Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Rwanda asylum plan and Deepak Chopra

Episode Date: June 13, 2022

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers speaks about the Rwanda asylum plan following the decision by the courts to allow the flight to go ahead, and Prince Charles' comments describing flying migrants to Rwanda as ‘appalling’. Piers also speaks to Deepak Chopra and to the pensioner crowd surfer at The Killers concert in Manchester who got the concert halted. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8pm on TalkTV on Sky 526, Virgin Media 627, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and app. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm Piers Morgan, our censor. Coming up on tonight's program, Rwanda Revolt, as the air goes spare on sending migrants over there, will ask his Prince Charles Wright. The Duke of Hazard, Prince Andrew faces earlier retirement from public life as he barred from another royal ceremony. And has the world actually gone nuts? Wellness Doctor of the Stars, Deepak Chopra, will be here live to Tuss. And the Silver Surfer, I'll meet the parting 67-year-old who became a showstopper and possibly My inspiration of a year. Well, good evening. The first flight taking asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda will take off tomorrow after an appeals court rule with the government.

But legal challenges to the policy mean that only about eight people will be on the plane. The government says it's a deterrent. But Prince Charles says it's appalling. Boris Johnson responded to that charge this morning. Just to clarify, Prince Charles is wrong, Prime Minister. Let me put it this way, Nick. What I don't think that we should support is continued activity by criminal gangs. No, I hear that, I hear that, PM.

But the Prince Charles is wrong. Very frail and very dangerous boats risking their lives, but also breaking the law. And the very last thing Boris Johnson would ever do, of course, is break one of his own laws. We'll debate all this in a moment, but I want to start with the story of Hassanakat. And not all asylum seekers are like him, but many are. They're a side of this story we simply should not ignore. 11 years ago, he was a 24-year-old English teacher in Damascus and Syria. He wasn't political.

But when 15 schoolboys were detained and later tortured, for the crime of spraying graffiti, Hassan, like many others, felt enough was enough. Peaceful demonstrations against President Assad's brutality broke out across his home country. So Assad joined them and took videos of his protests to post online. For that simple act, which millions of us take the granted every day, He was beaten so badly by security forces, he almost lost a leg.

Months later, after a terrible spell in solitary confinement and facing a lifetime ban from teaching, he fled Syria, which by then was engulfed in a civil war, and was soon become one of the deadliest this century. Well, footage of his son filmed of his perilous 87-day journey into Britain in the hands of people smugglers became the focus of an award-winning documentary. And in the UK, he became a successful filmmaker, but it was more his decision to join the front line of a different kind of war the broadened national acclaim here.

He worked as a volunteer cleaner, disinfecting hospital wars fighting COVID at the height of the pandemic. And this message to Boris Johnson persuaded the government to grant indefinite permission to stay in the country for the relatives of foreign health workers who died from COVID.

Us migrants are on the front line doing these very demanding jobs to help this nation overcome this pandemic. And the least you can do if we die, to give our families indefinite leave to remain. A powerful contrast to the outcome of the protest that brought him to the UK

and one which might never have happened if he hadn't arrived. Well, Hassan, I'm glad to say, joins me now. Hassan, great to see you again. Thanks for having me. This Rwanda proposal of the government, Prince Charles has apparently called it appalling. Today, all the major church of England leaders

have got together, led by the Archielloe and bishops to condemn it. It's been condemned by, many others. On the other side, the government stands by it. Boris Johnson says we've got to stop the illegal people smuggling. And I get some of that argument. So you're in a great position to tell really what you think of this proposal. And actually, if that isn't the answer, what is? Well, I do agree with the Prime Minister on stopping boats from crossing the English Channel. I think the English Channel, I mean, it is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world. People

shouldn't be risking their lives crossing on flimsy dinghies to come in a Sika Solomon in Britain. However, they should be provided like the Ukrainians with safe routes, safe passages. People should be, you know, if they're fleeing Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Eritrea, any country in the world, they should be given a safe passage to the country. Now, a safe passage into the country for these people doesn't exist. People cannot come here in a regular route. So that's why they are pushed to go on these flimsy boats. Now, the question that you ask yourself, why are we going to export our responsibility, our moral responsibility, to another country?

People who come here are our responsibility, our regal responsibility, and they should be processed and they should be granted asylum here in Britain. The government trying to put them on a plane to send them hasn't happened before. Actually, aside from Israel, no country has tried to export asylum seekers to a different country. The UNHCR said yesterday, they said that this scheme lacks the legality and the appropriateness for moving people from one country to another. So I think, in my opinion, it's inhumane, it's illegal, and it's inappropriate. When you were in a dinghy yourself, risking your life for freedom, escaping the hell of the war in Syria, put me into that dingy for a moment.

