Yuck! Stale pale males. They’re the worst of the wickedest, the vilest of the villainous. That’s what all decent and caring progressive folk are agreed upon. But this raises what you might call a prosoponic paradox (prosōpon is ancient Greek for “face”). In Britain, the proudly progressive Labour Party has traditionally been the home of decent, caring people who want to uplift women and non-Whites. But Labour has never been led by anyone but stale pale males. Meanwhile, Labour’s evil anti-progressive opponent, the Conservative party, has been led by four women and two non-Whites, a brown Indian Hindu called Rishi Sunak and a Black Nigerian called Kemi Badenoch (née Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke).

A prosoponic paradox: stale pale male Labour leaders versus vibrant Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch

Even more puzzlingly, the very new “far right” Reform Party in Britain has already filled two of its five most important posts with vibrancy, naming a Muslim Sri Lankan man as shadow home secretary and a Hindu Indian woman as shadow education secretary. So why do the despicable right-wing parties have a much better record on “diversity” than the decent and morally superior Labour party? What explains the prosoponic paradox of so many women and non-Whites as Tory leaders and nothing but stale pale males as Labour leaders? Well, I think it’s easy to answer those questions. You just have to look at British politics through the eyes of the most powerful, selfish and subversive group in British politics.

Undermining White men and Christianity

And which group is that? It’s Jews, of course. Jews believe that, because they’ve always been powerless victims, they need to rule the world to protect themselves. In the words of one Jewish activist, Jews are “a people [who have] survived for thousands of years in the teeth of the most prolonged and vicious persecution the world has ever known.” And who, for Jews, have been the vilest villains in that “prolonged and vicious persecution”? White Christian men, of course.

Farage the Fake: Nigel Farage with four firm Friends of Israel, two of them non-White

Accordingly, Jews in Western nations like Britain have worked tirelessly to undermine the power of White men and Christianity. That’s why Jews have organized and sacralized both feminism and mass migration. It’s why Jews in Britain and America believe that “Jews and Muslims are natural allies” and Jews in Holland believe that Joden en moslims zijn natuurlijke bondgenoten, which means the same thing. It’s also why, I’d suggest, the Conservative party has had all those vibrant leaders and the Labour Party has had no vibrant leaders at all. When newly emancipated Jews looked at the Conservative party in the nineteenth century, they saw it as dangerous to their interests, because it was created and run by White Christian men. Even more worryingly for Jews, it was a potential vehicle for White nationalism, Christian or otherwise. But when the Labour party emerged at the end of the century, it wasn’t dangerous like that. Labour was leftist and already served Jewish interests, knowingly or unknowingly. Therefore it was the Conservatives that Jews had to subvert, not Labour.

Churchill urges the troops to fight for rape-gangs and the mud-flood

The highly ethnocentric Jew Benjamin Disraeli became leader of the Conservatives in 1848 after the death of the previous leader, gentile Lord George Bentinck, at the suspiciously early age of 46. Disraeli’s ascent was a sign that Jewish subversion was well under way. And when the profligate alcoholic Winston Churchill became Conservative leader in 1940, he was owned by Jewish financiers and was guaranteed to follow Jewish orders. Back then, Jews wouldn’t have cared whether Labour had female or non-White leaders in the future. But they would have cared a lot whether the Conservatives did. A female or non-White in charge of that traditionally White male party would reassure Jews that its fangs had been drawn, that it was no longer a potential threat to Jewish interests. Sure enough, as Jewish control of British culture and politics grew ever greater, it was the Conservatives who acquired female and non-White leaders, not the Labour party. Putting a Black Nigerian woman in charge of Labour would have been wasted effort from the Jewish point of view. But putting a Black Nigerian woman in charge of the Tories? Ah, what a supreme symbol of successful subversion!

Dan’s downcast by defamation: Danny Finkelstein bewails anti-Semitism in the London Times

And so a Black Nigerian woman called Kemi Badenoch is now the leader of the Conservative party. But she’s not genuinely in charge, of course. She got the title as a reward for her dedicated goy-grovel, but her leadership is purely symbolic. Leftist Jews like Danny Finkelstein are the real controllers of the party, which is why it never hesitated to betray White voters during its fourteen years in power from 2010. Whenever Whites voted to reduce non-White immigration, the Tories always responded by increasing non-White immigration. The betrayal was most blatant under BoJo. That’s Boris Johnson, the part-Jewish, part-Turkish confidence-trickster who persuaded millions of working-class Whites to break their traditional allegiance to Labour and vote for the Conservatives, the party of strong borders and “British values.” After securing those White votes, BoJo and his female Hindu sidekick, Priti “Piranha” Patel, gleefully unleashed the BorisWave, flooding Britain with even more Third-World tax-eaters who despise British values and hate working-class Whites.

