Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Beano Under Threat, Afr-AI-d of AI, Just Stop Oil Banquet Pranksters

Episode Date: July 25, 2023

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers looks into how the 'sensitivity readers' who ransacked the Roald Dahl novels are now targeting Beano. Piers debates once again whether we should be afraid of Artificial Intelligence. Also Piers os joined by the pranksters who stormed a Just Stop Oil banquet. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Common Sense. Talk Radio. I'm here more than sense to tonight, the dreaded sensitivity readers, the ransack-roll-dahl, now turn their wicked gaze onto the Bino. Could teaching children that everything is offensive be one of the reasons why they're all now so anxious? We'll debate. Fears of an AI takeover in Hollywood has sparked the biggest actor strike in decades. Now there are plans for an IRS-scanning global AI bank.

Should we be afraid? Two of the biggest human brains in the business will join me live. Plus, they're the viral pranksters winning handsome minds by playing Just Stop Oil Cretins at their own irritating game will reveal the creators behind Just Stop peeing everyone off Live from the news building in London This is Pearce Morgan Uncensored

Well, good evening, welcome to Pierce Morgan Uncensored Live from London Sounds very difficult to be young in today's world Barely a day passes without stories of profound woe amongst our youth kids' mental health, as in crisis, we're told. Anxiety and depression rampant among children. There's even a child anxiety epidemic right here in the UK, apparently. It all sounds very alarming. It's also a bit confusing because generally speaking, the world is getting more prosperous, less poor, safer, there are fewer wars,

people are living longer and healthier. It should be that young people feel quite happy, actually. Now we've come through the pandemic, they should. should be, but they're not. And social media probably has a lot to do with that. An entire digital world of vipers exists where self-esteem can be measured directly in likes. Even I would worry about that if I wasn't, well, so well-liked. But perhaps there's a bigger problem here, and it's us. We ghastly adults, so at some point decided we should teach children to be mortally offended by everyone and utterly terrified of everything and that they could win it everything.

I never lose. Fresh from ransacking rolled Diles' led. Legendary children's stories, so-called sensitivity readers. God, that phrase just fills my skin with horror. Doesn't it yours? They make you just literally sensitivity readers. I've now said about canceling. You guessed it. This.

Come on, Blanc, Robotti. What are you doing in my pea soup? I used to love the Bastricht kids in the Beano. Those mischievous little rogues in Britain's best-loved comic book. They were always problematic. It's why I like them. like them being problematic. They've entertained children for 67 years without complaint. You know what? Kids can be problematic. I've had four of them. The consultants from inclusive minds.

The very same people who censored Roald Dahl's books have quietly decided there needs to be some changes. Of course I do. The B-N-A now takes professional advice from this committee of Fun Police, which has helped to rebrand its characters and vet its back catalogue. Spotty, who is called Spotty, because he's Spotty, is now known as Scotty. He's still got spots. You just can't say it. And Fattie, it was called Fattie because he's a fatty, is now known as Freddie, even though he's still fat. We just can't call him that.

The kids have been joined by five new pupils, including harsha, Mihira and Mendeera. In order to be more inclusive, Mendeera is featured in storylines about mental health to apparently highlight the anxieties facing children. Perhaps they should do one about Mendeera being warned that her friend Fatti is offensive. This is from the same set of geniuses who changed

cloud men to cloud people in James and the Giant Peach and decided that black tractors in Fantastic Mr Fox could not be described as black because it was potentially racist to other tractors presumably. Now there are two points here. The first is about censorship. If we continue to rewrite every work of fiction based on today's sensibilities, you're going to have to keep doing it every 10 years until you're left with a sanitised slab of nonsense that bears zero resemblance to the original.

The context of when something was written is part of what makes it informative and interesting. The second point is this. We heard a lot less about child anxiety when fatty and spotty were on the loose because they were considered to be funny then. It was a joke. It's a cartoon. If we genuinely want our kids to feel happier and less anxious,

maybe we should stop teaching them constantly that the entire world is out to get them, show them how to be less offended by absolutely everything. Stop allowing them to all get a prize in everything they compete in at school. So they all think that they're winners when sometimes they're not. Because none of that is a proper preparation for the real world. The one that in Barbieland is such a shock to Margot Robbie when she gets to it. The real world, I'm afraid, is warts and all.

It can be tough out there. So why don't we prepare kids for how to handle it rather than cover them in cotton wall? Well, I'm joined now by broadcaster of former Brexit MEP, Alex Phillips, talked to if you contributor and lawyer, Paula Rone Adrian and political journalist Ava Santina. All right, Alex, I brought up four kids. I'm not perfect by any means.

I'm being nearly perfect as a father, probably. But dis-sanitising of everything, this over-protection, There's wrapping in cotton wool. There's nobody can lose. Nobody can be called any funny names in cartoons, blah, blah, blah. A, it's exhausting. And B, all it seems to be doing is increasing the amount of anxiety in kids. All the figures show the situation's getting worse, not better.