What was it like to be in one of those dinghies knowing you might? actually die. Well, it's horrible because you feel like your cargo. You feel like you are, you don't feel human anymore and you're treated as a number. Did I expect ever in my life when I grew up in Damascus that this will ever happen to me? No, because I lived a comfortable life. I lived an incredible life, but you hit truck bottom within a second. You know, we've, we've, it just happens in a blink of an eye. And then when through the lottery of the world, you are born with a passport that you can't get visas anywhere, you can't get on a plane and go to Britain or to America or anywhere in Europe, then you are forced to travel on that boat. It is dehumanizing, it is painful, and it's quite

sad. And then imagine having traveled for thousands of miles, risk your life, crossed on a boat, and then came to Britain, expected that you'll be dealt with respect, with dignity, with humanity, and then the government he decides to put you on a plane and send you to Rwanda, to Rwanda, to a country that you have no connections with, No community, no friends, no one to look after you. It's my expectations of coming to Britain before coming to Britain are not aligning with the reality. This is really damaging the reputation of this country.

The argument that is put by the other side is that something has to be done that's drastic. Something has been done to deter the people smuggling. And that by doing this, if people genuinely believe, if they're in the Calais jungle, for example, where you were, if they genuinely believe there's a chance they may get flown to Rwanda, it will put them off getting in a boat. Do you think that is likely? It's not going to happen. You know, migration, when did migration ever stop?

When did people stop moving? Our world right now, you know, if the government is watching the news, man-made crises and climate change is forcing more and more people to move, to go on the run. It's not going to stop people from moving. What will, you, me, your viewers, everyone wants to see these boats from.

stopping from crossing the channel. But to stop that, we have to have legal and safe routes. It's the government's own finding, by the way, in 2019, the Home Affairs Select Committee, they did a study of our immigration laws, and they concluded that any policy which focuses primarily on stopping boats from coming will push people to take even more dangerous routes. People will continue to come, but you know what's going to happen,

the long-term effect? People will be pushed to the fringes of society. People won't claim asylum. They will go into the black economy. They won't be able to have access to education. to health, and they want even open bank accounts or get travel documents. Difficult question, but I want to put it to you anyway. If they were being flown to Canada, for example,

not one of the poorest countries in the world like Rwanda, which has a pretty dodgy record of authoritarianism and the rest of it, if it was a country like Canada, would you feel as exercised about it, or would you think it was something worth trying? I think that it is Britain's responsibility to deal with its asylum seekers full stop. They're sending them to Canada, to Rwanda, to America, to Malaysia. I don't care where they're sending them.

I think it is our responsibility to deal with them. Let alone, imagine someone, imagine me, fleeing Bashar al-Assad's regime, an authoritarian regime, and then traveling all this distance and coming here and then Britain sending me to another authoritarian country. And the truth is, Boris Johnson and his government wouldn't dare send any Ukrainians to Rwanda. No. So what they're basically saying is that that war,

is a protected war where we think that they are fully deserving of coming to our country. But if you're from Syria, where war still rages, or the Yemen or any of these other countries, somehow you're lesser asylum seekers. I find that part of it pretty hard to deal with. Yes, because it's not a refugee crisis. It's a racism crisis. They're creating a two-tier system. As you said, if you're from Ukraine, if you have a fairer skin, if you have blue eyes, if you're the civilized refugee, we will look after you. We will urge the British public to open the homes for you. if you're from Afghanistan or Sudan or Syria or any of these countries, no, we're going to put you on the first one. Or even countries like Iraq, where we wage it.

Which is our responsibility. Yemen, British made bombs were dropped in Yemen. Afghanistan, our shambolic evacuation from Afghanistan, and Afghanistan falling to the Taliban is our responsibility. And Iraq is our responsibility. So when people free these countries and come here, the least we can do is to treat them with dignity and respect and look after them. When you were in Calais, and you obviously met a lot of people, who were trying to get over. In the end, you came by plane because you got hold of a passport,

and that's how you did it. A fake passport. But the people that were there that were planning to get on the boats, for example, there is a belief, a large number of them, a young male economic migrants. What was your experience of the people there?

It's true. Most people who are doing these journeys are men. But we shouldn't demonize men. I think men are entitled for protection and they should be looked after. And then we ask ourselves, why do men do these journeys? I'll tell you why.

Because it's men who are fleeing military service. It is men who decide to leave their families behind, do these horrible journeys, these life-threatening journeys, then they can get to their destinations and then apply for family unification and then fly their families. That's why it's mostly men who do it.

