42:53
What happens when a pro-Palestinian eco-warrior takes on a Telegraph journalist that's pro-Israel? I did try to have a Sunday showdown with Dale Vince, and then this happened. Well, you asked me first if I agreed with this statement, and I don't. Yeah. are wrong. Okay. And then it got a bit long-winded and complicated. Do you know what? I'm going to leave because I'm I'm not having this discussion. I'm sorry. What? You're joking. Why? Because I'm just offended. Why are you offended? know, but I can't engage in a positive conversation about net zero and stuff like that because of what you've said, your attitude, your denial of the facts,
the human rights abuses. It's just outstanding to me. Astounding, I mean. I'm sorry. Okay. No disrespect, but I'm leaving. Okay, no disrespect. Then that is the Sunday showdown with Dale Vince over, ladies and gentlemen. Dale Vince, eco-warrior and entrepreneur. Can I call you that? You may. Welcome to the Daily T. You're having a green tea, very appropriately. Um and you are dressed for the weather. We're in a heatwave. Did you cycle here?
Yeah, I came in a cab. A black cab? Uh yeah, an electric one, I think. Oh, there you have it. Of course. Okay, so on trend. Now, we're going to have our Sunday showdown and debate some of the topics that really matter to you. I know that the key one is the environment. However, before we get onto those issues, can we just talk about Israel, please? Now, I appreciate that some of this has been the subject of a legal challenge, so I certainly would don't want to get myself into hot water by labeling you or anything else. But, you did once say in regard to Hamas, and I hope I'm directly quoting you, and tell me if I'm wrong, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
Did you say that? And do you regret it now? I did say it. It's a very common expression. I don't know if you've ever heard it before. Yes. Uh and I don't regret it because it's a matter of fact. Okay. I mean, I think some people would be offended by the idea of Hamas terrorists after October the 7th when they found to have raped and murdered Jews in Israel being described as freedom fighters rather than just simply as terrorists. What I said is one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. So the view is very different from the [clears throat] other side of the street, let's say. What are Israel doing
in Gaza, murdering and raping people? Is that better? I'm just talking about or are they terrorists? But let's just stick to Hamas. Do you think they're terrorists or freedom fighters? think we should stick to Hamas. Well, I'd like to just for the purposes of an answer to this question. Do you think Hamas to answer that question. You're not going to tell me whether you think they're terrorists or freedom fighters cuz they're prescribed as a terrorist group, aren't they? They are. So they are ergo terrorists. They are. So you do think they're terrorists? In UK law, they're terrorists. Okay. In your mind, Dal Vince, are they terrorists? talking about my mind.
Why not? This is what the Sunday Showdown is all about. We need to get into your mind. Let's not I'll let my I'll lay my mind bare. I think Hamas are terrorists. Do you agree or disagree? I'm not going to say. I think they've committed acts of terror, there's no doubt about that. But at the same time, they're trying to defend their country. I think there's no doubt about that. The incursion into Israel, I don't think was self-defense. That was a terrorist act.
It was a terrorist act. So October the 7th was definitely a terrorist act. This is what I'm struggling with then. If they are a terrorist group who have committed terrorist acts, they are consequently terrorists. Aren't they? I think you're one-eyed on this. Why? Because of what you say. Well, if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it is a duck. If it is a terrorist group and they carry out terrorist acts on October the 7th, which we both agree on as terrorist group by UK law. Yes. And they have committed acts of terror. I think that's a reasonably established fact, but at the same time they're trying to defend their country. Now, if it quacks like a duck and walks like a
duck, is it genocide that's been committed in Palestine? that's a really good point. Now, let's be honest about this, and I know you are somebody who absolutely thinks Israel has committed and is committing a genocide against the Palestinians. That's not been upheld in any court of law. There's been no legally binding decision to say that it is a genocide. So, let's be very clear about this. The ICJ has said that it is plausible that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza under the Genocide Convention are at risk of irreparable harm, and it's ordered Israel to take steps, but there has been no finding in law that Israel is committing genocide. So, how do you know better than the ICJ?
I don't, but I read that they had made a preliminary finding of genocide. No, they haven't. That's a misinterpretation of what the ICJ have found. They've merely found, and let me state it again, that they're at risk of causing irreparable harm to Palestinians, and Israel have been ordered to take steps. But, this whole Israel is genocidal isn't correct. It's It's not been found to be the case in international law. So, is somebody not murdered until a court founds them to Well, to have been murdered? Well, that's a really interesting point because murder requires intent to kill and an actus reus, the actual act of killing. If you're going to give a defense to murder, which in this case is self-defense, then yeah, you might not be found guilty of murder.
