#141 – Khaled Hassan – The Silent Coup: How The Muslim Brotherhood Captured The UK

Summary

---

The Peter McCormack Show — Episode #141

Guest: Khaled Hassan
Title: The Silent Coup: How The Muslim Brotherhood Captured The UK
Date: January 22, 2026
Host: Peter McCormack

---

Episode Overview

In this candid, wide-ranging episode, Peter McCormack sits down with Khaled Hassan—Egyptian-born, now British counterterrorism expert and convert to Judaism—for a provocative exploration of the challenges facing the UK regarding immigration, integration, free speech, and national identity. Hassan unpacks what he calls a “silent coup” by the Muslim Brotherhood, discusses the mainstream media’s failure to address uncomfortable truths, examines the decline in British governance, and compares the UK’s trajectory unfavorably to autocratic but forward-looking states like the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

Throughout, both host and guest grapple with the erosion of public trust and national purpose, the perils of broken institutions, and the desperate need for courageous, visionary leadership. The discussion is spirited, sometimes controversial, and always forthright.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Diversity Within Islam and Immigration Policy Failures

• [00:00–06:09]
  • Hassan argues the UK's problems with integration stem not from Islam per se, but from failing to discriminate between very different cultural interpretations of Islam (UAE vs. Afghanistan/Pakistan).
  • The UK, he claims, ignored the cultural and religious realities of new arrivals.
  • “No one wants to talk about this because that's racist.” — Khaled Hassan [00:55]

2. Media, Free Speech, and Dangerous Ideologies

• [06:09–14:05]
  • Mainstream media’s refusal to address contentious issues enables extremism and fuels a backlash expressed in racist nationalism.
  • Social media algorithms amplify extreme voices; “You gotta go,” is the message Hassan hears, despite his service to the country.
  • BBC and institutional bias: the BBC, says Hassan, wouldn’t dare interview him due to his opinions.
  • Hassan describes how demonization and suppression of open dialogue has destroyed trust and allowed dangerous narratives to fester in the dark.

3. Platforming Extremists and the Limits of Free Speech

• [14:05–24:49]

  • Peter and Khaled debate whether giving extreme voices a platform is helpful (to expose and critique bad ideas publicly) or dangerous (risking radicalization of the desperate or alienated).

  • Hassan: In Egypt, mainstream Nazi admiration is normalized—proof, he says, that some ideas fester regardless of exposure.

    • “If you give someone like Steve Laws a platform... out of every 100,000 people... two or five... decide, ‘Yes, this guy’s right. If we get rid of all those folks, I’m going to be better off.’” — Khaled Hassan [16:24]

  • The distinction between discussing controversial topics (immigration, demographic change) and crossing into advocacy of ethnic cleansing is discussed, with Hassan supporting hate speech red lines and McCormack favoring incitement-to-violence as the boundary.

4. Nationhood, Identity, and Policy Red Lines

• [24:49–34:48]

  • Where’s the policy boundary? Hassan supports debate about demographic change and immigration curbs, but calls for a moral and legal boundary against targeting people by ethnicity.

  • Discussion of British identity: the fallacy, Hassan says, that “diversity” is Britain’s essence, instead arguing for a remembered national character.

  • Contrasts are drawn between the UK’s openness and the explicit religio-legal barriers in Pakistan and elsewhere.

    • “Religion sets the base laws of a country... [with competing faiths] that leads to warfare, violence, sectarianism.” — Peter McCormack [34:00]

5. Dysfunctional Institutions & Political Paralysis

• [34:48–47:03]

  • Britain’s institutions are accused of wilful blindness and corruption—especially regarding religious extremism and anti-Semitism.

  • Security agencies, according to Hassan, employ those with personal or religious biases that compromise impartiality, especially when reviewing Arabic-language extremist content.

    • “Within our institutions... people deciding whether something is criminal... harbor these [anti-Semitic] views themselves.” — Khaled Hassan [40:48]

  • Political class at Westminster described as locked in “games of survival” and more focused on self-preservation than the national good.

6. How Did We Get Here? The Role of Political Parties

• [44:12–47:03]
  • Peter describes politics as a racket: politicians serve the interests of groups who deliver votes, with the “Muslim block vote” favoring Labour and creating perverse policy incentives.
  • Khaled emphasizes bureaucratic inertia and gatekeeping at every level, resulting in almost “no one running the country.”
    • “Ninety percent is trying to backstab others or avoid being backstabbed... ten percent is actually doing the job.” — Khaled Hassan [46:29]

7. Immigration Reform and Security Concerns

• [55:32–59:00]

  • Hassan proposes ministers take personal responsibility for every case they approve, and for the country to designate “risk” categories for immigrant source nations.

    • “I would designate different countries into risk categories.” — Khaled Hassan [56:35]

  • The ongoing threat of Islamist extremism is still very real, with thousands on watchlists and insufficient integration or vetting for cultural and ideological alignment.

8. Religion, Faith, and Personal Journey

• [60:03–70:13]

  • Hassan reflects on his personal journey from Islam to Judaism, noting that Islam is often misunderstood by its own adherents, largely due to politicization.

  • He describes the dangers and impossibilities of openly converting to Judaism in Egypt, where even reading Jewish literature could be considered subversive.

  • Discussion of concepts of hell and judgment in Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

    • “Islam is the most misunderstood religion, but it is mostly misunderstood by its own followers.” — Khaled Hassan [61:11]

9. Britain’s National Decline and the Loss of Vision

• [80:15–99:21]
  • NHS and other state services are now dysfunctional, say both; wage stagnation and loss of affordable public provision have undermined social mobility and optimism.
  • Britain, Hassan claims, is now “where aspirations go to die.” [86:49]
  • Saudi Arabia is held up as an example of visionary renewal, with “Vision 2030” aligning national energy for the future, while British values are described as “all passive.”
    • “We need a national vision or dream to get behind. That’s what Saudi Arabia has.” — Khaled Hassan [96:28]

10. Political Rot and the Need for Radical Reform

• [99:21–END]

  • Both speakers call for a total overhaul of politics, recruitment of talented outsiders, and the end of recycling failed old MPs.

  • They bemoan the prevalence of mediocrity across the political spectrum and the system’s immunity to bold or innovative individuals.

    • “Anyone who's slightly bold does not fit.” — Khaled Hassan [102:15]

  • Restoring parliamentary sovereignty, slashing bureaucracy, and building a sovereign wealth fund (à la Norway) are suggested as paths forward.

  • British education, innovation, and opportunity must be prioritized—otherwise, say the hosts, there is “collective depression” and a lost generation looming.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• On the challenge of discussing uncomfortable realities in integration:

  • “No one wants to talk about this because that's racist.” — Khaled Hassan [00:55]

• On media bias and mainstream institutions:

  • “The BBC would look at someone like me and just like, ooh, he's got seriously challenging views... but the opinions I have are, you know, talked about in Egypt.” — Khaled Hassan [06:55]

• On social media and extremist narrative:

  • “There's been like a pressure valve and now it's come off.” — Peter McCormack [10:46]

• On the risk of hard-right ideologies:

  • “You become a Nazi, essentially, you become a Nazi state. And it doesn't work.” — Khaled Hassan [13:24]

• On bureaucracy and political stagnation:

  • “No one is running this country. That's the challenge.” — Khaled Hassan [46:36]

• On immigration and national identity:

  • “If you are a minister, you have a case, and this case is case, you make the decision, does he go in, does he come in or do we leave him?” — Khaled Hassan [55:33]

• On religious and societal decline:

  • “We got rid of basically the values or the foundations of this country... and we did mass immigration.” — Khaled Hassan [30:33]

• On Britain’s malaise:

  • “I think Britain now... is potentially the place where aspirations go to die.” — Khaled Hassan [86:49]

• On the need for leadership and vision:

  • “We need a national vision or dream to get behind. And that's what Saudi Arabia has.” — Khaled Hassan [96:28]

---

Select Important Timestamps

• 00:00–06:09 | Introduce Khaled, context on Islam & immigration
• 06:09–14:05 | Media, racism, public discourse, BBC bias
• 14:05–24:49 | Steve Laws, extremism, free speech, historical comparison
• 34:48–46:36 | Institutions, identity, anti-Semitism, political survival
• 55:32–57:01 | Radical policy suggestions, assigning ministerial responsibility
• 86:49 | “Place where aspirations go to die”—Britain’s prospects laid bare
• 96:28 | Vision 2030/Saudi Arabia vs. UK's lack of purpose
• 97:23–99:21 | Education, indoctrination, and the loss of national ambition

---

Overall Tone & Closing Thoughts

The conversation is urgent, sometimes despairing, sometimes darkly humorous, but above all honest. McCormack and Hassan are both clear-eyed about Britain’s failures—its inability to integrate newcomers, its weak political leadership, its bureaucracy, and its lost sense of purpose—and insistent that only radical honesty and bold vision can lead to national renewal. The episode is a clarion call to address both the hard questions and the structural failures at the heart of modern British society.

---

End of Summary

Transcript

[A]

So there are quite a few versions of Islam, but I think the dominant version of Islam is a version that is, to different degrees quite political in many ways. But regardless of whatever it is in the uk, we could have chosen, like I always say this, if you allow every Emirati to move to London tomorrow, London is going to be one of the greatest cities globally. It's going to be amazing for business. It's going to be amazing, you know, to start a business to, you know, have a family, whatever it is. If you allow the same number of, you know, the equivalent number of people from Afghanistan or Pakistan, you're going to have serious issue because of the difference in, you know, what kind of version of Islam they practice. And no one wants to admit this. That's the challenge I have. No one wants to talk about this because that's racist.

[B]

This show is brought to you by my lead sponsor, Aaron the AI Cloud for the next big thing. Iron builds and operates next generation data centers and delivers cutting edge GPU infrastructure all powered by renewable energy. Now, if you need access to scalable GPU clusters or are simply curious about who is powering the future of AI, check out ayron.com to learn more. We're which is I r e n dot com. So you were telling me.

[A]

Yes, yes, the accent. Yes. So I grew up in Egypt and you know, like most sort of middle class families, you send your kids to the nicest school possible basically. So I went to a school where I was taught pretty much everything in English, American English. So, you know, the accent is now quite weird because I've been living in the UK for 10 years and sometimes I get you sound Dutch, sometimes I get, you sound South African. Sometimes I get, you know, I think.

[B]

I hear each one as you say it.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, I definitely hear the Dutch. It's quite weird. Yes, it's really quite weird. But you know, married to an English woman, you know, from the Northeast. So, you know, also quite, you know, very proud of the Northeast and all that stuff. So it's.

[B]

Have you been sucked into the Northeast football?

[A]

Not really, no. I'd like to, actually. I'd like to, I'd like to a bit. Yeah. I haven't had the chance yet because we haven't been living in the Northeast for, for a long time.

[B]

Who's the nearest Premier League side?

[A]

That's interesting actually. I mean we've got. Leeds is not too far, Manchester is not too far. Even, you know, Leeds is good.

[B]

I've been to Elham Road.

[A]

All right. Yes, yes. Leeds is Good. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah.

[B]

Well, it's great to meet you, Khaled. I normally. I normally have here. Yes. Five or six pieces of paper full of questions.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But today I don't. I have a blank sheet because we're touching on a subject which is widely debated and discussed at the moment in the UK and at a time I think the UK is really trying to understand what it is.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

What it wants to be. And certainly in my sphere of podcast worlds, it can be something that drives clicks and drives kind of debate and anger. But, like, I don't really understand Islam myself particularly well. Like, I know enough. I know the basics, probably less than I know about Christianity, but I don't really understand it as a religion.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

All I know is that we have some issues, some significant issues in the country with integration.

