More on Southgate:
[QUOTE]2.7 Our 'leader' as a security threat (to put it mildly)
2.7.1 The taste for structured organization
Southgate is very fond of creating structured organizations. To be sure, the ‘group’ that he ‘leads’ (if group it be -- we are talking here of some 10 individuals of varying ideological shades and with varying -- but uniformly low -- levels of commitment) changes its name and character from time to time in keeping with Southgate’s ‘butterfly mind’, but it remains an organization nonetheless and, as such, carries with it all the dangers inherent in political organizations. Structured organizations invite many problems. They are easy to infiltrate -- particularly at the upper levels. They involve fixed channels of communication, which can be intercepted or disrupted. And most serious of all, their leadership can be bribed, threatened, subverted or co-opted, particularly where that leadership is weak and ‘flighty’. If someone were to offer Southgate a hefty bribe to hand over the names, addresses and personal details of his supporters, given what is known of his behaviour, how much confidence would you have, dear reader, in his ability to resist?
2.7.2 The dangers of e-groups and Internet ‘discussion forums’ generally
Much of Southgate’s work is conducted on the Internet. He claims that he also has an operation that works beyond the Internet -- if this is the case then it is difficult to identify any impact that it has ever had on anything; it does not, at the time of writing, seem to have attracted much attention from anyone. His Web sites and other propaganda direct people to participate in a certain discussion group currently hosted by those robust opponents of capitalism at Yahoo!
The establishment of ‘forums’ and ‘discussion groups’ should be an obvious way for the security services to gain intelligence information about potentially subversive elements in any society. People who are perceived as likely to engage in criminal or subversive activity would be attracted to the Web sites of these ‘forums’, at which point their IP numbers would be automatically logged. This means that the authorities could potentially track them down. Thereafter, these people would be engaged in all sorts of friendly and casual conversations in which, of course, they would relax enough to reveal all sorts of information about themselves -- and their colleagues.
This should be fairly obvious to anti-Establishment activists but it is not and they appear to fall for it hook, line and sinker, time and time again. The amount of careless talk floating around these forums is frightening. Certainly, we have seen the national-anarchist group being used to attempt to gain personal information about people. One Danish supporter was asked to divulge his real name, for instance (he wisely refused, although unfortunately he has already passed precisely this information to absolutely the wrong people). We also see various 'polls' being set up to ask members of the group about personal matters -- one in early 2004 asked them for their location.
Just think. Suppose that you are a police force or other security service very concerned about terrorism, political subversion, ‘political extremism’ and so forth. Could you really miss an opportunity like this? Would not the temptation be overwhelming to set up a discussion forum on ‘communism’ or ‘Osama’ or ‘National Socialism’ or ‘national-anarchism’, for the specific purpose of finding out who is who, what they are thinking and what they are doing? Indeed, you might not need to set up such a forum: you can simply take over an existing one, or flood it with agents, or simply watch the chit-chat and learn from it. The security services would, indeed, be completely mad to miss such a tactic.
The use of ‘sting’ Web sites and discussion groups by police to trap paedophiles is a well known and well publicized tactic. One of the most famous examples is the Operation Candyman case. The FBI’s own Web site described the operation thus:21
On 01/02/2001, FBI Houston initiated an investigation after an undercover agent identified three Yahoo! Egroups involved in posting, exchanging and transmitting child pornography. One website depicted the Egroup as the following: "This group is for People who love kids. You can post any type of messages you like too or any type of pics and vids you like too. P.S. IF WE ALL WORK TOGETHER WE WILL HAVE THE BEST GROUP ON THE NET." (SIC)
An Egroup is described as an "Electronic Group" or "community" of people communicating via the Internet, for one purpose and/or issue (i.e.: child pornography). These groups can be "closed" or "open" communities. In a closed community you must be invited in by a member of the group and the identity of the group cannot be identified by non-members searching the Internet. In open communities, such as "Candyman," any person searching the Internet can conduct a search by title or category, locate the group, and may be granted membership by the monitor of the group. The monitor may be the creator of the group or a member selected by the group.