And then the government's own finding most people who cross here to Britain are genuine asylum seekers, are genuine refugees. In fact, the people who are being deported to Rwanda, the ones who were served, with deportation notices. Some of them are torture survivors.

These are the people who were deporting to Rwanda. Torture survivors, victims of trafficking, and even unaccompanied miners. Do you know people who have fled the Syrian War who were being sent to Rwanda? Yes, I know, two brothers, and they're being separated. One of them is staying here and the other being sent to Rwanda. Can you imagine? Just think about that for a second.

Think about, where's the humanity in that? There are politicians in this country who seem to specialize in demonizing those making the trips on the boat. We've got one here. Border force have been overwhelmed this morning, a huge number of boats again today. We even found a vessel a few minutes ago with 13 people in it with no engine. 13 people simply with oars. I mean, this boat hasn't even got an engine.

It's probably been stolen. They've got a lovely day. If the weather was to puff up, that'll be the end of that one. It is not an exaggeration to suggest that if we carry on as we are, it'll be 100,000 people that cross the English Channel this year and 90,000 of them will be young men without any documents whatsoever. The boats you can see are much sturdier than the previous ones we saw in the summer. This is not one of the really big ones, but be assured of one thing.

They're going to keep coming throughout the whole of the winter. I mean, I would have thought having Nigel Farage patrolling those waters might be a big deterrent anyway, actually, without threatening Rwanda. But the point is that he does this constantly demonising all of those who are risking lives to come over, What's your message to people like Nigel Farage? I mean, Nigel Farage built his entire career on scapegoating migrants. When I first came to the country, I remember him standing outside these posters of breaking points. He had these massive posters in the lead to the referendum,

which is, to me, this is the route that I took. He used people from my country as for his propaganda. What really scares me, basically, not Nigel Farage. I don't care about Nigel Farage, but scares me when Pritze Petal uses that. when Prissy Patel skibs migrants, the Home Office Secretary. She's using, basically, she's using us as poems in her culture wars. And people, our politicians, my message to the politicians, do not play politics with people's lives.

People don't come here for fun. They're not coming here for, you know, living as an asylum seeker is a crushing. At its worst, it's really agonizing. You live in limbo. You live in five pounds a day. You are not allowed a job. You can't access education. I have a friend of mine has been in

has been waiting for his asylum for seven years so people are there are no pull factors Britain isn't great you know and that's what that's I'm really I'm sorry I'm so fired up but this is too personal to me I'm I'm well I just remember when you came and one of the first things you did when the pandemic happened was volunteered to go and work in a hospital on a COVID-19 ward when many health workers were dying

and that to me showed your gratitude of this country for what it had done by taking you in? I've done that, but you know, I should be I mean, people should be dealt with respect and dignity even without having to rest their lives and volunteering in COVID words

because it's seeking asylum is our right, is our human rights and it's enshrined international law and Britain now is a breaking international law. Assam, good to see you. Thank you very much indeed. Well, on the answer, so next we'll be debating exactly what Asana Khan has just been telling us. Plus, Prince Andrew has been banned from appearing at the Order of the Guardian ceremony

following intervention directly by the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge. Is this the end of public life for the disgraced prince? Welcome back to Piers Morgan Nasson. I'm joined now by the Pear's Piers Pack, veritable trio of stars, Royal Editor of Vanity Fair, Katie Nicholl, playwright and political author Bonnie Greer and talk TV contributor Esther Cracker. Well, welcome to all of you. Esther, when you hear someone like Hassan Akkad,

who came from Syria, nearly got killed in Syria for expressing his right to free speech and protesting, and then finally comes here and then goes and works on a COVID ward as a cleaner to give back to this country. I mean, it takes a pretty hard heart to say people like him should be, if they get here, shipped off to Rwanda, isn't it?

Well, the difference is how he got here, right? I think he had enough respect for Britain to not gate crash his way via dingy, right? Well, he gatecrush his way with a fake passport, which meant he didn't have to get a dinghy, right? but he was in the Calais jungle and many other people like him get in these boats every day and they risk their lives. That doesn't make it right. And this is the thing.

I think people often assume that we're not compassionate to people's plight to trying to get into the UK. But it really says something about how you try and get into a country if you have complete disregard for rule of law. Look, we're in a cost of living. Yeah, but they're desperate people in the UK. We're in a cost of living crisis. People are being taxed to try and pay for the public services that we use to try and take care of their families. And the British taxpayers effectively signed a blank check to let these people in

and there are no checks, there are no borders, there's none of that. I don't think that's fair. Britain's always had a reputation for being, as her science said, around the world, for being respectful, for being accepting, for being tolerant. There's limited, there's limited capacity. There is. And there are no doubt there are some people, I'm sure, who scam the system.