[A]

Yes. Yes.

[B]

So where. Where's a good place to even start?

[A]

I think it's a very interesting question, actually. If you ask me where we could start on this conversation, I will probably start with decision making, as in the British government choosing certain policies that basically drove us to where we are now. Because I think, regardless of what anyone says, I think it's, number one, it's a British problem, as in British institutions, decision making. Because if you look at Islam, you're going to find that there are actually many versions of Islam. So there is the UAE version of Islam, which is, you know, extremely tolerant. You know, they don't. They even find it, actually, when I talk to my friends in the uae, and I have a lot of connections in the uae, including with some people who are very well connected, you realize that they've developed this culture where asking you what your religion is is actually quite personal. You know, they don't do it anymore. And if you cross the border and go to Saudi Arabia or elsewhere, that's the main question. Like, that's the question that decides how people deal with you, essentially, your religion, your beliefs, all of that stuff. So there are quite a few versions of Islam, but I think the dominant version of Islam is a version that is, to different degrees, quite political in many ways. But regardless of whatever it is in the uk, we could have chosen, like I always say this, if you allow every Emirati to move to London tomorrow, London is going to be one of the greatest cities globally. It's going to be amazing for business. It's going to be amazing, you know, to start a business, to, you know, have a family, whatever it is. If you allow the same number of, you know, the equivalent number of people from Afghanistan or Pakistan, you're gonna have serious issues because of the difference in, you know, what kind of version of Islam they practice. And no one wants to admit this. That's the challenge I have. No one wants to talk about this because that's racist. If you say, look, if you allow a huge number of people from Pakistan or Afghanistan, a culture where, you know, it's relatively okay to abuse your wife, to beat your wife, you know, to have fgm, for example, you know, female genital mutilation, then it becomes a really uncomfortable conversation, and people like the BBC don't even want to talk to you.

[B]

Well, that's the thing, because this is a problem of the mainstream at the moment. This is a problem of mainstream media, mainstream politics.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

It's not a problem of conversations in the pub on podcasts, which are independent. And for a long time, the mainstream controlled everything because we didn't have an Internet.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Now two people can sit in a room like this with a couple of microphones and a camera operator, and we can create something that the whole world can watch, and thousands might interact with it. Tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands. And so those conversations have gone from the pub to the mainstream audience, but just via a different channel.

[A]

Absolutely. Yes. I completely agree. And I think, to be honest, what the mainstream does, which is really, really appalling, like, it's. It's. In my view, it's probably the worst thing you can do to Britain right now, because the mainstream, like, if you look at the BBC, for example, you know, the BBC would look at someone like me and just like, ooh, he's got seriously challenging views. Although my mom is a Muslim, you know, I converted to Judaism. My mom is a Muslim, my brother is a Muslim, my dad died as a Muslim. And the opinions I have are, you know, talked about in Egypt. You know, people look at the uae, at the uk, and they say, what's happening there? Why are they accepting all those terrorists? Why are they actually allowing in the Muslim Brotherhood to essentially take over London? These conversations are had in Cairo. You know, my mom, a Muslim with a hijab, she would tell you, there is a serious issue in London, but the BBC would not touch me. You know, they wouldn't go anywhere near me. They once invited me for a discussion and then actually completely ghosted me. Decided not to engage in any further conversation. So that's the challenge. That's what I'm talking about. You know, when you look at all this, you realize that it's actually your problem. Your problem. Not you, not me. But you when we go and basically lay the blame on someone, it's the mainstream. We need to tell them this is your problem. And what this is leading to is a rise in, you know, sort of ethno nationalism in its most horrific form that I now get, you know, people telling me, like Steve Laws and stuff, brown scum, you gotta go. Brown scum.

[B]

Yeah, you gotta, you gotta go.

[A]

Yes. And I tell them, hold on a moment. I'm Jewish, I'm a counterterrorism expert, I've actually deported people out of this country because of their views, because of, you know, their behavior, because of their beliefs. When it aligns with terrorism, obviously, you know, they're terrorists or they support terrorism. And you look at this and you realize, yeah, but you're still brown.

[B]

You gotta go.

[A]

That's exactly.

[B]

Yes. Yeah, yeah.

[A]

I'm married to an English woman, you know, like, my kids, my kids don't even speak Arabic, you know, because they.

[B]

Would refer to your wife as a race traitor.

[A]

They do, they absolutely do. Well, she's a race traitor, so she needs to go with you as well.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

I've got these comments all over, but that's. I don't. The problem is I blame the mainstream for this.

[B]

Oh, this is. Look, there is a reality here. The mainstream media has a survival mechanism and that is by drifting towards more left wing ideas whereby they want to offend as few people as possible, but it creates other tensions that exist. And now the Overton window has been smashed, so open wide by the issue of immigration. Now we're talking about demographic replacement.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And by the way, I, I think it's okay to discuss it.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But we are now enabling the resurgence of a form of racism which I thought was dying.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And it's interesting because there is like algorithmic reinforcement now on social media.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

There is a. If you don't hold the position. Similar. Say if I did an interview with Steve Laws.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

And I said, steve, look, I want to hear your story. Tell me about it. Tell me about your views, tell me how you're going to achieve this. And if I said, look, Steve, I disagree, I just disagree with you. I don't think we should be removing people based on the color of their skin. The algorithm will reinforce his views because his audience wants to hear from him. And then the comment system will be like, you're a race traitor, you're a pussy, you're destroying the country. Weak men create bad times. All these things will come in. It's just like, dude, I'm happy to have the Conversation. I just disagree with you. Yes, it's. It's. There's been like a pressure valve and now it's come off.

[A]

Absolutely. And the challenge is, if you look at someone like Steve Laws and if he decides to have his own podcast, I'm not giving him ideas, but, you know, let's say he decides to do this. He may do at some point. Yes. Like all of us, there are no checks and balances, There is nothing that anyone can do. So the idea of the mainstream, you know, that you have the BBC, and if the BBC does anything that is sort of impartial, you know, that is not impartial or something, you know, that is, you know, quite obviously biased or whatever it is, you can, you know, complain. There is, you know, there is a process. That was the idea of the mainstream. It started off as a good idea. You can actually have a certain process where you go and it's sort of not influenced by the government, not influenced by blah, blah, blah. But it went into a direction now where the BBC refuses to acknowledge Hamas as a terrorist group and they tell you that this designation is political. Well, terrorism is, in its very nature political. So that means that the BBC is refusing to accept that there is terrorism? Essentially.

[B]

Yes. In that scenario, of course, yes, completely. I mean, they don't completely ignore terrorism. I mean, they will report on it. But, like, I agree with what you're saying, but I think I would argue Steve Laws doing a podcast is a good thing, because his ideas aren't going to go away. People like him aren't going to go away. They have a conversation which is valid to have that you can disagree with, but publicly, then his ideas, that's where they can go to die in that. My big question to someone like Steve Law is I've got four questions. One, what policies do you want to put in place to achieve what you want to do? Two, how are you going to accumulate enough power to make that happen?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Three, how are you going to execute this? And four, how are you going to bind the country by these laws? And this is where the argument crumbles. Because politics, you require a big tent. There won't be a big enough tent for his ideas. But even if he did accumulate enough power, executing it would destroy construction, the nhs, essentially, it would destroy the economy. And so his nationalist revolution would likely lead to internal civil war. You would also have to then police ethnicity. And policing ethnicity requires a police state. So you have to become very authoritarian.

[A]

You become a Nazi, essentially, you become a Nazi state. And it doesn't work. The problem is the problem I have with actually giving him a podcast or even giving him a platform. And this is my own personal experience. So I come from Egypt, you know, where basically Nazism is okay. Like, you know, Hitler is glorified. Like, that's. That's the mainstream view that Hitler was a great guy. You know, I've had. I've had. I've had German friends of mine visit in Cairo, and they often see, you know, they're often asked, like, when they said, oh, I'm German or I come from Germany or whatever it is and I'm here for a holiday, they always get, oh, Hitler was a great guy, wasn't he? That is literally a serious comment from the overwhelming majority of Egyptians.

[B]

Is that just because they hate the Jews.

[A]

Yes. Yeah. So the problem is.

[B]

Hold on. So you must be seen as the ultimate traitor in Cairo.

[A]

100%. And that's the challenge. That's the challenge. You know, when you see someone, actually, when you look at Steve Laws. So when he said, in his conversation with Andrew Gold Goldstein, actually when he talks about this, he said that he would go through medical records to decide who to basically deport based on ethnicity. So if he does this and he decides to deport every brown person, then that will include me, obviously, and potentially my children, because, you know, they're sort of mixed race. Although he can't, you know, they look like their mom. But obviously, if he's gonna go through medical records, then that, you know, includes DNA. And if he does this, you're going to find people like me who are actually, you know, counterterrorism experts or whatever it is who contribute to this country in the same sort of label as people who are terrorists. And then you're gonna have, like, brown versus white, and it will be a civil war. And if somebody comes to me and says, I'm gonna deport you by force, and if Steve Lawes is magically prime minister, I will fight back 100%.

[B]

I will fight back. A lot of people would.

[A]

Exactly.

[B]

So it's not an idea with which you can create enough. You can't accumulate enough power for it to happen. But I think there are things that you could discuss with Steve Law. So, for example, zero immigration itself would not. If you. If we move to zero immigration, we would maintain the ethnic majority of white people in this country. Yes. And. But. But for Steve, he wants everyone to just be gone, which is the. It's not executable.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

It won't be palatable to enough people, and it would lead to such a demonstrably bad economic outcomes that the country would collapse. And what happens when a country collapses? You end up with civil war, infighting, crime, rape.

[A]

Syria, essentially, like Syria or Iraq or, you know, that would happen. Yes.

[B]

It's not going to be some like white Valhalla where everybody's like, it will be essentially, you're right, Syria and policing identity will be difficult. So, like, yeah, I just ignore that. I'd put that to myself.

[A]

But here's something I want to ask you now. If you are arguing that, you know, bad ideas don't die in darkness, they die in the light. You know, if you actually sort of highlight these bad ideas. So why didn't Nazism die in Germany? Why didn't Nazism die in Egypt? Why is Jew hatred the norm and mainstream in Egypt and in Iraq, in Syria, in Lebanon, in Yemen? If we suggest. This is the concern I have. If you give someone like Steve Laws a platform where he can actually go publicly and say, you know, whatever he says, out of every. Let's assume that out of every 100,000 people in this country, there is going to be two or five who are very desperate. They have a serious sense of grievance, you know, poverty or whatever it is, and they decide, you know what? Yes, this guy's right. If we get rid of all those folks, we're going to. I'm going to be better off.

[B]

This episode is brought to you by Ledger, the most trusted Bitcoin hardware wallet. Now, if you're serious about protecting your bitcoin, Ledger has the solution you need. Their hardware wallet gives you complete control over your private keys, ensuring that your bitcoin stays safe from hacks, phishing and malware. And I've been a customer of there since 2017. Love the product. Use it for my Bitcoin. I use it with my Castle multisig for protecting the football club's Bitcoin too. Now, with Ledger's sleek, easy to use devices and the Ledger Live app, managing your Bitcoin has never been more secure or convenient. And whether you are a longtime holder or new to the world of bitcoin, Ledger makes it simple to keep your assets protected. So if you want to find out more, please do head over to Ledger.com and and secure your Bitcoin today. That is Ledger.com, which is L E D G-E R.com, that is Ledger.com when you talk about the Middle east, the countries there where people hate the Jews and you say Nazism exists and lives, these opinions Formed out of the conflict between Israel and its neighboring countries.