Standing with Israel

The BorisWave and other betrayals explain why Reform is now riding so high in the opinion polls and why the Tories are riding so low. White voters have vowed that they “Won’t Get Fooled Again” and pinned their hopes on the tough-talking Nigel Farage, who will surely deliver what the Tories so often promised to deliver and never did. In other words, White voters seem determined to be fooled yet again. Fake Farage will not deliver on his promises of strong borders and mass deportations, because Reform is yet another vehicle to serve Jewish interests, not White interests. The surest sign of that is the way the rabidly Zionist Robert Jenrick has abandoned the Conservatives and joined Reform, where he has swiftly become the party’s chancellor-in-waiting.

“Hand on heart, kaffirs!”: the Sri-Lankan Muslim Zia Yusuf makes a fake promise of tough action

Jenrick has a Jewish wife, the corporate lawyer Michal Berkner, and a Jewish billionaire backer, the IDF-fan Idan Ofer. While he was still in the Tories, he said that “the Star of David should be displayed at every point of entry to the UK to show” that “we stand with Israel.” Jenrick works for Jews and Israel, not for British Whites, and when he drew up a model budget for a future Reform government, he sent it for approval to the part-Jewish George Osborne, a former chancellor in the traitorous Conservative government of the part-Jewish David Cameron. The fully Jewish Danny Finkelstein once saluted Osborne’s Hebraic heritage as he waxed lyrical about the power of Jewish ethnocentrism in British politics:

That mysterious sense of Jewish connection

Some of my best friends are Jewish. Well, all right, most of my best friends are Jewish. And I’ve been thinking about why.

This week [in May 2018], reports on the wedding of George Osborne’s brother Theo included accounts of an Orthodox ceremony and Theo’s discovery that his maternal grandmother was Jewish. In other words, George himself is halachically Jewish [i.e., would be allowed to emigrate to Israel as a Jew].

This is the second time that one of my small circle of very close non-Jewish friends has turned out, in fact, to be Jewish. Something that not only I didn’t know when we first became friends, but they didn’t know either.

In George’s case this is made even more intriguing and amusing by the fact that I have often joked to him about how he seems to have made so many close Jewish friends and how striking that was. (George has often talked about being jealous at school of his friends having barmitzvahs. Former Israeli ambassador Daniel Taub responded by presenting him with a fountain pen.)

Which has led me to wonder whether this is all more than mere coincidence. […] [T]here is the undoubted bond that exists with other Jews, sometimes even complete strangers. Take, for example (although, yes, I’m fully conscious this is a ludicrous example) other Jewish members of the House of Lords.

There is no doubt that across parties and across the House there is a connection between those of us who are Jewish. It isn’t a political connection particularly (although there have been moments). It’s more a sympathy and an understanding of where we are coming from. […] A sense that we are all family. And that every time you meet another Jew for the first time, you are really taking part in a family reunion. (That mysterious sense of Jewish connection, The Jewish Chronicle, 22nd May 2018 / 8th Sivan 5778)

Finkelstein was revealing the sham of British democracy and admitting that Jews pursue Jewish interests “across parties.” One of those Jewish interests is open borders for non-Whites and non-Christians. And guess what George Osborne “revealed” in 2017? He said that, “despite having pledged to reduce immigration in both its 2010 and 2015 general election manifestos, the Tory leadership secretly abandoned this ambition long ago.” I’d quibble with part of what Osborne said. “Secretly abandoned”? No, “semitically abandoned” would be better. After all, it was the Jews funding and controlling the Tories who fixed migration policy and were happy for the party to lie to voters on immigration. Those lies have proved disastrous for the Tories, but why should Jews care? They never had any loyalty to the party and now that it’s sinking they’ve switched their subversion to Reform. Even as Nigel Farage rails against “identity politics,” the party has acquired a Reform Friends of Israel and a Reform Jewish Alliance.

Reformed Re-Routed: A potential vehicle for White interests has been semitically subverted

And although Farage once vowed to destroy the Conservative party, he’s now welcoming traitorous former Conservatives like the stale pale male Robert Jenrick and the vibrant Indian Hindu Suella Braverman, both of whom are happily married to Jews. Is that shared choice of spouse just a coincidence? No. It’s a sinister sign of successful subversion. Like the Conservatives before them, Reform are expressing bold ambitions on cutting migration that they secretly — and semitically — abandoned long ago.

The English author John Le Carré is best known for his novels of Cold-War espionage. His most famous character, George Smiley, has the following to say on the subject:

The obsession of the two great economic systems with each other’s identity, intentions, strengths, and weaknesses had produced by the 1970s a state of mutual watchfulness and paranoia that seemed to know no bounds. Each side was ready to pay any sum, take any risk, tell any lie, to gain a seeming intelligence advantage over the other. Neither seemed able to grasp the utter sterility of this situation.