I would argue this strategy hasn't worked. It's had the opposite effect. Yeah, it's utter madness. I mean, what we seem to be doing as a society now is making our kids into little hypochondria. to worry about everything, to police their own language at the time they should be learning how to develop their communication skills, to see everything through the prism of race, to see everything to the prism of gender. And then at the same time, the things perhaps we should protect them from, adult fetish, pornography,

we're foisting upon them at an alarming rate. And I don't understand what children are supposed to be anymore. Are they supposed to engage with this adult world of critical race theory and extreme adult context? A hundred genders? Yeah, there is no more innocent. Safeguarding has gone out the window. All right, Paula, we've discussed a lot of his issues, all right? And I get that some kids are anxious.

I've met quite a few kids who have a lot of anxiety problems. I think a lot of it is social media driven. I think a lot of it is dopamine driven that they're exposed through social media to a constant barrage of imagery from wars and other things, which we simply would never have seen when I was a kid. So I think that cannot be overlooked,

this constant sensory overload impacting negatively. And yet all the statistics will show young people if they're calmly explained, there's never been a better time to be alive, actually. But the statistics will also tell you, Peers, about the suicide rate amongst children, about how their mental health is suffering, about how children are being bullied both personally and online in the social world, social media world.

And so when we look at the Bino, what surprised me about this story is that, we weren't applauding what the Bino were doing. We weren't, you know, saying, we weren't championing what they were doing, which is to stop children from calling each other names because that's not appropriate. Well, you think it's going to stop because the Bino stops using names?

Come on. Well, yes, I do, actually, because it's teaching children that it's not appropriate. And you call somebody by their name, which is Frank, John, Paula, or Alex. You don't call them spotty. You don't call them darky. You don't call them fatty.

You call them by their name. And so what you are doing by what the Bino is doing is acknowledging that it's anachronistic in its style and that it shouldn't be, that it should be taking responsibility for providing a positive message for children. Stop being mean, children. Yeah, but the trouble is life is tough, Ava. Life is very mean.

You know, I always remind people of the Rocky Balboa speech to his son, who's a spoiled entitled brat in the sixth movie. And eventually Rocky loses it with him in the street and says, life is hard. It will beat you down, right? And the challenge of succeeding in life is how many times you can get back up

and keep moving forward. It's not how hard you can punch. It's about how hard you can get punched and keep going. We know this. And my argument is I think we're just not preparing kids properly for the real world.

And trying to create this kind of Barbie-style utopia where no one's mean, no one uses mean words, all that kind of thing. It means you basically have to airbrush now every work of literature going back in history because it was all full of mean stuff. It was. It was. From rolled dial to the beano. They're all getting censored.

I don't get it. I don't get any of it works. I think it's quite obvious that parents probably don't want to sit down in 2023 and read a bedtime story to their child about, you know, fatty and spotty. I think it's probably market. Hang on, I think it's probably marking forces that have dictated it and you love the free market and I think they've probably looked at it and gone, do you know what, beano not really being consumed anymore. Why don't we try to get this, you know, somehow purchased and back in school?

back at bedtime. And that's how they've responded. Let me throw this back at you. My daughter calls she's 11. She calls me fatty all the time, right? And does this to me all the time. Good, it makes me get at the gym. Didn't know this morning.

That's very, very different from reading her at bedtime story. I was actually Barbie pressing this morning to female trainers. I mean, this is how I flow. But the point is, I'm not offended when she does that. I think it's funny, right? Used to be, you could laugh at stuff like that. But what we're now in, we're now in a world where Cosmopolitan magazine, one of the most influential magazines for young women in the

country, but it's a 305 pound model model on the front cover and doesn't mention anywhere in the text, either on the cover or inside, that this is morbidly obese and very dangerous. Okay. We celebrate being incredibly fat. But if you dare to use the word fatty in the beano about a fictitious character, all hell breaks loose. The sensitivity police get called in. It all has to be changed.

Explain to me how that is good for society or good for the way. well-being of young women who think that being £305 when you're 5 foot 2 is a great thing to be. It's body positive because no one's got the gumption to go, sorry, you are morbidly obese, you're going to die. And by the way, if you all want to be this fat, you're all going to die too. But then we should have done that for the models who are 80 pounds and six foot tall who are on magazines for 20 years and gave, you know, the whole world eating. I said the same thing about the size zero campaign.

There was never any warning on there of how a woman achieved that body frame. ever talked about the smoking, no one ever talked about the drug taking or the excessive dieting. None of that ever appeared in a magazine. And Pierce, I guarantee your daughter when she calls you fatty and you have that lovely inside joke. You're not called Fatty, but you have a good joke about it and you're having, you know, this nice,

lovely moment, I guarantee you didn't teach her that word. That's probably something she's picked up and now you enjoy and you have a nice laugh. But you didn't teach her that. She's picked it up because actually kids do that kind of thing. They're kids, right? They're not going to stop because of Beano's changes everyone's You taught her that word, wouldn't it?

