National Action series; Part Two: the Army and the “Midlands” Five
In September 2017, when preparation was being made for this article (and others to follow), Hope Not Hate (who should know), numbered the active membership of so-called terrorist organisation, National Action, at 60. Events since then have moved-on, with UKIP’s fully fledged merger with the Alt-Right. Under Batten’s leadership the party has lined itself up as the “far-right” whipping boy, with its sudden alliances with astro-turfed YouTube stars, RebelMedia and Infowars “personalities”† – individuals and organisations already in the cross hairs of the Government’s Witch Finder General, Hope Not Hate’s Nick Lowles, who indicated how these types are going to be put to good use in comments made earlier this year: “While these people are not directly inciting violence, it is the logical conclusion of their rhetoric”. After the “Tommy Robinson” arrest psyop, we’ll probably see the Government assert connections between National Action and the “Free ‘Tommy'” movement, and through the infiltration into its ranks of Alt-Right “superstars”, UKIP. So much for the UKIP surge, and the taint that Brexit is going to receive because of it.
In all reality, the Beaver Patrol of your town’s Boy Scout Brigade was and is more dangerous than National Action, but for the British Government’s purposes, the public needed, and will still need to understand National Action, and the “far-right”, as a menace and a source of violent disruption to normal governance. That is why Hope Not Hate would publish the following in their 2017 annual report (as cited in the Guardian):
There is a paradox to the far right in Britain today. Organisationally, the movement is weaker than it has been for 25 years… Yet, at the same time, the far right poses a bigger threat – in terms of violence and promotion of its vile views, particularly anti-Muslim views, than it has in many years.
There is actually no paradox. The “far-right”, always a deliberate misnomer for the ideology that it is used to describe, is tiny in Britain, and it is weak. National Action itself is an illusion for constructing acceptance of a Government agenda, through manipulation by Government agents, within a full-spectrum dominance, Hegelian system. And here we have Hope Not Hate fulfilling their purpose in the scheme with an insistence upon an idea that the likes of National Action are dangerous.
Those of us who know better are merely reminded that National Action was projected into something bigger and more terrible than it is by the promotion that it received firstly by its outlawing – which is when the author first heard of the group – and then by so-called terror plot trials of 2017 and 2018, some of which are culminating right now.
But the above extract does not focus on supposed fanatics – it casts the net wider. It is the old ploy of creating alienation to drive folk into the arms of the severest reaction and the extreme option. Hope Not Hate stands for the Globalist “neo-liberal” consensus position, and this operates an ever-expanding range for denouncement so that more people are criminalised [or at least marginalised], and decent opposition is reduced. Of course, it is the Government that has caused a reaction to Islam through its own false flag terror: what “Islamic terror” boils down to. And the Government has provoked people enough with it that many have started to think that they might as well be hung as sheep than as lambs, as they adopt distorted notions of “them and us”. This is the goal.
Lately, it appears that Government has gained a lot of hard-fought ground with the UKIP coup, so that potentially a good deal more people can be tarnished as “violent” with a simple stroke of the same brush. And yet, for this to work a seeding kernel is still required – an object of the Government’s contempt that all others are, inevitably unfairly, equated to. It could yet be another job for National Action.
The illusion of a National Action threat was greatly enhanced by a string of arrests in 2017, that have been coming to trial in the spring and summer of 2018 (with one outstanding big case yet to be heard); these people must be dangerous if they are on trial, right? The first set of these for us to discuss is the one involving a number of men arrested at the start of September 2017:
Five serving members of the British army have been arrested on suspicion of being members of the recently banned neo-Nazi group National Action.
A 22-year-old from Birmingham, a 32-year-old from Powys, a 24-year-old from Ipswich and a 24-year-old from Northampton, all men, have been arrested under the Terrorism Act on suspicion of being members of a proscribed organisation, West Midlands police said. An army source said a fifth serving soldier had been arrested in Cyprus.
Because it is very important to establish that these individuals were all at one time identified as army personnel, here is another report from corporate-media that confirms it (the extract is from the Independent article linked to at the top of the page):
Detectives have been granted extra time to question five suspected members of National Action, including four soldiers, who were detained on suspicion of “being concerned in the commission, preparation and instigation of acts of terrorism”.
