Just Right Episode 968

Air Date: June 10, 2026

Host: Bob Metz

The views expressed in this program are those of the participants.

Clip (Four Lions):

Alright, everyone. Well, who's going to be the first?

I am.

Ah, very good. Very good.

Allahu Akbar.

What exactly did I volunteer for?

Messenger. Extra pay.

But, sir, this bicycle...

What's wrong?

Well, it looks kind of rickety. I don't know if it can get back up the hill.

I wouldn't worry about that.

Maybe if I take some of these bombs...

No, no, no. It is a part of the uniform.

And it doesn't seem to have any brakes.

It's okay. Allah will stop you.

Of course.

Bob Metz:

Welcome, everyone. It is Wednesday, June 10th, 2026. I'm Bob Metz, and this is Just Right, broadcasting around the world and online. Join us for an hour of discussion that's not right wing. It's just right.

Recent events in Britain have forced us for the second time in as many weeks to once again turn our attention not only to the events in Britain themselves, but to the very uncomfortable and broader and wildly triggering issue of Islam itself. Hot on the heels of Tommy Robinson's May 16 Unite the Kingdom event in London, England, came news about the murder of a young fellow named Henry Nowak in Britain, a murder that actually occurred six months earlier in December of 2025.

The national and international outrage and anger being expressed in how the British police handled the situation, which was all captured on video, has ignited a second wave of bringing people to the streets of Britain, demanding accountability and justice from their government and police forces.

And then, to add even more fuel to the fire, Restore Britain's leader Rupert Lowe, whose personal profile and party were both highlighted on our February 25th broadcast, addressed the British Parliament with a preview of what they can expect to hear when he releases his Rape Gang Inquiry Report, which is imminent anytime now.

So be forewarned. Some of what we'll be hearing today is deeply disturbing and affecting, in fact, downright horrifying. But out of these tragic and criminal events, a new conversation is emerging, one that has long been avoided but is now no longer being hidden from view.

And our part in that very necessary conversation begins right after our reminder that you can write us at feedback@justrightmedia.org. Hear us on WBCQ and on Channel 292 Shortwave. Follow and like us on your favorite podcast platform and visit us at justrightmedia.org, where you can access all of our social media links, archived broadcasts, and the support button that makes it easy for you to support the show. Because as always, your financial support is appreciated and is what makes this show possible.

Now when I first heard about the murder of Henry Nowak in Britain, I thought that this had happened in the immediate week prior to the news breaking. But then I realized that the reason this story was unknown so long was because the trial that eventually found Nowak's murderer guilty had just wrapped up, giving the media and public its first real glimpse into the situation. At the heart of the controversy was the issue of race. In particular, the race of Henry Nowak. He was white and he was unarmed and he made the tragic mistake of approaching a group of Sikh men whom he innocently assumed shared Britain's basic cultural values and behaviors, including being treated peacefully as an equal. None of this, of course, is going through his mind in any conscious way, but in a subconscious expectation based on the country he was living in. Tragically, he learned that Britain was no longer his country but now belonged to others, based solely on the fact that their skin color is not white.

By now, the wave of outrage and anger over this murder and details surrounding it, including the complicit actions of the murderer's family in the murder and the British law that allows Sikhs to bear arms while others cannot, has done the rounds and it's not our intention today to focus on this event, but rather on the subsequent events and discussions it has forced to the surface. And one of those discussions is the tragic state of Britain itself as a nation with a once identifiable distinct culture and history, and it is on that theme that the whole issue at hand must begin. So to that end, or I suppose to that beginning, on this side of our upcoming bumper, Australia's John Anderson's May 29th conversation with Britain's Carl Benjamin, who actually sounds as if he'd been listening to our recent string of broadcasts about the principles of freedom and national identity.

And on the return side of the bumper, American podcaster Tom Bilyeu in his June 4th conversation with none other than Britain's Tommy Robinson.

Clip (John Anderson Media, May 29, 2026):

John Anderson: Is there a place for a sensible nationalism and what does it look like?

Carl Benjamin: I think that without a kind of sensible nationalism, then we succumb to the global liberal order and we lose everything.

Because it's important to remember that our conception of countries and nations has become very detached from what a traditional conception of a country or a nation is. There's a great example of this during the Persian invasion of Greece. The Athenians just abandoned Athens and fled to Salamis to avoid the Persians. The Persians burned down Athens, but Athens was fine because its people were safe on Salamis.

And after the Persians left Greece and had been defeated, the Athenians just went back and rebuilt and Athens is now still the capital of Greece. So the geography of it is actually less important than the people who inhabited and actually carry out these traditions in their lives. And if we forget that, if we divorce or abstract the traditions or the political habits into a doctrine that can just be applied to anyone, well, then we'll find that we have actually been disconnected from something that we didn't realize that we carried ourselves. Our politics is coarsening.

Our politics is becoming a lot more, frankly, dangerous. You can profess a series of values in the abstract all you want, but if there are communities living among you who don't believe these values, then they don't really matter. They only matter if everyone actually abides by them.

And when you have large numbers of people who don't, you realize that, OK, well, if we continue on like this, we can say that Britain is still the geographic landmass, and we can claim to adhere to a certain set of laws and rules and norms. But in reality, what is actually happening is something different. And it's because actually the character of the people really matters.

