Palestinians living in Qusra, an occupied West Bank settlement, have been huddled within their homes due to the Israeli threat.
Israeli forces, who have demonstrated their military and intelligence abilities from Beirut to Tehran over the last three years, are yet to remove all settlers in the vicinity of the village. This is about one hour away from Tel Aviv.
Perhaps because the homeowner is an American Palestinian living in Ohio, The United States has issued a harsh rebuke.
U.S. Israel’s Defense Minister dismissed the radicals as “boys in the hills” and Ambassador Mike Huckabee called them “terrorists”.
They are actually the tip of a larger movement that has been supported and amplified by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This is an effort to cement Israeli control over territory, and prevent the creation of a Palestinian State.
Over 500,000 people now live in settlements that have been built over the past decades
Israel’s 1967 Mideast War captured Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. These are the territories that the Palestinians desire for their future state.
Israel has since built 150 settlements, which are now home to more than 500,000 Jewish settlers. The settlements are largely developed suburbs with shopping centers, industrial zones, and parks.
The Israeli army and other services have protected radical settlers from establishing hundreds of new outposts, despite the fact that they did not receive government approval.
Netanyahu’s Government, which is the most religious and nationalist in Israel’s recent history, boasted about establishing more than 100 new settlements. As the Israeli army moved into Qusra on Thursday, cabinet members celebrated the rebuilding a settlement which had been demolished in 2005 during the Gaza withdrawal.
The West Bank is viewed by Israel’s government, and a large part of its political elite as the historical and biblical homeland of Jews and the settlements are seen as crucial to maintaining security.
The majority of international communities views all settlements illegal, and as an obstruction to peace.
Separate laws apply to settlers and Palestinians
In the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority has limited autonomy over the population centers. The Israeli military controls the roughly 3,000,000 Palestinians. Israel operates its military in every part of the West Bank. Palestinians who are suspected of being militants can be detained without charges for many months, or even years.
Since the settlers are Israelis, law enforcement is usually handled by Israeli courts and police.
Israel Katz, the Defense Minister of Israel, said that in 2024 Israelis will no longer be held under administrative detention. This has been done against Israelis accused of violent acts. He announced on Friday that he plans to transfer the law enforcement of settlers completely to Israeli police.
In a press release, he stated that the military’s main role is to “fight Palestinian terrorism”. It also “focuses on protecting borders and settlements from threats.” Not chase boys up the hill.
This would cemented the current status of the West Bank’s largely separated legal systems between Jews and Palestinians, which, according to major human rights organizations, amounts apartheid. Israel, however, denies this.
Israel’s military and police have been reluctant in confronting the settlements
Itamar Gvir is the Minister of National Security in Israel. He’s a settler with a history of hardline views who was convicted 8 times, including for supporting terrorist organizations. Before entering politics, he was an attorney who defended Jewish extremists.
It says that the actions of the settlers in Qusra were “illegal and reprehensible” and it is trying to keep law and order on the West Bank. The Israeli military says that it has dismantled and arrested one Israeli in two outposts located near Qusra.
Rights groups claim that the military often ignores settler violence and, when they intervene, is focused on protecting the settlements. Yesh Din is an Israeli human rights organization that says 94% of all investigations on settler violence have not resulted in an arrest, and only 3% led to a full or partial conviction.
US pressure on Russia has been minimal and has weakened under Trump
After the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023 that sparked the Gaza war, the violence among settlers increased. In the following year, Biden’s administration introduced sanctions against settlers and Israeli groups accused of violent behavior.
Ben Gvir, and Bezalel Schmotrich, another Israeli cabinet minister who is a hardliner, have been sanctioned by other Western nations for “inciting extreme violence” against Palestinians.
As the settler communities rallied behind those targeted, sanctions were not effective.
Donald Trump, at the beginning of his second tenure, lifted the U.S. Sanctions and named Huckabee as his Ambassador. Huckabee is a strong supporter of Israeli Settlements.
In his first term as president, Trump changed decades of U.S. foreign policy when he moved the American Embassy from Washington to Jerusalem. He also supported Israel’s claim to territories captured in war.
Netanyahu’s critics condemn the violence, but they support settlement expansion
Netanyahu needs the support of Ben Gvir and Smotrich, as well as other supporters from settler groups, if he wants to remain in office after the October elections. Netanyahu will need to keep good relationships with Trump’s administration.
They have criticised what they call the chaos that is growing in the West Bank. Most Israeli politicians, including those who criticize Netanyahu’s policies, support settlement expansion and oppose Palestinian statehood.