If you were at bedtime and you taught her that word from the Be No Book, that would be a bit strange. I've tried to teach all my kids. Just don't worry about, my mother always told me. We talk about the patriarchy. I lived in a matriarchy with these wonderfully strong women in my family, my grandmother, my mother, my sister, my daughters inheriting the same thing. And it's just that sticks and stones will break your bones, but words will never hurt you.

You're very much a, never mind, sticks and stones, words are fine. They're not. They're literally not. And you know that that's not true. I do not know it's true. I think that's a really dangerous theory to push. We know that words hurt. We know that because our law recognises that fact, that people are often mistreated with words

and that it can impact on their lives. We know that bullying, which doesn't have to include physical attacks, when we're talking about a verbal assault on somebody, can often have the same threatening and intimidating effect as it could if you were physically assorted. I know, but my point is... Well, then if you say you know, then we need to acknowledge that because they are viewers watching this

who think it's appropriate to stand over a partner and shout abuse at them in their face or to even whisper it or to even whisper it in their face. I don't know there's any viewers. My viewers are not those sort of people. I would hope that they're not. I have a discerning audience. But Sadiq Khan recognises that abuse can be verbal as well as...

You're never going to persuade me that verbal mockery and stupid phrases is ever going to come close to physical vows. Well, maybe Meghan Markle might be able to do that. Megan Markle dishes it out like everyone I've ever seen in my life. She thinks it's fine to call the Royal Family a bunch of horrible racist scumbags and make hundreds of millions of dollars. You never complain when she does that. But you say that's not appropriate.

You say that that is not appropriate, and that's exactly the example that I wanted you to give. It's not appropriate to use language that was insults. The world, Paula. You're not. We're not going to stop people being mean. We don't have to sanitise the world. We can teach people to be kind. All right.

Let's teach people. What about teaching people to just state the bleeding of this? So in the Women's World Cup, it's called the Women's World Cup. We have a new superstar, the Canada midfielder Quinn, goes by the name Quinn. It wasn't the name that Quinn was born with. But Quinn has been heralded, celebrated this week, as the first transgender non-binary. footballer to play in the women's world cup to which my response when I read this was hang on a second hang on is she is she they whatever is she a biological male

no no it turned out she's a biological female so so what is she well whatever they'd like to go let's go well hang on hang on just to be clear i think oh Quinn I've not asked the question I've not asked a question here she's a they she is a transgender non-binary What is that? How can you be transgender and non-binary? Because that's what they are. I thought non-binary meant you in either one nor the other. Do you know what Quinn also is?

Is it an Olympian? Hang on, sorry. I thought transgender meant you literally, males to female, female to male. Turns out that non-binary is not the same as transgender or it is. I don't want to put words in their mouth, but I would say that it's probably because they're not allowed to take the correct amount of testosterone

because they are still playing in the women's team. And so I would assume they are saying they're not binary. Exactly. That's what I'm saying. Quinn doesn't want to be male. Because Quinn can't compete. Quinn is a female playing against females, but now doesn't want to identify a woman.

Because she won't let her play on the male team. No, no. You're missing the point. She doesn't want to play on the male team. She doesn't, she's not actually trained. They might. Quinn might like to do that. No, Quinn wants to be a, an ex-woman, Alex.

Who is upset about this? Who's upset about this? Stop being mean by interrupting. Who is upset? I'm coming to Alex. Alex. I'm going to get my head around this. She's a transgender, non-sett.

non-binary ex-woman. So my question is, if you're no longer identifying as a woman, what are you doing playing in the Women's World Cup? Not my title. That is the official title of a tournament. She doesn't qualify. They don't qualify, even though there's only one of them. They don't qualify for the Women's World Cup

because they used to be a woman, but now they don't want to be a woman. So now we have to call them they for being a transgender, even though they're non-binary, and they're still playing in the Women's World Cup, and we're all supposed to go, Well done, Quinn. What a moment. But no one was quite sure.

No, it was quite sure what we're celebrating. Alex, what are we celebrating? Rules change all the time. It's like we're bestowing upon people who have gender dysphoria, some sort of magical extra special power that normal people don't have. And I don't care, frankly. How many scores have they, how many goals have they scored?

You know, that's more interesting if you're a professional. Paula, why is someone who doesn't consider themselves a woman in the Women's World Cup? Explain to me. Because where else are they? going to be able to... In a trans or non-binary tournament? No problem. I don't see one. And I certainly don't... I keep being told there are millions...

I certainly don't see one on the world stage. Great. Have your own tournament. So, Peas, if you and I want to set one up, then I'm all for that. Swimming, you've just done it today. Fantastic. So why don't we do that? So instead of being angry... So you accept they shouldn't be competing? No, I do not accept that. In Queens case... No, I do not accept that.

In Quinn's case... What options did this person have? In Quinn? None was my answer. None. No options did this person have to perform on their world stage. Look at your mournful little faces. You both know this is such. No.

