-Caveat Lector- Right wing conspiracy theories--- Stranger things have happened Is there more to the London nail bomb attacks than meets the eye ask Nick Griffin? Spearhead - June 1999 Editor's note: We think it probable that the London bombs were timed to coincide with our European election campaign - whoever carried out the attacks. If they were not so timed, these atrocities were very convenient as a basis for yet another smear campaign against the BNP - hence our interest in the matter. It appears to be common knowledge among journalists that the man charged with the bomb attacks was not a loner, but a member of the political wing of the state-controlled or infiltrated C18 at the time of the bombings - and a group with nothing to do with ourselves. Only poor Joe Public does not know. If the media say they cannot reveal such political background details because of the forthcoming trial, then how could the The Mirror reveal that the arrested man attended a meeting of the BNP in 1997 - before disappearing? The legal answer is that matters of broad public interest can be discussed in good faith in advance of a trial, and are legally protected. The above issues are very much a matter of public interest, and their discussion in no way reflects any view or is intended to reflect any view about the guilt or innocence of the arrested person. IN BRIEF: WE ACCUSE! It is clear that the London nail-bombing suspect was involved in a state-sponsored 'pseudo-gang', and will have distributed material with the connivance or tacit approval of the security service. In any event, the security services may have hoped that the bombs would create a wave of media-led public hysteria which would a) derail the largest electoral effort by a British nationalist organisation in 20 years; b) allow the introduction of the kind of repressive laws proposed by the Macpherson Report, and c) provide a pressing reason for a huge increase in state funding for MI5 which would safeguard jobs threatened by the end of the Cold War and the possibility of relative peace in Northern Ireland. THROUGHOUT much of April, the BNP's national press officer, Michael Newland, and the party's Media Monitoring Unit, headed by Phil Edwards, had to fight an uphill battle against an avalanche of media smears and innuendo resulting from the alleged 'neo-nazi' bombing campaign in London. Prompt and hard-hitting submissions to newspaper after newspaper clearly took effect, with editors quickly learning to avoid trying to make the grotesque direct links between the party and the cowardly outrages. The party's PR team did even better on national radio, where there is no doubt that the BNP actually won the argument, with official party spokesmen and sympathetic members of the public dominating the main 'phone-in and current affairs programmes. Television, of course, is a much harder nut to crack, but even here a string of BNP complaints forced a toning down of some of the wild speculation of the first days of the crisis. Flying colours All-in-all, the party's media response machine came through its baptism of fire with flying colours, with references to the Media Monitoring Unit in heavyweight liberal-left publications such as The Guardian and Tribune magazine showing that its effectiveness is being noted in all the right circles. And then, just as quickly as the story blew up, it died away completely with the arrest of the alleged 'lone bomber' David Copeland. In fact, the story vanished so thoroughly, and the police were so eager to stress the bomber's complete lack of connection with any 'extreme right-wing group,' that experienced observers of the dirty tricks operations of those responsible for the multiracial 'experiment' are increasingly sceptical about the whole business. Demonisation Research at St. Catherine's House has shown, to the author's satisfaction, that Copeland is not Jewish, and that the claims by the fascist fundamentalist International Third Position that he is are based on a mixture of paranoia and perverse wishful thinking. Whoever carried out the bombings, if the BNP s policy of capital punishment for terrorism were in place, he or they would, if guilty, hang for the crimes. This would still have to be the case even if those responsible were in fact alienated victims of a multi-racial education system which even left-wing experts are now beginning to acknowledge shuts out and marginalises white children -- a product of `anti-racism', not of `racism'. On account of what was reported in all the media as a firm police statement that Copeland had no connections with any political group, the BNP assumed at first that we had never had any contact with him. Then, on 25th May -- just in time to try to revive the media hysteria before the European election -- the Daily Mirror ran a front page story claiming that Copeland had attended several BNP meetings in 1997. Since the individual's face was blacked out in the photos reproduced in the paper, it is impossible to tell whether he is in fact the same individual who appeared in the CCTV footage from Brixton, which remains the only picture of the alleged bomber. But a David Copeland was briefly involved with the party in East London in 1997. He made no particular impression on people who met him, and certainly never talked about anything connected with bombs. After attending a couple of meetings, he said that he was moving to Russia on a work contract, and vanished as quickly as he had appeared. If we are talking about the same man, of course, his alleged crimes have nothing at all to do with the BNP, which is committed to reversing the failed multi-racial experiment through peaceful political action and persuasion, and which rejects the use of force and violence. The British National Party is a public organisation which can be joined by anyone of British or