[A]

No, it was long before Israel existed. That's the challenge. Nazism, you know, this kind, this, this sort of pure, you know, unforgiving Jew hatred existed long before Israel existed. And that's the challenge I have. You know, we live now in 2026. And if we are suggesting that if you debate bad ideas, bad ideas go away, then why is communism in the US spreading? Why socialism in the UK still, you know, like.

[B]

But, but what is your alternative?

[A]

My alternative is there needs to be a framework. There needs to be a framework where we say, right, we can discuss pretty much everything except for xyz.

[B]

So you think speech should be policed and ideas should be policed.

[A]

They should not be policed. But nothing should be absolute. Like, we should never have absolute free speech in the sense of, you know, if someone says, I want to deport everyone who's non white, then that should be, in my view, treated as Nazism because that's dangerous. And if this actually spreads, we're going to have a civil war. As you and I have agreed.

[B]

Of course. But it's a slippery, Like, I. Look, I'm not a free speech absolutist. My, my red line is that incitement to violence, and it must be a high bar. I mean, if you tell someone to go and murder somebody and they do, I think you've incited violence. I don't think that is free speech. But I think, I don't believe in the idea of suppressing Steve Laws. I just, I don't, I don't think it will work.

[A]

Yes, but sometimes we also have to recognize that incitement to violence does not have to be 100% direct. It doesn't have to be like, go and kill Jews. But if I go to someone and say, you know, the reason you're struggling is because Jews have done X, Y, Z, and we need to get rid of Jews and, and make sure they leave this country. And then you're gonna have one maniac who decides, okay, I'm going to take things into my own hands and just goes, you know, goes ahead and just does it. Do you think that's the threat that we're facing?

[B]

Oh, no, I understand the point, but do you think suppressing the speech would stop that person?

[A]

Yes. And I'll tell you why. If you look at the uee, if you have someone like Steve Lawes who says what he says, he is going to be immediately deported or put in prison for a very long time.

[B]

If he says what if he says.

[A]

Stuff like I should get rid of every, you know, brown person or I should get rid of, you know, we should get rid of black people in this country. We should.

[B]

What if in that country he said we should get rid of every Jew or we should get rid of the Christians or the white people?

[A]

I believe it's the same.

[B]

Is it the same crime in uae?

[A]

Yes, yes, the uae. I'll tell you something very interesting, actually. I haven't discussed this before. One of the most prominent former officials in the UAE made an anti Semitic tweet. I took this tweet and I shared it with a contact in the UAE government. They made him. They forced him to remove that tweet. He deleted that tweet himself. And I'm telling you, I'm talking about someone who's well known globally, a former official.

[B]

Yeah, but as an official.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

You can enforce that. You can, you can. I guess you can police speech in some way as a company. You can say what is acceptable to be.

[A]

No, he's a former official. He's now a civilian. So, you know, he's now completely free to say whatever he wants. But that's not just him. What I'm talking about is the uae, for example, takes. Takes the view that any kind of hatred is unacceptable. So if you say we want to get rid of the Christians, that's unacceptable.

[B]

What about blasphemy laws?

[A]

I don't believe in these. I don't believe in these. And I think this is actually very dangerous. Once you start going into sort of, you know, oh, Islam is bad, or Judaism is bad. I'm completely fine with anyone saying to me, look, you're Jewish. I believe that Judaism is a terrible religion. I'll be like, yeah, fine. Or makes fun of it. That's completely fine.

[B]

Yeah. It feels like we're drawing different red lines in different areas.

[A]

Has to come with red lines.

[B]

Sure, sure. But with burning the Quran would be okay. But for Steve Laws to be saying he would prefer to live in a country if he was in charge, he would prefer to live in a country where there was no brown people. That. That is a red line. That is. You believe. Is that not even covered by the hate speech laws in our country anyway.

[A]

It is, it is. He's actually in serious trouble. He is in serious trouble with the, with, you know, with the law.

[B]

So what, what we know or you believe he may be because.

[A]

No, no, I believe he is. I. I know he is. I know he is. Yeah. I don't believe he is. I, I Think he mentioned something in, in a tweet that said, you know, he's basically got, you know, some sort of, I don't know, case, you know, in court or something like this. I'm pretty sure I saw this. But the thing is.

[B]

But does this not stop the discussion regarding demographic replacement? So, for example, do you believe it is right to debate the idea that currently by 2050 to 2060, white people would be a minority in this country?

[A]

No, I believe this should be discussed. I discuss it myself. I'm a brown person and I discuss it myself for a number of reasons. So I'm not sure if you've seen the Prime Minister recently saying it's. It's British to be diverse. You know, he said it like with such. Yes, yes. And I believe this is complete nonsense because if you look at, you know, 1950s and 1960s, Britain was overwhelmingly white. You know, we're talking about almost 98% or 99% white. So was Britain not British back then? I mean, you know, the generation of my children's great granddad, he fought the Nazis. He was, you know, as British as it gets. An Englishman. And he fought the Nazis. Was he not British when he fought the Nazis in the 1940s when Britain was overwhelmingly white?

[B]

So what's the line that a Steve Laws would have to be able to walk to have that conversation to say demographic replacement is real. By 2050-2060, white people may become a minority in the country. He himself doesn't want to see that happening.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Because of that, he would have certain opinions about what the country needs to do to ensure that.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

What is the. Because we're now policing. What are the acceptable things that he can say as a politician? So we would be saying it's acceptable of him to say we need policies to restrict immigration to ensure that white people make a majority. But some people are talking about re immigration as an important topic.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

So reimmigration is about which policies? Is it those who've committed crimes? Is it those who don't have a visa, those who've arrived in the last five years? Where's the line of acceptable policy in this? Steve goes to the very end and Steve says, I would just get rid of everybody. But isn't he just drawing a different line on the list of policies that you could do?

[A]

I think where we draw the line should be we can discuss policies, we can discuss ideas, but to sort of victimize or target a specific group of people the way he does, that's where he draw the line. Because I can discuss the idea of sort of demographic replacement, which is, you know, is a serious concern. When you're looking at, again, 1950s, almost 99% white, and you look today and it's almost 75%, that's such a huge change in a few decades.

[B]

But isn't any number of policies always victimizing a particular group in that, okay, we can stop immigration, we could remove foreign criminals from our prisons and deport them, but if we deport anyone who arrived in the last five years from another country, aren't we victimizing groups there?

[A]

So I think the challenge is if you deport everyone, for example, you know, if you talk about this, it's in my view, becomes you're picking on certain groups of people, you know, the way he does and the way he does it. It's not like, you know, let's deport people who arrived in this country, you know, over the past five years. He, he, he specifically focuses on skin color, which is specifically, you know, the idea of ethnicity is the main challenge. This is where it crosses the line. So, again, I actually think it's a.

[B]

Bit more nuanced than that, and it's a bit more cultural because Andrew Gold made the example, and I can't remember exactly. It was something like if you had a grandparent who was 30% Spanish and another one who was like 40% Swedish, and Steve was like, oh, no, they would be fine. And he was like, well, why? He's like, well, you know, culturally we're very similar, but, like Albanians who are also white, I would have rid of those. So I think it is all brown people and then specific white cultures. He's picking, but he's like, picking and choosing based on what he likes.

[A]

That's sort of like, you know, the definition of Aryan race. You know, the Aryan race. The Aryan race, you know, and again, this is where it gets challenging. So you can discuss immigration policies, you can discuss, you know, so, for example, where I live, I don't mention this publicly a lot, but I'm actually pretty much the only. Actually, we have two brown people where I live.

[B]

Okay, two.

[A]

That's it. So. And I have no issues whatsoever, you know, and I've seen. I've seen articles in the BBC and elsewhere saying, you know, that basically the countryside is racist because, you know, the countryside, you don't have.

[B]

I don't think it is. I think the cities and towns are racist. Where there is high. Where there is a high mix of different demographics.

[A]

I think, you know, the idea of sort of the Balkanization I have a serious issue with this. And I said, you know, one policy I, I would suggest, which would actually go. A lot of people see it as, you know, extreme, is to get rid of bubbles. You know, the bubbles and the concentrations where, you know, you have policies, you have policies like this, I think in, in Sweden or, or Denmark, where you look at, if there is one neighborhood here, and this neighborhood is, let's say, 50% unemployed, if we get a certain kind of crime like FGM or, you know, domestic abuse against women, and it's above, you know, 10% or 12% or whatever it is, then we have a cultural issue in this bubble and we need to dismantle this bubble. And that's what they have. Again, I can't remember whether it was Sweden or Denmark.

[B]

Do you know what Milton Friedman said about immigration? It was really interesting. He said, I'll get the dates wrong, but back saying, I don't know, 1925 in America.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And anyone listening can correct me on the year, but say it was 1925. America had pretty much open immigration. Anyone could come. Yes, everyone was happy with it. It's cool, you can come, no problem at all. And now they have less open immigration. Everyone's angry with it. And he said, the difference is now you have the welfare state. He said, you can basically choose. You can either have open immigration or a welfare state, but you can't have the two because the welfare state will attract people from other cultures, countries which doesn't have it towards that. And that's what causes the problem in society. And that immigration can work perfectly well with no welfare state.

[A]

Yes. I mean, it's a very interesting point of view, but I think the reason immigration has gone really badly in the UK is because unlike the US, we don't have the constitution. Back then in the 1950s, someone could move from Egypt and go to the US and become an American. And I believe in the Constitution. Now I'm an American, I believe in the Constitution, I believe in this country, and that's it. You're American. Because the Constitution is sort of their own Bible in a way. In Britain, we decided to do mass immigration and at the very same time reject organized religion. So organized religion became something horrific. You know, like Tony Blair would never mention that he's, you know, a Christian, you know, when he was actually in politics, because people would look at him like, oh, you know, this guy goes to church, you know, what is he?

[B]

You know, Also it's not very Christian to go and bomb another country and kill a million people.

[A]

But regardless of what, what his policies were, like, he believes he's a Christian. You know, he would go to church and all that stuff, but he wouldn't mention it because it's unpopular. Like, you know, people would not elect someone who's religious or someone who believes in God. You know, they view this as, like, you know, like you're against science, you're against, you know, modernity, you're against progressiveness. So we got rid of basically the values or the foundations of this country, which is Christianity, you know, national identity. And we did mass immigration. And the people who came to Britain, we did not expect them to sort of sign up for any kind of national identity. We just didn't. Yeah, we just didn't. Like, we didn't like, you can come from Turkey and you believe, you know, that Britain is horrible. You know, we have Ala Abdel Fattah who came from Egypt, and he believes that, you know, London should be set on fire and whatever it is. And he's a British citizen, you know, like, he's never been to Britain in a way. Like, he's never actually lived in this country. He never paid tax, he never got married here, he never went to school here. You know, his wife is not English or British.

[B]

And he's almost certainly costing the state money right now.

[A]

Yes. But he's just been given a passport because his mom was born here when her mom was studying in London. So we just gave his mom a passport. He was like, oh, you're born in London, here's a passport. And now every child you have can have it. Yeah.

[B]

And it's funny because in other parts of society, run a company, somebody wants to join it, you do an interview.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Qualification, experience, matter. But you're going to make a decision on whether there's a cultural fit as well. And you will reject some. Like Steve Laws would probably get rejected in a lot of large companies because they don't think he's a cultural fit. And in your own home, you get to choose who comes into your house. Even if you own a restaurant or a nightclub, you get to reject people. But as a country, we don't seem to have done the same thing.