Smiley — a role played onscreen by two equally brilliant English actors, Sir Alec Guinness and Gary Oldman — was obviously considering Russia and the West. In context, Smiley’s description is as masterful a summation of the Cold War as you will find in Le Carré’s fine writing. But, in today’s post-Cold-War world, it seems charmingly antiquated, like seeing someone riding a Penny-Farthing bicycle.

In terms of espionage, the Russian bear is no longer the problem for the West. Enter the dragon. The acceleration in Chinese espionage since the turn of the millennium means that British concerns over clandestine CCP (Chinese Communist Party) intelligence-gathering has gone from treating it as an irrelevance to viewing it with alarm. China has gone from a distraction from what was the main event — Russia — to a major security risk in just 20 years. Putin’s people are doubtless tied up at the moment and have little time to spy on the British. They know Britain is a part of NATO, and they know that NATO is funding Ukraine to keep a “forever war” going. Keir Starmer has already committed to funding Ukraine for the next hundred years. They don’t need to listen in on conversations to see the obvious. And the Cold War is over, or at least the combatants have changed.

Unlike the Cold War, today’s spying game is not played with covert recording devices, anonymous handlers, and mysterious double-agents called Olga. The Chinese gather intelligence via what analysts call “influence operations”. Thus, the first quarter of the new century has seen a marked rise in Chinese student-visa applications to Britain, many more trade missions than the norm, and researchers who don’t seem to be able to get enough of researching the United Kingdom. These new spooks are not to be found translating “book code”, like James Wormold in Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana, with his copy of Lamb’s Tales from Shakespeare, a coded letter, and a bitten pencil. Today’s spies are not to be found sitting in shady cafés waiting for a contact and wondering which of their many passports they will be using that day. Today’s spies are reading for a STEM degree at a fashionable university, manning stalls at trade fairs, and studying in the Reading Room of the British Library. The Chinese are also active in the property market. Americans and Canadians are beginning to get wise to the Chinese love of foreign property portfolios, and the People’s Republic have also been competing with Arabs and Russians to buy up London. One building in particular is of interest.

Royal Mint Court is on the approach road to London’s famous Tower Bridge. It is indeed the site of the old Royal Mint, from a time when printing money was a sign of a healthy economy rather than a diseased one. The Court itself is unprepossessing. I cycled past it on my way to work for a year and didn’t recognize it when I recently saw a photo, but that is because it is opposite the Tower of London, which tends to draw the eye. In 2018, Royal Mint Court was bought by a foreign owner, like so much of London. The new owners were, and still are, The People’s Republic of China. The intention was to build a new embassy there, the old one in Portland Place being too small to accommodate a planned consolidation of all Chinese diplomatic staff in London. There is, however, a problem with the site, not just for the new owners, but for the vendors. The Daily Telegraph, to their immense credit, were the first newspaper to pick up on the story, and they have run with it. If I were the editor, I would be wary of taking on any Chinese interns in the office, just for the moment.

From the Telegraph in January:

China is to build a hidden chamber alongside Britain’s most sensitive communication cables as part of a network of 208 secret rooms beneath its new London super-embassy.

The Telegraph were not alone in their misgivings. The new owners had their own problems with the acquisition, and the purchase was not straightforward. Several applications for planning permission made by the Chinese government had been turned down over security issues. The Director General of MI5 said, in a response to criticism of the super-embassy made by some MPs that “it was not possible to eliminate every threat” from the new building, a strangely asinine thing to say. It is not possible to eliminate every threat from anything. Children choke to death on soft toys designed to comfort them. Any foreign embassy represents a potential risk to any host nation because of diplomatic immunity. Nevertheless, the deal had stalled.

But help was at hand to hurry the Chinese acquisition through at Royal Mint Court, and it came in the shape of a new British government. Two weeks after Keir Starmer took up office as Prime Minister, the application went through, needing only a final set of signatures from the government itself to ratify the deal. This type of final, governmental imprimatur is standard practice if national security is an issue in any commercial deal with a foreign nation, and for obvious reasons. But the final sign-off was made in rather odd circumstances.

As is usual in international diplomacy, Starmer’s recent trip to China was planned months in advance. “Never-Here Keir”, as he has been dubbed, is known for fleeing the country whenever scandal arises, which is currently about every other day. The trip itself, however, was not signed off by the Chinese until eight days before Starmer was due to arrive in Peking. I won’t call it “Beijing” because that is what the media, led as they are by Associated Press, want us to call it. We visit “Paris”, not “Paree”. Well, we don’t anymore, but you take my point. Visa problems for one of Starmer’s people, perhaps? No, although Xi’s people did require a signature, on the dotted line at the bottom of the planning permission for the super-embassy. This was duly signed, and Xi got what he wanted. And what did Keir Starmer come back from China with, in terms of a quid pro quo? Well, holiday extensions. British tourists can now enjoy up to 30 days in China being tailed by CCP agents without needing a visa. So, we’ve got that going for us.

