Published On: Tue, Sep 25th, 2018

The vilification of civil disobedience; Part Two: the System Resistance Network

Share This

Rather coincidentally, in the light of the previous piece in this series, John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, gave a speech yesterday at the Labour Party Conference. Corbyn’s party is playing the same game as it did at the 2017 general election: using imposture to retain its Brexit-supporting traditional support. Apparently, if there is no deal after the Article 50 negotiations (designed to benefit the EU, not the UK), and there is no new election, Labour will back a “no Remain option” second referendum. This is for forcing a deal with the EU – so expect it to happen. Indeed, observe how the preparations are being laid. For instance, that gatekeeper extraordinaire, Peter Hitchens, in what now looks like a most timely piece in the Mail on Sunday, is bemoaning the likelihood of “no deal”. He has a big enough audience of know-nothing-know-it-alls to have a good deal of influence.

In any case, perhaps those in the Labour Party whose allegiance is to a foreign government will not be happy with Labour’s plan – but they should realise, as much as those who are looking forward to a “no deal” divorce should realise, that the design was always to tie Britain to the EU. All the EU legislation already accrued by dictation will be put on the statute books, and new statute will match whatever the Europeans are doing. It doesn’t matter which party is in office. Parliament was captured for the EU, and the whole stinking system needs kicking over – which means not feeding it. In other words, the only defence from the ever closer World Government, and every person in their place in it as a slave, is a form of civil disobedience in which income is expended, or retained, in a way that hinders and weakens Government.

Naturally, Government is quite aware of the threat to itself by the only measure that normal people have available to them to defend themselves. That’s why it has recently embarked on a wide-ranging operation to have the public associate civil disobedience with extreme and dangerous politics: in the previous article in this series there was an examination of statements by two politicians for that purpose.

A third statement, that was omitted from the previous, but features here to form a bridge, was also in the public domain at about the same time as the others – and it was by John McDonnell. The word coincidence was used at the top of the page, but of course there is no such thing: the risk of civil disobedience being triggered by the overt totalitarianism of the EU vassal government at Westminster is too great not to have politicians at the heart of the machinations soft-soaping the public on the issue.

This is what McDonnell said on 24th August to BBC Radio 4:

We have to be extremely careful. A number of us now are worried about the rise of the far right in this country, and elsewhere, and what we mustn’t do is open up any opportunities to the far right exploiting this issue [a second referendum].

We have already seen violence on the streets from the far right, when we saw the Tommy Robinson demonstrations and the attacks on the police and others. So Barry [Gardiner] is right to caution about how we handle this issue.

Once again, the reference to the “Tommy Robinson” arrest psyop confirms its central role in the program to vilify legitimate self-defence – the matter has been discussed to no end at FBEL (as has the part played by the fictional National Action – see here, here and here). In this article, we’re going to look at another branch of the phantom menace of far-right extremism that is emerging at this time: the “lone wolf” street-political neo-Nazi.

According to some corporate-media, 23 year old Austin Ross, went on a “month-long hate campaign” when…

Between May 2 and May 31 this year he spray painted Nazi [and neo-Nazi] symbols and stuck racist propaganda on to landmarks around his hometown of Newport, south Wales.

The sort of message Ross inflicted upon particular buildings gave his spree political significance above and beyond the apparent hate crime for which he was jailed 6 years (6 years for petty vandalism? Is it real?) Granted, Ross tried to set fire to property at two of his target venues, making him slightly more dangerous than the usual incontinent with a spray can, but one wonders if the damage really amounts to the rather large numbers, in pounds, that Ross has been found guilty of causing, or if they have been inflated for effect. The image below, which purports to show an example of the damage caused, raises another issue: evidently Ross gained access to at least one of the properties to start a fire. It’s not impossible, even in this overly security conscious day and age, but is it likely? How did he gain entry? As a matter of record, Ross pleaded guilty to 15 counts including arson, racially aggravated harassment and racially aggravated damage. That the petty vandalism was deemed “racially aggravated” must explain the sentencing.

Above all else, it is patently clear that his operation, where he visited locations over the course of a month to vandalise at will, allows for an observer of the case to construe that far-right hatred is intrinsically linked with valid criticisms of institutions that are components of the social engineering that has been inflicted upon Britain. The most sinister aspect of the case is the overarching identity to which Ross’ handiwork has been attributed. He was said to be involved with something called the System Resistance Network (SRN). The reader, like the author, may never have heard of what is supposed to be a neo-Nazi organisation. SRN, then, appears to be an even smaller and obscure (if that is possible) version of National Action that has gained notoriety only through the criminality of Ross. In fact, for all anyone knows (and as of yet), it could be something that only pertains to Ross. In any case, a clue to the big difference between SRN and National Action is in the name: System Resistance Network. “Network” suggests a looser affiliation of individuals rather than an organisation or a club, and a nonhierarchical “command” structure. It has been written before that National Action is a construct (with its head, nevertheless, suspectedly at the top of a real and rigorous hierarchy) that was meant to marginalise people who had certain views on immigration on national sovereignty. The name SRN indicates more of the same sort of thing, but to a more sinister degree. SRN suggests loosely connected individuals who defy the Establishment. Potentially, that puts a lot of innocent people in the frame for a good tar-brushing. Clearly, Ross, and others no doubt to follow, will become a means to incriminate many other people by the most tenuous of associations. Let’s look more closely at what Ross supposedly did, and some particulars of his court trial, whereby we can detect the indicators that there is more to his case than a lone-wolf tendency and a peculiar outlook.

