Featured Articles – Page 8 – The Occidental Observer

Understanding Iran

January 19, 2026/16 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Padraig Martin

At the time of this writing, the Trump Administration appears to have walked back from threatened military strikes on Iran. Despite a significant amount of pressure from the pro-Israel set of American foreign policy, especially the neocons who love war, cooler heads seem to have prevailed – for now. Whereas I have very little confidence that the current administration can withstand the pressure to “do something” at the behest of Tel Aviv, I think it is important for Americans to understand “who” the United States would be attacking if we moved forward with such a war. Iran is unlike anything we have ever faced.

For most Americans, Iran is an enemy country that came to prominence during the 1970s due to the capture of the American Embassy in 1979, and a subsequent hostage situation that lasted four hundred-forty-four days. Whereas the hostage crisis seemingly ended the day of Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, the US and Iran would have a complicated relationship throughout the 1980s. The beginning of American-Iranian relations was completely reformed during this critical period in the history of both countries.

Saddam Hussein launched one of the bloodiest wars in world history when Iraq invaded Iran in 1980 with tacit approval from the United States and a pan-Arabic alliance. That war lasted eight years and eventually led to the first Persian Gulf War. Meanwhile, religious and ethnic sectarian violence in Lebanon led to a Lebanese Civil War in 1975, but it reached new heights after Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982. That which would emerge is best described as a bar brawl. The fight would involve Iranian-backed Ismaili Shi’ites (Amal and later Hezbollah), the Arab-backed Sunni Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), the Israeli/Western-backed Lebanese Front, and the Soviet-backed Lebanese Communist Party and Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA). The US would tragically join a peace mission that resulted in the death of 241 service members (mostly Marines) by a suicide bomber. Iran was blamed, but every single piece of evidence suggests Israel was responsible for the bombing (a subject for a future article). Meanwhile, the US and Iran covertly cooperated on strategic matters related to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, Indian-Soviet cooperation in the Gulf of Oman, and most famously, a weapons smuggling program that involved the anti-communist Nicaraguan Contras. This muddle of confusion in the shadows of the final decade of the Cold War often clouds American judgment. It is time for some clarity.

Iran is more than just an Islamic nation state that hates the West. It is more than an historically Persian imperial territory. Iran has a very complex relationship with the region.

Iran’s Persian identity contributes to its self-preservation and security perspective. Persia is a geographic territory that has withstood multiple attempts by foreign conquerors since it was established in the middle of the 6th Century BC. The Alexandrian Greeks briefly held Persia, but the land has never been conquered.

No one has ever conquered Iran. Even at its zenith, Rome failed. The Mongols failed. The Turks failed. The Russians and the British briefly succeeded in the 1940s but still failed to hold the newly named “Iran” – the origins of the name having derived from the word “Aryan” or more accurately, “Land of the Aryans.” That last point is not lost on the modern Jewish state of Israel.

Coupled with this Persian identity is that of a Shi’ite Islamic identity. The history of the Shi’a is far too broad a topic to send in a single article, but it is important to understand their origins if you want to understand Iran. The Shi’atu Ali (Followers of Ali), or Shi’a, are followers of Ali ibn Abi Talib, a cousin and son-in-law of the prophet Mohammed. By most accounts, Ali was the hand-picked successor of Mohammed.

After Mohammed’s death, the significantly weaker Ali was pushed aside by less devout, but more power-hungry competitors as leaders of the infant faith. Ali’s willingness to step aside in order to keep the peace and allow the faith to grow was viewed as magnanimous by future scholars on either side of the theological spectrum. At the time, however, it caused deep divisions within Islam. One group of Mohammed’s fundamentalists, Kharijites, would reject every single sect of Islam as apostates over that which they considered ungodly compromises. Considering Ali a traitor to the mandate that Mohammed gave Ali to lead, and after some unsuccessful rebellions, the Kharijites assassinated Ali before fleeing to that which would eventually become the Syrian-Iraq border. The group would name itself the “[true] Islamic State (or country)” as early as the late 7th Century. This is the same group we would eventually call ISIS almost 1500 years later.

Meanwhile, the post-Ali Muslim world fell back into immediate division with those who backed Ali’s sons versus Syrian-centered power. The culmination of subsequent events led to a rather valiant yet ill-fated charge by Ali’s son, Hussein, at the Battle of Karbala (Iraq) in which approximately 70 Shi’ites faced off against estimates up to 30,000 members of a new global caliphate of followers, the Sunnah (Sunnis). The early Syrian-led Sunnis were so brutal to the Shi’ites that they would incorporate anti-Ali phrases into morning prayers. This led to an Islamic diaspora of Shi’ites that found refuge in the formidable and religiously tolerant Persia.

As Shi’ism matured as a faith, so did its self-identification as an unjustly persecuted minority within Islam. The Shiites believed they were justified by the words of Mohammed himself to follow the path laid before them. As such, the rest of Islam – the Sunnah – was largely regarded as misguided oppressors. This persecuted theological identity would dovetail with that of Persia’s own security conscience and embattled persona. It would become the perfect blend of both a genetic and theologically besieged ethnicity. At the core of Iran’s understanding of itself is that of a world in which everyone is seeking to destroy them – whether for physical gain (e.g., oil rights, territory, etc.) or enemies of Allah’s uncompromising devotees.

The totality of this blended ethno-religious persecution complex led to a structural design that has guided Persian and later Iranian leadership for centuries. Iran is purposely designed to never fail. Despite reports of a despotic regime, there is no such thing as a hierarchical leadership structure that ends with either a Shah or a Grand Ayatollah. Centralized leadership, be it religious or secular, is hyper-dependent on a unique system of interwoven local religious, financial, and insular tribal connections. Iran’s leadership infrastructure is more like a beehive than a pyramid. Whereas the country is led by a Supreme Council of Islamic leaders – for Americans, think of a religious version of the Supreme Court as the top of power – and it has a very functional parliament, the real power is disaggregated.

Iran’s localities enjoy an intersecting web of clerical leadership, Bonyads (financial “charities” that act as religiously guided businesses), and Basij (a religiously inspired quasi-militia/national guard). If you break one group down, you have to fight thousands of small units disconnected from a centralized leadership, but capable of running their own affairs. In effect, imagine a swarm of bees coming at an invader from every angle to protect the hive, but no single unit dependent on the other. Even if you destroy the central “hive,” an invader would have to deal with the fact that “the bees” have multiple hives – potentially thousands of religiously inspired independent militant units who have the full support of the locality, to include both faith and finances. Kill the Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and you have to prepare for a thousand Khameneis.

Like a trap intentionally designed to suck a predator into a compromised position, the Marines may take Tehran, and yet never penetrate the suburbs that surround it before they are systematically destroyed. Unlike Iraq, the populace is generally united in its shared ethno-religious identity. Unlike Afghanistan, there is no segmentation of twelve different linguistic tribes with their own needs. Unlike Vietnam, the geography is not conducive for sustained supply chain support. Unlike NSDAP Germany, the Iranians would not be weakened by some kind of global alliance and two front war. In other words, the American have never met an enemy like Iran.

