Far-Right Terrorism: Anatomy of a Lie

Over the past year there has been a concerted attempt by the system and its lackeys in the media to build up the spectre of “far-right terrorism,” and the threat that it supposedly poses to the Australian public. A coordinated effort has begun to justify banning organisations in Australia, even if they are not actually engaged in terrorism, and to change the existing laws to make White political activism illegal. As if on cue politicians, bureaucrats, the security services, academics, the media and others all started to mouth the same narrative at the same time, with no notable dissent. We have done some research, and discovered that over 40 articles have appeared in print since January 2020 on this topic, not including reports covering the same events, and coverage of Brenton Tarrant. With the parliamentary “Inquiry into extremist movements and radicalism in Australia” to be held in the coming months, we feel that it is time to examine the claims put forward by the system, what they are doing, and why they have done it. Australia’s laws already make it a potential police state. If the government gets what it wants out of this inquiry then Australia will become a police state in practice.

Lies, damn lies, and ASIO assessments

Unsurprisingly, little coverage of the issue has actually cited evidence of right-wing terrorism, or verifiable claims. The few pronouncements that moved beyond the realm of empty speculation were issued by ASIO, mostly at the start of 2020.

In its 2019-2020 Annual Report, the domestic intelligence agency claimed that:

The primary threat remains Sunni Islamic extremism, but other violent ideologies—such as those of the extreme right—are also of concern…right-wing extremists are more organised, sophisticated, ideological and active than previous years. While we have been actively monitoring the threat for some time, this year extreme right-wing individuals comprised around one-third of our counter-terrorism investigative subjects.”

ASIO Director General Mike Burgess elaborated on this in his Annual Threat Assessment speech in February 2020.

In Australia, the extreme right-wing threat is real and it is growing. In suburbs around Australia, small cells regularly meet to salute Nazi flags, inspect weapons, train in combat and share their hateful ideology. These groups are more organised and security conscious than they were in previous years. We continue to see some Australian extremists seeking to connect with like-minded individuals in other parts of the world, sometimes in person. They are not merely seeking to share ideology and tactics. Earlier this year, ASIO advice led to an Australian being stopped from leaving the country to fight with an extreme right-wing group on a foreign battlefield. While these are small in number at this time in comparison to what we saw with foreign fighters heading to the Middle East, any development like this is very concerning. Meanwhile, extreme right wing online forums such as The Base proliferate on the internet, and attract international memberships, including from Australians. These online forums share and promote extremist right wing ideologies, and encourage and justify acts of extreme violence. We expect such groups will remain an enduring threat, making more use of on-line propaganda to spread their messages of hate. While we would expect any right wing extremist inspired attack in Australia to be low capability, i.e. a knife, gun or vehicle attack, more sophisticated attacks are possible.”

The vast majority of the claims made in the speech and report can be dismissed as crude attempts to conflate extremism (i.e. opinions the government doesn’t like) with terrorism. Talking to overseas Whites who share your beliefs is not terrorism, and neither is circulating National Socialist propaganda. Nor is it a crime to run a well-organised political organisation that tries to protect itself against infiltration from leftists and the political police.

We can therefore reduce the claims made about actual “far-right” terrorism to those below. Nearly all of these points are deliberate half-truths, twisted to fit an agenda.

  • Extreme right-wing individuals comprised around one-third of ASIO’s counter-terrorism investigative subjects

It may well be true that “right-wing” extremists comprise a large percentage of ASIO’s investigative cases, but it does not follow that any of those being investigated have done anything illegal. ASIO has a long history of investigating and harassing political dissidents, including communists, trade unionists, anti-war protestors, anti-immigration activists and almost anyone else who isn’t a supporter of mainstream politics. It continues this proud tradition today by targeting White patriots on behalf of its paranoid political masters.

ASIO is not a police agency, and does not require a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, or is about to take place, to commence an investigation. According to the agency’s own guidelines, it can commence investigations merely because it wishes to “identify persons, groups or other entities and determine whether their activities are likely relevant to security and merit investigation…in order to understand and minimise the gravity of threats posed and the likelihood of their occurrence”. Wherever broadly defined words like “security”, “threat” and “understand” are used, it can be guaranteed that expansive interpretations will follow. If ASIO wishes to “understand” your political organisation to determine whether it is a “threat” to the existing order, then it will count you as being under investigation. And because investigating people for their political beliefs is something liberal democracies supposedly don’t do, it will file it away under counterterrorism.

ASIO is deliberately misrepresenting this information in order to make it appear as though there has been an increase in terrorism, rather than an increase in government paranoia.

  • National Socialists regularly gather in small cells to salute flags, inspect weapons, train in combat and share propaganda.