You want to be angry people. Look at your faces. Why are you not angry? Why are you not angry to protect? And applaud. Why don't you want to protect women? Why is it always left to me to protect one's rights? They're not.

This person has gone and they've won an Olympic medal and now they are playing successfully. Doesn't want to be a woman. I don't see what the problem is. Doesn't want to be a woman. Hates the idea of being a woman. I don't know about hate the issue. stuff to themselves.

Do you know what I mean? My understanding is they've not had any sort of testosterone so there's no biological problems. No, no, she's a... The caveat on thing in the sport points. I don't care. Just stop telling us all about your great move

to be a transgender, non-binary, whatever. Nobody cares. Nobody cares. Tell you what I do care about. The boss of Nat West, Alison Rose, has now admitted in this Nigel Farage Coots bank fiasco,

a serious error of judgment. Turns out she admits. She sat next to the top BBC journalist. The night before, the BBC journalist tweets. The real story about Nigel Farage is that actually it wasn't to do with his political views that he was removed from a Coote's account. It was because of his financial situation. Turns out to be a total lie because Nigel Farage got under the data rules.

He got all the minutes from the meeting where it was clearly his political views. Eva, whichever side you're on on this politically makes no difference. difference to me. I've got no truck to support Farage at all. He's tried to stiff me over Donald Trump, as I've said. As I said, he's got a lot of pain coming his way for that. So that's a different feud rumbling away. However, on this, I'm a Coots account holder. I ran Coos today. And I said, right, come on, have you got one of these on me? And I was told I'm not a politically whatever it is person. So they haven't, they assured me. But they've had a lot of calls from clients asking, am I next for this, right? What have you got on me? Is it my political views? What are you holding on me? This is not right.

in a democracy like this, that people's political opinions lead to them having their bank account counsel? And it's just not. OK, let's just make one thing crystal clear, which is that Coots is a very selective bank. So, you know, Nigel Farage was offered a bank account with NatWest. Not with Coots. He wasn't going to be just thrown out.

I mean, I can't go and get a bank account with Coots. You know, they are very selective. But, but, however, her briefing, the CEO briefing, the BBC business journalist, is absolutely extraordinary. I mean, to me, I can't understand. how you can talk about someone's financial matters. Totally agree. I don't understand.

Paul, on that alone, it's just a massive breach of his privacy. And I have to say, and it's on the record now, you called it last week, Piers, when we discussed this. You did. Yeah. And you're absolutely right to have said what you did last week because it's just uncomfortable, whichever way you look at it.

Completely wrong. Whether it is somebody in the street or Nigel Farage or the Queen. I mean, the Queen needs to back the good. Someone in the street, though. Let's talk about this in proportion. No, no, no. I read through every word of, of their meeting.

And Alex, the truth is, you know Nigel well, the truth is there was nothing in there other than apparently he knew Donald Trump, he liked Novak Djokovic's tweet. I mean, the whole thing was ridiculous. But I mean, it's a personal vendetta, isn't it? And what we've actually found out since Nigel told the world about this story

is this is happening to countless normal people. And it's really quite dystopian. It's worrying. It's like the Chinese social credit system. Believe what we believe, or you can't have access to life. Also, you've got to trust your bank, right? How can somebody you run? one of the biggest banks in the country, brief to a journalist, inaccurate, smeary information.

And that's the only little thing that can just correct something, which is that the reason that some people are being turned away from banks now is because they want to deal in cash, and banks no longer want to deal in cash. That is entirely different from political views. We've got two different stories here that are getting a little bit. That's a different issue. No, but if we're going to say that, we should... The clear issue here is if you have certain opinions,

it should not be down to a bank to decide your opinions don't suit their values. It's nonsense. Because his views are shared by about 60.5 million people of this country. To be fair, I do get to choose who I bank with. So, for example, I'm aware of one bank, and I think it's the cooperative bank, if they still do, that were very clear around an advertising campaign about how they would invest your money in environmentally friendly, for example, projects. That's a good thing.

And I can choose whether I want to bank that occur up or not. They should also have the opportunity to decide whether they want me as a customer. But hold on. If this is, when this is on the other foot. And a bakery in Ireland says, I don't want to bake a gay wedding cake. Oh, all hell broke loose. We are talking about, so if we're talking about race, if Coots said, I don't happen to Jeremy, this happened to Jeremy Corbyn, just imagine what would have happened.

If Coots has said, I don't want to bank with you because you're white or I don't want to bank, or you to bank with us because you're gay, then of course we're having a different conversation. Are we there? You cannot compare what Coots did to that case. All right. Are we all agreed, though, that this boss should probably not be in her job? Yeah, she should shuffle up at this point. It's definitely a grievance issue, isn't it?