But there's also no doubt that the majority of these people are fleeing war-torn countries. And we used to feel a moral duty to take people in. Now we feel that the only duty we have is put them on a very expensive plane, making no commercial sense, and fly them eight hours and thousands of miles to Rwanda. And I think most people in Britain feel really uncomfortable about this.

No, I'm sorry, I don't agree with this idea that we're effectively shirking our responsibility. Britain has always been a very generous country, but we're also a country that has limited space. And there's only so many things we can do. What about genuine asylum seekers, genuine refugees that go through a legal process to try and come to the UK? And we realized that we were out of budget

because we're having to put these people in hotels that have effectively come here by dinghies from France. They're not exactly escaping a war-torn country. They're coming from France. It doesn't mean they're not escaping war-torn countries. Exactly. No, but they are. They just happen to have got to France and want to come to the UK.

If you're a genuine asylum seeker, you go to the first safe country that you arrive in. What is wrong with France? Nothing, but what do they want to come to Britain? You don't get a choice. You say we're not absolving. Okay, well, Bonnie, I mean, the argument, we're not absolving our responsibility and they should all stay in France or we send them to Rwanda. I don't hear much from that side of the argument saying, actually, we should take a lot of these people in because they come from countries, which in some cases, we have bombed. Well, you know, quick things. I mean, there's a lot to say, but quickly, a lot of people, young people learn English.

That's their language. That's language of business. It is the international language. So they've got no business in France because they're not going to be able to speak the language. Okay, that's number one. Number two, one CEO said to me, a guy who makes his way across a desert, gets on a boat, a raggedy boat, makes it across the Mediterranean, gets across France and gets here. I might want to interview him for a job. Like his own. This is an enterprising dude. And the third thing is, and I think it's quite shocking, what's not taught in this country is that everyone in this country is either an immigrant or descended from an immigrant. So therefore, there should be basic understanding of immigration

and a basic tolerance of immigration. I agree, you know, we have to deal with, you know, with the country's capacity. I mean, I would say, look, you have to control your border. Of course you do. I mean, that's a national thing. You have to have a regulated immigration system. But there's a myth in this country that this country is somehow not an immigrant country. This is an immigrant country.

And not only that is that, as you said, In World War II, right before World War II, if it wasn't for Britain, there would be a lot of British people here who would have been in gas chambers if Britain hadn't taken them in. But the thing is, what you don't understand is, for every migrant that actually successfully makes it onto a boat, that successfully makes it across the Mediterranean and across the channel, there are tens of thousands of black Africans that are enslaved

in parts of the North Africa and Middle East that don't make it across there. It's not just about these individuals. Is that the reason? Is that your reason? No, but hold on. It's not just about the individuals that you see, that make it across the dinghies. It's the actual economy of people smuggling

that you don't see the other side of... So why don't we go and deal with that instead of... You need to destroy the economy. Here's why I do have some sympathy with the argument, is that there's no doubt that our efforts to stop these boats coming have not only failed, the situation has got steadily worse. There's also no doubt that if you don't manage immigration properly, you're going to get parts of the country

where they feel like way too many people have come in, way too much pressure on. the infrastructure, schools, services, and so on. There's no doubt those things can also be true, as well as thinking that we should not be sending people to Rwanda. So the answer becomes, if it's not Rwanda, well, what is the answer? Would you have a problem if it was Canada they were sending them to? That's what I asked.

He said not. Look, this is a British immigration situation. I actually think it's a complex issue. Exactly. And that's my point. You know, to say that suddenly we do this and that action happens, we didn't have a chance as a body population. to even ask why this particular country.

We didn't have a... And even the Tory party is saying it is immoral to actually export our immigration situation. I mean, I get told, for example, that it's, you know, Rwanda, terrible place, blah, blah, blah. And then I remember that my football team, Arsenal, the shirt sponsors are visit Rwanda. Because the president of Rwanda is a big Arsul fan.

But you know, it's nothing. And he's... They pay 10 million pounds. a year to sponsor our shirts. It's not about Rwanda. It's about the country exporting its situation to another country. It's not stopping anything.

We'll have to wait and we're going to move. I want to bring it on a different part of this. Prince Charles ignited a firestorm when reported comments he'd made saying he found this policy appalling were leaked to the media. There's been no denial from the palace, which I think always means it's probably true.