We do not undertake combat training, and are not aware of any National Socialist group in Australia that does. The idea that there are dozens of National Socialist terror cells operating in suburbs across the country is a ludicrous fantasy, reminiscent of the hysterical media reporting on “Al Qaeda sleeper cells” after 9/11. If these groups really do exist, then we must ask the question of why the government has done nothing to stop them. None of those arrested in 2020 as “far-right terrorists” seem to fit this description.

In the much-hyped cases of March 2020 on the NSW coast, the police only managed to find “numerous electronic devices, tactical equipment and three paintball guns” on one man and “hunting knives and survivalist equipment” in possession of another. In other words, overpriced camping equipment. Perhaps despairing of ever finding a real-world White terrorist, they then claimed that the guns they were looking for had mysteriously disappeared, and raided the home of another man who legally owned firearms. One wonders why that man’s firearms license wasn’t revoked earlier if he really was part of an organised terror group.

The description applies even less to the unfortunate Tyler “Slavko” Jakovac. The Australian Federal Police admit that his only alleged crimes were “urging violence against members or groups” and “advocating terrorism”. Translated from bureaucratese, he was arrested for some truly heinous shitposts. If he was involved in running one of these mythical terror cells, then surely the government would have made a massive show about it and charged him accordingly.

Evidently the White Australian equivalent of Osama Bin Laden.

Unless ASIO produces compelling evidence to the contrary in the upcoming inquiry, we can deem their statements about NS terror cells a blatant lie.

  • An Australian was stopped from leaving the country to fight with an extreme right-wing group on a foreign battlefield.

We have independently verified this is real, and legislation does allow the government to seize the passport of those who might “enter a foreign country with an intention to engage in a hostile activity, unless serving in or with the armed forces of the government of a foreign country”. It does not answer the question of why exactly fighting (and possibly dying) in a foreign war can be equated to terrorism. Indeed, in this case the individual was attempting to defend the territorial integrity of Ukraine, which receives military support from the United States and is an ally of Australia.

The difference between the way in which the government has treated this case, versus those who fought in the Rojava War is instructive. For years the government has allowed foreign fighters to join the openly communist terrorist Kurdish forces in Syria, which are not part of that country’s government. Just ask former president of the Northern Territory Labor Party Matthew Gardiner, gangland murder enthusiast Ashley Dyball, and army reject Jamie Williams. None of these men were stopped from flying to the Middle East. Nor did they face any punishment for fighting for a group which is a close ally of the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party)—a proscribed left-wing terrorist organisation which has been responsible for multiple atrocities in Turkey.

Why was the individual who attempted to fight in Ukraine seen as more of a threat than actual terrorist collaborators? The unfortunate answer is that the individual wanted to join patriotic Ukrainians who believe in European brotherhood, rather than communist thugs known to enjoy a bit of ethnic cleansing now and then. Fighting with people who don’t want to further the agenda of the Jews or the international plutocracy is considered a crime, even if it is in a conflict of which the government approves!

  • The Base poses a threat to Australia’s security.

This would be another point on which we would simply have to trust in ASIO’s word, were it not for the efforts of the Southern Poverty Law Centre (SPLC), a US anti-racist group. Using leaked internal communications from The Base, the SPLC quotes the leader of that group as stating that “probably a dozen” Australians had applied to join, with a mere seven actually joining. Of this seven, only one remained an active member of the group by October 2019. By January 2020 The Base was essentially non-operational, destroyed by a series of arrests of its US members, massive infiltration, and media reports which confirmed widely held suspicions about its leader. So unless there was an unusually large recruitment of useful people during that three month period, we can conclude that The Base in Australia was a one man operation.

So what exactly did this dangerous terrorist group actually do in Australia? While we haven’t encountered this individual, it appears from media reports that their lone member stuck up posters in a Perth park on a single occasion and did little else. As there haven’t been any counter-terrorism arrests in Perth since then, we can only conclude that ASIO is simply lying regarding the level of threat posed by The Base.

Based on the government’s own claims, we can conclude that the “far-right terrorism” threat is a lie.

Who really commits terrorism?

Now that we’ve debunked the “far-right terrorism” claims, let us investigate who actually commits terrorism in Australia. For the sake of brevity we will exclude failed plots, and only list attacks that have occurred over the past 20 years.

A quick glance at the chart shows that there hasn’t been a single White perpetrator of terrorism in Australia since 2000—but a lot of White victims. In fact we would go so far as to say that terrorism in Australia is another example of the grotesquely disproportionate amount of criminality committed by non-Whites in this country. Yet the media and government can’t shut up about the “far-right” terror threat! Let’s find out why.

