08/02/2018 Newsnight

Tonight...

Images of a massacre.

Reuters publish the investigation

that they say led to their reporters

being jailed in Myanmar.

They claim for the first

time to have evidence

from within the Burmese security

forces themselves of attacks

on the Rohingya carried out by them.

The Editor-in-Chief of Reuters

is here to tell us why they have

published even while their reporters

remain in a Burmese prison.

It's here, it's there,

it's everywhere.

MPs are in Washington tackling

the tech giants over fake news.

One of the few people Donald Trump

follows on Twitter is here to bite

back against the mainstream media.

And the power of the humble T-shirt

- remember this unique one?

The designer, campaigner and queen

of the political tee,

Katherine Hamnett, talks

about the day she made

it and wore it.

Good evening.

The Rohingya crisis has led at least

half a million Rohingya Muslims

to flee mainly Buddhist Myanmar

in the past six months,

escaping from a brutal military

crackdown and the torching

of whole villages.

It has sullied the international

reputation of Aung San Suu Kyi

and has also posed grave risks

for some of those covering it.

In December of last year two

journalists for the Reuters news

agency were arrested in Myanmar -

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oe.

They are still in jail,

awaiting trial for allegedly

obtaining confidential documents.

It was known that the two

journalists were covering

the aftermath of some of the brutal

violence against the Rohingya.

But since their arrest rumours have

circulated around what those

journalists were investigating.

Tonight, Reuters have published

what they believe is the real

reason for their arrest,

revealing the story that those

journalists were working on -

a detailed investigation into a mass

execution in a village

in Eastern Myanmar.

And we've seen their report.

Our reporter, James Clayton,

is across the story

and is with me now.

What has happened tonight? Watchers

have tonight decided to publish a

story that it claims is on the

international public interest and

why they have published is they have

been working on the story for weeks

and they have been in touch with

those journalists in Myanmar in a

prison there and they say they have

their consent to publish their

story. What were they investigating?

Reuters say the investigation is the

first to obtain evidence from some

of the perpetrators of this horrific

violence so they spoke to police

officers in Myanmar and Facebook to

members of a paramilitary group and

this spoke to local villagers in Inn

Din and what they managed to amass

was testimony of really quite nasty

crimes and they implicate the

military, they found pictures were

given pictures of an execution

before and after and they spoke to a

local Buddhist man who confessed to

the murder in cold blood of the

Rohingya Muslim.

Watchers say they

have the consent of the journalists

but they know the real reason they

might have been arrested was the

story they were working on.

What

might the consequences be? We do not

know, it has literally just dropped.

Clearly, Reuters are taking a

calculated risk by publishing

tonight. On the one hand I am sure

watchers will say, this is the real

reason why our journalists were

arrested and on the other hand, the

Myanmar government might say,

actually, we don't like the story,

it might anger them. And both

journalists are being held by the

authorities in Myanmar. We will

speak to the editor in chief of

Reuters but first of all, we have

put together some of the claims that

Reuters are making and a word of

warning, some of these images are

quite distressing...

On the 12th of December last year,

two Myanmar journalists working

for the Reuters news agency,

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo,

travelled to a restaurant

in northern Yangon to meet

two police officers.

They never came home.

They were arrested and later charged

under the Official Secrets Act

for allegedly obtaining confidential

documents.

They are being held

in a jail in Yangon.

Tonight, Reuters have

published what they believe

was the real reason

for their journalists' arrests.

An investigation that focused

on the village of Inn Din.

The violence that took place

here in late August and early

September last year was echoed

across parts of northern

Rakhine State.

These before and after satellite

images show the extent

to which the Rohingya part

of the village was

burnt to the ground.

Only the Buddhist area

to the top left was spared.

But what Reuters claimed to have

found was even darker.

Their journalists had been told

by a number of sources that ten men

had been picked up from a crowd

of Rohingya Muslims -

including fishermen,

shopkeepers and students

- and executed.

Reuters claim that after

a day of interrogation,

they were led into a wood.

Reuters say these images -

that the agency has

published tonight -

were given to their journalists

by a local Buddhist.

We have decided to blur parts

of this graphic image.

It shows the ten men

in a shallow mass grave.

You can identify many of the men

by the clothes they are wearing.

