Attempted murder of the BNP, by its own leader: Nick Griffin

Sex, Manipulation, Lies and Subversion — Real Life Studies of Anti-Nationalist Dirty Tricks

Sat, 04/09/2010 - 15:59

News Team

Vital reading for all BNP members! In this important article, Nick Griffin gives us an in-depth account and provides real-life examples of how opposition 'moles' strive to disrupt and divide nationalist parties. Once you've read this, you'll have a much better understanding of what is really behind the current wave of 'internal' and media attacks on our party.

"Those who refuse to learn from history are condemned to repeat it."

Very few BNP members have been actively taken in by the campaign of attempted destabilisation currently being waged against both the party itself and its elected leadership. But rather more are at present somewhat bewildered by the ferocity of the assault and by the way in which several apparently very different strains of discontent have come together.

Everyone wants to know the answer to the same question: Why are people who have in the past seemed so devoted to our common Cause now doing all they can — including providing ammunition for our traditional enemies in the media - to try to destroy the party?

This is absolutely the right question to ask. And for those who haven't yet worked out the full picture for themselves, I hope that this analysis will help.

There are four key factors at work here:

First, there are the innocents who have been told lies or fed gossip by individuals they trust. Being innocent, they have believed at least some of what they have heard and, because it would be deeply worrying if true, have been conned into being deeply worried about the future of the party for which they and we have sacrificed so much.

I have no doubt that a significant number of those currently in the Butler camp come into this first category, and to them I simply say: "The British National Party's door, and my door, are still open to you. Come, individually, to us and tell us what you've heard that worries you so much that you have been taken in by people who are now very clearly trying to destroy the party.

We can talk about it, demolish their lies, shake hands and welcome you back. By the time the core parts of this article are read and digested by our party collectively, those who at present would tend to be unforgiving will have a far better idea of how good individuals have been conned and led astray.

From such understanding comes the opportunity for reconciliation. There are far too few genuine committed nationalists in Britain for us to quarrel and fight, or even to hold genuine mistakes against each other. Please come home!

Second, there are also formerly good nationalists who have become embittered by some personal grudge. This may be based on some genuine minor injustice they have suffered owing to a mistake or misjudgment by some key party official; we all make mistakes, myself included, and if anyone in this category has been wronged by me I am always happy to listen, apologise and make amends. In the meantime, I ask them not to take it out on the party as a whole by giving an ounce of backing to what we all know is an attempted demolition job.

On the other hand, several of the figures behind all the lies, half-truths and bullying that continue to spew from the present operation against the BNP hold grudges over matters for which they have merely received their just desserts.

When a thief is stopped or exposed, it's no surprise when he rails against those who found him out. When employees are found to be unwilling or incapable of performing their jobs to satisfactory standards, it's almost inevitable that they will cut up rough over being pulled up, disciplined or sacked. It's part of human nature to tend to be lazy, and it's equally part of human nature to resent being exposed as lazy and called to account.

In several of these cases I could have opted for an easy life by turning my blind eye to such failings. But I'm not here for an easy life, I'm here to get things done and to build an effective organisation.

Crooks, spongers and timewasters therefore have to go — so why should anyone be surprised or even worried when they take the first opportunity to get their revenge on me and on the organisation of which — through no one's fault but their own — they are no longer a useful part?

Thirdly, there are the plain jealous. In the roll call of homegrown troublemakers, there are always in any organisation a few whose opinion of themselves and their abilities is either so high that they will stop at no treachery or deceit to elbow their way to the front, or so low that their own sense of inferiority emerges as hatred for anyone who is competent, confident and well regarded by others.

Just as a group of teenage girls will often turn against the prettiest so as not to be outshone by her, so the Green Eyed God eats away at people's souls in adult politics.

So far, the various reasons for which disgruntled individuals can turn on their former friends and colleagues will be familiar to anyone who has ever been a member of any human organisation. In his sermon at the Indigenous Forum Family weekend the Rev. West told us how this ugly but understandable side of human nature even comes into play in the internal politics of the Church.

But now we come on to a factor which only affects radical political parties and pressure groups whose message, activities and indeed very existence pose a threat or potential threat to the State — or rather to those people, interest groups and ideologies which motivate and direct the State. This factor is deliberate infiltration by hostile individuals and the 'turning', whether through bribery, flattery or blackmail, of people who start off on the Light side and cross over to the Dark.

