 We're joined by the one and only Joe Glenton. How you doing mate? Not bad mate. Not bad. Joe or Joey? Joe. Because I've heard people do say that. I don't want to be like you can call me Joe if you want. That's fine. And for the audience out there, tell us a little bit about yourself. The last 10 years. The last 10 years, I am what Wellington called the common scum of the earth, the lowly soldier. So I joined the army in 2004 because I was broke because I'm working class. And for a lot of us, partially economic, partially the ideological stuff. Went to Afghanistan. Quite quickly figured out it was bullshit. Came back from tour. Refused to go back. Ended up AWOL for two and a half years in the grand tradition of Vietnam vets running off to Canada or Sweden. I ended up in Australia for a couple of years. Came back, politicised, became very publicly anti-war. Got locked up for nine months in a military prison, which was all shits and giggles. What's that like in military? Is that worse than a cat B or a cat A? I suppose it's technically a low security prison. There were guys in there who had been in both and who were connoisseurs of the prison system. And some of them said it was better, some of them said it was worse. Obviously in the military prison, it's a military regime. So it's familiar. It's a weird one. In a civilian prison, you get locked up for years, more lock up or bang up or whatever they called it. And in a military prison, there's less of that, but you get fucked around a lot more. And you have to wear uniform and iron your kit and do certain military things. Tough for people, generally, I presume, or not? What type of people are in there? I mean, tough for people are the scrues and the prisoners, right? Yeah, yeah. I mean, the scrues are pretty unhappy about it. In fact, there's a military prison scrues court and it's all the people who don't want to go to Afghanistan. So they rebadge to this military prison thing. They got promoted straight to sergeant and they never really went anywhere. So it's the guys who really didn't want to die. So they were kind of on side in a way and they were the kind of guys who were getting tools at the end of their careers and they're like, I'm not going, I'm not running around in the sandpit anymore. I'm sick of it. So it's interesting. It's interesting. And so since then, what's happened? I came out of jail, went to uni, did international relations, wrote a book, published a book, buy it, first-hand book, sold your box. It's very good, I'm told. And then became a journalist. And that's where I am now. So what's the organisation that you work with at the moment? So I'm part of a group called Veterans for Peace, which is a UK chapter of an American organisation, which came out of the anti-Vietnam War movement. These are the actual, the guys of that area, these old Vietnam vets, they're amazing. They're so, so cool. So a friend of mine, Ben, who's an SAS guy, founded a British chapter and we're now 500 strong. We were active around anti-war issues, anti-imperialist issues, and we're the biggest democratic veterans organisation in the country. And we're part of this long history of angry soldiers and veterans in this country and around the world who do radical things and reject the narrative of empire and militarism and the army. So let's talk about this case that came up this week. So five men were arrested, four of whom were serving soldiers, two have since been released, I should say, under suspicion of terror-related offences. And it's being said that they're associated with a group called, is it National Action? That's right. National Action, who are a far-right organisation, White Supremacist organisation. And when this happened, there were, you know, there was a kind of media blackout around it. It didn't really seem like a massive story. I think that if they happened to have been Muslim soldiers, it would have been a much bigger story. And then there was the kind of social media storm, which is kind of inversely proportional to the amount of coverage often, saying, well, you know, these are White Supremacist terrorists. You know, this indicates that there is a endemic problem in relation to racism and far-right ideology in the military. And this is kind of being sat on as an inconvenient truth. And as someone who, if this might surprise you, but I've never been in the army. Really? I mean, I know I've got the classic soldiers billed. Not even like the CCF, your local cadets, doesn't they? Yeah, it's cool. Listen, I smote a ton of weeds at such a high school. So did we in cadets. I was just like, I'm not, this is not happening. I did have some really good camo trackies, though, but that was more of a, I was just a look to serve. What's your Twitter handle? It's at joejglinton. Can we just pull up Joe's, you can we pull up those tweets? And then because you had some very pertinent remarks in relation specifically to this, and we can track that in a second because I wanted to ask so the way in which this was being framed is that this is indicative of an endemic problem in armed forces culture. Has that been your experience? Has that been something that you've observed? It has a national action or a neo, not like a card carrying neo-Nazis group. I understand you. I've in my experience of being in the military and around the military have occasionally come across neo-Nazis. More often it's different kinds of nationalist. So EDL, people who are enthused by the EDL