Of course, none of this is reported on Fox News or CNN. The focus there is on the supposed organic protests and the capital of Tehran’s response. Watching the 2026 Tehran protestors is much like watching the 2020 George Floyd riots in Minneapolis or Portland. It would be easy to assume that the riots of 2020 were an indication that the United States wanted Trump deposed. Obviously, that was not the case. The real divide was between radical leftwing rioters – likely led by an internal color revolution – and your average American citizen who simply wants the country he once enjoyed in the 1980s or 90s. The difference between downtown Seattle and the suburbs of Salt Lake City, Knoxville, or Cincinnati may have been lost on outsider observers, but ordinary Americans know the difference. The same can be said for Iran. The protests of radicals in Tehran are not the generally shared views of the rest of Iran. The rest of “God & Country” Iran have ideals formed by the theological and ethnic constructs I described earlier. The world may see protests against a repressive theocracy. Your average Iranian sees protests led by external forces who seek to attack protectors of their very existence. They have never lost to such forces, even when the odds were against them.

In November 2004, I had the privilege of leading a small team in a wargame as the “leader of Iran,” against approximately 300 of the US Departments of Defense (DOD) and State’s (DOS) best thinkers on regional security. Our little eight person team defeated the United States so badly that by the end of the scenario, the US balkanized along politically sectarian lines, gas prices were nearly $20 a gallon, the US dollar was no longer the reserve currency, the US was demilitarized, and all of the American territories were taken to satisfy global war debt, as well as Hawaii and Alaska. What did I do to make this happen? My team sat back and waited for the Americans to take the bait and invade me. American strategic leadership does not understand the Iranian mindset or its unique construct. Israel does, but it does not care what happens to the United States. When the Americans lose in another regime-change war, like a parasite that killed its first host, it will just attach itself to a new host.

Jewish Involvement in the Push for Demographic Replacement in Minnesota

January 18, 2026/15 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

Minneapolis, once a bastion of Scandinavian and Midwestern homogeneity, now grapples with the fallout of unchecked mass immigration. Somali welfare dependency strains resources and cultural clashes erupt daily.

Recent ICE controversies have exposed the rot: aggressive raids targeting criminal Somali networks in the Cedar-Riverside “Little Mogadishu” neighborhood sparked outrage from refugee advocates. The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) condemned these ICE actions targeting the Somali community. Rabbis joined in the attacks, demanding ICE leave Minneapolis entirely.

The National Council of Jewish Women Minnesota stood with immigrants as part of a coalition of over 85 Jewish organizations. These defenses of illegal networks amid skyrocketing crime underscore how federal policies and activist agencies engineered this crisis, transforming Minnesota from virtually no Somali residents in the 1980s to over 100,000 by the mid-2020s—a remarkable demographic shift driven by chain migration and resettlement.

The foundation was the Refugee Act of 1980, signed by President Jimmy Carter. This landmark legislation raised the annual refugee ceiling from 17,400 to 50,000, established the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services, and created a permanent statutory definition of refugee aligned with international law. The Act authorized the Attorney General to admit refugees as permanent residents without meeting standard immigrant requirements like labor certification, public charge tests, or literacy tests. When Somalia’s central government collapsed in 1991 and civil war erupted, the United States began issuing refugee visas to Somalis in 1992. The State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration coordinated with voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) to place them nationwide.

VOLAGs executed the placements. Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota and Catholic Charities of St. Paul and Minneapolis were primary, motivated by Christian mandates: Lutheran Social Service expresses “the love of Christ for all people through service that inspires hope, changes lives, and builds community.” World Relief Minnesota, a Christian nonprofit, empowers churches to serve refugees, citing biblical passages.

The International Institute of Minnesota and Minnesota Council of Churches, affiliated with Episcopal Migration Ministries, joined in. Catholic Charities provided 90-day resettlement services and remains the only agency in Southeastern Minnesota. Somali-led groups amplified this resettlement venture. The Confederation of Somali Community in Minnesota offered ESL courses and advocacy; Somali Family Services built the Puntland Library; Somali Action Alliance hosted forums.

Despite this considerable Christian organizational role, it would be negligent to ignore the Jewish organizational role and the pivotal part played by the late Jewish Senator Paul Wellstone in changing Minnesota’s demographics. In a recent Twitter thread, Mike Peinovich called attention to Wellstone’s role in the demographic transformation of Minnesota, which is often overlooked by political observers.

From his first days in the Senate, Wellstone brought his family’s Ukrainian Jewish immigrant experience to bear on policy. His voting record showcased a commitment to promoting mass migration at a time when such positions carried significant political risk. The Congressional Record details a consistent pattern of support for expanding immigration. He voted against limiting welfare for immigrants. In addition, he supported extending Section 245(i), allowing legalization without return. In 1996, he voted against Clinton’s welfare reform due to restrictions on legal immigrants receiving food stamps. His most significant immigration legislation came in 2000. Working alongside Minnesota House Representative Bruce Vento, Wellstone championed the Hmong Veterans’ Naturalization Act which helped Hmong and Laotian Vietnam War veterans overcome language barriers to become full U.S. citizens. These veterans had fought alongside American forces during the Secret War in Laos, then resettled as refugees in the United States.

A Hamline University study on Hmong and Somali political incorporation noted that these refugee communities benefited from legislation championed by Minnesota’s progressive congressional members, including Hubert Humphrey and Paul Wellstone, to safeguard immigrants and refugees. Wellstone practiced what colleagues in the Senate called the politics of “diversity, inclusion, and empowerment.”

Wellstone was deeply embedded in Jewish community life, attending events hosted by American Friends of Lubavitch on Capitol Hill. Rabbi Levi Shemtov described him as a “real mensch” who showed real respect for Jewish things despite political disagreements. He worked closely with the Reform Jewish movement, articulating a special identification with its focus on social justice.

Wellstone had plenty of help from the organized Jewish community in transforming Minnesota’s demographics. Jewish Family Service of St. Paul, founded in 1911 to serve Jewish refugees fleeing Eastern Europe, today serves immigrants of all backgrounds including Somalis. Jewish Family and Children’s Service of Minneapolis states that in recent years, Minnesota has been resettling one of the largest groups of new Americans from African countries, specifically Somalia.

The numbers tell a story of rapid demographic change. In the 1980s, the Somali presence in Minnesota was essentially negligible, some students and a tiny number of families with no statewide breakout in census data. The civil war, famine, and state collapse in Somalia after 1991 generated a massive refugee outflow. By the late 1990s, state demographic estimates suggested at least 3,140 Somalis statewide, still a very small share but growing fast. The 2000 Census counted 11,164 Somalis in Minnesota, about 0.2 to 0.25 percent of the population.

By 2010, about 25,000 Somalis lived in Minnesota, roughly 0.4 to 0.5 percent of the state. A 2015 Census-based estimate gave 57,000 Somali-ancestry residents. By 2018, there were about 43,000 Somalia-born residents, representing 0.77 percent of the state, with 94,000 Somali speakers. Recent figures converge on roughly 90,000 to 110,000 people of Somali ancestry in Minnesota. A December 2025 report, citing Minnesota Census data stated that 108,000 Somalis call Minnesota home, with about 95 percent citizens and roughly 5,800 non-citizens.