And all of these things were really predicated on the character of a certain kind of people behaving in a certain kind of way because they thought it was the right thing to do. And if those people are gone, then it's not the same country, then the laws will not abide. I'd love to cite Rousseau on something, but he was correct when he said the true constitution is actually engraved in the hearts of men. And so a sensible nationalism must take that into account because otherwise the nations themselves will be lost. I don't know about Australia, but England is a scarred country at this point. It is a shadow of its former self.

And there is a kind of collective catatonic indifference because essentially to start addressing the problem, even conceptually, would require us to admit that almost everything we've done for the last 50 years has been atrocious and a complete mistake and needs to be unwound if we want to have anything that's worthwhile passing on.

John Anderson: It's a full 20 years ago now that I remember listening to our national broadcast of the ABC talking about a survey amongst British school children, which sought to extract their views on what it meant to be British. It was embarrassingly trite beyond belief. It was at the level of, well, we have Wimpy bars. Literally. There was no concept at all of Britain as the place that struggled through bloodshed, long and hard, the Magna Carta, the War of the Roses, the whole evolution over time of democracy. You go to Oxford and you see the memorial to the three great reformers who died at the stake. They surrendered their lives to the awful death of being burnt alive at the stake for freedom of conscience.

You think of the abolition of slavery. You think of decent labour laws. You think of the extension of the vote. None of that seemed to feature at all. So it immediately raises a question of who designed a curriculum that did not even basically outline, apparently to the enormous number of British children, how they came to live in the land that they did and what it was like.

Carl Benjamin: This is exactly the question. Education. This is a great point that T.S. Eliot made in his notes on culture, which is that education isn't about passing information. It's about passing culture. Children should be educated to understand that they are the bearers of their own culture with the long history and noble history that they have inherited. And it's actually terrible to deny them this because once you deny them an understanding that, you have something to live up to, well, why should they live up to anything?

John Anderson: Over time, particularly, I have to say, as Britain deserted its Christian faith, it's secularized to an extraordinary degree over the last century. Government has become God. And it's almost as though in becoming God, remembering that politicians are only human, they proved not to be up to the task. And then an open contempt starts to expose itself. And now we seem to live in this world where we're actually quite contemptuous of our leaders because we let them pretend that they're God. We're almost bowed before them. We find they're not up to it. And now we think the answer is to belt them harder and harder and harder. And all that happens is that the horse being ever harder flogged fails more and more to haul the load.

Carl Benjamin: I think it's probably profoundly observable from outside that our leaders are people of lesser quality than in previous generations.

You are absolutely right that the state finds itself in actually a paradoxical position. It is taken on the mantle as the enforcer of rights that were designed to protect the population from it. And we've got to a point now where our politicians feel that their job, and then we are literally at the moment we have a prime minister who is literally a human rights lawyer who is trying to impose this regime of unfettered and unlimited human rights on all of humanity. And so you're completely correct that the state does take on this aspect of God because the state has annexed to itself the authority to be the enforcer of rights that it was always the infringer of. It was always the thing that was infringing on the rights. The state is the oppressor. That's what does the oppressing. And that's why all of the rights of Englishmen were developed in the first place, were consciously developed. They were just assumed before, but now they have to be properly articulated.

Clip (Impact Theory, June 4, 2026):

Tom Bilyeu: If you had to explain what exactly it is that you're fighting for, how would you explain it?

Tommy Robinson: It’s a multitude of things: British culture, identity, our country, safety, family, all the things that I feel have been intentionally attacked by an agenda.

I'd say the far left have had a successful revolution for 20 to 30 years. Open border mass immigration, breakdown of identity, breakdown of nationalism, breakdown of the family, breakdown of the church, breakdown of the value system. And there's been a void left. And into that void has come whether it be Marxism, communism, LGBTQ+, Islam, many different ideologies have filled a void. And people are understanding that they've lost something, they're missing something as British men and women. And we feel like our country is changing beyond recognition. And it's not changing for the better. It's not changing to become safer. And it's our duty, my duty as an Englishman, as a father to hand down the safer, prosperous Britain to the next generation.

Obviously, I'm from a town called Luton, which is 30 miles north of where we are now. And I've seen all these problems. I've seen them 15, 20 years ago. I've seen them for my whole life. So I know what's coming.

Luton's a blueprint for every town and city in the UK. What happens when you become a minority, white English a minority in Luton? What happens with the expansion and the growth of Islam as an ideology and as a culture?

It's not good.

Tom Bilyeu: Given that the sense of there's a lack now of British identity, rather than let that be nebulous, what is the British identity that you want people to re-embrace?

So let me define what I think identity means and then you tell me if we're doing something different.

So for me, the reason that I think religion is so powerful is it actually tells you how to live. And so when I think of a culture having an identity, it is a shared set of values that tell you what is acceptable behavior, what is not acceptable behavior, and you can articulate it out loud. And you can say around here, we don't do this and we do do this. And that's why whether Christianity, Islam doesn't matter, they're able to give you a very articulatable set of do's and don'ts. And so when I hear you say we've lost our identity, what I hear is we've lost our set of do's and don'ts.

Tommy Robinson: And I do accept identity comes from Christian values, which is where we're now looking back. We're now years, I didn't, I never used to look at this. I'm now looking back thinking, where do our value system come from? What's right and wrong? Where does it come from?