And I'll be agreed that as a result, unlike the theme of Barbie, women shouldn't really be put in top jobs. Because they just can't be trusted. Me, to Sadiq Khan would say. Mate. And I haven't even got around. I actually think Sadiq Khan's onto something there. Because when I'm with my village mates, we do sometimes,

if somebody crosses a line, is inappropriate. Someone will go, mate. Come on. It is actually quite a good little, certainly in the villages. Mate, come on. Are you defending Sadiqa? Yeah. This is a problem.

I've agreed with him twice running. Last night about pollution. He's bang on about pollution. Ever since I've got air purifiers in my house, I'm a different beast. Yeah. Honestly, it's transformed my health. Just living in a very polluted area in London. I now have air purifiers.

Don't go out when the air's bad. And I feel great. And I tell everyone who's out there, he's got problems with red eyes, streaming, sinners, all that stuff you think maybe. your hay fever? I bet it's pollution. Go and get air purifiers, shut the windows, only go out when your app tells you to. Trust me, you'll feel exactly like I do. I'm going to get a piece of just-stop oil jacket. That's not go too far. Right, thank you, Pat. Good to see you. I sense the next meta-press officer Nick Clegg says artificial intelligence is too stupid to take over the world

and we should leave it all in their capable hands, which sounds to me like an incredibly stupid thing to be saying. My next guest says it's like an atomic bomb and we're in a new Cuba missile crisis. and I suspect he knows a bit more about it than Nick Clegg. We'll debate this after the break. Welcome back to you, Pizs, Morgan, Unsensit. AI threatens to radically reshape the world economy in the increasingly near future. Hollywood, too, is on guard.

The perceived threat of AI has driven both writers and actors to walk out in their first double strike for more than 60 years. And today, Chad GPT founder, Sam Altman, unveiled a global currency, which gives out digital coins in exchange for a scan of their eyeballs. It all sounds very futuristic

and quite alarming, doesn't it? Well, not according to Meta press officer Nick Clegg. You might remember him. Used to be a politician here. Who says that AI is actually very stupid, and we should let companies like his, Facebook, Meta, just get on with it. I think a lot of the sort of existential warnings,

the warnings of existential threats relate to models that don't currently exist, so-called super-intelligent, you know, super-powerful AI models. The models that we're open-sourcing are far, far, far short, In fact, in many ways, they're quite stupid. Really? Well, joining me to discuss the issue is the former Google ex-Chief business officer, Mo Gordat, and the godfather of virtual reality, Jaron Larnie.

Well, welcome to both of you. All right, Mo, apparently it's stupid AI. Nothing to worry about it. I'm just seeing here. I mean, in a very interesting way. It's not there yet, but the question is, when will it get to super intelligence is what most AI developers will not talk about. Isn't it stupid, though, to think right now? now that it's stupid? Absolutely. I mean, when we met last time, I told you that Chad GPT today is 155 IQ. That's compared to Einstein at 160. But the stupidity comes from the types of intelligence, because when you really understand that intelligence is not just IQ, you need EQ,

emotional intelligence or empathy, you need creativity, intuition, and so on. And AI today is being developed by a bunch of very masculine developers sitting somewhere talking about IQ, IQ, And when you really think about it, what destroyed our world or got us to where we are today in climate change and other topics is that we're so dependent on IQ and we have no empathy to the planet, no empathy to other beings. It's put that on steroids and we could be in a very dangerous place. Gerald Lonnie, in a recent survey, 42% of CEOs said AI could destroy humanity in five to ten years. I mean, do you share anything like that kind of view if it got out of hand? Well, it wouldn't be AI destroying humanity. It would be us destroying ourselves. The real issue is whether we become stupid. And unfortunately, we can use computer software to make ourselves stupid. We do it on social media all the time every day. And really all AI is, at least the kind of AI that we're building now, is a mashup of what people put into it. One person puts in a picture of a cat, another person puts in a certain style of painting, and you say,

can I get that cat as painted by that person? And that's the kind of thing we can do. And that's great. It has a lot of uses. But the danger is that we perceive it as being much more than that, and we put indeed a stupid thing in control. And, you know, my response to Nick Clegg is that a stupid adversary can be much more dangerous than a smart adversary, you know? And so just saying, talk about whether it's stupid or smart in a way doesn't help us. You know, like that's not the main issue. The question is, are we stupid or smart? And I'm a little concerned that we're just giving,

we're creating this almost like this religion around AI as this new super being. And I think doing that makes us stupid. I think that's the core of the problem. What should we be doing then with AI? How should we be positioning it, treating it? Well, I think we should look at the real scenarios for harm that are possible. And the one right now that I think is the most likely is not so much that the AI will break out of a jail and take over all the weapons and kill us, which we've seen in the movies many times, like in the Terminator movies.

I think the greater danger is that we'll overwhelm ourselves with deep fakes and nonsense and personally tailored propaganda, maybe at a crucial moment. when we can least afford it. I hate to say this, but the scenario that really bugs me is that we currently have a situation where the main social media platform that young people use is called TikTok, and it's ultimately controlled by China, and I don't want to lose myself to paranoia over China. But it is true that there's a plausible scenario where we end up in a conflict with them, And if that day comes, they'll have all this data about all the kids of key people in the military and industry and government. Their interiors of their homes, it's not quite economic yet to do it.