Gadi Eidkot, the former chief general who is seen by many as Netanyahu’s biggest opponent, has criticized how the government handled the Qusra events, accusing them of undermining the military leaders “in face of violent and anarchic lawbreaking committed by an extreme minority.”
He has told Israeli media he “never spoke about a Palestinian State” and that he is in favor of settlements “that are in line with Israel’s interests.”
Naftali Bennet, another prominent rival to Netanyahu and a strong supporter of settlements, condemned the violence by calling it “terrorism”.
In a recent Israeli media interview, he stated that “Precisely because we believe in our rights to land and the settlement enterprise…we need to denounce and eliminate the violence within our ranks. We cannot wait until the Americans tell us what to do.”
During the brief time that Netanyahu was not in office during Bennett’s tenure as prime minister and his National Unity Government, thousands of new settler houses were approved by the government.
___
Contributors included Erin Cunningham, Jerusalem, and Koral Snan in Abu Snan.

This week, a Washington state court ordered Kalshi not to offer sports betting and other bets on the prediction market. King County Superior Court judge John McHale has issued a preliminarily injunction as a response to the lawsuit brought by Washington against Kalshi.
The order from Washington Attorney-General Nick Brown yesterday required Kalshi to cease offering, accepting or facilitating bets on sport, election, politics, entertainment and culture, technology, science or tech, as well as mentions of Washington. Kalshi is required to implement an IP and residence-based geofence on August 19, and a solution for multi-source geofencing by September 2; It does not cover all wagers on Kalshi but it covers a significant part of the business which has in recent years been driven more by sports bets.
The court’s order stated that Kalshi was not licensed or registered by Washington state Gambling Commission to do business. McHale determined that Kalshi’s ads that claim “it offers legal betting” in Washington State are likely to confuse a consumer into believing that gambling is allowed under Washington law.
Kalshi may face fines of up to $120,00 per day under the court’s order if they fail to implement the geofencing ordered by September 2nd. Kalshi won’t prevent users from leaving positions that they currently hold. “The State reserves and does not waiver the right to recover fees and losses suffered by Washington consumers after September 2nd 2026.
Kalshi says it does not have to comply with state laws
A plaintiff has to show that they will succeed in their claim. McHale determined that Washington will likely succeed in its claim that Kalshi broke state gambling laws and consumer protection laws.
The platform is called a “prediction market” and allows users to wager on a wide range of subjects, including sports, politics, entertainment, pop culture and public figures saying specific phrases or words (McHale’s article mentions ‘),”).
According to Washington law, the judge determined that Kalshi’s marketing and advertising illegal gambling activities constituted unfair or deceptive practices or acts in commerce.
Brown applauded the ruling and said that Kalshi “has gotten wealthy promoting bets on sporting events, elections, disasters, Iran War-related events, etc.” Kalshi will be prohibited from placing wagers in Washington on many of these topics.
Kalshi argues it does not have to comply with state laws as the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission has jurisdiction exclusively over prediction markets. Trump’s administration has made this argument repeatedly and sued the states who try to regulate these platforms. In state and federal courtrooms across the nation, states, US government and Kalshi are fighting it out in the battle.
In a statement sent to Ars, a Kalshi representative said that the CFTC has jurisdiction exclusively over our exchange. We respectfully disagree and we are considering our legal options.
A spokesperson for Kalshi said that the company has not offered any markets on fires, “because these create perverse incentives”, nor on war, death or terrorism.
Kalshi may get assistance from Trump administration
Kalshi has a legal option to ask the Trump Administration for assistance. This week, the CFTC declared a “market crisis” in New York to try and stop New York from enforcing gambling laws on Kalshi. After Kalshi requested it, the CFTC took action and told the company that they could continue to operate in New York.
Michael Selig, Chairman of the CFTC said that Congress did not intend to regulate derivatives exchanges under a patchwork state gaming law.
Different courts wrestle with what Congress meant. McHale determined that Washington State gambling laws are not affected by the US Commodity Exchange Act.
McHale noted that the US law grants exclusive jurisdiction to the CFTC over certain transactions made on DCMs, but “it does not contain preemption express language.” Judge McHale referred to the US law which states:
Except for the provisions above, nothing in this section (I) shall supersede, limit, or otherwise affect the jurisdiction conferred at any given time on the Securities and Exchange Commission, other regulatory agencies, or any other authorities by the United States laws or any State laws, (II), or restrict, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other such authorities, from performing their duties and responsibilities according to such laws. This section does not supersede, limit or otherwise affect the jurisdiction of courts in the United States and any state.
