Nigel Farage and the Destructive "Toryisation" of Reform UK

Good morning and welcome to UK column viewers and listeners. Delighted to have very, very interesting guest with me today, gentleman who contacted me a couple of weeks ago as a result of a resignation letter. So my guest today is Joe West and he resigned recently as the local chairman for reform. And this is in the Derbyshire area. And Joe was very kind to send me a copy of his letter. And what we're going to do today is have a discussion around the

reasons why he's resigned. And I've absolutely no doubt that that discussion is going to lead us into, into a little bit more detail and analysis around the, we'll call them the opposition parties that have arisen in UK, which probably UKIP is one of the the key ones. But job, thank you. Thank you very much for agreeing to come and do an interview with me today. My pleasure, it's it's a honour to be with you. Thank you very much.

Well, I've learnt that you've, you've actually been a follower of the UK column for some time. So would you share with the audience, how did you find us and when was that? Oh, a very long time ago was to do with the British Constitution Group. And I went to see you at Stoke many years ago. The that whole movement I was involved with. I did think the British Constitution Group would lead the way, but it didn't.

But then eventually you sort of like turned into the UK column and I started following the UK column to do with that. And I've been following you for years and really the, the level of information that you guys give out is the best in this country without without any doubt. And I do follow an awful lot of social media. I do follow an awful lot of channels, UK columns the best. Thank you very much for those kind words.

And I'll just say yes, I also think the British Constitution Group did a lot of extremely good work. And but the key thing it was that it was never a party. It was, it was a fairly loose group of individuals who had concerns about what was then seen quite rightly as a as an ongoing attack on the constitution and indeed system of law in this country. But it wasn't a political party And UK column gave a lot of support to that.

And of course, we helped set up the conferences and I think the biggest conference that used the word we because it encapsulates everybody who was working hard at that stage. I think the biggest audience we had for one of those events was over 500. It was about 540. That could well have been the Stoke conference. So important things going on there and well, wonderful that you should have found us. And we're still doing our best

to push out information. Ladies said said to me a couple of days ago, the thing about the UK column news is it can be what she described as an information cascade, which I thought was a really interesting comment. OK, well your letter which I I have here was dated the 10th of February 2025. So obviously back in February you were feeling uncomfortable with what was happening in the Reform Party and you decided to resign. Tell us what was happening.

It's best for me to tell you when I joined Reform, which was in 2021. Now it's still under Richard Tyson those days and Richard Tyson come out with a policy opposing vaccine passports. At the time, that was a policy I strongly agreed with. I regard vaccine passports as a, a means to create a papers pleased society, you know, a police state. And so I thought, well that's great, somebody's standing up against vaccine passports reform

as well as the Brexit thing. Obviously the Brexit thing is very important to me because I was involved in UKIP before that and I was involved in the Referendum Party before that. So leaving the European Union at an essential political ambition as far as I was concerned for for the British people.

So I joined Reform back in 2021. I was chosen, selected to stand as the Reform UK candidate for South Derbyshire in the 2024 election, very proud to do so. And over the moon that we inflicted damage that we did on the Conservative government. We got rid of the Conservative government who I held in utter contempt for telling us lies years after year after year. So it was a wonderful thing. So I was over the moon in in June, July, I beg your pardon. This year I got 9000 votes, came

third. But as I said, we managed to get rid of the sitting Conservative MP in South Derbyshire, a lady called Heather Wheeler, and even though we replaced it with Labour, I felt sure that the the plan of the destruction of the UNI party, which was to get rid of the Conservatives first and then go for Labour, was on track.

Wonderful. September came along last year and an event took place then where our county organiser was fired, which was a strange thing to happen because she was such a good county organizer and every every constituency in Derbyshire really liked it. All those who stood for general election who then became party chairman of their local branches really liked this lady. So that was an anomaly and I

want to point that out. It was a strange thing to happen because it does have a bearing on why I resigned in the following February. And This is why I need to go back in time to explain to your viewers what happened that led up to my resignation in February. You know, in the beginning of February before Rupert and all the rest of them, I resigned first. Now I'll go to the the next issue that came up, which was after the the firing of our county organiser, wonderful

lady. We then had the Richard Tice episode where Richard Tyes described supporters of Tommy Robinson as that lot. OK, now I want to make it clear I'm not a Tommy Robinson supporter. OK, I watched how the Tommy Robinson issue broke up UKIP back in 2018. I watched it happen. I saw how Richard Brayne was basically kicked out from being the the leader of the party even though he was voted in, simply because he was trying to bring peace between the two factions

of UKIP. So I'm not a Tommy Robertson man, but I I had to respond to my members in my branch complaining to me that they wanted to cancel their memberships because Richard Tice had described them as that lot, because they had sympathetic Tommy Robinson. So I got on to my members and I said please don't leave us. Reform is the only game in town. You've got to stick with us. This is the only way that we're going to win this country back and have a sensible government. Please don't go now.

One of the members who had wanted to cancel his membership was a retired coal miner from Swadlincote. And he said to me, look, I'll stick with you, Joe, but you've got to understand that all that Tommy Robinson is doing is trying to defend Shaw. Yeah. So he said, have you seen the film that Tommy Robinson got into trouble about, which is called Silence? And I told him, no, I haven't seen this film. He said, well, will you watch the film if I stick with you?

And I said, yes, I promise I will watch the film. Before I watched the film, I then rang up management because I wanted to know what the management policy was for this. Yeah. So I rang up management and I said, look, I got people wanting to cancel their memberships. I said, what is the party line? How am I supposed to respond because Richard Tyson's made this comment. So they turned around and they said to me, let them go, don't bother with them, just let them go.

Zia has said that they're not wanted and that they're doing our vetting for us. Now, for me, that's looking my craw. At the time, yeah, that was something I didn't like. All I could see was my old swaddling coat coal miner who I knew in person, and he'd been to branch meetings. Yeah, being told that he's not wanted by some city boy. Yeah, and Muhammadan and a Sri Lankan to boot. Yeah, he doesn't want my old English coal miner to be a part of his party right now.

That didn't sit well, but I stuck with it. I just thought, OK, we've got to move on for the sake of the unity of the party, Will move further forward. Then the next issue that comes up was to do with vetting and this, this may sound like it's a detail, but it's an important detail. We had to vet and make applications for all those who wanted to stand for County Council in the upcoming County Council elections.

And these, some of these applications have been put in back in August. And we keep, I kept on asking my regional organiser, when are these vettings and these applications going to come through and be approved? Because we want to start making plans for who's going to stand in which ward and, and how we're going to, you know, start to manage our campaign collectively. OK. We're, we're fobbed off all the

time. All the time we're fobbed off with, Oh yeah, it'll be next week or it'll be a couple of weeks time. Don't worry about it. It's all in, it's all in hand. Christmas comes and goes and we still don't have these applications or these vettings approved. OK, now what? Your view is to just put part that to one side because it is

important. Now the new year comes, we're still under wiser, we've got obviously elections coming up in May and only months to prepare and nobody knows who's going to stand in which wards and who's going to do what. I'm getting very frustrated and I'm getting quite angry. The East Midlands Reform UK conference comes up in Leicester. I don't go. I've got better things to do. Yeah.