But there's not been on the record obviously, but assuming that it is true. I suppose my question would be, we don't know if he wanted it out there or not, maybe he did. But should Prince Charles be getting into any of these territories right now given that he is likely to be king sooner rather than later? And once your monarch, as his mother has shown for 70 years,

you can't be political. Because the moment you are, you're going to alienate last sways of your own people. Well, I think two things. One, we see how device of this issue is, just with two of your panel this evening, right? So for me... And feelings do run,

strong about this on both sides. I know lots of people who feel the same way that Esther does. So for the future king to be wading in, however that may be, and you're right, we don't know the context, but there hasn't been a denial, is quite a divisive thing to say. We don't expect that of a member of our royal family. We don't expect, as a future king, for Charles to be political in any way. Now, we know that the Prince of Wales is very outspoken on a number of issues, from architecture to GM crops, to climate change. I mean, he once said when he was accused of being a meddling prince. Well, if meddling's making things better, I'll meddle away. He's also, his history was being quite kind to him in a lot of the judgment calls that he's made.

He's been very astute. But that may not be the point. Maybe the queen, I know she has quite a few opinions. Well, we never knew what her opinion was over Brexit. I mean, she just simply didn't get involved. I think that's the key, isn't it? I don't think you can be a king or queen of this country and have political opinions. And we know that Charles does have political opinions. And I think there's something in what you say that possibly he wanted this out because there hasn't a denial. But I think it's very dangerous territory. I think climate change or it's political. He might argue that this is a humanitarian issue, but it's got him into hot water. Well, as someone who's not grown up in a monarchy, I have to say that, first of all,

the guy should be allowed to say what he wants to say. I know he can't. And I know that somebody leaked it and that he hasn't denied it is his way. This will be his kingship. He's getting us ready for the way he's going to be. Well, maybe. Maybe. Maybe. But he won't be able to intervene with the government legislation. Well, no, he won't, but he's made his opinion. And I think younger people will say, yeah, he should be able to say what he wants to say. I mean, my every instinct would be free speech.

He should be entitled to his opinions. Yeah, absolutely. I don't want him to not have opinions. The issue becomes, should a monarch be able to express political opinions? Well, did you have a monarchy? Well, that's a... Well, you're giving them ammunition, right? If you don't want to hear it.

I think the fastest way to end a monarchy is if you have a monarch who expresses political opinions on hot button issues where you alienate immediately large swathes of the population. But Charles is a child, as you say, Charles is a child of the 60s. Charles has always spoken out. Charles has always opened his mouth. But only is the Prince of Wales. Yes, but nevertheless, but he's still the Prince of Wales. And he has also acknowledged that when he's king, that will change. Let's talk about somebody who's currently still the Duke of York. But today, it was supposed to appear at the Garter ceremony. In fact, his name was on the order of service. So he was definitely coming and was going wear all the robes.

This is, by the way, an order for chivalry. I mean, the irony is not lost on us. But at the last minute, we're told, Prince Charles and Prince William, directly intervened with, we assume, the queen, to say he cannot come. That's the household, put him on there. Right.

And then he saw it. See, back in the day, what people used to do that Andrew's accused up, they vanished. Yes. They went and worked in soup kitchens, or they helped the homeless. And he's vanished for about two months.

of anybody. Well, that's my point, Esther, because I know your view about the monarchy generally, but my point is, if you, again, want to hasten the end of the monarchy, then you would allow someone like him. Someone like Andrew to make a comeback within two months of paying a woman millions and millions of dollars, right? So I just think he can't do this and he can't be allowed to do this. I mean, the man has no judgment. He is so arrogant and has no sense of, you know, reality. Why do you think that you are such, you are such a blessing to public life and public service that you have to show your way back in? But that's the age we're in. Nobody wants to vanish, okay?

No, no, seriously. So nobody has said to him, look, dude, what you actually should be doing now. You should be actually volunteering like what Profumo did in the 60s at Toinby Hall. I was going to say Profumel. Yeah, and he went and he helped the poor and he died. That was it. Listen, he's got two daughters who are both heavily evolved in anti-sex trafficking. Get involved with Beatrice and New Jersey. Whatever. Well, actually, one of the things that he apparently does want, one of the things that he apparently does want,

He wants them to both be allowed to be working royals. I feel incredibly sorry for his daughters. I know them. I know one very well. She's a delightful young lady. Always thought they're behaved impeccably themselves. Through no fault of their own, suddenly they're out of the main royal list. They're off the balconies.

And they're getting tainted by association. But Andrew demanded when Beatrice was born that she'd be a princess. She was not automatically meant to be a princess. He demanded it from his mom, who adores him, and his next child to be a princess. So he's always wanted that because that reflects on him. But if he was a really modest...

