Sturgeon Leaving for London Ep 149. 13 Aug 2025

Alistair McConnachie of pro-UK unionist campaign group and think tank, A Force For Good (AFFG), guest Damien Davies, and viewers discuss:
- Welcome.
- Meaning of our VJ Flag.
- Is Nicola Sturgeon finally appreciating the concept of Britishness?
- Learning from the 2012 London Olympics (ended 12th Aug).
- Sturgeon's new book reveals she knew she'd lose the Supreme Court ruling.
- 50,000 Channel Crossers arrived since Labour took power (on 4-7-24).
- Two things are needed to stop the Channel Crossers.
- GUEST: Damien Davies: Migrant boats being returned to France? Profiteers raking it in; Lawyers are raking it in; are hotel migrants going to be shifted into HMOs in the general population; it's a "safeguarding" issue; government failing its "first duty"; all cultures are equal, until this happens; Lord Chancellor's "send them packing" rhetoric; the relevance of the UN Refugee Convention (rather than ECHR); the "safe country" theory; international law is not legally "binding" but can be politically restricting; could we "tweak" these conventions; Nicola Sturgeon; follow Damien at his YouTube link below.
- Check out our new book, link below.

New book "Protect our Country: Policies to Stop Mass Immigration" is at
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0FJ2GWMD4

LINK FOR DAMIEN
https://www.youtube.com/@UCVj_oC2-o1V9pxiQCQjrr6g 

TO HEAR ABOUT our EVENTS, PLEASE SIGN-UP for our FORTNIGHTLY EMAILS https://www.aforceforgood.uk/sign-up

Please hit the Thumbs Up Button if you like what we say! 

And please Subscribe to this Podcast channel. It really helps spread the pro-UK word! 

DONATE 
If you like what we're doing, please consider becoming a monthly Union Supporter donor (with rewards) at https://www.aforceforgood.uk/union-supporters

MERCH STORES
Our Website Shop
https://www.aforceforgood.uk/shop-1

Our Tee-Shirts, Hoodies, and Mugs at
https://a-force-for-good.creator-spring.com

This is the 149th episode of "Good Evening Britain" broadcast on Wednesday 13th August 2025.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hello and welcome to Good Evening Britain, a Force for
Goods weekly show coming to you live from our studios
here in the heart of the great British city of Glasgow,
with me your host, Alistair mcconachiey. We are broadcasting on

(00:22):
all our digital platforms throughout the United Kingdom and across
the world. We're bringing you quality pro UK comment and
analysis every Wednesday from seven until eight pm on Facebook,
on YouTube, on x and also on TikTok. Folks, please

(00:50):
tell us where you're watching from tonight, in our wonderful
United Kingdom or anywhere else in the world. Please send
in your greeting, please send in your comments, and please
send in your questions on this amazing, sweltering, sweltering August evening.
It really has been a cracking day. I hope it's

(01:12):
been a cracking day wherever you are living. But I
would say this was possibly the hottest day in Glasgow.
It certainly felt like the hottest day in Glasgow this year.
Time will tell, of course when the numbers come in.
But lovely day, I hope, I hope everybody cut out

(01:32):
and enjoyed a few minutes of the sunshine. If nothing else,
because it doesn't happen very often. And I was looking
at the Met Office and they were suggesting that this
is going to continue for a few more days yet,
So I think that's absolutely fantastic news. Now, folks, in
the background, you'll see a flag which is comemor rating

(02:00):
the eightieth anniversary of the British victory in the Far East.
VJ stands for Victory over Japan Day, which was the
fifteenth of August in nineteen forty five. And we fly

(02:25):
this flag not to be triumphalist about things, but rather
as a commemoration, a commemoration for all those the soldiers
and the civilians on all sides, who who perished in
that conflict eighty years ago. Sometimes it seems longer than

(02:50):
that when you think about it, eighty years, because for
most of us it's almost like another world. And in
some ways it was another world, but there's still elements
of it that are with us today. And sometimes you
wonder did we actually ever learn from all of that,

(03:11):
And indeed does humanity learn or do we just keep
making the same mistakes, especially when it comes to conflict. Anyway,
we can do a bit, which is simply to remember
to remember and if remembering gives rise to thinking about
and discussing, then all to the good. And maybe it

(03:33):
might even enable us to learn one or two things
as well about how not ideally to kill our fellow
human beings. Anyway, that's the somber note that we begin upon.
Everything else is going to be upbeat from their folks.
I wouldn't look too closely at that flag. Actually I

(03:53):
don't think they a jet fighters back in nineteen forty five,
but let's not concentrate on that. I'll just block out
the two jet fighters there. There you go, there you go.
Everything else seems probably okay. Anyway, maybe those are jet
fighters today doing a fly past. That's what that must be. Now,

(04:17):
quite a lot to talk about tonight. First up, of course,
is that Nicholas Sturgeon looks like she's going to not
just stop being a Scottish nationalist but actually become a
Sloane ranger or maybe even a Chelsea pensioner. But whatever
she's doing, she's leaving the ghetto. She's made of money.
She's getting out of the ghetto and she's going to

(04:37):
be living the high life among the hoyploi, the glitterati
down in London, or at least that's what was suggested.
Let's run a short video of her talking exactly about.