McHale wrote: “The above language indicates that Congress didn’t intend to limit or supersede the authority of states in regards to gambling regulation or supersede any state court in relation thereto.”

Does the West still have influence five years after the Taliban took power?
A dozen women are busy in the whitewashed cellar of a village located south of Kabul. They stir cauldrons filled with bubbling plums and cherries, while also sticking labels to glass jam jars. This is one of few places where Afghan women can still gain employment and skills under Taliban rule.
Najia is the 47-year old Afghan mother and entrepreneur who married when she was 14.
Many of these women, Naija’s daughters included, could have studied for an entirely different future if the authorities had not barred young girls from attending secondary and university schools.
Even this has been squeezed. According to recent rules, women must ask men to bring their goods to the market and men are only allowed to sit in their trade show stalls. Taliban cites various reasons, such as women not wearing the proper headwear or hijab.
Najia says, “the world needs to speak to the Taliban differently because this is not working.” The lives of Afghan woman must change, because we are losing hope.
After five years, this extremist Islamist group has imposed a ban on women in the public realm and for girls over 12 they are forbidden to attend school. Inside and outside Afghanistan, many people are wondering the same thing: how can we engage with the Taliban in order to bring about meaningful change?
This issue has a deep divisive effect. Many groups are divided over a wide range of issues. Women’s rights are among them, as well as unpredictable Taliban decrees, sanctions, and cuts to aid during an escalating humanitarian crisis. International response is divided between Western countries, which are often more focused on the human rights issue, and other nations who care about investment opportunities. The West is split on how to respond.
Most people now admit that their efforts are not effective.
Engagement, not isolation
There are few voices that call for complete isolation. The United Nations has warned 22 million Afghans, nearly half of the country’s population, rely on foreign aid to survive.
Multiple shocks have hit the country: an economic catastrophe, devastating natural disasters, clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan and millions of Afghans who were deported to this poor land from other countries.
There’s no way around it: the Taliban now rule.
Since their fighters invaded Kabul in 2021 on the 15th of August, they have grown more confident and established control, despite attacks from armed groups abroad as well as Islamic State.
Taliban collect tax revenue and sign deals with Beijing, Moscow and Abu Dhabi as well as Tashkent and other neighbors in the mining and energy sectors.
They’re still suffocated by the international sanctions related to human rights and terrorism. Russia has been the only nation to recognise the rule of the Assads, but they’re still being strangled by international sanctions linked to human rights and terrorism.
The focus is now on the informal recognition of diplomatic relations.
The West has lost the debate over recognition, says an ex-UN official. He requested anonymity as he continues to work in Afghanistan. The growing number of nations that have granted de facto acceptance by signing deals, accrediting diplomatic staff, running embassies and other means is cited.
They say that “there’s no question the Taliban would love to be recognized at the UN, but this is no longer a powerful bargaining tool as it used to be at the start.”
Taliban diplomats continue to add names and flags, behind the towering blast walls, of the Foreign Ministry in Kabul. In the expansive compound with manicured lawns, and elegant historic buildings. They are no longer the last holdouts from the former government. The number of embassies under Taliban control is now more than forty.
Zabihullah Mojahid, main Taliban spokesperson says: “We must come closer to each other diplomatically and stop talking at a distance.
Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan is the true seat of power. Hibatullah Achundzada is the Taliban’s reclusive, reclusive, emir. He has steadily built his political, military, and social base in Kandahar.
The five-year anniversary is seen by many as a turning point.
A senior UN official described the current situation in a closed-door speech at an international meeting as “an unstable and potentially hazardous equilibrium”.
Afghanistan is a country that has been largely ignored by the rest of the world. The wars in Ukraine and Middle East occupy the international spotlight, while Europe is concerned about how to prevent so many Afghans from fleeing their shores. This is a shocking reversal.
A Western diplomat, who served recently as an ambassador to Afghanistan, said: “It is extraordinary that Afghanistan has been ignored given the size of the Western effort between 2001-2021.” The diplomats did not wish to be identified because they are still working in diplomatic service.
The US is responsible for the real diplomatic gap, they said, referring to the decision of the US government to abolish the position of special envoy and to dismantle several agencies including the US Agency for International Development, which was once the global leader in almost all Afghan issues.
There is frustration even within the ranks of the Taliban, particularly among those who disagree with the most strict edicts of their emir. The world does not seem to be willing to or capable of forging a new kind of relationship.