Through the issuance of a court order to Yahoo!, FBI Houston concentrating on the Candyman Egroup, identified 7,000 unique E-mail addresses with 2,400 of the addresses outside of United States and 4,600 located domestically. Subpoenas were issued on all of the Internet providers for the addresses within the United States. Information on approximately 1,400 subjects were provided to Houston.
Given the widespread public disgust at paedophilia, and the high priority afforded it by law enforcement, it is perhaps surprising that pro-paedophile Web sites can still be found at all on the Internet. But they can -- quite easily -- as a few minutes’ work with a good search engine will reveal. Some have discussion boards. Can these be anything other than ‘sting’ operations?
There is no shortage of very suspicious political Web sites. For instance:
The Red Action discussion board. Red Action is supposedly a break-away faction from the Socialist Workers Party. However, its Web site seems to do little other than denounce socialism as outmoded and generally express pessimism about the state of the world. It did, however, run a fascinating discussion board until December 2004. Here we had members of the British ‘white Right’ (a variety of parties too -- I have seen British National Party, Freedom Party and White Nationalist Party supporters on this forum) swapping banter and at times almost friendly discussion with their avowed opponents purportedly from the ‘anti-racist Left’. However, the most striking aspect of this forum was the tendency for posters to gossip -- often about matters that suggest some degree of involvement in infiltration and undercover work. Of course, this stimulates other posters (not all of whom are particularly bright) to gossip too. What a minefield for policemen and the security services!
Forums for ‘discussing’ Al Qaeda. There is a discussion group for people to ‘discuss Osama bin Laden’ (
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/discussosamabinladen/[accessed 15 November 2003]) and a message board for the same purpose (
http://www.mbpolitics.com/MBIssues_Osama_Bin_Laden.html). There is also a ‘Taleban’ discussion forum (
http://www.itszone.co.uk/Taleban.htm). The obvious question here, surely, is why? Would not the e-mail addresses and tittle-tattle of those participating in these forums be of interest to the security services?
Interesting Hamas sites. The hamasonline Web site (
http://www.hamasonline.com/ [accessed 15 November 2003]) appears to be a pro-Hamas site. Surprisingly, it has a facility enabling supporters to ‘contact us’ by e-mail. Further investigation reveals that the site is hosted by 357Hosting, an Islamic hosting company in the Netherlands. Given that the United States and the European Union (of which the Netherlands is part) have both designated Hamas as a terrorist organization, and that the government of Israel has announced an ‘all-out war’ against it (press release, 2 September 2003), it might indeed seem surprising that such a Web site should be hosted openly in the Netherlands. But given that it does ask Hamas sympathizers to e-mail it, perhaps we should not be too surprised. Would a genuine Hamas Web site, run by those with the interests of Hamas at heart, encourage potential supporters to consign their sympathies to writing and to send them via e-mail to a server in the Netherlands? Would not the e-mail addresses of Hamas sympathizers be of enormous interest to the CIA and to Mossad?
Uruk.net. Defunct since the early days of the American invasion of Iraq in April 2003, this purported to house the official Internet presences of Saddam's Iraqi government. Among its many attractions was a 'presidential' Web site in which anyone could send e-mails to Saddam himself. And people did -- in their thousands. And some of them were splashed all over the Western press when a 'security hole' was supposedly 'found' in Uruk.net enabling these letters to be read. (Some security hole!) Given that some of these letters appeared to be from individuals offering to sell Saddam weapons of mass destruction, the suspicion that Uruk.net was either an American operation or heavily infiltrated by American agents must at least flit across the mind of anyone taking an interest in such things .22
It is worth noting that the mainstream press have commented on the police use of the Internet to monitor dissident political groups. For example, the Toronto Star of 28 June 2004, in an article titled 'Web is terror's tool -- and trap', carried the following observations by Anick Jesdanun of Associated Press:
NEW YORK—Al-Qaida-linked terror groups and their sympathizers have in recent months made a big splash on the Internet, making it their communications channel of choice.