kindred European descent, and we have neither the inclination nor the resources to enquire as to the motivation and non-political activities of new members, in the absence of anything known against them which would require their exclusion. Anyone who approached the BNP and suggested anything such as planting bombs,would be regarded as either a Searchlight plant like Tim Hepple or a state asset like Charlie Sargent, the founder of the state-sponsored 'pseudo-gang', Combat 18. Either way he would be expelled and, if we thought he was serious, reported to the police. But the Copeland who flitted briefly through the BNP in 1997 did nothing of the sort. . Disappeared What is known, however, is that, soon afterwards he disappeared from BNP circles after witnessing a cowardly attack by some forty members of the so-called Anti-'Nazi' League (in reality a front for the extreme left-wing Socialist Workers Party) on John Tyndall and his wife. This incident led to the cancellation of the meeting, and was seized upon by C18 propagandists as the opportunity for renewed attacks on the BNP for having 'gone soft' by favouring constructive political work over street confrontations with the far left. . Some time afterwards, David Copeland became a member of the so-called National Socialist Movement (NSM). This collection of sad Nutzi cranks was fanatically hostile to the BNP. It was the political front group for the wing of Combat 18 'loyal' to the acknowledged police informer Charlie Sargent. The NSM was founded in 1997 by Sargent's brother, Steve It described itself quite openly as "the political wing of Combat 18." It produced a cheap monthly broadsheet and a expensive, glossy magazine, Column 88, packed with racial hatred, calls for violence against immigrants, and smears and threats against the British National Party in general, and me in particular (I received several threatening phone calls from Charlie Sargent and from unknown C18 callers in which I was told that they would 'blade' me if I went anywhere near East or South London. This unpleasant organisation's weird and violence-filled propaganda followed a line established by an 'asset' of the British security services. Our enemies from the start It has been known for some years that MI5 encouraged or even ordered the setting up of C18 in order to disrupt and discredit the BNP after its historic electoral success in Millwall in 1993. Contrary to numerous press reports, its leaders were never members of the British National Party. They had been members of the neo-nazi British Movement some years before, but had been expelled from that organisation amid allegations of their being police informers and agents provocateurs. The group was allowed to get away with publishing repeated calls for political terrorism and race war, not to mention detailed instructions for making bombs. This was not a 'one-off', but went on for literally years. The Observer confirmed the fact that Combat 18 was a state-sponsored 'honeytrap' right from the start (5/4/99), although it stated that its main purpose was to collect intelligence on Ulster loyalists. This may have been a factor, but it is not likely to have been the security service's main aim, since the loyalists have always regarded mainland extremists with a great deal of suspicion and, while happy to use them for the occasional errand, would never entrust then with any worthwhile secrets. At the end of the day, if you want intelligence on Ulster loyalists you collect it in East Belfast, not Essex! However, it obviously didn't fit in with the paper's own politics to state the main reason for the creation of the Combat 18 pseudo-gang: to disrupt the BNP, through lies, intimidation and physical violence against key officials; tricks which did indeed have a serious effect on the party's operations, particularly in East London, for two or three years. C18 itself has been effectively defunct since its founder was jailed for the murder of a former comrade last year. But the NSM continued until the start of May this year, when its nominal leader disbanded it when he heard of Copeland's arrest, because the 22-year-old engineer was a member! But didn't the police categorically rule out the idea that Copeland was linked in any way to any 'far-right' group? Certainly that's what the media thought they'd been told at the big press conference called after his arrest. But take a closer look at what was actually said by Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner David Veness:- "There is no suggestion at this stage that the arrest is linked in any way to the extreme right-wing groups which have claimed responsibility for these attacks. The man is not a member of any of the groups which made claims of responsibility, nor did he make any of the claims using their names. It is understood that he was working alone for his own motives." There is, of course, some truth in this statement. Copeland was not, as far as anyone knows, a member of the possibly non-existent White Wolves, nor of the now organisationally defunct Combat 18. But he was a member of the National Socialist Movement, which, in addition to its close MI5 links, is notorious for being riddled with police informers. In fact, this is to understate the case, for Copeland wasn't even just an ordinary member of the NSM, he was the Hampshire Organiser! This fact is common knowledge all along a gossip grapevine which straddles wide differences in organisations, strategies, rivalries and outright hostilities. And since C18/NSM (the two are completely interchangeable) are both riddled with security service 'assets', it beggars belief that the intelligence service didn't know of Copeland's organisational involvement the moment he came to their attention as a bombing suspect. So why did Assistant Commissioner Veness make such a misleading statement, which