Let's get one thing straight right at the start of our examination of the problem of external infiltration and subversion: I am NOT saying that all those who fit into this category will necessarily have appeared to side with the 'Get Griffin' camp which has made so much empty noise recently. Of course, most will have done so, because turning good people against the current leadership is a highly effective way of wrecking any organisation.

But there is obviously mileage in the old 'good cop, bad cop' trick that has long been used by detectives trying to persuade suspects to confess. In the case of a political organisation this could easily be adapted to having a well-placed State or Searchlight 'mole' who is apparently 'loyal' to the leadership but who in fact is working to undermine faith in it.

This could be done, for example, by making deliberate mistakes in his or her job which annoy people and reflect badly on the leadership, giving ammunition to other plants or simple malcontents in the 'anti' camp. Or by playing on the normal personal dislikes and foibles that crop up in any joint human endeavour, telling lies designed to create and then mutually antagonise two sides.

There is no point speculating which individuals in the recent attempted wrecking operation have from the beginning been conscious enemies of the entire party. What is more fruitful is simply to provide you with the cast iron proof that such paid agents and traitors are not a figment of the imagination of the writers of TV series such as Spooks, but an all too real, clear and present danger to our Movement.

The very first thing to understand is that. just because someone does good work for the Cause, befriends you and buys pints all round, doesn't mean that they can't possibly be agents of the security services or their plausibly deniable catspaws in the Searchlight criminal conspiracy. These people have almost limitless money and decades of experience to pass to their agents and turncoats — and use both to get them into the best positions from which to do the most damage when the time comes to activate them.

Since the good people who are their eventual targets will take no notice of someone known only for doing very little badly, this means allowing such an 'asset' to make a valuable contribution to our Cause.

In the case, to give an example from a very different side of politics, of the IRA, it was routine practice for MI5 and military intelligence to allow their moles and assets to shoot lower level 'touts' (as informers are known over there) and to plant bombs in order to establish their credentials of 'good nationalists', in order that they be trusted with plans for even worse atrocities. Going leafleting in all weathers, putting money in the collection or helping us win some by-elections is nothing by comparison.

Most of our people are already well-aware of the fact that, despite our strict adherence to constitutional and peaceful campaigning, the Powers-That-Be regard our party as at least as big a threat to their control and ideas as the IRA ever was.

Anyone who doubts that need only compare the attitude of the 'mainstream' politicians and David Dimbleby to Gerry Adams and to me on our respective first appearances on Question Time. Then remember that these people went to the same schools and universities, move in the same social circles and dine in the same clubs as those who run the intelligence services. Hence it would be very odd indeed if their attitude to us was any less hysterical.

Add in the inbuilt Stalinist and tribal Zionist fanaticism of those running Searchlight and it becomes clear exactly why the BNP has been, is, and always will be the victim of the unwelcome attentions of a literally never-ending supply of plants and agents provocateurs.

Lest any unusually naive reader still have any doubts as to the truth of this basic fact of nationalist life, it is useful to look at four case studies involving the past subversion of British nationalist organisations:

SEX FOR INFLUENCE — the sordid history of Mrs. Gable.

In 1975, various young and not so young males in the National Front in London were pleased to see a young woman, Sonia Hochfelder, getting involved and active. Early suspicions over her potentially Jewish surname (an issue in an organisation heavily influenced by people who had served in Palestine up until 1948, and who had cut their political teeth under virtual siege by violent gangs of militant Zionist thugs) were allayed by her explanation that it was German.

Even initial doubters were won over by her eagerness to turn up on activities, reassuringly 'hardline' comments, and readiness to sleep with various other members — not all of whom knew that they weren't the only one. While not exactly a beauty, she was readily available, so various nationalist males did what came naturally.

So 'hardline' was young Sonia that by 1976, she was flirting politically — and a lot more personally — with various leading lights in Column 88, a lunatic - and informant riddled extremist group today roughly paralleled by the wilder fringes of the English Defence League (though anti-Jewish rather than anti-Muslim).

To put none too fine a point on it, young Sonia slept her way into positions which gave her access to gossip, intelligence and secrets in both organisations. And, having done so, she then began to use her position and inside knowledge to set people against each other and to undermine the morale and cohesion of her bedfellows and the wider movement. Her activities also contributed to the atmosphere of careless extremism which provided the media with material for smear stories designed to frighten off normal members of the public.