[A]

Well, it's absolutely unbelievable because even Egypt is doing immigration in a better way. So if you are someone, let's say my mom's best friend was actually a Palestinian and she pretty much lived her entire life in Egypt. Her family moved to Egypt when she was like four and she went to school with my mom. I'm talking about the seventies and all that. Stuff. And she got Egyptian citizenship in her, like, late 50s after she married an Egyptian man and she was with him for like five or ten years and then she got it. So, you know, there are things that we need to have a framework that actually says we have values and you need to sign up for these values. As someone who went through that process, I can tell you there were no checks whatsoever. Like, no one goes and checks, you know, Does Khaled believe that Britain is a. Is a good country? Does he hate it? Does he, you know, does he. Like, who is he?

[B]

I mean, we, we literally let people come and live here who hate this country.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We let people come here who want this country to become an Islamic country.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And I think the religious, the religious point is really important. I was having a look into this. Like, for example, in Pakistan, you can only become. I'm not sure it's president or prime minister, but if they have both, tell me if I've got this wrong. But you can only do it if you are a Muslim. And they only allow 10 seats for minority religions within the parliament.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Whereas within our country, we allow anyone to come in, anyone with holds in any views, anyone holding any views can run for local office, can run for an MP and can become prime minister. And I find that really interesting because religion sets the base laws of a country. We are still a Christian country. Our base laws are Christian and Islamic countries have base laws which are based on. As kind of Islamic rules.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And. And they don't. There are contradictions between those laws. And so if you allow a certain religion to grow significantly within a country, you're going to have pressure on changing the laws. So. So, for example, cousin marriage would be the obvious example.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But, but it could go more to the extreme with that. And that's what I find really unusual because there's an incredible amount of history that has shown that with large dominant competing religions, that leads to warfare, it leads to violence, it leads to, I don't know, sectarianism. We've seen it in Northern Ireland between Catholics and Protestants. I mean, Lebanon's an absolute shit show.

[A]

Yeah. It just doesn't work. I mean, the Pope said it works. He said Lebanon is a great example of multiculturalism when he actually visits. And that's the Pope.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And this, this, this really shows you how terrible things are.

[B]

Maybe in the west there's a small window bubble where these things did work. Maybe there was a period of time in Lebanon when it did work and there's a period of time in the UK when it did work. But ultimately the trajectory is to sectarianism. And look, I've been to Lebanon and it is not in good shape.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I mean, the government's stolen all the money, the infrastructure doesn't work, they don't have power.

[A]

Yes. And it's one of the most beautiful countries you can ever imagine. It's.

[B]

It's beautiful country, beautiful women.

[A]

Oh, yeah.

[B]

Amazing food and just cool people. Yes, yes, the Lebanese are incredible. But there's also a large, large and accepted terrorist organization.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And there is significant amounts of poverty outside of Beirut, like just terrible amounts of poverty. And then there are like those 10, 20 billionaires who stole all the money.

[A]

Yes, yes, yes. The challenge is, I think we're doing everything the wrong way in Britain, although we actually should know better because, you know, Britain has a proud history, you know, the empire, one of the most successful sort of. I think Britain was actually one of the most successful experiments in human history, if you ask me. You know, extremely stable. Like, you know, if you look at British history, you're going to find that before Brexit, whether, you know what, regardless of, you know, how anyone feels about Brexit, it did sort of start a process of instability, you know, at least political instability. But before Brexit, we were extremely stable. You know, like, you know, this country did not have wars, this country did not have invasions, you know, didn't have, you know, sort of any major, you know, event or development like the Middle east, for example. But the thing is, wherever you look, you're going to find that we have decided to opt for or go for the most destructive way or the most destructive mindset. So, for example, if you look at, you know, the entire concept of religion, we have decided that it's racist to ask about religion or to sort of wonder if someone is doing something because it's part of the religion. We decided that beliefs do not matter. You know, I'm going to treat you as my equal in every way.

[B]

A conversation can be racist just because it examines.

[A]

Yes, examiner, exactly. Yes, exactly. So if you say, you know, oh, did. So I have a really serious question. For example, during, you know, the first wave of protests after the Hamas attack in Israel October 7, we had a man who is linked to Hezbol Tahrir, which is, again, designated terrorist organization now. It hadn't been, you know, back then. It wasn't. And he stood in the middle of London and he said, jihad, Allahu Akbar. Jihad, you know, jihad. And then the cps, the Crown Prosecution Service, basically, and the Police said that they had specialist officers who examined the footage of this man calling for jihad and they decided that he was not calling for jihad, he was calling for internal strife or internal struggle. Because jihad can be two things. Like, look, you know, you're sort of, you want to have sex, so they bottled it. And you have sort of the jihad within yourself to resist that urge to have sex.

[B]

Sure, but they bottled it.

[A]

Right, but who is the specialist officer? They said we had specialist officers who examined this footage and decided that this man was not calling for terrorism.

[B]

I'm going to assume he was Muslim.

[A]

That's the, that's the key question. Was he Muslim?

[B]

Oh, you don't know?

[A]

No, I don't know. Okay, so that's the question I'm asking. Because they did not reveal it. That's the challenge.

[B]

But it could also just be somebody who, you know, who's weak or nervous or works in a police force that has been accused of being institutionally racist. It's just like, I don't want to.

[A]

Cause this, but my, my own personal experience. And I'm going to tell you about my own personal experience because I've worked in different institutions in the private sector and also, you know, with, with, you know, different government organizations. The people responsible for viewing footage in Arabic, footage that is linked to, you know, again, you know, Islam and all that stuff, are usually people who come from a Muslim background.

[B]

Yes, because he understand.

[A]

Or an Arabic speaking background. Exactly.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So if you work, you know, for counterterrorism, please. And your job is to view footage, you know, in Arabic, it makes sense to hire people like me.

[B]

But. But, yes, but you're an anomaly as you've converted.

[A]

Yes, exactly. So that I had this, I had this in many occasions where I would be working with a theme of Arabic speakers, you know, some from Iraq, some from Syria, some from, you know, Egypt, whatever. And we would view a case where someone is saying something anti Semitic, but everyone sitting around the table who do not recognize Israel's right to exist, and they're the ones who are meant to keep us safe, they decide this is not anti Semitic. But because I'm the only Arabic speaking Jew I can like, it's anti Semitic.

[B]

Okay, so you're saying within our, within our institutions.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We have people who are deciding whether something is criminal, who hold a bias to defend.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Their own religion.

[A]

Exactly.

[B]

Because they are anti Semitic themselves.

[A]

Because they harbor these views themselves.

[B]

Right.

[A]

That is precisely the challenge we're facing.

[B]

Okay. That's a big problem.

[A]

It's a massive Problem. And the problem is no one is willing to face this.

[B]

And it's funny because they will arrest a granny for praying outside an abortion clinic.

[A]

Yes. And no one is willing to even. To even. To even go into this territory because it's extremely challenging.

[B]

I think Rupert Lowe would be.

[A]

Yes. But he's, you know, he's. He's.

[B]

Single seat again.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Why do you think this has happened at the political level?

[A]

I'm going to tell you something that I got to study. I think this is an excellent question. I read a study a few years ago. Why do women, like, when they see a woman getting sexually assaulted or raped, they decide to blame the woman. You go like, oh, well, you know, you were a bit sort of casual with this person.

[B]

They do. They blame them. There's a percentage you blame.

[A]

Oh, yes. Oh, absolutely. Yes, there is. There is a huge percentage of women, at least in the Middle east, who blame women. There is definitely a percentage of women also, you know, in the west who do, but it's a much smaller percentage. And the study went through this and basically came to the conclusion that it makes you feel safe because you do the same. Exactly. If I can say to you, you know, if a woman says to a woman, you were raped because you were dressed in a certain way, that makes me feel safe. If I don't dress like you, I'm going to be safe. This is essentially the mindset we have here. You know, there are issues that we have decided not to even discuss because it makes us feel safe. It makes us feel like those people are not bad people.

[B]

See, I think there's a couple of things going on. Myself, I have a deep distrust of government, and it's. I'm losing every strand of trust I have very, very quickly. I'm very. I see government very clearly now. My friend Michael Malice, who was sat there, he said to me, once you see government as competing gangs fighting for territory, it's very easy to see the games they play.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And our. All our politicians operate under every single politician. Doesn't matter which party you're from. Has the same two primary objectives. Primary objective is to win power, and the second objective is to defend your power. And what happens is the incentives are such that when you have control of creating the rules and the laws, and we have the ability, and that's not just a rights level, but that's at a business level or a personal level. When you have the ability to do that and you have control of the creation of money, you will naturally create laws and rules and Distribute money to the special interest groups that will vote for you. Yes, that just naturally happens and it's why politics is so corrosive right now. And so if the Muslim vote tends to trend towards voting for the Labour Party, you're going to give special privileges to those which can be welfare, which can be blasphemy laws, which can be the allowance of more mosques. You're going to give all the religious freedom to that group to ensure that group keeps voting for you because there are special interests for you.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And so that creates. That there are perverse incentives there. But secondly, it creates a flywheel because what happens is, is the accumulation of power starts to happen within that community and that view that that community will then vote for that community. So you get a flywheel that expands the protection of that religion whilst degrading the protection of, say, Christianity or other religions. And it just. That's how we get these perverse incentives. I see it very clearly. But the solutions to this at a political level, a lot of people in this country haven't got the stomach for it. Doesn't mean we shouldn't look at it, but they don't have the stomach for it.

[A]

Yes, I completely agree with you. And the challenge is, there is also, if you've been to Westminster and sort of, you know, went to Parliament and dealt with parliamentarians and, you know, state officials, you're going to sort of realize that there is something else actually a lot worse going on there. It's essentially a game of survival. So if you go and you meet an official, let's say a government minister, and this government minister has his own staff and he's meeting you because he thinks, oh, you know, Khaled is, you know, he's an expert on the Middle east, he knows, blah, blah, blah, his staff will start to play a game of survival with you. So they will try to basically gatekeep to make sure that, you know, this guy doesn't come into their territory and sort of, you know, gets given a job and you end up with survival games across all levels. So the staff of the MPs, the staff of the government ministers, everyone is looking out for themselves because it's. These are extremely rare opportunities, you know, to be working with a state official. So it's not about who's best for the country or who can actually offer the best sort of ideas or solutions or what? No, no, no, it's not that. It's about who can survive here. So, you know, everyone gets gatekeeps and the officials themselves and the MPs do the same. And it's essentially a game of survival. So I always say in Westminster, it's almost 90% trying to backstab others or avoid being backstabbed by others, and 10% actually doing the job.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Which essentially ends up with a country that no one is running this country. That's the challenge. No one is running this country.

[B]

No. This is the deep state Liz Truss talks about.

[A]

It's not even the deep state, because the deep state suggests that there is some sort of intention to impose certain views or whatever it is, but we're just heading in one direction that no one knows any different. Like, you know, everyone knows that this is how we've been doing things for the past 10 years, and we're going to continue doing things the same way for the next 10 or 20 years and it's going to be, you know, somebody else's problem when I'm done, basically.

[B]

Okay, so what do you do about it?

[A]

I think what you do about this is you dismantle the entire system. You seriously dismantle the entire system. Yeah, exactly, yeah. What you need to do is you need someone to say, look, Parliament has the authority. If we have a minister who decides that Allah Abdel Fattah needs to go, he goes, he just writes a little piece of paper and this guy goes, it's as simple as this.