But at that conference a young man called Andrew Southall, who had stood in the general election in Dudley, was replaced in the conference without him even knowing about it by Marko Longi, who was the sitting Conservative MP who had stood against reform in the general election and had been replaced with the by Labour. So I'm fuming, I'm thinking, well that's wrong. Why have they done that to that

young man? He's put in all the hard yards, he's done all the hard work and that they've gone and parachuted in. They're very conservative who they tried to remove. Surely this is not part of the plan. Surely we're trying to remove these conservatives, get rid of these people because they're obviously the ones that's ruined the country. That happens on the 3rd of January. The big bombshell for me comes next.

The following week on the 10th of January, the whole of Amber Valley Reform UK leadership resign right now. I'd heard undercurrents about this, I would, but they kept it secret to themselves until the moment when they'd all resigned. The reason why they resigned is because their leader, Alex Stevenson, had been suspended on December the 15th, unbeknownst to the rest of us. Yeah, and he himself hadn't found out to December the 29th by Reform UK and by Zia, Yeah.

Now the thing about Amber Valley that I want all your viewers to bear in mind is they are the best Reform UK branch in Derbyshire. That shadow of a doubt, really enthusiastic, did loads of work. They had parish councillors, they had town councillors, they had county councillors, they had the whole shoot match going on. They even used to do litter picking drives. They were really well liked in the local community in a way that none of the other constituencies have been able to match.

They were the best. They were the, in matter of fact, they could have even been the best in the East Midlands, but they were certainly the best branch in Derbyshire. They were targeted by the management deliberately and then wiped out. Now that's a very important thing that I want your viewers to understand is that the best branch in Derbyshire was deliberately targeted to be wiped out, to be decimated, yet to have its leadership removed.

And I want you to understand that because I believe that that is the intention for reform as a whole. The intention is to remove all the real reformers, all the best people in the party, you know, all the real activists who'd been with it for years. Yeah. And replace them with either Tories, Lib Dems, Labour. They don't care. Yeah. Just so long as you're somebody who's really in it just for the political process rather than for the ideology of saving the

country. They want professional politicians, which is why in my letter, which I now I wrote in the beginning of February, after, after giving due consideration all these things that have gone on. Yeah, and speaking to other people about the matter, I did give it plenty of counsel before I wrote this letter. I wrote my letter to Zia and I said basically your professionalisation of the party is essentially the Toryisation of the party. That's what your intention is.

Your intention is to remove all the real reformers, all the most dedicated and ideological of activists, and replace them with party men, with placemen, with people who only in politics simply to feather their own nest. You know, the typical politician types, people who think, well, I'm in, I'm in the local council. That means, you know, I'm on the inside. I can get certain perks, as it was to being a counsellor, as

well as the prestige. Those kind of people, the very kind of people that make politics in this country so bad and so corrupt. Yeah. And that's what this man Zeer Youssef was going about, making sure that he was doing. He was going to put people in all of his branches wherever he could, who weren't idealogs, who did, who weren't true believers. He wanted people who were in it just for their own advantage. Joe, thank. Thank you very much for giving us that introduction.

And I, I think it is a key introduction. I think we can tell our audience because for me it was very significant that when you kindly e-mail through your letter of resignation and I, I read it and then, then we had a, a chat on the telephone. And one of the things that I said at the beginning of that conversation is before you tell me your side of the story, let me tell you a few things that I

experienced in UKIP. And I can say to the audience, I was involved with UKIP back in the very early days. So I think it was about 2002 or soon after. Roger Natman was the leader at that stage. That had already been strife. And who? Who was the other gentleman? My notes here, Kilroy Silk. He disappeared off and tried to form a new party called Veritas.

But I initially had been looking myself for a party that was going to make proper change and fight back against what I saw as an organised destruction of the country. And UKIP was the direction that I went into into and what I then discovered was a series of events that happened such that when I read your resignation letter, I was thinking, my goodness, this is like ticking off a template.

So that's me setting the little a little bit of the scene and I'll talk more about my own experiences. But let's come back onto your resignation letter itself, because it's a pretty strong letter. I don't know whether you've got a copy in front of you. I haven't. You have you. You, you lead the way. Well, I, I think because it, we can more or less break it up into blocks.

But you say in your second sentence that you don't have confidence in Nigel Farage as leader of Reform or in the manage, in your management of the party. And there you're talking about the party chairman, Sia Youssef. And then you talk about why you went on to become a candidate in South Derbyshire and you wanted to help destroy the UNI party system. And I think that's an extremely accurate description of what we're up against.

And you were very pleased about the defeat of the Conservatives, which you just mentioned. You say let Labour was obviously going to be the next target. And then you'd you'd had to completely reconsider things. And the first thing you talk about is the fact that the party was not democratic and and the inferences, although improvements to the democracy in the party had been promised, these hadn't materialized.

So if I just give you that as the first chunk as I've picked it up, what what's your response? What was so bad in the party that you were having to specifically comment on the the lack of democracy? That goes back to the September conference at the NEC. Nigel had a vote at the conference for a constitution. If you actually look at the constitution, it means that only really the board, who Nigel will appoint can then say that Nigel can be challenged. OK, so that there is no system

by which. Anybody who was the leader, not just Nigel Frage, but anybody who was the leader could be challenged or removed by the membership. Now also my branch members made this point. I didn't notice. They said why is it that only the attendees institution published beforehand? Yeah, so that everybody could have a look at it and discuss it, you know, so it could be debated.

It was dropped in there at the conference, and only the attendees of the conference could vote, not the membership as a whole. Right. So even though this constitution has been adopted, it's only been adopted by a small minority of the membership of the form. When you're involved with it, you sort of things are brought about by people above you in the management system, so you have to take them on board. In retrospect, I realise that

Ben Habib was right. Ben Habib has made the point since that he wanted Nigel to democratise the party and matter of fact he even even joined because he told Richard Tyes that the party needed to be a more Democratic Party because that way it would represent the people better. Joe, if I may just break in here just to clarify for the audience, Ben, Ben Habib was deputy was was a dual deputy leader for reform. You will know better than I do, but I think we need to clarify his position.

His deputy chair, deputy leader, basically the second in command to Richard Tyson until Nigel Farage comes back on the 3rd of June out of nowhere after saying that he wasn't going to get involved when the September conference constitution was voted on by the attendees only. Yeah. Now this constitution made clear that only a board, a board that would be appointed by Nigel Farage could allow a challenge to Nigel Farage as the leader of the party.

So it it it's essentially meant that only Nigel's appointees and his friends were going to be the ones who were allowed to say that Nigel could be challenged as the leader of the party. Well, that's just that means his his position is unassailable. Yeah, in all practicality, he cannot be challenged. That's no good. That's not democratic. That's not the way any party should be run.

So in hindsight, Ben Habib, who was the party chair, Yeah, who's also deputy leader, who had got involved with reforms on the on the proviso when talking to Richard Tice that they would democratise the party as soon as the general election's over, Ben was given the boot and basically replaced by Zia Youssef. Now, at the time, I think simply thought that that was a

reshuffle. Yeah, I didn't take any that much notice of it. I thought it was a reshuffle simply because Ben Habib had not won his seat in Wellingborough. Yeah, looking back on it now, I see that Ben Habib's removal was entirely due to his, his demand that he'd made for quite some time, that the party be democratised. And Nigel was not going to have that. Nigel didn't want the party democratised.

He wanted it as his fifedom. Yeah, for him to rule as he pleased with Zia Youssef being his, you know, if if Nigel Farage was King John and then Zia Youssef is his Sheriff of Nottingham. This is fascinating because it's a description which I'm going to say to the audience. I I can understand from what I've witnessed happening around UKIP and and Nigel Farage's position. So the democracy side, you see Ben Habib go, there was another gentleman with it, was it David Ball?