They're benefiting from free discussion boards, e-mail accounts and other online forums for propaganda, recruitment, fund-raising and even planning.
If law enforcement has done little to squelch these outlets, it's only in part because of the difficulty of catching moving targets. More importantly, these online soapboxes can provide investigators with crucial leads.
'It's a game of cat and mouse in which the cat is always going to be behind,' said Michael Vatis, former cybersecurity director at the FBI. 'It's a more effective strategy to actually use these sites for gathering intelligence rather than engaging in a futile effort to shut them down.'
Mark Rasch, a former U.S. justice department computer crimes prosecutor, said he wouldn't be surprised if law enforcement agencies set up some of these forums -- much as undercover investigators create phony businesses to lure mobsters.
When such sites do get shut down, it's generally the work of hackers or the private Web hosting companies that unwittingly allow them to publish online, said Gabriel Weimann, who studies terrorism online at the U.S. Institute of Peace.
Even if we take the charitable view that Southgate is not working for the Establishment, is it really an act of wise leadership for Southgate to set up an Internet forum where all who take an interest in national-anarchism are encouraged to participate and where their identities and gossip can be monitored easily by the state? Is this not an act of asinine incompetence?
2.7.3 The tendency to 'take things down'
We have noted Southgate's 'butterfly mind' -- his tendency to flit from one cause and position to a diametrically opposed cause and position. Such people are, of course, always somewhat dangerous to their colleagues but the danger is particularly high when they inflict damage upon the movements that they leave.
According to an interview with Dan Ghetu, Southgate started out as a Labour voter (!).23 He became involved with the National Front in 1984. What happened next is explained in his article 'Transcending the beyond: from third position to national-anarchism'
By 1986 the NF claimed to have finally purged its ranks of -Tories- and -reactionaries- and, much to the chagrin of the traditional Left, was soon forging alliances with Black separatist organisations like Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam and commending the 'third way' stance of Khomeini's Iran. Indeed, whilst the works of Belloc and Chesterton were used to provide the NF with a unique economic platform, the organisation was also advocating Popular Rule, an interesting socio-political theory in which the structure of British society would become so decentralised that it would come to resemble that of Colonel Qathafi's Libya. Not culturally, but in terms of establishing street, area and regional committees through which power could be decisively channelled up from the grass roots. This, of course, was in stark contrast to the NF's former dependence upon the electoral voting system. The NF, in awe of its Libyan counterparts, was now distributing copies of Qathafi's Green Book and happily chanting the mantra 'no representation without participation'. As a consequence, therefore, the NF's rejection of the ballot box confirmed its inevitable admittance into the revolutionary domain of extra-parliamentary politics. The movement went on to express its support for regional independence, European solidarity, positive anti-racism and co-operation with Black and Asian communities residing in England.
These were exciting times for supporters of Revolutionary Nationalism, but the personality clashes which tend to prevail in all political circles eventually tore the organisation apart during the Autumn of 1989. On one side were gathered the supporters of Derek Holland, Colin Todd, Nick Griffin and Roberto Fiore, all of whom were involved in the establishment of a new rural project in northern France. On the other were Patrick Harrington, Graham Williamson and David Kerr, who believed that the administrative core of the organisation should remain in the British Isles. Holland, Todd, Griffin and Fiore all left to form the International Third Position (ITP), whilst Harrington and the remaining supporters of the NF disbanded the movement in March 1990 and formed Third Way.24
Given that Southgate left the NF for the ITP, one does not need to do much reading between the lines to see that Southgate became involved in much faction fighting, the end result of which was to tear the National Front apart.