led to the entire media reaching completely the wrong conclusion, and trumpeting the claim that the arrested man had "no connections with any extreme right-wing group"? Either because of grotesque police incompetence, or because he was hoping thereby to conceal the fact that the arrested man had been part of an organisation with its roots, not in British nationalism, but in the massive South Bank headquarters of MI5, the nerve-centre of Britain's political secret police. This should not surprise anyone. The way in which the FBI provoked the infamous Oklahoma bombing in order to discredit and disrupt the patriotic opposition to Bill Clinton shows how far the intelligence operatives of a supposedly civilised Western government will go to keep their corrupt masters in power. The question marks which hang over the Oklahoma atrocity are well known: Who planted the second bomb, inside the building, which caused so much of the devastation blamed on the truck bomb supposedly left outside by McVeigh? And why did none of the agents of the BATF show up for work on that day, leaving ordinary civilian secretaries and a creche full of children to provide a shocking casualty list? Strange but true At first sight, there are no such mysteries about the three bombs in London, but more careful consideration shows that, as a matter of fact, there was something strange about each and every one of them. The first bomb, in Brixton, the now increasingly yuppified traditional heart of black London, caused the horrific injuries it did because it exploded in a crowded market. Yet, according to early reports immediately after the blast, it was not planted there in the first place. The police stated that it had been moved, twice according to some accounts, from the place where it had first been left. The suggestion was that the sportsbag containing the device had been stolen, then abandoned once the thief realised what was in it. The second bomb, in the equally symbolic Banglatown centre of East London's Bengali community, was also apparently moved just before it went off. Once again, early reports mentioned a fact which was later allowed to slip from public view. We were told that a heroic member of the public spotted the bomb and placed it in the boot of his car in order to contain the blast and minimise the damage. Initially, it was said that he had been driving it to the police station when it went off, until photos of the wreckage made it clear that anyone doing so would have been killed. So the story changed: We were then told that this man of 'Mediterranean appearance' threw the bomb in his boot and ran away. Although he was acclaimed as a hero, police were withholding his name lest he become a target for the bombers, angry that his bravery had thwarted their planned massacre. Logically, therefore, as soon as an arrest was made, the Man of the Moment should have been the centre of attention. Smiles all round. Clicking cameras. A humanitarian award and a new car. Tea and handshakes at Number Ten (it would have made a nice change to see Tony Blair entertaining someone who had stopped a murderous bomb, rather than people with long track records of planting them). But no! For some unexplained reason, the man who sacrificed his car to save Brick Lane joined the Brixton bag thief in the memory hole. . No excuse Then there was the Soho blast. The common TV footage of 'gay' demonstrators flaunting their habits in front of the world's journalists showed just why so many ordinary people find these people so repulsive; but that cannot, of course, justify or excuse the bomb and the carnage it caused. Once again, though, there is a hint that the explosion only caused the casualties it did by mistake. For it turned out that the pub in question had actually been visited just the evening before by police officers warning staff and customers to be on the alert for suspicious packages Yet, according to spokesmen at Scotland Yard press conferences, the police were supposed to be on the alert for attacks by a cell of racist fanatics whose intention was to incite retaliation by immigrant communities and to spark a race war. Although the members of these media-hyped pseudo-gangs generally loathe homosexuals, the 'White Wolves' manual which was said to be their guidebook called for attacks exclusively on non-white immigrants. Was it really likely that such a group of racist fanatics would waste their energies and explosives attacking overwhelmingly white homosexuals? Hardly, so why did the police waste their time visiting Soho instead of patrolling the vast areas of London which contain large enough immigrant communities to have been far more likely targets? And there's more. According to a report in the militantly homosexual Pink Paper of 7th May (and no, I didn't buy it; it was removed from a library by a public-spirited supporter of ours and sent in), the Metropolitan Police didn't believe that homosexuals were likely to become targets:- "Duncan Lustig-Prean, a former Royal Navy Commander and leading member of gays-in-the-military group Rank Outsiders, told Pink Paper: 'MI5 sources informed me three days before the explosion that their intelligence was far more pessimistic over the gay angle than the Metropolitan Police position.... the Met, however, were convinced that the bomber would target another ethnic target first." So did MI5 have information on the bomber's likely targets which Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist experts did not? The same publication also reveals a curious fact about the warning which the mainstream media told us was given to London homosexual haunts before the Soho bomb:- "Last week Pink Paper warned gay communities to be particularly vigilant following the two earlier nail bomb attacks in Brixton and Brick Lane. The Metropolitan Police then visited gay