The Piaz Original: Tadhg Hickey on Censorship, Comedy and Palestine

Congratulations.

No, absolutely.

And on the other side, we have to mention about the fact that the argues that are being provided are usually bogus, very limited, very vague.

Which takes me to the next question, which is the stated reason was endorsing criminal organization.

What content do you think they are pointing at? And did they even point at anything specific? And then like we can kind of discuss more about that aspect.

Yeah, well, there's no, again, you see, like there's no actual evidence.

So they just take your page down and they don't provide any evidence of why they've taken your page down.

They say that they're trying to make the community safer, which is laughable if you think that the likes of Tommy Robinson The leader of the far right in the so-called UK, who has called for violence against minorities kind of his whole career, has an active YouTube page.

Benjamin Netanyahu, who's a wanted war criminal by the ICJ, has an active YouTube page.

So the idea of protecting the community from me, I think, is absurdly laughable.

But in the case of criminal organizations, I guess what they're talking about is my, I wouldn't say endorsement, my basic human sort of, you know, passion and instinct to support international law and to support resistance.

So I'm not an idiot, like I'm not going online saying, I love Hamas, everyone should join Hamas.

I play the game, even though I support the resistance 100%.

I'm never speaking about specific groups whatsoever.

They couldn't call up any videos where I had spoken about specific groups.

I had one sketch in the last three years where the sketch was about a guy wanting to join Hamas because he started off as being neutral and then he watched some clips of what the Israelis had been up for, up to, and then he decided he wanted to join.

It was a fictional character.

Now, that sketch was taken down.

But that's about two and a half years ago.

So there's again, there's no evidence.

But I think the bigger thing here, which we should all be pushing back at, in my opinion, is that even if I was to support a specific resistance group, international law has the support resistance even through military means up to and including military means that's enshrined in international law so there's an absurd weird break in the logic where international law accepts resistance but if you or I talk about a resistance movement which now extends by the way obviously you know to the Iranian army which is obviously also no prescribed group in the country that I'm in and if we talk about specific groups were liable to be arrested Well, how are you going to resist if all the resistance groups are proscribed? So either we need to go back to the drawing board with international law or we have to sort of scrutinize and interrogate how ludicrous that lapse in logic is.

Congratulations.

No, absolutely.

And on the other side, we have to mention about the fact that the argues that are being provided are usually bogus, very limited, very vague.

Which takes me to the next question, which is the stated reason was endorsing criminal organization.

What content do you think they are pointing at? And did they even point at anything specific? And then like we can kind of discuss more about that aspect.

Yeah, well, there's no, again, you see, like there's no actual evidence.

So they just take your page down and they don't provide any evidence of why they've taken your page down.

They say that they're trying to make the community safer, which is laughable if you think that the likes of Tommy Robinson The leader of the far right in the so-called UK, who has called for violence against minorities kind of his whole career, has an active YouTube page.

Benjamin Netanyahu, who's a wanted war criminal by the ICJ, has an active YouTube page.

So the idea of protecting the community from me, I think, is absurdly laughable.

But in the case of criminal organizations, I guess what they're talking about is my, I wouldn't say endorsement, my basic human sort of, you know, passion and instinct to support international law and to support resistance.

So I'm not an idiot, like I'm not going online saying, I love Hamas, everyone should join Hamas.

I play the game, even though I support the resistance 100%.

I'm never speaking about specific groups whatsoever.

They couldn't call up any videos where I had spoken about specific groups.

I had one sketch in the last three years where the sketch was about a guy wanting to join Hamas because he started off as being neutral and then he watched some clips of what the Israelis had been up for, up to, and then he decided he wanted to join.

It was a fictional character.

Now, that sketch was taken down.

But that's about two and a half years ago.

So there's again, there's no evidence.

But I think the bigger thing here, which we should all be pushing back at, in my opinion, is that even if I was to support a specific resistance group, international law has the support resistance even through military means up to and including military means that's enshrined in international law so there's an absurd weird break in the logic where international law accepts resistance but if you or I talk about a resistance movement which now extends by the way obviously you know to the Iranian army which is obviously also no prescribed group in the country that I'm in and if we talk about specific groups were liable to be arrested Well, how are you going to resist if all the resistance groups are proscribed? So either we need to go back to the drawing board with international law or we have to sort of scrutinize and interrogate how ludicrous that lapse in logic is.