Mullah Ab Salam Zaeef is a Taliban founding member who runs a madrasa on the edge of Kabul for girls and boys. Madrasas accept girls of any age, and many, particularly those that are privately run, teach more than just religious lessons.
He tells us that “just putting pressure on won’t do.” He looks at the history of Afghanistan in resisting foreign invasions. Why would the Taliban give up now? We didn’t submit to Russians or Americans.
Open dialogue
UN officials are convinced that their presence, even if it is limited, makes a positive difference in Afghanistan. The UN officials cite progress in areas such as treatment of prisoners and their discussions about the strict implementation of the Morality Code known as Propagation Of Virtue And Prevention Of Vice as well as improvements to humanitarian access.
The UN sums up the five-year dialogue in a sober manner: “Dialogue is intermittent, engagement is slow and progress is small. Reversals occur frequently.”
It insists on staying the course.
Georgette Gagnon is the current acting director of the UN Mission in Kabul. She is a former deputy special representative for Afghanistan and is currently the head of that mission.
UN critics have accused it of not doing enough to fight the Taliban. This includes holding forums like the so-called Doha Process in which, in 2024, a Taliban delegation travelled to Qatar’s capital to discuss various issues on the condition that Afghan women were excluded from the discussion. UN officials claim that all topics were covered and subsequent meetings involved their participation.
Mosaic is a new approach to negotiations that takes a structured format and focuses on six key issues. Human rights are on one side, including the rights of women, inclusive governance and counterterrorism. The Taliban demand sanctions relief, the unfreezing of assets and diplomatic representation.
Gagnon, who we met inside of the UN compound’s massive fortified complex, says that “confidence and reciprocity have begun to shape up to open engagement in the most challenging issues.” She called them “small step on the long journey”.
She says it must be done by a group effort and not just through individual government discussions. “Pressure and threats haven’t worked yet; we need to be consistent in our messaging and actions.”
Some sceptics even within the UN are concerned that the Mosaic Approach will not work.
It is essential to keep the lights on and prevent a slip into isolation.
Talk quietly
The conversations are ongoing in dusty province capitals, farmer’s fields and international aid agencies who struggle to find ways of working on the ground.
There, the edicts of the reclusive Emir are translated to what is known as a workaround. Workarounds allow women to be able to do their jobs in certain agency sectors at home or on different floors or rooms.
Chris Kinder, chairman of Afghanaid, an English charity that has worked in Afghanistan since more than forty years, says, “In Afghanistan, everything is about relationships. And day to day, this can make things easier.” He emphasizes that the majority of conversations about access and implementation is conducted by Afghan staff with experience.
In recent years, my own trips to province cities and towns have shown me how local Taliban officials are trying to come up with pragmatic solutions. Others, however, remain suspicious of foreign aid.
Another charity described local agreements as being “verbal” and “fragile”.
Kinder has rejected criticisms that agencies providing aid have been forced to compromise their principles in order to maintain projects.
The Taliban has their own red line and so do we and our donors. “We discuss the approaches to make sure both sides are aware of where each other is coming from.”
Many aid officials also call for more unity in this area.
Speak up!
Najia, the jam-maker believes that we should continue to talk but set some conditions. Women activists and human rights organizations in the diaspora also hold this view. They say that dialogue is a one way street with no significant change from the Taliban.
The discussion must not include aid until the issue is resolved.
Recent flashpoints include the EU’s decision in June to invite a Taliban delegation to Brussels, the first since the Taliban regained power. This one-day event brought together representatives from 15 EU member states to discuss the processes for sending back Afghan citizens who did not have a legal right to stay in Europe.
They were called “technical level” discussions by the EU. Taliban viewed them in a different way. The agenda included a possible consular presence on European soil and “the need for trust-building”.
The diplomatic community knows that technical issues are discussed through existing channels with the Taliban, says Rina Amiri, a former American diplomat of Afghan descent who was the US Special Envoy for Afghan Women, Girls and Human Rights from 2022-2025. She also struggled to determine the conditions under which she would meet with the Taliban.
She says, “Meeting at Brussels was a clear decision that had more to do with politics than logistics.”
Critics call this “creeping standardisation”.
Does it Work?
What can I show for the five years that I’ve spent in Afghanistan? Mahbouba, an Afghan activist and shelter manager, asks us this question when we meet her in Kabul. Seraj was in the news when, in 2021 after Taliban control took place, she declared that she would remain in Afghanistan to fight for women’s rights.
