Dan Wootton Outspoken - EXPOSED: REAL REASON ELON MUSK TURNED ON NIGEL FARAGE AS IT'S REVEALED HE IS PUPPET OF ZIA YUSUF

Episode Date: September 18, 2025

Advance UK leader Ben Habib joins Dan for a bombshell interview where he reveals the truth about Elon Musk’s falling out with Nigel Farage over Tommy Robinson, why Zia Yusuf is now running Reform UK, why Julia Hartley-Brewer was “stupid” to cancel him, and the growing concerns over King Charles going woke. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode is brought to by Tron Aries. For the first time the captivating world of Tron breaks out of the grid. Aries, a highly advanced program, journeys into our world on a dangerous mission, marking humankind's first encounter with AI beings. Featuring an electrifying original soundtrack by 9-inch nails. Tron Aries is a must-see movie event, filmed for IMAX and made for the big screen. Experience it only in theaters, October 10. Get tickets now.

No spin, no bias, no censorship. I'm Dan Wooden. This is outspoken episode 318. And I am very excited to say we have a special week of uncancled interviews ahead where we are going to go in depth with some of our favorite guests to look at the incredible challenges facing the United Kingdom and the world. And there is no one I would rather start off with than Ben Habib. the leader of Advance UK at a time when there is quite clearly the early shoots of a British political revolution. So because of the special episode today, there will be no Royal Uncancalled after show, but don't worry, lots of Royal videos will be going up after the main show on YouTube. No gracious Britain Union jackass either. But that will return when we are back live. I'm going to be speaking at CPAC Australia this weekend and then meeting up with my mum,

my dad, my sister and my niece, which is why I'm away for a few days. But of course, if there is any major breaking news, we will check back in with you. And we have some amazing guests to hear from over the next week. So we will be here as normal. So now, let's go. Ben Habib, leader of Advance UK, so brilliant to actually have you face-to-face in the studio for the first time. It's wonderful to be here because I've always seen it down the line. And it is a real place.

You are real. It is a real place. I'm not an AI invention. But look, Ben, I actually felt like what happened at the weekend. And obviously you also kicked off our special live stream from Uniting the Kingdom. And I mean, Ben, it was insane. We had over 100,000 people watching. the stream at one time we've had well over a million views now that's phenomenal and remember we're

just one of many independent channels broadcasting but a million views just on your channel just on that channel and you know we spoke about it on the day but the metropolitan police trying to say oh there are only a hundred thousand people there i just don't get that you know we were i didn't really realize on the day itself because i was in whatever goes as a green room in in in in one of those things, but I could see the aerial footage that was coming in. And it was all the way, halfway from Whitehall, down to Parliament Square, round Port Cullis House, onto the north side of embankment, coming round again back towards where we were, but also right across Westminster Bridge. Yes. To Waterloo Station. To Waterloo Station. Jam packed. They couldn't

make it in. And a lot of people didn't even try making it in. They just went home because they couldn't get across the bridge and that must be three or four hundred thousand people minimum minimum minimum minimum i mean i've really looked closely at those crowd numbers and i am convinced that it's well over a million because when you actually look at the fact that people were coming in and out over the course of the day and as you say i know from my own friends many of them just had to turn around they tried to get as close as they can but they were actually told they couldn't come over westminster bridge but look for me it almost doesn't matter what the main mainstream media say what the police say about the event.

The coverage was despicable in terms of its bias. But in some ways, I almost feel like it makes it more powerful what happened on the day because there was revolution in the air and these were not extremists. These were not people on the so-called far right, even though I don't buy into that term at all. I think it's an irrelevant term now. It's just a confection. It's a confection.

But, you know, these were true patriots. And the moment that you came on stage, I thought was very significant, actually. I'm not quite sure how much you could actually hear of what was going on around you because you were there in the centre. But there are these young British patriots who were chanting, Ben for 10, Ben for 10. And it felt like there was huge support for you in that crowd. I do wonder if you could say that maybe what happened on Saturday. Saturday was the start of this new British political revolution? Yeah, I mean, there was definite peaceful defiance, I would say, in the crowd.

The crowd had had enough. The other thing that they chanted when I was on stage, which you might recall. You can say it here. It started. I could just hear it starting, I think, in the same group of people. You know, Stama is a wanker. Yes. And I looked at them and it got louder and loud.

And I said, well, right, let's get it off our shoulders. Stama is a wanker. And of course, Starma is a wanker, and the people are there because the establishment has turned their back on them. And it was remarkable after the event, Stama came out and he said the flag, yet again he said the flag was being used as a symbol of division, as a symbol of, I think he used the, he quoted the expression, no surrender, which is a perfectly valid thing to say, we're not going to surrender, we're going to stand our ground. It's a metaphorical statement. We craft our language in military metaphorical statements, don't we? It's part of our English language. But he absolutely took it literally and then denounce people with the flag, denounce the crowd.

And what he should have done was recognised that the crowd was saying we want to change the way this country is governed. We are the British people. Look after us. And that message is gone, woof, straight over his head. So what I say is the crowd was right. Starma is a wanker. Yes. And what's so fascinating.

is that not only were you the only politician in the country who's prepared to say that, you were actually the only politician in the country who was prepared to show up. No serving MP was at Uniting the Kingdom unless they maybe showed up undercover, but certainly not in any official capacity whatsoever. If they'd wished to have spoken, they would have been welcomed with open arms. Absolutely, no matter what party they were. So no one can say they weren't invited. and therefore they didn't speak.

And I think you've, that for me is the other big takeaway, the number of big takeaways, but that's a big takeaway that an opportunity to speak to three, 400,000, maybe a million British citizens directly by those that ostensibly democratically represent us is shunned by the establishment. And one thing I meant to mention in my speech is one of the drawbacks of speaking without notes

was that, I don't know if you've noticed this, Dan, but over there, I'm sure you have noticed it. Over the years, the barricades in front of Parliament have got bigger and bigger and bigger. And last week I went to Parliament and now they have, as you may or may not know, because it was new to me, a nine foot tall metal fence from one end of Parliament to the other. And basically what that symbolises is an increasing separation of the people from Parliament. Parliament is turning its back on the people. It's cutting the people out. it's protecting itself and it's protecting the extreme policies it's practicing.