However, those in the ITP who had regarded Southgate as an ally were to find themselves bitterly disappointed. The same article continues:
Throughout those years I had served as Regional Organiser with both Sussex NF and the Tunbridge Wells branch of the ITP, publishing magazines such as The Kent Crusader, Surrey Action, Eastern Legion and Catholic Action. Combined with Northern Rising (published by the ITP-s Yorkshire and Lancashire branches), these publications comprised five-fifths of the organisation-s literary output. When the ITP virtually disintegrated in 1992, these magazines all withdrew their support. The ITP, meanwhile, was left with Final Conflict, comprising a mixture of skinhead youth culture and Christian bigotry.
The split occurred for a variety of reasons, most notably the fact that the ITP had rejected the internal cadre structure which had been used to such great effect during the NF period. Coupled with the fact that Derek Holland and several others had left the country and were now completely disinterested in the Third Positionist struggle in England, Roberto Fiore was attacked by myself and many others for his involvement in a ruthlessly Capitalist enterprise which operated from Central London. Several outgoing ITP activists also accused Holland and Fiore of stealing many thousands of pounds they had invested in property based within the group-s rural enclave in northern France. But the most decisive factor of all, however, was the ITP leadership's increasing obsession with Catholicism and its gradual descent into the reactionary waters of neo-fascism.25
In short, having played a prominent role in 'taking down' the National Front, Southgate launched what he thought was a devastating attack on the ITP, fermenting dissent within its ranks, accusing its leadership of all sorts of things and taking down its publications. The ITP survived and Southgate was left to try to mop up stragglers by creating a new group:
From the tattered remains of the ITP came a new independence organisation, the English Nationalist Movement (ENM). New attempts were made to restate the principles of the Third Position, and ENM publications like The Crusader and Catalyst attacked both Hitler and Mussolini and preferred to emulate home-grown English socialists like Robert Owen, William Cobbett, Robert Blatchford and William Morris. This was combined with a call to arms.26
Of course it was only a matter of time before Southgate unilaterally decided to 'take down' both the ENM and its publications, although the Rising Press continued. Southgate describes his efforts thus:
In 1998 the ENM changed its name to the National Revolutionary Faction and began to call for armed insurrection against the British State in even stronger terms. A series of detailed pamphlets and internal bulletins were disseminated amongst Nationalists across the length and breadth of the country, seeking to end the British National Party-s (BNP) obsession with marches and elections. The revamped organisation also forged contacts with like-minded Third Positionist groups abroad, such as Nouvelle Resistance (France), the American Front, Spartacus (Canada), the Canadian Front, Alternativa Europea (Spain), National Destiny (New Zealand), Devenir (Belgium), Rivolta (Italy), Free Nationalists (Germany) and the National Bolshevik Party (Russia).27
So, having played a major role in the demise of Britain's National Front and having made a valiant effort to do the same to the International Third Position, Southgate then launched a serious onslaught against the (then very wobbly) British National Party and sought connections with wobbly groups overseas, presumably with an eye to 'taking them down' (Russia's National Bolshevik Party, of course, saw a split between Limonov and Dugin, although I have no evidence that Southgate was instrumental in this).
The National Revolutionary Faction (NRF) project was no more successful than the ENM. The British National Party was taken over by Nick Griffin and began to preach a reformist agenda fairly harmless to the Establishment, mushrooming in size, at which point Southgate seemed to lose interest in it. Southgate has informed me -- and has been putting it about to others, including those aligned with the ITP -- that even at its height the NRF had no more than 20 members. (I suspect that, if this were indeed the case, several of those were probably Troy Southgate.) Accordingly, it adopted national-anarchism, apparently in response to a perception that anarchist groups had the potential to cause much more of a security problem for the Establishment than the white nationalist groups that had been Southgate's earlier target: 'In recent years the NRF has rejected Third Positionism and now describes itself as a National-Anarchist movement.' Of course this 'rejection' of Third Positionism has not prevented Southgate from continuing to attempt to forge contacts with, and keep an eye on, Third Positionists and National Bolshevists via his Web sites and the national-anarchist Internet group.