Self-defense. Yes. 100,000 civilians bombed. Six Hiroshimas dropped on the tiny state of Palestine by the Israeli army, a local superpower. I mean, look at the kettling of millions of people to starvation, the deprivation. I mean, and the statements of the Israeli government, they're saying they want them out. Mhm. And they won't allow food and aid in. They blame that on Hamas as well. But, you just look at the statements of the right-wing Israeli government, they are extreme. We wouldn't tolerate this from another country in this world.
Sure. So, okay, let's use a different example. Were the British committing a genocide against the Germans when they bombed Dresden? That was an act of uh [clears throat] Self-defense. No, no it wasn't. Fire bombs in a wooden city, that was a deliberate act of terror. But, in war when does war become genocide? Well, war has rules. Yes. So, under the current rules, the ICJ hasn't ruled that Israel is genocidal. Therefore, why are you bandying around this as some would say I'm not bandying around this. blood libel?
No, no. I think some in the right-wing Israeli government call it that, but it's a ridiculous thing to say. I mean, there's so much blood been spilled in Palestine by the Israelis. There is no question that it's deliberate targeting, targeting of civilians, of aid workers, of the press, of children. There are more child amputees in Palestine than anywhere else in the world. It's an incredibly barbaric thing that the Israeli military It is a two-way street, right? It's barely a two-way street. Well, hang on a minute. Stack the numbers up. Stack the numbers Hang on a minute, because this is the other thing. This is where I personally think your argument falls down. After
Bondi Beach, you said on X, let me just say this. Let me just say this and we can debate it. You said on X, "Nothing to do with Israel committing genocide in Palestine then." You can't have it both ways. You can't suggest that this is retaliation for what Israel is doing and then not suggest that Israel is retaliating against what Hamas did on October the 7th. It's a two-way street. So, if Israel are, then Hamas are. But, look, I don't know where this comes from. I wasn't here to talk about this, but to get onto environment, I promise. But, you're very vocal on these issues.
Give me a chance to speak. Okay, go for it. Cuz you're not, actually. You've got a prepared script and facts and you're bombarding me. Let me So, the Israelis have been clear that they've acted in response to the incursion on October the 7th, but it's an overreaction by anybody's measure. It's incredible. 100,000 deaths versus was it 1,000? I don't know. You know, it's almost 100 to 1. Now, is that a proportionate reaction? Is the bombing of Gaza to the extent that it looks like the face of the moon with 95% of all buildings gone, is that a proportionate reaction? Is the starvation of civilians on in millions of civilians in Palestine
the denial of aid, is that proportionate? That's that's a war crime, actually. Mhm. But okay, my counter territory. But bear with this an occupied territory. Israel as the occupier has the obligation under international law to look after those people, and it isn't doing that. My counter argument would be they haven't been found guilty of any war crimes. They haven't officially been found responsible for a genocide despite the rhetoric that you and others use. That actually Hamas have been using people as human shields now for years and years. The fact that there are mass casualties is because it's actually a proportionately tiny plot of land compared to the rest of the Middle East. That if actually Hamas weren't building tunnels under [snorts]
actual civilian populations, then the bombings wouldn't have that effect. And that indeed we know humanitarian aid has gone in because we've seen the humanitarian aid being delivered. We've also seen footage out of Gaza that doesn't suggest that everybody is being starved to death. We've seen the doesn't suggest that. Have you seen the pictures I've seen all sorts of pictures. I've seen staged pictures as well. barely a building left standing. Have you seen the reports of snipers targeting children in their schools? Have you seen those? I've seen all of the reports, but just in response to self-defense? So, human shield use of Gazan people as human shields by Hamas?
Do they That's what the Israelis say, but do they? Well, I think actually journalists have found evidence have been accused of doing that, going into buildings, holding Palestinian people in front of them. Mhm. Have you seen those reports? We've I've seen loads and loads of reports, but some of the reports are unverified, aren't they? Because we can't actually This is where you and I will definitely agree. What we actually need is for impartial journalists, and I mean impartial, to go in and try and find out what on earth is actually happening, as opposed to contested statistics from the Israeli government, contested statistics from Palestinian
health authorities that turn out to be Hamas. We haven't got an objective view of what's going on. think we have enough facts in front of us. We have videos, we have pictures, and so on. I think it's ridiculous, actually, to say that this is a two-sided affair, and we don't know what to believe. You know, we can believe our eyes, and what's happening is incredible. But let me ask you this question. Mhm. Were the Germans found guilty of genocide? Were the Germans found guilty of genocide back during the Nuremberg trials?
