From: milne_v@hotmail.com (milne_v)
Newsgroups: alt.mindcontrol
Subject: Violence and Terror
Date: 16 Oct 2002 12:58:03 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 273
Message-ID: <de7a2515.0210161158.15e3e669@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.215.29.66
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1034798283 32329 127.0.0.1 (16 Oct 2002 19:58:03 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Oct 2002 19:58:03 GMT
Path: rsl2.rslnet.net!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
Xref: rsl2.rslnet.net alt.mindcontrol:3419

Blood and Honor Field Manual
Violence and Terror
Combat 18 

A sensitive chapter but not as essential and domineering as our
enemies believe (or at least will have general opinion believe).
Still, no topic should go undiscussed, and considering the seriousness
of its consequences, I will tread carefully not to cause any
misunderstandings - neither from friend nor foe.

In school we were taught that only those without arguments use
violence, just to leave class with a good chance of getting yourself
involved in a bloody brawl over some youthful disagreements. In other
words: theory is one thing, reality another. This might seem cynical
and definitely not "politically correct" but there are as many degrees
of violence as there are reasons for it. The instinctive violence of
self-defence is naturally the most acceptable to society in general.
Less attractive may seem the sports violence of hooligans -
individually or in organized groups. Same goes for the occasional
street violence of skinheads (which may in fact be pure self-survival
in the ongoing gang wars between anarchists and immigrants on one side
and patriotic skins on the other). And the bikers of the MC clubs have
a long tradition of violence in all shapes and forms. It is easy to
scorn and condemn these people as "mindless thugs" and "criminal
brutes". Not as easy but far more constructive is to channel this
aggressive energy into political use. When the "proper patriot"
wishing to make a demonstration is confronted with the bloodthirsty
red mob I am certain that he or she wish there were more "thugs" and
"brutes" around in our own camp. Who else should make up the columns
of our security forces? There is also another kind of violence that at
least in certain European countries is generally accepted, namely the
aggressive mass demonstrations. If the farmers of France can
forcefully fight back against state sell-out and police brutality,
there should be nothing morally wrong in using force to defend your
people and country. And if there is any sense to any violence, it must
be stronger than that of the opposition. This is pure logic but still
seems to be constantly stressed. Hesitant half-measures will get you
beaten up, just as it will put your organization under the boot of
your political enemies.

Reds rely on violence. Not because they don´t believe in their own
stupid rhetorics but because violence have proved more efficient due
to their numerical advantage. And of course, the fact that hitting a
"Nazi" on the head seldom gets you in trouble with the law and more
often than not make you the hero of the press. How long shall we let
ourselves be humiliated and ridiculed by these Anarchist thugs doing
the dirty work of the Capitalists, Communists and Zionists? Pacifism
is for foolish dreamers and genetic wimps. Violence as self-defence is
natural and unquestionable. But then again, attack is said to be the
best form of defence. So where does that lead us? Nobody would deny
that for all those years since Adolf Hitler gave his life for our race
in a Berlin bunker, the nationalists and race-conscious Whites (as
well as the entire Aryan race for that matter) have been on the
defensive. Is it not high time to fight back? This is certainly
suggestive argumentation, isn´t it? It might easily be interpreted as
it is time to grab those guns and start shooting back. Well, it is not
the time! Far too many brave comrades have been taken out of
circulation by ZOG due to playing with guns and grenades. And I
deliberately use that word, because in 88% of the cases we are not
talking of people using weapons, rather they are collecting them -
hidden (but obviously not good enough!) or strutting around with them,
attracting ZOG agents like flies to the smorgasbord. In the majority
of the remaining cases, aggressive frustration has been the igniting
factor rather than careful revolutionary planning. Exceptions are of
course The Order and a few other more organized and well-planned
violent strikes against the ZOG regime. As for organizations openly
using violence in their operations, I guess Combat 18 is not only the
most well-known but also one of the very, very few presently existing.
And even C18 is - at least for now - not very active on the operative
front.

The more organizations and individuals there are who TALK about
revolutionary violence. Most are sincere, but there are undoubtedly
also enemy provocateurs and bogus groups among them, trying to lure
honest patriots into illegal situations and then entrap them. Examples
of this are legion. And ufortunately, sincerety is no guarantee for
either intelligence, actual activity or success. Those who do choose
the risky road of active rather than theoretical armed resistance,
should not only think twice before engaging in such dangerous
underground activities. The underground cell should also carefully
plan its operations and avoid any contact with those engaged in the
legal part of the struggle - for its own security´s sake but also not
to jeopardize the ordinary political work by linking these
organizations to subversive violence and what might be labeled as
terrorism. As for the established NS movements and patriotic parties,
they can obviously not participate, initiate or even actively support
acts of political terrorism. On the other hand, the pathetic attacks
from certain "moderate" groups (some sadly calling themselves "B&H")
condemning acts of direct force for their own petty safety not only
shame the cowards but far worse split the Movement as a whole. At this
stage, it is essential to have a clear view of the situation which
National Socialists as well as all White patriots find themselves in.
Therefore we need to ask ourselves several important questions. What
is terrorism? Is it solely the classic "mad bomber" or the gun-toting
guerilla groups? Who are the greatest terrorists? Those who
deliberately seek to neutralize our civil rights, minimize our
political freedom, ridicule our historical heritage, pervert our
national culture, mongrelize our people and eventually exterminate our
race? Or those who - feeling they are left with no other alternative -
use violence to fight back?