But before too long, they might be able to create massive, highly personalized and tailored deep fakes that just stress everyone out. And then you lose 20 minutes until you figure out it's a fake, but that's the crucial 20 minutes. you're spot on because TikTok is the number one news source now for most young people. Mo, this trying to be positive as well as looking at the kind of potential horrific downside of this. Take things like disease, heart disease, cancer, things like this, which humans have really struggled to conquer. How fast could AI find a cure for all cancers, for example? How realistic is it that AI can do that job infinitely better than humans?

Definitely faster than humans and definitely fast. It's the question which I agree 100%. It's we can be stupid. The reality of humanity is that capitalism doesn't make the larger amounts of money from helping others. You know, capitalism makes larger amounts of money from patenting medicine in a way or creating weapons and so on and so forth. It's the idea of us using intelligence in the right way, requires that. requires us to believe that there is going to be an abundance that's sufficient for all of us so that we don't need to compete for those limited resources.

But have you heard of, for example, AI's work in medicine and science now beginning to really accelerate in a beneficial way? Because people will watch this, and these conversations terrify people, right? I mean, you know, you hear people as eminent and expert as you two talking about what could happen with it. It's pretty scary. It's infinitely. I always say it's a singularity. have the potential to create a utopia and also the potential to mess it up, right?

And it is infinitely a big gift for humanity. If we were able to use this kind of intelligence, intelligence has no inherent negative value in it. It can solve all of the problems we're facing. It can help us reverse climate change. It can help us with disease. It can help us with human connection. It can help us with abundance in general. And I think it's definitely something that world leaders need to come together and say, let's put our differences aside and work on. Jarron, how do we stop nefarious forces seizing ultimate control of AI? Yeah.

So, you know, in my opinion, what happened is that when we built up the internet, we had an almost an ideology that we wanted the internet to be kind of mysterious. We wanted it to feel like this Oracle giving us information. And so we created an internet where you never knew where something came from. It all came from people, but we don't know where. And so now we're paying the price for that wanting that sense of an Oracle by having an AI that we don't understand. And it's a little bit of a dumb problem we created for ourselves. If we keep track of where the examples are from people that went into the AI and then keep track of which examples were the most important every time the AI does something,

then all of a sudden it'll become clear what's a deep fake, what's from a reliable source, what's propaganda. what's just incompetent or silly. We have to be able to illuminate the humans and what the humans are doing in order to understand what the machine built and operated by the humans is doing. If we try to treat the machine as just like this entity

that's supposed to make sense by itself, then there's really no possibility of understanding it because by definition, we've chosen to be blind to it. So we can basically make our AI what we choose to make it. And the question is, are we going to have the courage and the strength and the intelligence to make it a force for good, not bad.

Gentlemen, thank you both very much indeed. Fascinating debate, and we'll keep having it. Mo, I'll be probably seeing you every two months because that's how fast the story moves, you know? It's an honour, thank you. Onsen the next claims a gutter politics on both sides of Atlantic. Trump's support has posted a remarkable attack video. Is it one of the worst attack videos ever seen?

Well, Frank Lundsen, my guest thinks it might be. That's next. Welcome back to you, please, Morgan on our censor. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has today been accused of gutter politics after personally posting an attack ad tweet which claimed Labor is on the same side as criminal gangs smuggling migrants into Britain. The Labor itself was accused the same thing after a viral marketing campaign accused Sunac of not believing abusers should go to jail. And if you think we've got it bad, take a look at this conspiracy-laden video posted in America today. The video is posted by an arm's-length group which makes viral pro-Trump content and Trump often shares their videos. If I was the deep state and I wanted to destroy America, I would rig the election with a puppet candidate. I would create a false flag that allows for mail in ballots.

I would be in charge of the ballot counting machines. I would create a false flag to blame all the question, the results of the election. I would make sure all crimes I ever committed never happened. I would prosecute my biggest competition. I would make sure they could never run for office ever again. I would push my pedophilia ambitions on you. Well, that goes over several minutes along the same lines. Are these the new moral battlefield of which next year's elections are set to be forward?

Joining me now as political strategist and Polster Franklance and Donald Trump's pastor, Mark Burns. Welcome to both of you. Franklin's, you tweeted this is the most alarming political ad you've seen this year. Why? I still don't know how to describe it. I don't know how to respond. I was so stunned at how to.

advice or how negative and how it's designed to create anxiety and fear and and genuine dislike and distrust of people appears at some point you have to say enough is enough and I'll be curious to hear from the pastor when he counsels the former president is this really who we are as the people is this really who we are as a country does this add or detract from our political discourse it's getting worse and worse. And this ad frighten the living hell out of me, so I expect you're going to see a lot of it as a result. Right. So, Pastor Burns, I mean, I watched it, and it just is, this is what I call rabbit hole conspiracy theory clap trap, masquerading as mainstream politics. I mean, surely you wouldn't defend a lot of what you heard and saw in that commercial, would you?