Tom Bilyeu: Is this a complaint about we have people that are coming in and breaking apart our sense of tribal belonging? Or is it we have people coming in that don't share our values and that's creating…

Tommy Robinson: It's our values, it's our values because their values are the total opposite. When I went to high school as an 11 year old child, there's the Muslim playground and the non-Muslim playground. We didn't create that.

Tom Bilyeu: Why did they do that?

Tommy Robinson: Because they don't integrate or similar, they don't play with you. Going to the dinner hall at school and you'd have white children mixed in with black children, mixed in with Chinese children, mixed in with Hindus, Sikhs and in the corner you'll have 10 tables of Muslims. So I learned very quickly when I went to high school, well there's a lot of very different, the Pakistanis. There's something real different about them. The way they spoke to women, the way they'd beat up women, girls, they'd beat up girls. We had a rule at school, you don't hit a girl. Muslim boys will beat up girls and that's it. They don't care about whether it's a girl or not.

So I saw a level of aggression, saw a level of hostility and it was mixing all the more. You're mixing two things here. I knew girls who were victims of grooming gangs. My cousin was one, 13, 14, she woke up being raped by multiple Muslim men with beards.

I knew so many girls that were just lost and disappeared basically into these gangs. And the Hindus weren't doing it and the Sikhs aren't doing it. No one else is doing it. The Black lads ain't doing it. This is something so different, a value system that believes you can do this. You can treat a girl like this. You can take them and they are worthless. And all of these values are alien to us but every other value, if it was just people coming into the community, then when my best two mates growing up were from Trinidad and Tobago, Daniel and Dean, when they come in there wasn't a problem. We got on, we become best friends, we become like family. But that wasn't the same with the Islamic community. And that isn't our fault. None of this is our fault.

Tom Bilyeu: So what you're saying is this is about value system for me. Now, if that's actually true, if a Muslim person came in and was like, hey, I actually feel more aligned with you guys, I want to hang out, I want to chill, that wouldn't be a problem if they're…

Tommy Robinson: Not at all. And when I'm saying this, you have to understand that some of the best lads I knew are Muslim lads growing up. So I'm not saying every Muslim here because one of my best mates, Sully, whose mum is Black Kenyan Muslim, is as integrated and assimilated, but he doesn't follow Islam. He's a great British lad. But he doesn't follow Islam.

So I never understood what this was about. Until 2011, I'm sat on solitary confinement for 22 weeks, and the Muslim outreach group sent me in the Quran. And I've never read the Quran or got my head into the Quran. I just knew Pakistanis are a problem here. Big problem. But I hadn't gone down the Islam route. When I got the Quran, I thought, right, let's try and make sense of this book. And again, I'll challenge anyone to do it.

Open the Quran, and every time there's a reference to not be friends with Christians or Jews, write down the verse number. And within 20 minutes, I had pages, and it all made sense. It was a jigsaw just fell into place. My whole upbringing fell into place. I was like, oh my God, if you're getting taught this from the age of four, or three or four, you're being told you can't be friends with Christians or Jews.

No wonder they weren't friends with us. This is everything to them. This is the teaching of God. This is book perfect. This is how they have to live their life. They're not allowed to be friends. They're just not allowed to.

But if we were bringing our kids up from three years old, or two years old, and teaching them you don't be friends with blacks, you do not be friends with blacks, you're superior to blacks, you're better than blacks, blacks are all going to burn in hellfire. Blacks are evil, blacks are cattle, blacks are this. All the things that the Quran says about us, there would be an explosion of racism. And what we're seeing is an explosion of religious intolerance towards us.

Now Christianity is not telling us that about Muslims. It's not telling us Muslims are specifically evil. It's not telling us. And we're not embedded in it, or weren't. I was brought up a Catholic. My mom was a Catholic. But we're not embedded in it the way that Islam is.

Bob Metz:

The more I hear from Tommy Robinson, the more I begin to understand that this guy is as much an intellectual as he is an effective activist. Without hesitation, he identified the agenda of the far left as being responsible for what he has been witnessing and reporting on. And he understands that Marxism, Communism, LGBTQ, Islam, and others are all aligned on that polarity. In particular, the problem with the incompatibility of Islam with British and Western values goes well beyond the simple left-right polarity, which is why Robinson makes it a point of pointing out that Islam is different.

The behaviors tolerated within the Islamic community are unique to that culture. But more to the point that makes this such a rare discussion within mainstream circles is the fact that Islam is difficult. Difficult to talk about in the current zeitgeist, owing in no small part to a failure to distinguish between ideas and individuals. Muslims or Islamists, is it about faith, religion, or politics? Does Islam even allow for a separation of such nuanced perspectives?

But one thing I've always, throughout my entire life, associated Islam with is theocracy. An integration of the state with religion in and of itself entirely incompatible with the Western concept of a separation of the state from religion. This is most commonly and properly referred to as a secular state and secularism. But unfortunately, many religious people have begun to define secularism as some kind of atheism, which it is not. Despite the religious culture of many given nations, they still have fared very well when they operated under secular governments. Iran being a prime example.

But there was one part of Tommy's commentary that particularly caught my attention. When he cited the contrast between the Muslim playground and the other playgrounds, the Pakistanis beating up a girl. They don't care, they have a high level of aggression and hostility. And when he followed that up with his citing of the Quran and of all the pages of references he found, demanding that Muslims not be friends with Christians or Jews, he was led to conclude, no wonder they won't be friends with us, they're not allowed to. And with that observation, I suddenly discovered the reason that helped explain this exact same pattern. Here in the other London, London, Ontario, that is.