venues in Old Compton Street -- including the Admiral Duncan -- after early editions of the newspaper hit the streets of London on Thursday. "But the proprietors of other gay venues in London have expressed alarm that they were not contacted by the police. The manager of Brief Encounter, a frequently packed basement bar half a mile from the Admiral Duncan, is Paul Williams. He told Pink Paper: 'This bar would be the perfect target for a bomber, but we received nothing from the police before this tragic incident.' Barry Barham of the Coleherne, the oldest and largest leather bar in the capital, situated in Earl's Court, West London, said: 'We didn't receive a word from the police in advance of the bomb, but they've been around three or four times a day since then.' "And Jason Dickie of the popular South London venue Vauxhall Tavern complained: 'We received nothing at all. The police should have taken far more precautions over us as a potential risk. I'm very disappointed.'" Lustig-Pren, by the way, sits on the Metropolitan Police Racial and Violent Crime Task Force Advisory set up recently to 'educate' the police force about 'hate crimes'. On May 13th, Guardian hack Matthew Malthouse posted a message to the uk.gay-lesbian-bi-newsgroup, which was a reprint of one posted to a private homosexual e-mail list by Lustig-Prean. This says that the police gave the group a full briefing and that "the information was very frank and was sub judice." Lustig-Prean continued: "...the police remain - fairly - certain that the bomber was not operating in conjuction with any group, but they are investigating a number of issues in this regard." As well they might, but how on earth do they even have the nerve to pretend that they don't know about the NSM connection? Lustig-Prean goes on to say, however, that he, Gerry Gable and others disagree: "In our view PIECES OF SENSITIVE EVIDENCE (our emphasis) paint a fairly typical picture of someone operating as part of a far right cell." He concludes that they therefore think that possible targets should continue to take precautions, then makes a final cryptic request: "... forgive me if that is about as forthcoming as I can be given the nature of the evidence we are considering." At a guess, a twisted tissue of lies from senior intelligence desperate to conceal something. So police officers supposed to be giving a genuine warning to homosexual pubs in London don't so much as show their faces in the most blatant 'gay bars' in notorious Earl's Court, or indeed at other well-known venues right across the capital, but just happen to concentrate their advance warnings in the very street, in fact the very pub, where the bomb was actually planted 24 hours later. Am I the only person to think that something in this picture doesn't quite fit? Black propaganda? So what am I suggesting? Was the whole 'nazi terror campaign' in fact a politically motivated propaganda exercise that went wrong by accident? The scenario would then look like this:- Having frightened the life out of three very vocal minorities, it would only have taken a similar high impact/low casualty outrage directed against a Jewish target to have finished creating the political climate in which to introduce the draconian new restrictions on free speech proposed by the Macpherson Report, plus a further tightening of the screws against legal and wholly innocent organisations such as the BNP, found 'guilty 'by false media association. . . The same witch-hunt atmosphere would also have given the enemies of free speech the ideal opportunity to try to do something to clamp down on the new medium which is causing the liberal-totalitarians endless sleepless nights, the Internet. If this thesis is correct, who could have been responsible? Well, throughout the Cold War both Soviet Bloc security services and the CIA were implicated in just such devastating dirty tricks campaigns in countries in Western Europe. Given that America's main foreign policy aim these days is to prevent racial nationalism unravelling its New World Order magic carpet before it even gets airborne, it is not to difficult to see one group of spooks with a reason to export their methods. Mixed-up young loners who flit around the fringes of nationalist organisations are their favourite cannon-fodder. . Disruptive Curiously, Charlie Sargent received a great deal of help -- including use of an American PO Box as a 'safe' mailing address -- when he first set up Combat 18 from one Harold Covington, a self-proclaimed American `nazi' whose disruptive activities and off-the-wall extremism have long led most American nationalist activists to regard him as an FBI agent. Covington is believed to have spent several months in Britain at this time. Finally, we return to our own security services, with their long record of state-sponsored or licensed terrorism in Northern Ireland, and, as already pointed out, their proven involvement in the setting up of the racial-terrorist Combat 18 pseudo-gang. So we have three sets of people, all with close links with the ordinary police force, who stood to gain from the London bombing campaign. And we have a number of unanswered questions about the blasts themselves, all of which point to the strong possibility that the real responsibility for the mayhem and murder of the London nail bombs rests at least partly with Britain's own political police, MI5. The facts may just be coincidences; but the circumstantial evidence which suggests that there's more to all this than meets the eye is surely enough to attract the attention of some of Britain's fearless investigative reporters? Step forward Duncan Campbell. Step forward World in Action. Step forward Time Out. Step forward Nick Ryan. Step forward Larry O'Hara. The rest of you, don't hold your breath! DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