Speaker 2 (04:56):
This Suffocating's maybe putting it too strongly, but I feel
sometimes that I can't breathe freely in Scotland. I belong
in Scotland, It's my home. But you know, I think
being physically out of Scotland for a period might just
help to reset my perspective and to be more selfish

(05:18):
about it. Just removed me a little bit from that
kind of goldfish bowl scrutiny that I still live under
in Scotland. Again that I don't mean that as a complaint,
it's just the reality that, you know, Scotland's quite a
small country, it's quite a small body politic and I
still sometimes it feels, and this is very subjective, that

(05:39):
I just have to breathe the wrong way and somebody's
writing a story about it. It does sometimes feel very suffocating.
Is maybe putting it too strongly, but I feel sometimes
that I can't breathe freely in Scotland. So yeah, maybe
not abroad.

Speaker 3 (05:53):
You know, England.

Speaker 2 (05:55):
I love London. England is not yet a foreign would
never be a foreign country, obviously, even when we're.

Speaker 1 (06:00):
Independent obviously, there's Wales in Northern Ireland too, indeed.

Speaker 2 (06:05):
But you know, this may shock many people to hear,
but I love London and just for one thing and another,
I'm spending a reasonable amount of time in London at
the moment, so yeah, maybe a bit time down here
and who knows.

Speaker 1 (06:20):
M that's a very revealing, very revealing comments. They are
very interesting as well from the point of view of
Scottish nationalism versus Scottish unionism, because we at a force
for good recognized right from the very beginning that if

(06:40):
you were a person that had quite a bit of interaction,
if you were a Scottish person who had quite a
bit of interaction with England or Wales or Northern Ireland,
you it seemed to us it was far less likely
that you would actually be a Scottish nationalist if you
were somebody who maybe was growing up we spent some

(07:02):
time in England, or used to go down to England
to watch what concerts sort or things like that. We
noticed just to kind of we didn't do a study
on it or anything like that, but we just noticed
that it seemed to us to appear that if you
had interactions with England, you were less likely to be
a Scottish nationalist. We noticed that way back when we

(07:25):
started campaigning in twenty twelve and looking at the people
that we were interacting with and discussing these matters with them.
And I think Nicholas Dudgeon is now finding that out
for ourself. You know, she's going down to London. London
is a great British city. It's the second greatest British

(07:48):
city after Glasgow. And anybody who goes to London and
doesn't get mugged or stabbed or crushed in the tube
or run over by an e bike will usually come
away saying that they enjoyed it. And I mean it's

(08:11):
gone downhill, as I suggest right there in the last
five years, but I mean it's nevertheless it is a
great city and full of interesting people and so on.
It's becoming out of reach for anybody to actually live
there unless you're somebody like Nicolas Dudgeon and you've got
a lot of money, or you're prepared to live with

(08:32):
twenty other people in a flat on top of each other.
So but what she is discovering there is that actually
it's not bad being British and if you listened carefully
to what she said. She said, and I quote I
wrote it down, England would never be a foreign country.

(08:56):
That's what she actually said. And in fact, she said
England would never be a foreign country. Obviously now we
as unionists know that, but she should try telling that
to many of the Scottish nationalists who most certainly do
consider England to be a foreign country. In fact, that's

(09:21):
central to quite a lot of their philosophy. You read
the National every day, there's always people talking about England
being essentially a foreign country to them. And so for her,
a former leader of the Scottish National Party, to now
say that England's not actually a foreign country obviously, then

(09:43):
that's actually that's actually very very interesting and suggests that
her position on these things is actually adapting in what
we would call a sopho unionist position. Obviously, she's going
to be a Scottish nationalist forever, but the point is

(10:05):
that she's getting interactions there with people in England, she's
beginning to enjoy it, she's even thinking about moving there,
and England's definitely not a foreign country to her. So
that's an interesting development and almost like quite an important development,
and It's something that we've been saying as Unionists for
a long time because we see the British as a family.

(10:27):
We don't see them as next door neighbors. Even we
see them as family members, and sometimes quite literally they
are family members. So oh good, oh good.

Speaker 3 (10:50):
And.

Speaker 1 (10:51):
That made us think of it was yesterday, the twelfth
of August, which was the closing ceremony of the twenty
twelve London Olympics, which was quite an important event in

(11:13):
the history of Britain because it was generally considered at
the time to have repopularized the Union flag because it
was everywhere, and that was an important development as well,

(11:35):
because we were hurtling towards twenty fourteen when the Union
flag was going to become a symbol of keeping Britain together.
So it did get popularized in the public consciousness quite
a lot back in twenty twelve, and that was important.
But TEAMGB as well also did extremely well and they

(11:59):
came second, and we wrote an article about it at
the time and we said that the success of TEMGB,
if you use it as like an analogy for Scotland, England,
Northern Ireland and Wales working together, helps to remind us
that the story of Britain is the story of a

(12:20):
nation which is greater than the sum of its parts,
a story, we said, which has the ability to inspire, encourage,
excite and fill us with enthusiasm for all the good
that we can achieve when we work together. And we concluded,

(12:41):
it's hard to understand those who want to rip Scotland's
story out of this bigger British story. It's hard to
understand those who want to tear out Scotland's part in
it all. So it's always a delight to us when somebody,
especially Nicholas Sturgeon, comes to albeit a small understanding of

(13:08):
the of the relevance of the rest of these islands
to our common good. But I'm not going to butter
Nicholas Sturgeon up too much. I'm now going to I'm

(13:32):
now going to give us some tough love. Today in
the Daily Mail, it's a headline first Minister pushed the
Indief two legal case to quote satisfy SNP's voters. Because
she's got a new book out now, which is called
Frankly and in her new memoirs, it says in the

(13:55):
Daily Mail here she admits she secured a Supreme Court
ruling of aut Holyrood holding a new referendum as she
was quote in a bind and wanted to get her
over eager supporters off her back. She anticipated the Court
would block a second vote, but she said it helped

(14:18):
snap gung ho nationalists out of a quote collective delusion
that it would be easy because if we remember, that
was back in November twenty twenty two when all this
went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court said
that Hollywood cannot hold a referendum without the permission of Westminster.