Well, Pierce, let me just say this. There's a reason why President Donald Trump is leading in the polls statewide. There's a reason he's leading in the polls nationally. There's a reason why he is still the frontrunner, even though you had all of the fraudulent indictments that are coming against them, you know, led by the Biden and his DOJ, which has been weaponized to essentially interfere with an election, there's a reason why the American people are still choosing Donald Trump, because he is literally the modern-day Julius Caesar, right? It was the senators, the elite that killed off Julius Caesar. It wasn't the common man.

Donald Trump speaks to the common man, and that's why he's having a two-tiered system in America, and they're tired of being led by people like Joe Biden and the Biden crime theft. But, Pastor, in relation to what Frank does said, is it healthy for America or American politics or American democracy that you have such a nihilistic ad like this, flying around social media,

such a dystopian look at the country? You know, America was built on unity of a country that was welcoming to all the fought together to become the greatest country on earth. This kind of thing looks to me like it's an incredibly divisive attempt to brush off everything that's negative about Trump is absolutely invented by the deep state. They're all out to get him. He's Julius Caesar. The knives are flying in his back. It could be that, you know, a lot of the stuff that Trump's been alleged to have done is completely true. He shouldn't have done it. We'll find out in the court cases. But why would you, as his pastor, be happy for such overt negativity to be swarming around America?

Well, Frank, what is truthful, and you hit it right on the nail, that the American Revolution took place because the people came together for truth. But we had no representation, right, in England. So the people came together because of truth, fact. And the fact is, right now we have a government that is pushing a, the, a DOJ to be weaponized against Donald Trump. Number two, we are changing sexes in America. There's a reason why Donald Trump is touching the Christian community by saying that he would

not allow grown men to participate in female sports. The fact that we're questioning the identity of biology, male, what is a male, what is a female, but not questioning Pfizer, not questioning the COVID vaccines that has literally done harm. That's not conspiracy. People are actually in the ground, right? That is not a conspiracy. But also, but the young mother who died,

who passed, let me finish. Let me just interrupt. So the American people peers want truth. The American people want fact. They don't want to be killed in the dark anymore. Yeah, they don't really want to hit. I don't think a pastor should be saying that the only thing the COVID vaccines did was put people. Well, see, Jesus himself took on this type of.

Pastor. Jesus himself had this very type of controversy. I don't think a pastor should be saying the only purpose of the COVID vaccine. You could not read in my Bible because. Jesus himself had to deal with the Roman season. Pastor, let me speak. Pastor, this is my church. My church, not yours.

I don't think. Jesus, let me come to Frank. All right, Pastor, thank you. Because he was willing to go against the political elite of the day. Stop talking. Because he gave the truth. Pastor, what you've just said about COVID vaccines was not the truth. Yes, it had some adverse side effects.

But yes, actually, it saved a lot of millions of people from going under the ground. Franklin's, um, What do you do when you have Donald Trump's own pastor who signs up on all this stuff and thinks that actually it's all true? You ask your question rather than make a statement. Is this the proper discourse that we should be having on your show? Is this the kind of behavior that we should be emulating for your children? Are these the priorities? Are kids learning what they need to know to be successful in university, career and life?

Is this the right approach? challenge in this is that I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of the points either raised by the pastor or raised by the ad. It's how it's done. And peers, I've come my entire career, I've suddenly figured out that there's something's more important than the election, decency, civility, respect. These are values that are good country champions, and we're losing them in America. And one last point. We don't have to demonize each other to prove that we are ourselves are correct. It doesn't require the destruction of the opposition, or not the enemy, but the destruction of the opposition to promote the things that we promote. And here's what you've

always stood for. And I'm sorry for this conversation because, frankly, it's an embarrassment. Yeah, Pastor, all I would say to you, Pastor, is your job as a pastor, surely, is to bring people together, not to fuel division. And when you, when you speak, yeah, but your idea of what the truth is in mind might be different. You should be able to respect the fact that I have a different opinion to you, or the Frank does, or that other people do. Okay, Pierce, so I get all that, I hear what you're saying, but the reality

of it is, you're ignoring the fact that there is but two sexes in the world. There's male, there's female. No, no, I agree with you about that. Now, we have a society that's trying to tell us otherwise. That is not true. You're barking up the wrong tree. Pastor, I agree with you about that. That Donald Trump is fighting against.

This is why he's leading in the polls. This is why he's raising money. Because he is, God's anointed. And I understand that the powers that be like yourself who are coming against. And I love Frank. Frank, Mark, but Frank, of course, you know, as much as I love Frank. And thank you, Frank, my father, has gotten knee surgeries. You and I had a great conversation years ago. So I love you and I respect you. But you also said that Hillary Clinton was going to be the next president of the United States of America. So we know that you don't like anything MAGA. But the American people do, right? And the American people are behind Donald Trump.

