Over the past nineteen years Britain’s liberal elite, including three prime ministers, the Creative Director of the BBC, and the rock band Coldplay, have regularly been asked for money by a female Iranian psychotherapist who dresses like a Nigerian transvestite and has the exotic name of Camila Batmanghelidjh. The liberal elite have responded by giving Camila many millions of pounds. After all, what could possibly go wrong?
Camila Batmanghelidjh: “Feed me!”
A lot, it now transpires. Camila’s lavishly funded children’s charity, the emetically named “Kids Company,” has closed its doors amid allegations of gross financial mismanagement and waste. “More than 36,000” of its vulnerable charges will now have to fend for themselves in a cruel and uncaring world. Or so Camila claims. Unfortunately for her, even the devoutly liberal Guardian and Independent have begun to raise serious doubts about the reliability of her statements. When inconvenient facts and self-serving delusion meet between Camila Batmanghelidjh’s ears, your money should always be on self-serving delusion to carry the day.
Kid and Ego
In fact, she reminds me of a cross between Tony Blair and the late Princess Diana. Like Blair, she is a narcissistic confidence-trickster with an unwavering faith in her own saintliness. Like Diana, she is a manipulative autocrat who advances a raging ego by pretending a passionate devotion to children’s welfare. She is expert at the parasitic manipulation I discussed in the article “Verbal Venom.” Mason wasps paralyse juicy caterpillars by injecting them with neuro-toxin. Camila Batmanghelidjh paralysed juicy donors by injecting them with saccharine sentimentality. One example: “the six-year-old she describes finding in his underpants in the snow, unfed by his crack-addicted mother, surviving off scraps from neighbours.”
What cold-hearted brute would refuse to make a donation after hearing such a harrowing tale? The Telegraph describes how, in the midst of an important meeting with high-powered businessmen, Camila was called away to speak on the phone to a “child in crisis.” The businessmen were deeply impressed by her devotion and another large donation was soon sitting in Kids Company’s bank-account. And when Camila was facing tough questions on BBC radio after Kids Company’s collapse, she spoke movingly of how “one child was so upset she had to talk him out of jumping off a platform in front of a train in a phone call.”
All We Need Is Cash
Yes, Camila wants the world to know that she is overflowing with love for deprived and damaged children. That’s why hearts have been a prominent motif in Kids Company propaganda. You can see them on one of her trademark über-African dresses (see above) and on the T-shirts worn by those protesting in London about Kids Company’s closure (see below). Note how hearts form the eyes of a mother-hen and its chick, nestled lovingly together within a circle. In the same photos, you can see another prominent motif in Kids Company propaganda: downtrodden and oppressed Blacks. This is one aspect of Camila’s manipulation and fraud that will not be closely examined by the mainstream media. After all, are not all decent people agreed that Blacks are the helpless victims of centuries of White racism and exploitation?
And what better way to prove your devotion to Black welfare than by donating vast sums to Kids Company? Three prime ministers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown for Labour and David Cameron for the Tories, found donating to this noble cause even easier, because the money came from White tax-payers, not from their own pockets. Just like Camila, Cameron is now proclaiming that his purity of heart excuses any possible error of judgement. Here is how he justifies giving Kids Company a £3-million grant shortly before its collapse: “The government thought it was the right thing to do to give this charity one last chance of restructuring to try and make sure it could continue its excellent work.”
David Cameron attended the world-famous public school Eton College before obtaining a first-class degree in P.P.E., or Philosophy, Politics and Economics, at Oxford University (a course that is highly popular among Britain’s liberal elite). His expensive education seems to have given him little ability to read character. On gaining office, he appointed Andy Coulson, one of Rupert Murdoch’s sleaziest editors, as his “Director of Communications.” Coulson lost the job when he was imprisoned for phone-hacking while in Murdoch’s employ.