(14:46):
And in her book she says she had quote zero
appetite for trying to stage a referendum that did not
meet the standards of twenty twenty fourteen. She says, I
was in a bind. Many of my part to members
and supporters were unwilling to accept that I lacked the
power to bring about a referendum without Westminster agreement. I

(15:08):
knew that it was in all likelihood impossible. So she
asked the Lord Advocate to ask the Supreme Court in
Westminster if Holyrood could hold a vote under its existing powers,
And all of us knew what the answer was going
to be. It was going to be no. She writes

(15:32):
that in private, she was unconvinced and unsurprised when the
court delivered its emphatic judgment. She wrote, quote, I had
hoped that the Court might surprise us with a positive ruling,
but I hadn't expected it. So she went ahead. She
went ahead and asked for that ruling, and it cost

(15:56):
the taxpayers over a quarter of a million hounds, even
though she knew that it was likely doomed to fail.
Quite quite remarkable. But that's coming out in her new
book called Frankly, which is probably trying just to exonerator

(16:21):
on many issues Anthony's already shared on Facebook. Thank you, Anthony. Now,
what I want to talk about is the change in
rhetoric on various matters relating to the big issue really

(16:42):
that we put Sturgeon's book aside. The big issue is
fifty thousand channel crossers have come in since Labor took power. Now,
Labor won the twenty fourteen general election on the fourth

(17:03):
of July, sorry, twenty twenty four, the fourth of July
twenty twenty four, so that was thirteen months ago. Labor
won the general election, and there's been fifty thousand of
these book coming across the English Channel since then, that's
a substantial town. Okay, that's more people that live in

(17:28):
air for example. That's a lot of people. Now the
the labor person who's asked here, who is it? Baroness
Smith has been asked for her comment, and she's the

(17:51):
Equalities minister. She says that the crossings were not are
not Labor's fault and insisted that the government was taking
responsibility for it now, but added, I don't believe it
is our fault that it was enabled to take root
in the way in which it has done by a

(18:14):
previous government who failed to do what was necessary at
that point. And she's right, the previous government failed to
do what was necessary, she continues, the last government enabled
this hideous criminal activity to really get its roots into Europe.
There was a lengthy period at the time in which
the criminal gangs behind this had the opportunity to have

(18:36):
this operation set up and really embedded. And she points
out that the previous government, the Conservatives, did nothing to
stop all of that. And in that sense she is
of course one hundred percent correct, because this began in
earnest in twenty eighteen, the summer of twenty eighteen when

(18:58):
Theresa May was the Prime Minister and nothing was done,
nothing was done, and it was just allowed to go
on and it got worse. But now the rhetoric is
definitely changing. And the rhetoric is changing because the Government

(19:19):
of the day is facing a serious threat to its
legitimacy and to its electoral power. Labor is facing a
serious threat from the form, and the Tories are also
facing a serious threat at the ballot box from reform.
And next year is going to be English council elections,

(19:39):
Scottish and Welsh parliamentary elections is going to be a
crucial year and Labor is panicking and the Tories are panicking.
And we have a video here of Kemmy Badenoch really
upping the rhetoric. Let's listen to this.

Speaker 4 (19:54):
We need to process people in detention centers. We need
to build proper camps where we keep people safe, whether
they are migrants or the local communities, but just having
people who can stay in a hotel, go out and
come as they please, whether or not they're criminals. We
have no idea who these people are. I don't think
that that's right. And it's gone on long enough.

Speaker 3 (20:13):
These camps are they tents. Are they for building buildings? Where?

Speaker 4 (20:17):
What are these camps? Well, I remember during COVID when
we were able to build Nightingale hospitals very quickly. There
are examples of how we've done this before. So that's
not where I am an expert at. What we need
is the government to actually get the people who are
experts to figure out what the solution can look like
it can be done. There's no point just making excuses.
And what worries me most is that the government will

(20:38):
say they're taking people out of hotels and just put
them into migrants, into private accommodation, which will be even
harder for us to track what's going on. And that's
what really worries me. Now, Labour should not be doing that.
They need to build proper places where we can put
people coming to our country illegally. But the thing that
will fix this problem, what will stop the boats, is
a deterrent, which means they don't come here in the
first place. And labor does not have a.

Speaker 1 (20:59):
Detor Indeed, a lot of good points there a lot
of good points from chemy Badenoch, but listen to her
talking about detention camps and that sort of rhetoric would

(21:20):
not have even been allowed two years ago, even six
months ago. People would go, that's strange, but of course
that's what's needed. I personally wouldn't use the phrase camps.
I would use the phrase, and we do use the
phrase in our book. Secure detention centers is what's needed. Well,

(21:43):
two things are needed. There should be prison time for
people who come via illegal roots, and there should be
secured detention centers for everybody else. And one of the
illegal roots would be across the channel in a dinghy.
If you do that, you should go to prison. You

(22:05):
would normally go to prison for entering the country illegally.
The only reason, as we'd never tire of saying, that
the Channel crossers are not treated in that criminal manner,
is because Britain's membership of the UN Refugee Convention allows
them to come in that way provided they are quote

(22:28):
unquote claiming asylum. And this relates to a theory that
got up after World War II, which is that you
should not block people who are trying to get into
your country. If they are escaping, if they are fleeing,

(22:49):
if they are running from potential death, you should legalize that.
And that may have had or it may have a
relevance in some cases, but it's clearly not relevant for
anybody coming over from France of all places. So if

(23:10):
you come over from France, you're clearly not escaping imminent death.
Therefore you should not be allowed to use that roote
and climb asylum. It has to be made illegal, but
under the UN Refugee Convention we cannot make it illegal.