His general graffiti included swastikas, the SRN logo, and amongst other obvious slogans, a “Hitler was right” outburst. Obvious was the word used, because with this sort of daubing Ross creates a perceived link between individuals who defy the Establishment (with himself representing them) and the notion of mass murder along racial lines – as far as the general understanding of what the Nazis were and did (The Nazis were a Masonic secret society, whose Aryanism was an expression of chosen-man Luciferianism writ larger – it has nothing to do with no-government anarchy, which is what “far-right” means beyond the fake political paradigm).

It won’t surprise an FBEL reader to discover that Ross also gave expression to a piece of “Free Tommy” spray-painting, accompanied by a swastika, at the University of South Wales campus. If the implication wasn’t enough for its dim readership, the Telegraph took the trouble to overtly point out the significance in its coverage:

Ross was a supporter of jailed English Defence League co-founder Tommy Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

Of course when a neo-Nazi paints on a wall the name of a very different sort of racialist, and a Zionist interloper in the British nationalist movement to boot, then it suggests that Ross was not motivated in the way that superficially appears. What Ross is doing here is suspiciously just beyond his own remit as an individual who is resisting the system. He is taking care to connect neo-Nazism with the “Tommy Robinson” movement, and big crowd protests, and thus to reaffirm the assertions made by politicians about “civil disobedience” being akin to the rise of fascism: hence Ross begins to look as if he was orchestrated by others looking to influence public perception.

Of all Ross’ handy work the most threatening was an attempt to set fire to his old school (some other issues being worked out here, perhaps – if it really was his old school), and the Newport Masonic Hall.  To aid understanding of his supposed motive regarding the attack on the school, Ross scrawled “Marxist filth” on its walls. The British education system, with Constructivism at its very heart (and thus the [Luciferian] moral relativism)† plays a crucial role in moulding children to fit a socialised society: or inculcating them into Cultural Marxism, as many half-aware folk will understand it. Marxism, applied communism, socialism – and indeed Nazism – call it whatever you like, they are all the same thing at the bottom: Luciferianism and the “chosen man” government over the masses. It is apparently lost on Ross, as a supposed neo-Nazi, that if the form of socialism that schools were inculcating children into was a slightly different variety, then he would be all in favour of them; – but that doesn’t make him a vandal without a political motivation after all (the vast majority of people in Britain don’t know the simplest distinctions).

Homeschooling is on the rise (up 40% over three years in 2018, according to the BBC). Loss of confidence in state education is a problem for Government, as is loss of confidence in its health system (the NHS is a social management complex). Homeschoolers are bound to cite objection to political indoctrination as reason for teaching their children themselves (or organising with other families to do it), and Government’s totalitarian true colours never show more when it is creating legislation to force attendance at its daily indoctrination prison camps against the parents’ will – so it must create fear of being labelled a Nazi to negatively influence perceptions of independent tutoring; how convenient for Government it is that neo-Nazis are attacking that Cultural Marxism thing. It must be very much maligned if Hitler supporters don’t like it.

Likewise, Masonry. Masonic Halls, of course, are the barrack-rooms of the foot soldiery of the New World Order, thus the Government control grid (with favours – blind-eyes turned, contracts awarded, power and influence granted – being repaid with a helping hand up the greasy-pole towards the favour-asker; it’s about abusing the memberships’ sphere of influence, at whatever level of importance it is). A short perusal of alternative media will tell the reader that Masonry cannot be exposed; mini-Bilderberg meetings in every town are innocent, and those who cast aspersions upon them are Nazis. Cleverly, the reporting of Ross’ escapades in the Mail points out that the Newport Masonic Hall has a Star of David decorating its exterior – it wouldn’t be the only one in the UK to do that. But just look at the completely redundant fashion in which this information is introduced:

He then caused £38,000 worth of damage by causing a fire at Newport’s Masonic Lodge, which had a Star of David on the front of the building, and another £20,000 worth of damage by starting another fire at Bassaleg Secondary School, of which he is an ex pupil.