He should actually just vanish. There's not... There's nothing. There's not a lot of thing. I believe in second chances for people, right? Not like... Not for everything. But I do believe in second chance of people. And it has to be said that legally he's never admitted

any crime. He's done an out-of-court settlement in a civil action. So we need to remind people of that. But I don't think you can come back several months after doing this. It's going to be years. We go against what we just said. If he becomes, whether he likes it or not, he's born into a role model situation. And what he needs to show people now is how you be a public servant without being in the public guy.

I agree. He's got to earn his rights. Just go away. I don't think so. I'm sorry. Even if we put all the allegations aside, he was still friends with a known convicted Peter and he went on record in an interview and admitted it and showed his complete lack of judgment.

I think you can't come back for that. No, I don't think he ever should come back. Let me just cheer the mood slightly. We had a moment at the weekend where Britney Spears the king, Elvis. Elvis, the king. So Britney Spears got married at the weekend and she had Elvis Presley as she walked down the aisle.

Let's take a little look at the clip. Now, one of the guests at the wedding was Paris Hilton, the socialite from Los Angeles. There they are. Amazing picture. Was it Vegas? This was not Vegas. I'm not quite sure where it was, actually. But anyway, Elvis was the theme.

Paris Hilton's there. And this is personal to me, ladies, because it may come as some surprise to you. But I myself... Elvis impersonate. Well, before I pay the clip... Well... You've actually hit the end on the head. So there was a little furority that blew up several weeks ago when Elvis's estate banned Elvis lookalikes and impersonates from performing at Vegas wedding ceremonies.

And they've just rescinded the band. They've lifted it. So the Elvis's a back in the day. And this is personal for me, Bonnie, because I actually married Paris Hilton in a Vegas chapel with Elvis Presley there. When you marry Paris Hilton? Watch. Watch. You, here's Morgan. Take Paris Hilton. to be your wedded wife. I do.

And you, Paris, Holt, take Peir's morning, to be your loftly wedded husband. I do. Pears, what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. But I'm keeping the ring. And she did keep the ring. And suffice it to say, it didn't last.

But it was a magical day. But I'm just so glad that Elvis has been saved for Vegas. That's ridiculous. It wouldn't be the same. We wouldn't remember him if he wasn't. Exactly. Now, what's the worst job you've ever done? I lived with 100 men.

What? Yes, I worked in an ICT training center in France, and I lived with all my students, and there were about 100 men. That's horrific. In my early days in New York, I took a job as a cleaner, and with a feminist painter. And so I went to clean her house. I was very excited because I thought her paintings were going to be there.

Actually, she wanted me to wash her underwear. And this was a feminist painter. I left. I can imagine. I worked for Selena Blovers before I got into Fleet Street. I was just trying to make some money. And I was tasked with stitching buttons onto these very expensive design. Anyone that has seen me with needle and thread knows that's the last thing you should give me.

He's like, I had to spend one hot steaming summer in the 70s banging mushroom compost in a field in East Sussex with my brother, who became an army colonel and did many war zones and said that the mushroom compost bagging was the worst thing he ever had to endure. But the reason I'm asking you is that last, about three weeks ago, I said that the worst job in the world was when I heard that Madonna was auditioning for a new toy boy. And I thought that would be the worst job in the world. But it's been quickly overtaken because we now have a new winner, which may never be beaten, actually. President

Vladimir Putin's bodyguard apparently has to scoop his excrement from the toilet during trips abroad and store it in a special briefcase. This is reportedly to stop foreign powers stealing the stools to gather information on his health. I think we can all agree that is the most thankless job in the entire world. Macron did not want him to actually didn't want to have a test because he didn't want his DNA in Russia. It's your DNA. It's your DNA. I'm rarely speechless, you might imagine.

But that is your DNA. Or maybe that he's got various illnesses, which they don't want people to know. I would think that's very much. Ladies, great to see you. Great panel. Come back soon. Thank you very much. It says the next, the world's number one.

He's like a wellness guru. He's a spiritual guru. He's the guru of all gurus. And my theory is the world's gone completely nuts, and I can't think of anybody in the world who can tell me more about what we do about it and Deepak Chopra. Deepak, I'll talk to you after the break.

Welcome back to Pierce Morgan, Uncenth. I'd like to be joined now by Deepak Chopra. Deepak, welcome to Piers Morgan Uncenseensed. And I need to start with an apology because I've told the one thing you don't like being called is a guru. So me repeatedly calling you the guru of all gurus probably was not the best way to introduce you earlier.