(23:31):
We have to come out of the UN Refugee Convention
so that we can then say you come across the
channel to climb asylum in a dinghy, that's an illegal thing,
and you're going to go to prison. And people say,
wh why should we have to pay for them? Listen,
we won't have to do it to very many, and
we won't have to do it for very long until

(23:53):
everybody else gets the message, and that would be the
deterrent to stop the channel traffic. Prison and we can
definitely build as she suggested there. She didn't say prisons,
she said camps for processing, which she's still got to
make the next step to prison. But we can build
nightingale prisons for these people until the rest of them

(24:15):
get the message. Lots more to talk around that issue.
No doubt. We'll talk about it now with our colleague
Damien Davies from Cheshire Cat Musings. Folks, if you're watching
on TikTok, you won't be able to see this because
it's on the computer here. But if you go to
YouTube dot com forward slash uk a forced for Good,

(24:38):
you'll be able to see our discussion with our man
Damien around these and many other issues. Folks. Please say
hello to Damien hither Damien. Good to see you tonight.

Speaker 3 (24:55):
Good Athony, nice and warm down in Cheshire. I hope
it's the same for you up in the Central Beals.

Speaker 1 (25:00):
It has it's it's been, it's been a lovely day.
I'm glad to say the sun shining on the righteous here.
And have you been following this fifty thousand people coming in.
We've built, we've we've we've made the Guinness Book of
Records for the fastest fifty thousand people crossing the Channel

(25:21):
in the last thirteen months. So that's something that we're
quite good at, is letting people into the country who
shouldn't really be here. On one of Britain's finest achievements
in the last in the last couple of years, I
think after winning the Olympics.

Speaker 3 (25:36):
Did you see the video on act that was circulating
regarding what happens to the migrant boats?

Speaker 1 (25:43):
Just remind us of that again.

Speaker 3 (25:45):
Well, basically there was a citizen journalist that actually viewed
the boats and Dover, the dinghies actually being shipped back
over to France in a hall of Cantaigner and the
hall of container was actually released by the British governments
I either Home Office. So the boats are coming into Dover,

(26:10):
the people are disembarking, and the dinghies that they came
over and they're not being destroyed. They're being sent back
over to France. Now, hello Dabby, And to me that's
I'm awful of a cycling But this has taken the make.

Speaker 1 (26:29):
Recycling the robber dinghies exactly. Well, that's shocking if in fact,
I have no doubt that that's correct. But maybe unless
there's some other reason for it.

Speaker 3 (26:40):
I just think it's there's too many things that there's
too many things that are hello Anthony, there's too many
things that are coincidental about it, and I don't know a
video on it. Earlier in the week. Basically I also
done a video on the hotels themselves, because I'm of

(27:01):
the view that if this was truly about a humanitarian effort,
if this was truly about putting our best foot forward
and being the best country in the world and allowing
these poor, innocent, defenseless refugees and with open arms, then
surely it would be done for free. It wouldn't be
a business. These private hotel companies like the Batania hotels

(27:24):
all over the country that are making money hand over first, well,
if it was about humanitarian a they'd be doing it
for free. In fact, the government would insist on it
being done for free, because it's all about commandeering the hotels,
commandeering the resource and doing it a cost. If not
for free, then not making a profit on it, because
at the end of the day, nobody wants to make

(27:44):
a profit on a genuine humanitarian crisis. Surely, I mean
that just be wouldn't be right, I mean I'm speaking,
I'm speaking, you know, a tongue in cheek here. But
it's if it wasn't a business, this is the thing,
the thing that as told is not what's actually happening.
All the money that's being made in all these little vestors.

(28:06):
Yeah quite Chris, Yeah, I agree. With that one. Actually
my point is My point is that if it was
truly a genuine refuge emergency, there's no nobody, no human
rights lawyers, no, no, no part of the cost as
industry that's growing up around this asylum system would be
making money because it's not about making money, or the

(28:29):
lawyers would be in a pro bono public hoa surely,
because because why would anyone make any money off it?
Because if you're Umanitarian, you don't make money. It's all
about doing the best for your fellow man, is it not,
or fellow woman.

Speaker 1 (28:43):
Well that's an interesting point, and I think that reveals
the hypocrisy behind a lot of it, especially with the lawyers,
you know, because they're raking it in. They have got
endless clients. Every every boat that's coming over the channel
is just a new raft of clients for them.

Speaker 3 (29:03):
Well, yeah, exactly. I mean there was a there was
a it was last weekend the story broke. It was
Morgan McSweeney, who's basically one of the higher ups and
down in the streets. He was responsible for the speech
that Kisarma wrote about the Island of Strangers, and he's
very if very were that labor have lost the rest

(29:23):
read well in the next election. He is the one
that was getting them to go with the promigrant rhetoric. However,
his dad is in charge of asylum accommodation and he's
making a tidy profit on it as well. And the
business that his dad owns is actually registered in Ireland,
the Republic of Ireland for tax purposes, so they got

(29:45):
even more money and pay less corporation tax. So it's
all right, Labour saying was smashing the gangs, we want
to stop this system. That's the rhetoric. But behind the
scene is how many of their high ups I've got
the fingers in the cookie jar the world implicated in my.