The fifth suspect, a soldier who was serving with the Royal Anglian Regiment in Cyprus, was formally arrested on Friday after being flown back to the UK from RAF Akrotiri.
The 24-year-old from Northampton remains in custody alongside a 22-year-old man from Birmingham, a 32-year-old man arrested in Powys, a 24-year-old arrested in Ipswich and a 24-year-old arrested in Northampton.
Please note, because it might not be obvious, the individual arrested in Cyprus is one of two 24-year-olds associated with Northampton. If the reader will bear with it, we will examine another extract, this time from a BBC article published on the same day as its Guardian cousin. The reader should know that this article was altered between 5th September, 2017, when a version was saved by the author, and as it appears currently. This is how the information of our interest originally appeared:
Four serving members of the Army have been arrested under anti-terror laws on suspicion of being members of banned neo-Nazi group National Action.
The men are a 22-year-old from Birmingham, a 32-year-old from Powys, a 24-year-old from Ipswich and a 24-year-old from Northampton.
This is what it looks like now:
Four serving members of the Army have been arrested under anti-terror laws on suspicion of being members of banned neo-Nazi group National Action.
A fifth person – a civilian – has also been arrested on the same charge. One of the soldiers was detained by the Royal Military Police in Cyprus.
… Police said [of the four arrested in the UK “being held at a West Midlands police station”] they were a 22-year-old from Birmingham, a 32-year-old from Powys, a 24-year-old from Ipswich and a 24-year-old from Northampton.
There was a very speedy change of mind whereby one of the suspects was now declared not to be armed forces personnel (there is good reason to believe that it was the 22-year old from Birmingham).
Sky News also reported that suspected National Action members were British Army, but were all over the place in terms of any effort to correspond with the other reportage:
Four alleged members of a banned neo-Nazi group arrested on suspicion of terror offences are serving members of the British Army, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.
A 22-year-old from Birmingham, a 32-year-old from Powys, a 24-year-old from Ipswich, and a 24-year-old from Northampton are being held.
The soldiers were arrested in Brecon, Ipswich and at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, according to Sky sources. Three of the four serve with the Royal Anglian Regiment.
The men are accused of being part of the National Action group, which was banned last year.
The 22 year old from Birmingham is still being listed as if a soldier, and there is no mention of a fifth man; the impression is now given that his is one of the four.
Later on in September of 2017, stories appeared in corporate-meda of two serving British Army soldiers and a civilian university graduate being charged with offences related to National Action membership. Although there did appear in these cases to be a relationship with the arrests above mentioned, there was rarely any reportage across corporate-media that made any clear link between five armed service personnel being arrested, and two soldiers and a civilian being charged. The best example that could be found was a Press Association report carried by the Guardian, reproduced almost in its entirety here because there is not much detail that should be omitted:
Three men, including two British soldiers, who are accused of being part of banned neo-Nazi group are to appear in court charged with terror offences.
Mikko Vehvilainen, Mark Barrett and Alexander Deakin are accused of being part of the proscribed organisation National Action.
Vehvilainen, based at Sennybridge Camp, Brecon, Powys, is also charged with possessing a document containing information likely to be useful for terrorism and publishing material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, by posting comments on a website intending to stir up racial hatred. The 32-year-old is also charged with possessing pepper spray.
Barrett, 24, who is based at… Dhekelia Garrison, Cyprus, faces a single charge of membership of National Action, contrary to the Terrorism Act 2000.
Deakin, from… Great Barr in Birmingham, faces the same charge as well as possession of documents likely to be useful to a person preparing to commit an act of terrorism, and distribution of a terrorist publication.
The 22-year-old is also charged with inciting racial hatred concerning National Action stickers posted at Aston University campus in Birmingham in July last year…
West Midlands police said the arrests last week were “pre-planned and intelligence-led and there was no risk to the public’s safety”.
The force said a man from Northampton and another from Ipswich, both aged 24, were released without charge on Saturday following inquiries.