How do you like to be described? So, peers, let me ask you a question. Can you spell guru for me? G-U-R-U. That's it. G-U-R-U. The only guru is your own self. Everything else is an impersonation.

So how do you best describe yourself, Deepak? I'm still trying to decide what I'll do when I grow up. I think any description you have of yourself is limiting. Yeah, I know what you mean. The reason I wanted to get you on was because I just get a feeling. A lot of people think the world's gone completely crazy. You know, we've had a global pandemic, a war in Europe, surging inflation, possibly a recession,

culture wars erupting all over the place, cancel culture and so on. Can you put it into some kind of historical perspective? Are things any better or worse now, than they've been before. And if the world is going a bit crackers, what's the best advice for dealing with it? So very well stated. If you do not believe that the world is gone insane, then you're declaring your own insanity. What do you call a world that is sleepwalking to extinction right now, with climate change, with social and economic injustice, with mass migrations, with pandemics,

with mechanized ways of killing each other, cyber warfare, terrorism, the immense fear, sympathetic overdrive. Sleepwalking to extinction is insanity. So we are definitely at a crossroads where we need a new story for our well-being, a new story for humanity, and a new story for this planet. Otherwise, we are doomed. We are sleepwalking, as I said.

to extinction. If insects disappeared from this planet, in five years all life on this planet would cease. If humans disappeared from this planet, in five years all life on this planet would flourish. We would return to the state of innocence, the state of grace, and the Garden of Eden. Now, metaphorically speaking, what I'm saying is not just a metaphor. It's literal. This world right now does not realize that what we call the average is the psychopathology of the insane, divided, tribal, conditioned mind with modern capacities. You're saying, are things any different? Well, in a way, they aren't. You know, I spoke to my parents a long time ago. They spoke of the Holocaust, the Second World War, the atomic bomb. My grandfather spoke about the First World War,

the pandemic. But what we have to be. today, Pierce, is modern capacities for mechanized extinction and death and tribal medieval minds. The combination doesn't work. We also have another threat, and I want to preface this. By playing a clip, I did the last television interview with Professor Stephen Hawking before he died. And it was a remarkable day, incredible experience in my life, I have to say. But I did put to him a specific question about what is the biggest threat to civilization. Here was his response. There is a greater danger from artificial intelligence

if we allow it to become self rapidly. You know, I was reminded of that today with this extraordinary story of the Google engineer who claims that an artificial intelligence bot that they do, a language model for dialogue applications, had turned sentient, was beginning to express emotions and feelings and responses of a seven-to-eight-year-old human child.

Now, Google have denied it, but I was cognizant, as I heard, read this story, about what Professor Hawking had warned me about, which is the threat from artificial intelligence if it ever does self-design. Well, I'm a fan of artificial intelligence. In fact, I have a replica of mine called digitaldepak.aac.a. AI, you can check him out on the internet, and he knows more about everything than I do. He's read my 95 books and he can be an excellent coach for well-being, etc. On the Google statement or the Google news, it's absolutely ridiculous, absolutely a joke. Does the AI have anxiety about death, the AI have sex,

does the AI feel hunger or thirst? Does the AI have existential dilemmas? The AI is just an algorithm. What Professor Hawking said is true, though, unless we have ethical editors, editing of AI, it could turn to be dangerous. But I don't think it could ever be sentient. And already there's a move in the AI world called ethical AI where you build in safeguards against AI taking over or destroying humanity. And you use AI for things that we don't, you know, right now, for example, the legal system is going to be obsolete because of AI, the regular contracts.

Diagnosis, precision diagnosis, deep learning, remote surgery, these are all happening because of AI. We could relegate these things to AI so that we can tap into our consciousness for insight, intuition, creativity, higher consciousness, and create a critical mass for a more peaceful, just, sustainable, healthier, and joyful world. and AI has a role, provided we are also aware of its possible dangers. There's no technology which comes without danger, Pierce. Fascinating. Deepak, let me ask you about another thing which has been bothering me. All of these mass shootings we've been seeing in America,

two of the common themes around it are not just guns, obviously, which are the weapons used. But in my view, something else is going on here, which is a combination of the sensory overload that young people are now getting just generally. Both the shooter in the Evalde, Texas school mass shooting and the Sandy Hook shooter were both addicted to call a duty, the war game, for example.

And Hollywood stars today have all signed a petition to try and reduce the amount of glamorizing of gun violence in movies. And I spoke to Dr. Phil a couple of years ago. And he said, the difference between today with young people and when he was young was that the amount of bad stuff that young people see now through social media, through clips that do the rounds of their friends and so on, is relentless and is damaging to people.

