves in that 246 00:13:32,040 --> 00:13:34,320 tradition. I mean, one of the rappers who 247 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:37,400 who has inspired Bob Villain directly is Dizzy Rascal, who's 248 00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:39,520 not particularly political, but when he. 249 00:13:39,520 --> 00:13:41,800 Raps all I care. About is sex and violence a 250 00:13:41,800 --> 00:13:43,880 heavy baseline is my kind of silence. 251 00:13:44,760 --> 00:13:46,920 You know, sure, that's going to be off putting to some people. 252 00:13:46,920 --> 00:13:49,320 And some would say, oh, Mr. Roscoe, you're you're letting 253 00:13:49,320 --> 00:13:50,920 yourself. Down, but he's a. 254 00:13:50,920 --> 00:13:53,560 Rapper These are punk artists. What do you want from them? 255 00:13:53,560 --> 00:13:55,960 The trouble with all this, I guess, isn't, isn't it, and we 256 00:13:55,960 --> 00:13:59,280 see this in America as well, that there is no universal free 257 00:13:59,280 --> 00:14:02,920 speech, you know, someone else's someone's free speech is someone 258 00:14:02,920 --> 00:14:06,600 else's unfree speech. Elon Musk rages about, you know, 259 00:14:06,600 --> 00:14:09,680 the need to have free speech on X, his own platform. 260 00:14:09,680 --> 00:14:12,240 But if people criticize him, well, he cancels them. 261 00:14:12,240 --> 00:14:17,120 So what is the definition of free speech, Toby, in a deeply 262 00:14:17,120 --> 00:14:21,960 tribally divided democracy like America and to some extent like 263 00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:24,600 ours? Well, as I say, Matt, I I like 264 00:14:24,680 --> 00:14:29,920 as my guide, my guide rope. I like the Brandenburg test 265 00:14:30,280 --> 00:14:32,640 which says that speech should be protected. 266 00:14:32,640 --> 00:14:35,160 This is on public platforms, in the public square, not 267 00:14:35,160 --> 00:14:38,720 necessarily on privately owned companies where it often 268 00:14:39,680 --> 00:14:43,560 conflicts with the right to freedom of association, but in 269 00:14:43,560 --> 00:14:45,160 the public square. I think the test should be the 270 00:14:45,160 --> 00:14:49,000 Brandenburg test, which means that unless you can show that 271 00:14:49,000 --> 00:14:52,200 the speech is going to lead to imminent lawless action, then it 272 00:14:52,200 --> 00:14:54,320 should be permitted. And how that one way of trying 273 00:14:54,320 --> 00:14:59,480 to understand that, Matt, is if a white supremacist group 274 00:15:00,240 --> 00:15:04,160 marches through a Jewish neighborhood chanting death to 275 00:15:04,160 --> 00:15:08,920 the Jews, then that speech is protected by the 1st Amendment. 276 00:15:09,040 --> 00:15:12,360 But if they say kill this particular Jew in this 277 00:15:12,360 --> 00:15:14,960 particular place at this particular time, that isn't 278 00:15:14,960 --> 00:15:16,800 protected. And part of the rationale for 279 00:15:16,800 --> 00:15:19,760 that is I think this became clear during the Lucy Connolly 280 00:15:19,760 --> 00:15:20,840 case. I don't think Lucy Connolly 281 00:15:20,840 --> 00:15:23,240 should have been prosecuted for that tweet, because I don't 282 00:15:23,240 --> 00:15:26,480 think it's possible to show definitively that what she said 283 00:15:26,480 --> 00:15:30,080 lead to an outbreak of serious violence. 284 00:15:30,080 --> 00:15:33,120 Now, serious violence did follow what she tweeted, but the fact 285 00:15:33,120 --> 00:15:35,680 that A follows B doesn't mean B caused A. 286 00:15:35,960 --> 00:15:41,520 Had she called for a particular hotel housing asylum seekers to 287 00:15:41,520 --> 00:15:44,600 be burnt down, and that hotel was burnt down, then yes, it 288 00:15:44,600 --> 00:15:45,800 would have failed the Brandenburg test. 289 00:15:45,800 --> 00:15:48,440 She should be prosecuted, but because she didn't, and because 290 00:15:48,440 --> 00:15:51,040 she added the caveat for all I care, which suggested 291 00:15:51,040 --> 00:15:54,200 indifference rather than actual incitement, I don't think she 292 00:15:54,200 --> 00:15:56,960 should have been prosecuted. I think 1 interesting case is 293 00:15:57,760 --> 00:16:01,600 Kneecap at Glastonbury this weekend did call for people to 294 00:16:01,600 --> 00:16:05,960 riot outside Westminster Magistrates Court when one of 295 00:16:05,960 --> 00:16:12,560 the band members is going to be on trial for raising a Hezbollah 296 00:16:12,600 --> 00:16:15,280 flag. And I think that that is that is 297 00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,840 an interesting case because to my mind that could fail the 298 00:16:18,840 --> 00:16:21,920 Brandenburg test. He's not just calling for a riot 299 00:16:21,960 --> 00:16:24,320 in general in response to the prosecution. 