Before gaining office, Cameron had strenuously cultivated Camila Batmanghelidjh. To achieve high status or hold high political office in Britain, it is essential to parade your devotion to non-Whites and their welfare. This is why Kids Company, which worked in the inner city with “vulnerable” Blacks, was so popular among our liberal elite. It’s also why Cameron is still insisting that the charity was doing “excellent work.” Think of that “six-year-old” shivering in the snow, “unfed by his crack-addicted mother, surviving off scraps from neighbours.”
“Excellent work” at Kids Company
Kids Company have always laid great stress on the way they rescue children who exist on the margins of society. The starving six-year-old was allegedly found by Camila herself, but its other “clients” actively sought its protection: “We are a self-referral organisation, the kids self-refer. Many of them are not looked after by local authorities.” If you want to know why vulnerable “kids” were “self-referring” to Kids Company, this report in the Telegraph offers some clues:
As part of my research I visited the Kids Company centre in south London. Batmanghelidjh claims 50 or 60 kids a day visit the centre for its nutritious meals, education and Pilates. On my first visit, however, I found just one sulky teenager over whom 10 staff hovered solicitously.
One of the staff told me to return the following Friday if I wanted to see what was really going on. This time I found about 20 young people having lunch. When I asked some why they came, they looked surprised: “For the money of course.” It certainly was not for the education or Pilates. As I saw for myself, staff handed out envelopes of cash ranging from £50 to £200 — a serious amount to a young person receiving roughly £50 a week from the state. According to staff and kids, this happened every Friday.
This financial allowance appeared to be the key to the popularity of the centre. One member of staff said: “You don’t see most of the kids coming any other day.” One girl told me: “I come on Friday lunch times to socialise, pick up my allowance and then I go.” Outside I saw four or five cars queuing up. Young people jumped out and ran into the centre. They returned a few moments later, waving their envelopes in the air and grinning. Then they got back into the car and were driven away. Two girls sent by the Prince’s Trust for a week’s course described how, when one young man turned up furious that his allowance had been cut, he threatened staff, shouted abuse, then snatched up a fire extinguisher and threw it into the office where the woman who handed out the cash crouched, terrified. …
That was, admittedly, nine years ago. But last summer I sat outside the same centre for two days to see what had changed. Not much. And disturbing questions about the charity continue to emerge. One young woman who worked in its accounts department claims that Kids Company still hands out cash (though these days to parents, and on Wednesdays and Thursdays instead of Fridays). She claimed the money is not given according to need but, more often than not, because “people turn up and cuss and make a noise until they get their money”. (Kids Company: Did good PR mask deeper failings?, The Daily Telegraph, 4th July 2015)
What was the race of those throwing fire-extinguishers and “cussing”? It’s not hard to guess, because self-righteous aggression is as characteristic of Blacks in Britain as it is in the United States. Drug-taking is characteristic of Blacks too. Sure enough, the money handed out by Kids Company often went up in smoke: “We would queue up and sign our names down and get an envelope with £30 and an Oyster travelcard [for travel in London]. Then we would go to the shop and buy whatever we wanted with that money. It was weed [marijuana] heaven on a Friday, you could smell it coming down from the landings.”
Room to Groom
Kids Company has also laid great stress on how “vulnerable” its charges are. In the original Latin, the word meant “able to be wounded.” In fact, a more accurate term for many of Camila’s “kids” would be vulnerant — “able to wound”:
Kids Company has been accused of failing to act on claims older men using their classes were forcing younger girls to have sex with them. The charity closed this week amid a row over Government funding after it was accused of financial mismanagement. But claims have now emerged that the charity’s classes in London were used by men to groom younger girls.
A former employee told BBC’s Newsnight that girls aged 16 to 18 were blackmailed into sex by men in their 20s. It is claimed that fears over sex abuse, which happened away from the charity’s centre after the men met the girls in classes, were not passed on. In separate allegations, a woman who used the charity when she was a teenager said she was sexually assaulted by an older man she met at the centre. (Kids Company staff ‘knew of claims adult men were abusing teenage girls they met through the charity’, The Daily Mail, 7th August 2015)
It is highly likely that the unspecified “men” were Black and that, just like Britain’s many Muslim rape-gangs, they went unchallenged because of political correctness. Camila Batmanghelidjh has responded to these claims of sexual abuse by invoking her favourite internal organ: “Hand on my heart, I had absolutely no awareness of it.” Her words remind of Tony Blair and his legalistic evasions when accused of wrongdoing. What sense is Camila giving to “awareness”? Does she mean she wasn’t a direct witness of the abuse?