What do you think about? Well, there are many issues. First of all, America particularly has a romantic relationship with guns and with violence. And so does Hollywood have a romantic relationship. It doesn't matter. we're going into the different galaxies but we're still talking about Star Wars.

Everything is about a war. Violence is part of our culture and our romance with violence is what makes money for Hollywood and for entertainment and it's the ultimate hypocrisy. The other thing is Americans like to talk about the Second Amendment or, you know, the right to carry guns,

but in a moment they'll strip women of their rights for their reproductive rights. So it's totally, hypocrisy and it's driven by bunny. And unless we address the free say you can, a teenager cannot buy cigarettes or alcohol or pornography, but can go to a 7-Eleven or some Walmart or whatever, you know, a gun store, although Walmart is changing his policies, and get a gun. So this is very ridiculous what's happening in America.

Unfortunately, the rest of the world follows America. And so between gun violence, the romanticization of violence in general, war and terrorism as something to be looked up to, and the chain of money that drives these with special interest groups, especially in Washington. There are, for every legislator, there are 30 health care lobbyists, 30 gun lobbyists, 30 people from the medical, industrial, complex. So what we call corruption, cronyism, influence peddling, and gangster leadership is taking over the world. And we really have to resist that. We are at a crossroads now with new things emerging like blockchain and NFTs and metaverse where I think we'll need to take power away from these people who are only interested in cronyism, corruption and money peddling

and bring democracy truly on a global level through information technologies and even AI. You know, Deepak, you always express these things so eloquently, far better than I could. You got a great book out, abundance, the inner path to wealth. You got the idea, I understand, from the Bob Marley lyrics, some people are so poor, all they have is money, which is brilliant. Deepak, I've got to leave it there.

I could talk to you for hours, and we'd love to get you back again. Thank you. It's great to talk to you again. Thank you very much for joining me. Thank you. Thank you very much, Pierce. On the sensor next, find out why this 67-year-old man may be the most inspiring public figure in Britain right now.

Most 67-year-olds, when they hear a song like Mr. Brightside by the killers, probably think not for me, get the pipe out, the slippers, and just slouch in front of the TV watching Love Violin repeats. But not our guy, because last night was, on Saturday night, the killers were playing at Old Trappard, Manchester and somebody went crowd surfing. Well, Doug James 67 decided to just get airborne for about 35 to 45 seconds. Unfortunately, he then fell on his head, causing himself quite nasty injuries.

He was fine. But here's the killer's lead singer, Brandon Flowers. They paused the performance to make sure he was all right with blood steaming from Doug's head. And then Doug taking the crowd's cheers, obviously. Now, my first reaction, I'm joined now by Doug James and his son Baz, who is with him. Doug, first of all, how are you? I'm absolutely faint. I've just got a few icks, you know, with their own muscles there, like, but otherwise, perfectly faint.

Good, well, my first reaction was, what is this lunatic doing at 67 going crowd surfing at a killer's concert? And then I thought about it, Doug, and I realized you're actually an inspiration to all of us who are now hurtling through middle age towards 67, and I now want to go crowd surfing. You've become an inspiration to me. Excellent. Excellent. Let me ask you.

I did have a look, mind you. At your crowd surfing. I mean, on a technical point, though, Doug, when you were actually airborne, did you not worry that this might prove to be the last thing you ever do on earth? Oh, no. No, not. You cannot worry like that. You've got to trust the crowd, go with it,

You know, and you feel that the support on you underneath. Admittedly, I did have a few dips. And the last dip was quite a big dip, but never mind. It was good fun, and I enjoyed it. All right, now, Baz, most young people who go to a concert like the killers, they don't really want to see their old dad getting crowd-surfed and then plummeting to his head. What was your reaction to it?

Well, I was chasing him through the crowd, and he was ahead of me. And at first I was a bit worried But then he got up and he was talking himself And absolutely fine And then after that it was You know just everyone in the crowd I mean he got called the wrong name on stage So everyone was going

It's Billy, it's Billy, get a photo with Billy And everyone was dead happy afterwards So it was a... So what you're really saying What you're really saying Is that your old man has now become a bona fide rock star Because even the killers tweeted A picture of you, Doug

With the headline There's no age limit for a lot Rock and roll. How is he calling me an old man? Yeah. It's been such a good like... I just wanted to get you on the show to say to Doug, congratulations.

You are my inspiration. Keep surfing. Thank you. And I want to be surfing when I'm your age. Thank you both for giving us all a good laugh. That's it from me. Whatever you're up to, keep it uncensored. Good night.