The media and other leftist institutions are quick to glorify any
armed resistance coming from their own side. Kurds are oppressed and
therefore have the right to engage in acts of terrorism not only in
Turkey, but also all over Europe. Likewise the Muslim Kosovo Albanians
and the Chechnyans. And naturally, any band of Indian Reds in Latin
America. (The IRA as long as the socialism overrides the nationalism,
and the Palestinians as long as they are no serious threat to
"Israel".) Even the murdering Red Brigades of Italy and the
Baader-Meinhof group in Germany gave the red wine radicals some
delightful thrills. In fact, all over the Western world Communist and
Anarchist groups on the lunatic-fringe preach the violent overthrow of
the Capitalist system. They are left in peace while any nationalist
group even as much as hinting the use of force, are persecuted,
prosecuted and banned. The obvious reason is that not only do these
loony lefties present no real threat to ZOG, they are actually ZOG´s
own political mobsters allowed to run about causing havoc in order to
physically wipe out the real resistance against both Marxists,
Capitalists and Zionists, namely the Nationalist opposition.

An example from Sweden shows exactly what I mean: While the Chancellor
of "Justice"´s court action against three B&H national revolutionaries
for spreading White Pride music took place in Helsingborg, Red
arsonists burned down the studio of nationalist rock band Ultima Thule
in Nyköping. While ZOG´s right hand try to confiscate (and eventually
burn) the patriotic rock CDs, its left hand burns down the CD source
straight away! What happened to the freedom of art? How dare these
hypocrites moan over the 3rd Reich´s symbolic burning of perverted and
subversive literature while these quasi-democrats actively or
passively allow the oppression of cultural freedom under their own
rule? What kind of signals do the ZOG perpetrators send out by such
actions? It is pure incitement to counter-terror.

If that´s not enough, how about this: That curse to real European
unity, the "Jewropean Jewnity" of bankers and bureacrats,
cosmopolitans and traitors, engage in a hysterical campaign against
Austria for exercising its democratic right to vote in the government
of its own choice (I bet ZOG regrets that Ostmark is not a part of
their Bundes-German province now!), while at the same time accepting
any Communist, pro-Communist or post-Communist in other European
governments and doing multi-billion monkey business with the biggest
Communist dictatorship ever, namely Red China. As I said, it is
tempting to flirt with ideas of armed resistance, terror actions of
sabotage and the violent overthrow of the ZOG yoke. And the oppressive
rulers of today who engage in various degrees of state-sanctioned
terror have nobody but themselves to blame for outbursts of so-called
"Nazi" anti-terror. The moral responsibility lies solely on those who
suppress others´ rights and threaten those people´s very existence.
Let that be crystal clear. However, is it wise to totally leave the
few options so-called democracy still give us? Personally, I think we
should try to work within the system - within reason. There are
principles and ideas we represent that never can be compromised,
whatever the regime demands of us. And some times acts of violence, in
defense or as necessary reprisals are unavoidable. But we should in my
view try to exploit those possibilities the present-day laws actually
give us. Some are of another opinion. This must be respected rather
than condemned. Nobody has a guaranteed recipe for victory. On the
contrary, the rebel might point to the track record of the post-war
NS/Nationalist movement which shows a seemingly endless string of
failures. But those who choose to risk both their own life and that of
their comrades-in-arms and maybe even innocent by-standers have a
great responsibility which they should not take lightly. Without
mental training and physical fitness these people will not last
through the sabbath, and although their heroism and initiative may be
admired, this admiration can never make up for the loss of brave
comrades through incarnation or liquidation for efforts that were all
in vain.