or the BNP are probably most commonly far right kind of loyalist guys from Northern Ireland and Scotland from that side of the orange side of the divide who are very open about their views. And there's space to do that. There's space to do that in the military because it, I mean, in a sense, I've come to the conclusion after years of kind of throwing this around my head that in a way the military is a far right organization, but most commonly it's kind of less neo-Nazis, more kind of nationalist groups like the EDL, BNP. Why is that? I don't know. Maybe they're, I mean, I'm not sure why. I guess it's just more accepted. I'd neo-Nazis probably would stand out more because they're so, so far right. Not say the others are that much better, but the nationalist stuff is kind of part of the part of the DNA of the military. There's, it's kind of allowed to be there and it goes unremarked upon. It's just kind of accepted those kind of ideas. There's just more tolerance for it. And it's also kind of part, part of the, it's part of the training, I suppose, the ideas of nation and nationhood, and I don't think neo-Nazis quite fits that in the same way. We're trawling over that Joey's tweets, but I think there's really embarrassing stuff. You guys, the back of the McDonald's worth is one of that. So you can, you know, he's a good, good, good person, a good human being. So you would say it's defined by a nationalism. So, but what I'm interested in is obviously because you've seen in the last 10 years in particular, the rise of English nationalism, the rise of the SMP, which for a unionist Scotts of problem, we're seeing changes now in Ireland, the potential unification of Ireland. It's not probable, but it's on the agenda when it was just implausible before Brexit. So are these broader political dynamics, imperial decline coupled with the potential breakdown of the union, a continued erosion fundamentally of a shared British identity, declining prestige in the world and so on and so forth, are these coming together to, are they changing fundamentally? Those dynamics that have always been there of the army as a quintessentially nationalist organization, which inculcates far right values. I think, I think that when you look at the kind of juncture we're at, you have a couple of failed wars. We're a failed army. Our armies failed not for, not because of the quality of the troops, but the quality of the leadership failed to, to, to achieve the aims of the wars. You also have a period of capitalist crisis, and most guys who are coming out of the military, this is veterans, more than anything, are coming back to poverty and anger. A lot of these guys will come out with some degree of mental health issues, more, more recently recognized more in the states that the kind of signature injury of these wars is moral injury, when your morals are kind of fractured, your moral compass is fractured, and I think the conjunction of all those things probably has seen arise, has made the military fertile ground, and the veterans community fertile ground for nasty ideas. But at the same time, the other side of that is that some people go the other way, and then you see the rise of things like veterans for peace, which has a much more progressive agenda. I mean, so I guess a question that I have is there seems to be two impulses in the left. And I think one is probably the tendency that I have, which is to address the military from a kind of instinctively anti-imperialist position, one which has looked at the war on terror rather than as failed wars as kind of successful in the sense of, you know, securing certain resources in terms of a never-ending war on terror both domestically and abroad, which justifies ever-more invasive forms of state power, again, both domestically and... Hanna-Som was successful? Well, the thing is, it's like by what measure of success, right? Oil prices. I mean, I don't think by any measure, really, that they're... No, I mean, what I'm saying in that regard is that it becomes its own kind of raison d'etre, right? Like, you create an enemy, which you kind of, you know, there's a... It's at the existential heart of what it means to exist in the global north at the moment is simply not being of that barbarous eastern other. Right. And also an anniversary of 9-11 today, and so we kind of think of that as this decisive historical break. The thing about that analysis is that it rapidly becomes unmoored from domestic politics. So we stopped thinking about, well, how is it that the army becomes the only option to escape from certain neighbourhoods? Or why is it that that mode of belonging, which is certainly predicated on forms of racialised and gendered violence, like why does that become so appealing? And then indeed, how do we engage with those who have come back incredibly damaged by those forms of violence? And then there's the other side of it, right? Which is a kind of, you know, patriotic protectionist leftism, which says, well, socialism within this country and a strong military is a part of that, and a kind of valorisation and a lionisation of military participation is a part of that. How do we kind of create a conversation between these two things which are often pitted as polar opposites? And you've got a figure like Jeremy Corbyn, who is a smack dab in the middle of this kind of ideological contest. Yeah, I mean, it's a very complex question. Yeah, sorry, it was a very rambly one. No, no, no, I mean, it's