What are the security risks specific to Royal Mint Court? If the Chinese are going to spy on the British, surely they can do it just as well from Portland Place. If they built their new embassy in Chinatown, at the back of Wardour Street and Leicester Square, staff wouldn’t have far to walk for a good noodle-based lunch, leaving them more time for spying. But those areas don’t have the advantage of being in close proximity to high-capacity fiber-optic cables, telecoms infrastructure which carries many terabytes of sensitive information daily to the City of London and Canary Wharf, and the Wapping Telephone Exchange, itself a focal point for the aforementioned financial hubs. These are not just the biggest financial centers in London, they are among the biggest in the world, with a wealth of sensitive commercial information running right by the new Chinese Embassy. It is a big site. The Chinese got 20,000 square meters for their £225 million, and that is without digging down, which the new owners are doing to a depth which is alarming architects and security chiefs alike.

The building work itself is already going deeper than the original planning permission allowed for. There is a complex warren being built beneath Royal Mint Court, but no one seems to know why. Convection coolers have been shipped into the building in bulk, indicating a lot of processing capability that needs to be kept cool. Some of the wilder conspiracy theorists claim these rooms will be dungeons, because the Chinese are not just spying on the native British, but also on Chinese dissidents who are a part of a minor diaspora to the West.

The British government seem almost nonchalant about the new site. Shabana Mahmood, the Muslim British Home Secretary who says that Islam is at the forefront of everything she does, is either colluding with the Chinese or ridiculously naïve for a Home Secretary. From her statement on the planning permission:

There is no suggestion that the operational development permitted by any grant of planning permission would interfere with the cables, nor that a lawful embassy use of the site would give rise to any such interference.

So, that’s okay then. As long as the Chinese have given their word that they won’t tap into cabling which passes directly through property they own, and contains incredibly sensitive financial data, then surely they are to be trusted. We really must move on from those old racist stereotypes of the inscrutable and untrustworthy Chinese. Do we really think they are going to spy on us? We are all friends now. Also, note Mahmood’s use of the phrase “lawful embassy use of the site”. Lawful according to whom? Within any country’s embassy, you are in that country, in terms of being a legal entity. That’s why Julian Assange was effectively in Ecuador for seven years, even though physically the Ecuadorian embassy is situated in London. It’s a bit like architectural transubstantiation. Does Ms. Mahmood imagine that there is a Chinese law forbidding the CCP from spying on their hosts? And it is not just Chinese embassy staff who might be flouting British law behind the smokescreen of diplomatic immunity.

Last year saw the trial of two British men accused of spying for the Chinese. Except it didn’t happen. The trial collapsed at the 11th hour as the British were required to give an official acknowledgement of the fact that China poses a security threat to the UK. This was something a fledgling left-wing government could not afford to do, despite British intelligence having held the line that the Chinese most certainly did pose a grave security threat. When former Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed this, a chorus of dissent led to the decision to scrap the trial. The fairly obvious conclusion is that the British government had stepped in to halt the progress of the case. The Chinese are very sensitive to what is said about them, and “face-saving” is a lot more important in Chinese (and perhaps Asian as a whole) culture than it is in the West, where “getting away with it” is more the fashion.

One curiosity of the Chinese embassy affair, particularly as it was part-brokered by a Muslim Home Secretary, is that there has not been a word of protest from Britain’s powerful Islamic lobby. One might have thought that China’s notorious treatment of their Uighur Muslims would have led to vociferous complaint. But the Muslims who increasingly run things in Britain seem quite content for the Chinese to embed themselves at the heart of the capital of the UK, regardless of whether the CCP keep Muslims in concentration camps back at home to use as slave labor. Xinjiang controls information with ruthless efficiency, but leaked documents, satellite images, and survivor accounts suggest human rights abuses on a scale that would usually lead to a chorus of objection from both Western and Muslim leaders, as well as a blizzard of #IStandWithUighurs infesting social media. But there is silence on all fronts concerning the plight of these unfortunates. In Europe, there is a near-psychotic reaction if a copy of the Koran is damaged. But actual Muslims suffering is of no concern. Muslims often hide behind the ummah, the worldwide collective of the Islamic faith, but they couldn’t care less about the Uighurs any more than rich and influential Jews facilitating mass immigration care about the Jews who are raped and murdered by Muslims across Europe as a direct result of these insurgent policies. Both the Uighurs and the disposable Jews of Europe are collateral.

But back to the new embassy.

Planning applications in Britain, and actual plans for permission to build or adapt, are supposed to be publicly available, not “for your eyes only”. The plans for the Chinese embassy are indeed available, it’s just that they are heavily redacted. It is to the Telegraph’s credit that they have been all over this story, and other stories the deep state would rather they didn’t cover. Their recent allegations that Starmer took on a case, when he was a human-rights lawyer, which led to the 12-year persecution of an army veteran accused of an improper killing in Iraq (Starmer allegedly took on the case pro bono), was close to the level of journalistic integrity which led the Telegraph to expose Parliament in 2009’s expenses scandal. They will make enemies of the Chinese, and that is a brave editorial risk.