On 29 January 2003, and much to the surprise of at least some of his associates, Southgate posted the following message to various Internet groups:
URGENT ANNOUNCEMENT
We are currently designing a new website to promote the cause of National-Anarchism. However, rather than continue as an organisation with a membership structure, we have decided to disband the National Revolutionary Faction (NRF) altogether. This is a decision which should have been made some time ago. The NRF no longer exists and we shall now function as a political think-tank and be known as the 'National-Anarchists'. This group of thinkers and intellectuals is centred around a philosophy which will hopefully make a considerable contribution to the anti-capitalist struggle in the years ahead. If you are a free spirit and genuinely identify with this current or wish to write articles for the new website, then please get in touch immediately. The idea must come first and this is your chance to become involved in the advancement of a new ideology for the future of all peoples.
Yours for National-Anarchism,
Troy Southgate,
London.28
In a subsequent post to the national-anarchist Internet group on the same day, Southgate elaborated: 'This was something which was well overdue. We are now building a brand new website that will promote National-Anarchism on a world scale . . .' A Greek comrade was somewhat surprised: 'This decision was approved by all the members of the NRF?' she enquired. The response came back: 'Yes, it was. The NRF no longer exists. This is not the tme for organisations and movements. The world is already full of them. We must now enter the intellectual and ideological battlefield in order to promote National-Anarchism as an IDEA . . .'
Nor was even this the end of the story. As we have seen, in January 2005 Mr Southgate launched an organization called the British New Right! Presumably the objective of this is to forge links with right-wingers, persuade them to provide information about themselves, lead them into a variety of dead-end activities that never accomplish anything, and then to abandon them as he moves on to form yet another organization . . .
As a historical note we should remark that our own Web site,
http://www.nationalanarchist.com, was created specifically because of the complete failure of anything noteworthy to happen even some months after the announcement of the demise of the NRF was made. The rest is history. We have already commented on Southgate's role in taking down Voice of the Resistance and his attacks on me personally and on the nationalanarchist.com Web site.
This, then is the horrible truth: not only does Southgate have a record of lurching from one worldview to another but he has a perhaps unrivalled record for lurching from one organization to another, wreaking havoc on everything that he touches, taking down numerous initiatives and publications, completely demoralizing those few of his associates who he does not stab in the back, making no headway whatsoever with any anti-Establishment project, and invariably ending up serving the cause of the Establishment.
This is the man whom we are supposed to support as the leader of anti-Establishment forces throughout the world!
2.7.4 Violence
Since its inception, the
http://www.nationalanarchist.com Web site has always held a consistent view on violence and criminality and upon those who urge their followers to engage in such. Its message has been:
As a general rule the costs of unlawful acts vastly outweigh any benefits. The forces of law and order, in the Western world in particular, are vigilant and have access to quite frightening technology. If someone suggests to you that you should do something unlawful the chances are that the person making this suggestion is either (a) an idiot, and therefore dangerous, or (b) an agent provocateur -- an enemy deliberately trying to get you into trouble. We therefore explicitly do not encourage you to break the law or commit acts of terrorism.29
In the light of these words, Southgate's position on violence is rather interesting. Let us return to his article 'Transcending the beyond' and revisit the words we quoted earlier:
From the tattered remains of the ITP came a new independence organisation, the English Nationalist Movement (ENM). New attempts were made to restate the principles of the Third Position, and ENM publications like The Crusader and Catalyst attacked both Hitler and Mussolini and preferred to emulate home-grown English socialists like Robert Owen, William Cobbett, Robert Blatchford and William Morris. This was combined with a call to arms.30
Note the last sentence. When Southgate left the ITP and set up the ENM he issued a 'call to arms'. The article adds, further on: 'In 1998 the ENM changed its name to the National Revolutionary Faction and began to call for armed insurrection against the British State in even stronger terms.'