David Ball. David wasn't pushing for the democratisation in the same way as Ben was. Ben was the big man when it came to pushing for democratisation and I think that's why he was flicked off. He was got rid of because he posed too much of a problem, because he is very popular amongst the activists in the membership. He really is. Yeah. And that's still to the. As a matter of fact, he's more popular now with everything that's happened with the Rupert Low situation.

Yeah. It's Ben was the Canary in the coal mine way back when. Yeah. So we're talking back in June, back in July, it was Ben who was saying that we were going to have problems. Right. It's OK. And later on in, well later in the letter you of course mentioned what had happened in Derbyshire and you've you've really given some overview of that in your introduction. But in the remainder of your letter you were constantly referring to other people who, who had concerns in the party

and were speaking out. And let me see down here you talk about the resignation of Howard Cox at one stage. For exactly the same issues, Yeah.

For Howard Cox, the problem was not being able to mention Tommy Robinson. Now, as I've said before, I'm not a Toby Robertson man, but I can see why for a great many people who vote before Tommy Robertson is somebody they have a great deal of sympathy for and who they support and for, for Howard Cox not to be able to mention Tommy Robertson is, well, that's far too controlling. You know, when you have a real Democratic Party, you need a lot

of robust ideas. Essentially, politics is about the exchange of ideas and ideas being put into the marketplace and everybody talking about them. That's how you find out which is the best idea and to be able to turn around to somebody who's a leading light in your party. And Howard Cox is because don't forget that Fair Fuel campaign that he runs means that he has an awful lot of popularity even

before he stepped into reform. So you've got this leading light, this man who's well known, this man who's not being too provocative. All he's saying is what's happening to Tommy Robinson is wrong. Yeah. And I and people should look into it now for Reform to then turn around and say, we're getting rid of you. We don't want you to talk about that. It's time that you went. That to me is far too controlling, especially for a party that's supposed to be about free speech.

And that's what Reform, that's one of the things that Reform stands on, is that we want free speech. We don't want to be told what we can say and what we can't say. Yeah. And for them to turn around to to our own leading lights and say, well, do you know what? You don't like what you're saying, so it's time for you to go. That's wrong. Let's just end because there's a couple of critical, well, very short paragraphs right at the end. You, you say, I'll, I'll read this out for you.

It's clear to me that your drive for the professionalization of Reform is actually a drive for Toryisation of Reform. And you, you end here by saying I, I did not join Reform UK to continue the treacherous government of a parasitic ruling class who nested in London, have neither love nor loyalty to the British people, their customs, traditions, law or religion. I pray that you and you're referring there to to the chairman that you and Nigel Farage fail in your endeavour to

mislead the British people. So Joe, powerful words from you. You're not, you're not mincing your words in sending this letter into the party. And do do you want to add anything for the audience following those statements?

What I would say to the British people and to anybody watching this, regardless of where in the world you are, is that I have now come to the conclusion that we have certainly in England a class in London who see it as their way of life to manage and to manipulate the ordinary people. And I think that is evil. And I stress the word evil because it is opposed to everything that is good, everything that is truthful, honest, generous and courageous.

I look at the people who run this country in the City of London and in Whitehall and in Westminster and I just see a bunch of criminals, liars, and frankly, people who are quite happy to see other people die in order for them to achieve their goals and their aims. And I, I want to stress that I'm in it's, it's not just our local, as it were, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, way of life. That's, that's been challenged here.

This political class, this bureaucratic and corporate parasite class extend their tentacles to places like Libya, like Syria, like Iraq, like Afghanistan, and now like Ukraine. They cause mass murder in order to advance their program. Their ideology, which I believe is only about power and privilege and pay. It has no other ideology than that. Now I could go more metaphysical about it, but I won't.

I will stick to the principles that as far as I'm concerned, these people who run our country, not just our country, but the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, I believe that the Anglosphere is run by people who have a Frederick Nietzsche ideology, which is that God is dead and there is only the will to power. I agree with everything you've said there. I could certainly couldn't disagree with anything you've you've said there.

Joke. And if I think back to my early days, so I've, I've mentioned right back to the beginning of UKIP, I was looking at material which was essentially describing the organised breakdown of UK. And one particular book, it's very difficult to buy now because it's very expensive, but you can actually get the PDF online was Christopher's Story's book which was entitled The EU Collective enemy of its member

states. And in the first few pages of that book was a table which the footnote said that the information in the table had come from a KGB defector who was Yuri Besmanov. People can find him on on YouTube. But essentially the the table described an attack that was to be carried out on Western society, first of all to demoralise it, then to destabilise it. And the final part is to have total breakdown whereupon a new society would be formed.

And that was actually called a normalization process because that happened to be a term which I think originated in Soviet ideology. But sat with a cup of tea. I went through the table and I could literally tick off each thing as it was happening. The breakdown of education law being made inconsistent, victimizing the victim, the military being destroyed, the introduction of the homosexual agenda, every single thing in the table you could take off.

And as a recently retired military person, I thought to myself, the country is clearly under attack. I regarded it as subversion. I didn't believe that at that stage we could pin down who was, who was ultimately behind the policies, but you can nevertheless see these very destructive policies. And so the the words you've used, possibly some people listening or watching this interview might think that's a bit strong, but for me, this is

absolutely the case. We've got, we've got a, a system, we've got individuals and ideology attacking UK. But as you quite rightly point out, their tentacles are unleashing this unbelievably cruel agenda in overseas countries and in Ukraine alone now we've, we've clearly got over well over 1,000,000 1/2 casualties dead and wounded as a result of their policy. So that's, that's really our starting point isn't it, for a discussion on what's what's been

going on in UK politics. I was born in 1966. OK, so as a boy I would watch my favorite films were either cowboy films or war films. So I'm brought up on that ideology that we fought the Nazis and with guns and tanks and warships and aeroplanes, and that it was a real kinetic war. Yeah. That's what we were brought up to think about, how we fought and defeated our enemies.

I now realize that the war that we are now involved in, which in, in my view has, you know, is a continuation in a way of that Second World War. Yeah. It isn't involving tanks or aeroplanes or warships. It's far more subtle. It really is about mind control and controlling the way that the masses see themselves and see life itself. And that's what I think that

we're dealing with. And that's why I think sometimes people don't realize the the way in which this management manipulation that has happened to our country has been done in such a surreptitious and secret way that they have. All they can see is how slowly and incrementally in that sort of like Fabian Society fashion, you know, our world has changed. And they they can't really put their finger on it.

And they because it's not tanks in the street, because they don't have to take up arms and you know, you're, you're fighting the enemy and shooting bullets at him. They don't know how to respond to it. And I mean, I'm just the same. I was, you know, I've, my ideology has changed over the years. Now I recognise the subtlety with which we are being manipulated and controlled now. It's a very English way of doing it. Yeah. It's, it's a very advanced way of doing it.

And you, you know, people shouldn't underestimate the English. Yeah. Very clever race of people. Yeah. And whereas we may have gone out and used gunboats 100 years ago, we've found different ways of controlling people that don't involve gunboats. And of course nowadays we have this new phrase soft power. Soft power is mind control. That's the top and bottom of it. And that's what we're dealing

with. And that's why the the British people as a whole have to go back into their own history and look at their own traditions and their own ways of life that even only maybe 3 or 4 generations ago we lived, that gave us this healthy bedrock of life, that LED us to enjoy life better. Yeah, We're not enjoying life at the moment. Most people aren't there having to work too hard.