This book is primarily a manual for political work, written by and for
Blood & Honour supporters. It is not a field manual for guerilla
warfare. The latter are easily accessible from most survival outfits.
Books on that topic range from US Army manuals to Anarchist cookbooks.
Therefore I do not intend to go into detail about warlike operations.
I will just say that there is, even on this matter, several schools of
conduct. You have those who believe in the relatively new strategy of
Leaderless Resistance, meaning small cells of a tiny group of national
revolutionaries (including one-man-operations) acting independently
and striking at the ZOG system through direct actions of violence
and/or sabotage. The phrase was coined by the well-known American NS
seditionist Louis Beam, who describes it in the following way:
"Conversely, the LAST thing Federal snoops want, if they had any
choice in the matter, is a thousand different small phantom cells
opposing them. It is easy to see why. Such a situation is an
intelligence nightmare for a government intent upon knowing everything
they possibly can about those who oppose them. The Federals, able to
amass overwhelming strength of numbers, manpower, resources,
intelligence gathering, and capability at any given time, need only a
focal point to direct their anger (ie Waco). A single penetration of a
pyramid style organization can lead to the destruction of the whole.
Whereas, Leaderless Resistance presents no single opportunity for the
Federals to destroy a significant portion of the Resistance." Another
famous American national revolutionary, our comrade John Metzger of
WAR has put it like this: "Leaderless Resistance is a fancy title for
self-starting fanatics who have adopted an ideology of racial and
personal survival and prepare to carry it out by any means, needed the
objective. Sophisticated organizations are a waste of time and money
during this period. The individual or small cell holds great power in
their hands. Does the Jew need endless meetings to tell him that the
Nazi is the enemy? Does the wolf need a membership card to stalk the
deer? Did the Unibomber have a uniform or wave a flag? Leaderless
Resistance is not the end product but it is the best during this phase
of the struggle. People join membership groups to make themselves feel
the strength of the group. I say, if you are not strong, there is no
group that can make you so." Others see this as merely chaotic and
inefficient provocations against the colossal ZOG power machine. They
prefer army-like operations of the classic guerilla style with a
central co-ordinator and strict leadership of the "old" school. (For
an interesting and though-provoking criticism of Leaderless
Resistance, see Resistance magazine, Winter 2000.)

I have myself discussed this in an article in Blood & Honour
Scandinavia magazine no. 3 and came to the conclusion that there are
both pros and cons on both sides of the argument (surpise, surprise).
It would seem that the LE style is best suited for a country of USA´s
size and mentality. America has a long and deep-rooted tradition of
vigilante action which hardly exists in the European countries.
Especially the Nordic societies are much smaller and thereby more
difficult to operate in as an anonymous strikeforce. This does not
mean that there have been no attempts to sabotage society through
individual action in the Scandinavian countries. The Reds started it
in the beginning of this century and took up the tradition again
(though in a far more wimpy way) in the sixties and seventies. In
Norway there have been fairly bloody attempts by lone NS wolves in the
seventies and eighties, while in Sweden national revolutionary
comrades who finally ended up in the prison organization Aryan
Brotherhood have committed several acts of terrorism according to the
theories of Leaderless Resistance. Then there was the famous case of
the Swedish so-called Laser Man, who shot a long line of immigrants,
killing one of them. And the murder of Marxist prime minister Olof
Palme in Sweden may, or may not, have been an ultimate act of
Leaderless Resistance.

But apart from the Palme murder, which does suggest a powerful
organization behind the termination, all have been caught - be they
Red, Blue or Brown activists. There is also the risk that nationalist
leaders promote the idea in order to avoid responsibility, or even
worse, avoiding getting their own hands "dirty". And it is true that
the Swedish VAM (White Aryan Resistance) finally collapsed due to its
lack of organization and tendency towards leaderless resistance. Their
activities were spontaneous and ill-prepared - too often the result of
momentary "inspiration" rather than a careful strategy of individual
warfare.

So what´s the answer? It is - as mostly in life - neither yes nor no.
In some countries Leaderless Resistance is highly recommendable. In
others, like Germany, it has through the dictatorial excesses of ZOG,
become a must for the die-hard National Socialist. (Rote Armee
Fraktion is turning into Braune Armee Fraktion right in front of the
frustrated STASI officers!) In Scandinavia - especially Sweden and
Denmark - there now exist well-organized NS movements which actually
know the score. They are prepared to work legally if "democracy" lets
them. But they are also willing to change their modus operandi if that
should become necessary. Unity does mean strength, and a
well-organized movement of strong individuals multiplies that strength
by its number of members. On the other hand, some comrades work best
on their own, and their actions are of such a nature that total
anonymity is needed and no organization can take responsibility
without forever leaving their legal status. Last year the Washington
Post reported that the anonymous loners who show up at meetings but
not as members, listen but do not make themselves heard - and then go
about their own subversive and violent business, are the biggest
threat to society according to FBI. These lone white wolves must be
respected and left alone to stalk the worst enemies of our race. They
expect no support and assistance but they deserve acknowledgement and
understanding.

Whichever way you choose is eventually up to no-one but yourself.
However, whether you work in an organization shoulder-to-shoulder with
your NS comrades, or you take the dark and lonely road of individual
counter-terrorism, you should put all your energy, all your heart and
all your brain into your actions!

http://www.anti-fascism.org/da/fat/c18-field-manual-violence.html