Yentob the Yehudi
But she has at least accepted that the abuse could have taken place. Her staunch ally Alan Yentob, the Iraqi-Jewish “Creative Director of the BBC” and “chairman of Kids Company,” has dismissed the allegations entirely:
Kids Company is not the only troubled charitable organisation over which Yentob has presided. He was chairman of the Institute of Contemporary Arts from 2002 until 2010 during a turbulent period at the organisation which almost ended in its closure. Yentob said on Thursday that claims of financial mismanagement at Kids Company were “complete rubbish”. He told Channel 4 News: “The idea of what I have heard some journalists call ‘appalling financial mismanagement’ is complete rubbish. We have been audited by the government every year since Tony Blair and the Labour government started to give us money.”
Explaining the collapse of the charity, Yentob added: “It happened because over a period of the last year or so we have had problems raising funds and the demand has been increasing of children. We are a self-referral organisation, the kids self-refer. Many of them are not looked after by local authorities.”
He said he had not been aware of allegations of sexual abuse at the organisation, saying: “I had no idea and I don’t believe them for a minute.” He said the “rumour and allegation and counter-allegation” about Kids Company “is disgraceful”. (Kids Company trustees accused of ignoring finance warnings, The Guardian, 6th August 2015)
As the University of Virginia rape hoax demonstrates, it is a central dogma of liberalism that allegations of sexual abuse “must be believed,” no matter how implausible they are. But Yentob, a high priest in the liberal cult, feels able to dismiss the allegations about Kids Company. Has he consulted an infallible oracle? Yes: his own ego. He has also denied that he “abused his position” at the BBC by making repeated interventions there on behalf of Kids Company and Camila Batmanghelidjh, including “what was described as ‘a verbal attack’ on BBC special news correspondent Lucy Manning, who was compiling a report into allegations of sexual abuse at the charity.”
Yentob was displaying another kind of self-righteous aggression. This time, it’s characteristic of “Yehudis,” as Jews are called in the Arabic of his ancestral home. This is another aspect of the Kids Company scandal you won’t see discussed in the mainstream: the arrogance and anti-White subversion of powerful Jews like Alan Yentob. What attracted him to Kids Company? I would suggest he liked the way Kids Company transferred resources from Whites to Blacks and promoted Blacks as innocent victims of a racist White society.
Cash and contraceptives
The social pathologies Camila claimed to be fighting are common among Blacks, who combine low average intelligence with high average aggression and impulsivity. If Britain were a genuine democracy, Blacks would never have entered the country in such large numbers, because the White majority have never voted for their presence. But the pathologies exploited by Kids Company are not just a result of mass immigration. Like France, Britain subsidizes Blacks and other pathological non-White groups to breed at much higher rates than its indigenous Whites. Part of that subsidy went to Kids Company, who were eager to work with “vulnerable” Black “families,” particularly if they were illegal immigrants.
This insanity in Britain and France is not found in Israel, which denies entry to non-Jewish Blacks and tries to limit the numbers of its Black Jews: in 2013 the Guardian reported that “Thousands of Ethiopian women are said to be receiving shots of Depo-Provera [a powerful contraceptive] every three months in Israeli clinics.” The Israeli government is well aware that Blacks are tax-consumers, not tax-creators. Kids Company was also a tax-consumer, quickly spending all it received, then demanding more:
Camila Batmanghelidjh, the founder of the bankrupt Kids Company, ran the charity as a personal empire from an office that looked like an “Aladdin’s den”, former workers have claimed. The full extent of waste at the charity which received millions of pounds of public money began to emerge as officials began crisis talks with other charities after the group suddenly closed down amid a spiralling financial crisis. …
As Miss Batmanghelidjh vehemently denied that financial mismanagement was the cause of Kids Company’s collapse, new allegations emerged of lavish spending and claims that there was a culture of fear and favouritism at the charity.