And this has come about not because the Germans crossed the Channel. This has come about because of an ideology that has now infected ruling class and is now being passed on to the rest of the people in this country, which means that all of us are having to struggle in our daily lives in a way that we shouldn't have to do.

You know, you go back to say, Harold Wilson back in the 60s talking about the white heated technology and how life is all going to be better for us and how boys like me in the 70s used to watch Tomorrow's World and think, well won't, won't life be great because everything will be so much easier. Technology will make life so much easier for us. We'll all have so much more time, so much more time to enjoy ourselves. Not the case.

We all have to work so much harder to get well to just to put a roof over our heads, you know, and, and, and never mind about the breakdown of the family. Crikey, you know, the family is the joy and the ambition of all

sensible men and women. You know, for me to be able to come home and of an evening time, sit down with my wife and my children and enjoy my dinner and have a laugh and a joke and hear what they've done today and what they think and what they've been watching and all the rest of that normal family life. That is the best part of my day and it should be the best part of everybody's day throughout this country and throughout the

world. Family life, your wife, your children, and the best things that you have. And to think that we all have to work so hard and spend so much time away from those people, you know, to get what bricks and mortar, a motor car, you know, it's go on holiday somewhere fancy, you know, that's not the real deal.

And I think we've been taken down this, we've been LED into this hole in the ground by a pied Piper ideology that has LED us Into Darkness. And we don't realize that we've been LED in there and we have to get back outside into the light, out of the cabins and learn to live again. And that's is really the, the essential part is learning that family life and that other human beings are the best things in life and not things. And I think that's, that's the

real crux of the matter. And that's really how they've learnt to control us is by materialism and saying that material goods. Are what you really should be aiming for as as well as the sort of like the hedonism of personal gratification through sex and drugs and rock'n'roll, you know? Yeah, Job you, you've covered a lot there, all of it pertinent. And I'm going to say we'd

definitely get in amongst that. Before we do, I just just want to draw us back a little bit to the fact that you've started out, you know, describing how you've left a political party, you've been disappointed and you've left a political party. And I'm very aware that there are many people out there that are looking to the, the alternative political parties as a sort of life boy to save, save them from the, the system that

you described. So people have many people, thousands of people have have spent probably millions of hours trying to support parties like UKIP or the Brexit Party or Reform in order to fight back against the political system.

And I can imagine that many of the people that have put time into these parties are pretty sensitive when I'll say we because it it is you and I, we start to discuss problems within these organizations because I think some people think, Oh my goodness, just when we start to see progress, just when we start to see a fight back, then here are people criticizing parties that are trying to do the right thing.

And I think, I think we need to discuss this because my intention and I'm sure it isn't yours, my intention in having this discussion is not to cut the ground out from people that have put a lot of time and effort into trying to challenge

the existing system. I think that the the key thing which I'd like to do is inform people in a way that they can see who the enemy is better and how it actually can attack them and manipulate things which they assume are one thing, but in reality it's something completely different. So if if we come back to your experiences of reform, you've picked up pretty strongly, of course on Nigel Farage and his

leadership of the party. And you've also picked up very strongly on the chairman, Mr. Yousaf. And I was very interested when I saw a party chairman coming into post who's got a professional background with the banking system. Goldman Sachs is part of it. I can't remember who, the other one, Merrill Lynch or something

like that. Merrill Lynch. Yes, and a person who in coming to the country of say to his credit in 1980, goes on to be partner in a company with a value of about 230 million and when he sells it, he makes a call 30 million. But my brain says to me that this man cannot be in touch with what life is like on the ground for the average person who's having to work and probably man and woman, husband and wife partners working full time in

order to have a house. Reform with Nigel Farage brought in a party chairman who seems to me to have been part of the very establishment that we might point a finger at and say has been causing the trouble. Do you think that's unfair? If if I point a finger at this man and say what exactly is he? No, I don't think so. But it's not just Zia Youssef. You know, Zia Youssef could be anybody. He was put in place because he is a Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch City boy. You know he's there.

I have no doubt that Nigel Farage didn't pick Zia Youssef. Nigel Farage was told that he had to pick Zia Youssef. All right, the powers that be that control Nigel Farage have put Zia Youssef into place. A lot of branch activists will say, oh, if only we could get rid of Zia Youssef, you know, everything would be all right. No, it won't, because Nigel and Zia both work for the same sort of people.

And the problem we have is what you just mentioned there about ordinary people not having a say. The problem we have in our country, and it's in every country, is when you get to a certain level of materialistic wealth. Yeah. You're so cut off from what it is to be ordinary, you know, to worry about paying the mortgage, to worry about paying the electric bill. You know, you have no idea what

it is to be an ordinary person. And so, you know, the idea that the troubles of ordinary people are not that important to you, You have no empathy with them, you know, And that's what we're dealing with. For somebody like Zia Yusuf, he's a rich kid. He doesn't know what it is not to be a rich kid. He's been, he's been involved in in City of London enterprises since he's been in his 20s. All right. So from being a young man, all he knows is how to get the easy money.

And it is easy money. There's no two ways about it. Yeah. And that's what he knows. Well, no, that's that's interesting analysis. So I'm going to bring in toys at the same time. I've got some additional comment about Mr. Toys, but but isn't he another one? Isn't he another person that's come into the party, largely, it would seem to me, as a result of wealth? With Richard, you've got somebody who did carry the party along. Yeah, and it did use his own money to keep that going.

You know, I don't get me wrong. I'm not going to kick every, every rich boy. Yeah, I'm not going to kick every, every public schoolboy and say, you know, I'm a grammar schoolboy. But I'm not going to kick, you know, I used to kick Stowe boys when we used to play rugby against them. But I'm not going to kick them just because they're public school boys and they're rich kids, right? I'm not saying every one of them. Yeah. It cannot be patriotic and cannot have integrity.

Yeah. And a sound moral and ethical view of life. Right. I'm not going to say that. But what I am saying is when you have people who are removed from the ordinary way of life, then there's no two ways about it. It's going to be difficult for those people to understand just how important ordinary practical solutions are. You know, they can live in their their ivory towers because they literally do live in ivory

towers. Well, you only have to go into London to see, you know, that's where those people live. And they don't know what it is. They're not interested in what it is. As a matter of fact, for some of them, and unfortunately, I think for an awful lot of people, they'd rather not be associated with poor, you know, that's a bit beneath them. And it's, it's a tragic thing. And for me it, it, it does have a religious connection.

You know, when our Lord says, blessed are those who are poor in spirit, that's because those of us who are poor in spirit have to call upon God, you know, to, to find the strength to carry on because we don't have the power, we don't have the money. When you have power and money, you don't sometimes need God, you know? And that means you also don't need ethics and morals because you simply have power and money. A really fascinating comment. A lot there. Am I moving off the subject

again? I beg your pardon? I knew this would be an interesting discussion because in, in having a brief conversation previously it, it was just so apparent there was so much to talk about. But I just at the moment I just want to stay on the issue of parties and party politics because I think this is a very important thing to try and help wider audience understand what is going on. And also maybe what we see that

other people don't quite see. That's if I go back to my time in UKIP, I looked to see where was a party that was challenging what was happening. And for me a lot of the poisonous political agenda that was coming into the country at that time was clearly coming from one place and that was the European Union. And the European Union power was being promoted in UK. It was clearly, if it was unchecked, going to have massive impact not only on our Constitution but also on our system of law.