Speaker 1 (30:04):
View, yes, yes, that's that's that's a good point is
to say follow the money, follow the money, and once
that money starts coming in, it's very difficult for the
hotel owners, for the lawyers, for the NGOs.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
Well even the private landlords that that that would normally
rent their homes out to student accommodation for UNI students
or private tenants, they would rather take a five year
contract from the governments were as guaranteed income and then
any breakages or anything wrong with the property is going
to be paid for when the clients move out. Now

(30:45):
back to my point earlier, if the government just went
out into the public and started requisitioning or privately held accommodation,
lake hotels and these private flat flat complexes and whatnot,
and so right, you're not going to be paid for this.
We're just taking it because we need it for the refugees.
I've got a feeling this entiressylum system would collapse pretty

(31:06):
much over night.

Speaker 1 (31:08):
I'd like to I'd like to think so. And that
might be coming because they're talking about wanting to stop
the hotel accommodation as soon as possible, certainly by the
next general election, but ideally before then. Well, if they're
not going to stop the flow of people coming over,
if they've got no effect of strategy to do that,

(31:31):
then where are they going to put these people?

Speaker 3 (31:33):
They're both directly in the community and HMOs houses are
multiple occupancy. That's exactly what they're going to go. So
the headline, the headline is oh, we've shut the hotels.
People might look at that and, oh great, they've shut
the hotels. The small princes, they're not being deported, they're
going to remain in the country. They're still a danger
to you women and children. It's just instead of having
hotels where the security cause there's for there's some level

(31:56):
of segregation between these film seekers and the general of
population that's not going to be there at all. They're
just going to be there in the wild in your community,
and we'll wash our hands of it. And yes, I
find what I do find that's interesting is and I
don't necessarily like the framing, but I like the fact

(32:16):
that we're getting results on it. There's a lot of
activists and campaigners that are are making it a safeguarding
issue for women and children, and they're saying, your policies
of allowing infinity refugees into the United Kingdom without any
vesting because we don't know who they are worth they've
come from, is making old women and children unsafe or
less safe than they were because if you look at

(32:37):
the violence and essays we'll call them for YouTube purposes
that are happening. From the early two thousands, it was
about six thousand in England and Wales, and that shot
ups in early seventy thousands in England and Wales. And
that's in my opinion, due to the mass migration policy
where we're important people with vastly different values and culture

(32:58):
sets of ours on the on the on the hope
and a pratherm that they're going to assimilate and integrate
into British life, and persently that's not true. So I
sort to take issue with the fact that it has
to be framed as a woman and children issue, because
it should just be that you're breaking into the country.

(33:19):
You don't get to stay. That that's the end of
the matter in my view. However, if we're getting women
and children now it's on the street, like the pink
Ladies down then London, all dressed up, very very distinct,
so so they can't be categorized as far right thugs.
I'm the saying this is a safeguarding issue for our
women and children. Well, yes it is, and it is

(33:40):
getting results. I mean, what are your thoughts on that.

Speaker 1 (33:44):
Yes, I think that it is very important to emphasize
the the safety element, because you and I and most
normal people will say you shouldn't be breaking into the country,
it should be illegal. However, if that's not cut any
ice with the powers that be, then you do have
to look around at well, what are the implications of

(34:06):
people illegally breaking into the country. What are the implications
of all these men of whom we know absolutely nothing,
And then you realize, well, they are potentially there is
a potential danger there. And that's really why we called
our new book Protect our Country. Oh fantastic, fantastic, good

(34:27):
we've sold. We've got a copyright there to you. Thanks well,
I hope you enjoy that. But that's why we called
it Protect Our Country because this is an issue of
security and our safety, safety and security of the British people.
And we say in the very first line here we say,
quote the first duty of the government is to keep

(34:49):
citizens safe and the country secure close. Quote. That's not
us saying it, that's literally the very first sentence which
appears on the Home Office website. So is the Home
Office really performing it's quote unquote first duty to British
citizens and our country to keep close. No, of course

(35:10):
they're not.

Speaker 3 (35:11):
The prioritized their human rights cross as industry, above and
beyond the defense of the realm and the defense or
for the women. I'm gonna even say men, because yes,
women and children are more vulnerable, but men and men
can be attacked as well. It's just that it's likely
so it's the safeguardeners for everyone in the country to before.

(35:34):
But there's also a with the lefty liberals I don't
know rights upon this on my channel yesterday as well,
there's a what's the phrase hypocrisy, that's the one essentially
the very eager to say that all cultures are equal,
everybody's equally valid, there is such a thing as a

(35:56):
universal person. We all need to hold hands in Sincombe
Are because that's the best thing to do until the
people that are imporusing into the country break the law.
As soon as they break the law, they will turn
amount and say, well, we have to consider they weren't
naturally raised in Western Europe. We have to consider that

(36:18):
they may have different cultural norms where they come from.
And they allow this in sentencing for mitigation, which is
why you'll get people that have committed heinous crimes and
the Galla twelve month sentence and they're out in six months,
or they won't even get a prison sentence because THIRDI
or Sensel the Gallas to spended sentence because of all

(36:39):
this mitigation. So it turns out that all cultures are
equal or people are equally valid, and there's no difference
until mister foreigner, mister channel migrants, mister asylum seek who
is not from Western Europe commits a crime, and then
we have to consider there they're very specific cultural differences

(37:03):
and how they may not know that attacking women is wrong,
or they may not know that you can't just go
up and grow women in public because because there's an
issue of consent. It's it's very it's a strange, it's
a strange, strange hypocrisy. Now, either all cultures are equally
valid or than not. And I'm not taking it because
to me, it's very, very, very racist to treat somebody

(37:26):
from outside of Western Europe differently to somebody inside of
Western Europe, with the assumption that people from outside of
Western Europe need to be treated like children because they're
not as civilized as Western Europeans. I think that's deeply
racist and problematic by the liberal left's very very own criteria.
But I also, oh.

