 Beth ydych chi'n fawr i chi'n meddwl mewn Jim Cary wedi yng nghymru, fe fe nid defnyddio'r pethau sy'n gwirio a'i ddim yn ddiwg i'n meddwl i'n cymaint ac cefnig ar gyffinion. Felly fod y feddwl mwych i'w lleol mewn cilio, ond rydyn ni'n ei rhain yn meddwl yn buddig yn wvarjol, yn ddiwyll i ddaeth bwrdd ac plefyd yn fawr i chi'n meddwl ac rydyn ni'n meddwl fawr i'r wlad hwnnw, fod wedi'n meddwl yn ddiw i'w glwybaidd, Fe wedi bod yn ymddangos yng ngheilio gynghwyl yn Llywodraeth? Mae, mae gennym yn ymddangos y Gymraeg i chi, fe wedi bod yng ngheilio gynghwyl. Fy rydyn ni'n groes am ychydig yn gymryd yma, a rydyn ni'n ymddangos yn Llau. A rydyn ni'n gynyddiad cymryd am ychydig. Felly, mae gymraeg ei ymddangos yn ddiddordeb o fwyaf, wedi bod yna'r bod yn ychydig yn ymddangos. A'r bod yn ymddangos yn gyfanyddol, ..dw i'n meddwl y gallwn ei wneud ymweld y fawr. Yn ymweld yma yw'r ffordd yw'r ffordd. Yn ymweld, os ydych chi'n ddau'r ffordd... ..y fwy fwy o'r ffordd yw'r ffordd, yw'n meddwl yw'r ffordd... ..y fyddi'r ffordd yw'r ffordd. Yn ymweld, mae'r gweithio yma, a'r ffordd yw gym... ..eithio y gallwn yw'r ffordd. Yn ymweld, yw'r ffordd... Llywodraeth yn gwybodaeth i gafodd o hynny. Beth yna efallai y gallu gwneud y lle mae hynny? Beth yna efallai y gallu gwneud y lle mae hynny? Beth yna efallai mae'r lle mae'r gwneud y lefyn yn gallu ei gwelio? Rwy hynny ychydig yn dwyaf. Mae'r rhai, rhai, rhai, rhai, mhreistfan. Yn ni wedi rhoi, yng nghymru, o'r holl bwysig. Why aren't we exploring all possibility? Not that you come across information and just because you come across it, that that's true then, I believe that now, now- No! You question it, process it, come to conclusions about it. But it's very simple and history shows us this. Systematically reducing the amount of information, ddifesrwtio'r ddifesrwtio a ddifesrwtio ac yn ddech chi'n gweithio th毆. Nid yw eu roddon ni'n braf. Dw i'n ddae'n gwybod, mae'n ddoros o'r ddifesrwtio yn banyddol ar digestion. Dwi'n diwrnod o'r tyamenau, erbyn digon oedd oedd mawr yn talodol, fe hmol o'r tymen na'r ddenigio am hyn, mae'r poradol o ddifesrwtio i drefio'r ddifesrwtio ddifesrwtio is what they want people to believe, every time. So whenever you're in a situation where the free flow of information and view and opinion is being censored, you are in a tyranny. And what humanity has allowed itself, not everybody of course, but great numbers, especially the political correctness group is, is they've allowed themselves to become a tyranny while claiming to be anti-tyranny. I see anti-fascist protests full of people acting fascistically because they're so far up their own ass and so full of their own self-purity. They don't realise that what they're doing is actually projecting their own behaviour in what they're opposing. Anyone who gives someone a hard time for having a different view, however much they may not agree with it, is a psychological fascist in my view because they are seeking to impose their will on someone else. And it's quite simple. You let all information be circulated and then people make their own minds up what they want to believe and what they don't believe. And this is a key. What we're seeing now, not least through algorithms and through self-censorship by being intimidated into being terrified of speaking your truth, we're seeing information censored before the point of delivery, before anyone can hear it. This is fundamental because I believe that all information and all views should be allowed to be expressed because if anyone is censored from expressing those beliefs then no one has freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, the freedom to speak. It's not freedom to speak what is acceptable, it's the freedom to speak. And once anyone is censored, freedom of speech is dead because what's left is only what is acceptable to speak and that's not freedom of speech. And then what they've done and what they're doing all the time is squeezing that acceptability so freedom of speech gets narrower and narrower until it disappears altogether. And so what we have is a situation where if people are allowed to say and communicate whatever they want that is a situation where no authority in any form has the power to decide what people see in here. Once you start censoring before the point of delivery, which is to say algorithms and self-censorship is now doing, you are giving authority the power to decide what people see in here. And of course it starts out with one excuse, we must stop jihadis justifying or promoting violence. Okay. Oh, fake news, fake news. What's fake news? Whatever we say it is. Yeah, we've got to stop people saying fake news so we've got to censor that. Oh, the more people we can get to be victims and upset, the more excuses we've got to censor even more, right? Yeah. So give people all the excuses they want to be upset and to be feel a victim and then we can censor people saying things that upset them and so you're moving along this road. None of that can happen when we have the free flow of information, nothing censored. So people say, well, what about saying go and kill people? Yeah, but there's laws against that. There's laws against that. There's laws against telling people, oh, burn that house down. But they're after the point of delivery, which means you can deal with the extremes of what our people use speech. But it's, it's heard. Then you can deal with it if it needs dealing with it. And most speech does not need dealing with it all. You know, come on, let's go and kill this person. Well, obviously, you know, you deal with that. You have to deal with that. But it's after the point of delivery. And as long as we hold that line, authority has no power to censor. What we're seeing now is the opposite of that. That beyond before that line is where most censorship is starting to happen. And thus freedom is disappearing.