No. Was that word used? you tell me when they By the Hague. You tell me when they were found guilty. I'm saying when they were gassing Jews in concentration camps, were they found guilty of genocide? Well, not at the time, because it didn't emerge until later. No, so should we have acted to stop the gassing of Jews in the concentration camps, or should we have said, "Well, actually, there's no evidence that they're actually committing genocide. We have to wait for a court to say." Well, I think that we shouldn't be suggesting that the ICJ has found them guilty of genocide if they haven't. an answer.
No, it is an answer. you No, you're pivoting back to the ICJ. I'm asking you a question directly about the legal finding of genocide. Do we have to wait for it? I think you do need it. You need a legal finding of war crime for anyone to be found guilty of anything criminal, they actually have to be found guilty of it. No, I think you're missing mine. I think you can't just accuse people of things without actually didn't commit genocide Well, we know they did now, because they We know they did now, because it was found to have been the case at the
Nuremberg trials. It was found to be the case. That's too. The prisoner who escaped from um Auschwitz putting a huge dossier together which helped to inform the British and American legal case against the Nazis. we didn't know about it before Nuremberg? Well, we didn't know about the extent of the gas chambers in the camps until they were liberated. No, unfortunately. Some people at the time knew they were happening. Uh Churchill and others did, but we didn't try it. at that point when Churchill knew it? Um I don't know because I don't know what he knew at the time, Delvins. I'm just saying it's not genocide until it's found to be genocide.
Exactly. And that's your argument. Therefore Churchill couldn't have known it was genocide. Okay. So if you get a feeling someone's guilty of a crime if you get a feeling someone's guilty of a crime, you're just going to call them a criminal without any legal finding. being silly. We're not talking about one person. We're talking about an army. We're talking about a Middle Eastern superpower that is mass murdering Palestinian civilians, aid workers, and journalists. The people you'd like to be here to tell us the truth. That targets if they go in there. are they genocidal maniacs?
Oh dear. No, not until a court finds them guilty according to you. you agree with me. Right. We've found a period of agreement. Let's move on to net zero because I think that will also be mass murder is not genocide, right? What? Well, sorry. You need to look up the definition of genocide because there is one. It's the intent to uh eradicate Yes. Do you think that there are some Islamic extremists in the Middle East that want to wipe out Israel and consequently are guilty of genocidal thoughts?
Thought crimes now are we talking about? think so? Oh uh who knows? I think you're entirely probably right. But look, we're talking actual genocide or thought crime genocide. Come on. Well, no. I'm just saying that of course if people for instance you could argue that somebody who says from the river to the sea Palestine will be free actually wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map. If they want to do that, then they probably do have genocidal tendencies. That's That's an incredible stretch of logic. and Hezbollah, and Hamas, who basically want to exterminate the Jewish population, not just of Israel, but of the world by blowing them up, probably are genocidal, don't you
think? And whereas Israel are entirely peaceful nation. Right. They've never did any harm to any Palestinian people. They don't actually covet their land cuz they've said they want the land and they want them to go. They've even made proposals for shipping them out, the Palestinian people. You've made your case. You've made your case on this. I've made mine. you one Let me tell you one other thing. Okay, go on. Cuz I want to get on to green matters. Yeah, I'm up for that. But look, on the question of one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, I saw a film last night about Nelson Mandela.
Sure. He was a terrorist until he got let out of prison, became the president, and then history looks back and says, "Actually, he was a freedom fighter." think Forgive me, but I'm not sure Nelson Mandela ever raped and tortured people finished my little children. Okay. So, if you go back to I think it was like the early '50s, the late '40s after the Second World War, Israeli terror groups operated in British-controlled Palestine. They bombed a hotel, I think it was the King David Hotel. They killed 100 people. It was a bomb without warning, and three terrorist groups were operating there campaigning for a state of Israel. They eventually got it, and the leader of one of those groups became one of its
early presidents. Freedom fighters, terrorists turned into politicians and leaders. In Israel, he will be a freedom fighter, but this makes my point. Even in Israel, terrorists become freedom fighters or you know, they're viewed I totally get the premise of the quote. I just think that Hamas are terrorists. Is that it? That's it? At the end of your appreciation of world affairs? No, no, no. Just on that particular quote because you said it about Hamas. I didn't. You did. It was in relation to Hamas.