But there couldn't be a better metaphor for what is going on in British politics. Absolutely represents it. We are so detached now, Ben, from our leaders, from our so-called leaders. And the fact that they were not there and the fact that they drag out their far-right slurs and have their favorite broadcasters

talk about racists and activists It's so, I mean, look, we've seen it all summer long, haven't we? It's the same thing with the hotel uprising, outside the migrant hotels. These are ordinary, patriotic people who are no longer prepared to be scared off by derogatory terms. Absolutely. And this is putting a slap in the face of democracy. For Starma to react the way he did to that crowd, what he should have done was say how terrific it was that a million people came down. How terrific it was that it wasn't violent. It was all peaceful. I know there were

apparently 25 arrests. Yeah, but outside the barriers of the actual event. Of the event. And, you know, 25 out of, let's take their figures, 110,000, that's 0.0.02%. Yes. And I mean, you crunch the numbers very brilliantly compared to the Notting Hill Carnival, where there were 528 arrests compared to nine arrests at United the Kingdom. Weapon, possession, 46 versus none, sexual offences 18 versus none. And as you said, Ben, what did the MSM say about the Notting Hill Carnival? Lovely family day out. What did they say about the United Kingdom rally? Far right, racist yobs. But we see through it. It doesn't matter. We don't rely on these people for our view of the world anymore. It's changed. And you mentioned the million views you've had.

And while we were actually speaking at the weekend, I think on X alone, there were one and a half million people watching. Yes. And I think it went up to two million. That's bigger than any MSM channel at any point in time. And as Tommy said, on stage 9,000 people were watching sly news because they don't trust sly news. And by the way, they shouldn't because I came back from the rally and I watched the mainstream media coverage and I was like, hang on a moment. This was not the event that we were at. And it's incredibly depressing. But in some ways, I think for you, it's a huge opportunity now. It is. And, you know, what I said, because I I've also been cancelled, as you know, by talk and by G.B. News is I'll go over the head.

I'm absolutely shocked by it, and they deny it. But it's true because it's self-evidently true. I haven't been on. The day I launched Advance UK was the last day I was on GB News. Well, you know why I say their denials are absolute Boulder Dash, is that when Elon Musk had that meeting with Nick Candy and Nigel Farage at Mar-a-Lago in January, both GB News and Talk TV acknowledge. that this was the major story of the week. There was virtually wall-to-wall coverage about it. Yet, Elon Musk actually has gone, I would argue one step further, and we'll talk about this in a moment,

but I would argue one step further. He has pretty much endorsed Reform UK as his political party of choice in the United Kingdom. What did I say, sorry, reform UK? No, sorry, he has pretty much endorsed. That is a very fraudulent slip. Well, he won't be doing that. We know that now.

He certainly won't be doing that now. No, he has advanced. He has endorsed at France, UK. Absolutely. But Ben, not only did they not invite you on, it didn't even warrant a mention. No, it's extraordinary. And the telegraphed G.B. News Talk TV.

No, and I'm the leader of a political party, which has grown faster than reform did, and there wasn't any coverage of my speech on any channel. It's not that I, it's not for my ego that I say that, is that they should have covered it, because this is a fast becoming a significant political movement. And what I say, and I'm so encouraged by the, the million views you had, the 2 million people that were watching it on X and so on,

is that we'll reach over the heads of mainstream media. To hell with them. 100%. The 34th, 35,000 members we've now got, we got without them. 100%. But this was Donald Trump's strategy and he won. And this is the thing that I find so frustrating in a way about the strategy of Nigel Farage and Reform UK. It's like you are meant to be the game changes.

The revolutionaries here in the media. But Nigel is totally obsessed about, you know, what the Daily Express writes about him or what the BBC writes about him, it's irrelevant. He's fighting yesterday's battle. Nigel Farage, for all the claims that he makes of being in tune with where the people are, he's way behind where the people are.

He's way behind where the media are. He hasn't kept up. He's fighting the battles of the 1990s in the early 2000s, having to keep in with the male, keep in with the sun. You know, if they're not with you, forget about them.

Totally. And also, and remember, you know, I was executive editor of the Sun and I was the main columnist for the Daily Mail online for a period before my cancellation. I have been disgusted by what's happened to both of those newspapers. They are now against the Patriots of this country. And it was interestingly, I was speaking to a very former senior editor at the mail over the weekend. His view of what happened at Uniting the Kingdom was that Nigel Farage should be very, very, concerned indeed. I'm sure he is concerned. The 35,000 members or whatever we've got are vastly

at his cost. Most of them, I think there are a few who are for the first time ever joining a political party, no doubt. But there would have been a big impact on reforms membership, which by the way doesn't show up in their ticker. Their ticker is just resolutely stuck at 240,000 or wherever it is. Well, they're going to lose a lot at some point. when it comes up to the year because I think they lost about 40,000 when Rupert Lowe was reported to the police. But I am told what their strategy is, is to be, by the time those people are taken out of the ticker, others have joined. They will have replenished. So they're feeling quite confident about that now. But what they didn't do is take out the 40,000 who resigned at the time

of Rupert Lowe's defenestration because they had been. paid their membership fee for a year. So just so you know, that's the sort of technical around it. But on a moral front, I do feel like it was a complete disgrace for Reform UK not to endorse the people who were at that protest on Saturday, not endorse the message of that protest and actually be gutless. I mean, I watched Layla Cunningham, for example, who's their recent Tory defector on the London assembly.

Yes. And it looks like she will probably be their Merrill candidate. It's quite interesting. She's obviously a Muslim woman. That's the path that Nigel seems to be wanting to go to in terms of thinking that, I mean, he's been very public about it. The only way that we can win is with a big Muslim vote. But she went on GB News and said, well, I'm not going to comment on Tommy Robinson. Well, why and how? Why are you so scared? I don't know. As you say, I think, well, as I said, I I think they're fighting yesterday's battle. They're trying to ingratiate themselves with mainstream media. They think the way to get elected is to become the establishment, which is why, you know, again, I really don't want to go down the reform rabbit hole. But, you know, Farage was on Capitol Hill denouncing the Online Safety Act. And then two days later, he recruited Nadine Dorris, its architect, into the bosom of reform. Yes.