Published on 12th September, this article references arrests made in the previous week – which would put them in the same period of time as when the five “soldiers” were taken into custody. This article also accounts for two 24-year-olds from Northampton and Ipswich in the original list: released without charge. As for the three remaining, their ages correspond to those of the men linked to Birmingham, Powys and Northampton (captured in Cyprus) who were arrested at the beginning of September. So, undoubtedly, this Press Association report concerns the five men of our initial focus, and in particular, three of them who were then charged with committing offences.
One of these individuals was photographed through the window of the vehicle in which he was being returned to jail after the plea hearing in the case (none of three were given bail). Handcuffs visible and all, this picture was used in several corporate-media outlets, and his appearance of defiance matched his performance in court where he protested his being in custody. The Times was one that put his picture at the top of their article, and covered the court appearance of the three men with an angle that gave all the attention to Deakin:
A recent graduate accused alongside two serving soldiers of being members of a neo-Nazi group banned for encouraging terrorism claimed in court that he was “a prisoner of conscience”.
Alex Deakin, 22, appeared alongside Lance Corporal Mikko Vehvilainen, 32, and Private Mark Barrett, 24, at Westminster magistrates’ court charged with terrorism offences over alleged membership of National Action.
The author thinks that the use of the imagery was unusual; promotional, almost.
Of course, Deakin was also the character who had been in the Army, and all of a sudden, was not – as per the corporate-media reporting. The corporate-media reporting is all we have for evidence, but based upon it the author suspects that this individual could have been an officer cadet; in other words, a member of the University Officer’s Training Corps, which is a reserve unit that leads to a commission in the regular army on graduation. His circumstances could have been such that it was possible for the Army to publically disown him in a way that couldn’t be done with the other four men.
The trial of three men, two soldiers and a civilian, took place in March 2018, and verdicts were found, and sentences handed down – or not, according to each individual case.
Mikko Vehvilainen was given 8 years for possession of a banned CS gas canister – which he pleaded guilty to – but cleared of “terrorist” charges. His sentence was given with other offences taken into consideration – which is interesting. Seemingly having a penchant for weapon ownership: knuckle dusters, a shotgun(?), a machete – if a particular image released by West Midlands Police is anything to go by – and also “knives, crossbows and a ‘war hammer’” according to the BBC, one wonders if Vehvilainen was someone that the Army was quite willing to sacrifice.
Of course the big scandal in this story should be about this fellow, a full corporal in a standing British Army, being Finnish. Not to lump all foreigners from European Nazidom together (there must be some who are not white supremacists and do not hate Jews), but if the Army will take indiscriminately from populations that don’t entirely meet British cultural expectations in ways that have been documented hereabouts before, then they should not be surprised to have the likes of Vehvilainen in their ranks; a man whose own defence lawyer said of him that it is “not in dispute that he is a racist”; a man who “kept a photograph which showed him giving a Nazi-type salute at a memorial to his native Finland’s independence”. Speaking of which, when ones see an image of Vehvilainen, one can easily picture him wearing Wehrmacht grey and fighting the Soviets.
But the author must do better to stop himself from having a natural reaction; one must always remember that a Mercenary in the Queen’s Army doesn’t have to have any loyalty other than that to the City of London.
The BBC also reported that a Private Mark Barrett, 23[?], and of Rutland, Leicestershire[?], “was acquitted of membership of the banned extreme far right terrorist group, National Action”. Presumably his Army career would be able to continue.
And the BBC also reported the fate of a third man:
A 23-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was also jailed for three-and-a-half years for possession of two terrorist documents and distributing another.
Why can’t a 23-year-old man be named in connection with a crime that a court has convicted him of? To keep it out of the press: to prevent a future glittering career from being spoilt, perhaps?
A court drawing from the Birmingham Mail – the defendant who could not be named for legal reasons has his features obliterated. That must be Vehvilainen on the left.