While some people had warned of what she was right from the start, but it still came as a shock to many when it emerged that Sonia Hochfelder was in fact an agent for Searchlight and a dedicated Jewish 'anti-fascist'.

While she did seem to get genuine sexual and psychological kicks from involvement with extremists and talk of violence, she was also ideologically motivated. Her father had fled to Britain as a socialist refugee when the Nazis marched into the Sudetanland. Brought up as a Marxist, she had joined the Communist Party at 16, before switching to a Maoist splinter group at the age of 18.

In Sonia's distinctly mixed up head, therefore, infiltrating the fascists wasn't just a big personal turn on, but also a heroic political adventure on behalf of her Marxist, Jewish, gay and coloured friends.

Gerry Gable later wrote this about Sonia, later to become his second wife and still today an active member of the Searchlight anti-nationalist conspiracy. A gushingly romanticised account of their spy-ring activities was published in the Independent on 22nd Feb 1997.

In addition to her specialised knowledge as a tax inspector, Sonia now also uses her experience as a very effective infiltrator/disrupter to teach a new generation of Searchlight spooks and grasses the tricks of the trade, and to brief and debrief them on their subversive activities.

The debriefings are particularly important, because they allow information collected by one agent to be fed to the others. The case of Andy Sykes, the Searchlight mole who became Bradford BNP Branch Organiser, and Jason Gwyn, the BBC infiltrator who used Syke's protection to make the Secret Agent smear 'documentary', shows how two operatives working to a co-ordinated plan are much more effective than two individuals working separately.

But for security reasons most moles and turncoats are 'run' without knowing each other, so their individual debriefs by experienced handlers like Mr. and Mrs. Gable are a crucial part of the whole operation, especially during one of their periodic campaigns of frantic subversion, when their various operatives are all used to inject as much poison into the nationalist body politic, and to target specific individuals for maximum effect.

How many of these creatures are there in our ranks at present? There is no way of knowing, but all experienced true nationalists will know that groups like Searchlight-UAF have along history of publishing detailed accounts not just of our major national events, but even of the goings on in many local BNP branches. That information can only come from their grasses, so there must be several dozen at least.

It would be very strange indeed if these people had not been active trying to spread alarm and division over the last couple of months, and if they are not right now agitating in support of Mr. Butler and in favour of some kind of split.

THE 'RESPECTABLE' WRECKER — the strange career of Paul Kavanagh

As the National Front rose to prominence in the mid-1970s, so did one of its newer recruits. Paul Kavanagh described himself as a businessman, wore the right suits and talked the right talk.

In a party desperately short of talented middle management and 'respectability', he quickly rose through the ranks. Industrious and apparently loyal, Kavanagh wasn't a great speaker, but he did try and, more important, he was constantly on the go, organising and attending activities in the London boroughs around his small but smart flat in the expensive Barbican development.

So when the NF launched its bid to buy a large prestige Headquarters building in London, the experienced and well-heeled Mr. Kavanagh seemed the natural and obvious choice to be given charge of setting up the holding company required — NF Properties. The fact that he packed it, and the local branches in the area, with people loyal to him, passed unnoticed in the excitement of raising the money, buying and converting the five floor Victorian warehouse in Great Eastern Street.

Kavanagh worked patiently until the 1979 General Election, then struck. Working harder than anyone had ever seen him work before, he ran a relentless campaign of black propaganda against the party leadership.

He and his clique — all trusted on account of the good work they had done in the past — regaled shocked and angry East London activists with lies about how John Tyndall and the NF's office staff were stealing all the money. Brown envelopes, mockingly marked "Members' Hard-Earned Cash" were supposedly waved around and blown with glee in pubs and Indian restaurants.

Not everyone fell for it, but enough did to give Kavanagh the head of steam to declare himself the leader of a 'reform' body, The NF Constitutional Movement, and to use this as the fig leaf excuse to try to seize control of Excalibur House for his own faction.

The asset-grab was thwarted, but amid confident predictions that the Front itself was doomed to bankruptcy Kavanagh persuaded a significant number of well-meaning London activists to defect to his new party, which was also 'sold' as the antidote to the 'extremism' — both real and imagined — of the Front's elected leadership.