Reuters journalists were told

by the man who dug the pet that

eight of the men were shot

by soldiers and two were hacked

to death by the villagers.

Back in Myanmar's capital,

Naypyidaw, at the same time

as the journalists' arrests,

Myanmar authorities were themselves

looking into the execution.

On the 10th of January

the military announced

on its Facebook page that they had

undertaken their own investigation

and that soldiers and local

Buddhists had indeed taken part

in the killings.

But the military were forced to kill

the "Bengali terrorists", they said,

because police stations

were being attacked by Rohingya

militants and it was unsafe

for them to transport them.

A decision was made to kill them,

says the military statement.

But Reuters say that Buddhist

villagers their journalists

interviewed reported no attack

by a large number of insurgents

on security forces in Inn Din

or that the ten men had any

connection with terrorism.

The news agency claims

their journalists also gathered

unique evidence of military

involvement in attacks

on Rohingya Muslims.

Speaking to not only local villagers

in Inn Din but police officers

and members of the paramilitary.

One man who spoke to the two

journalists described finding four

Rohingya Muslims hiding

in a haystack.

One of the men had a mobile phone.

The soldiers told him to do

whatever you want to them.

"And so I started hacking him

with a sword", he said.

"A soldier shot him

when he fell down".

Reuters has cross-referenced

testimony from Buddhists

on the ground with Rohingya refugees

over the border in Bangladesh.

Newsnight is unable to verify

the claims made by the agency.

But Reuters claim that their account

marks the first time soldiers

and paramilitary police have been

implicated by testimony

from security personnel themselves.

It is clear incarceration

is taking its toll on Wa Lone

and Kyaw Soe Oo and their families.

Reuters believe that the evidence

the journalists obtained is the real

reason for their arrest.

But the Myanmar authorities

are continuing to pursue charges

against the two journalists.

Will telling this story help

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo?

We will find out in court.

A Myanmar government

spokesman told Reuters...

They added...

Joining me now from

New York is Stephen Adler,

editor-in-chief of Reuters.

Good evening. You heard James

Clayton saying that, in fact, this

is taking its toll on both men and I

want where you decided to publish

tonight?

We believe this is a story

of vast global importance and we

have a responsibility to publish,

that is what we do as journalists,

we report stories fairly and

honestly and we publish them and we

thought it was important enough and

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo agreed and

you will see that their names are on

the story. Anybody can see the

story. They fully support us

publishing.

A very brave thing for

them and for their families to do

so. I am sure you do not do this

lightly, what is the next step for

them?

We certainly do not do this

lightly, but we did not take the

legal considerations into hand in

deciding to publish. We are

concerned about security but we

believe that when the story is known

by people that it will be helpful to

them because it really gives a very

careful, well sourced account of

what happened and those facts

support the idea that they were

reporting, not violating any law.

You think you have come upon the

real reason for the arrests, that

they had this material, and the

authorities could go either way, as

with that statement, if these

investigations are true, they would

move along the lines of the law that

exists. What do you take to mean by

that?

Again, I think the point

really is that we have to go forward

and report the story and we have to

tell the world about it. I think it

provides a tremendously valuable

service, our journalists agree with

that and we think that as the facts

come out, it will be favourable to

our journalists and what we're doing

but you must consider there are

tremendous risks doing journalism

anywhere in the world. Reuters

journalists take that risk every

time, like BBC journalists and

journalists everywhere. That is part

of the job and we are hopeful and we

hope the government will release

them shortly. I will also say that

it is very important for the world

community to care about this and

governments all over the world will

take an interest, representatives

from many countries attended the

last hearing and there is another

next week and we are hopeful that

the support we are getting and this

information coming out will be

helpful.

What were the

considerations? You talked to the

journalists but what were the other

considerations about how this story

might progress?

We are going to go

forward and continue reporting on

Myanmar, we won the Pulitzer Prize

in 2014 for reporting on human

trafficking of Rohingya Muslims and

it is important to continue so while

we have no certainty as to how

things will proceed, we think it is

our responsibility to give

reporting.

For the first time, who

not only have members of the

security forces but Buddhist, a

villager, confessing to this

involvement?

If this is about the

sourcing of the story...

The

significance of the information that

has been found from the side of the

Buddhists?