The ITP has had enormous fun commenting on Southgate's 'call to arms' and 'call for armed insurrection'. The idea of Southgate, apparently a married man with a family and only a handful of supporters who have proven extremely reluctant to do anything at all (even to write articles for his journals) suddenly leading an 'armed insurrection against the British State' -- the British state with its vast intelligence resources, its numerous police officers, its state-of-the-art armed forces complete with sophisticated weaponry and other technology -- is truly the stuff of comic strips. I shall resist the temptation to repeat the ITP's jibes about 'Field Marshall Southgate'. I shall instead content myself merely with reproducing part of one paragraph from the ITP's book Satanism and its Allies:
Of even greater consequence is the fact that Mr Southgate is actively promoting terrorism. Those who have been around in the National Struggle a great deal longer than Mr Southgate will know that such a position has always been pushed by two types: lunatics or State agents. Why? Because the British State is one of the strongest in terms of repressive capabilities -- to believe that a handful of 'revolutionaries', who publish irregular, photocopied bulletins, can rid the country of the State through terrorism is tantamount to believing that the moon is made of cheese. Have we been unfair? Read this . . . 'It is impossible to beat our enemies at their own game and to participate in a System which is inherently corrupt is to give credence to the very system itself. Violence, on the other hand -- or what we would prefer to call legitimate armed struggle -- is not born out of frustration, due to our inability to gain power through the ballot box; on the contrary, it is a necessary evil which must be used in self defence. On the other hand, in order to facilitate our self defence in the cause of the Nation, we must remember that it is often wise to strike first.' Big words, but what is Mr Southgate going to strike back with? Unsold copies of The English Alternative wrapped up in bundles?! . . . 31
Has Southgate's position changed in recent months? Unfortunately not. He's still playing the same game, which appears to be the game of trying to get young and innocent anti-Establishment activists with violent inclinations in trouble with the police. Having been mocked merciliessly by the ITP in the past he is now a little more subtle -- but not much. As at January 2004 his Web site calls for 'revolution on the periphery' (which is a somewhat more defensible position than 'armed insurrection against the British State' although one is still left wondering how he would carry it out). In his 2003 article 'Organising for the collapse' Southgate argues that 'Creating a counter-culture or, indeed, a counter-power structure alongside the existing system is a basic necessity, but looking at current trends realistically, there is to be no peaceful or purely political solution to the multifarious ills of modern society. '32 He continues: 'But where do we begin? 'The means for the preparation of revolutionary combat already exist, and are there to be exploited. Let's examine three areas into which National-Anarchists should be integrating themselves with the specific intention of gleaning some vital knowledge for the future . . .' These three areas in which he urges national-anarchists to become involved are listed as '1. Physical fitness', '2. Self-defence' and '3. Further activity'. He elaborates 'further activity' thus: 'If revolutionary activists are forced to defend themselves and their families from the faceless mercenaries of the State - and this includes the police, army, landlords, tax collectors, bailiffs etc. - then they must become familiar with the means to do so. It is worth noting that if you can spare one evening a week and just one weekend every month, then why not join the Territorial Army (TA)?'
I do not even need to ask at this point whether Southgate's position on violence is not powerful evidence that he is in the pocket of the security services -- a classical agent provocateur attempting to induce young radicals to plan criminal acts that would then permit the security services to arrest them and pass them on to the courts, which would 'take them down' for several years. I am quite content to permit readers to look at the evidence presented in this article and draw their own conclusions on that matter, as I have drawn mine. Let us grant him the benefit of the doubt and assume, purely for the sake of argument, that he is not working for the British intelligence services. Can anyone really take seriously, let alone accept as a leader, a man who, with no resources, apparently no military experience, and no discernible organizational ability calls upon others to engage in 'armed insurrection against the British State'? Are we not dealing here with, at best, a fruitcake?
2.7.5 Questionable connections
I want to begin this section with a thought about policing tactics and then a couple of anecdotes. The relevance of both will become clear in due course.