In December, her last shelter was closed, providing a refuge to more than 30 Afghani women who fled domestic violence. She has repeatedly appealed to Taliban leaders for them to open classrooms again to women and girls.
She laments, with a visible sense of sadness, that “these small windows, these little openings and secret schools, including the ones for girls are only meant to trick everyone.”
A former Afghan official involved in confidential discussions with Taliban officials says that only more effective diplomacy can bring about change. He hopes that whoever becomes the next UN Secretary General at the beginning of the year, will be more effective in their engagement.
It’s the local community that is driving the change, not the international one.
The answer, says an analyst from the West who has been working in Afghanistan for many years and asked to remain anonymous. Five years later, it is clear that the only way to bring about real change in Afghanistan is from within.
Some of the Taliban’s senior officials speak out against the harshest orders from the emir, such as the closing girls’ schools. There have been rare cases when they were able find ways to reverse his directives. Last year, the nation-wide Internet shutdown paralysed everyday life. It was then reversed.
Edicts of the emir are considered absolute. It has been shown that the movement values power and unity above everything else. The emir’s enforcers have not bowed to the pleas of Islamic scholars or officials from Islamic countries around the globe, even when it comes to the issue that is most important: education.
There are still no easy or quick solutions.
Najia has a jam-making workshop where a wall is covered with framed certificates of training from various Afghan institutions and the defunct USAID. This table attests her determination to be a better businesswoman in spite of the increasing restrictions.
A new society is taking shape year by year. Many Afghans continue to pray and push for a better future, and they hope that the world will not forget them.
Getty Images
BBC InDepth, the app and website for deep analysis and fresh perspectives on today’s most pressing issues. Emma Barnett and John Simpson present their selection of deep readings and analyses every Saturday. Subscribe to the newsletter by clicking here

Don’t trash Count Binface just because he lost the Nigel Farage by-election. His popularity is still intact. Candidate wearing a trash can on top of his head won more than a quarter in the contest against Nigel Farage, one of Britain’s most well-known politicians.
In a bizarre campaign that was sparked by Farage’s resignation, the long-time satirical contender had one of his strongest performances yet.
Binface’s message is simple: “I am here to remove the garbage.” Binface’s name may be confusing to some Americans, as in the U.K. a garbage can is known as a bin.
Binface, a mainstay in British politics for many years, has appeared on ballots at several election over the last few years.
Binface is the latest in a line of funny political candidates who have run for office in U.K. Screaming Lady Sutch is the founder of the Official Monster Raving Loony Party and he holds the record as the musician who has run in the most number of parliamentary elections. He won 39 from 1960 to 1990.
Binface, dressed in the attire of an earlier novelty candidate, ran against Theresa May, then Prime Minister of Great Britain. He then adopted the name Count Binface and competed against Boris Johnson, Andy Burnham, and other U.K. politicians.
He lost every race and got very few votes. It is the first occasion he has crossed the 5% mark, which earns him his deposit of 500 pounds (roughly $677).
Binface’s defeat means he will be unable to carry out his radical and, as some would say, sweeping electoral platform, including nationalizing Adele and raising your taxes, while lowering those of others, and constructing “at least one affordable home.”
Farage, the leader of the Reform U.K. Party, won 63%.
Binface did not win 9455 votes this time around, but he still received 27% of the vote. In his bid to challenge Burnham, he only received 95 votes.
The election on Thursday was somewhat of a farce, so perhaps the satirical candidates was the ideal foil for Farage. Farage, an ally of Trump, who led the far-right populist movement that has swept the U.K. in recent years, resigned as a member of parliament in July to force the special elections.
Farage announced his resignation by saying, “I have decided to let the citizens of Clacton be my judges.”
He said that this would be “a by-election between the people and the establishment.” It was “a chance for us to show the whole establishment where they should go and to tell them the truth.”
At the time, it was considered a risky political move to renew Binface’s mandate as voters were under increasing pressure due to a scandal involving his failure to declare financial gifts. Binface became more credible when all legitimate parties boycotted elections.
Farage is now a real threat to Burnham at the next elections. These elections have to be held by 2029 but the prime minister may call them earlier. Burnham, a member of the Labour Party, was selected to succeed Keir starmer, who resigned as Prime Minister after losing support from many in his own party.
A Count Binface in a resurgent state would be a great candidate for 2029.

LONDON, England (AP) – Nigel Farage defeated the comic candidate Count Binface in a special election to regain his seat at Parliament. He had quit the position a month earlier to start the much mocked Special Election.