I understand. What is

important about this story is that

we heard from Buddhist villagers and

Rohingya Muslims and members of the

military and police and what is so

compelling about this story is the

information that comes together for

these different places so you are

not seeing one or the other side

presenting information but this

story is being woven together with

people and monitoring what happened

and I think it is very important

because I think this has often been

seen as merely a conflict between

two sides but there are facts here

and we have established those facts

by talking to many people on the

ground using traditional reporting

methods, just interviewing people.

Thank you so much for joining us.

I'm joined now by the Labour

MP Rosena Allin-Khan,

who has visited Rohingya refugee

camps in Bangladesh.

What is your response?

This evidence

we have seen mirrors the testimonies

I have heard and the injuries I

experienced when I went to work in

the camps as a doctor. It is deeply

upsetting, you have seen the images.

This is not going to be the first

such a card that we see, more and

more evidence that this is going to

unfold and currently we have been

bystanders to a genocide.

These

reporters, in jail, they want the

story out there?

Let us be clear,

this evidence marks a turning point

because for the first time since

they started to unfold in August, we

have heard from the perpetrators

themselves.

We cannot deny this

evidence. What does this tell us

about what might move and change and

also what the Burmese government

said?

The deep disappointment thus far is

that it has been termed ethnic

cleansing which is not a crime

according to humanitarian law but

nothing short of a referral to the

International Criminal Court will

bloom.

Actually from the

announcement -- will do. They do not

deny that this might have happened

and surely that is a move forward?

To be honest, I place very little

trust in what their government says.

They conducted internal

investigations last year that

yielded results that showed that

they were not guilty of any crimes.

If they are happy to have an honest

and transparent investigation, they

need to allow external investigators

to come into the country.

Even the

fact that for the first time they

acknowledged the atrocities that

have taken place, that there are

problems, that in itself is surely

you will press forward on?

Absolutely. You are correct, but I

think the acknowledgement is

important but it has to be followed

up and properly investigated and

they need to allow external

international investigator to come

and look at this because it needs a

referral to the International

Criminal Court. This will not be the

only grave found. Even last weekend

we heard evidence of genocide. We

have heard of mass graves where

people have been systematically

dehumanised by the use of acid, the

very definition of genocide.

Over

the last few months the

international reputation of Aung San

Suu Kyi has altered immeasurably,

and if this is the case, this will

change it again. What will happen do

you think?

I want Aung San Suu Kyi

to use the position she has Tuchel

for the correct thing to happen,

this has to be investigated

properly. She has called it a fake

news, she had a bystander, our

government also has to apply more

pressure. We have a seat at the

Security Council, where not doing

enough, the international community

needs to stand together, stand up

and say, look, we have seen this

evidence, the army had admitted it

itself, what is Aung San Suu Kyi

going to do about it? Let's have a

transparent process of investigating

this and make sure the perpetrators

of these he describes are brought to

justice.

Thank you very much.

US officials have said tonight that

two British men believed to be

members of the Islamic State group's

most infamous cell have been seized

by Syrian Kurdish fighters.

Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee

Elsheikh were the last two members

of the four man cell nicknamed

'the Beatles' to remain at large.

The alleged ringleader of the group

was Mohammed Emwazi -

also known as Jihadi John.

I'm joined by the BBC's security

correspondent, Gordon Corera.

This news broke this evening,

British officials are not yet

confirmed it but an American

national security official I spoke

to said that these two men had been

captured. They were part of this

four man group, slightly

unpleasantly called the Beatles

really pulls the people they were

holding hostage could not see them

because they wore masks but they

could hear the British accents of

the men and they were involved in

terrible mistreatment including the

killing of around two dozen hostages

including British aid workers Alan

Henning and David Heyes. The group

were sought by the intelligence

agencies and authorities, one,

Mohammed Emwazi, was killed, another

is in jail in Turkey and now these

two captured by Kurdish forces who

had their suspicions about the men

and approached US special operations

command who had access to them and

appear to have used biometrics to

confirm their identity and that

happened in mid-January.

And taking

them alive was important but what

happens next and what does it tell

us about foreign fighters?