300 00:16:24,560 --> 00:16:26,240 Well, they're not just calling in fact, but that they're 301 00:16:26,240 --> 00:16:30,080 calling for a specific riot at a specific place at a particular 302 00:16:30,080 --> 00:16:31,720 time. So I think that probably does 303 00:16:31,720 --> 00:16:34,200 fail the brand. But Toby, it's according to your 304 00:16:34,200 --> 00:16:37,160 definition then and the Brandenburg test as you just 305 00:16:37,640 --> 00:16:41,200 described it, what was said on the stage about the IDF then 306 00:16:41,640 --> 00:16:44,080 passes that test. That's free speech because it's 307 00:16:44,080 --> 00:16:47,200 not specific. I agree, Yeah, I think it should 308 00:16:47,200 --> 00:16:48,840 be. If we had a First Amendment in 309 00:16:48,840 --> 00:16:50,160 this country, it would be protected. 310 00:16:50,440 --> 00:16:52,880 And actually, I think, I think I mean it's. 311 00:16:52,960 --> 00:16:54,960 So was the BBC right to it to broadcast it? 312 00:16:55,720 --> 00:16:57,240 Was the BBC right to broadcast it? 313 00:16:57,480 --> 00:17:00,440 That that doesn't mean the BBC, that doesn't mean the BBC will 314 00:17:00,440 --> 00:17:04,200 right to broadcast it, I think. Well, if it's free speech, why 315 00:17:04,200 --> 00:17:08,079 not? Well, the BBC, the BBC isn't 316 00:17:08,079 --> 00:17:11,440 committed to broadcasting anything, provided it's lawful. 317 00:17:11,440 --> 00:17:14,319 The BBC makes editorial decisions about what to 318 00:17:14,319 --> 00:17:15,880 broadcast and what not to broadcast. 319 00:17:15,880 --> 00:17:18,400 And it ought to have, you know, a degree of latitude and not 320 00:17:18,400 --> 00:17:20,720 just broadcast anything, provided it's lawful. 321 00:17:21,560 --> 00:17:27,119 And, you know, I think most viewers reasonably expect the 322 00:17:27,720 --> 00:17:32,120 television company they're paying for to observe certain 323 00:17:32,120 --> 00:17:34,520 standards of propriety and what they decide to broadcast. 324 00:17:34,520 --> 00:17:35,680 And I think it fell short of that. 325 00:17:39,120 --> 00:17:42,640 And so just on what one of the band members of Kneecap said 326 00:17:42,640 --> 00:17:45,720 regarding the riot, again, I was at the set and he specifically 327 00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:49,080 said afterwards, I'm only joking, don't do that. 328 00:17:49,240 --> 00:17:54,000 So while I think it's fair to say, was that necessarily wise 329 00:17:54,000 --> 00:17:57,280 considering the broader context of of, you know, one of their 330 00:17:57,280 --> 00:18:00,600 members being charged with terror related offences? 331 00:18:00,800 --> 00:18:03,600 I think that, you know, when someone says I'm only joking, 332 00:18:03,600 --> 00:18:06,640 for me that that that should be taking it as a mitigating 333 00:18:06,640 --> 00:18:09,240 factor. I agree with Toby actually, that 334 00:18:09,240 --> 00:18:13,920 I think the Lucy Connolly sentence was unduly excessive 335 00:18:13,920 --> 00:18:17,480 and I think it sets a very bad precedent for for prosecutions 336 00:18:17,480 --> 00:18:21,200 regarding forms of expression that morally I condemn. 337 00:18:21,200 --> 00:18:24,200 But that doesn't necessarily mean or it doesn't follow that 338 00:18:24,200 --> 00:18:26,320 you want the state to intervene in all of those cases. 