That is not consistent. So what about, can I just put one counter argument to you? Because I'm interested to know if you believe this is now a threat for your political party. So the counter argument that I keep hearing from, as you call them, Farragists, do you know what I mean? There are a certain group of propagandists who will never say that reform has done any wrong. And even those within that group who support Tommy Robinson, their argument to me privately is that it is too much of a risk for Nigel to be seen in any way supporting Tommy Robinson. Robinson because of what has happened to Marine Le Pen in France and the possibility that the deep state could attempt to prescribe reform UK as a terror organization. Is that paranoia or is that a realistic fear? So first of all, he doesn't need to be supportive of Tommy Robinson. A good first step would be to stop throwing him under a bus. Even Tommy Robinson himself. It's all he's ever asked for. And no individual in my mind should be at the centre of one's thinking when it comes to establishing a movement. Now, Tommy Robinson, the persona, represents in people like Farage's

mind, some kind of hard, right, Voldemort of British politics. That's the persona they've created around Tommy Robinson. But Farage should be a big enough man to know that in politics, they try and vilify you, they try and take you down. He's been on the receiving end of it. And he must know there's two sides to this story. And he must also know that the incarceration of Tommy Robinson last year was a politically motivated incarceration, because by definition it was. It was the politically appointed, ennobled in order to get him into government, Lord Homer, the attorney general, who decided to throw the book at Tommy Robinson. A civil case effectively became a criminal case. All Nigel Farage had to do was say, look, I don't like Tommy Robinson. He said some things I disagree with. but his incarceration was political. That would have been the correct thing to say because that is the truth. And if Nigel Farage is going to be the saviour of the United Kingdom, he must establish an association with the truth.

We've had too many what I would call political expedients who deny the truth in the pursuit of curring favor with this constituency or that constituency. If we're to save the UK, and again I'm sure you will agree, with this, Dan, because you've been on the receiving end. We as politicians mustn't allow the cancellation of those who should not be cancelled. And we've got to be brave enough to stand up for them, even if you're going to have the establishment against you,

particularly if you're going to have the establishment against you. Many people have said to me, Ben, you're on really dangerous ground now. You're going to get the attention of the establishment. They're going to come after you personally. They're going to come after your businesses. Well, I say, let them come. come they're underestimating

where the British people are they're underestimating voices like yours and others Katie Hopkins millions literally and we will take them on I will do it very peacefully I will do it with argument with debate not using any other means

but I will stand my ground firmly and I will reveal how they're using the system against those that wish to change the system I agree. I don't want to go down the reform rabbit hole. So I just want to ask, because I want to talk about advance and Elon. I think it's really interesting given we've got this time today. But I do just want to ask one final question. There is a sense of inevitability growing around the idea of Prime Minister Farage. Even the establishment and the mainstream media, which for a long time believed that that was a political impossibility, have had to change their thinking. Is there any part of you that thinks it's too late, that his lead is just too big, that the organisation is just too strong, and that actually, no matter how hard you try, most people on the right in the end will think, well, we've got to go with the more realistic option. I might agree with Ben Habib and Elon Musk and Tommy Robinson more purely on where they stand politically. but actually reform is our last hope. What's your response to that? I see it very differently.

I think whether or not advance exists, reform is not going to make it to 2029 because they're incapable of getting good people into the party. They're incapable of establishing what I would call a political philosophy and they're even less capable of producing policies that are coherent. We've seen them. Look, the signature policy for Mr Farage should be. be deportations. He's built a career on campaigning against immigration. Yet when he came out with

their Rasmataz deportation policy, it was shot below the water line by himself within 24 hours when first he said women and children would be deported, which was the correct line, with their husbands, with their men. Families go back collectively when they're deported. Then push comes to shove the next day under questioning. He said, well, actually women and children won't be deported. That revealed two things for me. It revealed, first of all, that he doesn't understand how to make coherent policy, because if you exclude women and children, that gives a gaping hole for more women and children to come across the channel and be encouraged to do so, because they know that they're not going to be deported even under a reform government. But it reveals

something else, which I don't think people have really picked up on. The reason he excluded women in children was because he sees deportation as an extreme policy. He thinks it's draconian and awful. And so in the pursuit, again, of currying favor with the mainstream, he thought, oh, I'll take women and children out and I'll look like the nice guy. But actually what he did was just hold his own policy within 24 hours. So, and I can say the same about the way he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he, he, the policy on putting trans women into women prisons, prisons, and a whole host of other

things. They go this way, they go that way, and they look like idiots. and they're not going to make the distance. They're not going to make the distance. One of the wake-up points for me on reform, when I recognize that they're actually not going to make it to 2029, was when they threw Suella Braverman and Robert Generic under a past. Now, many people said that was very clever politics

because that basically, from Zaire Yusuf, it removed the threat of a Suella Braverman leadership in Reform, UK, or Robert Generic leadership. But actually what they did in that one move, was to throw the right of the Conservative Party under a bus and take all the pressure off Kemi Badenock to stay right for fear of losing Suella Braverman and Robert Jenrick. Are you with me?

100%. And then we saw a shadow cabinet reshuffle and we got James Clevely in the shadow cabinet revealing to us that actually Kemi is not worried about Suella and Jenric. So reform has now taken all the pressure off the Conservative Party who are coming to their normal liberal Democrat center, reform itself has said they're going to be left of the Conservative Party by the next general election.

That means reform has left the 17.4 million voters who voted to leave the EU, who were entirely of our disposition, unrepresented. So reform, I think, ain't going to make it. And whether or not advance exists. And the reason advance must now exist is to make sure those 17.4 million people have representation, because they're not going to get it from the Conservative Party. And it does feel very clear to me, and remember I know a lot of these people, as to you, and we know how things work behind the scenes. It does now feel very clear. In fact, I can say

it as just a fact that Zia Yusuf is being lined up as the successor to Nigel Farage. And this is a guy who bought his way into the party with a 200,000 people. pound donation who we know very little about including by the way his faith his Muslim faith which he we know is a huge part of his life but he refuses to speak about publicly and I think then a lot of people can see through what's going on with reform and are very concerned about the influence of this man Zia Yusuf so his presence in any political party in the manner in which he was taken in is inexplicable isn't it two hundred thousand pounds doesn't buy you the position that he's been bought.

So there's something else going on about which we do not know. Correct. And that means there's something sinister happening. Correct. That means Farage, just a logical set of steps. Farage is his puppet. And that ain't good.

It's not. Which is why, obviously, so many people are desperate for an alternative. And the huge earthquake, shattering moment in British politics, in recent months, completely ignored by the mainstream media, was Elon Musk's endorsement of Advance UK. This was a massive moment.