[B]

So we have to get rid of the ECHR 100%.

[A]

100%. It has no role to play in the future of Britain.

[B]

Because it was quite funny because a lot of people saying, why don't we just kick this guy out? Why don't we just not let him in? It was actually just. We couldn't legally. It was just procedural. Right. He just. He had the right. He applied.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And what we're actually saying is we need someone who have the ability to quite easily go, we don't want him in our country.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

He's never lived here, never paid tax.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

You know, he's hold views which are racist, homophobic, misogynistic, anti British, anti British state. You can't come. Why couldn't he stay in Egypt? Was it dangerous for him?

[A]

I mean, he was jailed in Egypt.

[B]

You know, but he was pardoned. But was he pardoned on the condition he went to another country?

[A]

No. He could have stayed.

[B]

Would he be. Would he have been under any risk there?

[A]

Potentially, yes, but it's not my problem. The problem is, you know, when people look at this, it's just like, look, there are so many people who are being persecuted globally you know, we can try to help in certain cases, you know, but these certain cases also need to be mutually beneficial.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So if we're going to rescue, for example, you know, a Christian guy who's being murdered, you know, by terrorists in Afghanistan, then this guy, you know, should be at least sort of, you know, a good contribution to this country. At least, you know, there are certain basics. But if there are 10 people, you know, sort of struggling and we have a place for one person, we cannot decide we're going to have to help those 10 people. The case of Al Abdul Fattah is really exceptional because you have the way I imagine it, imagine this room, and you've got the entire British state in this room. And ala Abu Fattah walks into the room, there is a passport for him on the table. He picks it up, all of them are sort of fighting, you know, with each other and shouting and, you know, and saying, we don't want you in this room, whatever it is. And he just walks in, gets the passport and goes home. That's exactly what happened. Because we have a law that basically gave him the right to have this passport even without any checks.

[B]

We are so dysfunctional as a government.

[A]

Exactly. So the entire government, the Prime Minister himself, is sat in a room and, ah, we don't want him. And he just walks in, takes the passport and goes, cheers, guys. Yeah. That is literally what happened. And no one can do anything about this.

[B]

Where do I sign up for my welfare?

[A]

Yes. However, we need to also mention something else. That the Home Secretary can actually revoke his citizenship at this stage.

[B]

Is that true?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But does it have.

[A]

He has no authority.

[B]

Can it only happen once he's here. So could they have rejected him before he got here?

[A]

I don't think so. No. Legally, as far as I know. Again, I'm not a legal expert, but as far as I know, you know, working in these cases, I'm gonna actually mention another example. But regardless of whatever it is, she can now she has the authority to reject him, you know, to revoke his citizenship because he's basically, you know, an issue for us. You know, that's the simplest way when it comes to national security and whatever. But they will never do this because this will be a diplomatic and international embarrassment that is somehow unprecedented. There has never been a country that has been yelling and screaming about a man saying he's a great human rights activist. Give him to us, you know, come on, release him, you dictator, you. Blah, blah, blah. Just sort of losing it and, you know, getting really Serious and saying it's a top priority, and then says, oh, we're actually going to give him back. Well, and it's.

[B]

But it's so embarrassing for the state because I think within hours everyone had searched this guy's social media and said, oh, look at all this shit he's saying. And it's. And when Tony, not Tony Blair, when Keir Starmer says, oh, well, I wasn't aware this was a failure, like, of my advisors. Like, come on, have you, have you sacked those advisors?

[A]

The Egyptians have said. Explicitly. And I wrote this. The Egyptians have. They came.

[B]

They told him.

[A]

They came up with the receipts.

[B]

Yeah, they told him this whole bullshit.

[A]

Yes. But here's the challenge. So I'm going to mention another case that's very relevant to this. When I was, you know, during, you know, Priti Patel's time as Home Secretary, she granted asylum to a man who came to the UK and he is one of the most well known broadcasters and YouTubers for the Muslim Brotherhood. This guy, you know, has his photos with Hamas, you know, the leadership of Hamas, blah, blah, blah. So I prepared the dossier of, you know, sort of criminal offenses under the counterterrorism law and I sent the entire dossier to Priti Patel and I said, look, here are the offenses this guy committed, which basically disqualify him from even gaining entry to Britain. She looked at the dossier. Well, her office did. She responded to me. But I'm, you know, I'm not sure whether she even looked at this. I know now that she did afterwards. But I got the response that because of, due to sort of privacy laws that we have, basically she cannot discuss the case with me. And that's sort of an off the shelf response that she gave. Oh, we appreciate blah, blah, blah. We reject anti Semitism. We are blah. You know, it's the same template and I'm going to tell you why. It's the same template that the Home Office uses. That was 2019. This guy, you know, fast forward, actually 2021, sorry, fast forward to October 7th and this guy says after the Hamas terrorist attack that this is the happiest day of his life. He's never been happier. He's so thrilled. Especially because Hamas took hostages and that means that Israel will not be able to respond in Gaza. So I wrote to again the Home Office and all of my contacts there and I said, what are you playing at? I warned you two years ago that this guy is a terrorist. And now you see this. Then he got deported eventually, you know, in November 2020.

[B]

So they were able to eventually.

[A]

Yes, exactly. The Home Secretary was able to do it after two years of giving this guy, granting him a kind of visa where he worked from London with the rest of the Muslim Brotherhood and established a media base for the Muslim Brotherhood from London for two years. Now, forget about this. I wrote to the Home Secretary, you know, recently, a couple of months ago, about someone else. I got the same response. We reject blah, blah, blah and hatred in its all forms, blah, blah, blah. It's the same template that has been used, but due to privacy laws, we cannot discuss this person's case with you. So we have given those people a privilege and a right. Although they're not British, they are harmful to this country, they hate this country, they despise this country, and they're actually linked to terrorists and anyone can see it. And we can't even discuss their case.

[B]

So on this podcast, you are definitely hearing me talk about bitcoin a lot. Well, why? We live in a really strange time with governments driving inflation with their reckless spending and endless money printing. There is a way out of this. There is a way to protect your money, and that is by stacking bitcoin. I've made loads of shows about bitcoin. You can go and research this, you can go and read the books, but the truth is, it is the hardest money ever created. If you are interested in protecting your financial future, it's time for you to get on the bitcoin train. I have. I've been stacking bitcoin personally and through my businesses since 2017. It's protected me, it's secured my family's future, and it also strengthens all of my businesses. So if you want to start stacking bitcoin, where do you do it? Well, for me, it's with Gemini. They're a fully licensed, full reserve exchange and custodian. So they give you a secure way for you to buy and own your bitcoin. There's no risks and no funny business. So if you're serious about stacking bitcoin the right way, head over to gemini.com, which is g e m I n I dot com. So if you were writing the new immigration laws for this country, how would you structure them? I would regards to reducing the threat of Islam in this country.

[A]

I would make ministers personally responsible for every case they sign off. Okay, so if you are a minister, you have a case, and this case is case, you make the decision, does he go in, does he come in or do we leave him? Basically, if you sign off.

[B]

Would you prefer people coming to the country from specific countries?

[A]

Yes, 100%. Not entirely. I would say there are cases, again, where, you know, if you look at Egypt, for example, if you look at, you know, Afghanistan, we have people in Afghanistan that worked with, you know, the British army, you know, people who are serious people who really believe in, you know, the values of this country. Again, it's rare. It's not, you know, it's not. It's not, you know, the common thing.

[B]

But that would require probably temporary citizenship and a citizenship test and ensuring that person is.

[A]

Yes. And again, the ministers sign off personally, so I would. I would designate different countries into, you know, risk categories.

[B]

Bit like Trump did.

[A]

Yes, in a way. Exactly. Yes. So if someone wants to come from Germany, you know, it's not. It's not a big deal, is it? Someone wants to come from the U.S. in most cases, it's not a big deal. But if someone wants to come from Pakistan, if someone wants to come from Egypt, if someone wants to come from Yemen, then this requires, again, an increased level of scrutiny of investigations that actually meets the risk level.

[B]

How big a problem do we have with the more extreme elements of Islam in this country, the extremists who may be plotting or preparing acts of terrorism within this country? Is it still a significant and large problem?

[A]

100%.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

I think, you know, even if you read, you know, the assessments that we get almost every year now from our security services, you know, Islamist extremism is still the main thing because still the main threat.

[B]

We monitor something is this. Something ridiculous, like 40,000 people.

[A]

Yeah. Those are actually the people on the list, you know, of basically being watched, being monitored almost 24 7.

[B]

But if you're on the list, you almost already at a point where you've done something, which means you are really, you. You've done something which. How do I put this? I'm trying to put it in the best way possible. If you've been flagged.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

You probably don't identify with the values of this country.

[A]

Most likely. Yes. So basically, you've either sort of looked up how to make a bomb.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And you're an extremist, or you go to a mosque and you listen to a certain preacher who tells you, this is amazing, basically.

[B]

And so those people we should just be deporting already.

[A]

100%. Yes. Now, there is another issue, actually. Again, talking about this. If you look at the mosques, how mosques responded to the October 7 attack in Israel, you're going to find that it was the Norm that you would see, you know, an imam in the mosque, you know, giving the Friday a prayer sermon, and he would say, you know, God, sort of help the Palestinian warriors fighting for the nation, the Ummah. So those are people who are essentially praying for Hamas to win and destroy Israel, basically.

[B]

And that itself is extremism. And those mosques perhaps should be closed 100%.

[A]

We don't do this. Again, we don't do this in Britain.

[B]

And that is fear of.

[A]

I think it's number one. They are afraid. Security services are really frightened and terrified of the prospect that those people would go underground. Okay, so if you close a mosque, you know, the sort of extremist elements would go completely under the ground, which means they are untouchable. We can't really find them, which means more terrorist attacks. So let them operate. We can listen in, we can keep an eye on them and see what's happening. But again, do you agree with that as a strategy? No, I don't. No, I don't. There will be bloodshed at some point, because what if the extremism becomes mainstream, which it has within the Muslim community, sadly, because if you look at the number of mosques who actually condemned terrorism, that's an issue. It's very, very, very, very few. I can't name any, to be honest. So that's the challenge, because you're allowing this to be like, okay, we're letting you do your thing. Then they feel like, well, it's just okay, isn't it?

[B]

Why did you reject Islam? Did you reject Islam itself before you converted or did you come, like, what was your process?

[A]

So it's very interesting actually, because I was never truly a Muslim. I was never truly a practicing Muslim. I grew up again, middle class family. Yes, My mom and dad prayed, you know, they're Muslim, whatever. And you know, at a certain point when I was a child, I fasted for Ramadan and all that stuff. But as I was, you know, sort of, you know, in my teenage years, I just decided, I just don't want to do this. You know, I want a more liberal life. You know, I was sort of spending my time with Americans a lot, you know, drinking, you know, had a girlfriend. So I just felt like there is more to life. Yes, exactly. There is a lot more to life than sort of, you know, you're going to go to hell if you have a drink. You're going to go to hell if you masturbate. You're going to go to hell if you have sex. I don't want that, you know, that was my decision. Again, I respect, you know, Muslims like the Emiratis, you know, moderate Muslims. I have nothing against them. And I actually believe that Islam is the most misunderstood religion, but it is mostly misunderstood by its own followers.

[B]

Interesting.

