← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Howard Campbell, Jr.
Thread ID: 17361 | Posts: 23 | Started: 2005-03-17
2005-03-17 17:54 | User Profile
A good summary of this Regime tactic. Don't take any candy from these babies...
Once someone joins an organization for the purposes of gathering information, the line between data gathering and participation blurs. Two types of infiltrators result -- those who are under "deep cover" and adapt to the lifestyle of the people they are infiltrating, and agents provocateurs. Deep-cover infiltrators may maintain their cover for many years, and an organization may never know who these people are. Agents provocateurs are more visible, because they will deliberately attempt to disrupt or lead the group into illegal activites. They often become involved just as an event or crisis is occurring, and leave town or drop out after the organizing slows down.
An agent may:
Volunteer for tasks which provide access to important meetings and papers such as financial records, membership lists, minutes and confidential files. Not follow through or complete tasks, or else do them poorly despite an obvious ability to do good work. Cause problems for a group such as commiting it to activities or expenses without following proper channels, or urge the group to plan activities that divide group unity. Seem to create or be in the middle of personal or political difference that slow the work of the group. Seek the public spotlight, in the name of your group, and then make comments or present an image different from the rest of the group. Urge the use of violence or breaking the law, and provide information and resources to enable such ventures. Have no obvious source of income over a period of time, or have more money available than his or her job should pay. Charge other people with being agents (a process called snitch-jackets), thereby diverting attention from him or herself, and draining the group's energy from other work.
These are not the only signs, nor is a person who fits several of these categories necessarily an agent. Be extremely cautions and do not call another person an agent without having substantial evidence.
(More at: [url]http://www.druglibrary.org/think/~jnr/bugstaps.htm[/url] ).
2005-03-17 18:37 | User Profile
Howard,
Someone asked you a question earlier and when I saw this post I thought to myself "is this about TGMNN?" :lol:
There is an interesting novel based on history that does a good job of showing this in action by Robert Moss entitled [I]Carnival of Spies[/I]. This revolves around the Comintern.
2005-03-17 18:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]Two types of infiltrators result -- those who are under "deep cover" and adapt to the lifestyle of the people they are infiltrating, and agents provocateurs. Deep-cover infiltrators may maintain their cover for many years, and an organization may never know who these people are. Agents provocateurs are more visible, because they will deliberately attempt to disrupt or lead the group into illegal activites. They often become involved just as an event or crisis is occurring, and leave town or drop out after the organizing slows down.[/QUOTE]
Good post, Mr. Campbell, Jr.
Begs the question, can an insurgent organization be operationally democratic or must it be authoritarian with all decisions made by either one individual or a handful of leaders that intimately know and trust each other? Ideally one would prefer the former, but realistically I think the latter has the only chance of any kind of long-term success, primarly because of the risk of subversion and disruption.
2005-03-17 18:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Howard,
Someone asked you a question earlier and when I saw this post I thought to myself "is this about TGMNN?" :lol:
There is an interesting novel based on history that does a good job of showing this in action by Robert Moss entitled [I]Carnival of Spies[/I]. This revolves around the Comintern.[/QUOTE]
The old Czarist Okhrana perfected the technique of State Provocation after the abortive 1905 Revolution--not that it bought 'em much time.
One drawback to posting here is that one misses a lot of personal questions...dare I ask what TGNN is? Is it some tiresome Phora thang?
2005-03-17 18:54 | User Profile
Not at all. "TGMNN" = Traitor Glenn Miller National News. Not quite a Phora thing. It's a Lindstedtism.
2005-03-17 19:00 | User Profile
Thanks, Colonel Travis.
Discipline towards the common goal is essential--whether asserted by our own hearts or applied from above.
I believe that the Resistance is better Leaderless for the time being--none of the armband crowd do squat but raise money for Abe--and ratchet up the threat to that precarious First Amendment.