My daughter Danielle has on more than one occasion reminded me about how her two youngest kids, my grandkids, back when they were still in the single digit age category, just prior to the COVID period, would play in the public park behind their home with groups of other friends and kids who were white, black, Asian and other. But whenever Muslim kids were in the park where their parents might be holding an event or get together, they never joined in with the rest. And not only did they not mix or play with the other kids, they bullied them to the point where my grandkids and some of their friends no longer visit that park. And the parents of the bullies fully aware of what was going on at the time were not saying or doing anything to discipline their kids.

Which explains why Tommy Robinson made it a point to say that none of this is our fault. There was nothing that the other kids did to warrant the treatment they received from the Muslim kids, just as most people have done nothing to warrant accusations of Islamophobia and racism while actually being discriminated against themselves.

So the issue of cultural incompatibility seems to run much deeper than just ideology. It's also part of a strategy, which is also not our fault. Now I do have some points to follow up with regarding the comments of Carl Benjamin made earlier, but I'm going to hold off on them until the final quarter of the show following his second audio selection. But right now, here again, is Tommy Robinson in conversation with Tom Bilyeu speaking about where we go from here and how to get there.

Clip (Impact Theory, June 4 2026):

Tommy Robinson: So I think there's so much we could be doing. And I believe that without doing these things, when you don't see light at the end of the tunnel, I can tell you now from September 13th of last year to this event, May 16th, the temperature of the nation has risen so high. Do you know the work that we had to put into this event to make sure it's peaceful? Because people don't see peaceful solutions.

I'm hearing it from so many men around the country. Peaceful protest doesn't fucking work. It doesn't work. We've got to do something. You've got 30% of the British public believe we're heading to civil war.

Tom Bilyeu: What do you think would be the tipping point?

Tommy Robinson: I believe that defining moments change the direction of a nation in history.
Bloody Sunday changed the direction of Northern Ireland. Who knows what the moment's going to be for Europe, but there's going to be a tipping point. I think it'll be a school and I think it's coming. I think they'll hit a school.

My awakening moment in my life was the Beslem school massacre. It was the moment that made me start looking into his arm. When I saw dozens of men sharing an ideology that told them they could go and execute children in the school and I can see the mums dropping on the floor.

Tom Bilyeu: What year was this?

Tommy Robinson: Beslem, 2002, 2003. I was young. I was 20. I was about early 20s. I remember watching it and I watched it and thought, this isn't one mad man here. These men share a belief that this action is justified against children. I remember watching the parents and just thinking, wow, they're outside the school. The police have locked them all off and they can hear their children being butchered. The mums are on the knees and they're all screaming and crying and they don't know what to do.

Then two weeks later, I saw the leaders, Saif Lizlam is the gentleman's name. He was the number two for Al-Mujrah-Hadeen. He sat in a chicken shop in Luton and his words with his mates on a camera were an attack like that would be justified in the UK. That was when I launched against him.

Tom Bilyeu: Did he say why it would be justified?

Tommy Robinson: Because of British foreign policy. He handed a woman in the street 52 verses from the Quran that he says forced him to do it. So scripture and teachings always comes back to it every time. When the judge said he betrayed Islam, he went mad in court, I don't know if you remember. Because you have to look at, in the teachings of Islam, one of the verses that Nick Clegg after that terrorist attack stood on TV and said, in the Quran it says, if you kill one man, you kill all of humanity.

It does, yeah? And then I've had this debate multiple times, I said, carry on reading that verse. If Nick Clegg would have carried on reading that verse that he stood up to justify that he had nothing to do with Islam, it says unless you cause mischief in the land, then you have your hands and feet cut off, you're executed or you're exiled from the land. So the exact verse that Nick Clegg misquoted is the exact verse that Lee Wigby, because when you say mischief in the land, say like Ibn Kathir is one of the world's lead scholars on Islam, historical scholars, the lead in the world. For the majority of Muslims, he's the lead. Mischief means not believing in Islam.

And then also the surrender. You could be a victim and we've just seen, I've spoke about this so many times. I've given an example. I'm out in Luton Town Centre, my cousin's wife rings him and says, get home, it's all kicking off up on the estate. So we fly up to the estate, get up there, Muslim men are there with baseball bats, poles, they're fighting the kids on the estate, the kids are like 14, 15 years old. All hell is going off.

Please come screeching up in their cars. They jump out, they run and jump on the white kids. They're holding the white lads on the floor while the Muslims are standing with weapons.

And I'm like, what the hell are you doing? But that I've seen that you're the victim and you're the victim again. Because the police don't jump on them and they don't attack them. And Henry Nowak, you know the case we're looking at now of the boy who's just been stabbed, he was stabbed five times, the Sikh claimed racism. The police jumped on the white boy, handcuffed him, even though he's telling them he's been stabbed, they ignored him, three Sikhs, one white boy. They didn't jump on them. They didn't handcuff them.

That same surrender to political correctness and the accusation of racism is what I've seen my whole life.

Tom Bilyeu: What do you think drives that belief system, that reaction?

Tommy Robinson: Institutional racism against us.

Tom Bilyeu: When did we start reinforcing this idea of, okay, white people are bad or whatever. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that would lead them…

Tommy Robinson: Critical race theory. I'll tell you that the Metropolitan Police Force was found to be institutionally racist after Stephen Lawrence murder. Yeah, that was found.