The Somali heritage share of Minnesota’s population went from effectively zero percent in the 1980s to around 2 percent by the mid-2020s. Most of the steep growth occurred from the early 1990s through the 2000s, as refugee admissions increased and chain migration of family members kicked in. Growth continued in the 2010s and 2020s, but the key story became consolidation and citizenship rather than just raw inflows.

These seismic demographic shifts in Minnesota and across the United States are no accident. They are the deliberate handiwork of Jewish activists and politicians like Paul Wellstone and organizations like HIAS and Jewish Family Service, which have diligently engineered the racial transformation of America through refugee resettlement and mass migration advocacy, culminating with their triumph in passing the 1965 immigration law that set the stage for the current reality. The infrastructure and incentives that have developed since have resulted in recruiting a great many Christian allies but it’s hard to see their motives as religious—and they are certainly not ethnic. To a considerable extent these allies, like HIAS, have a very large financial incentive to advocate for refugees. For example, Catholic Charities received around $2 billion during the Biden years, accounting for around two-thirds of their budget, and there are huge financial incentives for those who run it. For example, the median President & Chief Executive Officer Salary at Catholic Charities Agencies is $842,554 with a range from $640,308 to $1,075,827. Somalis aren’t the only onces gaming the system.

Fortunately, refugee programs have been cut back by the Trump administration, with White South Africans given preference, so refugee resettlement services have fallen on hard times.

The Politics of the Myth: The Quest for the Double and Death

January 17, 2026/5 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Tom Sunic, Ph.D.

John W. Waterhouse, Echo and Narcissus, oil on canvas (1903)

This brief essay, structured in three short sections, aims to show how mythical figures from the Roman poet Ovid’s Metamorphoses can help us better grasp our distorted political self-perception. There is no scholarly consensus on a definition of the ancient Greek term μῦθος (“mythos”). Scholars approach the origin and meaning of diverse myths often from divergent angles. Most, however, agree that “the myth stands free from time. … Myth makes history possible, but history does not reach it.” [i] By contrast, modern political myths carry a far clearer meaning—though politicians of communist or liberal persuasion avoid this term when spouting their own mythical narratives. One could critically point to the liberal and communist myths of “economic progress,” the myth of “human equality,” or the myth of the “multiracial society … or the “myth of the end of history.” So far, the word and the idea of “myth” has had far greater traction among nationalist politicians and scholars. One could cite here the Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini who declared in a speech in 1922: “We have created our myth. Myth is a faith, a passion. It is not necessary that it be a reality. … Our myth is the Nation, our myth is the greatness of the nation.”

Ancient Greek myths, however, served a timeless and ahistorical purpose and could be told and retold at any time and in any place. Some scholars view Greek myths merely as storytelling that explains the origins of the cosmos and recounts the adventures of gods, heroes, and demons. Others, by contrast, regard Greek myths as little more than quasi-allegorical literary devices—comparable to sagas, proverbs, legends, or riddles. Myth, in their view, is just a “verbal gesture,” the manifestation of the inevitable: something fateful that cannot be rationally explained—but neither avoided.[ii] We are what we read—and what we hear…

What we can say with certainty, however, is that Greco-Roman myths—or, for that matter, all ancient European myths, sagas, fables, or fairy tales regardless of their surreal content—had a strong didactic purpose. They were intended to offer moral guidance to the community while issuing stern warnings: do not transgress communal norms; do not try to compete with gods; do not pretend to be something you’re not. Almost all ancient Greek myths caution against hubris, a concept we might today popularly rename into wishful thinking or a morbid desire to become one’s own superior Double.

Judging ancient European myths through the lens of the linear conception of historical time, shaped by the Semitic legacy of Judeo-Christianity, inevitably leads to a false understanding of myths. In simpler terms, applying the Christian and its latter-days Communist concept of time as a one-way lane heading toward earthly or heavenly paradise or the “end of history” is the wrong way to grasp ancient Greek myths. Understanding myths requires first and foremost the skill to step out of historical time altogether. Or to put it simply: myths tell us how to explain the world, whereas modern political myths exhort us to change the world—often with catastrophic results.

One might shrug off ancient Greek myths today as outdated products of a storyteller’s imagination, or as the sign of his intoxicated mind. Fair enough. Yet why do we continue, even more than two thousand years later, to identify with Homer’s mythical heroes from his epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey? Why do we love to read J.R.R. Tolkien’s works, or enjoy watching techno-scientific pseudo-myths embodied in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s movies? A century ago, scenes from the movie Terminator would have appeared as an amusing fantasy tale; today, those scenes seem all too real, likely to terminate our lives in a nuclear conflagration. One could also consider the mythical scenes in the horror novels of H.P. Lovecraft, whose prose tells us far more about our demonic self than we are willing to admit.

As a framework for my essay, I am drawing on—and at times paraphrasing—the novelists, poets, and philosophers whose works are well immersed in the spirit of Greek myths and who can be classified as “pagan-traditionalist-postmodern or archeo-futurist” authors. I’ve limited myself to mythical figures from Ovid’s Metamorphoses only, because they graphically illustrate our often-weird urge to shapeshift ourselves into our fantasy Double. [iii] When these mythical analogies of ours—together with the grotesque wannabe doubles of our leftist or liberal politicians or communist world-improvers—are projected into modern times, the political future of Whites looks quite grim.

The Myth of Free Will

Free will—or “free choice,” an expression popularized by a fanatic thinker of North African descent, later known as St. Augustine — has consistently inspired false hopes among Christians. Hopefully, and eventually, future behavioral geneticists and racial scholars will have the final say on the philosophical drivel of free will. Why are we never at ease with our hereditary or God-given, home-bound boundaries, always searching instead to become—or to surpass—our neighboring higher Other?

Greek gods punished severely those who tried to impersonate them, as we see in the immortal Titan Prometheus, the cousin of Zeus. For his transgression—stealing fire and giving life to mankind—Zeus chained him to a rock for all eternity. The tragic fate of the immortal rebel Prometheus, along with many other strong-willed mythical figures, poses a haunting dilemma for all of us who pride ourselves on having free will. Under adverse historical circumstances, free will can fail a White man spectacularly, or get him branded a war criminal by hostile posterity. Thousands of well-meaning, strong-willed Western politicians, after savoring the bliss of success for a fleeting moment, have sunk into the memory hole of vilification.

Worse yet, free will must sound like a cruel joke to a high-IQ student or a decent, well-mannered aspiring politician if he is plagued by physical or verbal deformities—or tortured by hereditary dread of exposing himself on the world stage. A high-IQ craftsman—the mythical Daedalus—and his wax-winged son Icarus, or the chariot-driving demigod Phaethon, kept pushing their free will to the utmost limits of the universe—only to trigger the wrath of supreme god Zeus and disintegrate into thin air. Likewise, a contemporary Western politician, who is smart, well-educated, strong-willed, with high-IQ, inevitably confronts “Invidia” already discussed on TOO as —raw jealousy—from his closest friends. The duplicity of his supposedly friendly political or academic milieu is best captured by the modern pagan, death-affirming philosopher Emil Cioran: “If we could see ourselves as others see us, we would vanish on the spot.”[iv]

The Myth of the Echo-Chamber

Hence a reason for our politicians—in order to secure the steady flow of their paychecks—to play the game of self-deception, or to don the grotesque mask of their faked Double. Indeed, the US Congress or the EU Parliament resembles a vast echo chamber, where narcissistic politicians regurgitate empty words straight out of the former communist Soviet textbook. The mythical nymph Echo springs to mind here as the perfect template of modern liberal Newspeak. Her misfortune was engineered by the jealous goddess Hera, Zeus’s wife, who could not tolerate the big-mouthed nymph’s covering up Zeus’s sexual escapades. Hera punished Echo by stripping away her power of speech, condemning her to repeat only the last few syllables to be echoed around. Things grew even uglier when the now half-mute Echo fell madly in love with the self-obsessed hunter Narcissus, who deemed himself way too handsome to accept the passes of the horny, lovesick nymph Echo. Total communication breakdown ensued. The parallel is glaring with today’s main stream media verbal echoes such as “hate speech,” “antisemitism,” “racism”, “white supremacism”—parroted by Western lawfare inquisitors.