very valid. But it's kind of, I mean, how do you, I'm going to try and boil it like, how do you engage this two sides to it? How do you engage veterans? I think you have to look at Corbyn's programme and compare it with the programme post-1945 and go, look, this is the nearest thing that is being offered to you to that original settlement. And a lot of veterans are still caught up with the idea of lineage in history and the achievements of 1945. So that's one part of it. I mean, yeah, I mean, that's a big question. I don't know if I can just roll out an answer to you because we just pulled up Corbyn's snubbing Glastonbury. Yeah. And that was, of course, in the same day as Veterans Day. Yeah, which is a completely manufactured new thing that's got veterans. Yeah, the veterans day particularly. They just come up with the games that the Invictus Games. Yeah, where Harry, Harry, who there's a couple of people they've picked out as like the veterans champions. Johnny Mercer is one of them. Dan Jarvis is another one. And Harry is another one. Touring Labour MPs. Yeah, yeah, and Harry is another one, isn't he? Harry went up on stage at the Invictus Games for wounded troops and shook hands with George fucking Bush. He was there, the kind of architect of these guys mutilation or one of them. And yeah, it's bizarre, it's absolutely bizarre. But there is this whole, this kind of charity, sporting event racket, which has grown up and that's about bolstering support for the military. They talk about it as a kind of celebration of our guys. They always frame it as the blokes. And then they go, by which we mean the men and the women, it actually says that on the help heroes, like the blokes, by which we mean the men and the women. And it's really cynical, twisted stuff. Have you seen the Millies? Maybe we could put up, sorry, this is a bit. God, they have like the Best Sniper Award. This is bad, yeah, this is bad of me to the production team. But does the sun have this, this Millies, they call it the military Oscars, have you seen this? There's like the Apotheosal that's fucked up in the room. The sun, the sun runs it as well. I mean, it's interesting that you brought up the blokes, right? Because there was a report carried out in, I think, 2015, which was addressing sexual harassment in the military. Oh, Jesus Christ almighty. It's bad, huh? Fuck me. It found that four out of 10 of female personnel in the army had received unwanted sexual comments or exposed to material of sexual nature. 19% of women had received unwelcome sexual gestures. That's 6% have been sent sexual explicit material like pornography and whatever. And just 3% of unwanted sexual advances were ever reported. So we talk about the racialized aspect and I think that's incredibly important. But in terms of gender violence, both in terms of what happens when a military is posted abroad but also internally as well, is there a culture of what is often called toxic masculinity? Absolutely, that's absolutely the case. And I've only come to recognize that more recently because for years I was like, what is this toxic bit there? But it's absolutely the case and the army has riddled through it with it. Well, my core for example, some parts of the military don't have women. Mine did and they were routinely slurred and slandered and abused in various ways. And it's just absolutely standard practice in my experience across the military and talking to women who've been in the military. That was there. And it's a weird thing that many who are in the military don't get is that women appear, when I've spoken to women veterans in the US in here, women in the military exist in a constant state of kind of sexual threat. They're constantly under, this is their words, not mine, they could explain it much more coherently. But there's this constant, they know they're in a man's space, a hyper male space throughout the whole time. And that obviously is extremely damaging while they're in and afterwards. So when you were posted in Afghanistan, how did people that you worked alongside make sense of the war that they were in? This is it, you don't, because you're not, you just hold not to. It's not your job, it's not in your pay scale. You don't need to think about that, just crack on with the job in front of you. And so in that sense, it's kind of compartmentalized. It is not, as private scumbag, Glenton, it's not my job. It's my job to worry about getting this load of ammunition from here to here. It's not my job to think about the geopolitics of Central Asia. And for most people, that remains the case, where that's someone else's concern, and you just concentrate on your own little job across the military. For some people that, and I suppose I'm one of them, that cannot be sustained. And I did start to question, but then when you do, you're in a world of fucking hurt, to be honest, because you can't go and debate these things. And so even though it was obvious as the, we were in there in the first stages of like the second Afghan war, Helmand and Kandahar, even though it's very obvious that from within about two months that it was going very badly and no one really knew what we were doing, and there was still no space to question that. Because we talked about this before the show started, and I kind of think that would be a really valuable thing for our audience to hear about as well, is that you were talking to me about the difference between a professional army and a conscripted