UK Government’s Cointelpro, 2019 version; the role of Hope Not Hate and “Tommy Robinson” in it
There is nothing new under the sun. Take Cointelpro, for example: a broad scale US Government operation over the course of two decades from the mid-50s onwards – officially, that is – that infiltrated and then discredited and disrupted political groups. If Wikipedia were to be taken as gospel, then a researcher reading its entry on the subject would get the impression that the victims of Cointelpro could be characterised as being subversive in terms of any threat they posed to the apple-pie-eating White America. However, one will also find this nugget of information:
The FBI also financed, armed, and controlled an extreme right-wing group of former members of the Minutemen anti-communist para-military organization, transforming it into a group called the Secret Army Organization that targeted groups, activists, and leaders involved in the Anti-War Movement, using both intimidation and violent acts.
What is in fact being revealed here is that the FBI controlled the reaction to the acts of destabilisation it rendered on the other side: full spectrum dominance, or the Hegelian dialectic at work. In the 1990s, when Americans were re-establishing and reconstituting state militias, the FBI ran Patcon, where agents infiltrated constitutionalist political movements to disrupt and discredit them; it was Cointelpro by another name. If one listens at length to the broadcasts of William Cooper, one gets a better and immediate sense of the scope and method of US Government activity than is possible from reading what has been officially released about the project. If this information was to be believed, the FBI targeted a small number of groups about which there were “legitimate” concerns borne out of fears of home grown terrorism enacted by antigovernment, racist, anti-Semitic, or Christian extremists. In reality, when Americans who were antigovernment or Christian – two demographics that aren’t defined by the hatred of a type of human being – were lumped together with anti-Semites and racists, it was about conflating all categories under the umbrella term of “patriot” so that objection to rule-breaking, immoral Government could be demonised as being undesirable. Moreover, inventing a predilection for violence as a trait shared by all “patriots” was about potential criminalisation of those who might challenge Government on the grounds of its illegitimacy.
So, a bright person should be able to see that the US Government had the infrastructure, out of the official Cointelpro era, whereby it was able to be the racists and the anti-Semites, and to infiltrate, discredit and disrupt constitutionalist state militias: groups of Americans who must have been viewed as incredibly threatening. Cooper, a leading militiaman, was reportedly identified by Clinton’s White House as the most dangerous radio broadcaster in America. Clinton’s administration evidently felt insecure, hence the extreme lengths it went to. Patcon, some say, extended to the false flag attack on the Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City in 1995. It explains, therefore, the burning of the Branch Davidians at Waco in 1993 – which, in official accounts, was the incident for which the Oklahoma bombing was retaliation (in fact, there appears to be a lot more to Waco than meets the eye). Incidentally, the author suspects that the Alex Jones operation, which originates in the same era, might well be an expression of Patcon (with its purpose to ape patriot leadership while in fact offering nothing of the sort – an idea previously explored at FBEL here).
In fact, the allusion to the Alt-Right brings us neatly to current times, and the present iteration of Cointelpro and an environment where “American white supremacists/white nationalists, white separatists, anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, neo-fascists, neo-Confederates, Holocaust deniers, conspiracy theorists and other far-right fringe hate groups” (according to Wikipedia) are pitched against the likes of Antifa and Black Lives Matter (remember “Unite the Right” at Charlottesville?).
Things are not limited to America; in the UK, Government has created a situation (out of pre-established rent-a-mob, football hooligan, and the infiltrated racial nationalist movement infrastructure) where there is a conflation of the phantom menace National Action (neo-Nazis), and “Tommy Robinson” (anti-Muslim hate groups and terrorists – see Darren Osborne) [- with the likes of Britain First completing the ideological continuum between them – ], and UKIP (anti-EU/government), with a currently unfolding plan to throw the Israel-criticising “left” and the entire Brexit-voting “right” into the mix as anti-Semites and Islamaphobes respectively. Ranged against them are the likes of Unite Against Fascism and Hope Not Hate, although the latter of these has in fact migrated from a kind of Brown Shirt street presence organiser into a position of self-appointed arbiter of political correctness, serving the same kind of function as the Anti-Defamation League, or Southern Poverty Law Centre has historically played in the USA (a witch finder general), so that there can be discrimination between the acceptable “left” and that which decries the crime of the state of Israel. (Don’t let the term “left” deceive; there is no left and right, there is only the State versus the individual. It’s usage here is redundant in terms of usual understanding, and in substitution for a term to denote the political principles of the Luciferian technocracy of the State).