Cases of contemporary free-speech suppression can be traced to multiple ancient Greek myths, and they apply with striking precision to the study of our modern surveillance society. Ovid describes the mythical tyrant from Balkan Thrace, King Tereus who was married to the Athenian princess Procne, yet lusting all the time after her sister Philomela. He raped Philomela in secret, then cut out her tongue so she could never reveal the crime to her family and the city of Athens. The bloody tale of Tereus, one of Ovid’s most horrific crime scenes in his epics Metamorphoses, best applies to the verbiage of our ruling class which hides behind the guise of “protecting free speech”. What comes to mind is the case of the wealthy pervert Jeffrey Epstein, along with countless other double-faced modern politicians, who know deadly well how to reduce their victims to speechless, frightened and mute species.

The Myth of White Self-Delusion

Over the past fifteen hundred years, Whites have shown a classic split personality: fierce, pagan-Hellenic-inspired will to power bordering on arrogance on one hand, and on the other, the grovelling Christian-inspired drive to “take the knee” in front of racial outsiders. One encounters these arrogant characters in Ovid’s description of the mythical queen Niobe, who bragged in front of the goddess Leto about her multiple progeny, as well as the satyr Marsyas, who thought he could outplay the god Apollo with his flute. The gods punished severely their arrogance.

The myth of modern White guilt stems from the Christian dogma of self-denial, which has inflicted for centuries huge damage on Whites’ self-perception. It is far too convenient to criticize or ridicule Jewish myths of world creation and their secular avatars in World War II victimhood status. But why ridicule Bible-inspired Jewish victimhood while at the same time embracing the myth of the immaculate conception of the Jewish virgin Mary or the serial shapeshifting adventures of the metamorphic conman St. Paul—still regarded by many White Christians as the bulwark of the Western civilization? The foremost expert on Homeric gods and myths, still quoted as the standard reference in studies of myths, Walter F. Otto, wrote long ago: “The Christian world has developed an extraordinary mastery in this practice of self-abasement.”[v]

The craving to overreach oneself or to metamorphose into a cherished Double or surreal supermen is a major trait of most White nationalists. Many wallow in deliberate self-delusions, eternal false hopes, and a pathetic drive to become imaginary heroes in an abstract White homeland. They could learn a lot from Ovid’s epics and countless other writers who portray delusional individuals.

White activists and many fine White scholars are well aware of the coming doomsday scenario caused by racial replacement. But who can guarantee that in the much-craved White homeland perpetual harmony will ensue? The track record of European history is one of bloody wars. The savagery of the recent war between two closely kindred European peoples—Serbs and Croats—dwarfs tales of African cannibals or the cruelty of the Greek tyrant Phalaris, who locked his dissidents in a brazen bull and roasted them alive. The ongoing savage war between two similar European peoples—Ukrainians and Russians—does not bode well for sustaining the myth of a White homeland. The answer to the future lies in the stars…

Notes and further reading:

[i] Robert de Herte, « Les mythes européens », Eléments, (fall 1984); p. 2.

[ii] André Jolles, « Mythen », Einfache Formen, (1930 Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1969), pp. 91-125.

[iii] Ovid, The Metamorphoses, Translated by Henry T. Riley ( London: George Bell & Sons, York St., Covent Garden, and New York, 1893).

[iv] Emil Cioran, The Trouble with Being Born, Transl.by Richard Howard (New York, Arcade Publishing) p.44.

[v] Walter F. Otto, Der Geist de Antike und die christliche Welt (Bonn: Verlag F. Cohen), p. 69.

Kosher Konservatives: Defections, Elections and Unnatural Selections

January 16, 2026/4 Comments/in British Politics, Featured Articles/by Tobias Langdon

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.

James Edwards Interviews Padraig Martin and David Zsutty on Iran

January 15, 2026/in Featured Articles/by James Edwards

What follows is a joint interview conducted by talk radio host James Edwards with Padraig Martin and David Zsutty, who offer two different interpretations of the current military action in Venezuela in this special Q&A.

Padraig Martin holds two master’s degrees and is a retired government contractor who worked in 78 different countries. David Zsutty, an attorney and Executive Director of the Homeland Institute, served six years in the United States Air Force, achieving the rank of Staff Sergeant.

* * *

James Edwards: What work did your job as a government contractor entail, and how do you believe that experience makes you uniquely qualified to offer an expert opinion on the recent military action in Venezuela?

Padraig Martin: My very first responsibility as an employee of the United States government was the Western Hemisphere desk – with a focus on the Tri-Border Area (Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay). Venezuela and Colombia were critical components of the lawlessness of that region. The work I did in the region led me toward the discovery of unique improvised explosive devices (IEDs) created by former members of the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) selling services to members of the Marxist Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC: Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia). That unique device (triggered by advanced radar speed guns used to catch speeders) found their way to the Palestinian Refugee Camp in Jenin, West Bank. This level of intricate, international cooperation for asymmetric warfare training led to the creation of a report that I delivered to the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation and the US Army War College in early 2003. This led to my transition to terrorist and insurgent supply chain operations led regionally – creating my ultimate career of watching and tracking Iranian-backed non-state armed groups. The amount of cooperation between Iran and Venezuela in the early days of the now-deceased Hugo Chavez government played such an important role in my early days that the two were almost inseparable in any conversation on American security. As a side note, in late 2004, I defeated a 300-person-plus wargame as the leader of Iran, in part by using covert assets in Venezuela. By 2010, I was fully engrossed in operations related to GWoT as a contractor, but Iran was a critical source of supply for Hazara militants in Western Afghanistan. Venezuela was still a partnered actor at that time.

Edwards: Let’s begin to examine the reasons given to justify this most recent regime change. Are you buying or selling that this was done due to drug smuggling?

Martin: There are a number of reasons floating around regarding the attack on Venezuela and the abduction of Nicolas Maduro and his wife. I am not a fan of Maduro, but I am also not a Venezuelan. Their country, their problems. I would much sooner support a military invasion of Minnesota to send home the Somalians than an invasion of a Latin American country. But let’s look at the reasons “why” we went into Venezuela.

I am not buying the drug smuggling story at all. Whereas I am sure Maduro was tacitly supporting drug operations into the United States, the overall production and supply chain capacity of Venezuela to infiltrate American borders was nominal, at best. Mexico is by far the most significant threat for illicit drug manufacturing and logistics. Venezuela has some bad actors, including Maduro, who have no love for the United States, but I do not believe that nominal drug smuggling operations – better managed by the Mexican cartels – was the impetus for an invasion of Venezuela.