Speaker 1 (37:45):
Yeah, one hundred percent, I really like that point that
you made there, which isn't one I had really thought about.
But it just speaks to the fact that endless excuses
will be made if you haven't got you know, if
you don't like that excuse we've got other excuses for
them sort of thing.

Speaker 3 (38:02):
It's like he was gone down and there was a
Nigerian and he wasn't even sent to prison because of
his difficult background. He wasn't an any assaulted a woman
and he wasn't even and he wasn't even given a
primity prison sentence. Who had given suspended sentence? Now to me,
he should be on the first one back to Nigeria.

Speaker 1 (38:22):
Well, I absolutely, and I wonder if maybe he is
going to be because that. We'll just put up a
picture here of a tweet that was sent by the
Secretary of Justice yesterday and we'll just read it out,

(38:42):
fire it up here. There we go, Shabana Mamod. I
am clear. Foreign criminals must be deported never to return.
And she's got some words here. When foreign nationals commit
a serious time, the appropriate punishment is clear to me.

(39:03):
They must be sent packing. By failing to live up
to their responsibilities, they must lose their right to call
our country their home. They must be deported never to return.
Shabana Mahmood Lord Chancellor, Secretary of State for Justice now

(39:24):
crying out loud. I mean, I think that's great. I
think that's great rhetoric, and I think it's to be applauded,
and we retweeted that indeed, and credit where credit is due. Now,
of course, whether Labor will do a thing about that
remains to be seen, but we cannot discount that powerful rhetoric.

(39:47):
I mean talking about sending people packing. I mean a
few years ago, if you had said that, people would go,
what do you a member of some strange fringe party?
You know, But that's the law Chancellor saying that. So
even if she may not do very much with that,
what that does is it brings those words into reality,

(40:08):
and it makes everybody else emboldened to say the same thing,
and that's how policies can eventually change. And of course
we know she's only saying that because she is her
party is being threatened by well, let's be frankets by
the Reform party that's saying those things, and she doesn't
want to lose votes. But whatever the reasons may be,

(40:29):
at least she's saying the right things, things that you
and I have been saying for years.

Speaker 3 (40:34):
She is she is. However, we have to caveat that,
And the caveats that I would have is that her party,
as we Okay. Starma Lord Turner is the attorney Jamble
for England and Wales and Sadi Khan, all human rights lawyers,
so this is that Braden butsup. So it's very interesting

(40:57):
because I don't know if you remember when Boris was
firemenas U, he tried to get a flight off the
ground of dangerous foreign criminals and basically it got grounded
at the last minute, and some of them were serious
offenders from Jamaica and other Commonwealth countries and it got
grounded at the last second. And it was on the
basis of human rights interventions. And one and two of

(41:19):
the signatories work Istarma and Diane Abbotts. So it seems
like the behavior can be different if you're in opposition
to when you're in power, and that's what you need
to watch. Like the Tories have been very strong at
the moment on immigration rhetoric. Well that's fine, whether we're
in opposition. They're not in a position to affect anything,

(41:42):
so that's why the rhetoric is so strong. That's just
my opinion. I'm a bit I'm a bit cynical. I'm
done with the uniparty alistair, I'm done with the Tories
and I'm done with the Labor Party at this point.
He can he can say we're not going to like
a single immigrant back into the country, and it's not
going to be it's not going to be that zero
migration is going to be negative migration. They could say that. Well,

(42:04):
until that's translated into actual action, then then I'm not
really buying it. I mean, the rest of it looks nice.
If anything else, it gives us more leeway to what
we can and can't say ourselves. We can gatherize supports
on a local and national level that those are all positives. However,

(42:24):
I'd like action as well, oh.

Speaker 1 (42:28):
One hundred percent. Absolutely. Unless we actually see serious action
in that regard, then it is just it is just rhetoric,
and I don't I'm not holding my breath for any
serious action because, as I've always said, and as we
say in our book, I mean to actually stop this

(42:48):
channel traffic will require a complete overhaul of Britain's obligations
to the international legal framework, and the part the Labor
Party and the Tories as well, I don't think they
really want to go there. That's why we never hear
them talking about leaving the UN refugee convention, they'll say,

(43:12):
the Tories will say, oh, we need to leave the ECCHR.
And I think that there's reasons that we could leave
the ECCHR, and maybe we should, but it's not the
main player as far as legitimizing the people who are
coming in over the channel. And what the ECCHR will
do is if you are an asylum seeker, if your

(43:33):
claim has been heard, if you've been running around with
appeal after appeal, if you've been here for five or
six years and you've run out of appeals and you've
got to go home, you can make a case that
you've got a right to a family life because you've
been here long enough to actually establish a family and
to establish a life in this country. And yes it

(43:56):
does apply to those people, and yes it generally does
stop those people leaving. But those people are a minority.
They are they are very much the people who have
been given us, given us the run around for years.
The convention which legalizes what to us is illegal entry
via the Channel is the UN Refugee Convention, and that's

(44:19):
the one that we need, we need to overturn in
some ways no longer deal.