Elon Musk is not just the richest man in the world, is just not arguably one of the most powerful men in the world. He's a man who has huge resonance with British patriots who are deeply concerned about the future of the country because we know Ben that Elon Musk has done more to shine on, light on the Pakistani Muslim rape gang cover-up than virtually anyone else in the world. It wouldn't have

entered the psyche of parliament to debate it if it hadn't been for Elon Musk. They couldn't ignore it anymore. And the fact that it took an American to get our parliament to do the right thing. It's extraordinary. But it does absolutely reveal one thing. Elon Musk has

influence. And ignoring what Elon Musk believes or where he would like things to go is to our own detriment if we do it. There are 536 million people on X. 225 million follow Elon Musk. I was on with Piers Morgan the other day. He kept asking me about would you take money from Elon Musk? Taking money from Elon Musk isn't the salient question. The question here is, you know, I've got the support. Advanced UK's got the support of a very,

very influential man. Donald Trump arguably wouldn't be president of the United States of America if it wasn't for Elon Musk. Advanced UK now has that. protective blanket. And people may say, well, Ben, he's a foreigner. He shouldn't be interfering in British politics. But this is a man who cares deeply about Western civilization. I spoke to him, as you may know, and he, yeah, I told you, I broke the news with you. And his biggest concern was the threat to Western civilization. And he sees the United Kingdom, or he saw the United Kingdom, as the bastion of stability, the bedrock of democracy in Western civilization, and we are now being threatened. And so for America's sake,

for Europe's sake, the United Kingdom needs to be rescued. And so his endorsement should be welcomed by British patriots because he is going to help us resist the forces that would do away with our own country. And can you just talk to me a bit about, because people are fascinated, how does it work with Elon Musk? Like, has he planned? any type of financial support? No. At the moment, is it just moral support? How does it work?

So it's moral support, but also he does repost our output. So when we put something out, I've got 215,000 followers. That gets a certain amount of traction. But if Elon retweets it or reposts it, you know, then I've got exposure to 225 million people. But in that first conversation, though, when he encouraged you, I mean, He was the one. Yeah, I said, we need a new political party. And he did say he didn't believe Nigel Farage was strong enough, right?

A hundred percent, yeah. He sees Farage for, well, he said it was a runny source, I think, was the expression. So in that phone conversation with you, he was critical of Nigel Farage, but he was also very resolute that you needed to be behind a new movement. He wanted a new party. Or a new party. He wanted a new party. He made no secret.

to the fact correctly that it could either be Rupert or me or both, ideally. And he would like Rupert, I'm sure, to join us. He likes Rupert a lot. Because Rupert Lowe has set up, restore Britain, but as a political movement rather than a political party. And I'm sure, like many other people, he would like Rupert Lowe to join advance. But of course, that is a decision for Rupert Lowe. And right now he's not keen.

Well, he's clearly not keen. I mean, the party was set up around Rupert. And I think Rupert takes the view that, he wants a cross-party movement to make the arguments and reveal the policies that need to be revealed in order to save the country. And that's fair enough. But I think without the instrument of a political party, you can't actually deliver at the ballot box and you can't therefore deliver the policies he wants. So we'll be looking, I've joined Restore Britain. We'll look very closely at the policies that Restore Britain put out. And to the extent that we agree with them.

You can use them almost as how a main party might use a think tank. or the Fabian society. But the difference is this is a very transparent, democratic movement. They're actually publishing, aren't they, all of their votes from their members? I mean, Reform UK can take the policies if they wish to. I have a feeling they won't. I have a feeling they won't. But the point I'm trying to make is whether in or out of the party, to the extent that he's got a contribution to make, it'll be made.

And I get that. But I guess the point that I'm trying to get to is that even though you say Elon Musk hasn't pledged any money. It feels like, given he was planning, to give a major donation to reform UK, and we know that because, well, Anisnik Candy and Nigel Farage lying about their conversations, but the whole reason why they had that pilgrimage to Mara Lago, though, was to get the money, right? Well, I, look, I can't be definitive on this, but the, I think it was audacious for Candy and Farage to say they were getting $100 million.

Put yourself in Elon Musk's shoes for a second. and you're the richest man in the world. You must get tapped up every five seconds for money. And for Farage to put on his Farage smile and say I'm getting $100 million from Elon Musk. If I were Elon Musk, I think who the hell are you? He jumped the gun. To be pledging my money.

You know, he absolutely needed to abide his time and wait for Mr. Musk to decide how that money, to what extent and, you know, how much he was going to give them. So you're being very clear. You're not there with a begging. bowl. You're not interested in Elon Musk just because of his money. You're interested in his support because of the power he holds as a cultural figure. He's a comrade. He's a comrade. He shares our views. He's a comrade in arms, proverbial arms. I have to keep saying the word proverbial in case Kirstarmer gets

upset with my language. And there's a police officer waiting outside the studio, which these days but we use military metaphors. It's part of being English. Yes. But he shares our, he shares our vision. He He wants to save the United Kingdom and I, and I welcome his input. Just to be clear, what I said on Piers Morgan, I'll say it again now, I will never ask Elon Musk for a penny. No, and I respect that. Yeah. I respect that, but I'm just trying to, I think it's important to know that he was very formative in terms of the launch of the party. And that may be without Elon Musk at Fance UK might not exist.

You know, what else does that say? It says he's got vision. Yes. He could see straight away we need another party. Yes. But you've got to admit, Ben, there was a litmus test issue. the litmus test issue was Tommy Robinson. So Nigel Farage comes out in December, as you say, quite audaciously, says, well, we've got the 100 million, he gets all the headlines, he gets the grinning photo with Nick Candy

and Elon Musk. And then Musk does something which Musk does, and it's a very clever strategy, is he uses his massive platform and influence on X to put Nigel Farage on the spot over Tommy Robinson at a time when, let's be honest, I mean, no one. sane could agree that Tommy Robinson should have been in solitary confinement for months and months on end for a film. For a piece of journalism. I know. It's unbelievable. But again, as I say, if you just follow the fact, it was a politically appointed attorney general who decided to incarcerate Tommy Robinson. Just like Lucy Connolly. But, but Nigel failed the test. It is a litmus test issue

for Elon Musk. And by the way, it's so interesting. It's a free speech issue. Well, it is. Isn't it? If you can't protect free speech, democracy is dead. Well, do you know who was speaking about this before anyone? No, Tom. Charlie Kirk. Yeah. And I find that utterly fascinating, Ben, that what we have seen over the past couple of weeks is the British right, including Farage, absolutely, quite rightly, paid tribute to the huge important work that Charlie Kirk did. But remember, Charlie Kirk, in 2018,

was talking about the fact that Sadiq Khan was anti-free speech because Tommy Robinson was a political prisoner in the UK in 2018. And so again... And he was so young. Yes. To have seen it at such a young age. It's extraordinary, isn't it? But again, I find it so interesting. It's like you could... There's very little difference between the political positioning of Charlie Kirk and the political positioning of Tommy Robinson. Charlie Kirk is quite rightly being treated as a hero by everyone from Boris Johnson to Kemi Baydon to Nigel Farage. But the point that I'm making is he's saying nothing that Tommy Robinson has said in this country. And you believe Tommy Robinson is an enemy of the state. I mean, does this come back to that age old issue of classism? Is it because Charlie Kirk was an