Farage, the leader of Reform UK, a party that opposes immigration and is seen by some as a potential next Prime Minister, abruptly resigned his seat at the end of July after an investigation was launched into whether or not he had failed to declare a gift worth 6 million pounds ($6.7 million), given from a crypto-billionaire in another country.
In order to show that he was popular, he ran for an open seat. He won with 63% on Thursday. Binface finished second and won 27% of the vote, according to Friday’s results. On the hottest summer day so far this year, 44% of voters turned out for the election.
Binface is a candidate that has been a challenger to prime ministers in the past. He became the default opponent after major parties boycotted Farage’s campaign.
Farage called the results an “overwhelming victory” after he received 1,000 votes more than when he was first elected in 2014 with 46%. The turnout in the general elections of 2024 was almost 60%, and Farage faced an even more strong field of candidates.
Farage stated that “today, the voters of Clacton gave the two-finger salute to all the political establishment” referring to a British version of the crude gesture used in other cultures.
Farage’s victory in the East Coast of England constituency showed how strong his support was, but that doesn’t mean he will be able keep his seat. The investigation of a parliament watchdog, which was suspended after he left office, is expected to be resumed and Farage could face another election.
The vote is not counted by Farage
Farage announced his victory early in the morning, and he did not go to the official announcement where he was expected to be present with the other candidates who were running joke campaigns.
Farage said to supporters during a celebration of his victory: “I will not stand up on stage after a resounding win… only to be humiliated or denigrated by nobody.”
Farage claimed he did not attend the event because police had warned him of an “organized campaign” to degrade and disrupt it. A Reform spokesperson said that there was a credible threats against him. However, police denied this.
Binface celebrated his highest-ever results. He ran with a bizarre platform, including a promise to “cut taxes for you and increase them for everyone else,” and build a home that was affordable and nationalize Adele. This was an enormous increase in votes from his 95 vote victory in the special election held two months earlier against Andy Burnham.
He quipped: “So, against Nigel Farage and Andy Burnham I am 1,000-fold more popular.” Does that explain why he’s not here tonight?
Farage is still under investigation for undeclared donations
Bridget Phillipson, Labour Party Chairwoman said that the elections were not a victory for Farage. He needs to be honest about his finances and relationships with fraudsters.
Phillipson stated that “the mountain of scandal and sleaze he, and Reform have now become engulfed with has grown as he tried to distract the people by running a by election against a trash bin.” The by-election that Farage used to distract the public from his scandals does not clear up his name. It only shows how much more he has hidden.
The Parliamentary Standards Watchdog has opened an investigation into a donation made to Farage by Christopher Harborne in 2024, a cryptocurrency billionaire from Thailand. Farage claims he did not need to declare money given to him by Christopher Harborne, a cryptocurrency billionaire based in Thailand. The gift was used for his personal security before Farage was elected.
Newly elected legislators must report gifts exceeding 300 pounds ($400), if the gift is related to their political activity.
He described his resignation on 7 July as a “hit job by the establishment” and an “media-driven witch-hunt”.
Farage is also under investigation for his relationship with George Cottrell. Cottrell was an aristocratic cryptocurrency-gambling entrepreneur, who spent eight months in prison for fraud back in the U.S. a decade earlier after offering money laundering for agents pretending to be drug traffickers.
Cottrell is still close with Farage, and he has given him cash for staff and security.
Farage was one of the major players in convincing Britain to leave Europe a decade earlier. His poll numbers are still high, but they have dropped over recent months as his finances were scrutinized.
Binface was the frontrunner amongst several comedy contenders
Farage’s gamble to quit and run again backfired after other parties refused. He was then left with a large field of small and independent party candidates including novelty acts like Howling Laud Hope from The Official Monster Raving Loony Party or Marcus White of the Everyone is God Party.
Binface, already an established joke at British elections, gained the most attention for his political satire and portrayal as a planet Sigma IX space alien.
The 500 pounds ($675) deposit that candidates must pay in order to run is refunded if he wins at least 5%.
Jon Harvey is Binface, the alter ego of Jon Harvey. He wears a black cape and trash can helmet, as well as ample body armor, straight from a low budget sci-fi movie. Jon Harvey has been trying to stay cool in the heat of summer for most of this campaign.
His repeated bids for the presidency were meant to promote the British democracy, which has been around since the 1800s. Even the highest-profile politicians in Britain are not above anyone — even someone from outerspace.