Notice the way the reporting of the vandalism at the Masonic lodge runs into that of the terrible assault on the children. There is no other reason to do this than to invoke recollections of Jewish persecution. Naturally, the real explanation for why a Masonic Hall boasts this symbol is not offered: it [the Star of David, with a “delta” triangle overlaid with an inverted copy] represents the combination of the fire and water elements. The Sun and the Moon (fire and water) represent the Knowledge (gnosis) and the School in which it is collated. The combination of fire and water, sun and moon, is the Hermetic [or Alchemical] Marriage by which adepts are created. No mention of this, just the implication that Ross is an anti-semite.

To be sure, Ross covered the gamut of issues, in all sorts of significant places, to ensure his credentials  as a far-right racist were firmly established and appreciated (from the South Wales Argus):

Newport’s multicultural Maindee Primary School, where parents reported seeing racist posters outside it referring to refugees, and the message ‘You have been visited by the SRN’.

If there is a whiff of Ross being involved in a campaign to cause a public relations effect, then nothing is done to prevent the development of a full stink when we learn that he uniformly wore “black paramilitary clothes” on his “solo night patrols” – a little detail that the Telegraph reports was made known to the court. Ross, then, is a cartoon character in a homemade Nazi uniform – a cardboard cutout substituting for those to be incriminated by ever-so loose association, and to whom his acts are more easily identifiable as being from a particular political motivation. While his targets are, in the realms of decent discourse, now becoming exposed for their part in the problems people face every day in a socialised country, and before valid (unveiling, and therefore terminally damaging) criticism of them can consolidate in civilised forms of expression, Ross is busy at work on “night patrols” to demonise this opposition and those involved in exposure of the system. Cui bono? Who benefits when the System Resistance Network, is potentially, in the future, as far as the dumb general public can be told, anyone who sticks a hat above the parapet to mount a legitimate critical assault upon the control infrastructure. Take note that the conditioning of the public to react as Governent desires is well advanced. Take the case of the Radio 4 audience that had a meltdown because of a Raheem Kassam interview in which he denied he was of the far-right (it doesn’t matter what he says – he plays a role for the corporate-media and Government to sell as it likes to the public):

One Twitter user [reports the Express] said: “I just heard Raheem Kassam singing the praises of Tommy Robinson and claiming neither he nor Steve Bannon are far-right, with very little challenge. Switched off in disgust.”

The problem for this Twitter user was that Kassam was allowed to state a view without it being categorised as undesirable to satisfy the listener’s indoctrination (such people don’t understand that the interview was meant to reinforce the conditioning). Indeed, Kassam’s appearance on Radio 4 was called a normalisation of the far-right, which confronted a BBC audience without being given horns and a tail and a pitch-fork – and yet this provoked an even more violent reaction. Such is the advanced state of political label-association conditioning in the UK.

To finish, examine the summarising words of the individual presiding at Ross’ trial at Newport Crown Court, a Jeremy Jenkins, with notes added by the author:

Your beliefs and attitudes are not only abhorrent to the majority of people living in this country [the politically correct consensus defined and enforced by Government against which any divergence must be adjudged potentially criminal], they offend deeply those members of the community to whom those beliefs are targeted [when views and attitudes divergent with Government definitions are presented to those who would, by definition, be offended by them, then they become criminal. At the heart of this is the issue of the criminalisation of any criticism of Government by the setting up of a victim Government-client class who would act as trigger for prosecution.]

You and others like you have not the slightest idea of what living under a tyrannical regime is like, and the irony is that you fail through ignorance and prejudice to see that those you target were responsible, by sacrifice and selflessness, for the freedoms you now enjoy.

The big message in the second paragraph is that the Establishment is responsible for a society where there are no restrictions on freedom, and to perceive that the UK is indeed a totalitarian state is to be imagining it from a position of ignorance and bias – and to resist the Benefactor Establishment is to be an ingrate: a terrible crime indeed. This sort of telling off is to be expected ahead of future schemes to reward “good citizenship” and punish the “divergent” with poor employment, if any, and restrictions on travel and purchases – there will be no tyranny then either. And while this judgespeak, generally, is only ever going to express a viewpoint out of the politically correct consensus defined and enforced by those in power, there is an option to say that it might not reflect anything other than the judge’s poor intellect. However, what business has a judge saying “You and others like you have not the slightest idea of what living under a tyrannical regime is like” – this is Ross’ trial, not anyone else’s. And no one else is on trial for the views they hold – and yet the big sweeping political statement. This is another clue by which we can suspect that this case was for social conditioning, and the judgement upon Ross for provoking support for him – but more importantly his mode of expression – from people to whom the uneven-handedness of the State is all to evident, just in the same way that support is corralled to “Tommy Robinson”.


† Lots more to come on this subject, but as far as it has been covered already, it gets a brief mention here.


It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>