Tom Bilyeu: Yeah, but what I want to know is how does it become that? Because my take home is, let's agree what our values are, which I think is the biggest problem. I don't think England or America, in my case, knows what their values are anymore. As they have left Christianity, which I'm not Christian, but at least it gives people a set thing that we can point to and go, this, this book tells you what we're about.

If I'm going to focus people on a solution, it isn't going to be us good, them bad. It's going to be, ooh, this system is educating people with something that is creating this problem.

Tommy Robinson: Yeah, I'd say that political correctness and the fear of being branded a racist and the power of the word racist and the fear of losing your job and the fear of getting a black mark against your name has created a situation where automatically you don't have that fear when you're dealing with a white kid. You can beat the white kid with a ban. You're not going to lose your job. You're not going to be accused of racism.

That accusation of racism, and we have to say how powerful is that accusation? Well, we now know, which we tried talking about since 2004, we now know that it was that powerful, and you have to actually say this out loud to make sense of where we were at, that entire police forces in every town and city let children get raped rather than be called racist.

Tommy Robinson: That's not my opinion. That's come out in the government investigation.

Tom Bilyeu: Yeah, I know it's wild. Well documented, completely freakish.

Tommy Robinson: That's how powerful. So when a police officer turns up, for example, to Henry a white boy dying and three Sikhs standing with knives, look at the news reports of George Floyd and compare them to the news reports of Henry, whose death is far worse, far worse. But there's been a system that's embedded to glorify or to use these ones, manipulate this system in order to silence the public, in order to scare the public.

It's all been done intentionally. The accusation of racism has been used as a... and Keir Starmer tried it this week again. It's used to instill fear in the public from speaking their open mind.

Tom Bilyeu: By who and for what reason?

Tommy Robinson: By the establishment who have been intent on mass open border immigration to bring in low skilled workers and people who can be reliant on the state. So there is a shift and all of these things, I'd say we put together a free four year vision for how we get to where we want to be, which is culture, media and politics and all free run separately but complement each other.

But I'll leave it to the political price to the politicians to solve this because they will all ride the wave and we're seeing them ride the wave of nationalism and patriotism already. Things are shifted, hugely shifted and they're not going to slow down.

Tom Bilyeu: If you had a one final vision that you wanted to leave people with.

Tommy Robinson: So our movement is about unifying people. I know many of you may have listened to what I'm saying and thinking it's pretty divisive or polarising. The reality is polarising. Where we're at is polarising. So unfortunately we've got to go down this path.

I want to unite people. I want to politicise people. Unfortunately as working class people we're not political. We're not encouraged on politics.

Many of us don't understand politics. I had never voted. Most people I don't know have ever voted in their lives.

Not rich enough, not poor enough to make a difference, probably people think as they're growing up and don't think their voice matters. So I'd say that's where I want to sit and say is I want everyone to be political and understand that they have to get involved in politics. And this battle is about winning the hearts and minds of the public.

The next party that get elected in three years time. You said Rupert Lowe, you said Nigel Farage, whoever it is need a real mandate. You had four years of Joe Biden and you needed it as Americans because you needed to see what it was like. You needed to see that. So then come in with a mandate for mass deportations.

A mandate for change that gives the new leader the opportunity to implement the change knowing he's got support in the nation. So unfortunately all of these problems that we're facing have to happen. We had to get this low in order to elect, awaken spiritually, culturally, awaken as a nation to then elect in three years time a government and give them a real mandate. Say okay we've decided as a nation people have to leave. We've decided now we are a Christian country. We're not going to surrender these values anymore. We're going back to where we come from. We're focusing back on ourselves. So all of these things had to happen.

Bob Metz:

You're listening to Just Right broadcasting around the world and online. You know I hear that argument being made by many different people in many different contexts. Essentially that you have to hit rock bottom before you're willing to seek a cure. It used to be a common saying associated with drug or alcohol issues and recovery. And a lot of religious people I grew up around would often say something similar that we learn from suffering to the point of viewing suffering as a virtue of some kind.

Well unexpected and unexplainable pain and suffering are signals that something is wrong but they do not prescribe any kind of information or learning solution about the cause of that suffering. But at the same time you can't deny that awakening to the crisis first required recognizing it. You could say that without the knowledge of evil the appreciation of the good tends to wane. Especially once taken for granted. Like freedom itself which is so routinely taken for granted it is not until a significant loss is experienced that awareness of that loss and its significance is first recognized.

So I was a bit concerned by Tommy Robinson's warning that the temperature of the nation has risen so high that people no longer see peaceful solutions. That they're saying that peaceful protest doesn't work and they think that they're heading into a civil war. In part I was concerned because there's a lot of truth in saying peaceful protest doesn't work if that is the only political action that the people engage in. Which thankfully is not the case in Britain as with the rise of a political party like Restore Britain.

But saying that peaceful protest doesn't work is an expression of the ballots or bullets principle with an implied abandonment of the ballot side of that option. And how coincidental that Tommy Robinson should be echoing the title of our last broadcast. Shift happens. He says there's a shift involving culture, media and politics. And he wants everyone to be political and understand that they have to get in politics. But the problem is that working class people are not political.

Well, welcome to my world. This is a message I've been pushing since my earliest days in politics. In fact the very first door to door pamphlet we produced with the Freedom Party of Ontario back in 1984 began with the phrase, “Maybe politics doesn't interest you...” Because that was something that was just unavoidable.