Was Paul Kavanagh perhaps just a conman trying to lie his rivals out of office in order to get his hands on a valuable piece of real estate? Those who saw him operate didn't believe so. For one thing, he kept his 'Con Movement' going well after the chance of making any money was long gone. It was a joke party right from the start, so the only purpose it served was to allow the media to portray the NF as hopelessly divided demoralising its existing members and put off potential new recruits from among the 10,000 enquiries it had received during the election.

Even more telling, Kavanagh had always claimed to be in business buying and selling machine tools. In the frenetic factionalism of late 1979, a fair few activists and officials visited him in his office and industrial unit. Machine tools were clearly visible, but not one moved for months.

A young NF member had a summer job on the switchboard, secretly passing to the party's proper leadership details of who was phoning the head of the artificial rebellion against financial impropriety that never was. One kind of call was noticeable by its total absence — no-one ever phoned to inquire about buying or selling a single piece of machinery. Not so much as a single nut or bolt!

The supposed business was clearly nothing more than a cover — there only to stop people asking how someone could afford to live and give so much time and energy to the Cause.

Nowadays, sadly, to use machine tools as a cover in de-industrialised Britain would raise more suspicions than it would allay. But plenty of other excuses could serve the same purpose — a well-paid job with a public sector employer who mysteriously showed no interest in or suffered any pressure over the presence of a high profile nationalist, for example. Or a fortuitous inheritance, generously spent in pursuit of the Greater Good. Wouldn't that be convincing — and noble? It would probably even fool some people for a while.

THE BOGUS LEADERSHIP CONTENDER — Searchlight's Ray Hill and the attack on British Movement.

While Paul Kavanagh was working to destroy the NF in its East London heartland, another enemy mole was brought into play in Leicester, where the party had achieved huge votes and acquired a local Headquarters building in Humberstone Road.

The NF AGM in 1979 witnessed the return to Britain of Ray Hill, a petty criminal who had been involved on the far-right scene in the 1960s before emigrating to South Africa. Hill had already concluded that betraying his nationalist comrades was more profitable than robbing cigarette machines, and was working for Searchlight.

As the following quotes illustrate, Hill's autobiography, The Other Face of Terror, provides valuable insights into the work of a Searchlight mole, and how such wretched creatures manipulate the naive and good-hearted into helping them to wreck nationalist organisations.

Successive editions of Searchlight magazine (in the days before the Internet the main tool used for injecting black propaganda into the nationalist movement) worked to build Hill up as a big fish. Settling in Leicester, he played a major role behind the scenes pushing for the creation of another splinter group, the British Democratic Party, and then ruining its naive leader with a fake gun-running scam.

"Between us, World in Action and Searchlight and myself ran such rings around the characters involved that they must have believed that the gods themselves were conspiring against them. When the dust settled, one of Britain's smaller but more promising right-wing parties lay in ruins and its leader was in exile in Ireland." (Page 87).

Having played a small but significant role in helping to tear the NF apart — and destroyed perhaps the most promising party that emerged from the wreckage — Hill now switched to another target. The openly neo-Nazi British Movement had been founded by Colin Jordan, but by now was run by Mike McCloughlin, a Liverpudlian who in the course of the previous ten years had led the BM to a ten-fold increase in size.

Gable and Hill hatched a plan to deal with the threat, either by dividing and demoralising the British Movement so it fell below the size at which it could be effective, or — even better — saddle it with a leader who was actually a Searchlight agent. This was particularly attractive, as it would not only then be completely under control but could then also be used to siphon off the harder core elements of any genuine nationalist party into a bogus extremist safety valve, thus damaging two parties for the price of one.

Hill joined British Movement, taking with him some of the genuine but gullible nationalists he had lured out of the Front and into the BPD. With their help, and with the regular plugs in Searchlight about how good he was as an organiser, and how dangerous it would be if he became leader of the BM, he rapidly came to be seen as a serious heavyweight.

"The strategy we adopted envisaged that I would endeavour to establish myself as a rival to McLaughlin for the party leadership. As long as I recruited enough support, the plan could not fail. Either I would depose McLaughlin and then allow BM to collapse under leadership the like of which they would never have seen before, or McLaughlin would be forced to expel me, in which case I would split the party, taking as many members as possible with me." (Page 133).

Central to the plan was a concerted effort to discredit McLaughlin by accusing him of failure and of financial impropriety:

"In private conversations with activists I missed no opportunity to make guarded suggestions that while I was out there on the 'front line' with them, McLaughlin was comfortably ensconced in North Wales 'raking in the membership fees'." (Page 134).