army and what that means in terms of people questioning the situations that they find themselves in and not complying. Yeah, yeah. Since Vietnam, and for us it's more World War I, because we never had a Vietnam, and Vietnam for the Americans, the US and UK, for example, are terrified of, they cannot even countenance the idea of a conscripted army, because it is a virtual guarantee of some kind of rebellion on a large scale. And so we opt for professional armies, volunteers, generally there's other kinds of conscription, obviously there's economic conscription, because they know the kind of radical potential that those big forced forms of military service hold, and that's a terrifying thought for them. So is there potential to, this is very dangerous saying this as a Muslim, is there potential to radicalise people in UK armed forces to criticise them and to, you know, open up what can be, you know, we talked about the inability of the left to deal with soldiers, but to open up a conversation. I think there is, I mean, the right are doing it, clearly. The right can do it, and I don't see why we can't. And there are, you know, the military is a weird thing, because it is very reactionary in many ways and very right-wing, and it's about power and submission. But at the same time, in a weird way, the military also has, it almost has the kind of germs of something else, because in its own way, it relies on solidarity with each other. You still operate in a team, even if it's in a way that would be hard to kind of digest for the left. But also you look at the military, and it's a planned economy. Everyone's fed and clothed and watered and educated, to some extent, and employed in what the establishment would suggest is a useful way. So there are germs of something else as well, and that kind of solidarity, which is very intense, and it obviously, often in the military, is described in a very masculine way. It's like the brotherhood. But there is something of value there, I think, but it depends which way it goes, and if it can be expanded in a more progressive and meaningful way. I mean, people talk about this in terms of selflessness, that people, when they're fighting alongside one another in a high, sort of high-precious situation, they're doing it for their mates, rather than a, you know... They're comrades. ...queen and country, yeah. Yeah, and you can see how if you could kind of create something like that on the left, it would, hopefully, it could potentially dispense with some of the fracturing, the kind of fractious nature of the left. I just think there is some potential there, some kind of example, a deeply imperfect flawed example, because obviously, the military's very good at giving you, kind of ingraining this team ethic and this solidarity in you, and then they say, now go and kick fucking Iraqi's doors in. And so it's kind of, they build this solidarity, this human bond, and it's a very human thing, and then they use it for their own ends to dominate other countries and abuse people and extract resources. But there is something in there which I think is of value, could be of value to us. We're going to wrap up in a second. Do you want to? Oh, I've got a question. Go on, you ask a question, and then I'll, yeah. It's another biggie, which is, this is a point of antagonism in the left at the moment, and you've got those, like, Paul Mason, who think that this isn't a useful conversation to have right now, so you kind of accept some of the limitations of, you know, expansionist nationalism. But do you think that we can, and indeed should be working towards building a social majority, a cultural hegemony, whatever you want to call it, towards building a disarmed and demilitarized society? What are your strategies for that? Do you think it's possible? I think it is possible, and I think we should attempt it. And one idea which is flowing around fellow dissenters, me and fellow dissenters, is the idea of neutrality, of Britain being neutral, and by that I do not mean defenseless, which is what the right would obviously respond if we're neutral, we're defenseless, but I do mean a non-expiditionary, a country which doesn't do expeditionary warfare in the way that it has, and that means not necessarily disbanding the army, well not disbanding the army, and not being defenseless, and that might be a way that would appeal, because we talked about this earlier, there are large sections of the right to question and reject the arguments for us being in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that also, the more traditional kind of anti-war left in the peace movement, that would probably also appeal to them. So maybe there's potential there, but this idea, and I'd encourage people to explore what neutrality, national neutrality actually means, and look at that and see if there's some, a kind of radical program which can emerge from that, that we can consider campaigning on. What do you think? Paul Mason's sort of, when he stands for nuclear weapons, he's a big fan of Trident. He says he is a fan of Trident because he wants to eliminate an expeditionary army effectively, and he says, well look, we want to save money, we want to put money elsewhere, we don't want to invade foreign countries, so keep trying and get rid of the other bit. I can see the logic there, I don't know if I agree, but I can certainly see the logic there, and I think I would agree in terms of the neutrality thing, and you would