And it always comes back to the same realization that even if you're not interested in politics politics is always interested in you. There's no escaping politics. And the reason that politics doesn't interest working class people is precisely because they are working class. They work for a living. They don't vote for a living. Yet another polarity that happens to divide the right from the left.

The idea of getting political is almost repulsive to producers. Since they have always been conscious of or aware that politics is something that usually gets in the way of production. Which is not so much about all politics as it is about the left. In fact, Ayn Rand referred to the left as being the leading force in the anti-industrial revolution. From shutting down oil pipelines to destroying the competitive nature of a free market under capitalism.

But politics isn't just about voting. In a free society it's about maintaining that eternal vigilance against collectivism. Combined with an eternal effort to defend and uphold the principles of individualism. Which does involve the trinity of culture, media and politics that Robinson was referencing. So I couldn't help but smile when I heard him say that his objective was to unite people while at the same time recognizing the polarizing nature of that challenge. Reality is polarizing, he says. Which is exactly why you will hear people on the left constantly trying to convince us that politics has become too polarized. What do they actually mean when they say that?

What they mean is that disagreement should not be tolerated. So when Tommy said that there is a system developed in order to silence the public, he sounded a lot like Maria Karlova, who in our last broadcast described this process as being part of what was being called the tabula plena model. The full slate theory of how the human brain is conditioned to accept its role in the larger collective until of course the shift happens. The shift from left to right on the political polarity.

So once again shifting our attention from political action back to the incompatibility problem with Islam, Robinson referred to what he called the surrender. That same surrender to accusations of racism that he has seen his whole life. And what drives that reaction, he says? Institutional racism against whites.

Now we should always remember that only racists use the term racist or identify by race. And the more they hurl their accusations of racism and far right fascist labels at others, the more they are projecting their own identities and values on the true right. Which the polarity of individualism is incapable of thinking of in those terms.

"The accusation of racism is so powerful that entire police forces in every town and city let children get raped rather than be called racist." Says Tommy, which again speaks to the power of labels and to the necessity of defining our terms in objective ways that are consistent with reality and reason.

You know in a way I wish people would stop using the term two-tier policing. This completely misses the essential fundamental. The correct and accurate term to be using is racism. Officially treating people of one given physical identity differently under the law as people of other differing identities is the very definition of racism. So let's stop using such a polite term like two-tier policing. These guys are racists, plain and simple. Time to reverse those labels and point them in the direction where they properly belong towards the left.

Now as I warned at the beginning of our show today, we have reached that point in the conversation where it becomes necessary to face some deeply disturbing and affecting realities. And on his June 5th show, AsmongoldTV featured Rupert Lowe's address to the British Parliament in advance of Lowe's upcoming rape gang inquiry report. And if there's anything out there that can verify and document so many of the horrors described by Tommy Robinson, this is it. As we'll be hearing on this side of our upcoming bumper, and on the return side, Carl Benjamin puts his political support squarely behind Rupert Lowe on his Restore Britain party, yet another positive sign that shift happens.

Clip (AsmongoldTV, June 5, 2026):

Rupert Lowe: I want the world to hear during the two weeks of our independent rape gang inquiry hearings. I sincerely urge this parliament to listen to the testimonies from these brave survivors and to act, to finally act.

So the first testimony, he took his pants down, penetrated me, had sex with me. He then stopped before ejaculation. He picked up the bottle of Jack Daniels, which was now empty, and he forced it up inside me. He broke the glass while he was there. At that point, I was about 12, nearly 13.

Another testimony. I was held down by the men as they each took turns to orally and vaginally rape me. When the assault ended, the men hit me repeatedly, threatened...

Asmongold: It's very important that he actually says this in plain English, because a lot of people, one of the reasons why this evil is allowed to continue, is because nobody wants to directly even say what it is. It has to be verbalized. It has to be externalized. It has to be said, spoken, and revealed.

Rupert Lowe: ...find me, kill me, and harm my loved ones, if I ever tell anybody what had happened.

Another. Comments were constantly made suggesting that white girls, the Christian girls, were viewed as having fewer morals or lower values, whereas Muslim girls were described by some of the men as having dignity and higher moral standing. These comparisons were used to justify the way I was treated and to further humiliate and control me.

Another. She was a white woman herself, who I imagine may have been groomed, and has obviously now married into the family, shouting obscenities at us. Throughout the whole sentencing, she was constantly saying, fucking liars, lying white bitches. She said to me that God will be the witness for what happens to me.

Another. Race did play a part and motivated the selection or demographic of the victims. Throughout my exploitation, the other girls I encountered, or who were abused alongside me, were almost exclusively white.

Another. She had a baby by him. And his dad was an imam. His dad knew. And he got his son married and said that he wasn't allowed to see the child.

Another. Over the course of the abuse, I was raped by multiple police officers in different parts of the country.

Another. He put a cigarette out on the baby's face.

Another. It started when I was 13. I was raped by probably about six or seven hundred different men over three years. They would take the horn of the car and then a child would be taken to the front door by a staff member of the children's home.

I was bleeding from both my vagina and my back passage and it was so swollen I could not sit down. I told hospital staff my drink had been spiked and I did not know what had happened because I was too afraid to tell the truth. They did not ask any questions. They gave me tablets and discharged me. I was 15 years old.