As the lies and poison manufactured by Hill seeped through and undermined the BM, the Searchlight plotters began to work on the final stages of the plan — to get Hill expelled from the already weakened organisation, and then join up with John Tyndall (then leading the small and ineffective New National Front) in a new 'party of nationalist unity', in which Hill would already have enough influence to be able to set off a civil war in that in due course.

"If I could present a challenge to McLoughlin, and strongly make a case for unity, we could both tempt him into expelling me, in which case I could not be accused of splitting the movement, and prepare the ground for a significant number of BM members to leave with me, encouraged by the prospect of unification with another organisation.

"For the moment, I concentrated on building myself up as an alternative leader, assiduously cultivating activist members at every opportunity. I used the same old theme that the movement's leadership was stale, tired, lazy and probably corrupt and that Change was needed.... Some members even started muttering about having an election for a new leader." (Page 137).

Faced with Hill's relentless campaign of black propaganda lies, McLaughlin did indeed expel him, and the naive members Hill had conned rose up in his defence:

"My expulsion caused a furore among the membership. In London Tony Malksi pledged his support for me..... at the next Leicester meeting, the members unanimously agreed that I should ignore McLoughlin's edict and carry on as local BM leader.... From around the country came similar declarations of support from groups of activists.... To all intents and purposes, BM was split down the middle." (Page 141).

Backed by Searchlight's money and lawyers, Hill went on to issue a writ against McLaughlin for 'invalid' expulsion. The costs of contesting this added to the financial crisis caused by the split over Hill's removal and the artificially created worries over financial probity. Ground down by the character assassination and by the endless financial crisis, in September 1983 McLaughlin simply closed British Movement down.

Even before that happened, however, Hill had already taken enough members with him to join the newly-founded British National Party to be a major player in it. His autobiography includes a photo of him sharing the top table with John Tyndall at the press conference at which the BNP was launched in 1982, and another of him and Tyndall at the head of the new party's first march in London a few weeks later.

Hill was already in pole position to continue his work:

"Behind my involvement in the whole enterprise was the certain knowledge that as long as the process of splitting and fusion and then more splitting could be prolonged, no far-right group would be in a position to look outwards and project itself as a serious political force. At that time, we anticipated that we would later be in a position, if BNP began to grow, to split it down the middle by provoking a life or death leadership battle between myself and Tyndall, and then begin the cycle of internal war all over again. As it happened, the BNP never even began to show potential for growth, a factor which helped our later decision that I should go public." (Page 165).

Ray Hill "came out" not long afterwards, in a Channel 4 documentary that cast him as the hero who had broken up the National Front, the British Democratic Party and the British Movement. In the case of the NF, that was a huge over-statement. In the case of the BDP and BM, it was all too true.

One man, having worked his way up, been a drinking mate and stood shoulder-to-shoulder with real nationalists in confrontations with the violent left, had set real comrades against each other and destroyed all they had achieved. Yet despite the clear evidence of what he had done, and despite repeated warnings from the more perceptive, some of those who had followed him didn't believe it until they heard his boastful confession on TV.

As our study of the parallel case of Sonia Hochfelder has already shown, such plants can also be female. When they are, they have the added advantage of being able to make allegations about sexual harassment or assault — a totally different line of attack to the financial impropriety trick but one which can be used in the same way.

When the now defunct Workers Revolutionary Party, for example, was proving a nuisance to the British State (at one point they had a daily newspaper, funded by Libya's Colonel Gadaffi), their leader Gerry Healy was repeatedly accused of molesting the idealistic but often neurotic young females who formed a high proportion of their recruits.

Internal jealousies, attention seeking, crude attempts at blackmail and straightforward Special Branch black propaganda lies about "cold, clammy hands" (the exact phrase used in a recent recycling of the tactic) combined to create a cloud of suspicion over the target, who — while undoubtedly a Marxist fanatic — appears to have been wholly innocent.

It was and is noticeable, however, that those involved in making unfounded allegations never have any assets and so are safe from any chance of having to provide evidence for their smears in a court of law.

POLICE PLANTS TOO — the State intervenes directly

So far we've looked mainly at plants who are almost certainly nothing more or less that assets of the sinister Searchlight operation. Unfortunately, however, it is not the only well-funded agency that runs agents and disrupters within radical organisations. The black propaganda campaign against the leader of the Workers Revolutionary Party, for instance, was the work of Special Branch and MI5, and it is a well documented fact that various such State agencies have long taken an unhealthy (for us) interest in the BNP

On Sunday 14th March this year, The Observer ran two remarkable reports on the undercover life of a policeman member of a hitherto secret unit of the Metropolitan Police, the Special Demonstration Squad.