That's why he's leaving the point. They know the Biden, Prying family and weaponize the DOJ. Listen, if we're going to talk about videos, how about you talk about DeSantis' video and his Nazi imagery? Pastor. How about his homoerotic video that he just produced a couple weeks ago? We're not here to talk about Desanis.

Final word to you, Frank. Make it quick, please. We're running out of time. I'm sorry that I did this interview, and I appreciate that the pastor likes me. This is so inappropriate for British audiences, for American audiences. And if this is the direction we're headed in,

peers, we're going to have a really bad 18 months. Yeah, I think I agree with you. It's got to be a more civil way to debate. I totally agree, Frank. Good to see you both, though. Frank, thank you for joining me. Pastor, thank you for joining me. Maybe go a little easy with the President Trump next time you see him.

Tell him to just dial things down a bit. Dial it down a bit. Dial down the rhetoric. Not everyone has to hate each other. It's got different opinions. Good to see you both. Thank you. Unscensored next, the ante though, to Just Stop Oil,

a new group called Just Stop peeing everyone off is taking them on their own game. People behind it will be revealed next. Welcome back to Pittsburgh, welcome on the Sensor. Just Stop Oil protests have become a national irritation, targeting all the things that we love, like sporting events, flower shows and so on. One of their latest possessions was so delightfully met

by counter-protesters, staging an intervention. And the group, Just Stop Peeing Everyone Off, also infiltrated at Just Stop Oil banquet. And gloriously, they had balloons which flew around, which had alarms blaring off. Take a look. Oh, so fabulous, isn't it? Listening to them all.

getting annoyed and irritated, just like they get to irritate and annoy us. So who is behind this and is there more to come? Well, you'll be unsurprised to hear, perhaps, if you're regular viewers of the show, that it's my old friend's Joshua Peters and Archie Manas, who joined me now with the world's top pranksters. Great effort, chaps. I was roaring you on. When I first heard about the first one, I thought,

that's got the mark of my boys. And sure enough, it was you two. You've taken me by surprise. I didn't think you'd be a fan of it. So I'd really relieved that you liked it. I love it, because they are so annoying. And in my view, the manner of their protests has been completely backfiring

because the public are just seeing people setting out to deliberately ruin their day-to-day life. That's not how you bring people on the agenda with you, right? No, not at all. I think we can all agree that climate change is a very serious issue and we all know that something needs to be done. But when you're protesting and campaigning for things,

you need to bring people with you and just stop oil are having the exact opposite effect on the British public. And what you don't need to do is have a sock in great big party on Sunday. I mean, that does nothing to help the environment at all. There was a harp. There was a harpist, live music.

They were all clinking their single-use. How many heard today that just policing, just up, well, this year's cost over seven million pounds. Now, people are going through a cost of living crisis. Seven million pounds to police these idiots who most of the time are doing idiotic things. I mean, the other day, they were blockading a pregnant woman who then her boyfriend got into a fight with him.

I didn't agree with the violence, but I understood why he was so defensive. of his poor pregnant partner. Another woman had a newborn baby in her car and couldn't take a baby wherever they were going to go. All this kind of thing is just like, to me, it's just moronic.

It's not achieving anything. And we, in order to pull these pranks off, we had a mole inside, so we infiltrated their ranks, and we followed them around for a day before we pulled any stunts. And part of the interesting was talking to the police men and women

who hundreds of them, on Parliament Square, policing this stuff, they don't want to be doing it either. No. And they're so respectful. Of course they don't. They've got better things to do.

More important than. things to worry about. We all agree broadly with the calls. We just don't agree with the methodology. I don't think it's changing people's hearts and minds. Are you going to carry on doing these traps? I think we'll call it a day. I think we've proved our point. Look, you know, I don't think you should. I think you should keep in the same. Somebody has taken the just stop peeing off slogan and whacked it on a website. You should be everywhere they pop up annoying people. You should be annoying them. Well, here's on that note, we've brought you a little present. Thank you. Your very own. I will just not wear this proud. In fact, you know,

You know who I'm going to give this to? My eldest son is watching tonight. He's big fans of you two. He knows you two from the nightclub scene. No, no, we deny that. And he's 30 years old tomorrow, which makes me feel unbelievably old. So, Spencer, if you're wondering what your present is,

it's just a ride. And I know you'll love wearing this. You can take this to a Bithu, where you're going tomorrow. So happy birthday for tomorrow. Happy birthday, Spencer. 30-year-old son, my God. I've never thought that day was fun. He's really panicked about it.

But I want him to join your group. I think they're a wonderful group to join. Chats, well done. Thank you for restoring a little bit of counter-attack, of his madness, and doing it with your normal panache and humour, which is the key, I think. Good to see you both. Thank you for having us, all the best. I really appreciate it.

That's it for me, we're up to. Keep it unscensored. And remember, the key message tonight is this. Just stop peeing everyone off.