maintain some kind of armed forces clearly for defensive purposes. In a context where Donald Trump has nuclear weapons, where Kim Jong-un has nuclear weapons, well I think we will only see the further proliferation of nuclear weapons in the next several decades, I think unilateral disarmament maybe is a limited strategy. I believe, and this is a difficult thing to say because every schmuck in the Labour Party in process, well I believe in multilateral disarmament, but it's a cover for not really believing in disarmament whatsoever, but I think now, as more and more countries have access to these weapons and this technology and this knowledge, we really have little other choice we have to, and to underline the fact I believe that, I would add, I would say there's no other great miracle in the second half of the 20th century as I said last week, actually, than the fact we didn't have a nuclear war after 1945, and it is a miracle, it's a fantastic thing, and unless we do something about it, I think it probably will happen at some point, and hundreds of millions of people will die, so I'm not saying it should be ignored, but it would have to be addressed at the multilateral level. What Britain can do unilaterally, and this is perhaps where I agree a bit with Paul, is the expeditionary warfare stuff. I mean, I would, in fact, frame things in a slightly different way, and I think you see this in an especially pronounced way in America, where the technologies and tactics of the war on terror have been brought back domestically, in particular to police, black and Latino communities, and I think that there is a strong argument to be made in terms of the protection of civil liberties, and indeed, in terms of domestic anti-racist movements, which haven't always lined up that productively with a kind of international anti-imperialism and making connections between these kinds of technologies of violence, and it's something that the Black Panthers did incredibly well, so going back to Vietnam, is that it took the language of anti-imperialist opposition to warfare and connected it to issues like poor housing, like mass incarceration, like police violence, and I think that when you look at the political moment that we're in, in the UK, where I think there's been this kind of wonderful confluence between Corbyn's Labour Party and, you know, politically engaged in particular young people of colour, young working-class people of colour in urban centres, that's something that we can work on quite productively. Can I just say I really don't want there to be a nuclear war because I want to have, like, 11 babies. I want, like, a football team of babies. Can I just say it's not just the technologies as well, it's the literal kit. Yeah, yeah, that's not what I meant. They're just, like, metaphorical technologies, more like tech-tech. Yeah, yeah, like, the actual kit that's used in these theatres of war is, you know, at reduced cost, then given to various, you know, police forces. I think one example is Stephen Seagal in his American series, Lawman. There's a video of Stephen Seagal with who is this guy that was let off by Trump recently? Joe Arpaio? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Something like that, I can't remember. If you got on YouTube Arpaio Seagal, he's like, what's going on in the Arizona? And it's like, Arpaio's from, like, the North, right? Arizona's like a borderland with Mexicans, as you're saying. And it's purely for the cameras. They basically, like, drive a tank through, like, a chicken farm. And it's like, they were cock-fighting, like, they were breeding chickens for cock-fighting. It's like, this is unreal. And it wouldn't happen to a white American. Oh, it could, but it's highly unlikely. And this was a perfect example, albeit a very funny one, not for the gentleman involved, of course. And yeah, I think it's a way of rendering these demands tangible. Because I think that, and we saw this with the Nature of the Anti-War movement in 2003, is that these things had a limited amount of mass participation, but it felt so distant, that cognitive distance with the war on terror. A few people cried, most people were silent. In terms of saying, well, the threat's here, there's a fifth column of Muslims. And so, you know, they were operating on a different kind of terrain. And I think that there's a way to bring that back and not see that ground to the right. Can we get, because I just saw a lawman come up. Can we cut to lawman with the sound? Wouldn't that be amazing, Steven Seagal? I was listening to Chapo Trap House, and they were saying how, is this it? Oh, yeah, yeah. Can we get the sound on? Oh, my God. Is this, is the sound on? There it is, the culprit. The fifth column. There's Seagal, look, with Joe up high. And they, they bust up like a chicken farm, and they kill a puppy, I think. Just to make it. And this is like regular law enforcement in the US, and they've got like snipers, and like it's, it's unbelievable. But then, but then you look at the presence of the National Guard in Ferguson, and you, you know, you look at how they're kitted out. I mean, these aren't, you know, we're not just talking about kind of metaphorical resonances here. It's like, it's something that's really immediate. I had really good friends who were on the, the bigger, the Native American protests, the pipeline. The, no DAPL. No, they were, they were out there. Some of them were, some of them were First Nations people, but