No, no. We're having a conversation about the Middle East and what Hamas and Israel are doing to each other. All right. Should we're going to agree to disagree on I'm so surprised. Well, I know. This is why it's a Sunday Showdown, Delvins, because we can have these debates and still hopefully leave here as something resembling friends. I think your people should have said to my people that this is not only about net zero, we're also going to get into the Middle East. can we not? You've got your scarf here. You were You're constantly talking about the Middle East.
Your script didn't My I did Do you know what? This isn't a script. It's questions. And the next question is, why don't you like the term net zero? Maybe we agree on that. Well, maybe we do, but I'm really annoyed by what you've said about Israel and Hamas. Okay, well, I'm sorry. Can we move on from it and talk about the environment? Because of the suffering that's been committed. Again, I was saw a film last night. wanting to talk about it more when you want to move this on to the environment. the things you have said that they Let's both be unsatisfied and talk about green issues. Why don't you like the
term net zero? You think it's flawed. You think it's lost popularity. You think perhaps that people are turning against the environmental cause because of the lingo. Yeah, I don't know. I'm just a bit peeved off about the things you've said. I mean, I think it's a an incredible position to take the human suffering is off the scale in Palestine. It really is. I agree with you about the human suffering on both sides. I find you particularly one-sided about this. It is on both sides if you are the Bibas family whose children were killed. It is on both sides if you're sitting in a kibbutz No, I said the
and you have your daughter murdered, raped and murdered in front of you. I said the scale of suffering. I said the scale of suffering is off the charts. suffering on all sides, Delvins. 100 to 1, at least. The ratio of deaths and suffering is 100 to 1. Okay. Can we talk about green issues? Cuz that's what you're here to talk about. completely put me out of the mood to talk about green issues. can't talk about green issues because I've challenged you on your views. you're saying is the most hideous propaganda. Right. It's not I think that you're perpetuating propaganda. You think that I am perpetuating propaganda. Can we cuz we're grown adults and I do want to hear
what you've got to say listen, about green issues. I'm also a human being and I'm affected by what's happening in Gaza. [clears throat] And I'm affected by what you said about it. I am affected cuz I'm a human being. I also have a great many Jewish friends and colleagues who feel that they have been discriminated against in this country and beyond because of people holding very pro-Palestinian views. Now, I appreciate that there isn't necessarily a correlation between people who support Benjamin Netanyahu and just being Jewish and that sometimes support for Israel and being Jewish is conflated. But I'm merely representing a different proposition here
to the one that you adopt. I'm allowed to do that. It's a free country. allowed to be inflamed by what you said. inflamed by what you've said. That's crazy. That's properly crazy. Okay. Well, maybe. On green issues, let me just read out an email from a chap who contacted us who is a regular listener to the Daily Tee and I'd like you to see whether you think you agree with this. Fuel poverty is being exacerbated and our economy is being decimated at the cost of many trillions of pounds as we outsource industry to countries which are building a record number of coal-fired power stations. That could be
a standard Telegraph view that although our readers want to do their best by the environment, they want to recycle, they believe that climate change exists, they're worried about the execution of this. They're worried that actually some of these measures are making the poor poorer and indeed colder. Is that a fair argument to mount? Well, you asked me first if I agreed with his statement. And I don't. Yeah. are wrong. Okay. And then it got a bit long-winded and complicated. Do you know what? I'm going to leave because I'm I'm not having this discussion. I'm sorry.
What? I'm just not. You're joking. Why? Because I'm just offended. Why are you offended? a I can't engage in a positive conversation about net zero and stuff like that. Because of what you've said, your attitude, your denial of the facts, the human rights abuses, it's just outstanding to me. Astounding, I mean. I'm sorry. Okay. but I'm leaving. Okay, no disrespect. Then that is the Sunday Showdown with Delvin's over, ladies and gentlemen. Uh because clearly robust debate is not possible. Just for the record, I was going to ask about net zero, I was going to ask about Ed Miliband, I was going to ask about donating to the Labour Party, I was going to ask about donating to the
Greens, I was going to ask about Mr. Vince's green gas from grass project, I was going to ask about the 100% renewable energy grids, I was going to ask about the 100% plant-based food system. But I can't ask about any of that because unfortunately we have not disagreed agreeably and Delvin has now left the studio. So, what we will do is we'll find somebody who campaigns on the environment to answer some of the questions I have about net zero and the green agenda. But we'll be back tomorrow, 5:00 p.m. If you're enjoying our journalism, why not sign up to From the Editor, our free email newsletter. Start your day with the latest news and opinion, plus our bite-size puzzles. Scan the QR code to sign up free today.
