Politics: “pure cold rage”

By Richard North - June 3, 2026

Said Shabana Mahmood, the Pakistani-heritage home secretary who believes herself to be an Englishwoman, “There have been accusations, I know, of two-tier policing, and that one community has been prioritised over another”.

She was speaking in the Commons, after the release of the bodycam footage (picture) on the police treatment of the dying 19-year-old student, Henry Nowak. But, of course, Mahmood refused to comment on these accusations, even if the facts speak for themselves.

As Nowak lay dying, pleading for help and saying, “I can’t breathe” no fewer than nine times, the police arrested, handcuffed and cautioned him, refusing to accept that he’d been stabbed, one constable declaring: “I don’t think you have, mate”.

The police, having dragged the dying Nowak across the gravel, turning him over with his face to the ground, so that he could be handcuffed, conversed with his murderer, Sikh Vickrum Digwa, who denied that Nowak had been stabbed and falsely accused him of a racial attack.

Then a potential suspect of murder, Digwa was conveyed by the police to Southampton Central police station, without handcuffs, whence – still unrestrained – he was led to the canteen where he was offered a menu from which he was allowed to choose a meal.

But, of course, there is no two-tier policing, evidenced by the Hampshire Constabulary Race Action Plan 2024-2026, which proclaims:

We will protect all of our communities. We will put victims first ensuring that our services and response are accessible to all. We will pursue offenders and deal with offences that cause the most harm to our ethnic minority communities. We want to deliver a policing service to all of our communities and victims that we can be proud of. Our victims will be put first and treated according to their needs regardless of any differences that may exist.

Such pronouncements serve to confirm my earlier observation that it might be possible to believe that the “establishment” has a death wish, deliberately engineering situations which provoke outrage from the “online Right” and play into the hands of Reform.

Sure enough, right on cue, Farage took to the social media. Ignoring Nowak’s Polish heritage and conveniently forgetting that, eleven years ago, he had declared “Indian and Australian immigrants better than eastern Europeans”, he launched into the attack, telling his million-plus viewers that they should respond to Nowak’s murder with “pure cold rage”. The rights of white people mattered less than those of ethnic minorities.

Being a politically motivated opportunist, though, doesn’t make Farage wrong, and it hardly takes any great insight to understand and articulate what millions of White English people are thinking. But the tone-deaf Starmer left it to his spokesman to respond, saying: “There is no such thing as two-tier policing. The police enforce the law without fear or favour, that is what the police do”.

This is the sort of bullshit which infuriates just about everybody, especially as it is manifestly untrue, but that didn’t stop his Pakistani-heritage home secretary trying to deflect in the House yesterday, warning of “a dangerous undercurrent that I have seen in the reaction to this awful crime”.

Attempting to take the moral high ground – an odd stance for a Muslim whose very creed is dedicated to murderous violence – she slipped into “preach mode”, telling the great unwashed that: “Threats against police officers are utterly unacceptable. There can be no justification for intimidation, abuse or attempts to take the law into one’s own hands”.

As a general statement, this last bit of dogma may be valid in an ordered society but, at some point – when it becomes apparent that the police have become the enemy (alongside the politicians) – the dictum cannot hold.

The trouble is that, if anyone is expecting any relief from the leader of the opposition, they are going to be disappointed. In her own way, Badenough is as bad as Starmer, attacking Farage for “whipping up” anger and division after he declared that “white lives matter”.

Speaking on ITV, Badenough said: “What Nigel Farage is doing is reinforcing the difference. I have said that we need to find what we have in common, not what separates us”.

“I don’t want to hear about Black Lives Matter. I don’t want to hear about white lives matter. We all matter”, she added, declaring: “Enough of this nonsense, where we keep separating everybody and splitting people into different groups. We are descending into tribalism. I do not want that. It is why I say that we should be a multiracial country, not a multicultural country”.

Thus, she declared: “Let’s have one shared culture, British culture. How the police treat everyone should not matter, depending on the colour of their skin, and we shouldn’t pretend that racism is something that only happens to ethnic minorities, it happens to everybody, black or white”.

This is the same schtick she was churning out in the leadership race back in September 2024, and it is as vacuous now as it was then.

Her blathering about us being “a multiracial country, not a multicultural country”, wilfully neglects the fact that race and culture are inseparable. Impose a multi-racial society on Britain and you get multiculturalism.

Moreover, when she complains that “we keep separating everybody and splitting people into different groups”, as a result of which, “We are descending into tribalism”, she must truly live on another planet. The ethnic tribes separate themselves. There is no “shared culture” and never will be.

But then, as a black Nigerian who was brought up in Africa, she has to pretend that a multi-ethnic state can work, a baseless assumption that renders her singularly unfit to be leader of the opposition and wholly unsuited to become prime minister, leading (still) a predominantly White English state whose people never wanted hordes of third world dross imposed upon them.

Similarly, the response from Mahmood is equally dense. “We cannot allow this murder to turn communities against one another. We must condemn those who seek personal political profit from tragedy”, she says.

There speaks the wormtongue. This wasn’t a “tragedy”, implying as the term does, a passive event. It was an outrage, driven in part by policy choices and by the blind, malevolent stupidity that believes we can import third-world dross by the millions, without consequences.

Mahmood says that “instead”, we must show who we really are in this country. But, to do so, we need to follow the Farage route – “pure cold rage” is who we are. The death of Nowak and the circumstances of his dying cannot just be dismissed, as Mahmood would have it, as “a vile and violent crime”.

It was the inevitable consequence of a failed policy that has been imposed on the English people against their wills, and – just as the left politicised the death of career criminal George Floyd as a symbol of “black oppression”, Nowak is a symbol of a failed state which is treating its indigenous peoples as second-class citizens.

We are at one with Mahmood in her claim that “We condemn those who committed this heinous crime”, but we must also condemn those who made it not only possible but inevitable.