Edwards: I have seen baffling claims from Alex Jones and other MAGA adjacent media that Venezuela helped rig the 2020 election against Donald Trump. Do you believe this is plausible?

Martin: One of the chief claims by MAGA is that Venezuela was the host of data centers for voting machines. This was a loose claim made by individuals like Sydney Powell in 2020 (she was unable to prove it and ultimately admitted in court that she had heard it from someone else). The evidence for this is simply not there for one key reason – Dominion’s British owners and Smartmatic’s Israeli and Jewish-American owners both withdrew from Venezuela in 2018. Both companies announced in 2018 that they would move their North American data centers to Justin Trudeau’s Canada. At issue was Venezuela’s lack of infrastructure. They simply could not support the power required to run a data center of that size, let alone two of them. This entire story is a MAGA conspiracy. If you want to attack a country for meddling in the stolen 2020 election, Canada is the more likely culprit.

Edwards: Based upon your previous work for the government and informed knowledge of how the present system works, what do you believe is the biggest driving force behind Trump’s decision to forcibly depose Maduro?

Martin: Israel is the most likely reason for this regime change. This would remain consistent with my previous work on insurgent supply chains. Israel faces an additional energy challenge to support its AI-driven data needs. At present, Israel has no assured energy source. The Middle East region is still not fully on board for cooperation with Israel. Israel cannot get its AI future without the oil Venezuela can provide.

One report stated that the Commanders for Israel’s Security (CIS) movement, which includes over 550 retired IDF colonels and generals, as well as former senior officials from the Mossad, Shin Bet, Police, NSC, and the diplomatic corps, said, “The US operation in Venezuela is a warning to the regime in Iran.” This statement came out within minutes of the attack, indicating that they were well aware of the operation as it was ongoing.

Maria Machado, the leader of the Venezuelan opposition and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, may become the new leader of Venezuela. Her political party, Vente Venezuela, established a formal cooperation with Netanyahu’s Likud Party in Israel back in 2020. She has promised to move the Venezuelan Embassy to Jerusalem when she becomes president, reestablish Venezuela-to-Israel oil transfers, and she would invite Israeli military joint operations in the country. Machado is a well-known supporter of LGBT rights, promising to introduce gay marriage and “modernize Venezuela’s banking” (i.e., usury). Maduro banned both gay marriage and interest-based lending. If it is not her, whoever it is will almost certainly be similarly amenable.

The fact that Netanyahu visited the White House two days before the removal of Maduro, and while Iran is undergoing destabilizing protests, seems intricately linked. Maduro apparently offered a number of concessions to President Trump, including the reestablishment of normalized oil relations in exchange for peace. That was turned down. It does not appear that Trump had any interest in a peaceful relationship with Maduro’s Venezuela. Israel will finally get a steady supply of oil from a new strategic partner.

Edwards: In your opinion, is there a way that legitimate American interests can be served, even if Israel had a heavy hand in orchestrating this campaign?

Martin: I really do not see it. Regime change has never worked out for the American people. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has already said she will expand permanent resident status to Venezuelan migrants who left during the Chavez/Maduro regime (something the administration is now walking back). The vast majority of the Venezuelan ruling class are still Chavez/Maduro acolytes. The US would need to remove entire bastions of bureaucratic and military officials. That requires a lot of money and ultimately boots on the ground – i.e., nation building. Destabilizing a country never works in our favor. I see no benefit beyond potentially denying China a foothold in the Americas, which they already have in the Panama Canal and American business.

* * *

Edwards: Do you believe your background as a former Staff Sergeant in the United States Air Force enables you to see the recent activity in Latin America from a different vantage point?

David Zsutty: Yes, in fact, I was an Airborne Linguist, and my language was Spanish. I want to give anything sensitive a wide berth, but it became readily apparent to me that Central Command, which deals with the Middle East, was lavishly supported, Europe and East Asia were of secondary importance, and the Western Hemisphere was a neglected child. As I came to learn, that’s because Israel controls our foreign policy through a combination of bribery, blackmail, and brainwashing. I would like to see a return to the Monroe Doctrine, which would be the exact opposite. The Western Hemisphere should be our top priority, and the Middle East and Africa an afterthought, if even that.

Edwards: During a recent radio appearance, you argued that White interests in America can be advanced as a result of this, once the dust settles. Please present your case.

Zsutty: Venezuela is about the oil, and I appreciate how Trump is being honest about this. It’s not about vapid abstractions like democracy or human rights. It has never been. Seizing that oil will help White Americans economically. It will also deter China from invading Taiwan, which, unlike a quick and easy regime change close to home, is a war that I am strongly opposed to us being dragged into. America can use Venezuelan oil to undercut oil prices, thereby bringing Russia to the bargaining table on Ukraine. Russian hysteria on social media suggests this is very likely.

People are already memeing which liberal world leaders they would like to see Delta Force arrest next. This includes Ursula von der Leyen and Keir Starmer. Eventually, I would like to topple anti-White regimes like Australia, Belgium, and the UK. That’s not likely to happen soon. But in the meantime, we should withdraw from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing agreement. And place everyone involved with anarcho-tyranny and the Great Replacement, from law clerks and cops to heads of state, on a sanctions list and charged with conspiracy to commit genocide. A few were already given a travel ban, but that’s not enough. They should be debanked, deplatformed, their assets seized, and deemed prohibited persons. Leftists revel in their status and are completely unaccustomed to pushback. Thus, even a little bit of pressure will go a long way.

Trump has made it clear that he’s not stopping with Venezuela. He’s signaled that Cuba, Mexico, and especially Colombia are in his sights. While I’d prefer he would liberate White countries next, this is still a win. Colombia is poisoning our country with narcotics more than Venezuela. And a war or special military operation against Mexico would present an opportunity to transform domestic enemies into foreign enemies, like what the Left tried to do with the Russian collusion hoax. I would prefer that Trump simply ignore rogue judges. But maybe striking Mexico can serve as a step towards suspending habeas corpus.

In pursuing Israeli interests, we have long been stuck in the cycle of “bomb the third world, import the third world.” Returning to the Monroe Doctrine might be a way to break that cycle and facilitate remigration. For example, while I admired Bashar al-Assad, when he was deposed in Syria there was a wave of remigration. There has been some confusion about how Venezuela will be handled. Kristi Noem confirmed that TPS (temporary protected status) is ending for Venezuelans, but they can still apply for refugee status or asylum. As of today, it’s unclear whether those applications will generally be granted or denied. But we can pressure the administration to send them back.

Trump is very aggressive on foreign policy but timid on domestic policy. Part of that is pandering to Jews. Another part is that he is continuing the liberal tactic of trying to enact abroad what he would like to do at home. It’s easier for Trump to act abroad because he is less hindered by the woke judiciary, Congress, institutional entropy, insubordination, and elections. Trump consistently picks easy fights while avoiding big ones. Sometimes, winning easy fights is a good way to build strength for hard ones. But with Trump, its clearly become cowardice and procrastination. Many have noticed the disparity, especially in regard to remigration and cracking down on Leftist violence. But we can use this to our advantage by highlighting the disparity. We can and should demand the same will to power for domestic enemies. That means ramping up deportations, and finally arresting, ignoring, and or defunding woke judges.