loads of, loads of veterans were there, obviously. And they found themselves on a kind of picket line, faced with all the kit that they used in Afghanistan, like looking at it. These were guys in the, in the VFP America, but it was just, they were stunned by the fact that all the bomb-proof vehicles that they were given, and the rifles, and the sniper rifles, and the drones, and the sound weapons, and the stuff they would have used on operations was suddenly pointed at them. This was the, you know, they switched sides and found themselves staring down the barrel. I remember those, we should cut this in a sec, but there's a book by a guy called Frank Kitson, who was, I think Brigadier of Monstrous. In Burma. Yeah. He masterminded the Northern Island. Exactly. And this is the book that basically encapsulates some of the logic behind that. It's called Low Intensity Operator, Countering Low Intensity Insurgency. And the book is just unreal, because he's, it's written in the early 1970s, and he's saying, look, the things we've learned in Burma, the things we've learned repressing colonial conflicts, we're now having to use Northern Ireland, and we'll have to use them on the British mainland. He looks like that kind of guy. Yeah. And you know what he explicitly says, and we'll have to use them on the British mainland this decade. And of course, with urban riots, primarily centering on people of colour in Toxteth and Brixton in the 80s, and we see that carrying on. I mean, it's, it's prophetic in a way. Yeah. This is what gets me, I mean, one of the big issues around the veterans community now is kind of legacy prosecutions for Iraq and Afghanistan. There was a lot of stuff about that. And then Northern Ireland, and it was always the case that, even down to the Marine Aid case, whether this Marine executed a, and he went down and should have gone down, to me, that's my view. But it's always, there's a phrase in the army, shit rolls downhill. It's never a kitsun. It's always Lance Corporal Scumbag, or Sergeant Scumbag. It's never the guys at the top. It's never at the level of senior command, or the executive level. It's never Tony Blair. It's always Private Jones. And kitsun is a classic example that he's still, he's still kicking. I think he's in his 90s. Yeah. He's the architect of this brutal, brutal campaign in Northern Ireland, based on these other brutal campaigns he conducted in Burma and Malaya, and then Kenya, who's involved in the Kenyans, I think. But those guys just keep on kicking, and it all rolls downhill to these guys. Brits don't know about this, but like in Malaya, maybe you correct me if I'm wrong, in Malaya, they literally forced people, like half a million people, were moved into purpose-built cities, which they called concentration camps. So they could monitor them, and it's like half a million people. Do not get me started. Wow. Failure of Britain to reckon with its colonial past, because we've got, I mean, we can have a whole hour-long show. This isn't like the 19th century, right? Like I said, the guys still alive. It's a living memory. The guys literally still alive. A good friend of mine, Walter, was there, who's a 17-year-old cold-streamed guardsman burning these people's food, taking them off the land. He's in his 80s now, amazing guy that lives in London. We should get more? No, he's fantastic. Absolutely fantastic, Walter. And he was there, he was involved in all this stuff, and he breaks down like 40, 50 years on, or whatever it is now. They had bounties for heads. They had tribesmen, diac, tribesmen, yeah, yeah. And there's a shocking image of a royal marine with a head, and they could take bounties, and the guys were encouraged to take the heads of the communist insurgents. Of course, it was all naturally about Dunlop, rubber, and they would get a bounty from the local council. Take your head down, the local council will pay you however much in the local currency. Savage. Well, we have to get Joey back on. Yeah. Don't we? I'm around. This has been the best discussion on leftist international relations and geopolitics that I've had in a really long time. Thank you. And your book is, what's it called again? Soldier Box, Buy It. It's awesome. It's with Verso Books. Am I looking at which camera? Buy It. We'll get Joey back on, and then the legend Harry Lesley Smith wants to come on. Soldier Thing. Do you know something? I think, like, I think it's because I never knew my granddad. I feel this intense sense of affinity with Harry Lesley Smith. I just kind of want him to give me some, like, life advice. And I think he's built that space that Tony Ben used to occupy when Tony Ben passed away. He's like that old, wise, lefty dude. For me, that's how I look at Harry Lesley Smith. Mate. He's like the Gandalf figure. Me and my friend call him Teflon White Man because it's like, because it's like, reason I call him Teflon White Man is because he's like, listen, I fought in World War II. It's like, ah, so you're down with, like, you know, expansionist imperialism. He's like, no. Yeah. And it's great. It's just like, he's like, kind of... Love that guy. It's perfect. We love you, Harry. He is a treasure. Yeah, we'll get Harry Lesley Smith on. There you go. Absolute Don. Absolute Boy. My grandfather, Harry Lesley Smith. Yeah, I can see the resemblance. Now, he's a Don. He's an absolute dynamite. We'll get him back on. Joey, what a gen? Cheers, mate. What a treasure. Thank you. Thank you, mate.