It is hardly news that the Chinese are buying into every continent which will take their money, which is every continent. Outside Britain, China is not necessarily building super-embassies in historic buildings, but what they are involved in is worth an inventory. The CCP has invested heavily in Africa, specifically Kenyan and Ethiopian railways, ports such as Djibouti, mines in Zambia, and telecom infrastructure across the dark continent. Asia has seen similar levels of investment, with Chinese money flooding into transport corridors in Pakistan, more port projects in Sri Lanka, energy pipelines in  Central Asia, and the integration of manufacturing across the continent. Where once we laughed in the West at the fact that so many cheap items had “Made in China” stamped on the base, so too the Chinese will soon joke that all their trinkets say “Made in Bangladesh”.

Europe has also seen Chinese port investment and acquisition, such as the historic port of Piraeus in Greece, a vital military and commercial hub since at least the Peloponnesian War. As for Latin America, the Chinese are mining Lithium in Chile and Argentina, taking over energy concerns in Brazil, and once again shoring up infrastructure and telecom concerns across the continent.

Like Donald Trump, the Chinese know the art of the deal. The CCP’s financial arm invests with Confucian wisdom, often tailoring their investments to suit the national temperament. Here in Costa Rica, the capital San José got a brand-new football stadium in 2011. The CCP picked up the $11million tab, and it is an effective sweetener in a country in which, after la pandemia, the football pitches opened for training before the churches re-opened their doors. The only quid pro quo the Chinese required was that the major political parties in Costa Rica recognize China’s claim on Taiwan. Simple, really, like all the best deals. Oceania and North America are well aware of the extent of Chinese acquisition of land, technology partnerships, mining rights, and excursions into the venture capital realm of both continents. Canada is slowly waking up to Chinese influence. Wherever these global financial concerns exist, of course, so too there will be Chinese intelligence. The UK will not be the only country spied on by the Chinese.

It is often said that history is written by the victors, and it remains to be seen whether the history of this century will be written in English, Arabic, or the attractive ideograms of Mandarin Chinese. The story of the Chinese super-embassy will be either a footnote in that history, or deserving of a chapter on its own, as the first time a powerful Western country openly invited another super-power to spy on it. Any observer of the current plight of Britain, once the world’s greatest super-power, does suggest a question; what do the Chinese think is worth spying on in the UK? The financial data noted, of course, but proximity to cabling is irrelevant given the advanced state of computer hacking and cracking. There are people out there now who are a long way further down the road than the phreakers and script-kiddies of early-day computer hacking. Then there are the dissident Chinese. There are already concerns in the wake of reports that, as in the US, there are “Chinese police stations” across the nation tasked with monitoring Chinese who have migrated (and effectively defected).

International espionage is still a sort of perpetual-motion machine, and largely a pointless one, as George Smiley pointed out. Countries do it because they always have done, and they always have done because they always have. Like the British stock comic character, the “nosy Parker”, twitching the curtains to see what the neighbors are getting up to, the Chinese are about to have their very own terraced house from which to snoop and spy on the people next door. What they will find out is anyone’s guess — apart from possibly the details of your bank account — and they will know the risks attendant on grappling with MI5, if only via the James Bond franchise. But it is more likely that they would feel uncomfortable if they weren’t spying on their hosts. As George Smiley says in the screenplay to Smiley’s People:

It’s simply a question of whether your Service wants the product. I can’t see that anything else is of very much importance.

The system spies on the system. Eventually, like all technocracy, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Here is a game for any reader in London (although I would rather you imagine it than attempt it). Go and take some photos of Royal Mint Court. Keep doing that, and let me know in the comments how long it takes before the police turn up to feel your collar. They will be there a good deal quicker than they would if your house had been burgled, and you won’t need a fortune cookie to know whose side they will be on.

Politicians lie. That’s a toxic truth of life across the world and through history. But the British politicians Robert Jenrick and Nadhim Zahawi will never lie on one very important matter. They’ll say that their proud patriotism and devotion to popular service will not alter one iota after their defections from the Conservatives to the Reform Party. And they’ll be completely correct. They will continue to unswervingly serve the nation and people they entered politics to serve: Israel and Jews.