[A]

This is my view of Islam. They focus on the stuff that is extremely political because over the past 70 years or whatever, they decided to make it a political movement, a pan Arabist political movement, rather than just a religion like Christianity developed and everything else. So that's, you know, that was. That was. And I fell in love in Judaism, you know, once I realized, well, I'm not really a Muslim anymore, I'm not calling myself a Muslim, you know, I started learning about Christianity, Judaism, and I just felt Judaism really is where my heart is in a way. So. Yeah.

[B]

And did you face, what challenges have you faced converting to Judaism because you don't look like a traditional Jew?

[A]

It's actually, it's brilliant because if you go to Israel, I'm not sure if you've been to Israel.

[B]

I've not been. No, I've not.

[A]

Yes, there is no such thing as someone who looks like a traditional Jew. You know what I mean? No, I know what you mean. Yes, I know what you mean. I'm not saying what you're saying is.

[B]

Wrong, but if I had to, if I've never met you and I had to guess your religion, I'd probably pick that you were a Muslim before you were a Jew.

[A]

It's fascinating because, you know, the Jewish world itself is really very interesting. You're going to see a lot of people who look very much like me. I have, you know, a few friends of mine, you know, born Jewish, everything. But they're Mizrahi Jews. Mizrahi Jews, which means, you know, Jews who come from Egypt, who come from Iraq, you know, and they look, you know, not different to me at all. But I think in the UK we're used to, you know, the more sort of Ashkenazi Jews, you know, in the traditional sense. But I think it's. I mean, the question is, I think the challenges of converting to Judaism is, number one, Judaism is essentially banned in Egypt. And by banned, I mean, there are mosques. We have really serious historic mosques, you know, because Egypt is, you know, has one of the oldest Jewish communities globally. There's only now around, I think, six Jews left in Egypt. But the challenges are. It's virtually impossible. It is seen even the slightest interest in Judaism or even reading a Jewish novel, you know, a novel written by a Jew that could be seen as an indication of espionage. You could be seen as a Mossad agent or an agent through the Jews or whatever it is. So it's virtually impossible, basically. And then when you convert, you know, you become, again, this, you know, ultimate traitor of, you know, Islam, you know, Muslim. And I always get this comment, you sold out Islam. It's like, what do you mean, I sold it? Like, do you mean do you think people get paid to leave Islam? Although actually, there is a concept in Islam where you can pay people to become Muslim.

[B]

What?

[A]

Yeah. So Zakah, which is the charity that you give in Islam, it can be given in certain cases. So it can be given to someone who's a widow, for example, to orphans, to whatever it is. And giving people who just converted to Islam or are considering converting to Islam is legitimate. It's a legitimate way to spend your money to convert people to Islam, basically.

[B]

Would you face any significant risks if you went back to Egypt now?

[A]

Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely.

[B]

Can you basically not go back?

[A]

No, I can't.

[B]

You can't go back.

[A]

Yeah. Yeah. And especially now after, you know, October 7th as well and everything else. And, you know, sort of, you know, working with, you know, Israeli decision makers meeting is really. Decision makers. It's. It's a big no. No. Yeah.

[B]

Where has this left you philosophically with regards to religion? And I say that as a. Somebody raised Catholic, went to church as a kid, have rejected it as an adult, don't I? When I go to church, I don't feel what people feel there. I have no faith. I just. I'm wondering what. What. What is it I'm missing here?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I don't get it. I. I don't have that spiritual part, to me.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

So I asked you, like, what's this done for you philosophically with regards to a world where we have multiple religions.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

That are always in conflict with each other.

[A]

Yes. I think generally I believe in God, but sometimes I feel very resentful of God. Because if you believe in religion, especially Judaism or even Islam, you believe that God, you know, he sees and he knows everything and sometimes. And he can stop everything if he wants to, you know, in a way. But obviously that will be against, you know, sort of the rules of this world because we have our own, you know, free will. That's, you know, one of the challenges. But I feel really resentful of God sometimes when I see things happening that maybe should not be happening, you know, like. Or, you know, things that I cannot really understand, like people getting bombed, you know, people getting essentially murdered, going to Synagogue, especially children, you know, because that's a very serious issue. Sometimes I feel very resentful of God. But I noticed this recently. One of the days when I was really feeling down, I just, you know, I was sort of talking to God and saying, you know, I really despise you. And that was the sort of extreme position I went to. But I still sort of. When you talk to someone, you actually believe they exist. Then I realized, but I still believed that God existed. You know, I might despise him on occasions or resent him on occasions, but I still believe he exists.

[B]

If God could interject on these things once, then surely God should interject on every questionable, moral, violent, unfair scenario. So what is the meaning of life with a God that can interject? Is the meaning of life not. Is it not a test? Have we not always understood it is a test?

[A]

Well, this is the challenge I have, you know, what is the point of the test? That is the question, you know, like, what is the point of the test? And I think this is the limits of questioning. You know, in Judaism and in Islam.

[B]

By the way, do you believe in judgment after death?

[A]

It's. I don't really believe in it. I mean, in Judaism we don't really believe that. You know, this is what we strive towards in a way. You know, like you're going to find most Jews, they don't really talk about the afterlife. In Islam, everything is about the afterlife. You're being told that, you know, the afterlife is sort of, you know, this eternity, but you know, life itself is almost like five minutes in Islam. So what do the Jewish people believe in Judaism? You know, we don't. We also. One of the most beautiful things about Judaism actually, and you know, I think this is relevant is I can look at, you know, for example, my father in law who, you know, passed away recently and he was Christian, like had a Christian background. Christian, European. And I don't believe he's going to hell. You know, that's. We don't believe in that. In Judaism we don't believe, oh, he's going to hell. But in Islam, yes, if someone was even a decent person in life, but he wasn't a Muslim, he's gonna end up in hell.

[B]

So is there no hell with.

[A]

We don't really focus on it. That's the thing, we don't really. The idea is there is. Yes, it's mentioned in the Tanakh. I think it's mentioned once or tw. You know, the idea of Jahannam, which is in Arabic actually the term in Hebrew is also very similar, but again, that's, you know, hell essentially. But it's mentioned extremely rarely. And again, you know, Judaism, it's not the focus, while when you look at Islam, it is the main focus. I was thinking, for example, of something else recently. In Islam there is the concept of the literal translation is torture in the grave. And we are taught, you know, like as even children, that if you are not a good Muslim, you're going to be tortured in your grave. And that for me is one of the most horrific things to teach a child.

[B]

So if you have a misinterpretation of the Quran and you believe you will be tortured in the grave, your misinterpretation could lead you to doing violent things.

[A]

Yes, it's trauma. Yes, absolutely. If you tell a child, for example, that if you do something that is not good, you know, judged by God is not good, and you're dead, you're going to be tortured in the grave by this great massive serpent, you know, snake, and you're going to spend basically almost eternity being tortured in the grave and being resurrected and tortured and killed and then resurrected and tortured and killed, which leads people to think, well, what can I do essentially to be a good Muslim?

[B]

But if there is a hell in Judaism, yes, there will be a judgment that decides whether you end in hell.

[A]

Again, the concept of hell, you know, heaven is really not, you know, like I said, we don't really go to a Christian and say you're going to end up hell, you know.

[B]

Well, some do.

[A]

We. It's extremely rare. It really is. Extremely, extremely rare. I haven't seen any Jew do this, to be honest. Like, you know, it's. It's the focus is this life, you know, lead this life, live this life, you know, as a decent person. And that's all that matters. And there is also another concept, you know, that we have laws for people who are not Jewish that they can lead these lives as meaningfully as, you know, as righteously as a Jewish, you know, so we don't have this discrimination that because you're not a Jew, you're going to really suffer. You know, it doesn't exist. I find this concept of, you know, again, this is where I think, you know, Islam is misunderstood even by its own followers, that they just focus incessantly over this idea of torture and pain and suffering and hell, you know, And I don't think if you look at the Quran, there is mention of this, obviously, you know, quite a bit. But there is also mercy and justice and, you know, Other concepts that they can focus on if they choose to do so, but most don't.

[B]

So that comes down to scholars and interpretations.

[A]

Yes, absolutely. Yes, yes, yes.

[B]

I, I have a level of skepticism with regards to God, but I have a. Despite my skepticism, I have a larger fear of judgment.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I'm right now, I'm currently just started reading Dante's Inferno.

[A]

All right. Yes.

[B]

Have you read it?

[A]

Yes, yes.

[B]

Heavy.

[A]

Yes, yes.

[B]

And somebody said to me, you're having a spiritual awakening. And I was like, what do you mean? They said, because you are starting to question who you are on this planet and the things you do, the impact on others.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And that is a good thing.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But it is a spiritual journey.

[A]

Yeah, 100%. You know, you know the saying, there are no atheists in the trenches, you know, it's. I think that sort of applies to me because if you come from the Middle east and you have seen things that most people in Britain would never see. Like I have seen people getting killed, you know, in the Middle East, I have seen people getting, you know, I mean, killed, as in slaughtering. You know, I've had friends of mine shot. I had friends, you know, I've seen things that most, you know, even if you see like a 90 year old in Britain, you know, they don't really, most of them don't really get to see a lot of the stuff that we see in the Middle East. And I think that gives you sort of a decision, you know, you have to believe in something, otherwise you end up going mad in a way. But I think also it's very interesting because I believe that faith is also why you do things that you would not do otherwise if you didn't have faith. Like now you see when people talk about, are we going to go to war against Russia? And you see a lot of people saying, I wouldn't go to war for Britain. Now part of it is because people no longer have faith.

[B]

Yeah. That draw, that draw to having a faith is. I think it's an interesting one because you, I think you can get lost in life.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

There's like a purpose. But you meant to believe. You're meant to have to work hard, get a job and. But, but in front of us are temptations everywhere. And even micro temptations, which I know. Like for example, with a podcast like this.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

The temptations are, well, sponsorship, incumbents. I should get clicks. Well, how do I get clicks? I can get. I could get Steve Laws on here.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And I'd get 2, 300,000 views and such and such. But am I doing it because I want to talk to Steve Laws, or am I doing it because it's controversial?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Like negative negativity. And controversy sells in my world. Well, if I am of faith, would I do that?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Would I make a better choice?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

It's. That's my draw to it is, is like, I'm 47 now. I'm not sure I always make the best choices. Like, I rant about government, I rant about politicians and their perverse incentives and why the government is so bad. And I'm like, well, am I. Am I the same? I have diverse incentives. I follow them sometimes. Why should I expect better from them than of myself?

[A]

I think this is also something else that you end up realizing with experience.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You sort of. We all talk about, you know, what we would do, how differently I would do things, but once you are in there, once you're in Westminster, once you're meeting MPs, once you're, you know, you're in that cycle, you actually end up pretty much consumed by the same stuff. You end up becoming another person who's just in there with the same mindset.

[B]

With the same everything, same survival.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Instinct.

[A]

Yes. Because you end up realizing that everyone has got a role to play and everyone's got something to serve. You know, like, it's. I'm offering this in exchange for my position. I'm doing this in exchange for a vote. And if you don't offer whatever is being offered by everyone else around you, you're just out. And that's the challenge. And this is where faith comes in. Are you actually willing to make decisions that are, you know, in the immediate and potentially long term, really bad for you when it comes to, you know, making money, when it comes to, you know, having your position, when it comes to all that stuff?

[B]

It's cowardly, really, isn't it? It's a cowardice.

[A]

It is. It is.

[B]

It talks about that in the. I mean, the third. The second chapter of Dante's Inferno.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Talks about the cowards.

[A]

Yes, yes, yes. So here is something else that I have come to know personally and really experience. You're going to realize that, you know, now a lot of people don't talk about Elon Musk and whether, you know, he's doing something right or wrong. Because a lot of people don't talk about Elon Musk. Oh, Elon Musk. Yes. Yes.