Edwards: In the spirit of fairness, it should be mentioned that Maduro was most assuredly not someone who had the interests of Whites in his mind and had even decried so-called “white supremacy” on several occasions. He was no Francisco Franco. However, Israel is celebrating his removal and will almost certainly see installed as president someone who is friendlier to the Zionist state. You also addressed this matter. Please square it for us.

Zsutty: First, much of Latin America has a multiracial underclass that is prone to revolution. Speaking bluntly, they are unable to generate wealth despite their proximity to natural resources. They see the Whiter elites and middle-class as having simply stolen their wealth. But when they come to power, all they ever do is make everyone poorer because they are shockingly stupid and corrupt. Maduro and the Chavistas are textbook examples of a colored peasant rebellion hijacking a country and running it into the ground.

Second, it’s true that Hezbollah received funding from Venezuela. But for decades, we couldn’t have a functional country and pursue our interests because of the holocaust. I’m not going to fall into the inverse of that and not pursue White interests because it might make a Jew happy via a collateral effect. That is sloppy, reactive, and contrarian thinking. For example, Israel and the murderously anti-White South African regime despise each other. And Hungary staunchly opposes the Great Replacement despite being friends with Israel. I can’t help but wonder if certain shock jocks would side with the ANC regime against the Boers because of Israel.

Edwards: Gentlemen, I thank you both for your time and your expertise.

This article was originally published by American Free Press – America’s last real newspaper! Click here to subscribe today or call 1-888-699-NEWS.

When not interviewing newsmakers, James Edwards has often found himself in the spotlight as a commentator, including many national television appearances. Over the past 20 years, his radio work has been featured in hundreds of newspapers and magazines worldwide. Media Matters has listed Edwards as a “right-wing media fixture” responsible for Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton personally named him as an “extremist” who would shape our country.

“Never Again”: The Magic Wand of Democracy

January 15, 2026/12 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Pierre Simon

The desire for vengeance that Disraeli asserted made many Jews “odious and so hostile to mankind”[1] was especially malignant after the Second World War when Jews from all over the world were seeking vengeance for the persecution of their brethren for no rational or logical reasons… from their point of view!

As Russian armies poured into Germany near the end of the war, the Jewish Soviet Propa-ganda minister, Ilya Ehrenburg, had millions of leaflets printed up and air-dropped onto the Russian troops, exhorting them when they entered Germany to: “Kill the Germans, wherever you find them! Every German is our mortal enemy. Have no mercy on women, children, or the aged! Kill every German… wipe them out!” In another leaflet drop, Ehrenburg urged the Russian troops to: “Kill, kill, you brave Red Army soldiers, kill. There is nothing in the Germans that is innocent. Obey the instructions of comrade Stalin and stamp the fascistic beast in its cave. Break with force the racial arrogance of the Germanic women. Take them as your legal loot. Kill, you brave soldiers of the Red Army, kill!”[2]

When the fighting stopped in Europe, Roosevelt’s Jewish Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau’s plan was executed. The goal of this “Semitism gone wild for vengeance”[3] was to destroy the German economy, subdivide Germany into several smaller states, enslave, and starve to death millions of her citizens. Though the Plan was eventually toned down by saner heads, most of it was implemented with brutal consequences for the German people.[4]

A small group of German “well poisoners” who had fled Germany before the war came back with the intention of poisoning the water supply of the city of Nuremberg.[5] They failed, but with the complicity of Jewish American soldiers, another group of East European “well poisoners” successfully poisoned 2000 loaves of bread with arsenic which were then delivered to a POW camp in Germany holding 36,000 German SS prisoners. “Thousands of SS soldiers were seized with violent stomach pains,” and, “700 to 800 died during the year.” [6]

After the defeat of Nazi Germany, Jews were now in charge of the concentration camps. The most sadistic post-war camp commandant was the 26-year-old Jew Shlomo Merrel.[7] German soldiers interned in his death camp in Poland were beaten by Jewish sadistic guards with rubber clubs and hoses before they were executed Palestinian style. “Women who fared even worse,” notes Dr. E. Michael Jones, “perhaps because they were more helpless,” were forced to exhume the corpses of the Poles who were buried there:

They started to suffer nausea as the bodies, black as the stuff in a gutter, appeared. The faces were rotten, the flesh was blue, but the guards, who had often seemed psychopathic, making a German woman drink urine, drink blood, and eat a man’s excrement, inserting an oily five-mark bill in a woman’s vagina, putting a match to it — shouted at the women… “Lie down with them!” The women did and the guards shouted at the women. “Hug them!” “Kiss them!” “Make love with them!” and, with their rifles pushed on the backs of the women’s heads until their eyes, noses, and mouths were deep in the Polish faces’ slime.[8]

Then there was the Jewish Brigade. Formed in Palestine, outfitted in British Army uniforms and riding in American Jeeps, the Brigade was established, not to fight in the war, but to enter into Germany behind the British army to take revenge on the now disarmed and defenceless German officers. There were no charges filed against these German officers, no trial, no judge, not even an arrest; they were simply murdered according to the caprice or whim of vengeance-seeking Jews. The Jews called it “vengeance,” but, in fact, it was a simple murder of defenceless men who may or may not have been guilty of anything except having served in the German Army in defence of their country.[9] And more than one young Jew of this brigade was heard to say: “I must kill a German in cold blood, I must. And I must rape a German girl. That’s our war aim, revenge! Not Roosevelt’s four freedoms or the greater glory of the British Empire or Stalin’s ideology, but vengeance, Jewish vengeance.” [10]

Finally, a hugely disproportionate number of Jews flooded into the Nuremberg Trials and used it as a means of exacting vengeance not only on the German leadership but on the German nation. Of the 3,000 people who participated in the Trials, 2,400 of them were Jews. Working just behind their gentile front men, they could do whatever they wanted, while the defeated, starving, prostrate Germans were without any means of defending themselves.[11] In this tribunal set up by the victors to judge the defeated:

–The crimes for which the Germans were indicted had been committed by at least one of the four prosecuting powers;

– The court could accept whatever evidence it liked as it was not bound by technical rules of evidence;

—Unsworn “copies” of documents and third-hand statements (hearsay) were admitted as proof;

—Cross-examination by the defence was not permitted; lawyers were outnumbered and had no access to the prosecutor’s documents; prosecutors eliminated other tools that were usually available to the defence such as the right to call any witness it wanted;

—Forensic evidence such as autopsies and the examination of the crime scenes was not admitted; this means that the trial does not prove the extermination of six million Jews and the existence of gas chambers;

–Judgments were obtained strictly on the basis of confessions, spurious testimonies, and fraudulent documents; the confessions that were obtained by the mostly Jewish investigators were extracted by intimidation, threats, torture, and extreme duress; most of the German guards at Dachau, for example, had their testicles crushed beyond repair; Auschwitz commandant Rudolph Höss was tortured for days on end by Jews serving in the British army; beaten nearly to death, his wife and children threatened with death and deportation to Siberia, he signed the most important confession of the Nuremberg trials, an admission full of absurdities and lies. The goal of these exactions was not the search for truth and justice, but lust for vengeance and the obtainment of financial reparations;