Jenrick ♥ Jews: Robert Jenrick performs the goy-grovel at Conservative Friends of Israel

Indeed, it will be no surprise if Reform itself adopts a policy that’s very close to Robert Jenrick’s heart. While he was still in the Tories, he said that “the Star of David should be displayed at every point of entry to the UK to show” that “we stand with Israel.” He has a Jewish wife, the corporate lawyer Michal Berkner, and is funded by the Israeli billionaire and IDF-fan Idan Ofer. In short, Jenrick was a kosher Conservative, certified loyal to Israel and dedicated to serving Jewish interests. That won’t change now that he’s abandoned the Conservatives and joined Reform. Nadhim Zahawi is the same. He too was a kosher Conservative and he too will continue to serve Israel and Jews with unshaken devotion in Reform. Back in 2022, Zahawi looked and sounded like a super-villain from a James Bond movie when he performed an essential ritual of Western political life. I call it the goy-grovel. It involves a gentile politician abasing himself before powerful Jews and showering Israel and Jews with sycophantic praise. Here’s what Zahawi said during his goy-grovel:

Krooked Kurd performs goy-grovel: Nadhim Zahawi at Conservative Friends of Israel (see Youtube video)

CFI [Conservative Friends of Israel], I have been supporting now for 25 years and CFI has always been there for every Conservative candidate and every Member of Parliament. The work that CFI does and its ability to educate and expose Members of Parliament to the incredible innovation and democracy in the Middle East, the great state of Israel, is invaluable and long may it continue. (Nadhim Zahawi at Conservative Friends of Israel, 2022)

Are you surprised that there’s not the slightest hint of Zahawi’s dedicated and decades-long goy-groveling on his page at Wikipedia? You shouldn’t be. In January 2026, I didn’t get a single hit when I searched there for the string “jew.” But I got six hits when I searched for the string “israel.” However, none of those hits linked Zahawi to the state of Israel. They were all in the neutral info-boxes below his bio and five of them fell in the name “Disraeli.” That’s Benjamin Disraeli (1804–81), the first fully Jewish prime minister of Britain. Disraeli also wrote novels and in those novels he espoused Jewish supremacism and opined that “All is race; there is no other truth.” He was being hyperbolic about race, but was accurately expressing his own and entirely typical Jewish ethnocentrism. Although race isn’t “all,” it’s certainly of central importance to culture and politics. That’s why Nadhim Zahawi’s page at Wikipedia has been subject to kosher curation and scrubbed clean of the truth about his real masters. Jews control Zahawi and he works for Israel, therefore neither Jews nor Israel are mentioned in his biography at Wikipedia.

Wolverines and wasps

Zahawi’s own race is mentioned at Wikipedia, however. He’s Kurdish and was born in the Iraqi capital Baghdad. Like Chechens in the North Caucasus and Alawites in Syria, Kurds are a very interesting group. But they’re interesting partly in the way that wolverines or wasps are interesting: because of their ferocity, aggression and predatory nature. All three of these groups — Chechens, Alawites and Kurds — are what Italian calls montanari, “men of the mountains.” These groups have all lived in mountainous regions for millennia and have all followed the same strategy: men of the mountains prey on peoples of the plain. All three groups have the same reputation among the different races that surround them. They’re “stereotyped” as violent, primitive and disloyal. And the stereotypes are perfectly accurate. But their disloyalty is to the larger states, like Turkey, Iran and Iraq, of which they have nominally become citizens. Chechens, Alawites and Kurds are unswervingly loyal to their own race[1] and, of course, to themselves as individuals. And, like similarly predatory Jews and Gypsies, they cultivate self-serving and self-pitying myths about the cruel persecution and prejudice they suffer from the out-groups whom they prey upon. For example, the Kurds have a self-pitying saying: “No friends but the mountains.”[2] In other words, after they’ve raided the plains or valleys, they have to flee for safety to the mountains from the wrath of those they’ve raided.

Nadhim Zahawi certainly fits the mountain-man pattern of disloyalty and self-service. He’s both a kosher Conservative and a crooked Kurd. He’s disloyal to Britain and devoted to Israel, because it’s by serving Jewish interests that he’s won political power and enriched himself. The villainous vibes he gave off in his goy-grovel at CFI accurately reflect his character. He was happy to take the money of White tax-payers in “parliamentary expenses” to cover the cost of electricity for “the stables” at his luxurious private estate.[3] But he wasn’t happy about meeting his own tax obligations, which is why he was ignominiously dismissed from the Conservative government by the Hindu-Indian prime minister Rishi Sunak, also a loyal Friend of Israel and disloyal Enemy of Britain. Like Sunak, Zahawi fully supported the Boris Wave, the flood of Third-World immigrants that began to surge into Britain under Boris Johnson, yet another loyal Friend of Israel. And, as a cherry on the kosher cake of his Kurdish crookedness, Zahawi was a vax-villain too, serving as “COVID-19 Vaccines Minister” and encouraging children to get vaxxed without the consent of their parents.