I've posted this thread (along with the COINTELPRO topic) to address this appalling lack of sophistication about these measures among our folks...let none of us get tarbabied by Br'er Fox(man). :D
2005-03-17 19:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Not at all. "TGMNN" = Traitor Glenn Miller National News. Not quite a Phora thing. It's a Lindstedtism.[/QUOTE]
Miller's an Informer and should be absolutely shunned.
He'd be pushing up shamrocks if his ratlike cowardice had similarly betrayed comrades in the Irish Resistance.
2005-04-10 00:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Be extremely cautions and do not call another person an agent without having substantial evidence. [/QUOTE]I certainly agree here. As big a problem as this is, we need to be credible and careful.
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]Miller's an Informer and should be absolutely shunned.
He'd be pushing up shamrocks if his ratlike cowardice had similarly betrayed comrades in the Irish Resistance.[/QUOTE]I don't wasn't to get too much into this, his murky past. A lot of the people he were involved with had murky pasts too. But the fact that a person like him is in a leadership position is bad.
Not just because of him himself. But there are stil a lot of red flags that would normally fly around anyone like Glenn Miller, which will still be obvious. To accept a person like Miller, you're going to have a tendency to start relaxing these tendencies in general. Loosening up the standards to let Miller in, I suspect there's going to be quite a few more real AP's get in. Do you think an organization with people like Miller is going to be eager to look over every suspicious person and action with a fine-tooth comb?:lol:
:ph34r:
2005-04-10 03:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]Miller's an Informer and should be absolutely shunned.
He'd be pushing up shamrocks if his ratlike cowardice had similarly betrayed comrades in the Irish Resistance.[/QUOTE]
Do you even know anything about the Miller matter? Do you know that someone ratted on him first [which is why he "ratted" after that]?
I am fast losing patience about the Miller matter.
Please tell us the details, Howard [and you, too, Okie].
[edited]
2005-04-12 15:51 | User Profile
...he "ratted"...
Thanks, Franco. Informing is a mortal sin in the serious political world...
[img]http://www.thevmmc.com/images/victorm.gif[/img]
2005-04-12 16:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Howard Campbell, Jr.]...he "ratted"...
Thanks, Franco. Informing is a mortal sin in the serious political world...
[img]http://www.thevmmc.com/images/victorm.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
And for that matter working for federal agents.
[QUOTE]- "Here's a thought from Bill White, posted over at the nazi.org forum ...
Most "white power" groups in the US are run by either Jews or agents of the federal government. While they have a nominally independent leader, the entire second tier of organizations such as the World Church of the Creator, the National Alliance, and the Aryan Nations are and have generally been people in the pay of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, the Southern Poverty Law Center, or the FBI. Good examples are Michael (?) Reid in the Aryan Nations and Tony Evola in WCOTC (or Christopher Evans in Resistance Records, or Glen Miller in VanguardNewsNetwork, or Richard Barrett of Nationalist.org, etc ... all public and documentable informers for the federal government who have testified against other white activists)."
[url=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showpost.php?p=108713&postcount=24]Petr-National Socialists - They Hurt Our Cause[/url][/QUOTE]But of course the people involved (the rats themselves or their willing dupes like clownish Franco) think differently, and in any event, don't want to discuss it "water under the bridge".
I take this as a tacit admission of the accusations truth.
These people have given up being real agents of change in this country, for the fun of being play Nazi's, with all the perks that quiet government/jewish support provide. Culturally and politically this makes them really just another species of crypto-jews, which upon inspection suddenly jumps out all over you.
2005-04-12 17:03 | User Profile
Good article. I often read about "government agents" infiltrating Pro-White groups, but I think we can rest assured that whether employed by the government or not, they are Marranos. Look at it this way; if they weren't Jews and infiltrated a Pro-White organization they would soon enough understand the legitimacy of our criticism of organized Jewry and this would not suit the ADL. That said, they would make sure all the infiltrators are their own.