"Officer A — with a long ponytail, angry persona and willingness to be educated in the finer points of Trotskyist ideology — was never suspected by those he befriended of being a member of the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), a secret unit within Special Branch, whose job is to prevent violent public disorder on the streets of the capital. Known as the "hairies" due to the fact that its members do not have to abide by usual police regulations about their appearance, the unit consists of 10 full-time undercover operatives who are given new identities, and provided with flats, vehicles and "cover" jobs while working in the field for up to five years at a time.

"Officer A joined the SDS in 1993 after two years in Special Branch. It was a time of heightened tension between the extreme left and right and almost every weekend saw clashes between the likes of the Anti-Nazi League, Youth Against Racism, the British National Party and the National Front. The SDS is believed to have infiltrated all such organisations."

The second article is more valuable still. Entitled "Inside the lonely and violent world of the Yard s elite undercover unit," it reads:

"They got drunk together, stood shoulder to shoulder as they fought the police and far-right activists, and became so intimately acquainted with each other's lives that in the end they were closer than brothers. But it was all a sham. Hidden among the close-knit and highly motivated group of violent far-left activists was a serving police officer, operating deep undercover, whose presence was intended to bring the group to its knees.

"That man, known only as Officer A, has now come forward to give his account of the years he spent working for Scotland Yard's most secret unit, the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), on a mission to prevent disorder on the streets of London. For four years in the mid-1990s, he lived a double life six days a week, spending just one day a week with his wife and family.

"Week after week, year in and year out, he lived and breathed the life of a hardcore Trotskyist agitator with a passion for heavy drinking, a deep-seated hatred of the police and a predilection for extreme violence."

"I had a really good time with my targets and enjoyed their company enormously – here was a genuine bond. But I was never under any illusion about what I was there to do. They were not truly my friends. The friendship would last only up until the point when they found out what I really was. I was under no illusion about what would happen to me if they did."

Officer A allowed himself to be spotted and recruited by his target, and then agreed to attend a small demonstration the following weekend. When the event turned violent, he found himself standing next to his target and others from the group as they launched a series of attacks on uniformed police.... "That day developed into a major ruck. At the end no one would have believed I was a police officer."

Officer A wasn't the only one attacking his former colleagues. At the time of his deployment, other SDS officers had infiltrated opposing right-wing groups such as the BNP and Combat 18, as well as other far-left groups.

Once inside the groups they were ordered to infiltrate, it was relatively easy for SDS officers to rise to the top because they were often prepared to work long hours on boring, administrative jobs.

Having won the trust of several high-profile anti-facism and anti-racism activists on the far left, Officer A was ideally placed. Over the next two years he worked his way up to become branch secretary of Youth Against Racism in Europe, a leading anti-racist organisation that was a front for the far-left group Militant.

"You get given a file on your target that tells you everything you need to know. You become that person's brother. You know everything that makes them tick. You know how much they like to drink, you know where they like to drink. You know what kind of music they like, you know what kind of women they like. You become the brother they never knew they had. None of it is ever said to the target, it's far more subtle than that. The first time they get in the car, it will be just the right kind of music playing. The first time a redhead walks by it will be: 'God, I'm really into redheads.' It's all done fantastically cleverly.

"If someone started talking about getting good information from a female target, we all knew there was only one way that could have happened. They had been sleeping with them." He himself had slept with two members of his target group. Although not officially sanctioned, such activity among SDS officers – both male and female – was tacitly accepted and in many cases was vital in maintaining an undercover role. "You can't be in that world full-time for five years and never have a girlfriend or boyfriend. People would start to ask questions," said Officer A.

The most chilling part of the article is Officer A s assessment of the effectiveness of such tactics:

"If the SDS had been in existence at the time of the Suffragettes, their campaigns would never have got off the ground and would have been quickly forgotten.....Once the SDS get into an organisation, it is effectively finished."

Bear in mind that this is only one police squad, working only in London. Are there similar teams in the police forces of Merseyside, Yorkshire, Glasgow, etc? It would be strange if there weren't, wouldn't it?

