| Hateland -
Articles |
??/??/??
- Stranger things have happened
British National Party
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 othnot 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 po
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!
|
| Contact : bernard.omahoney@bernardomahoney.com |
|
|
|