Any of us who are involved in groups of any size should learn to accept that we are always under suspicion of being infiltrators, that this is the nature of the beast and we have to deal with it. Personally, I see this situation as something that reflects the value of leaderless resistance and smaller groups. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that NA and all other such organizations are infiltrated. That does not in itself make them unworthy, just drastically reduces their potential effectiveness.
VIGILANCE.
2005-04-12 20:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=travis]Good article. I often read about "government agents" infiltrating Pro-White groups, but I think we can rest assured that whether employed by the government or not, they are Marranos. Look at it this way; if they weren't Jews and infiltrated a Pro-White organization they would soon enough understand the legitimacy of our criticism of organized Jewry and this would not suit the ADL. That seems a rather naive viewpoint.
My point was that the rle of these people in these organizations, and the organizations, typically advance the stereotypical extremism and irrationality jews chaaracterize all WN, intead all whites or nationalists, as being.
They also seem to undertake their assigned function of undermining the moderate non-Nazi nationalist movement (obviously the real threat to jewish organizations power), in almost uequal zeal as do the ADL themselves.
Any of us who are involved in groups of any size should learn to accept that we are always under suspicion of being infiltrators, that this is the nature of the beast and we have to deal with it.
True.
Personally, I see this situation as something that reflects the value of leaderless resistance and smaller groups. There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that NA and all other such organizations are infiltrated. That does not in itself make them unworthy, just drastically reduces their potential effectiveness.
VIGILANCE.[/QUOTE]Organizationswork is undoubtedly seriously affected. But rather than going underground, I think a good argument can be made for going above ground, and adopting a corporate sense of organization.
Deliberations and actions in open mean the AP's work must be done more in the open, where it is easy to see. This makes it quite a bit more difficult.
2005-04-12 22:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]That seems a rather naive viewpoint.
My point was that the rle of these people in these organizations, and the organizations, typically advance the stereotypical extremism and irrationality jews chaaracterize all WN, intead all whites or nationalists, as being.
They also seem to undertake their assigned function of undermining the moderate non-Nazi nationalist movement (obviously the real threat to jewish organizations power), in almost uequal zeal as do the ADL themselves.
True.
Organizationswork is undoubtedly seriously affected. But rather than going underground, I think a good argument can be made for going above ground, and adopting a corporate sense of organization.
Deliberations and actions in open mean the AP's work must be done more in the open, where it is easy to see. This makes it quite a bit more difficult.[/QUOTE] I don't belong to any WN group.
2005-04-12 22:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE]But of course the people involved (the rats themselves or their willing dupes like clownish Franco) [/QUOTE] Gee, I didn't know I was "clownish." Thanks for telling me.
2005-04-13 02:01 | User Profile
QUOTE=FrancoI don't belong to any WN group.
------[/QUOTE]Well you follow VNN's line closer than the hair on the back of a dog.
2005-04-13 04:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Well you follow VNN's line closer than the hair on the back of a dog.[/QUOTE]
:king:
2005-04-13 05:45 | User Profile
------------[/QUOTE]
Genuflect 'til ya kowtow, Dude. :D
[img]http://www.whiterevolution.com/images/linder2.jpg[/img]
2005-04-13 17:33 | User Profile
How can you people expect me to learn how to use proper English on this board when you yourself don't use it?
I am the most illiterate individual on this board but after reading some of you I sound like an English professor.
2005-04-15 16:19 | User Profile
Argot, itz.
2005-04-15 17:54 | User Profile
[quote=Howard Campbell]Streicheresque dittos...
I just caught that. Good one.
2005-04-16 02:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]I just caught that. Good one.[/QUOTE]I didn't. [I]se vous plait?[/I]
2005-04-16 16:16 | User Profile
S'il vous plait...
[img]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/nuremberg/Streicher&Hitler.JPG[/img]
Streicher's the bald guy.
[img]http://media.portland.indymedia.org/images/2003/10/272754.jpg[/img]
"Dittos" Limbaugh's the fat guy.