We were we, we could become a completely different country overnight. And therefore for me, a lot of my focus was in believing that a lot of the danger was, was coming through the European Union. And the only party that was really standing up against that was UKIP. So I got involved and in my brief time with the UKIP I did a lot of work. I, I canvassed, I put out leaflets, I did all sorts of

things. But at the same time, I was digging into areas myself and one of those areas was looking into the political charity Common Purpose. And I'm, I'm talking to you about it because a few minutes ago you were talking to the audience about how you saw the psychological attack on, on the country as being very significant. So if if I go back and, and I'm talking the early 2000s, I've got to the point where I think I'm allowed to say I was from a military background.

I got a certain certain amount of knowledge about intelligence analysis in various areas and I believed I was witnessing deliberate subversion within the country. And my analysis was evidence based. I was dealing in documents, Freedom of Information requests. And very early on, I attempted to get the UKIP leadership to pay attention to what what what I was talking about.

And in particular, I was looking very early on to get Nigel Farage to pay attention to what I was talking about because I assumed that he would actually be really interested when I said, look, I I can demonstrate at least one of the ways in which our society is being attacked. But to my surprise, he would never engage.

I never did get to sit down with Nigel Farage and talk about what I was seeing, even though at one stage I had quite a lot of connectivity in the party and I was I was getting other white senior people in the party to engage. So I'm going to say to you, Job, that at that very early stage, I was fascinated as to why Nigel Farage would not engage with me when I was putting factual documentary evidence on the table about how the country was being subverted.

And before I add a little bit more to that, I'd pass it back to you, you know, for comment or an explanation as to why I might have got that response from him. I did have a little crisis of conscience with my resignation letter and I, I, I had joined the political party and for the same reasons that you I've joined Referendum Party, UKIP and Reform. And that's because I in myself, I wanted to do something. I've always been of the opinion that it's no use just shouting

at the television. Yeah, if you want to effect change, you have to get up and go and do it yourself. And that's why, as you say, I'm not interested in trying to cut the ground from underneath people who want to be involved in politics. Yeah, I want everybody as much as I wish more people took time to study politics and to think about politics because it is so important in our everyday life. So I'm not interested in that. I join political parties because

I want to affect change. I want to make something happen. And then when you come up against party structures and things that happen in political parties that don't make sense and they don't make sense because you think, well, surely this is a sensible thing. I'm telling you a sensible thing. Let's go. Let's follow the sensible policy. Let's try and do things and support people who are being good. And then when you see things happening in political parties don't make sense.

Yeah. When, when good people are kicked out or maligned or when good policies are ignored, Yeah. When things that you should be following up are are are just displaced and left to one side, you know, you begin to think simple. You think, oh, well, it must be me. You know, I mean, I'm not in control. So, you know, I'm a part of the party. But you know, the leadership.

I've got a better idea. The problem I have now when I wrote my resignation letter in February and I had this crisis of conscience, is that I've come to the conclusion that it is a possibility and this is a possibility. I want everybody to think about that as soon as any political party in this country begins to get traction and begins to affect any kind of popularity and change, it is Co opted and it is controlled. Yeah. And we are all being manipulated all the time through these

political parties. And that's the worry that I now have. Those are the ideas that over these last few weeks I'm beginning to consider and contemplate. Yeah. And what is the resolution if that is in fact the truth? And I don't know what you think about that. So you tell me what you think about that, that position.

I agree with that. That idea that actually what we've got going on is, is some very simple in some ways sophisticated in other ways, control of the political system, not just through the established mainstream parties, Labour and Conservative, but actually targeting any other party that dares show its head in order to challenge what the UNI party system Conservatives Labour are doing.

I, I think this is absolutely correct and This is why going back to your resignation letter, it was just uncanny for me because I could, I read what, what you talked about in that resignation letter and then things came back into my head. As an example, you, you, you talked about the fact that when people in the Reform Party were doing good work and they were making progress, they were then undermined or abandoned.

And what came into my head was, I can't remember the exact year, but it was the year when UKIP had tremendous success in the local council elections. And in Plymouth, two of the ladies that I'd got to know were the key Plymouth organisers for, for UKIP, a lady called Carol and a lady called Kate. And they were so buoyed up by the fantastic local election result from UKIP that they were immediately talking to the senior UKIP team and saying what do we do now?

Because we've we're, we've got the, the political system moving. People know us. We've had fantastic results if you like, we've got a breakthrough. We need to reinforce it. We need to get the activists out on the ground now benefiting from from all that good work and success in the local elections. And to their astonishment, these local ladies were told by the senior UKIP leadership, oh you go away and have some time off and and have a rest, have a holiday.

And one of them who was quite a feasty lady, Carol, she said what are you talking about? We should now be pushing as a party to, to, you know, reinforce the breach and, and to have even greater success. What are you talking about? We should have a holiday. But nevertheless, that was the policy that the senior UKIP leadership enforced, that all the local activists went into a black hole.

There was, there was no further direction from from the party as to what they should be doing on the ground. And of course as the activists were concerned, all of their hard work in the elections then started to break down it. It started to sort of dissolve because you didn't have the leadership, you didn't have the direction, you didn't have the enthusiasm from from the senior league UKIP leadership team.

And that particular incident incident was a key one for me where I thought what we've got happening here is a deliberate policy by the UKIP leadership to make sure that where success was taking place, it had limited effect. All that effect was dissipated. So I'll pass it back to you again. But that's what one of the key things that came into my head when I read your resignation letter with Reform. Well, I think that's exactly the

case. That's the opinion that I've come to with Reform and I did see it with UKIP. I saw it back with UKIP back in 2018. I saw going back to the Tommy Robinson thing, there was Gerard Batman just stood down. Gerard Batman was trying to sort of like bring in the Tommy Robinson element into UKIP. There was a group within UKIP who under no circumstances wanted anything to do with Tommy Robinson. The election for the leadership came up and Richard Brain stood

for the leadership. He won with 53% on the 1st ballot so they didn't have to have a second ballot, and he stood with the commitment that he would bring peace between the two factions. He said if you want to support Tommy Robinson, you can support Rob Tommy Robinson. We're not going to kick you out the party. But equally, yeah, I'm not going to pursue Tommy Robinson to become part of the party. Yeah, a perfectly rational, sensible position to take, a really middle of the road

position for him to take. He got in, he was voted in. He he was in for a month, maybe six weeks. And I watched as the NEC of UKIP and the chairwoman, Kirsten Harriet, backed up by the likes of Neil Hamilton and Ben Walker. Yeah. And a lawyer that they brought in called Piers Wanshop, did everything they could to make sure that Richard Gray was completely frustrated in what he was trying to do, to the point where he and Liz Phillips just walked away from the party all together.

Now that to me, not so much at the time. At the time I just thought, well, that's just in infighting in politics. That's ridiculous. But now I recognize because I've seen it in reform. I see the pattern, what they try to do. I think with political parties especially, like you say, UKIP or Reform, smaller parties, yeah, or maybe I don't know what

the other ones are. Well, the British British National Party would be 1. Yeah, but all these parties, I think what they, what they tried to do is as you just described, they try to, they get people to a certain point and then they frustrate them. They realise that frustration is a really good tactic to use in order to stop people being able

to advance. Yeah, it's that that Fabian Society are sort of like tactic where if they can frustrate people, put people off, dishearten people, demoralize them, you know, so that they just shook their hands and think what's all this about? You know, it's a really effective. It's very, again, it's subtle, Yeah. It doesn't take a lot of energy. All it takes is a little bit, a few lies here, a bit of misdirection there. Yeah, a little bit of gossip there. It's it's it's really easy to

affect. Yeah. It doesn't take a lot of effort to do. But you can break down and you can control people's ambitions or what they want when it comes to politics and how they people want to live their lives. You can do that.