What

happens next is interesting. There

will be people in the US who will be

preparing a case to put them on

trial, they had been involved in the

killing of American hostages Steven

Sotloff and James Foley amongst

others, and it is possible the Trump

Administration might want to put

them in Guantanamo Bay. That is less

likely but Donald Trump has talked

about it recently. It might not be

such an issue for the UK Government

because it is thought possible that

there are citizenship may have been

stripped of them, that has not been

confirmed but reported in the

American media.

A significant night.

Certainly.

Thank you very much.

Local councils all over England

are using words like "severe

financial challenges"

and "a grave financial future."

Such is the squeeze

on local finances -

and most importantly

for the government, some

of the biggest calamity

is in staunchly Tory territory.

Services at risk are everything

from social care to education

to refuse collection.

Research carried out by the Local

Government Information Unit

and the Municipal Journal found that

80% of councils fear

for their balance sheets.

Council tax will rise

in 95% of authorities.

The research comes as

Conservative-run Northamptonshire

County Council imposed emergency

controls on its spending,

the first local authority in 20

years to resort to that measure,

and there are calls in councils

across the country for a fundamental

redesign of the financial system.

Our political editor, Nick Watt,

has been to another Tory

heartland facing the squeeze.

In one of the bleakest corners of

England's pleasant pastures, the

troubles of austerity should be a

world away -- LI theist. But true

blue Surrey has run up the deficit

to rival the Schauble in the

nation's books clocked up at the end

of the new Labour era. I am on the

Wentworth estate, the millionaires

Row of Surrey. This area was once

home to Sir Elton John and for a

period to the late General Augusto

Pinochet and it lies in the heart of

Chancellor Philip Hammond pros

Runnymede and Weybridge constituency

which is one of the most affluent in

Britain. And yet the challenges

faced across the country of an

ageing population and spending cuts

are leaving this area with some

serious fiscal challenges. Surrey

County Council is warning of the

most difficult financial crisis in

its history. As document showed it

is running a £105 million deficit.

That represent a funding gap of

12.4%, nearly double the English

average. The council, which spent

71p in every pound on adult and

children's social care, is digging

deep into its reserves to keep

going.

I'm not going to pretend

Surrey is a poor county because

accords its not but since 2010 when

David Cameron became Prime Minister

Surrey has lost over £500 million of

funding and it has meant that most

of the police station in Surrey have

been closed, apart from four or and

thou they are starting to close fire

stations. -- now they are starting

to close fire stations.

One minister

complained that Surrey two specific

financial challenges. In the first

place it spent a lot of money on

public services which this minister

supports but secondly it's relative

wealth means that Surrey has faced

what he described as stingy

financial settlement from Whitehall

under a funding formula that target

resources at less affluent areas.

I

worked for the CAA be see all the

problems that come on with lack of

social care. I don't blame councils

-- the CAB. They are being starved

for cash by the government.

We have

had experience with our mothers in

social care come in the Midlands and

down here, and I must admit the

social care was better in the

Midlands. Surrey might appear to be

a very affluent county but it does

not mean to say that it has

wonderful hospitals.

wonderful hospitals.

Surrey have

been seeking additional government

money for quite some time and

obviously that is a process of

negotiation between Surrey and the

government but clearly I have some

sympathy for them because of their

ageing demographics. But there is a

large number of other services that

Surrey County Council provide that

have to be looked at very carefully

to make sure they are structured in

the best way to get the best value

for money.

Surrey County Council

said in a statement... We have

agreed a three-year budget despite

the severe financial pressure we and

councils across the country are

under due to rising demand for our

services and fall in government

funding. We're been successfully

managing the growing need for adult

social care, children and other key

services, partly through making

savings of £540 million since 2010

and have made sure we keep within

our overall budget. In a tranquil

riverside setting where English

liberties were proclaimed just over

800 years ago, Surrey invites

visitors to celebrate its history.

Little did the county note that

today's politics would encroach on

this rural idle.

In Washington today MPs

from the Digital Culture,

Media and Sport Committee

were grilling Facebook,

Google and Twitter on -

among other things -

their response to fake

news on their platforms.

Here is the committee chair,

Damian Collins, grilling Twitter.

What were talking about is lies,

someone who is deciding to spread

lies about somebody else.

They're not harassing them,

they're not intimidating them,

they're not inciting violence

against them, they're

just spreading lies.

And they're using the anonymity

of Twitter to do that.