American? Or if you take it in a UK context, Douglas Murray has a posh voice. Like, is this what it's about? Yeah. Well, Charlie Kirk died, of course. So I think, you know, to the extent that Farage may have disagreed with Charlie, that point of disagreement is absorbed into the tragedy of his death and the manner of his death. And so I think they somehow feel enabled then to come forward and endorse him and support him. It would be interesting. I haven't done it. And then to do an analysis, if there's any such material available, to see what was said about Charlie Kirk by the establishment. before they started, you know, saying it was blooming awful. But, you know, it's interesting to me because when you practice cancel culture,

as effectively has happened to Tommy Robinson, he's been cancelled from society, when you practice that, what you're effectively saying is I've lost the argument, I can't debate this guy, I'm not prepared to debate this guy, so I'm going to either use lawfare, which is the way that... Most people do it in the UK, or in the case, the tragic way that Charlie Kirk was removed is through violence. Violence. But the minute that guy pulled the trigger on his rifle, he was signaling to the world that Charlie Kirk had won the debate. So Charlie Kirk tragically died, but he won the debate.

And that means that people like Kirstama, Kemi Baddnock, and Farage need to wake up. And they need to try and understand where Charlie Kirk was in his. positioning and perhaps look at the march that took place last weekend again and decide whether or not they still feel the same way that they did before they join all those dots together. Because by the way, I completely agreed with Charlie Kirk, so I don't say this as a criticism. I say it as a compliment. But what Charlie Kirk was saying about Islam and the threat of Islam to the United Kingdom was actually, I promise you, I've analyzed all of these posts on X was actually more.

to use their language, extreme, than what Gertfield is or Tommy Robinson knows. Oh, he was right out there on some of the stuff Charlie was saying. I can see Farage absolutely, you know, turning his nose up at it and being fearful of engaging on it. That's why I'd like to do an analysis to see, you know, what he said about Charlie in the past, if there is any such analysis. Well, I think because he was friends with Trump, of course. It's easier to ignore, isn't it? But when it's Tommy Robinson. And then, of course, the other thing they use, Ben, and we've seen this.

with myself, with Katie Hopkins, now with you. The other tool of the deep state, the regime media, is censorship. And I think people really often miss how important that is. Who is G.B. News choosing to put on its sofas. And certainly since I left the channel, it has changed dramatically. I feel a decision has been made by Paul Marshall, who is the billionaire owner of G.E. BBC News, at least one of them. There's also Lagartan Institute, or not known as the Prosperity Institute. I think a very clear decision has been made. We need to make Nigel Farage

Prime Minister. So explain to me why they've done that, Dan. You'll know more about it than I will. Well, I see, my personal belief is they didn't used to be Farragists at all. They were not. I mean, interestingly, in the case of Paul Marshall, who is a man who I believe is massively underreported in the UK media, given his huge influence. Remember, he now owns the special Spectator. He owns Unheard. He made a very serious bid for the Daily Telegraph. This is a man who wants huge amounts of political power and political influence. You might love him because he was an original Brexiteer, but he was also a Lib Dem. You know, this is not, you know, this is, yeah, this is not a small C conservative. What was his first decision as editor of the spectator, sorry, as

owner of the spectator to hire Michael Gove as editor? What was Michael Goh's first decision as the editor? to endorse Kamala Harris to be the president of the USA. So I think there is number one a wake-up call that has to be going on about these sort of new media moguls who are pulling the strings, spending a lot of money. When it comes to G.B. News, though, what it's about now is about being able to say, we elected a prime minister. It was G.B. News, what won it, to use the old term. Well, that is a terrible motive. Sorry, I am being. being naive because I just assumed

they may want the best for the country. Well, no, because if they wanted the best for the country, they would allow free and fair debate. They wouldn't have cancelled you. They wouldn't have cancelled Rupert Lowe. They would have accurately covered Tommy Robinson's rally and allowed him on. They would have accurately covered

Katie Hopkins case. I don't believe it's about that anymore. Now, certainly when I joined GB News, I obviously joined very altruistically at a time... Did you think the same thing that I did? Absolutely. And I mean, Ben, my whole thing is I've never been a party political guy. As you well know, I was extremely critical of Boris Johnson over COVID.

But I absolutely supported him before the 2019 election when I believed, and I know that you would say you've been proven right on this now, and I would be prepared to accept that. But at the time, I believed that the way to deliver Brexit was through Boris. You and millions of others. 100%. And you can look in hindsight. and say it was a big mistake and Farage was tricked

and we were all tricked. But we had an honest debate about it. Yes, but my point was, I was never on G.B. News as a propagandist for any political party. And if Richard Tice came on or you came on and don't get me wrong, and Nigel was on my show every week. But I viewed my role

to question the policies of Reform UK and to also hold Reform UK to account, and exactly the same way I would hold to account any political party. Of course my sympathies lied with them. I voted for Reform UK at the last election when you were still deputy leader and I was very honest about that. But I think a huge change has happened at GB News and they are now effectively the media arm of

Reform UK. I know for a fact that there are multiple presenters who have held discussions with Reform UK about standing as candidates in the future. But I also know and I think this is a little bit more chilling for me because I think presenters should be honest about these types of things. some have also held discussions with Reform UK about entering senior political roles, for example, the Caroline Levitt role, you know, the spokesperson role. So there's a lot of people who feel like... This is the power of patronage. Yeah, exactly. Their future career, some of them want to be in the House of Lords, for example, as well. So I think there is a clear change now where GB News exists to make Nigel for us. Prime Minister, hence Tommy Robinson cannot be part of the ecosystem, hence you and Rupert Lowe cannot be part of the ecosystem. Yeah, well, they're in for a shock because they don't control the British people.