In fact, as this environment matures in Britain, it becomes clear to see that Hope Not Hate is indeed a front for Government, and through the positioning of Hope Not Hate as deduced by its list of enemies, the breakdown of the long maintained illusion of “right” versus “left” is hastening to a complete malfunction. Hope Not Hate is not of the “left”, it is absolutely an entity and guardian of the Masonic Anglo-globalist political consensus, and ultimately is working to create a technocratic dictatorship where threat to the hegemony is obliterated by enforcement of correctness (i.e. the persecution of politically divergent enemies by their alienation and criminalisation). It is with great interest that the author notes that Hope Not Hate’s logo is (or was) the sun – the All Seeing Eye, the symbol of Gnosis (the knowledge by which the inner-god is attained, the crux of Luciferianism). Hope Not Hate’s name is a clue in itself. “Hate” is how rule-breaking and immoral Government designates the motivation for resistance against bad government – and the reader should be reminded of the effort in America to portray constitutionalist militia as racist by default, and of the current effort in the UK to have Brexit, via “Tommy Robinson”, associated with neo-Nazism. As for “hope”, it is faith in better things to come, but it does not entail a guarantee of delivery, thus when Government is offering improvement, then it will be a faith betrayed. And so “Hope Not Hate” means submission to a confidence trick, and ultimately submission.
With no apologies offered for the somewhat over-lengthy introduction (all necessary), we now arrive at the meat of this piece. Hope Not Hate has recently released an annual report: The State of Hate, 2019. The organisation’s head man, Nick Lowles, was given space in the Independent to summarise. Prior to the release of the report, another article, by its “home affairs editor” Mark Townsend, appeared in the Observer to preview some of the material that was going to feature. Both of these pieces will serve just as well as source material for this article without having to waste time and broadband allowance obtaining and reading the Hope Not Hate document.
What strikes one who knows what to look for is the sense in the output that the Government is finding itself having to deal with the bottom dropping out of its “far-right” phantom-menace hoax. In other words, the numbers in terms of public support it wants to count in the ranks of a “far-right popular front”, which ranges from “Trump supporters to hardline nazis, Ukip members and football hooligans”, are just not there, and cannot be attributed in any plausible way to an entity described as a “far-right popular front”. Lowles may headline his piece, Far right hate is spiralling out of control – and politicians aren’t doing enough to stop it, but it just isn’t true – the first part isn’t, at least. The “far-right” is a British Government version of Cointelpro (which FBEL has been uncovering with analysis of National Action and System Resistance Network), so please notice the conflation of UKIP – which is code for Brexit voter – with hardine Nazis in exactly the same way as it was done in US Patcon.
Naturally, Hope Not Hate appears to attempt to explain the fact that that there has been no emergence of a unified “far-right” coalition by suggesting that it is “at pains to remain leaderless and amorphous”. This implies a strategic intent, but the truth has to be this: there is no organic emergence of a leader of a “far-right” coalition because, left to its own devices, the pool of talent would just not big enough for it to happen. On the other hand, while there has clearly been an obvious effort by Government to engineer “Tommy Robinson” into a figurehead, and perhaps, as time will tell, into UKIP leadership, Lowles deviously writes “observers have been intrigued that he [‘Robinson’] has not attempted to launch a formal group, or adopted a formalised leadership position within one”.
Ultimately, behind Hope Not Hate’s insistence that a “broad far-right movement which has coalesced under the “anti-mainstream politics” sentiment… is active online and through street protest”, is the fact that Government has recognised, and is concerned about the way the British public are rejecting Westminster party politics. The headline of Townsend’s piece also reflects this: Disillusioned Britons turn to far-right ‘popular front’. It isn’t true, but the need to demonize a vast swathe of people in borne out of the perspective held by the politically correct (Luciferian) consensus, where opposition to it is extremism. Indeed, when Hope Not Hate decrees that broad far-right movement has coalesced under “anti-mainstream politics”, it identifies the nature of that extremism.
From this perspective, if one argues against unlimited immigration, which is a matter of efficient government, one is a racist; if one wants to pool sovereignty at a national level (again, for efficiency), then one is a xenophobe. In fact, it comes down to this: people are extreme if they do not submit to the politics which will bring about the global government. “Far-rightism” is the label most useful to define the bulk of this opposition because of powerful historical association which can be used to influence perception of the anti-globalist politics (the fact that Nazism was a form of socialism, and therefore of the “left” on the false left/right spectrum is a detail that doesn’t deter its usage as a tool of disparagement in this manner). Hence, when talking of the rallies connected to “Tommy Robinson” that took place in 2018, Hope Not Hate optimistically claim that attendance was in “numbers not seen in decades and potentially not since the interwar period of the 1930s”. In fact, the crowds at all the rallies have been very poor, but Hope Not Hate can’t admit this because the analogies with Oswald Mosley and British fascism would fall down.
The “extremism” which Hope Not Hate depicts the rejection of mainstream politics cannot be labelled “far-right” in a vacuum, and this is what “Tommy Robinson” has been engineered for. In fact, there are a number of, what Hope Not Hate calls, “far-right influencers” that have one thing in common by which they can be portrayed as “racists” (right or wrong) – which is their anti-Islam sentiment. Above and beyond this, “Robinson” is a special case: his previous membership of BNP enables demonstrative justification for his portrayal as a racist. Of course, there is another characteristic that Hope Not Hate’s “far-right influencers” have, and that is the most of them have a history of being shills, disruptors, and provocateurs (see here and here for a start [and please note, because there might have been a failure to mention it as yet, that Paul Joseph Watson’s most infamous act of shillery was “debunking” the false flag attack out of Woolwich Barracks in 2013]). There is an overwhelming sense, then, that the high profile of these characters (undoubtedly astroturfed for the purpose) is explicitly for creating the appearance that there exists a wide public appeal for “far-rightism”.