Speaker 3 (44:24):
With, isn't it In troined in British law that we
have the Whites who refuse refugees if they've traveled through
a safe country to get air.

Speaker 1 (44:35):
No. No, I mean some people make that argument that
that's what the UN Refugee Convention is about.

Speaker 3 (44:42):
But I've heard prominent MPs or former pays like Smog
actually make that argument on GBN News saying they've gone
through a safe country, they should be claiming asylum. Now. Now,
I don't know where he's getting that from, because as
a former and paid expectant to know something about it. Now,
either he is mistake and always trying to argue a

(45:03):
point that's not been established common law for right and work. Basically,
he may have a point, but it's not been argued
effectively exactly.

Speaker 1 (45:11):
It's both of those things. It's both those things. It's
not an established point of law. And to the extent
that you would take that to court under the UN
Refugee Convention, there's plenty of lawyers will say, oh no,
that's a misinterpretation of the UN Refugee Convention, and we
do actually have to continue to allow people even from

(45:33):
a safe country. So yeah, that's just one of these
legal pieces of legal ease which will be argued over
and over. You can take it to court, and it's
very likely that the that you'll lose it as well,
because the UN refugee lawyers will come up with all
sorts of reasons why they had to be in that
safe country because it was the only country they could

(45:55):
get to, all sorts of all sorts of things. It's
just a piece of legal ease which has not been tested,
and it's not going to save us at all. The
only thing that's going to save us is just getting
out of that convention and establishing our own, our own version.

Speaker 3 (46:11):
And I would I would say, I mean, from my understanding,
there's no such thing as international law. What you have
is a series of treaties and conventions like the Refugee
Convention were essentially you have you have nation states, or
we'll call them parties just for the sake of the argument.
So say, for example, you've got fifty countries and they

(46:32):
all agree to we're going to do it this way.
Are you the Refugee Convention it's not actually binding anywhere,
meaning we could leave tomorrow. I think we have to
give a year's notis I think there was a notice
period to say like, we're withdrawing comment, but it's naturally
enforceable because it's not, because international law is just a
series of agreements. It's not actually a legislation.

Speaker 1 (46:54):
That's that's also correct. That's also correct, But that convention
can be socially binding on a country in such a
way that the country fuels that it can't really go
and do its own thing when there's another forty nine
countries who are going to say you cannot do that.

Speaker 3 (47:10):
So essentially it's worded as guidelines, but many people read
it as rules rather than guidelines.

Speaker 1 (47:18):
Yes, and it becomes accepted to such a point that
it becomes like a commonly established international rule, even though
it might not be enforceable in some way. It's just
like Britain doesn't want to come out the UN Refugee
Convention because then all the other countries would say, well,
why can't we come out of it? And you'd find
that that structure, which has been built up since nineteen

(47:40):
fifty one, will just start to disintegrate. And nobody wants
to be the first person to say this isn't working
for us anymore. We need to go our own way.
So you're right in the sense that it's not legally binding.
You're right that we could leave it, but politically it
requires a lot of courage for a national leader to

(48:02):
say I am leading my country out of this convention
that the whole world agrees with.

Speaker 3 (48:08):
Well, just between me and you and your audience, Alice
Arbors amountains say straight the way, it's not working for
us because it's put on our women and children in danger.
It's putting them at risk. If there's one serious crime
that's the result of this refugee convention and somebody given
or granted and definitely leads to remain on the back
of a refugee convention, then that's too many exactly. That's

(48:31):
my opinion on the matter, and that's demostom what you
said earlier in the in this segment that the first
priority of any government is to keep its people safe.
So to me, anything that contravenes that should be a
secondary or tertiary consideration. Yes, they're nice to have, okay,

(48:51):
ehr nice to have, wonderful grace. Refugee convention nice to have.
They're not essential to the running of the country. You
should have them lower down the total poll. It's like
the European conventional human rights. It should be for Europeans.
It was specifically set up after World War Two, after
the Holocaust and other war times that happened during World

(49:15):
War two, and it should be redefined so it's just
specifically for Europeans. Yes, I mean that that would cause
all the people from Africa. It's not costing the Mediterranean
into Europe because the UHR has been redefined as specifically
for Europeans. Yes, that would be one tweak. Well, even

(49:36):
know it's no one ever mentions these tweaks that are
very logical and very practical. You could put these measures
in m that would that would that would make a dance.
It wouldn't stop the problem, but it would make a
dance if you redefine the e c HR for just
Europeans or you or you redefine it to say only
people that are signed up to the EHR as nation

(49:57):
states can act us the rights that come with it.
For example, so you can't get refugees from Nigeria or
South Africa anymore. I'm considered almost happening in South Africa.
I want to take a few refugees from South Africa
like America is. Well, you've got the principles on a
making that there's very specific. I mean there were they

(50:20):
were that they were defined in a way before we
understood how they were going to be abused in the future.
It's like anything. If any legislation or any law is
not working, you either revise it or you repeal it.