And it's really easy. And when I think about the amount of resources that the state has and that the ruling class have at their disposal to be able to sit down and have a, let's say they have a meeting and let's say they say, I know, how are we going to control this patriotic feeling that's rising in the country? You know, we've got to do something to be able to manipulate and control it. So there's going to be parties rise up.

When those parties rise up, we'll put our people in and they'll be there to control that opposition. And this is what I've come to the conclusion all political parties can be. I'm not saying they are, but they are open to the process of controlled opposition by our ruling class. And I believe it is our ruling

class that is the problem. And I genuinely think now that what ordinary people have to do is to turn around and think to themselves, you know, what, if I keep on waiting for the saviour to come, the saviour political movement to come and save me, Yeah, you're going to be wasting your time because you're going to be waiting for. Because it could well be that every political party that comes along can be controlled and

manipulated. Yeah. So what people have to do is stand on their own feet, on their own connections, their own trust, relationships with people who are local and close to them. I think that is the way to go. Don't bother looking up. Yeah, for your leadership, look to the side, look to your friends, look to your family. They're the people whom you can work together with to live a

better life. Try as much as you possibly can to avoid relying upon government, upon the state, because I truly believe that the real problem is that class of people who find themselves in the positions of power. I am. I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that those particular positions in life, whether it be Westminster, Whitehall, the top of the civil service, whether it be the City of London and Commerce, they, they attract people who have a psychopathy, A psychopathic, sociopathic,

narcissistic ideology. And that's why we have the problems that we do. And once you've got a civilization like ours that has now turned its back upon its own Christian, Protestant, Reformed ethics and morals, and you have this complete hedonism and will to power ideology where all that matters is me. Yeah. And there's no greater transcendent power above me. Yeah. To which I am beholden.

Once you create that situation, which is what's happened since the 1960s in this country, yeah, you've got a ruling class who are without morals, without ethics, don't give a damn except for themselves. And they are psychopaths and they are narcissists and they are sociopaths. And the problem with pyramid systems is they they draw the few to the top who are the worst kind of people to rule. Job again, I think this, this analysis is, is, is very good.

Are we just dealing with political parties? I don't think so anymore. We're dealing with people who operate above and through political parties. I don't think there's any doubt about this. And is there an assembled malevolence at the top of the pyramid? Without question on my bookshelf. I'm afraid I can't remember the author, but I know he was a political, sorry, a Polish psychologist and he he wrote a book called Political Ponerology, where ponerology is the study of evil.

And his book is, is, is about how bad people sort of manifest and are, are, are attracted to positions of power. I, I was, it was recommended to me many years ago. It's sitting over on my right hand side on the bookshelf. And for me that's a text which captures a lot, lot of what you say. Now I'm I'd, I would like to do

something. I'm actually asking you as a guest here for the UK column, because I have never really spoken out before about my experiences around UKIP and, and Nigel Farage. And, and I, I know that if I've mentioned Nigel Farage, you know, over the years, there's always a couple of people that come back to me pretty strongly. And they say to me, you know, Brian, it's utterly disgraceful that you should attack Nigel Farage because he's done this

and he's done that. And so I know that if I start speaking about Nigel and, and UKIP, there will be a little bit of a backlash. But if, if you will bear with me on this, and I'm very happy for you to be the, you know, be the one who holds my feet to the fire. I just like to share with the audience a little bit more about my experience. I just talked about the fact that when we saw progress in Plymouth, it was squashed. And of course those experiences were reflected by other people

across the country. Because when I started to speak out and when I started to ask some questions, I was contacted by other UKIP activists, a lot of them who've been with the party a long time from other parts of the country. And they said the same thing is going on here, Brian. And that told me that the shutdown of successful activism within the party was coordinated to such an extent that it it it

was being done across the party. But I'll stick with the fact that in my early days I was warning about subversion in the country, I was warning about the political charity Common Purpose. I'd started to give public talks. Those public talks were always evidence, document, documentary evidence based. And I'd started to get a lot of support from people who were

UKIP supporters. And indeed if we just mention the British Constitution Group as well, when we put on those big events looking at the attack on the constitution and law and order in in these wonderful islands, we had a lot of people from UKIP. They formed a core support base both for the UK column and and the British Constitution Group.

So I knew that what I was talking about was of interest to the bulk of the party, a party membership, which was why we were able to attract such huge audiences. But at no stage could I get the senior UKIP team under Farage's leadership to engage with what I was talking about and indeed other speakers, many of them very well qualified, particularly in the constitution, were talking about. So eventually it gets to the position where relations between myself and Nigel Farage were

frosty to non existent. But what then happened was that I was banned from attending the more major UKIP events, the conferences. I was actually banned. And this then really started to make me wonder what was going on because I've always been measured in the way that that I've spoken out on things. I've always been evidence based. But UKIP leadership under Nigel Farage would not engage with a word that I said off to one side. At that time the British National Party was still working

and I got invitation. I think I spoke at 3 BNP events and I have to say I met some wonderful people. I did not meet any violent extremists, I meant just people who were very concerned for their country. But what fascinated me was that the BNP leadership not only was keen to understand what I was talking about, they without me asking, they ended up promoting material where I was warning about subversion in the UK and in particular the use of this

political charity. So I'll come back to you, Joe. That was where it got to for me, that in speaking out and saying, look, this is what I'm seeing and I came from a professional background, I came from a military background. Nigel Farage not only would not engage with me, he banned me from from attending the major UKIP events. There has to be a reason for this. I think there is. And I think, right, I'm going to be, I'm going to go metaphysical on you, right?

As far as I'm concerned, life is a choice between good and evil. Yeah. And I genuinely believe that that the these very people that I'm describing as parasites, vampires, psychopaths, yeah, who run our country, do so because they in a, in a materialistic way, let's say, rather than a metaphysical way, they believe in evil. They believe that it's quite all right to lie. They believe that it's quite all right for people to die as long as their advantage is advanced. Yeah.

I believe that they're quite prepared to rob people, to deprive people of their wealth, to take it off of them, unlawfully cheat them of it. Yeah. I believe that these people see that as their right. Yeah. They're they're superior beings. So they have the right to do this to you.

Yeah, and I see our political class as a materialistic, materialistic manifestation of an evil that I'm afraid mankind has to live with, you know, and until our Lord Jesus Christ returns, I'm afraid we're just going to have to knuckle down

and deal with people like that. And this is the process that we're all involved in. People like you, people like me, people who are watching this programme because if they're watching UK Column, that means that they are aware that something is going wrong and they want to find out the truth. Yeah. You don't come to somewhere like UK Column because you're happy with GB News or you're happy

with the BBC. Yeah, it's when you're unhappy with the BBC, you're unhappy with GB News that you come to UK Column and places like this because, you know, you're not being told the whole truth and you need to find out the truth. There's a a feeling inside of us, and I believe that that's a spiritual reality that exists in human beings. Yeah, some of us do have this inclination to need and desire the truth. We it's just something that's visceral inside of us. We've got to have it.