339 00:18:26,560 --> 00:18:30,200 I'd like to add to that the use of terror legislation and the 340 00:18:30,200 --> 00:18:33,880 prescription of terror organisations because there's a 341 00:18:33,880 --> 00:18:35,720 freedom of speech dimension as well. 342 00:18:35,920 --> 00:18:38,960 So when it comes to a group like Palestine Action, if I were to 343 00:18:38,960 --> 00:18:41,320 say following their prescription, I think what they 344 00:18:41,320 --> 00:18:46,160 did was brave and honourable and justified under section 12 of 345 00:18:46,160 --> 00:18:49,120 the Terrorism Act. I could be charged for being 346 00:18:49,120 --> 00:18:52,600 reckless as to whether that could cause someone else to 347 00:18:53,040 --> 00:18:56,520 support Palestine Action and there is no journalistic 348 00:18:56,520 --> 00:18:59,640 exemption from the Terrorism Act. 349 00:18:59,640 --> 00:19:03,080 What we've seen is a pro Palestine journalist such as ASA 350 00:19:03,080 --> 00:19:05,400 Winstanley, his house was raided. 351 00:19:05,400 --> 00:19:08,560 A judge later ruled that that was unlawful and he's being 352 00:19:08,560 --> 00:19:10,560 investigated under terror legislation. 353 00:19:10,840 --> 00:19:13,040 So I think that there is something very troubling here, 354 00:19:13,040 --> 00:19:15,520 which is the terrorist. The Terrorism Act was was 355 00:19:15,520 --> 00:19:18,840 brought in in the year 2000. At the time the home secretary 356 00:19:18,840 --> 00:19:22,640 said we're not going to use this for domestic or industrial or, 357 00:19:22,640 --> 00:19:25,840 or environmental cases, right. They, they specifically said 358 00:19:25,840 --> 00:19:27,760 we're going to use this for international terrorism. 359 00:19:27,960 --> 00:19:30,480 But now we're seeing a government abuse that 360 00:19:30,480 --> 00:19:32,880 legislation. I think it's in such a way which 361 00:19:32,880 --> 00:19:35,000 has very chilling implications for free. 362 00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:36,960 Speech. If I've got this right, you both 363 00:19:37,000 --> 00:19:41,440 seem to agree on this, that this wasn't a criminal offence, you 364 00:19:41,440 --> 00:19:43,280 know, although it's being investigated now by the police, 365 00:19:43,280 --> 00:19:46,160 that, you know, these are First Amendment free speech rights. 366 00:19:46,360 --> 00:19:49,040 But you also both seem to agree that, you know, Israel has a 367 00:19:49,040 --> 00:19:51,800 special case here. You, Toby, seem to think that 368 00:19:51,800 --> 00:19:54,040 Israel is being singled out for criticism. 369 00:19:54,040 --> 00:19:57,000 And you, Ash, seem to think that Israel's being, you know, 370 00:19:57,000 --> 00:20:00,080 getting a, getting a, an easy ride on what it's been doing in 371 00:20:00,080 --> 00:20:02,160 the Gaza Strip. Just to be clear, I think it's 372 00:20:02,200 --> 00:20:07,640 possible that what Bob Villain said might be a criminal 373 00:20:07,640 --> 00:20:10,120 offense. I think it turns on whether you, 374 00:20:10,360 --> 00:20:13,440 whether the IDF can be defined as a racial group. 375 00:20:13,640 --> 00:20:16,040 Now, on the face of it, you'd think, well, no, so they can't 376 00:20:16,040 --> 00:20:19,240 be prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred under the Public 377 00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:21,560 Order Act. But then Lucy Connolly was 378 00:20:21,560 --> 00:20:24,600 prosecuted for stirring up racial hatred on the grounds 379 00:20:24,600 --> 00:20:26,960 that asylum seekers are a racial group. 380 00:20:27,680 --> 00:20:30,920 Now, Hachi plead not guilty and the Free Speech Union defended 381 00:20:30,920 --> 00:20:33,200 her. We probably would have argued 382 00:20:33,200 --> 00:20:35,560 that asylum seekers aren't a racial group. 383 00:20:35,600 --> 00:20:37,320 They're made-up of many different ethnic groups and 384 00:20:37,400 --> 00:20:40,800 they're not defined by their membership of a racial group so 385 00:20:40,800 --> 00:20:43,520 much as the fact that they're seeking asylum here. 386 00:20:43,760 --> 00:20:45,600 So I think that would have been our defence. 387 00:20:45,600 --> 00:20:48,800 And I think if the villain are prosecuted, that would be their 388 00:20:48,800 --> 00:20:51,280 defence too. The IDF is not a racial group, 389 00:20:51,280 --> 00:20:54,720 it's a military organization. And this is perfectly fair 390 00:20:54,720 --> 00:20:56,960 comment. And I think for that reason, I 391 00:20:56,960 --> 00:20:59,000 think because that defence would be pretty strong, I think for 392 00:20:59,000 --> 00:21:01,040 that reason they're very unlikely to be prosecuted. 