Speaker 1 (50:33):
Exactly. There's so much that could be done. There's so
much that could be done, but there's just silence from
people who should be who should be guiding us. Paul
Rais is the good point here about you know, you
have to be checked for safeguarding. If you're working in
many jobs these days, you have to be checked and
so on to protect the public. Like yet we're letting

(50:56):
people into the UK without any kind of safeguarding checks
at all. And absolutely well, we'll come into the end
of the show and it's been a good talk. We
didn't get to even much to.

Speaker 3 (51:12):
Your former first mistress, the paus and Dwarf, did we.

Speaker 1 (51:16):
We didn't even get onto onto that at all either.

Speaker 3 (51:19):
Know. Apparently I'll just say a few thinks about Nicholas
Surgeon before you go then to give you a better
fault than I think it's ironic that the lady that
wanted to lead Scotland from the oppressed English wants to
relocated London chatter out of a book? Did she? Because
she's mentioned that all over the press. For some reason,
we're being subjected to her all over English television sets

(51:41):
at the moment as well. I think it's quite comical
that her biggest achievement when she was in office was
the baby box that nobody wanted. Mm hmm. Seems to
be her claim to fame. But yeah, everything everything that's
going on from Nicholas Surgeon this last week or so,
it's just with is absolutely pathetic. She's an international ath

(52:03):
and store, she's a national disgrace and uel shot of her.

Speaker 1 (52:09):
Yes, yes, well, hopefully she may enjoy her time in London.
I think what she'll probably end up doing actually is
you'll be seeing a lot more of her because you'll
get a job as a political pundit on one of
these shows. Or she might even be the new host
of Question Time. Imagine that that would be like another

(52:29):
reason never to watch question Time.

Speaker 3 (52:32):
Well yeah, with nicolassertion, now, I really don't understand why
people are plugging her so hard at the moment, So
I really don't get it. Well, I also found interesting
before we fit, before you got off, basically and leave
is that if you remember in the twenty fifteen general

(52:54):
election debates, for some reason she was debased in Najel
for Argent David Cameron on a national stage for the
Westminster Parliament. What I don't understand is why she was
allowed to do that, because she's got no power in Westminster.
She's not an MP, she wasn't an MP, she wasn't
wanting for election in the British Parliaments, and yet she

(53:17):
was able to debate National Party leaders like Rage and
David Cameron. I didn't understand that. And then you flip
and then you flip it forward nine years to the
twenty twenty four general election. John Sweeney wasn't debating with
Ferrage and but she's soon Acqua was he? He sent
Stephen Flynnan. So for some reason that changed.

Speaker 1 (53:40):
Possibly it was just because the SNP didn't have any
other other talent.

Speaker 3 (53:45):
That so what you're saying to me that see if
you Flint's more impressed than John Swenney.

Speaker 1 (53:52):
Probably actually yeah, well he's unfortunately likely to be the
next leader of the SNP of johnswhen he steps down him,
he's he's the he's the favorite to become the next
leader exactly, exactly, Well, Damien, sorry, thanks for coming along
tonight anyway, And another problem, you do a regular show.

(54:15):
You're putting out videos every day on your YouTube site,
which is at YouTube dot com. Forward slash at Cheshire
Cat musings all one word and I definitely do recommend
it as a channel for some regular common sense.

Speaker 3 (54:35):
I have started reading the book. I've not got through
it because it is quite thick. However, I have started
reading to it and it's an interesting read. I've skimmed it,
but I will be cracking my knuckles on it soon enough,
so we'll be going through a bit and Moodie as
hell brilliant.

Speaker 1 (54:50):
And something about it is that you can just dip
into it because the chapter headings are fairly fairly clear.
So if you want to find out about the UN
Refugee Convention, or how to stop the votes, or how
to stop legal immigration or how to do deportation, or
why do so many people who are not British citizens
why do they have the vote which is a major

(55:12):
issue in Britain. Actually, then then it's all there and
protect our country. So Damian, we'll have you on as
we suggested, you've got to come on once a month anyway,
and so we look forward to having you back on.
But in the meantime, have a great evening and a
great week down there in Runcorn.

Speaker 3 (55:34):
You have a good evening as well, and let's keep
Hart Concis together. Vote. Thanks for your hand yet.

Speaker 1 (55:40):
Absolutely good night. Okay, fantastic great man is Damien, and
so I'm so glad to have met Damien's acquaintance, a
great YouTuber as well, and so so yes, a lot

(56:01):
of good comments they are coming in as well from everybody.
And if you hadn't noticed, we are pushing the book
Protect Our Country, three hundred and fifteen pages of common sense,
all about policies to stop the invasion of the country,

(56:26):
literal invasion. Basically that's happening. And so if you're interested
in that field, if you're a politician of some kind,
if you're hoping to stand for a political party, doesn't
matter what party it is, you'll find a lot to
think about and a lot of stuff to say from
this book. And if you yourself don't see yourself reading it,

(56:51):
but you think you know what my local MSP or
my local MP should really have a copy of that
sitting on their bookshelf. Just buy it from Amazon and
send it to the person. All you need to do
is go on too Amazon dot co dot uk and
search for Protect our Country and you can also get
it in ebook. Great stuff. Okay, well let's draw it

(57:19):
to a close. Thank you very much folks for watching.
We'll be back next week hopefully have a guest for
you next week. It just remains for me to thank
the two people who gave us the super chats. That
was Karna Parks who gave five pounds, and also to

(57:41):
Dtube who also gave five pounds as well, with a
pointed comment there about Madame Sturgeon. Good stuff. Okay, folks,
we'll be back next week. In the meantime, God bless

(58:02):
the United Kingdom and God save the King. See you
next week.