We need to discover it for our own Peace of Mind, you know, for our, for the contentment of our own souls. Unfortunately, there is also the opposite. There are people who have no interest in the truth whatsoever, who would rather lies. They prefer the lie and that you know, the sooner the people realise that it, it is that kind of a conflict that we're dealing

with. It's not just straightforward conservative Labour, you know, it's not Democrat, Republican, you know, it's it's not that straightforward. It is far more profound and it and I think for a lot of people that this dawning realisation that the UNI party as we describe it now has become common parlance. Yeah. It's used far more now than it ever was when I was you. Yeah. People are beginning to understand that it doesn't matter who you vote for. The government always gets in.

They realise, I mean, you've got the likes of Dominic Cummings talking about how the, the the the secretaries in the bureaucracy are actually deciding what the agenda of the government is going to be. And the ministers are simply the sales reps. Yeah, they're just presenting it to the people. And I think that's the that's the position that we've got to now. And I don't know if I did you want me to go more into the, the this I'm fascinated about this book.

You were telling me about, by the way, by this Polish author about, you know, evil because that's how I see it. I genuinely see this as evil manifesting itself through a pyramid structure. You know, like, like Pharaoh. Yeah. And I believe that the likes of us are Israel and that we are are trying to escape from this pyramid structure that is trying to control our lives. This is fundamental stuff where we've got into to hear, we've got to at this point tonight, I'm, I'm very happy to talk

about it more. Before we do, let's just put a little bit of a line under the political side because we've put some pretty hard comments into the into the airwaves about what's what's happening with within politics. I don't think anybody would challenge the idea that it doesn't matter whether you vote Labour or Conservative, red or blue, you are in fact voting for a uniparty system where the same policies will be continued through each successive

government. So there's the pantomime of an election and, and all of the electioneering, but the reality is that the individuals may change and their colour may change, but the centralised policies continue. And those policies are clearly designed to absolutely wreck this country. And, and just to qualify that statement, of course we've heard the phrase Build back better being used. So the implication is that we've got to build something better than existing.

But I've reported many times on on 2 politicians. Danny Kruger was one of them. The other gentleman's name's gone at my head, but they were on public record saying that the Conservative government at the time planned to bring in what it called creative destruction in the public services in order to herald in a new system of politics and and a new sort of nation state. And they were vilified. Danny Kruger, who was a parliamentary candidate at the

time, he was deselected. The other MP, embarrassing myself because I can't remember his his name, but we'll make

sure it goes up in the notes. He also talked about this and alongside that statement of creative destruction, I'm going to say I was one of the few people warning at the time about a wider government agenda to use what it called disruptors in order to get into the institutions and the civil service, to break down a stable, productive management system in order to make it easier to introduce whatever the new

agenda was. So, so we have seen absolutely the intent to break, you know, to break down society and anybody who is trying their best to fight back against this are going to say we, because I think it's reasonable, we are saying keep going. So we are not saying we're not saying stop. We're we're saying keep going. But whatever party you're in, understand. What is actually happening around you Because you need to

understand it to be effective. And your key point, I want to reiterate there was you said instead of looking up for this saviour to arrive, whether it's Nigel Farage or it's Donald Trump or it's Elon Musk, wherever he's come from, we should be looking left and right to our fellow men, fellow man and woman, in order to deal with good people, whatever colour or background, who also see what they're fighting.

I just wanted to put that as a baseline in before we move on to discuss some of some of these more spiritual aspects. But do you think, do you think that's a reasonable summary? I think that's a great summary, and I would just like to add 1 point to it about the way in which the country's been broken down. We have been deindustrialized in a shocking way. And it doesn't matter whether it's Conservatives or the Labour Party that have been in government. We are being deindustrialized.

Yeah, the shutting down of the steel plants, the shutting down of our coal, our energy. You only have to look at the potholes in the road, take a look at our high streets or shutting down. Yeah, it's just one, it's one attack against our against our whole way of life. The the fact that our water isn't any good, the fact that our food isn't any good, the fact that we can't even feed ourselves. It's just one thing after

another. So I did want to make that point about the practicality of how it doesn't matter who we vote for, we're getting the same problems. And of course, the, the, the main issue of the day is it even though we voted for these Conservative governments, even though we voted for Brexit, we get even more mass immigration, which is just compounding the

pressure on everything. So let's move on to the spiritual now, Brian. Well, I going to say I, I just want to respond to that one because of course immigration is, is such a, is such a hot topic and I always enjoy looking at the camera and saying, if immigration is upsetting you, then start to research where the migration policies came from. Where is all this mass migration come from?

And a man that that UK column has pointed at over the years is the the late Peter Sutherland. Sir Peter Sutherland who was EU NS ambassador for migration and he's on public record as effectively stating that we presumably the United Nations, but political masters, we need more mass migration to break down the homogeneity of the nation states.

So what we were being told very clearly was that migration was going to be used as a political weapon to not just break down the UK, but to break down the Western states. And of course that is happening. We're all suffering as a result of unsustainable immigration in this country. 600 odd 1000 people came in last year according to the government

statistics. But those people being used as a political weapon and many of them suffering themselves and their home country suffering from the loss of labour and and young people. I felt it was so important to say say this joke because because so many people want to look at migrants and they are the enemy. When I think we got to look deeper as to how they got here.

As I said at one BMP meeting, and it was very interesting how the audience reacted to me because I asked at one point where the people were concerned about immigration and, and they certainly said they were. And then I asked the audience, how did they get here? And initially there was silence. And I said, well, you know, this is a simple question. Did they fight their way ashore? And again, there was a big

pause. And then, and then a man, a very big man at the back of the room shouted out, no, we let them in. And he, he, he used an expletive with it as well. And I then said, oh, you let them in. I've always wanted to know who let them in. And of course, that that produced a pretty explosive response where we started to discuss who had opened the doors for this policy. And then I, I just asked another

question. I said OK, if you know you've been betrayed by your own members of Parliament, is the enemy the people who've betrayed you or the people who were invited in? And it it was fascinating to see how we then got a proper debate going in, in that BBC of course would have branded it an extreme right wing audience. That's not what I saw in those people. But we did get a proper debate about immigration having spelt out where the problem had come from in the first place.

I agree. I mean, that's one of the the tweets I've just put out recently is again going back to this idea that I have about a parasite class, a criminal class who run this country from the City, from Whitehall and from Westminster. They are the real enemies of the English people is London. Yeah, that's the problem. If we could, well, if we could just make ourselves more county, if we could just take power back to the shires, we might be

better off. But so long as these people who are at the top of the pyramid, I go back to this pyramid symbology, as long as those people are sitting there in London and telling the rest of us what's good for us, we are going to have problems. And it won't just be immigration, it'll be transhumanism.

It'll be, I don't know, doing away with cash that all these things that we're we're all having to struggle with all come back not to the symptom, which is, you know, lots of Pakistanis and Indians and Nigerians coming into the country and putting pressure on our nation because we can't, we just can't house them. It's as simple as that. But it's the real traitors, The real enemies are people who look just like us. Yeah. They're as white as you and I are, and they're as English as

you and I are. And they're sitting there down in London, and they think they have the right to destroy our lives because they've got a better ideal. Yeah, and we should just do as we're told and, you know, crawl up into a corner and die somewhere basically, because I think that that's basically what they want for the majority. And they are the real enemy. And people need to focus that that is where the enemy is, is where the power is.

And let's just end and end by reinforcing that that point with Tony Blair made a completely open and and publicly reported statement at one point that his intention was to create a new political class who would be appointed. That goes back to your, to your common purpose thing, which you used to talk about years ago, which I used to listen to and the post demo, the Post Democratic Society. Yeah, that's what they were. That's what they were pushing.