Things would escalate around Eid and holidays. Parties got bigger, got worse, got more violent. People, more people involved, more girls involved, the parties were just bigger.

Another. The main clash that I kind of had with the religion side of it was I grew up as a Christian.

I would wear my cross because it was something really special to me. It was just used as a way to break me down. They said, where is your God now? Has your God forsaken you?

Asmongold: This is the kind of shit that would get people to do crusades back in the day. And nowadays you have a bunch of fat, Seth Rogen lookalikes running on media, trying to run defense for it. This is exactly what it is. It's a horror movie.

Rupert Lowe: I know. It was all of the white girls in every home that I went to. I remember a man opening the back of a van and I saw 15, 20 girls locked in dog cages.

Another. Dogs were brought in and I couldn't move at all. I had nowhere to move. I think that was the scariest thing, was not having any concept of it. There were men around me, not horrified, not disgusted, not helping, but filming and laughing. Making bets on whether the dog could actually rape me or not. And yes, I was raped by a dog. The man just held my face, stared me down straight in the eyes, and he wanted to see me break, and he did.

I could continue for hours and hours. All of us in this building have a responsibility to finally act, not to talk, but to act. Our Rape Gang Inquiry Report will be released in the coming days. It will change Britain for good. Thank you.

Clip (John Anderson Media, May 29, 2026):

Carl Benjamin: The reason I think that we have such a shattered multi-party system at the moment, which is genuinely unique in modern democratic history, is because nobody knows what to do about it. We're stuck with politicians who honestly kind of seem clownish. They come to the electorate and say, hey, elect us to be your leaders. And I just look at it and think, well, I don't really want any of these people leading us.

John Anderson: Where will this lead in your view? Because you just made the point that no one seems to have the answers. Are the voters saying we're going to embrace, Restore, and the other Reform, to kick the existing parties in the hope that they come back to common sense? Or are they really seeing these two new entrants as potential parties of government?

Carl Benjamin: I think it's too early to say. There's a distinct disconnection between Nigel Farage's voters and what he personally professes and seems to believe. His voters are a lot more radically right-wing than he is. And he operates in a space where he's called radical right-wing, but he's not. I think he's deliberately filled the upper echelons of his party with Muslims to avoid charges of Islamophobia. He left UKIP because UKIP began to raise the issue of political Islam in Britain. And the common media narrative about Farage is that he is an extreme right-winger. And this has given, I think, people a sense of false advertising, actually. Britain is a very socially conservative country, actually.

John Anderson: And along comes Rupert Lowe, who is another contender altogether with Restore Britain. His polling suggests that he is picking up some of the people who actually don't think that perhaps Nigel Farage and his team are the answer. And he talks of things like re-migration, addressing the migration concerns in Great Britain. Where does he fit in your judgment, Carl?

Carl Benjamin: So just to be clear, I'm a member and supporter of Rupert Lowe and Restore Britain. So my judgment will doubtless be clouded by my proclivities and biases on this. But I have joined many people in realizing that I do think Nigel Farage is actually the tail end of the modern paradigm.

Nigel Farage doesn't want to restructure the state. He doesn't concern himself about demographics. He refuses, in fact, to address the issue of demographics. And he's on record multiple times saying this just isn't a concern of his. He is not going to address these issues. He is just going to try and make the Blairites, sort of international liberal state, function as he thinks it is intended to function. And I'm sorry, I just don't think that's a project that can be redeemed. And even if it could be redeemed, why would we want to redeem it, actually?

It seems to be quite an evil thing that frankly is designed to rob us of our nations. And I just don't want that. I just don't want to have my country stolen out from underneath me through legal means. I don't care if it can be done legally. I just don't want it done.

And Rupert Lowe represents a sensible patriotism in that he is speaking in the old language of duty and hard work and personal sacrifice. I'm sure you saw the video that went around where the line that really struck out to me was that fixing this problem is going to be incredibly painful. He's not promising us ease. He's not promising us wealth. He's not promising us a good time. He's promising us that we will fix the problem, but it's not going to be easy. It's going to be a loss of labor and it's going to hurt. And I think he's right. And I think that's honestly the only mature way to look at the issue.

And I think the message resonated with a lot of people because I think it's quite childish to expect the government to do everything for you. It's obviously not working. And so it seems that Rupert Lowe is the only person who is actually speaking to the issues, not just in a mature and sensible manner, but being honest about what the actual problems are.

And the actual problems are obviously the constitution of the state, which, as I said, Reform have already said they are not going to interfere with. But obviously, but also the demography of the country, because British people have never once voted in favor of mass immigration and almost every or any immigration at all, actually. And since the days of Enoch Powell to now, every opportunity British people had to vote against immigration, they voted in the negative. They did not want it. And yet we have millions of people in our country who really shouldn't be here and who are here against our will.

So Rupert Lowe saying, if millions of people who shouldn't be here have to go, then millions of people who shouldn't be here must go. That's a message that's really resonated with people because you should just see the state of the place. It is unrecognizable in many parts, unrecognizable.

It's only Rupert Lowe who is actually addressing this issue. And it begins with saying the politics of this country should be there to serve the native people of the land, as in it should serve the British people rather than either foreigners or an abstract set of liberal ideals. And that's essentially the only thing else on offer.