In fact, a contrary and stark reality is reflected in a statistic discovered by Hope Not Hate’s own opinion polling, which apparently happens regularly and most recently through YouGov, where 40% of respondents may have seen a “Tommy Robinson” video (which they become aware of because of the astroturfing), but only 6% had a positive view of “Robinson”. “Tommy Robinson” is not popular. In fact, it is surprising that these figures were released because they totally undermine Hope Not Hate’s case.
Beyond the Alt-Right, “far-right” social-media figures, and creating a bedrock of threat from which Hope Not Hate can cry wolf, is the state-manufactured phantom menace of far-right “terrorist” organisation. Principally, this is National Action (which appears to have a good deal of its origins in the British Army – see FBEL’s investigative series). Another that emerged out of nowhere in 2018 was the System Resistance Network (SRN) (unraveled as a nonsense here at FBEL), which doesn’t actually get a mention in the Hope Not Hate articles. What with the sudden appearance of a brand new bogey man group, the so-called Sonnenkrieg Division – a name which Hope Not Hate, in its role of publiciser of these non-entities, is essentially introducing for the first time to a mainstream audience – the author is led to suspect that the SRN has been retired after a failure to have it gain traction. The Sonnenkrieg Division, which has already seen so-called membership arrested at the end of 2018, is something that FBEL will be investigating in 2019.
With the elements of the British Government’s Cointelpro all now introduced, it is possible to see how a system of demonization works to tar a vast expanse of people as extremist haters and terrorists. The likes of Hope Not Hate make associations between Alt-Right social media personalities, and phantom-menace neo-Nazi groups constantly – but the vital key for building plausibility into this linkage is “Tommy Robinson”, as the “verifiable fascist”, as the vital interface. However, the grand stroke for blanket demonization was when Gerard Batten firmly attached UKIP to the front of this system of guilt by association through his support and promotion of “Robinson”, making it much easier to present a notion of widespread racism beyond an Alt-Right fringe. UKIP was a mainstream party at the time it teamed up with the “Tommy Robinson” industrial complex, and it stood for anti-globalism in ways that no other national party did – hence anti-globalism became an official element of hate-politics according to the Luciferian consensus. There is every reason to believe, not least because of Batten’s persistent latching on to “Tommy Robinson”, that this was all quite deliberate. The purpose was to blacken the image of a widely-held reasonable political perspective that was extremely dangerous to the State.
However, these machinations have spectacularly failed, hence the lamentations of Hope Not Hate in their report regarding the lack of a visible and believable “far-right” threat. A new approach is indicated by some ominous reporting coming out of Townsend’s piece, which quotes Lowles stating this:
We cannot wait for a traditional, united, far-right umbrella organisation to emerge before we act. We need to start connecting the dots now.
What this indicates is the desire for a blatant witch hunt, where the system for winkling out political deviants, with Hope Not Hate at the heart of it, by which anti-globalists are indentified as “far-right” criminals, should be treated authoritatively. This statement may well indicate that efforts to engineer a unified “far-right” movement have been shelved, and therefore there can be no demonstration of a “far-right” threat by which real political opposition would be demonised by ties between them as asserted by Hope Not Hate. In such circumstances, the mere say-so of the witch finder general would be sufficient to condemn a person. And Hope Not Hate has made it clear that this abuse would be spread even further than it hitherto has – as indicated by what appears to be a new development in a Hope Not Hate report where there is a squaring-up to the so-called “anti-Semitism” of the “left”. There’s not enough space to do this topic justice in this article, but reading between the lines, what this is a probably a reference to is people who dislike the activity of Israel.
Briefly, this development would explain why the anti-Semitism, so called, of Labour under Corbyn has been a feature of recent politics. As mentioned above, there is a lot more to this topic that can be dealt with briefly, but suffice it to say that Corbyn is an enabler for discrediting to take place, and then, naturally, a figure who won’t defend against it. His whole career has been about constructing a profile of political unconventionality which can then be used to undermine him. Crucially, his leadership of Labour was to keep anti-Establishment voters in Labour, and out of UKIP, and at the same time, to encourage some would-be UKIP voters back into previous allegiances with the Tories through fear of his “loony-leftism”. Corbyn is all about maintaining the status quo in Britain. Moreover, the socialism that he is associated with is not his alone: it is the outward expression and the ultimate destination of the Luciferian technocratic tendency that the entire Westminster political class shares. When the State, either on its own, or in partnership with corporations, owns all the capital, and individuals own little or none of it, then this is socialism. The opposite is capitalism. The delusion usually held by those on the “left”, of the sort that Hope Not Hate are now to witch hunt, is that the State can own all the capital in a benevolent way on behalf of all individuals in society, but when those people disabuse themselves of this erroneous notion, then they’ll have even more in common with their constitutionalist, capitalist allies. The end of divide and conquer is not what the British Government must have had in mind when it launched its version of Cointelpro against the “right”, but it just might be the unintended consequence of it.