Let’s leave this third person unidentified, and turn to the overall impression that the author gains from his dealing with this material, which is this: the people who launched ISIS upon Syria are also giving you National Action. Police claim that they arrested a good deal of alleged National Action members in 2016 after the group was proscribed, but the author cannot find evidence of that. On the other hand, this arrest of five people at the start of September 2017 was the first time that the Government was seen to be combating the hyped threat of violent “far-rightism” in the same way that it had been dealing with “Islamic terror” – thus inflating it to the same level of significance in the public consciousness, as was required. Of course, as per many other pysop like those executed in the name of prosecuting Muslims for terror offences, Government must set up its own personnel in order to take them down. But unlike Wahhabist Islam, National Action is literally a name and nothing else; it has no adherents, despite the claims of the Government’s Witchfinder corps. It is another fantasy. So where could the Government get its alleged suspects from? Notice, with two out of five convicted – and with protections being handed to one of those – the event was more Public Relations than counter-terror – which in itself matters not if the purpose is to create flurry and the impression of activity. We should perhaps not be surprised that the Ministry of Defence declined to launch an inquiry after doubts were raised that “the armed forces… [were] consistently monitoring for extremist activity in their ranks”. The Independent reported that it…
understands the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is treating the first arrests of their kind as an isolated case and has no plans to launch a wider investigation into extremism
In short, the MoD knows, without looking for it, that there wouldn’t be any reoccurrence of an outbreak of alleged National Action membership in the ranks of the Army or any other service. It figures: as suggested by the MoD’s confident rejection of an enquiry, nothing happens that isn’t ordered in the state within a state that is the British Armed Forces.
And has the reader noticed that there is something missing in this story. Three men were tried together; what was the conspiracy between them that bound them in such a way? Look again at the charges; the one thing in common is alleged membership of National Action. Why would they need to appear together at a trial? Because it looks dangerous. It is for show. Additionally, what is it about them all collectively that has led to their predicament? They knew each other through dubious locations on the web? Or did they know each other through their work? During the trial, Vehvilainen was accused of being a recruiter, with the inference being made that he had abused a position of being a trainer – but how could he recruit a “civilian”? What is the simplest explanation, all things considered?
In the FBEL article that was written in September 2017 – one that was always meant to have been an opener for an ongoing series in which National Action was continually exposed – the author voiced a suspicion that was only half-seriously proffered (there not being any evidence to back it up), which now appears as if it could be very pertinent:
To date the most notorious act by National Action was a “mass” May 2016 assembly of 20 to 30 boys (yes, “mass”) outside York Minster to squeeze pimples – sorry, that should be to make Hitler salutes. The author suspects the location was chosen because of the proximity to Catterick, where the university training corps must have been on camp at the time.
† For those readers who haven’t heard, Paul Joseph Watson has joined UKIP. The party’s official website, done over like a RebelMedia operation where, lately, “Sargon of Akkad” interviews infamous trouble-maker and disruption-runner, Neil Hamilton, has been boasting a YouTube video of his urging people to join UKIP. With him is the ever-so dubious Milo Yiannopoulos (considered an actor by many), the said “Sargon”, or Carl Benjamin (consult Jeff C on this one), and Mark Meechan – or “Count Dankula”. Meechan, of course, is the one who became famous through the case of his Hitler-saluting dog, a story so stupid that it could not be real, and now we see why. According to the Daily Beast, Watson tweeted this: “I’ve officially joined UKIP and plan to take it over in a soft coup which will lead to the total restoration of freedom in the United Kingdom”. People who may have paid any attention to Infowars, the operation to which Watson is seconded, during UKIP’s EU election win heyday would know that Watson used to feel rather differently about the party. He would rather run out of breath than let the word “UKIP” pass his lips. He was no promoter of UKIP then. The author suspects that he adopts a position as he is told to.
Of course, infiltration to steer UKIP is not new – see the Carswell vs Kassam disruption. At the gut level, the recent long leadership fights were battles between those who too closely resembled people working for outside interests, and those who didn’t want the party to be body-snatched. Amazingly, in the end, Batten, with his Establishment-friendly Putin-loathing and Muslim-bashing walked into the job. So, in truth, the moving-in of Watson et al is very much the result of a coup that already happened.
