Published On: Sat, Mar 3rd, 2018

False flag terror bears fruit: the fantasy “far-right” decoy & the real target for British ire

After a flurry of activity in which various members of the proscribed “terror” group, National Action, have appeared in court or been newly arrested, the counter weight in what is quite clearly a Hegelian system to create a synthesised outcome according to Government agenda, Hope Not Hate, has released its annual report in which it warns of the desire of “far-right” groups to fight a “civil war” with British Muslims. Once again citing the false flags that were the Jo Cox incident and the Finsbury Park Mosque attack as evidence of a trend, the Independent hosted what was purported to be the results of research – although it could quite easily have been the opinion of Nick Lowles, chief executive of Hope Not Hate, who was described as saying

With the combination of “civil war” rhetoric and growing online hatred, “we must be prepared for more terrorist plots and use of extreme violence from the far-right for the foreseeable future”.

“There is a huge spectrum of people but they all believe in this coming conflict”.

Lowles doesn’t acknowledge it, but the “huge spectrum of people” is actually a good deal of decent British people who are concerned about the impact of immigration on their power of self-determination, not to mention the welfare state that they pay for. They are people who voted to Leave in the EU Referendum to gain control of borders to be able to implement workable and beneficial immigration. These people, however, are predictably characterised as being “far-right”, which is then identified with anti-Semitic and Islamophobic white supremacy.

It is of course rhetoric that is constructed on years of insistence by Luciferians (call them Marxists, Globalists, Communists, Socialists, it all boils down to the same thing) that racially-based totalitarianism is the polar opposite of their position – even as they decry white supremacist groups who describe themselves as anti-capitalists and national socialists. To indulge for a moment in the fake left-right paradigm, racially-based totalitarianism is in fact a core characteristic of the “left”. “Far-right” is anarchy, which the UK has never experienced, only ever coming anywhere remotely near it in the 18th century. It means each man is free to live by his own devices, whatever the colour of his skin or his religion. In such a system, immigration would only be possible for those who could sustain themselves; it wouldn’t be an issue. Libertarians should loathe immigration into a welfare state, because it affects changes on the lives of people who didn’t ask for it, and who are obliged to financially support it. Freedoms are impinged upon. And so “far-right” principle actually resolves itself into a meritocracy, and has nothing to do with the Statism associated with the Nazism that it is likened to; see how badly it is misrepresented by the Luciferian liars.

Lowles’ maligning pre-crime accusation against huge numbers of people is presented as being justified by Hope Not Hate research that depicts them as haters of Islam, and thus a potential new breed of terrorist looking to fix a problem for themselves:

With increasingly negative views towards British Muslims – and Islam more generally – there is a growing pool of possible recruits for the far right and, with some now having huge social media platforms, they now have ways to reach people that were unimaginable in the past.

The reader of FBEL doesn’t need to be told that any suspicion of Islam in the British public has been fuelled by the long years of Government-run terrorism; any hatred of it has been engineered by the same. The British Establishment gave a free pass in the UK to the destructive Wahhabist and Salafist forms of the religion, and then devised false flag incidents using willing their own assets, or (albeit ultimately duped) patsies indoctrinated in to what is in fact a Masonic Assassin’s cult. The British Establishment then whipped up hatred of Muslims in the corporate-media coverage of the “terror”. The truth of the matter is that Assassin-cult Islam needn’t have been a problem if the British Establishment didn’t allow it to germinate and prosper in the UK. But the British Establishment had and still has a mind to use it as a weapon against its own people.

And the British Establishment, to deflect from its own criminality, would like to see the reaction to what appears to be the great problem of Islam corralled into a place where it can be criminalised. This is why the Independent, in the very same article that it carries Nick Lowles’ denouncement of the “far right”, names social media personalities to whom it can throw that part of the audience who react unfavourably to what they see as vilification. This audience section is to be handled by gatekeepers, who will guide it to that point where it can be persecuted by the state. These gatekeepers will be familiar to FBEL readers (from the Independent article):

Prominent right-wing figures including American commentator Ann Coulter, ex-Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, Infowars editor Paul Joseph Watson, EDL founder Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Lennon), and former newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins are reaching millions of people through their social media posts and videos.

The FBEL reader will undoubtedly recognise many in this gallery as controlled opposition, and could probably add a few more names to the list. The Independent article continues:

“While these people are not directly inciting violence, it is the logical conclusion of their rhetoric,” Mr Lowles said.

“With the upsurge in terrorism coupled with the growth of far-right online and their ability to spread their poison to far larger numbers than ever before, we shouldn’t be surprised that people act on it.”

Here, Lowles confirms the Hegelian nature of a grand operation which sees, in reality, Hope Not Hate working in concert with parties also working to further the very same agenda from the supposed other side of the spectrum. The audience that is driven to the likes of Paul Joseph Watson will commit far-right terrorism, says Lowles (although he is mealy mouthed in saying in). Naturally, Paul Joseph Watson would deny it, but it doesn’t matter, because this part of the narrative is constructed by Hope Not Hate. And it is not so much that this is then adopted by the British Government into an official stance, but that Hope Not Hate is working as a Government agency to install the concept. The Hegelian Dialectic: thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis. Problem, reaction, solution. The solution is the criminalisation of a majority who, if they hadn’t been bamboozled by the Government’s operation to misdirect it, would be able to clearly identify the Government as the enemy. The civil conflict that Lowles wants to call a civil war should be aimed at the Government. The Government, for which he is an agent, would like to see sections of the British public at each other’s throats so that it can step in and seem justified in making an example of some people, but mostly so that it can impose its “solution” on a cowering public.

So, the British Government wants you to bark up the wrong tree. The correct tree is the one around which it coils to make itself a home from whence all sorts of criminality is conducted. Very few of us are focused on this true target. Activity to encourage misdirected wrongheadedness is everywhere – and the main thrust of this has been discussed in the body of this article, but a word also needs to be had about alternative media that ranges from the second tier (the not-quite-so popular as Infowars) to the very small. Consumers of this genre may notice that there is a lot of blame attached to the Jew. Moreover, there is a great complaint, from the quarters where this blaming happens, against other alternative media that are accused of never dealing with Zionism (while they themselves deal with it in doses more than enough to go around). For these people, absence of blame of the Jew causes suspicion, deceived as they are that that is some kind absolute benchmark of truth.

But the reader is asked to notice that what is actually truly absent in 99% of alternative media is study and scrutiny of Masonic secret societies, and if there needs to be any concern about who omits what, it should be with regards this subject. Because Masonry is at the root of the World Socialist State, while Israel is merely a symptom of it. Mystery Babylon, by which is meant the religio-political system of the ancient world whereby certain men contrive a divine right to rule based on a fable that order on earth guarantees order in the heavens, is the ancestor of Masonry. Masonry by another name existed a long time before anyone had heard of Jerusalem, and Mystery Babylon is essentially about ruling all the men in the world as slaves: the New World Order. Yes, lots of alternative media talk about the Illuminati as if it is the explanation, but this in only to provide a superficial treatment (for a veneer of credibility) that basically casts the ruling elite as Satanists. We get to call them evil, but we still don’t understand them. Satanism is an expression of some of the “science” and ritual of Hermeticism, but it appears mostly to be about mockery of Christianity. It doesn’t get to the very root of humanity’s ills: hence, nor does alternative media. And one can suppose that, while a good many are just taking up the assumptions that they have learnt from mentoring influences as they have entered the environment, for the actual most part, it’s not meant to. It’s all about having you bark up that wrong tree.

To come in a follow up article: the Government construct known as National Action gets more exposure.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
T-shirts to protest compulsory face coverings - click image