A goy-grovel at Yad Vashem

Now Zahawi has added another cherry to the kosher cake of his Kurdish crookedness. He’s defected to a party whose leader, Nigel Farage, he condemned in person on social media as “offensive and racist,” adding “I would be frightened to live in a country run by you.” Farage himself said of Zahawi: “I thought Zahawi had principles, but tonight we learned all he’s interested in is climbing that greasy pole.” In 2026, racist Nigel has welcomed principle-free Nadhim into Reform. The party is providing a cosy refuge for rats deserting the sinking Tory ship, which is now helmed by the Black affirmative-action hire Kemi Badenoch. She’s the Nigerian shabbos shiksa who paved the way for her successful leadership bid by performing a goy-grovel at Yad Vashem, the Israeli memorial that is the heart of the Holocaust cult exercising so much power across the modern West.

Black affirmative-action hire Kemi Badenoch performs the goy-grovel at Yad Vashem

But Holocaustianity isn’t yet all-powerful in Britain. We learned this when Nigel Farage refused to perform the goy-grovel and bow before the moral might of eleven “Holocaust survivors” at the end of 2025:

A group of Holocaust survivors have demanded Nigel Farage tell the truth and apologise for the antisemitic comments that fellow pupils of Dulwich college allege he made toward Jewish pupils. The Reform UK leader has said he never racially abused anyone with intent but may have engaged in “banter in a playground”.

But in a letter to Farage seen by the Guardian, the 11 survivors said: “As Holocaust survivors, we understand the danger of hateful words – because we have seen where such words lead. Let us be clear: praising Hitler, mocking gas chambers, or hurling racist abuse is not banter. Not in a playground. Not anywhere. When allegations arise about invoking Nazi attitudes toward Jewish children, the responsible response is honesty, reflection, and commitment to truth. So we ask you: did you say ‘Hitler was right’ and ‘gas them,’ mimicking gas chambers? Did you subject your classmates to antisemitic abuse?”

The survivors include Hedi Argent, who lost 27 members of her family in the Holocaust. Another member of the group, Simon Winston, was held in a ghetto before escaping in September 1942 and spending the rest of the war in hiding. Another signatory is Anita Lasker-Wallfisch, who was sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau where she spent nearly a year. In October 1944, she was moved to Bergen-Belsen, where she was liberated by the British in April 1945. The eight others are Janine Webber, Edith Jayne, Helen Aronson, Ruth Barnett, John Fieldsend, Susan Pollack, Hanneke Dye and Agnes Kaposi.

Their intervention follows comments made by Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, to describe the testimony of more than two dozen people as “made-up twaddle”. Since the Guardian published its investigation about Farage two weeks ago, more contemporaries have come forward. Twenty-eight former pupils and teachers say they witnessed racist or antisemitic behaviour by him at Dulwich college in south London.

Peter Ettedgui, a Bafta and Emmy-winning director, who is Jewish, has said that a teenage Farage would sidle up to him and say “Hitler was right” and “gas them”, sometimes adding a long hiss to simulate the sound of the gas chambers. Eight other contemporaries have offered accounts to corroborate the claim that Farage targeted Ettedgui at school. Most of them have done so on the record. Only one is active in party politics, as the chair of the Liberal Democrats in Salisbury.

Tice told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that Ettedgui was a liar and the former pupils coming forward had a “political axe to grind”. The survivors have asked Farage whether — since he has denied abusing Ettedgui – he was saying that Ettedgui and the others were lying. They said: “If you deny saying those words, are you saying that 20 former classmates and teachers are lying? If you did say them, now is the time to acknowledge you were wrong, and apologise. Those who hope to lead our country should never divide people by race or religion. Antisemitic hatred must never be normalised. This moment is about moral responsibility. The choice is yours, Mr Farage.” (“Holocaust survivors call on Nigel Farage to apologise over alleged antisemitic comments,” The Guardian, 5th December 2025)

Farage’s choice has been to ignore the awesome moral authority of the eleven Holocaust survivors and continue to deny the allegations about his racist and anti-Semitic behavior at school. As for me, I think the allegations are entirely accurate. They’re too detailed and have been made by too many disparate people to be lies in a conspiracy or plot against Farage. Yes, the allegations are being made and given extensive coverage in the leftist media to damage Farage and Reform, who seem set to do very well in forthcoming local elections and in the still distant general election. The ruling Labour party are trying to cancel as many local elections as possible, fearing heavy losses to Reform, and Farage has been warned by Dominic Cummings that the Deep State will try to destroy him with dirty tricks. But I still think the allegations about Farage’s schooldays are entirely accurate. He did indeed say “Hitler was right,” mimic the sound of a gas-chamber, and sing the following deplorable ditty:

“I was in the CCF [Combined Cadet Force] with him from 1979 to 1982 or so,” said one former pupil. “[Farage] did teach the younger members of the CCF the infamous “Gas ’em all” song, or at least led the singing of it on CCF coaches to training areas,” he claimed. The song, variants of which were heard [at English soccer stadiums] in the 1980s, is sung to the tune of [the pre-war entertainer] George Formby’s “Bless ’Em All”. One version runs: “Gas ’em all, Gas ’em all, Gas ’em all! / And into the showers [they’ll] crawl / We’ll gas all the niggers / We’ll gas all the Jews / Come on, you lads, gas ’em all!”