And what they should do is pivot very quickly. They should look at Farage carefully. They should look at Zeyar Yusuf carefully. Come to the conclusion that Elon Musk and I came to that these two people are not capable of a political philosophy, let alone the policies and legislation required to save this country. and change and change before it's too late. Do the country a service and do themselves a service because they'll be equally fated

if they correctly, in my view, endorse Advance UK rather than reform. Yeah, or don't endorse anyone, but have you all on? Have us all on, yeah. Of course I'd love to be endorsed, but yeah, have us all on. Totally, because I don't actually think as a news network Yeah, they should be doing that. They should be doing that, but I think what they should be. doing is giving the viewers a choice. And look, I know for a fact, and I've said it on my show a lot, but I know you were certainly in terms of Michelle Drewbray's show, the most popular guest that they had on. You know, the feedback that they would get from appearances from you was absolutely massive. So this is not something that they have done because the viewers don't like you. Well, that was the next thing I wanted to come on to, though, because you did suffer a real cancellation attempt during the

course of the last election. I do just want to talk about it. With Julia Hartley-Brough, I do want to talk about it. So, because it's what led to Nigel Farage being so prepared to criticize you publicly, although I know you have some doubts about that. But let's just watch the interview with Julia Hartley-Brough, because I'm interested, no, I haven't seen this for a long time. How do we feel about this a few months on? Let's have a look. Are you genuinely saying the reform UK policy is we will let people drown to make a point? Because I think that's what you're saying there. Julia, if someone comes, let's not infantilize these people.

They have free will. They were safe in France. They paid good money to get on a boat, speaking illegally to come. So I'm not going to infantilize them, and I'm not going to be held to ransom by their claim that they deserve protection as soon as they get into our door of waters. At the point when they use the tactic of jumping into the sea and they're drowning,

are you saying that British Border Force, and the British Navy will be instructed not to rescue those people from drowning. No, you didn't hear me. I said that we could, as an idea, provide them with another dingy into which to climb and then go back to France. And if they choose to scupper that dingy, then yes, they have to suffer the consequences of their actions.

Then you would leave them to drown. They cannot, absolutely, they cannot be infantilised to the point that we become a hostage to fortune. That would work quite well. However, that is not a policy that a civilised country shouldn't. Ben, did you deserve to be cancelled for that? Well, I mean, I wasn't cancelled for that. I mean, obviously it caused a few shockwaves because if you ignore... Nigel Farage has claimed it was privately...

Yeah, has he? That that interview was sort of one of his red lines for removing the deputy leadership. Yeah, well, I'll tell you what is interesting. I'll come back to the interview in a second. I've stopped hearing from reform that it's their policy to intercept the dinghy's. and send them back to France. They stopped saying it. Yes, they are now doing the Conservative Party approach, which is everything is through deportation. Detain and deport.

No turn back policy. No turn back policy. And we need a turn back policy. You absolutely have to have a turn back policy. And do you commit to a turn back policy? I absolutely commit to it. And it's proven to work. The Belgians do it.

Australia. And Australia did it. The Belgians did it without any loss of life. But the video you just played, with Julia Hartley Brewer. You can see it's a stupid hypothetical example. And the example is they leave the shores of France. They get to our waters.

We say, go back. They stab the boat with their knife. They end up in the drink. We provide them another dingy. They stab their boat again with a knife. They end up in the drink. And she says, and I was getting cross because it was a stupid... Because it's not going to happen if they know no one's going to be there to rescue.

It's not going to blumen happen. And that's the point. It's a deterrent. And so I said, you know, if they insist on drowning... well, then they must be allowed to get on and do what they wish. You can't infantilize them. But your fundamental point, though, is that it would not happen. It wouldn't happen.

Because, of course, these people don't want to die. They're not suicide bombers. And I did go on in the interview, if you played it on further. I said, well, you can give them five boats. And maybe you should take them into a boat, shackle them so that they can't stab it, and then send them back to France. But whatever you do, you don't let them come to the United Kingdom. Because then you have the problem of deportation.

which is much more difficult to deal with, much more expensive, the whole legal process, and then you've got to get them back to their countries. Send them back to Flipping France. And if we send them back to France, then France will wake up to the fact that they haven't got an exit to the United Kingdom, and France might start doing the right thing with its own borders. Are you with me? Do you start the domino effect of countries behaving?

100%. And the point is, without a turnback policy, I mean, I've always been for a turnback policy, not on its own. I think it works as part of a bigger program. But, you know, I also, and a lot of people say that I'm unrealistic, but I also want offshore processing as well.

Absolutely. Because I think we have to do everything. Absolutely. And you know what? In Australia, because I followed this very closely, sure, all of polite society from the UN on down,

absolutely said Australia was the most shocking, barbaric. And moral barbaric. You know, Tony Abbott, Might as well have been, you know, the worst human rights abuser in history. Funny that they don't speak about the weak of Muslims in China like that, isn't it? But actually, what Tony Abbott did was save lives in a whole load of ways

because he saved the lives of the people who were coming over on the boats. But also, he saved the lives of the Australians who were going to be killed by the people on the boats because we know a lot of the people on the boats are murderers and rapers, and we don't talk about that enough. Absolutely. We've got to the point now where we've forgotten that it's... terrorists, by the way, too. We've forgotten that it's civil society, British citizens that need our protection, not people breaking into the country. The criminals now in our country

get the protective blanket of the state. And the victims, and the victims, by the way, every time an illegal migrant comes to the United Kingdom, the victim is all of British citizenry. But by the way, they are protected. They're protected in France. Okay, they might be intense, not in four-star hotels, but they are not in a third world country. They are in France. But anyway, this sparked the huge barrage of public criticism that Farage felt like he could put out. Watch this. To being in touch about is Ben Habib. What's happened there for anyone that's not followed that twist and tan? Yeah. Well, that was the real champagne moment of the day.

I mean, it was a good day, but Ben Habib announcing he's not with us. Really was the absolutely icing on the cake. Look, after the election, Ben didn't get elected, other people did, and he and David Bull had been the deputy leaders under Richard Tice. And I said, Ben, David, I'm really sorry, but I want to make Richard Tice the deputy because he's in the House of Commons. He would literally deputise for me when he's there and I'm travelling around the country. And David Bull accepted that and is very much a part of the organisation. And poor old Ben felt bitter about it and he's attacked me more in public

than the Labour Party have. He's gone very bitter, very twisted, it's very sad. The fact that he's walked away, frankly, is a huge relief. Are you incapable of saving the UK and would you do massive damage in office? Is this the same Ben Habib who lost election after election?

Is this the same Ben Habib who, when he was deputy leader of the party, failed to get any of the candidates vetted, which caused us such problems at the general election, and failed to get us to stand in more than 12% of seats last year. Is that the same fella? What is this? Ben Habib, is there a way back for Ben? Over my dead body.