[B]

Sorry. Yes.

[A]

No, it's all right. And a lot of people don't talk, you know, within Trump's administration, they don't criticize the president, they don't do something that he wouldn't like. And a lot of NGOs that want access to the president and his staff and his administration would basically issue statements supporting the president and his administration, even if they believe. They believe that they're doing something that's completely useless. And that's because, well, you know, I get money from my donors because I have access to the president. If I don't have access to the president, I'm not going to get money from my donors. So even if I believe he's doing something wrong, I'm still going to praise him. I'm still going to say, this is amazing.

[B]

It's the J.D. vance dilemma.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

If J.D. vance wants to become the president, at what point can he criticize Trump? Because it may be necessary for him to criticize Trump.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

To win votes.

[A]

I think it's the same in our politics now, because also we are facing a serious challenge that they don't face. In the ue, for example, in the ue, they have continuity, you know, they know who's going to be in power in 10 years. In Saudi Arabia, they have a crown prince today who's almost 37. He's, you know, 30, 39. He's, you know, a few years older than me. And we know he's going to be king in 10 years, 20 years, you know, he's going to be there. The same vision is going to be there. Basically, we don't. So in the west, we're very busy fighting over access to politicians. And, you know, the NGOs are fighting over donations and donors and whatever it is. So everyone is fighting for now. What happens now? What do I get now or the next year or the short term? Short term, exactly.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

No one cares about, well, what about your kids and mine?

[B]

I mean, the. We have this such. We have such a large surface area for the state that it's so easy now to grift and corrupt it.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Everything we've seen with the daycare centers in, in America, that is just because the surface area of the state is so big.

[A]

Yes, yes.

[B]

And it's so easy to corrupt it.

[A]

But the problem is also we really fail where it matters. Like, you know, the welfare state was, in my view, essentially created to care for the most vulnerable.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Like, if you have someone who's seriously disabled, no one in Britain would tell you, no, just let them die. No one would say that. But we are failing those people because now we are, you know, now we identify ADHD as a disability. Now we identify whatever it is as, you know, some other. We have expanded the definition of disability to include so many people who were not otherwise identified as disabled. Now, so somebody who's got, you know, who's slightly, you know. Autistic. Slightly autistic would be treated as someone who's, you know, an amputee. You know, there are serious levels and serious issues and they go through the same process.

[B]

And it's unaffordable.

[A]

Exactly.

[B]

And it means we will have less funding for education.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And then education itself becomes corrupted.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Because education is dictated by party.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Whereas I assume in Saudi uae, education is directed towards creating the best people possible to build the country.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Rather than build the party.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We have corruption, corrupted the university system.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We've corrupted the nhs. Everything has been corrupted by politics. The police was corrupted by politics.

[A]

Yes, yes. I mean, the NHS is a really massive mess. Because when you look at the nhs, the NHS has a very specific issue with extremism, by the way.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Because the NHS gets a lot. So during COVID for example, we got almost between 2 to 3,000 doctors from Egypt. Have any of them been vetted when it comes to security, when it comes to terrorism, when it comes to extremism? Almost no.

[B]

And by the way, on that point, what hole does that leave in the Egyptian health service?

[A]

That's another thing.

[B]

I mean, we always talk. It's a really interesting thing when we talk about, well, we need immigration because we need nurses from Nigeria and doctors from Egypt. Just like, well, what privilege do you think we have? It's like when I talk about inflation, I'm an asset holder, right?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I benefit from inflation. I'm against inflation, but I benefit from it. For me to win through inflation, somebody has to lose.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I have greater purchasing power. Other people have lesser purchasing power. I did nothing for that. I did nothing. So what privilege is it that we think we have that we should just be taking health care workers from other countries and not answering the question, well, what's. What does that do to their health service?

[A]

That's very true, actually, because that has been happening in Egypt and it seriously drained, you know, health care system in Egypt. It seriously drained it. It is now talked about in Egypt that Egyptian doctors are leaving because they're not getting paid well. So they end up leaving, but also because there is demand. The UK wants Egyptian doctors. And there is also another issue when it comes to the quality of our services. If someone is being educated in Egypt, where, you know, the education system is really dreadful. They're not the same level as someone who's, you know, been educated in London. And when you sort of inject two or three thousand doctors in the NHS during a few months, then who's going to monitor the quality of the service?

[B]

So is democracy itself a false God?

[A]

I think democracy now in that format where we have it is really terrible. It's not working. It's just not working. It just isn't.

[B]

I mean, in the world that I've been in for the last 10 years, there are many people who hate democracy. It is the tyranny of the, the, well, you say the tyranny of the majority, but with this Labour Party, it wasn't even a majority of the country. Yes, but it creates a tyranny that exists. It corrupts everything it touches. It's disgusting. But what is the alternative? Do we return to a monarchy?

[A]

I mean, in my view, to be honest, a monarchy worked really well, you know, in the ue, it worked really well, you know, in different places. But obviously there is no guarantee you could get a prince who's completely mad and decides, you know, the mad king.

[B]

I'm gonna, you know, we had Cromwell, we can cut their head off.

[A]

Yes, well, it's, I think Britain is really an exceptional case in many ways because we still have a monarchy, we still have, you know, sort of some tradition, but we don't really know who we are anymore.

[B]

Well, we spent centuries proving what works. Now we're proving what doesn't work.

[A]

Yes, precisely. And I really fear for my children's future because now when you look at, when you look at the nhs, you know, my daughter, I don't talk about this publicly. I haven't actually talked about this publicly at all. She's a child, she had major life changing surgery at the age of two and we were on an NHS list for a year. And then she had a doctor who operated on her and he basically did so many things that were wrong, even, you know, administrating the pain. After the massive surgery that was horrific. This guy operated on almost 800 children. And the cases go from horrifically damaging the child to, you know, sort of slightly damaging, you know, or slightly, you know, misconduct basically. And he's a Muslim. I'm not saying that this is relevant, but when he was being investigated, he just fled the country. He headed to the ue.

[B]

How's she doing now? Is she okay?

[A]

Yeah, she's not bad. Yes, but obviously, you know, we look at this and you realize, well, you know, she was on a list Waiting for a whole year.

[B]

I think about. I think about my children a lot.

[A]

Sorry.

[B]

I think about my children a lot in this country. I was listening to. I think his interview with Dominic Cummings the other day that he did with the Spectator, and he was talking about. And a reason a lot of people are leaving this country is it's not for them. It's. They've got to get their children out.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Where is the opportunity?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I feel very similar. Very, very similar at the moment. It's like, what is this country? What does it mean? What does it stand for?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

What is the opportunity? What is the future? And all I see is a government which gets worse every time.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I have no faith in any party anymore. I think we are stupid. I think we breed stupidity. I think government will continue to get in debt. And the thing about the debt and the inflation that bothers me is we. We all know. We all know that the more debt this country has, the more we're stealing from the future of our.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Children.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And if that is the case, then we are cowards because we, as adults. And I just. I'm just doing the collective we. But the collective we are saying, I, as an adult, want stuff now. My children have to pay that for that in the future. What cowards are we. We are meant to, as adults, create a better future for our children.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

The world they're inheriting from us is. Is not better. Significantly worse. But I don't believe that's the case in other countries.

[A]

No, No. I mean, if you go to Saudi Arabia, you're going to see. I was thinking about this actually today, and I wanted to mention this. I think Britain now, as I would describe it, is potentially the place where aspirations go to die.

[B]

Oh, man.

[A]

This is, in my view, you know, because you look at this and you realize, like they were discussing a recent policy that they want. They suggested that anyone who passes their theory test, driving test will have to wait for at least six months because they cannot possibly be ready in a couple of weeks.

[B]

But is that really for their practical test? Is that bullshit? Is it basically because they just haven't got enough testers?

[A]

Yeah, but the point is, why are you sort of putting things along the way to keep, you know, to hold people back? And you look at Saudi Arabia and they're allowing women to drive. They're sort of. You know, if you look at the Saudis, every single Saudi I've ever spoken to, and I've spoken to people who are really well connected in Riyadh, there is this vibe, there is this energy that the country is changing. You know, we're allowing now theaters to open, we're allowing restaurants to, you know, accept anyone. Everyone is getting dressed in a different way. Yes, we are still, you know, we still have our tradition, but there's going to be alcohol being served soon, you know, there's going to be, you know.

[B]

Cinemas soon because it's attracting Westerners from shitholes like this. People are going, I don't want to be here anymore. And there's a lot of people living with Cope, but there's people going, I don't want to live here anymore. Everything is expensive. Yes, but everything's getting worse.

[A]

100%. This is, this. I think this is my main challenge with rec. When I came to Britain, 2016, I could go to a dentist, you know, an NHS dentist, and pay around £60 or whatever it is, and, you know, have my teeth looked at, whatever it is. Now that NHS dentist does not exist for my 3 year old and my 5 year old. It just doesn't exist. There are no more dentists on the nhs, which means I have to pay privately. When I arrived in Britain, you know, around 2018, I was getting paid around 30 to $35,000 pounds a year. My most recent job in the private sector, I was paid 40. So in almost eight years my salary hasn't really shifted.

[B]

Your purchasing power has gone down as well.

[A]

Exactly. And, you know, I used to be able to go and, you know, get an NHS dentist. Now I don't. But I also have two kids who need a private dentist.

[B]

We squeeze.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Squeeze more.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And within that there's wage compression, because the minimum wage is approaching, I think, £26,000 a year now. The minimum wage.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Yet Those are on 30, 35. They're not seeing wage growth.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

They're seeing everything. Get more expensive services, degrade. If you go out for dinner, the food isn't as good.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And that is a sign of a collapse of an empire or the collapse of a nation. And, well, what does that mean in 10 years? Have I got a teenage daughter, you know, and a young. And a son, he's just in his early 20s. Where's it going to be in 10 years? Yes, where's the compression? I don't believe things are getting better and I don't believe anyone has a solution to get them better. So if they're not going to get better, what am I condemning? What are we condemning our children for in this country is we're saying you should expect and accept less than we have. Because we want stuff now.

[A]

Yes, it's terrifying when you think about it, because also suicidal. It is. It really is suicidal. Because when you think about it, like, I mean, I'm talking about 2016, when I arrived in Britain, and now, you know, it's 2026. So it's 10 years. And in 10 years, Britain has changed on a scale that I don't think I would have ever imagined. You know, like things vanished. Like services that were being provided by the government, like an NHS dentist, not free, because you still paid. So, you know, sort of almost, you know, subsidized, let's say. And now it doesn't exist for my children. So what won't exist in 10 more years? That's the key question. If the NHS dentist is just vanished, basically for people, then what won't exist in 10 years?

[B]

And where's all the money going? Because that's what I would. Where's the fucking money going? Where's the money going?

[A]

But I think, to be honest, the people of this country will regret voting Labor. Whoever voted for Labor.

[B]

Oh, they're already there.

[A]

Yes. But they will seriously regret this for many, many, many years.

[B]

It's when they revolt, that's when I wonder, when will they revolt? When will collectively people say, this is just not unacceptable? And do you know what? I think Steve Laws is a revolt. And I think Tommy Robinson is a revolt. I think Zach Polanski is a revolt. I think in every.

[A]

But it's in the wrong direction. I mean, somebody like Zach is. It's terrifying that he's actually gaining popularity now and he's sort of.

[B]

But it's expected it. Because actually, what is he complaining about?