There's basically nothing

you will do about it.

If I could, the anonymity

on our platform is not a shield

against breaking our

terms of service.

Telling lies on Twitter

isn't a breach of the

Telling lies on Twitter isn't

a breach of the community guidelines

and wouldn't require action to be

taken against the account.

That's what you're saying, isn't it?

If that's the only ground...

We do not have rules based on truth.

So is fake news such a big deal that

it's necessary for UK politicians

to head to Washington for,

or is the DCMS committee getting

a bit overexcited about a term

that has had its day?

With me in the studio

is the right-wing

campaigner and best-selling

author Ann Coulter -

one of the very few people

Donald Trump follows on Twitter,

and joining me from LA is the writer

Laurie Penny.

Good evening. Ann Coulter, does fake

news damage society?

Yes, that is

why Donald Trump keeps attacking it.

We live in democracies, people are

to be informed.

to be informed. And people at

allegedly serious networks are

putting out lies. This happened long

before Trump, Ferguson ripped the

country apart the alleged shooting

of an unarmed black man and went

Trump came along it has gone through

the roof.

If you are in a situation

in an election campaign and a

website which gets hits from nearly

800,000 people says that members of

Hillary Clinton's campaign were

involved in a Satanic cult, that

matters, doesn't it? Or does it not?

Should the tech giants be filtering

this stuff?

The internet is the only

place people can get the truth,

maybe not from the website you just

mentioned but 800,000 viewers,

Hillary Clinton spent $1 billion...

This idea that what is putting likes

of Facebook swung the election is so

insane, that is fake news -- bots.

You believe things like CNN, CNN,

ABC, they've put out fake news?

Intentionally, the claim that Donald

Trump admitted to groping a woman's,

you know, blank, is alive. They edit

the tape to lie about it. You can

win that is a summary judgment case

in court and the editor that part of

the quote out.

If it damaging to

have not only fake news but actually

the idea that it doesn't necessarily

matter?

matter?

Yup hit on something quite

important, the distinction between

censorship and what is going on out

is important. Fake news, what we

have come to call that, which is

actually lies, the point is not just

to spread lies, it is to make people

unsure of the distinction between

what is true and what is false. When

people have eroded trust in the news

media which is what Ann Coulter is

trying to do right now, erode trust

in honest journalistic networks,

when people cannot trust their

media, they often prefer to believe

convenient lies to hard truths. But

there are still people out there who

believe in the power of honest

journalism and the power, in real

democracy, which involves people

being really informed and there are

people out there who believe that

people in power should not just to

be allowed to dictate what is true

and what is false. Some of those

people are sitting around you in a

studio right now, they are working

in a BBC studio, and some people

watching at home, people who believe

there is a distinction between truth

and falsehood and that distinction

matters. I would encourage...

Ioane

situation where if you are saying

that the mainstream news networks

readily pile out fake news, are you

not just aiding the despot who say,

it's all about fake news from CNN,

even the BBC, so we won't believe

it? You are helping people by

undermining the probity of

mainstream media.

I am citing laws that have been put

on it, it doesn't mean you believe

everything. I agree with you guessed

that the issue is censorship, who is

deciding? I have just listed... 20

lies that have been and continue to

be put out by the media, they claim

that Donald Trump mocked a disabled

man, not only was alive but the

Washington post you that was a lie.

Video proving that was alive. And

you're only light is some website

said he is part of a Satanic

cults... How about, she defended...

It doesn't matter if a is told...

Of

course it does! The lies that are

told about Donald Trump...

In a

Satanic cult? Are you finished? May

I speak? The word salad that you

have heard is exactly what we're

talking about, what she wants to do

does not make a distinction between

what is true and not true, it is

just to confuse people and make it

easier for people in power with no

scruples to just decide what is true

and what is false and this culture

is a troll with no credibility and

so is the President but we should

not take this as the basis upon

which what we can decide is true or

not.

Once you start essentially

filtering or censoring, then who are

the deciders? There is no such thing

as absolute truth. There are nuances

of truth.

That is why we have

journalism. You have worked at the

BBC for a very long time, everybody

in the studio has worked for a long

time, journalism is still at think

that exists and matters and should

be a distinction.

