The first of the anti-tyranny “terrorism”; Part Three: Framing a patsy

Oliver Lewin was sentenced in January 2023 for preparing to commit a terrorist attack, but in the process of having crimes stacked against him so that the punishment would seem to fit the slander, it was said of him that his was a more insidious plan yet: to “topple” the UK Government by attacking national infrastructure and disrupting official broadcast media. To this greater end he allegedly carried out reconnaissance of targets (“a water culvert under the M1 motorway near his home”, and “radio transmitters [at Bardon Hill and Copt Oak] in the Leicestershire area along with another near Sutton Coldfield in the West Midlands”) and procured equipment by which to carry out his sabotage mission(s) (“an army-surplus jacket, backpack, groundsheet, rifle sling, rifle scope and a silencer to fit three airguns”, “a walkie talkie and binoculars as well as a packed rucksack to camp overnight”, and “wire strippers and shears”). Moreover, Lewin was accused of preparing something that was explained as if it were a “foxhole” where Oliver the warrior could retreat after committing an act of sabotage (the exact one not specified) and keep himself hidden from police.

We are possibly also to understand that literature partially written by Lewin (i.e., uncompleted by him) and residing on his computer was aimed at formulizing what might be called a methodology of terrorism. This “Civilian Resistance Operations Manual” was supposedly nefarious (whatever the real nature of its contents, undisclosed as they are) because it would have been used in the training of others that Lewin was allegedly attempting to recruit to his terrorist cause: as proved, supposedly, by his joining the notorious Resistance UK telegram channel, with its 8,000 members (at the time).

The full complexion of the particular sort of crime being called preparing terror offences as it applies in Lewin’s case was succinctly described by the head of counter terrorism for West Midlands Police, Detective Chief Superintendent Mark Payne, who said:

Lewin claimed he was a fantasist but it is clear he took the steps to carry out reconnaissance of targets to attack, bought equipment and tools, dug hide-outs and tried to recruit and train others.

He wanted to advance a political cause by damaging property and wiping out media organisations.

Extremists use this kind of ideology to create discord, distrust and fear among our communities and we strive to counter this.

What this doesn’t cover, quite unsurprisingly, is the extent to which two security service operatives, working undercover and posing as forum members on the Resistance UK channel, influenced Lewin or provoked him to incriminate himself. The chances are highly likely that these operatives, described as “police” in corporate-media reportage, did both. We should note that it is the claim of the prosecuting UK state that Lewin began his “preparations” in the month of July 2021, and was active accordingly in the four weeks to 25th August, when he was arrested. We should also note the coincidence of Lewin joining the Resistance UK forum on 25th July, and his immediately being placed under physical surveillance. One is clearly able to argue that Lewin, having joined the online community and somehow indicating that he was vulnerable enough to be exploited, was pounced upon by lurking agents who could deliver him into the sights of counter-terror colleagues where he would be seen acting in ways by which he would incriminate himself.

As we have seen it referred to, Lewin’s defence was that he was a fantasist who was never going to act out. Accordingly, Lewin said he lied to other forum members about formerly being a member of the Armed Forces, and indeed special operations forces. He never was such a thing. When asked at trial by his counsel why he thought it was necessary to present such a false picture of himself to forum members, he explained:

Because if I told them the truth of what was actually happening in my life they wouldn’t accept me, they wouldn’t let me in. So I had to bring something to the table that made me indispensable to them.

It is from this explanation that one is able to be impressed that Lewin did not have either the experience or sense of necessary worth so that he would join the Telegram channel, as he was accused, to recruit others to a terrorist cause. Rather, one gains the idea that on joining he fell in with people with expectations – expressed in what was being communicated to him – that he felt he must live up to.

Consequently, there is a ring of truth about Lewin’s explanation for his “reconnaissance missions” being nought but normal walks that he would take, with his accounts of them “sexed-up” as part of his needing acceptance by those he thought were his online friends, and more importantly, his co-persecuted at a time, as he put it, when “we were in trouble” with the “emergence” as he saw it, “of a Chinese communist system” in Britain.

Unsurprisingly there is little corporate-media coverage of the interaction between Lewin and the two online security service informants, but the most substantial, which is presented below, for a reason to be explained, appears to support the idea that Lewin was not the leading radical in his online engagements:

However, the court heard that in a message to one of the undercover officers on 6 August, Lewin said: “Attacking critical infrastructure works. We don’t need guns for that. A pair of wire cutters is enough.”

In this example message, used to prove the paradigm of Lewin being an agitator, it is quite possible to discern that he was in fact rejecting the suggestion put to him by the undercover intelligence agent that there should be resort to arms. If it is the case, as this suggests, that Lewin was being fed ideas either to endorse or act upon, then it means that he was indeed being entrapped. In fact, the author strongly suggests that this was indeed the case, and is the good reason why there has been no general revelation of the context of any of Lewin’s supposed online “call to arms”.