393 00:21:01,720 --> 00:21:03,560 But then, I don't think Lucy Connolly should have been 394 00:21:03,560 --> 00:21:06,640 prosecuted either. But you also both believe that 395 00:21:06,640 --> 00:21:10,080 Israel has been singled out either for criticism in your 396 00:21:10,080 --> 00:21:13,040 case, Toby, or for being let off the hook, in your case, Ash. 397 00:21:15,200 --> 00:21:17,360 Absolutely. And just to go back to what it 398 00:21:17,360 --> 00:21:21,240 was that Bob Fillon said, which is death, death to the IDF, I 399 00:21:21,240 --> 00:21:27,400 think that he was echoing an emotion of disgust and of horror 400 00:21:27,640 --> 00:21:31,360 and of anger that is shared by many people just in this 401 00:21:31,360 --> 00:21:32,680 country. But across the world. 402 00:21:32,760 --> 00:21:34,960 When you look at the images of starving children, of bomb 403 00:21:34,960 --> 00:21:38,040 schools, of bomb hospitals, when you see the assassination of 404 00:21:38,040 --> 00:21:41,800 journalists, when you see the restriction of aid and when you 405 00:21:41,800 --> 00:21:45,040 see, as I said before, toddlers being admitted to hospital, 406 00:21:45,040 --> 00:21:48,480 sniper wounds to the head, Of course you would want that 407 00:21:48,520 --> 00:21:52,640 organization which has perpetuated all these horrors to 408 00:21:52,640 --> 00:21:54,640 end. And I think that if you are 409 00:21:54,640 --> 00:21:57,360 going to make the argument that saying death to the IDF is 410 00:21:57,360 --> 00:22:01,160 anti-Semitic, you end up in a really silly place because then 411 00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,440 you'd have to argue, well, destroy ISIS must be 412 00:22:03,440 --> 00:22:05,440 Islamophobic. Because then you're saying 413 00:22:05,440 --> 00:22:09,480 there's no separation between an organization which has got 414 00:22:09,480 --> 00:22:13,240 political goals, which is armed, which carries out war crimes and 415 00:22:13,240 --> 00:22:16,680 the community that they claim to represent in its broadest 416 00:22:16,680 --> 00:22:19,320 possible sense. And I think that's stupid place 417 00:22:19,320 --> 00:22:23,360 to end up in and really, really worrying if that's where a 418 00:22:23,360 --> 00:22:26,720 political class and where the editorial decision making of the 419 00:22:26,720 --> 00:22:30,400 BBC is at. I think Ash and I probably 420 00:22:30,400 --> 00:22:34,560 disagree about whether singling out Israel for particular 421 00:22:34,560 --> 00:22:37,040 criticism and holding Israel to such a high standard, much 422 00:22:37,040 --> 00:22:39,520 higher than other countries in the region and much higher than 423 00:22:39,520 --> 00:22:43,560 China, is ultimately motivated by a degree of anti-Semitism. 424 00:22:43,560 --> 00:22:46,720 I'm not saying that because it is, it should therefore be 425 00:22:46,720 --> 00:22:48,800 prescribed. I have no more truck with the 426 00:22:48,800 --> 00:22:52,440 IIHRA definition of anti-Semitism than I do with the 427 00:22:52,840 --> 00:22:55,600 APPG on British Muslims definition of Islamophobia. 428 00:22:55,600 --> 00:22:58,640 I don't think any particular religious or ethnic roots should 429 00:22:58,640 --> 00:23:02,400 be given special privileged protections in the public 430 00:23:02,400 --> 00:23:04,720 square. So I think Ash and I probably 431 00:23:04,720 --> 00:23:06,960 agree with them, agree with each other about that. 432 00:23:07,240 --> 00:23:10,400 I'm not suggesting that that that speech should be prosecuted 433 00:23:10,440 --> 00:23:13,760 because it's anti-Semitic and that particular group should 434 00:23:13,760 --> 00:23:16,440 enjoy special legal protection. I don't think they should. 435 00:23:16,440 --> 00:23:18,080 I think everyone should be equal in the eyes of the. 436 00:23:18,080 --> 00:23:19,360 Law, OK, we're going to leave it there. 437 00:23:19,640 --> 00:23:21,880 Ash Sarkar, Toby Young, thank you very much to both of you. 438 00:23:22,160 --> 00:23:23,960 That's it for this episode of THE Forecast. 439 00:23:23,960 --> 00:23:26,520 Until next time, thanks for watching and goodbye.