Well, he wrote a piece saying you didn't deserve your victory. Did you see it? I mean, I'm sorry, you get these small, very insignificant people who think they've got, who think they're more important than they are. They're frankly nothings. There you are. See, I would argue those comments have aged pretty badly now that you have the support. Well, I mean, what, an insignificant nothing who has the support of the most powerful and rich man in the world.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think Farage was expecting Advance UK to garner the support, certainly from Musk, then the 30,000 members as quickly as you did. No, we are a force with which he is going to have to reckon And he doesn't like it And you'll take him on Ah, 100, but I couldn't care less, absolutely If the only thing I'm interested, I'm not bitter There are a huge, there's lots of things I could say

Which I don't want to because it'll be the rest of the interview But the only thing I care about Is saving this country If Farage can get a political philosophy which would deliver that And a bunch of people who are capable of implementing that political philosophy. I would be over the moon and I'd back out. But they've thrown Suella Braverman under a bus. They've thrown Robert Jenrick under a bus. They don't know what deportation is. They don't know what a trans woman is. They have taken Jake Berry, who was

voted remain pro-lockdowns, pro-vaccine, net zero nutcase into the party. One minute they denounce the Online Safety Act, then they take Nadine Doris into their bosom. I mean, they're all over the place. So it's not me being bitter. Anyone who is prepared to look at this dispassionately and look at what they're saying, what they're doing, will realize they ain't the answer. Ben Habib, I really need to speak to you about King Charles. And this is a difficult conversation. I'm always very honest with my audience about why I find this difficult, because I am a royalist and I am a monarchist. And I'm always torn when it comes to criticism of our monarch. And the very lucky thing with Queen Elizabeth II is that we were privileged and blessed to have in her someone who really didn't put a foot wrong over decades and decades. It was always going to be a difficult transition. And of course, his reign has been so traumatized by the fact that this very serious incurable cancer diagnosis came early. And of course, for someone who's waited his entire life,

for that job, it's incredibly difficult. So I say all of that, not as a caveat, but just as an honest feeling about the fact that in some ways I find this conversation uncomfortable. However, we have to have it. There is huge concern, Ben Habib, that King Charles is not operating as the defender of the faith and is indeed moving so close

to not just protecting, but also actively promoting the Islam faith over that of Christianity as the head of the Church of England. Now, Elon Musk, who as we know is a major advance UK ally, has been very open about his concerns about the future of the Church of England. And you are one of the only political leaders in the country who has been brave enough to tackle this subject. Do you think we should?

Because I know this is one of the number one concerns of my audience. Trust me. They are hugely... King Charles, specifically, and Islam. That issue. It is one of the number one concerns. It is one of the number one issues in my mail bag. And no one's talking about it, Ben, apart from the people.

You are. So can you just explain to me what your concern is? And is there anything we can do about this? So I think a few things. I'm like you, I'm troubled by having to talk about the king because in my heart I am a believer in the monarchy, a believer in the constitution,

the unwritten constitution of the United Kingdom, of which the monarchy is a considerably important part. It may only be a titular head of state and a titular head of the church, but it is nevertheless very symbolic and it carries with it great weight with the British people. and I'm very reluctant to mess around with that and I won't mess around with that to be honest

I will leave things advance is not calling for a republic we're not calling for a republic that's a relief there are many many other things that we need to sort out before that we're not going to consider that we need to settle this country of course if the country was settled

and we understood our constitution as it should be applied then the king of England wouldn't have the opportunity to do anything, which was damaging to the fabric of the country. But it seems to me that the individual, Charles, does have some views which are completely in line with woke and completely damaging to the United Kingdom, including promoting this net zero nonsense, which is so economically harmful. And leaving that aside, there are two sides to the Islam debate. The first side is the debate about Islam itself. And what I say to people is we can get into the

weeds on Islam, but actually the only thing you need to know about Islam, the only thing you need to know is that the Quran is the word of God, and as transcribed by Prophet Muhammad and dictated to him by the angel Gabriel, it's the word of God. Therefore, it is perfect, and it is incapable of debate, and it is rigid, and it doesn't evolve with time. That makes it undebatable, which is why they want to pass Tarik Ali, what was his name, the Labour MP who wants to bring in protection for the Abrahamic face. What he wants is a protection against the debate on Islam. Now, if you wish to prevent debate of any ideology, it makes that ideology fundamentally incompatible with our very delicate Western democracy, our liberal democracy.

So Islam, in its fundamental sense, and Nigel Farage and I will differ here, because Farage will talk about the need to challenge extremist Islam. And I would say, Of course you've got to. There's no such thing. Well, I mean, and also extremism, to say you're going to challenge extremism is a statement of the bloomin obvious, isn't it? Or Gadzad says extreme Islam doesn't exist. You just have Islam. It's a fundamentalist Islam. I think there are Muslims who, so when I was born in Pakistan, Islam was going through an enlightened period. If you look at photographs of women, for example, from the 1950s and 60s and early 70s and. In Iran, Saudi, not Saudi, sorry, forgive me, Iran, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, they were all dressed in a self-evidently kind of Western way. Islam then did what Islam will always do over time, which is go back to its fundamental root.

It's essentially a fundamentalist religion because it wants to bring back everything to the word of God, to the prescriptive word of God. It's also more than a religion. It's a legal practice. It's a way of life. You know, Sharia law is part and parcel of being a Muslim. And being practiced in the United Kingdom. And being practiced. So it wants to yank that all back.

That makes it fundamentally, and I use the word on purpose, fundamentally incompatible with our very delicate liberal democracy that we have in the United Kingdom. So that's, and we can then go on. I think that's all you need to understand about Islam to know, that it poses challenges, fundamental challenges to the United Kingdom. But you mentioned the Quran. I mean, there are videos of King Charles quoting from the Quran.

And that's why people have such issues that he seems to celebrate major Islam moments like Ramadan much more than he does Easter or the Bible. There needs to be the next prime minister, assuming he's pro-British, needs to have a chat with the king and say, you know, this isn't on. you're the head of the church. And would you? Absolutely, I would. It's not on. And this is the flip side of the, this is the other side of the argument, which I really want to make as part of advance, is that we're not just culturally a Christian country. We are constitutionally a Christian country. And that's why the bishops still sit in the lords, though Stama

wants to take them out. We're not a multi-faith country. We're a Christian country. And we've got to make that case. You might recall in my speech at the Unite the Kingdom rally, I pointed to the flags and said, perhaps people find our flags offensive because actually they represent our Christianity, the St. George's flag, St. Andrews, you know, St. Patrick's when it comes to Ireland and St. David for Wales. These are all the patron saints of our four nations. And so that's offensive when they're represented in a flag to anyone who wishes to remove our Christian identity. The national anthem, Dan, is a hymn. Jerusalem is a hymn.