—Indictments were also obtained on the basis of laws that were invented for the purpose; in other words, defendants were punished for acts which were not against the law when committed (in the absence of a law there can be neither crime nor punishment);

—The ultimate injustice was the final interference of the legislature with the judiciary. [12]

In the aftermath, several independent newspapers were highly critical of the farcical nature of this trial. In October 1946, Mr. Paul Sauriol, for example, the editor-in-chief of the largest French-language Canadian daily newspaper, Le Devoir de Montréal, condemned the Nuremberg trial in the following terms:

Historians will look back with astonishment on this great trial, which set such formidable precedents in international law. Under the Nuremberg judgment, it is understood that the victors have the right to judge and condemn the vanquished; to judge and condemn them under retroactive “laws” enacted after their defeat; the victors can act as both prosecutors and judges; they can also judge only the actions of the vanquished, without taking into account similar actions committed by the victors; finally, the fact of having prepared for a war of aggression will be a crime for the vanquished, because it is the victors who will decide which side committed the aggression.[13]

And in his book Nuremberg II or the Counterfeiters, French nationalistic scholar Maurice Bardèche had this to say about the Allied occupation of Germany:

The record of the Allied occupation of Germany is utterly despicable. It is not even hatred, for real hatred has its own nobility. It is something abject and underhanded, a mixture of looting, swindling, influence peddling, sexual depravity, baseness, hypocrisy, and fear. And a smell of Levantine rot rises from this mass grave. It doesn’t even have the grandeur of rage and sacrilege. It mixes horror with something shady and mercenary: everywhere you look, you see the profile of the usurer and the trafficker.[14]

In the final analysis, the Nuremberg trial laid the foundations for a globalist New World Order in which nationalism is forever stigmatized and suppressed.[15] Jewish power, which had been severely defeated and humiliated by Hitler’s nationalist Germany had to make sure this kick in the face would never happen again. The expression “never again” is in fact one of their favorite magic wands with “Nazi,” “fascist,” “anti-Semite,” or “White supremacist.” As if by magic, these powerful words can trigger feelings of guilt, fear, and anxiety in a Pavlovian type reflex which can neutralize any desire to threaten or resist Jewish power.

The following excerpts from Maurice Bardèche’s prophetic book, Nuremberg, the Promised Land are a brilliant illustration of this sleight-of-hand magic with one caveat: In light of what has been described above, it can be argued that “the conscience of humanity” means first “the conscience of Jews” as they are the most affected by a resurgence of nationalism and the positive feelings of pride, homogeneity, solidarity, and independence that come with it. As noted by Jewish journalist Charles E. Silberman, Jews are committed to the “never again” magic wand of democracy “because of their historically held belief that Jews are safe only in a society that accepts a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups.”[16] And if one controls the money and the media, democracy is the easiest political system to subvert:

There is a very simple way to tell if the organization to which you belong runs the risk of being declared criminal one day.

If you catch even a whiff of the adjective nationalist, if one invites you to be masters in your own lands, if one speaks to you about unity, discipline, force, grandeur, you cannot deny that this is not a very democratic vocabulary, and consequently you are likely one day to see your organization become criminal. So, beware of bad thoughts, and know that what we call criminal is always marked out with the same intentions.

The world is from now on democratic for perpetuity. It is democratic by judicial decision. From now on a legal precedent weighs down on every sort of national rebirth.

The decision of Nuremberg thus consists in making a preliminary selection between the parties. One is legitimate, and the other suspect. Those in the one are in line with the democratic spirit and have the right consequently to seize power and to have a concerted plan because it is certain that their concerted plan will never threaten democracy and peace. Those in the other party, on the contrary, are not entitled to have power, and consequently it is useless that they exist: it is understood that they contain in themselves the seeds of all kinds of crimes against peace and humanity.

The right to interfere and destroy governments that are considered authoritarian is therefore inherent in these simple statements. This right, however, is peculiar in that it does not entail, or does not seem to entail, an identifiable will to interfere. It is not some great power in particular or some group of great powers which is opposed to the re-establishment of nationalist movements; […] it is the conscience of humanity [the conscience of Jews, my comment]. “We do not want to see that again,” says the conscience of humanity [the conscience of Jews, my comment].

If a movement similar to National Socialism were established tomorrow, it is certain that the UN would not intervene to require its suppression. But the universal conscience would approve any government which announced the prohibition of such a party or, for greater convenience, of every party which it accused of resembling National Socialism. Every national resurrection, every policy of energy or simply of cleanliness, is thus struck with suspicion.

There is a closed world of democratic idealism which is of the same order as the closed world of Marxism. It is not astonishing if their methods manage to coincide, if their justice ends up being the same even though words, as they use them, do not have all the same sense. It too is a religion. It is the same attack on our hearts. When they condemn nationalism, they know well what they are doing. It is the foundation of their Law. They condemn your truth; they declare it radically wrong. They condemn our feeling, our roots even, our most profound ways of seeing and feeling. They explain to us why our brain is not made as it should be: we have the brain of barbarians.

The condemnation of the National Socialist Party goes much further than it seems to. In reality, it reaches all the solid forms, all the geological forms of political life. Every nation, every party which urges us to remember our soil, our tradition, our trade, our race is suspect. Whoever claims the right of the first occupant and calls to witness things as obvious as the ownership of the city offends against a universal morality which denies the right of the people to write their laws. This applies not just to the Germans; it is all of us who are dispossessed. No one has anymore the right to sit down in his field and say: “This ground belongs to me.” No one has anymore the right to stand up in the city and say: “We are the old ones; we built the houses of this city; anyone who does not want to obey our laws should get out.”

And we are free to protest, free, infinitely free to write, to vote, to speak in public, provided that we never take measures which can change all that.[17]

[1] Benjamin Disraeli, Lord George Bentinck: A Political Biography, 1847, Chapter XXIV. Cited by Kevin MacDonald in The Culture of critic. An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, third edition, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2025.

[2] Joachim Hoffmann, Stalin’s War of Extermination, 1941-1945. Planning, Realization, and Documentation, Castle Hill Publishers, 2001, pp.155-160.

[3] Dr. E. Michael Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, Fidelity Press, 2023, p. 125.

[4] Benton L. Bradberry, The Myth of German Villainy, Second Edition Updated and Revised, Money Tree Publishing, 2024, p. 385.

[5] Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, p.105.

[6] Ibid., p.108.

[7] Sepp Jendryschik, Zgoda – Une station sur le chemin de croix silésien, Akribeia, 2004.

[8] Jones, The Holocaust Narrative, p. 112.

[9] Morris Beckman, The Jewish Brigade. An Army with Two Masters 1944-1945, Spellmount, 1998.

[10] Michael Bar-Zohar, The Avengers, Hawthorn Books, 1967, p.21.

[11] Mark Weber, The Nuremberg Trials and the Holocaust. Do the ‘war crimes’ trials prove extermination? The Unz Review, 1992.

[12] David Irving, Nuremberg. The Last battle, 1996. Cited by Charles Stanford in Chapter 7, “The Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal,” of The Holocaust Narrative by Dr. E. Michael Jones, pp. 117-157.