They included claims that people were employed straight off the street, while Miss Batmanghelidjh allegedly had up to five personal assistants at one point. A postgraduate student who worked for several months as an intern at the charity’s London headquarters spoke of amazement at seeing the flamboyant style of Miss Batmanghelidjh’s office. “Her office was like an Aladdin’s den, with a tree in the middle, it was bizarre,” she said. “I was so pro-Kids Company, but even on day one I just couldn’t believe the waste. The ethos is great and when she first started I think she was very well-intentioned, but having the attention of celebrities around her, her ego seems just to have got bigger and bigger. …”
In a scathing feedback report written earlier this year, seen by the Telegraph, she described the charity as “extremely overstaffed” and hopelessly inefficient. She also claimed that the charity effectively doctored its own statistics. She said she had been deeply disillusioned after seeing staff asking children to change what they had written on satisfaction questionnaires if they gave the “wrong answer”. (Kids Company boss Camila Batmanghelidjh turned HQ into private ‘Aladdin’s den’, The Daily Telegraph, 7th August 2015)
A Guardian analysis of five years of [Kids Company] accounts show how the charity got itself into dire financial straits. Despite receiving millions of pounds in government funding, it lived hand to mouth, never built up any reserves, and spent almost all its income each year. “Kids Company didn’t have any reserves, the government knew they didn’t have any reserves, and they bailed them out time and again. The charity, the trustees, got complacent, they got into this habit, they knew they would always get bailed out,” said the source.
Analysis of the charity’s accounts from 2009 to 2013 shows the organisation was receiving huge injections of funding, which included millions of pounds in government grants. Between 2009 and 2013, its income increased by 77% from £13m to £23m, but the charity was spending almost every penny it brought in. In the same period, its outgoings increased by 72%.
Senior management also took pay increases over the past few years. In 2009 the employee with the highest salary was paid between £60,000 and £70,000. However, by 2013, the top-paid employee in the charity was receiving between £90,000 and £100,000, while another employee was paid between £70,000 and £80,000. (Kids Company trustees accused of ignoring finance warnings, The Guardian, 6th August 2015)
At the same time, Kids Company was hiring more staff and inflating the number of “clients” it claimed to work with:
The charity routinely described itself as supporting “more than 36,000 children, young people and vulnerable adults”. However, it has emerged that 8,264 of these received no support from the charity at all and were merely at the same school as children taking part in group or one-to-one therapy sessions or activities. The charity defended their inclusion on the grounds that the children benefited from the knock-on effects of helping their classmates. (Kids Company: The truth behind the collapse of Camila Batmanghelidjh’s charity, The Independent, 6th August 2015)
The liberal Guardian and Independent are scrutinizing Kids Company now, but for years they helped Camila Batmanghelidjh carry out her giant confidence-trick. It was the centre-right Spectator that began proper investigation into the charity and precipitated the current scandal, just as it was the centre-right Sunday Times that revealed the Muslim rape-gangs operating in Rotherham. Credit is also due to the neo-conservative minister Michael Gove and to some civil servants, all of whom were suspicious of Kids Company and tried to end its government funding.
Charles Dickens Understood Liberal Pathology
In the twenty-first century, liberals pride themselves on their sophistication and discernment. In fact, they’re as naïve and prone to self-deceit as liberals were in the nineteenth century. If you want proof of that, just turn to Charles Dickens and his character Mrs Jellyby, who neglects her own children in favour of Blacks in far-off Africa:
We passed several more children on the way up, whom it was difficult to avoid treading on in the dark; and as we came into Mrs. Jellyby’s presence, one of the poor little things fell downstairs — down a whole flight (as it sounded to me), with a great noise.