We already have

the situation where you tweeted what

reported to be a Muslim man

attacking a young Dutchman and you

have 1.8 million and Donald Trump

retweeted that and you did not even

know where that came from. Without

checking it. And you're somebody in

the public eye.

You regret that? I

have seen no proof that it is untrue

and your question is correct, who is

deciding what is true? I keep citing

things that are provably false. It

wasn't true! Your guests say that

journalists will decide, our country

was ruled by the Ferguson shooting

for a year and that turned out to be

the biggest lie ever invented by the

media.

Thank you very much. That is

not true!

Two days after the Guardian

newspaper reported that two

Freemasons Lodges are operating

secretly at Westminster,

with their members' names protected

under the rules of freemasonary,

the United Grand Lodge of England

has fought back with full page

advert in newspapers including

today's Times headlined

'Enough is Enough'.

Signed by their Chief Executive,

Dr David Staples,

he writes that its 200,000

plus members are stigmatised

and discriminated against.

So, the letter states,

over the next six months

the Freemasons will by running

a series of open evenings

for people who want to know

who they are and what they do.

Our reporter David Grossman, though,

is getting ahead of the crowds.

If you're like me, you haven't spent

too much time thinking

about the Freemasons or what goes

on in a place like this.

This is Freemason's Hall in London.

But today, the Freemasons do want us

to think about them.

They have taken out a full-page

advert in the newspapers.

"Enough is enough", it says.

And in this letter, they say

the Freemasons are unfairly

stigmatised in the media

and by wider society.

We have been invited in to see

what goes on here by the chap

who wrote this letter -

Dr David Staples,

the Chief Executive.

David, hello.

Nice to meet you.

David Grossman.

We have come about your advert.

We were told we could go anywhere,

see anything and talk to anyone.

Could we see a lodge

meeting, we asked?

No problem, they said.

Except...

Well, there was a problem.

We have to find one?

We have to find one.

Do you want to stay here

and I'll nip upstairs?

OK, thank you very much.

Once we found the meeting,

it was full of smartly dressed men

wearing aprons and sashes.

What is the dagger for?

That is a ceremonial thing to guard

the entrance of the lodge.

This chap here is called

the inner guard.

You're the inner guard?

Hello.

And what do you do

as an inner guard?

I knock on the door,

let people in and...

Make sure people

are dressed properly.

Do you understand why some

people will look at this

and go, it's sinister,

it is all cloak and dagger?

I mean, there's literally

a dagger there.

We have just not done enough to show

people who we are and what we do.

We have allowed members of the media

space in the last 20 years

to have the same old hackneyed

conspiracy theories, the same

old jokey things about trouser legs

and all the rest of it.

That is not who we are.

The reason for the "enough

is enough" message in the papers

today was a story on Monday.

A secret cabal of Freemasons

at Westminster involving

journalists and MPs.

David says there is no

truth behind any of it.

The reality is, today,

he says, that masons

are discriminated against.

I have barrister friends

and they don't want to let people

know that they are Freemasons.

Not because they are involved

in anything furtive or secret

but because they don't want to be

associated with the myth

of all the corruption.

And it is detrimental to them to be

a Freemason in the open.

There is policemen, completely

the reverse of what is reported,

there is policemen who I know

who are absolutely clear

that if they are outed

as Freemasons, that is the end

of their career prospects.

Big exposes of Freemasonry

in the '70s and '80s alleged

the police were riddled with secret

handshakes,

backscratching and worse.

Labour Home Secretary Jack Straw

said in 1997 that masons

in the police and judiciary

should be identified.

He eventually backed down

in the face of a legal challenge.

But at the same time

as being seen the sinister,

Freemasonry also has

a comic reputation.

Having once identified a Mason,

immediate steps must be

taken to isolate him

from the general public.

The final part of my tour

was the Grand Lodge,

a sort of cathedral of Freemasonry.

Lots of symbols, an all-seeing eye

to symbolise the belief

in a higher power.

The trappings of religion,

but I was told it certainly wasn't.

Every Freemason has to have a faith.

You don't have to

believe in one God.

You can't be atheist or agnostic?

No.

You have to believe in something

greater than yourself

because you have to believe that

you have to behave yourself or else

there is something greater

than you that is going to notice.

And that is what holds

people together?