[13] Citation from Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg II ou les faux-monnayeurs (Nuremberg II or the Counterfeiters), Omnia Veritas ( original publication in 1950), p. 157.

[14] Ibid., p. 134.

[15] Editor’s note, Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg and the Promised land, Counter-Currents, August 9, 2013.

[16] Charles E. Silberman, A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, Simon and Schuster, 1985. Cited by Scott Howard, The Transgender-Industrial Complex, Antelope Hill Publishing, 2020, p. 116.

[17] Excerpt translated by George F. Held; see Editor’s note, Maurice Bardèche, Nuremberg and the Promised land, Counter-Currents, August 9, 2013.

Minneapolis’ Jewish Mayor Stirs Up Chaos to Shield Illegal Invaders After ICE Takes Down Threat

January 14, 2026/11 Comments/in Featured Articles/by Jose Nino

Jacob Frey, the scheming Jewish mayor of Minneapolis, wasted no time twisting the death of Renee Nicole Good into a weapon against federal immigration crackdowns, all to keep the floodgates open for his community’s long-standing push for unchecked migration.

On January 7, 2026, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer Jonathan Ross fired three shots into Renee Nicole Good’s vehicle near East 34th Street and Portland Avenue, striking the 37-year-old in the head. As her car careened out of control and crashed into parked vehicles, two versions of events emerged. One, rooted in conservative media and the White House, portrayed a necessary response to a threat. The other, amplified by local officials like Frey who cherry-picked video evidence, painted ICE as villains to stir outrage against immigration enforcement.

Frey’s response was immediate and calculated, designed to gin up tensions. In a blunt assessment that grabbed national attention, the mayor called the federal government’s characterization of the incident “bullshit,” insisting video showed Good was “backing up and trying to get out” rather than attacking agents. “This was an agent recklessly using power that resulted in somebody dying. Getting killed,” Frey added.

In a fit of rage, Frey commanded ICE to “get the f out of Minneapolis,” accusing them of “causing chaos and distrust” instead of safety. He branded the shooting “murder by ICE officials” and insisted Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension join the probe—knowing it would politicize the process against enforcement.

Witness videos and local officials, parroted by Frey, claimed Good was simply in her vehicle when ICE approached and demanded she exit. Footage allegedly showed an agent approaching her door, her car reversing briefly, then lurching forward—prompting Ross to fire three shots, one through the windshield and two through the driver’s window, hitting her in the head.

Good, a U.S. citizen from Colorado who recently moved to Minneapolis, was affiliated with the open-borders group “ICE Watch,” whose members have a track record of obstructing U.S. immigration enforcement. Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara noted that there is “nothing to indicate that this woman was the target of any law enforcement investigation or activity,” a detail Frey exploited to imply random targeting of innocents by ICE agents.

Federal authorities held a contrasting perspective. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem accused Good of “stalking and impeding” ICE officers, and attempting to “weaponize her vehicle” to run them down, labeling it “domestic terrorism.” President Donald Trump posted that Good “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense.”

None of the Minneapolis mayor’s combative rhetoric toward ICE and his sympathy for mass migration should come as a surprise given his ethno-religious background and political trajectory. Jacob Frey entered Minneapolis politics through a path steeped in Jewish identity and activism. Born in Arlington County, Virginia, he was raised in a culturally Jewish household where his father converted to Judaism and his mother, of Russian Jewish ancestry, clung to traditions despite her agnosticism.

After studying government at the College of William and Mary and earning his law degree from Villanova, Frey practiced civil rights and employment law before relocating to Minneapolis. He served on the City Council for the Third Ward before capturing the mayor’s office in 2017. Now in his third term, he stands as the city’s second Jewish mayor and the only Jew in elected city government.

Frey’s Jewish identity permeates his life and politics. He attends two Reform synagogues in Minneapolis, Temple Israel and Shir Tikvah, alongside his wife Sarah Clarke—who converted to Judaism—and their two daughters. He sits on the board of the Jewish Community Relations Council and collaborates with Jewish Community Action. When Temple Israel suffered antisemitic graffiti vandalism in October 2025, Frey staunchly defended the synagogue and the broader Jewish community.

Throughout his tenure, Frey has enjoyed unwavering support from the Jewish community, which views him as a key player in their broader objectives to subvert Minneapolis’ White gentile population. The Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas has provided him with consistent institutional backing. In his 2025 reelection against Democrat Socialists of America-backed challenger Omar Fateh—whose staffers allegedly justified Hamas’s October 7 attack—Minneapolis Jewish activists mobilized for Frey. Ethan Roberts, deputy director of the Jewish Community Relations Council, publicly praised him, while Jewish party activists voiced fears over “Jewish safety in Minneapolis” under Fateh, ensuring Frey’s victory and continued promotion of their immigration and Jewish-friendly policies.

Like many in the Jewish community, Frey has worked tirelessly to position Minneapolis as a haven for refugees and illegal aliens, undermining federal authority. “Minneapolis’ immigrant and refugee communities continue to be an irreplaceable driving force behind our economic competitiveness,” Frey declared in 2021, peddling the canard that diversity—code for non-White mass migration—strengthens the city, when in reality it dilutes the native stock in line with the Great Replacement orchestrated by organized Jewry and their gentile servants.

In December 2025, he signed Executive Order 2025-02, barring federal immigration enforcement from using city-owned parking lots or facilities for operations. The city then updated its 20-year-old separation ordinance to enshrine this prohibition, explicitly directing Minneapolis police not to collect immigration status data or arrest individuals for their illegal presence.

The ICE shooting hurled Frey into his favored role, feigning discomfort while orchestrating tensions between political factions to advance his subversive aims. Frey has a long a track record of getting behind anti-White causes. During the 2020 George Floyd riots, Tucker Carlson ridiculed him on air, while MAGA accounts mocked his kneeling at George Floyd’s casket.

Frey’s critics have not been exclusively from the Right, however. From the Left, pro-Palestinian activists have hounded him for his liberal Zionist political actions. In January 2024, he blocked a City Council resolution for an immediate Gaza ceasefire and end to U.S. aid to Israel, claiming its “one-sided” tone ignored Israeli Jewish history and the Holocaust context. The Council overrode it, prompting a Palestinian-American real estate developer to ban Frey from his property—an episode Frey spun as antisemitism to garner sympathy from his Jewish supporters. In December 2024, he vetoed aid for University of Minnesota students suspended over pro-Palestinian protests, positioning himself as a champion for Israeli interests from a liberal angle.

Like other Jewish actors in politics, Frey pushes the familiar “invade the world, invite the world” framework that’s dominated Western politics since WWII. It’s at the very core of organized Jewry’s grand strategy to control and eventually dispossess the goyim in White majority polities.

Frey stands as the archetype of the subversive Jew, promoting policies that relentlessly flood White America with migrant hordes to dilute its blood and culture, while his tribe fortifies synagogues, maintains ethnic solidarity, and establishes global primacy through Israel’s endless wars and vassalage over countries like the United States. This poisonous duality—open gates for the goyim, iron walls for the chosen—exposes organized Jewry’s master plan to rule the ruins they create. Minneapolis deserves better than this scheming mayor’s betrayal; America must eject such traitors to reclaim its destiny as a sanctuary for individuals of European extraction.