Why the system demands “far-right terrorism”

  • Defending the pseudo-religion of multiculturalism

The primary reason why the system is pushing the White terrorism narrative is because it requires a new scapegoat for the inherently violent dynamics of multiculturalism. There has never been a single society in all of human history where vastly different racial and cultural groups lived together on terms of perfect equality, ruled over by an impartial state. Multicultural countries are either held together by an authoritarian state (such as Singapore), or the overwhelming power of a dominant racial group (as in the 19th century United States). Without this they collapse into ethnic violence (see Yugoslavia), or become failed states where all politics becomes a crude scramble between ethnic groups to capture the resources and power of the government (see nearly all of sub-Saharan Africa). Australia is hardly immune to this dynamic of violent struggle between competing racial and cultural groups. More terrorist attacks have been carried out, and attempted attacks foiled, in the last 20 years than occurred during the entire 70 year history of the White Australia period.

The government can never tell the public this, and is unable to deviate from the course it has chosen. It is driven by a religious adherence to the tenets of liberal universalism, and the economic interests of capitalist political donors. The deranged equality freaks of the left, and the greed-crazed free marketeers of the right, are united together in their love of multiculturalism. As their sacred doctrine can never be called into question, they devise crude narratives that try to blame the inherently authoritarian and violent dynamics of multiculturalism onto a scapegoat group.

Years of attributing this failure to the refusal of Muslims to accept liberal values had the unintended effect of making the public realise that forcing completely incompatible racial and cultural groups to live together in the same space results in violence. This reached its peak in the early 2010s with the Reclaim Australia/United Patriots Front rallies, which made the government fearful that resistance to multiculturalism could spread beyond the anti-Islam movement.

The government is therefore seeking to change the narrative, putting the blame for the failure of multiculturalism onto White Australians, who are apparently too racist to see the benefits of slowly becoming a minority in their own country. However, it is not sufficient for them to merely demonise these views, as they have always done. Instead, they are trying to create an equivalent to the Islamic terrorist threat, even though there is quite literally no evidence to support the claim. They don’t care how many innocent lives are ruined by their deranged search for something which doesn’t exist. For them, the lack of actual terrorism only proves the need to redefine the term so that it includes actions that were previously considered to be perfectly legal. They will have their White terrorists, even if they have to invent them.

  • The counter-terrorism industry

The other dynamic pushing the “far-right terrorism” narrative is the growth of the counter-terrorism (CT) industry. The CT industry includes a large number of disparate actors in the security services, academia, politics, consultancy firms, government contractors, the media and among the general public. What unites them is a desire to use the murder of innocent people to make a lucrative career and criminalise their political opponents.

The primary reason why the CT industry constantly tries to build up National Socialism as a terrorist threat is because it would be highly profitable to them. Politicians love to claim to the public that they can protect them from the terrorism that the government’s own policies cause, even though countless instances over the years have proven that this is an impossibility. As a result, anyone peddling a solution to the terrorist problem has at their disposal a seemingly bottomless supply of government money.

The industry that has grown up around this endless burden on the taxpayer has a very large incentive to keep finding more “terrorism”, regardless of whether it actually exists or not. And if they can’t find terrorism, then they can at least find people with opinions the government doesn’t like, and build up the threat of “radicalisation” and “extremism”. The security services get increased budgets and ministerial attention, the academics get grants and the satisfaction of appearing as experts in the media, contractors get to sell all the snake oil they could ever dream of, and random Twitter pundits get to become “open source researchers”. Everybody wins, except for the taxpayer who has to fund it all and the poor saps who get railroaded into dubious terrorism trials. And all the while the real cause of terrorism—multiculturalism—is quietly ignored.

Then there is the fact that many of these profiteers, especially in the academic and think tank world, are openly anti-White and cheer on our replacement. While the average race traitor academic does little more than provide vague filler comments for the media and rage on Twitter, there are some operating in institutions which have significant influence over the security services. The most important of these institutions are the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), and Charles Sturt University’s Graduate School of Policing & Security, both in Canberra. ASPI receives significant taxpayer funding, and “experts” from both are frequently used to provide training to government personnel.

At ASPI we have Ariel Bogle, author of a recent article questioning why Australian “right-wing extremists” aren’t being harassed over a protest done on another continent. Her Twitter account makes for some interesting reading. Then there is Dr Isaac Kfir, who once taught “counter-terrorism” in Israel and now wants to turn the lessons learned from Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians against White dissidents. He favours the tactic of lying about Europe’s past in order to combat any dangerous feelings of racial pride in Whites. There are doubtlessly many more of these sorts in ASPI, but we have limited ourselves only to those whose beliefs we can confirm beyond a reasonable doubt. To round out our survey of the anti-Whites of ASPI, we shall leave our audience with this rather interesting report- The Christchurch terror attack from an Israeli CT perspective. No further comment required!