But holds people together

to what purpose?

I ended my tour not fully

understanding much more

about what Freemasonry actually is.

As best as I could make out,

it's a sort of networking

club based on principles

of self-improvement and altruism.

But in the mysticism and the ritual,

there is plenty of room

for outsiders to see anything

they want, good or bad.

In this age of mass

instant communication,

there is still a place

for one of the simplest,

most powerful instruments

of information and opinion -

the T-shirt, or slogan tee.

The utilitarian garment,

which been emblazoned

with everything from the OZ trial

to the Rolling Stones logo,

ripped, safety pinned,

and ripped off from one designer

to another, is as much part

of our social history

as our fashion history.

It's being celebrated

at an exhibition at London's Fashion

and Textile Museum.

This unique T-shirt, though,

is only in the Newsnight studio,

not the exhibition.

It was made minutes before and then

worn by the designer and campaigner

Katherine Hamnett when she met

Mrs Thatcher on 17th March 1984.

So who better to meet me

at the exhibition than the Queen

of the political T-shirt?

So this, this is your first T-shirt?

Yes.

It actually came out

with an argument I had with Lynne

Franks, who I think you know.

Because she was doing this Buddhist

exhibition and I said, nobody's

going to bother to go,

it's just not putting it over.

I said the only way you can get

this message over is,

how about printing it in huge

letters on a T-shirt?

This whole idea of

making a statement in a

T-shirt, where did

you get that from?

Well, I was kind of frustrated,

you know, during sort of

Thatcher's years because we felt

we had no voice, democracy slipping

through our fingers,

couldn't

stand...

And I thought, well, at least

if you could do something that

people could read from 200 yards

on your chest, you know...

It gives you a voice.

Tell me about this one.

This was actually taken from a BBC

poll, taken before we decided to

invade Iraq and it was 91% of people

polled were against invading Iraq

without a second resolution.

And we did this the

moment the poll came

out.

It was done at a local Snappy Snaps.

Do you ever irk people

with the T-shirts, do you think, you

know, annoy them?

I don't know and I

don't care actually.

You know, be irked, you know.

Do you go to bed at night and think,

God, what can I do a T-shirt

on tomorrow?

What would be really good?

No.

No, they're kind of cries

from the heart, they come by

themselves, like this one.

Yeah.

Like, I just couldn't

stop myself I feel so

passionately about it.

You know, I thought I'll

actually wear this,

tell you when you came,

I'm wearing this or nothing else.

Use a condom, don't shoot.

All these, you look at those

and say these are Katherine

Hamnett T-shirts but of course

they're not all like that, are they?

I mean, the trouble is that lots

of people want to appropriate your

style.

Does that matter?

They were designed to

be copied but then I

think it's really sad if they copy

the style and just write something

rather drivelly, you know,

something a bit pathetic.

It's a shame.

Is there something about the T-shirt

that then creates a tribe?

Immediately if you have the same

T-shirt on as that person and have

the same sentiment as that

person in your head,

the T-shirt gives you

a

sense of belonging?

Well, I think you're

friends, aren't you?

You know, because you

have the same values,

and you believe in the same

things, it's nice.

Then when it came to the punk

movement, it was about ripping

up T-shirts, deconstructing them,

again, that was fashion.

I think punk was amazing.

I mean, it was fascinating

and they did the big

sort of anarchy, you know,

in the UK,

BLEEP

the Queen,

all of that, and, you know,

I think a slight

misunderstanding of the word anarchy

because they thought it was just

smashing down everything

and actually it means a leaderless

society, a society that is so well

run it doesn't actually need

leaders, like a direct

democracy maybe.

So, it was inspiring,

it was a very exciting time.

That's almost it from us.

Before we go, Elon Musk may have

put a car into space,

but now we have the first rave

in zero gravity.

20 clubbers from around the world

were selected by promoters

BigCityBeats to go up in a special

Airbus A310 to dance -

and float - to a set

from superstar DJ Steve Aoki.

So here they are getting

very high indeed.

Goodnight.

MUSIC: Signalrunners - "Corrupted"

# A rocket's kick

# A cold pin prick

# A missile launch

# Corrupted this

# Calculated risk

# Was worth a lot

# Corrupted was the name of the game

# They'll take that then

they'll give it away