The national anthem, effectively for England, is a hymn, as is the flower of Scotland, and so on. And we've got to make the case, and we've got to propagate Christianity through our constitution and culturally, again, in the United Kingdom. Because we vacated the space. Well, of course, and one of the issues with Stama, and it's one of many,

that he is an atheist, but it's not just that he is an atheist alone. It's the fact that he has, for example, hired as his home secretary, Shabana Mahmoud, who is on the record, both in interviews and also in Parliament, by the way, saying every decision that she makes, the first thing that matters to her is her Muslim faith. It is her number one priority in life. She's on the record of saying that. Absolutely. And the problem is...

And that cannot be right. Well, no, but we have a king who, because of... this government is so weak, Ben, we know is influencing politics in a way that never happened under the late Queen Elizabeth II. Of course she had her private conversations, but you know it's more than that with Charles. He's formed a close relationship with Ed Miliband. He had a close relationship with Angela Rainer. He has a close relationship with Stama. He is much, much more influential because this government is so weak. Yeah. And he's on the side of the government's thinking, which, you know, we know that on the environment, don't we? And I think

we also know that on Islamophobia. And he said, he said the other day, people said, Ben, don't give it too much store, but he said the other day there is no border between France and England. Yes. I thought, what? Well, then you have no kingdom. Then you have no kingdom. And that's my real concern. Does he not understand that? But I think he's a collateral. I've got to be careful, because I don't want to denounce the king, but he's a collateral consequence of the collapse of our parliamentary system. Exactly. If we had a stronger government, we wouldn't need to worry about where the king is. He would hold his views privately if he had weird views. But, you know, I heard a speech the other day given by David Cameron when he was prime minister,

banging the drum about how we're going to get Muslims into this place of authority, that place of authority. Why are we wishing to import a foreign religion, a foreign ideology, into the fabric of a Christian? Christian country. I don't understand this obsession with wishing to do it. I'm half Pakistani. My dad's a Muslim. By the way, let me just say something. I know lots and lots of Pakistanis who look at fundamentalist Islam and go, oh my God, we don't want to go there. We do not want that. And even Saudi is now liberating itself. The UAE, there are many people in the UAE, including its prime minister, who looks at the United Kingdom and says, you've got groups of... Well, don't may ban the Muslim Brotherhood and we don't.

Absolutely. And a whole load of other Muslim groups that have been founded in the UK and practicing in the UK are prescribed in the UAE and not here. This isn't the thing about trying to nail people on their faith. It's a fundamentalist religion. And the form of practice taking place is fundamentalism. But I think the fear, Ben, just to wrap up, is that I believe this government has two overarching priorities. one introducing digital ID it's been Tony Blair's dream for decades as we know Starma is one of his puppets

who is probably going to make it happen but I believe the other is to introduce somehow some way this definition of Islamophobia that would effectively introduce a blasphemy law via the back door in Shibana Mahmood there is the perfect home secretary in which to do

both of those things I mean she's very open about both of those issues you know she's been open about digital ID since becoming home But if you look at her previous comments on the Islamophobia law, she is completely behind it. And you've got a king who I think also wants to make that happen. So to me, I feel like because the government is such a mess in so many ways, some of us are maybe not talking enough about the threat of digital ID and the threat of this Islamophobia law. The direction of travel is inescapably clear,

which is that ever greater state control, ever greater mingling, coalescing into some kind of, kind of amorphous global governance system. And this is the point, I think, Dan, the fundamental point. The people Stama calls far right, are people who believe in this country, believe in borders, believe in a sovereign United Kingdom, freedom of speech, democracy, getting rid of the EU, equality under the law, very fundamental British things. He finds them far right. He finds them repugnant because Stama is anti-British.

Stama is ashamed of the country that he has been given responsibility for And we've got to recognise that And if you're anti-British Then of course mass migration is fine He can't even call He can't bring himself to call illegal migrants illegal He calls them irregular migrants

I mean And that that basically legalises their illegality Doesn't it And if you can't get your language right You haven't got a hope in hell of governing properly Starma's anti-British A lot of people in the Conservative Party are anti-British British, anti-the-British state, and they want to take our borders down, they want us to be

part of the EU, they want us to give up our identity. What better way to do it than to import lots of cultures into this country? And what better way to make the case for digital ID than to sow discord. The discord that he says we were bringing at the weekend over the United the Kingdom March was nothing. We wanted peace. We want peace. Let me be clear. Starma, if you're listening, we want peace. He's the one saying discord. He's the one who will Use that discord to bring in ever more draconian laws. And I just want to say one thing. Please.

We, patriots on our side, need to be very careful. I hear people on our side saying, bring back capital punishment. Let's give the police more power so that they can clamp down on Palestine, pro-Palestinian marches, etc. Wake up. The state is against us. You do not want to be giving this state any more power. This state has already legalized killing old people. This state is already legalized.

abortion up to nine months, basically killing babies. This state should not be given any more power. We must not be calling for things we will come to regret. A very good thought, but I'm just thinking, goodness me, a chilling thought, I completely agree with you, but a British prime minister in slippery Stama who is anti-British. And that is what we're facing. I think Ben Habib is completely right on that, but that's why the battle ahead is actually going to be so But Ben Habee, advanced UK leader, so brilliant to have you face-to-face in our studio for the first time. But you know you're never banned here. No, well, thank you.

And I'm delighted that you're not an AI creation. No, I'm very, very real. You can finish me. There is no uncannceled after show today. And there won't be while I'm in Australia for the CPAC conference. But don't worry, we have the most incredible lineup of guests for you over the next few days. and I know you're going to love our conversations. If you do want to join the Outspoken community,

www.w.outspoken. Live is the address. Sign up on Substat. You'll get first access to our after show. But also, Substack is such a brilliant community. Free speech focused. I'm protected there from Lawfare as well. You can also message me direct. I would love you to be part of it.

And Dan, what an Outspoken now available as a podcast too, so you can subscribe and please rate and review. Wherever you get your podcast, actually, most people seem to do so these days on Spotify where you can also watch us on video or Apple Podcasts. So we're back tomorrow, 5pm UK time, midday Eastern, 9 a.m. Pacific. And remember, I promise to keep fighting for you.