The two most important anti-White academics from Charles Sturt who have influence in government are Levi West and Kristy Campion. Levi West is another academic with a rather revealing Twitter account and experience aiding Jewish terror in Israel. He wants to shut up debate about mass immigration and Muslim terrorism, and claimed at the height of the George Floyd riots that Antifa thugs had never committed acts of terrorism. Campion has written that the problems of multiculturalism are not due to the government’s immigration policies, but should solely be attributed to “the broader Australian community that ignores or accepts the presence of right wing extremists in its midst, and tolerates the increasingly Islamophobic and anti-immigrant discourse in Australia.” In line with this repulsive hatred of her racial kinsmen, she contributed to a report for ASPI which demanded that the Australian Government adopt the UK’s PREVENT scheme, which suppresses political dissent under the guise of counter-terrorism. She also appears to be horrifically misinformed about even basic elements of our cause, claiming James Mason wrote a book called “The Siege” and William Pierce was in the Ku Klux Klan.

This man is paid taxpayer money to teach the security services about counter-terrorism. Yes, really.

To demonstrate the incestuous nature of the counter-terrorism industry, we need only look to the example of an event held in Canberra in 2019 titled “The changing landscape of terror: from 9/11 to right-wing extremism”. At this event Campion held stage with none other than Alex Mann, the ABC journalist who attempted to infiltrate the Lads Society under the guise of investigative journalism.

The above information is intended to stimulate public debate regarding the infiltration of anti-White ideas into Australia’s security services, and should not be taken as a threat. We simply want to expose their lies to the cold light of day, instead of allowing them to fester in the closed conference rooms and academic conferences where these creatures like to hide away. If you’ve ever wondered why the police and ASIO who harass you keep spouting bizarre conspiracy theories about “far-right terrorism”, now you know who fed that poison to them.

The government’s plans

The government itself has largely been silent about what it intends to do with the political capital that it is gathering from the terrorism hysteria. Thankfully, certain federal politicians have been more than happy to share their deranged fantasies of crushing all opposition to liberalism.

The outbursts from Senator Kristina Keneally, the shadow home affairs minister, have been most illuminating in this regard. The senator has argued that the fact that no “right-wing” groups have been proscribed is evidence that the proscription laws are insufficiently broad, rather than evidence that those groups do not support terrorism. In other words, she thinks that legal political activism ought to be labelled terrorism when it is done by people whose opinions she doesn’t like.

If only Keneally had been there to oversee the Victoria Police officers that failed to note the terrorism taking place. All those innocent people killed at the Grampians would still be alive.

Keneally is also on the record as saying that banning a group would send a “powerful message that these extremist views will not be tolerated”. This is highly significant, because it is a complete reversal of the government’s usual claim that they police crime, and not ideology or beliefs. Her argument is clearly based on the idea that terrorism laws should be used for explicitly political purposes—as a weapon of political terror against the government’s opponents. It must be remembered that once an organisation is designated as a terrorist group, membership is a crime with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.

Our second source of evidence is the terms of reference of the government’s “Inquiry into extremist movements and radicalism in Australia”. The committee has been asked to investigate how the government could “provide a barrier to those who may seek to promote an extremist ideology in Australia,” “preventing [sic] radicalisation to extremist views” and “disrupt and deter hate speech”. Suspiciously, none of these points seems to pertain to actual acts of political violence. There is very clearly an agenda to conflate “extremism,” also known as opinions the government dislikes, with terrorism.

What recommendations will this inquiry end up making? It’s not hard to guess, with the committee which will conduct the inquiry including Senator Keneally, two Jewish MPs and Anne Aly, who was a lifelong member of the counter-terrorism industry before entering parliament. It is being chaired by Senator James Paterson, who admits to being “particularly close to the Jewish community in Melbourne”.

We are convinced that James Paterson will give so-called far-right “terrorism” and “extremism” a fair and honest assessment at the inquiry. With so many Jewish friends, their well-known honesty and love of free speech will have most likely rubbed off on him.

From the evidence above we can only conclude that the government will use the cover provided by the “right-wing terrorism” scare to ban peaceful political activism by White dissidents, or anyone else who publicly questions liberal shibboleths like multiculturalism, mass non-White immigration and enforced tolerance of degeneracy. They may do this by proscribing activist groups under counter-terrorism laws, or by introducing extremely restrictive racial hatred laws similar to those in force in Western Australia. The government knows that it cannot allow the truth about its ruinous policies to reach the public. That it would eventually resort to state terrorism to do so was perhaps inevitable.

Conclusion

The conclusions of our investigation are extremely ugly, but the truth must be told. We have a government that wishes to cover up the horrific cost of its policies through a campaign of lies and terror. And feeding off this we have an industry of professional enablers, willing to back up the government narrative in order to profit off the misery of the victims of real terrorism, and the innocent Whites sent to prison as a result of their falsehoods. If the scum that floats on the top of this system get their way, then Australia’s increasingly tenuous claim to be a land of free men will be over. In its place will be a police state erected by criminals.

Don’t say we didn’t warn you.