[A]

Same things that we are complaining about, almost. Yeah, yeah.

[B]

He is complaining about the collapse of services, the increase in taxes, the wealth disparity and that. Wealth disparity that comes from inflation. Yes, it comes from. It just comes from inflation. And so he sees the same problems that I see.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We just have different solutions. I say freedom and liberty. Burn down the government. He says, make government bigger. Tax the rich. Who will leave? But. But it's a scary. It's. Sometimes I'm like, is it as bad as I think? Is it worse than I see? Is it better? I don't think it's better. So what. What do we do?

[A]

It's. It's dreadful because there is so much resentment out there. I'm someone who's really resentful of many things. For example, I lived in this country for many years as someone who did not have a British passport. So whenever I went, you know, on holiday with my family and came back to Britain, I would be taken through a different queue. You know, my children, my babies, my wife would have to sort of hold them on her own, including my child who had the medical issue, and I would go in a separate queue. But then I look at Ala Abdel Fattah and he is. He has nothing in this country.

[B]

He has a red carpet.

[A]

And he, the Prime Minister of this country, publicly welcomed him to this country. What makes you think so? And there is serious resentment. And obviously he's going to have access to Lennon chess now. Obviously he's going to have access to our public services now.

[B]

But the thing is, right, what is the political message that restores this country to greatness? That has the biggest enough tent because reformer every. The demise of the Conservatives and the Labour Party is a reflection on everything we've spoken about. And the rise of reform and Green are a reflection of that.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

But nobody is dealing with. Wants to deal with the hardest, toughest things because perhaps they're scared, perhaps the country doesn't have the stomach for it.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

And it's almost like things haven't got shit enough yet.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

That's the scary part. It's like, how bad did Argentina have to get to get Melee? How bad did. How bad did El Salvador have to get to get Bukele?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

You know, how bad does the UK have to get to get that person who says, no more, no more. We've got to fix these big fundamental issues in the country.

[A]

And I don't know, but it's also very scary because when we get to that point where somebody says no more, things have to change, what are they going to change and who will be affected? Because let's look at it at, you know, sort of the welfare state. If somebody decides enough is enough.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

You're going to have the people who are seriously vulnerable.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

The disabled and everyone else seriously affected.

[B]

Yes. I mean, look, we can. We can trickle into. We can. We can have this trickle of decay where things just get a little bit shitter, 1% shitter, 2% shitter every year. Or we can. We can all collectively agree we've got to take a haircut here. William Cluson, the sdp, came in. He said, look, the MP should stand up and say, we got a problem here as a country. We all have to contribute, we all have to become part of it. Dominic Cummings said about it. He said, there's a bunch of people in this country. They have to take one for the team now. We need to get the best people in government.

[A]

Yes, yes.

[B]

And I think if. If there was a collective agreement, MPs, we're. We're going to take a 30% haircut. You know, you're not going to get 100 grand as an MP. You're going to 70 grand. We're all doing that. We're all taking a big cut because this is what the country needs and we are going to have to raise tax on some of you and we're going to cut taxes for some of you more. And the. When they talk about the wealthiest with the broader shoulder, shouldered a bit more of the blame. I believe if you came to them with a realistic plan of civic restoration, it's like we're not just taxing you more to piss more money away on quangos and dei and bullshit. It's actually to restore the country.

[A]

I think people would buy it 100%. I think we need a national vision or dream to get behind. And that's what Saudi Arabia has. So Saudi Arabia has Vision 2030, which is basically, look, they said we are dependent, like almost 70 or 80% dependent on oil. If everyone stops buying oil, that's it. We're bankrupt, basically.

[B]

We need tourism.

[A]

We are no more.

[B]

We need tourism, we need sport. Yeah. You've seen it.

[A]

So they went mental and they've executed. Yes.

[B]

They've taken over golf, boxing, football.

[A]

That's the scary thing. We've also decided that, I mean, I was talking about this and actually I made a video about this. If you look at British values as defined by the government, you're going to have, you know, you're going to see democracy, rule of law, mutual respect, tolerance for people of different beliefs. And the last one, I can't remember even.

[B]

It's all a bit meh.

[A]

It's all. None of it. All of it is passive.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

So you sit on the sofa and you believe in democracy, you believe in the rule of law. So don't commit crime, basically. Yeah.

[B]

Be kind to everybody.

[A]

Be kind to everyone. But no one tells you that innovation is of British value.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

And you want Britain, that Britain invented the railway system, that Britain invented, you know, the radar, that Britain invented, you know, the jet engine that Britain invented, the radio, the tv, you know, the World Wide Web. This is British. And we want that kind of innovation. Can you be innovative? Can you actually do something, you know, inspirational? No one tells you that. And in my view, those. And they actually teach kids that stuff in school.

[B]

But, like, do they I mean, I. Somebody sent me a photo the other day and it was in a school and they had a huge board up and it was all about why labor are great, all about the Labour Party, what Labor stands for. I'm like, why are we indoctrinating politics? The only politics we should have in school is political debate. This is this party that what they stand for. What should they do and have the courage to put in teachers who would say no. You have to debate every party and you have to respect every party. Apart from that, we shouldn't be indoctrinated and we should be saying, the values are education, hard work, innovation. We should be. The fact that we spend more money on debt, interest and education makes me want to vomit.

[A]

Yes, yes.

[B]

Where. Take all that fucking money away, put it in education. Because the future, like, we should have an NHS for the kids. We should have NHS for the kids. We should have opportunity for the kids. They should be able to leave school, get a job and be able to buy a home and have kids. Otherwise, if they cannot, if they cannot deliver on that path, some are going to leave.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Some are going to kill themselves. Some of them just could be depressed. Some are going to live off the stairs. Like, what a thing are we doing?

[A]

Yes. It's. It's, it's terrifying. I mean, when you look at this, you. I. I think the thing that scares me most, for example, and, I mean, I exchanged messages with Kimmy, Kimmy Bach on for a while and tried to.

[B]

Get her in here.

[A]

She's. She's, she's great. You know, she's great when it comes to policies. She's quite thoughtful, all that stuff. But I told her I can't, I can't. Like, I. I just don't see this working because you don't have new blood. You don't have new blood in the sense of any. Everything is done the same way. So basically, the person who's, you know, chief of staff for Kimmy is Rachel McLean, for example. You know, no disrespect to anyone, but she is a failed mp. She didn't win in the previous election. And we're recycling the same kind of process. We're recycling the same kind of process that produces the same kind of ideas.

[B]

See, we need to surgically find the best people in this country. Yes, the best thing.

[A]

But we also need to get out of that sort of Westminster mindset. We need to get out of, like, look, a failed MP is not going to give you brilliant new ideas. We need to get someone from the Private sector and go like, right, what would you do now? How much money did you make out there? And how did you make it? And like, sort of, you know, how do you actually come up with a process that gets you new ideas, bold ideas, something really different? And the tragic thing is, and I think this is where people are going to get really disappointed. Even reform is doing things the same way.

[B]

Of course they are. That's why I've lost all faith in reform. Dominic Cumming has put it really well. It's like, look, they've. They're gonna win the next election.

[A]

They will win, Yes, I think they will, probably. Unless there is an alliance from the left.

[B]

But they need. Yeah, perhaps, but they need to find like 500 MPs to run. Right. They've already struggled on their local councils or the councillors, but we're not seeing a pace of change. And like commonly said, we should be out there, do a public recruitment program. We want the best people in this country to come and work for this party. We don't want old failed MPs. Well, Danny Krueger seems all right, but we don't. We want new blood.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

If you understand health, come and come here. If you understand finance, come here. If you create a business like, come, you've got to take one for the team. You're going to get paid a shitty salary compared to what you get in the private sector. But you're gonna help restore this country. We want the best people. Let's have a big public recruitment program and just get the best people. Get rid of all these dickheads. And why all the cause? I mean, I look across the political spectrum, particularly the Labour Party. I look at the front pitch, I look at Keir Starmer, Ed Miliband, Yvette Cooper, Bridget Phillipson, Angela Ray. Well, she's not front bench anymore. David Lammy. These people are terrible. These are terrible humans. They are terrible at their job. Well, are they terrible humans or does the system just allow average, bland people.

[A]

To do the system? The system only allows them. That's my serious challenge. Anyone who's slightly bold does not fit.

[B]

And then you look in the back. I mean, who's that guy? Is it Richard Bergen or whatever his name is? The guy is a more like a moron of epic proportions. And these people, like, I think. I think we're on the same page. We have to completely and utterly change this, because if we don't, we will not have a country that's worthy of our children. And it's not. It's like the Rest of the world is laughing at us.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We are humiliating ourselves in public.

[A]

I mean, the fact that we were humiliated by Egypt. Egypt is a country that is now virtually, you know, almost going to declare bankruptcy. You know, you're talking about a country that is. It didn't have a sneeze in.

[B]

Was it last year? 50% reduction in the currency.

[A]

Oh, more now. Yes, absolutely. Yes, yes, yes, absolutely. It's, it's, it's, it's one of the worst situations you can possibly imagine.

[B]

It's becoming a failed state.

[A]

Yes, yes. And the fact that they're outsmarting Keir Starmer is. And they're laughing at Keir Starmer and they actually. And I mean, look, the thing is, I believe we have to start with one thing, parliamentary sovereignty. We need to make sure that people in Parliament and the Prime Minister can actually make decisions.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

We need to get rid of the checks and balances that we tried to create to make sure, you know, that the government does not step over and sort of do things their own way. And we don't have institutions anymore. We need to dismantle this completely. It's going to be scary, we have to admit, and it's going to be.

[B]

I'd be excited by it.

[A]

No, but if you look at this, you know, for example. So we have, again, if you go to the BBC, we have an arrangement where the government does not tell the BBC what to do, you know, but they're paid by the taxpayer and all that stuff. But it's not working and we have to get rid of that stuff. We have to make sure that whoever we elect is going to be the decision maker. And if we decide, if Britain collectively decides, look, we're going to have a sovereign wealth fund, which is something I think we should have agreed. 100% baby drill. Exactly. If we're going to. I mean, it's impossible. I paid this month just for energy. £360. And it's a small house. It's a small house with one bathroom and, you know, two adults and two little kids.

[B]

It's because we have Ed Miller Band. We need Catherine Porter in there.

[A]

It just cannot be. It just cannot be that. I'm almost paying almost 400 pounds. How many hundreds of pounds do I have to pay just to be able to turn on the lights and the heating?

[B]

Imagine the tax. The biggest tax break they could give is lower energy prices. Everyone would have more money.

[A]

Exactly.

[B]

Put into the economy.

[A]

Yes. We can go on forever. I think we can.

[B]

Listen, like I say, I came with a blank piece of paper today.

[A]

Yes. And.

[B]

And it was at a time where I'm reflecting a lot and I. I think the funny thing is, is you could sit anybody down in that scene for every conversation. You may be on Islam, somebody on health, you know, I could get a sportsman in. I could get any. If anyone sat there and they felt they had free rein to say whatever they want.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

We'd have a very similar conversation, I imagine. I could sit there with a Marxist and the only point we start arguing is on the solutions. I think the symptoms, we would say the same. I think this country's fed up. I think we've got. I think we've got collective depression in this country because the hope has been destroyed. But for me, if we can collectively agree there is a problem and it's not going to be solved by left versus right narratives, then perhaps, you know, something can happen.

[A]

I hope so. I really hope so.

[B]

It was great to meet you, man.

[A]

Thank you for having me.

[B]

And thank you to everyone for listening. We'll see you soon.