The former pupil added: “There were black, Asian and Jewish CCF cadets on the bus. As I say, one of them asked me not to sing it or make those sort of comments. And I didn’t.” (“‘Deeply shocking’: Nigel Farage faces fresh claims of racism and antisemitism at school,” The Guardian, 18th November 2025)

I think Nigel Farage did all that, but I don’t think he was a genuine Nazi. Instead, I think he was a bully who enjoyed picking on people for being different. After all, the White English have often bullied White Scottish, Irish and Welsh in settings like workplaces and the army.[4] And the White Scots, Irish and Welsh have bullied the White English when the balance of power is reversed. But that kind of behavior is sadly a human universal. Like the apes from whom we descend, human beings often enjoy dominating and hurting those weaker than ourselves. And I’d say that Farage’s insults and songs weren’t based on genuine Nazism, but on bullying and the psychopathic pursuit of transgressive thrills. I think Farage would score high on any test of psychopathy. Yes, the Jewish writer David Cole has said that “Nazis are by nature bullies” and that “today’s cosplay Nazis are worse, since many of them are ‘working out’ a childhood filled with being on the receiving end of bullying (being bullied in school defines [Elon] Musk’s personality).” There’s much truth in that, but the same applies a fortiori to communists, whose regimes have always persecuted, tortured and murdered many people who aren’t in fact enemies by the standards of communism. Nazism didn’t target loyal or innocent citizens as communism has often done.[5] Yes, bullies and psychopaths are attracted to authoritarian ideologies, but the Gestapo that oversaw Nazi Europe, with 30,000 to 40,000 officers, employed significantly fewer personnel than the 91,000 officers of the Stasi that oversaw the much restricted territory and population of communist East Germany.

So I’d say that Farage wasn’t a Nazi as a schoolboy, but a bully and seeker of transgressive thrills. And I’d say that, as an adult, he’s a very clever and charismatic politician. But his charisma is partly owed to his psychopathy. Charm is, after all, characteristic of psychopaths, because they don’t feel social anxiety and are adept at manipulating and deceiving non-psychopaths. For example, they are happy to make promises they have no intention of keeping. I think Farage is doing that when he promises to secure Britain’s borders and start deporting illegal migrants. Nick Griffin has predicted that Farage in power will behave just like the traitorous Giorgia Meloni, who “got elected on an anti-immigration ticket” but is now “flooding Italy with hundreds of thousands more Indians and Africans.” And Farage was obviously lying when he promised that Reform would replace and reject the traitorous and anti-White Conservatives.

Parallels in the natural world

Instead, Farage and Reform are becoming Toxic Tories 2.0. They’re welcoming kosher Conservatives like Robert Jenrick and Nadhim Zahawi, who have passed through what you might call the unnatural selection of British politics. Britain owes its now fast-fading greatness to its fast-shrinking racially White and historically Christian majority. Yet for many decades politicians in Britain have been selected for their hostility to Whites and Christianity and their devotion to the service of Israel and Jews. The same applies across the West. How can this be, when Jews are such a small minority in Western countries? Is it not ludicrous to claim that tiny numbers of Jews can manipulate and control much larger numbers of gentiles?

In fact, no, it’s not ludicrous at all. There are obvious parallels in biology and the natural world. Very small or simple organisms like protozoa and fungi can manipulate and control much larger and more complex organisms like mammals and insects. The mindless micro-organism Toxoplasma gondii, which famously manipulates rats into being eaten by cats, also infects human beings and may have significant effects on human behavior or even shape entire cultures. The kosher conservativism of politicians like Robert Jenrick, Nadhim Zahawi and Kemi Badenoch isn’t the result of such unnatural selection after all.

[1]  More accurately, they’re loyal to clans or sub-sects within their racial group.

[2]  The literal translation of the original Kurdish, Ji çiyan pê ve tu heval nînin or Hîç hawrêyekman niye cige le şaxekan, is “Our only friends are the mountains” or “We have no friends but the mountains.”

[3]  The horses in Zahawi’s “stables” may reflect his ancestral hippocentrism. Kurds have traditionally used horses for fast raids and getaways.

[4]  The Ulster Unionist politician Doug Beattie was violently bullied in his army days for being Irish, despite the (misplaced) loyalty of Irish Protestants to the British royal family and the British mainland.

[5]  See the distinction drawn by the Reagan-era diplomat Jean Kirkpatrick between right-wing authoritarianism, which leaves citizens alone if they didn’t challenge the power of the state, and left-authoritarianism, which targets everyone for control and obedience.