They were pushing this. I had some, I mentioned this to a customer one day about common purpose. I've been watching one of your things and I happened to just mention it. And this is in Milton Keynes. Yeah. And this is at least 15 years ago. And they said to me, Oh yeah, they're the new Masons. Common purpose are the new Masons the the new the new way in which you create a class of people secretly to control everybody else.

That's, that's very interesting. Joe Blitz, I'm watching the clock and I, I think we, we, we need to come into a close in a minute. But you you brought in the spiritual aspect, which which I think is, is so critical. And I'll say to the audience that at the weekend I got the opportunity to do a little interview. I've still got to edit it, so it's not available yet. But I spoke to a gentleman called Ross who has been very active with the church down in Cornwall.

And he was describing to me how the Church of England system in Cornwall is being absolutely dismantled as a result of policies which are particularly coming through the Bishop of Truro, Bishop of Truro's office. And what does it involve? Well, it basically says we have no money, we've run out of money and therefore we can't pay vicars. And therefore, well, unfortunately you can't have a vicar per parish, per church was the traditional system.

What we're going to have to do is have one vicar for several churches and that could be 3 or 4 or 5 or 10. And if you're worried about what the pastoral care is going to be, well, don't, because we're going to bring in amateurs, we're going to bring in members of the public who are going to step in and fulfil the traditional role of the vicar. And Ross took me through a lot of detail about what he could

see. And ultimately he's saying to me, Brian, the Church of England has now unleashed a policy to destroy churches across the UK. And it was a fascinating interview interview. And I'm, I've got to say that what he was talking about was making complete sense to me.

I also pointed out to him that in research work that the UK column had done, we we had Archbishop Welby at the time very excited that he was working with international bankers and hedge funds to raise 17 trillion to support the global, the gayer green agenda. So we can't put ruse on churches, we can't support the poor in the parish. But we had the Archbishop of Canterbury drinking champagne with the likes of Christine Lagarde and others to say we can

raise 17 trillion. This can't be accidental job. This has got to be calculated destructive policy from the very top of the Church of England. Absolutely. I mean, I call Justin Welby. Justin the bastard. Yeah, because he is, by the way. And his father was personal secretary to Winston Churchill. Yeah. Justin before he became a member of the Church of England. Oh, no. Before he became part of the clergy. Yeah. Was involved in trading in the City of London.

So you see where this man is coming from. He has no interest in spiritual well-being of this country. He has no interest in saving souls. He has no interest in telling men, women and children about Jesus Christ because Jesus Christ is the way in which you learn to have a more abundant life, a healthy life, a happy life. It's a fact, all right? For those of you who aren't religious, don't worry about it.

It's just the fact. Go and buy yourself a Bible and think about things, Read the Bible, think about things. You will find that Jesus Christ is the man. Yeah. So when you've got somebody like Justin. Yeah, coming along and hollowing out the Church of England because that's what he was put there to do. As a matter of fact, I think one or two of them before him, we're also given the same job. But essentially it's about hollowing out our spiritual life. When I was a boy in our village,

it was a post office. There was a couple of pubs and there was the church and the school. Yeah. Those are the things that make living in an English village one of the most wonderful places to be. Yeah. And if you take away the church, you take away the spiritual heart. It's not, it's bad enough that the pubs go, yeah, it's bad enough that the post office has gone. Yeah, but you take away the church and that's it. All you have is a collection of houses. And I don't think people realise

that. And I Oh, no, I think people, it's beginning to dawn on people that that's, that you need that church in the middle of that village by the village green. Yeah. In order for a village, a community, to have a real heart, especially for the English people, the Scottish people, the Welsh people, the Ulster people. We are a Christian people. It's in the very essence of who we are. Everything about our history and our traditions and our customs is based upon that Christianity.

And when you get somebody like Welby, who's from that vampire parasite class again, yeah, who? They have nothing but contempt. Jesus Christ. I genuinely believe a great many of them are real 100% Satanists. And I mean that when I describe Satanists. I'm not just talking about Anton La Vey and walking around with a pitchfork or, I don't know, running about nude in the middle of the night and all this kind

of carrier. I'm talking about people who genuinely believe in Satan's promise that they can become God. Yeah. That they can have their own will to power and they can be their own. Their own spiritual world is all to them. And it's all about imposing. It's all about them having their will all the time, every time. Yeah. And they see no reason why you should ever do anything good unless it pleases you.

I believe these people think that they can, that they can live forever through transhumanism, that they can defeat God. Yeah. That they can do what they want. And they never, ever have to submit to a moral or ethical higher order in the transcendent as God. You know that they never have to. And this is the important point I'd make about Christianity. They never have to have faith.

They never have to turn around and put their lives in God's hands and say, all right, God, I'm, I'm beat, you know, I can't do this. You're going to have to do this. I'm going to rely upon my putting my future in your hands. That's the wonder of life. That's where real life is. These people don't want that. They never want to be grateful. They never want to have to hand over their lives to God.

They want to be in charge all the time and they want to impose their will upon every aspect of their life and everybody else's life, and that is true Satanism. Very, very interesting comment Joe, and I'd like to continue this. Me too, Brad. So I hope that you'll come back because there's so much to talk about both politically and

spiritually. But there's two things I'd just like to say for we part company to the audience is that if you're out there and our comments about Reform and UKIP or BNP, whoever else we've mentioned, if you're feeling that your feathers have been ruffled and that we we haven't quite been fair, then I hope that you will come and join us

for a Part 2 about this. Because I feel the time has come for me in particular to take the gloves off in respect to what I actually see going on in the political party. So that's my challenge to the audience. If if you're finding this one is not to your taste or you're feeling a bit upset, don't disappear. Come back for round two and we'll see where we get to. And the other thing I'd like to say is that if if anybody is perhaps you know, not a not well, it is not spirit.

I'm going to deliberately use the word spiritual, but doesn't quite understand why you job have have started a home in on matters spiritual and Christian. Just think that in 2025, UK is a country in which prayer is now being banned, in which a country in which you pray and you can end up in court, you can end up in prison. So prayer is apparently so dangerous, it's got to be banned.

And there's a reason for this. And to understand the reason why the government thinks that prayer is so dangerous, in my opinion, echoes back or reflects back onto the things that you've just been talking about, because they're frightened of prayer, because it's the prayer which directly challenges their spiritual, their malevolent spiritual position. Absolutely right. I think people don't recognize how important prayer is. I mean, I always say there's two

things that a Protestant needs. I am a Protestant. I make a big deal about being a Protestant, right. And the two things that our Protestant needs is King James Bible and prayer, because prayer is the way in which we connect with that transcendent power that is our Father in heaven. And they don't want us to connect with our Father in heaven. They want to keep us unconnected. Yeah, with the transcendent,

with our Father, they don't. They want us all to be orphans who they can abuse and beat and nobody. And we can't have a connection with our father. Yeah, they want us not to know our father. They want to keep us trapped in caged and beaten down. Yeah, but when you know your father, when you know your father's there and he's on your side, then that gives you hope. They don't want you to have that more than anything else in the world. Joe, thank you very much.

So from reform to prayer, I think that's a pretty interesting discussion in in a bit over an hour. So I'm going to say thank you very much for joining me. It's been a really fascinating conversation. I've extended the invite to you, I hope. More than happy, Brilliant. I look forward to it, Brian. It'd be great. OK. Thank you very much for joining me today. Thank you, Brian. Goodbye.