Mrs. Jellyby, whose face reflected none of the uneasiness which we could not help showing in our own faces as the dear child’s head recorded its passage with a bump on every stair — Richard afterwards said he counted seven, besides one for the landing — received us with perfect equanimity. She was a pretty, very diminutive, plump woman of from forty to fifty, with handsome eyes, though they had a curious habit of seeming to look a long way off. As if — I am quoting Richard again — they could see nothing nearer than Africa! …
The room, which was strewn with papers and nearly filled by a great writing-table covered with similar litter, was, I must say, not only very untidy but very dirty. We were obliged to take notice of that with our sense of sight, even while, with our sense of hearing, we followed the poor child who had tumbled downstairs: I think into the back kitchen, where somebody seemed to stifle him.
But what principally struck us was a jaded and unhealthy-looking though by no means plain girl [Mrs Jellyby’s daughter Caddy] at the writing-table, who sat biting the feather of her pen and staring at us. I suppose nobody ever was in such a state of ink. And from her tumbled hair to her pretty feet, which were disfigured with frayed and broken satin slippers trodden down at heel, she really seemed to have no article of dress upon her, from a pin upwards, that was in its proper condition or its right place.
“You find me, my dears,” said Mrs. Jellyby, snuffing the two great office candles in tin candlesticks, which made the room taste strongly of hot tallow (the fire had gone out, and there was nothing in the grate but ashes, a bundle of wood, and a poker), “you find me, my dears, as usual, very busy; but that you will excuse. The African project at present employs my whole time. It involves me in correspondence with public bodies and with private individuals anxious for the welfare of their species all over the country. I am happy to say it is advancing. We hope by this time next year to have from a hundred and fifty to two hundred healthy families cultivating coffee and educating the natives of Borrioboola-Gha, on the left bank of the Niger. … No, Peepy! Not on my account!”
Peepy (so self-named) was the unfortunate child who had fallen downstairs, who now interrupted [his mother] by presenting himself, with a strip of plaster on his forehead, to exhibit his wounded knees, in which Ada and I did not know which to pity most — the bruises or the dirt. Mrs. Jellyby merely added, with the serene composure with which she said everything, “Go along, you naughty Peepy!” and fixed her fine eyes on Africa again. (From Dickens’ novel Bleak House, 1853)
Dickens was a liberal who didn’t allow his emotions to over-rule his intellect, which is why he satirized figures like Mrs Jellyby. Their narcissism and self-regard underlay what he called their “Telescopic Philanthropy,” or concern for distant causes and neglect of their obligations at home.
Britain’s modern liberals are also addicted to Telescopic Philanthropy. As I’ve described above, Kids Company appealed to them so strongly because it worked with Blacks and other non-Whites, whose presence in Britain harms the welfare of Whites, particularly working-class Whites. Just like Mrs Jellyby, modern liberals feed their own egos by promoting unrelated groups at the expense of their own kind. A story in the Daily Mail describes how, on a visit to Kids Company, a journalist “got the impression that the young, largely black youths in the background were merely accessories to the image the donors sought to project.”
“The ultimate guarantor of Jewish safety”
But that analysis doesn’t apply to Alan Yentob or to the Jewish journalists who are in favour of open borders for Blacks and Muslims. Yentob promotes Blacks at the expense of Whites because he thinks undermining Whites is good for Jews. As the late Larry Auster put it in an American context: “it is not surprising that these Jews look at mass Third-World and Moslem immigration, not as a danger to themselves, but as the ultimate guarantor of their own safety, hoping that in a racially diversified, de-Christianized America, the waning majority culture will lack the power, even if it still has the desire, to persecute Jews.”
In other words, the Kids Company scandal is merely the tip of a very large iceberg. The money wasted there is dwarfed by the money wasted elsewhere on vain attempts to cure non-White pathologies in Britain. The minority worship that assisted Camila Batmanghelidjh in her nineteen-year fraud is causing harm on a much wider scale, from the “random” murder of Whites and Lutfur Rahman’s “Tower of Power” to Muslim rape-gangs and Greville Janner’s long immunity from prosecution. More will emerge about Kids Company and its ludicrous matriarch, but the mainstream media will not admit the full truth. Liberals will merely condemn symptoms while continuing to spread the disease.