All of the other parties, Farage included, is trying to serve a series of institutions, a series of political values and ideals. And Rupert Lowe is the only person who said, no, I'm actually concerned about the people themselves of this country. They're the people who matter. And Rupert Lowe is the only politician in the country who has approached this with dignity and seriousness and actually stipulated that the real problems that are making everything worse need to be addressed.

And so I'm not actually that surprised to see the meteoric rise of Restore Britain as a party. And I'm joining. I'm going to do my bit as much as I can to help and organize and get the word out, put leaflets through doors and try and persuade people that no, I'm sorry, this is going to hurt, but we have to just take it on the chin to fix any of this.

Bob Metz:

Little did I realize how fairly accurately I saw what was happening in Britain politically back on our February 25th broadcast, particularly with regard to the growing disconnection between Rupert Lowe's Restore Britain party and Nigel Farage's Reform UK. But I can see that Carl Benjamin echoed my very observation at that time when he said that there's a distinct disconnection between Nigel Farage and his voters in terms of what he professes to believe. His voters are a lot more radically right wing than he is, but Farage is called radical right wing, but he's not. Well, exactly.

Now, putting aside the unnecessary adjectives of radical and wing, because what he's talking about is just the right. It is here that the critical use of labels left and right fall under the spotlight. Clearly, Benjamin does not associate the right, whether just radical or with a wing, with fascism, racism, or collectivism of any kind. In fact, he went so far as to say, which I thought was quite humorous actually, that calling Farage an extreme right winger has given him the benefit of false advertising.

So consider the paradox at play here. When the left hurls labels at its opponents for being far right and right wing, it's an insult that we're supposed to associate with fascism, Nazism, and racism. But here we have a situation where being labeled radically right wing is being presented as a compliment and as a positive. And while this is a giant step in the right direction, it's clear that there's still a great degree of discomfort with acknowledging exactly what the right represents and symbolizes. Individualism, freedom, capitalism, and yes, common sense.

But what I found most interesting about Carl Benjamin's commentary were a number of the comments he made in our opening audio bite at the beginning of the show. Again, because of how much his presentation echoed many of the ideas that we've recently highlighted made by other podcasters and commentators. Most significantly, when he reluctantly conceded that Rousseau was correct when he said that the true constitution is actually engraved in the hearts of men, that was quite significant. As podcaster Frank Zanu recently observed in regard to the American Constitution, a comment we featured on our April 29 broadcast, quote, writers of the Constitution only put into that document what was already a part of them. Constitutions cannot promise to yield anything. Constitutions are not notes you write for what you want to become. It's not a promissory note. It's not a blueprint. Constitute, that is the word. You have to have it first in order to write it down, end quote.

And in reference to a constitution being engraved in the hearts of men, Benjamin similarly noted that the rights of Englishmen were consciously developed and assumed before, but now they have to be properly articulated. Therefore, it remains abundantly clear by what is meant when it is said that politics is downstream from culture. I've often expressed this when saying that we are less governed by laws and rules than by convention, which essentially is the political dimension of a given culture. Laws and rules are usually created in response to that convention. After that, whether they carry any validity or not depends on the people.

So you can see the problem that arises when, according to that British survey cited earlier, we discover that Britain's school children have no concept at all of Britain's history or cultural principles. And in response to the question of who designed the curriculum that did not even outline these principles in history, I might suggest that it's probably the same people who have been graduating students from their schools without even being able to read or write or spell.

This didn't happen overnight. In her 1943 essay, Our Japanized Educational System, God of the Machine author Isabel Paterson warned of the abandonment of phonics by public schools in America in favor of what I've come to call whole language, and she described the dumbing down process thusly, quote, “The little ones were grouped around the schoolmaster who had a picture in his hand. They looked at the pictures of animals and down at the words dog, cat, cow, until soon they knew which word went with which animal. This is to teach pictograph reading. As far as possible, the advantage of the phonetic alphabet is nullified, including the systemization of knowledge by reference under an alphabetical index,” end quote.

So if you're still wondering why so many people have become so unbelievably stupid in an age of high tech and modernity, state education is the problem. Now I know that a lot of the material we covered today is far from being pleasant or even far from the radical ideological polarities of left and right. But like Asmongold commented earlier on, with regard to Lowe's rape gang inquiry, quote, “It's very important that he actually says this in plain English, because one of the reasons that this evil is allowed to continue is because nobody wants to even directly say what it is. It has to be verbalized, externalized, said, spoken and revealed,” end quote. And as many observers are realizing, for those of us in the West, we are in uncharted waters when it comes to resolving the incompatible cultures sharing the same jurisdictional territory.

However, one thing to keep in mind is that this particular incompatibility is really no different than the incompatibility between left and right on the grand political polarity.

So here's the thing. Now expand Asmongold's statement and apply it to the political polarities of left and right themselves. And it would read, quote, Because one of the reasons that this evil of the left is allowed to continue is because nobody wants to even directly say what it is. It has to be verbalized, externalized, said, spoken and revealed, end quote.

Well, that also happens to describe the mission of this show, our mission of eternal vigilance, that will continue when you join us again next week as we continue our journey in the right direction. And until then, be right, stay right, do right, act right, think right, and be right back here. We'll see you then.

Clip (Stand-up Comedy):

I wouldn't deport you. You seem nice. Are you a...?

No.

Okay. But you're legal?

Yes.

All right. I'm gonna check her papers. All right. Well, good to have you. We need you. We need immigrants. You know. Yes.