The ultimate evidence of the weakness of the concept of Lewin as an agitator, or a recruiter to terrorism comes in the summing up by the presiding official (the judge), a one Paul Farrer, a “King’s Counsel”, who quite evidently had decided that the things Lewin was saying online were due to a character flaw exacerbated by an insecure environment, rather than a real capability to act them out:

At the time of the indictment, you were socially isolated, depressed and lacking in self-worth. These features led you into telling many lies about the extent of your terrorist activities.

Your objective was to influence the government although in reality the prospects of you successfully doing so were remote in the extreme.

In light of all of the evidence, I conclude that at the time of your arrest your plans were far from complete, and your intended terrorist action was not imminent.

There’s much more hay to be made from this conclusion, but first a quick detour to examine how the sentencing betrayed a sense of embarrassment for the UK legal system, as if it, represented in person by Farrer, was acutely aware of the abject nonsense of locking Lewin away as a terrorist. So, this is how it was announced in certain corporate-media:

A telecoms engineer and conspiracy theorist has been jailed for six-and-a-half years for planning to launch terrorist attacks against phone mast sites.

Oliver Lewin, 38, from Coalville, Leicestershire, was told he must serve two-thirds of his sentence before being able to be considered for parole.

Four years in the slammer for Lewin, then – a measly amount in contrast even with the minimum term of eight years for Usman Khan, handed to him after an appeal against an original ruling of 16 years; his (admitted) crime, in 2012, also preparing a terrorist act.

Of course, had we been aware, we would have already spotted Farrer provide explanation for his leniency: Lewin was a very long ways – eternally so, perhaps, as any man with common sense and access to the full facts might adjudge – from being able to carry out a terrorist attack. Or, his preparing was coming to nought. So, in Lewin’s case, His honourable worship wasn’t so much upholding the “dangerous rubber duck principle” (which is to decide that a tool wholly not fit for the job of committing an act of terror still demonstrates capability), but instead was doing the same for another preposterousness where being wholly unprepared to commit an act of terror is subordinate to the apparent fact (according to the UK Government’s definition, and irrespective of a plausible defence or being encouraged to it by informants) of going through any motions to prepare.

Indeed, the ludicrousness of this other principle for irrespective guilt is such that police had to make sure to arrest Lewin at a sort of crescendo of going through the motions of preparations, presumably because there was a chance that at some point thereafter he would not continue. This is clearly evidenced by the statement by the counsel for the prosecution, who made this statement at trial:

[Lewin’s] activities began to accelerate and he repeatedly expressed the aim of carrying out action in September of 2021. The police moved in.

This is to say that police arrested Lewin because of how his preparations, according to what passed between him and the informants, had come to a point of fruition. Of course, according to the presiding official at Lewin’s trial, this was not true. We can therefore interpret the timing of Lewin’s arrest to be convenient according to the agenda of the people who wanted to convict him. He was plucked when ripe.

In other final analysis, when Oliver Lewin entered the Resistance UK Telegraph forum, and presumably fell in with the wrong lurking crowd (as anyone – as the author is certain – will do who takes up residency in any such like online communities) he was harvestable not only because he had previously worked for an audio visual engineer for a small company that installed and maintained radio masts (thus already owning certain “weapons” for his brand of terror), but because he had already been driven to a certain susceptibility by alternative media, which – as this site assures its readership – is always controlled, and once again in this case can be seen fulfilling a crucial role in a scheme for manipulation by UK Government.

The whole point of the prosecution of Oliver Lewin was to create a chilling effect about being in opposition to UK Government, and therefore making an association between ideas said to be held by Lewin and his so-called terrorism. Alternative media initially has a part to play in this process by mixing abject fear-porn nonsense in with reasonable information so that the latter can be made ridiculous by being tarred with the same brush as the former. It appears to be the case that when he was denounced as a “conspiracy theorist” in corporate-media reportage, Lewin wasn’t seen to be knowledgeable of a single reasonable piece of information that could form the basis of real opposition to London’s criminal overlordship of Britain, but he did know all about the nonsense of a “planned genocide”, for instance, as no doubt pushed on him by the likes of UK Column (see here, for instance) and Vernon Coleman (with his article “Covid-19 Vaccines Are Weapons of Mass Destruction – and Could Wipe out the Human Race”).

Lewin was also a proponent of a Chinese connection in the creation of a “communist system” in the UK (referring to evident loss of freedom [which was never accepted at this site]), and this was stuff that Alt-Right media pushed in blanket fashion as an ancillary, in fact, to stories coming out of corporate-media regarding Chinese origins of “Covid-19”. None of these, of course, covered the fact that “Covid-19” was a pneumonia triggered by western pharmaceutical products (as was the sole case at this site), but then it is not their role to have people reliably informed and level-headed. It is their role, as it should by now be plain to see, to discombobulate, panic and drive the sheep to their destruction – in Lewin’s case, into a place where he could be manipulated in order to be made an example. For the sheep, apparently, there is not a warning about their hidden-in-plain-view agitators that doesn’t cause them to turn against the warner. Inevitably, one concludes, more of them will go to jail.