After all, virtually every urban police force in Britain operates in the knowledge that one spark could set off an explosion of communal violence between various different ethnic and religious groups. Wouldn't the really odd thing be if the leftist/Common Purpose clones who have been put in charge of our police forces DIDN'T use their power and resources to try to destabilise the British National Party?

We see their orders being carried out every time venue owners are intimidated by police threats, so why should we have any doubts as to their capacity to use other dirty tricks against us in the shadows?

Then there are the national security services, who operate separately from the police, jealously guarding their own bureaucratic and intelligence empires, as well as doing the jobs for which they too are well paid. Chief among these is Britain's domestic intelligence service, MI5 (not to be confused with MI6, which handles foreign affairs intelligence matters.

MI5 has spent a hundred years monitoring and disrupting home-grown 'subversive' organisations. There is a small library of serious studies of its activities, many of which confirm that part of MI5's brief is to infiltrate and destabilise a wide variety of target groups, including the BNP.

To give just one example, in Defending The Realm - inside MI5 and the war on terrorism, published in 2003, Mark Hollingsworth and Nick Fielding note that: "...as the National Front declined into a mere rump, the British National Party has been seen as a more serious threat. By the early 1990s, MI5 had successfully recruited or turned several agents within the BNP, although they also retained some full-time active agents in the National Front."

The authors go on to point out that one of MI5's ways of justifying its continued huge budget in the wake of the collapse of the Communist bloc in 1989 has been to brief Ministers and journalists alike on the need to keep 'far-right extremists' under surveillance and control.

Would it not be really strange if these various State security bodies hadn't been mobilised to disrupt our General Election campaign, and if they weren't right now doing everything in their power to keep the disruption going - especially given the inevitable social and political impact of the gathering storm clouds of spending cuts, financial crises, the unwinnable Afghan War and the inevitability that, sooner or later, another Muslim terror plot will work?

Why would they not be working to hinder us from signing up the new recruits attracted by that campaign and from applying the lessons we've learned from that campaign to improve our organisation for the future? Stopping such things is exactly what they are paid for, and you can bet your life that they are at their work right now.

CONCLUSION

So now you know! Four different, real-life examples of the use of credible, long-term, at times popular and apparently sincere and constructive 'moles' who wreaked havoc in the British nationalist movement by playing on the honest naivety of some and the ambition or discontents of others.

In a way it's a frightening thought - that we're up against well-connected and massively funded opponents who have such a long track record of using a succession of plants and traitors to keep the nationalist movement in repeated factional convulsions designed to demoralise and demotivate.

But at least the hysterical desperation of their current efforts gives us an insight of just how frightened our opponents are of the formidable party machine that we have built together - and of the growing support it commands among huge numbers of ordinary Brits [sic, Britons].

The more an individual involved is attacked with smears and demonization propaganda, the more you know he or she is understood by our enemies to be vital to our continued progress.

Fortunately, the very fact that you now know their game gives you the moral shield and psychological armour you need to brush off the blows aimed at you and other sincere patriots by our most dangerous and relentless enemies.

How can you tell friend from such camouflaged foes? Clearly, as the case studies above show very well, their training and collective experience makes it virtually impossible to catch them out for certain. Only occasionally do Searchlight allow one of their top moles to 'come out' for the purposes of a sensationalist TV programme, only once in a blue moon does a police officer end up going rogue and suing over stress.

So you have to make up your mind on the balance of probability rather than absolute proof. So don't judge people who claim to be sincere nationalists on how they look or sound, or on what they claim to be. Judge them simply on the crucial question: Is what they are doing good or bad for the British National Party?

Are they encouraging activism or apathy?

Are they trying to raise money or to stop people giving?

Are they telling the truth or spreading lies?

If there is a genuine problem (for no party is perfect) are they quietly taking it to the people who could do something about it, or are they plastering it all over the Internet to the delight of our external enemies?

Are they being attacked by the ruthlessly controlled and anti-British mainstream media, or are they suddenly in favour with the papers, the BBC and Rupert Murdoch's Sky News?

Are they brutally attacked on the far-left blogs and crank neo-Nazi forums, or are they treated with kid gloves by such enemies of our Cause?

If you read what they write or listen to what they say, do you feel enthused, enlightened and more determined than ever to win our sacred struggle? Or do they leave you sad, worried and demotivated?

The answers to those questions will tell you all you need to know for, as ever, the Biblical maxim sums it up: By their fruits shall ye know them!