The security services have a problem whenever they want to infiltrate or disrupt radical anti-Establishment groups or to spread gloom and disillusionment in their ranks. One would imagine that an experienced intelligence officer would need at least a few years' training -- it is presumably important and even dangerous work. This means that experienced intelligence officers are unlikely to be young (although they might look young). This poses a difficulty given that many of the groups they wish to spy on and wreak havoc upon are young -- they tend to be full of people in their late teens and early twenties. The age factor means that it would not always be easy for an experienced officer to fit in. Moreover, as officers age they become increasingly incapable of fitting in. It is just not possible for a security service officer nearing retirement age to mingle naturally with a group of students or teenagers. Thus, although they might accumulate valuable experience and contacts as they grow older, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to deploy these assets 'in the field' as it were.
We might speculate that one possible solution to this would be for them to persuade their children or other family members to use some of their spare time casually to join and report back on targeted groups, perhaps in exchange for financial remuneration. This would be a win-win scenario (although not for the groups being targeted). The parent receives on-the-ground intelligence; the child receives training for a possible career in the intelligence services; the intelligence services receive trained recruits whose backgrounds and idiosyncracies are known to them as well as the all-important intelligence information.
Hold that thought.
My first anecdote concerns an experience that I had as a member of a small, legal but somewhat anti-Establishment political party in the 1980s. Our local branch had a few active members and we met on a monthly basis. These meetings were attended by a young fellow called Stanway. Stanway openly admitted that his father was 'in the police'. We thought nothing of this -- we were not out to do anything illegal and Stanway had, indeed, been open about his connections. One day we decided to stage a protest against an activity held by a rival political group. As far as I was aware this was supposed to be an entirely lawful event. Unknown to me, one of our number had brought a firework along, presumably with the intention of using it to disrupt the activity in question. When we arrived on the scene, the police were waiting for us. They went straight for the person in possession of the firework and arrested him. He was charged with possession of an offensive weapon and received a fine. (We later pitched in to help pay the fine.) It was evident from court proceedings that the police had acted on information passed to them -- in short, we had a mole in our ranks. Strangely enough, we did not immediately think of Stanway as the culprit -- there was another supporter who seemed more dubious, although we had nothing definite on him. Many months later, I was sitting with a fellow member in a local police station. Party property had been stolen and, as we were young and innocent and not particularly anti-police in those days, we had decided to see whether we might get official help in recovering it (such help, of course, was not forthcoming -- but that is another story). We were ushered into a room and told to wait. We waited. While we were waiting we amused ourselves by looking at various bits of paper on the noticeboard. One of the pieces of paper detailed various police football teams. As we looked at it we noted the name 'Stanway'. We also noted that, thanks to a supreme piece of incompetence on the part of some rather sleepy police officer, this individual's Special Branch affiliation was noted. At that point the penny dropped.
My second anecdote concerns a much more recent experience. I was again a member of a small, legal but somewhat anti-Establishment (although by no means anti-police) political party. Time and time again, I was warned by various people, especially the party leadership, to beware of a certain individual named Braithwaite. He had a track record of causing disruption and mayhem and was widely regarded as a probable plant. My own observations of him bore this out as he was exceptionally disruptive and unhelpful, although I did not regard him as the primary threat to us. One day I was distributing leaflets with him and we began talking about the police. He mentioned, very casually, that he had a close family member (I believe he said an uncle -- I cannot recall) in the police. At that point I felt a definite sinking feeling.
Since then I have always been rather suspicious of radical individuals with 'family connections' in the security services.
Let us now return, with a bump, to our 'dear leader', Mr Southgate. Let us look at some of the people, other than Satanists, with whom he has associated.
2.7.5.1 The Bill White connection
White's main claim to fame is that he runs the Overthrow.com Web site. He has, in the past, been closely associated with Southgate. Thus, for instance, on 27 April 2003, he reported 'I often trade emails with Troy Southgate and like both him, the NRF, and the publication Synthesis.'33 In January 2005 his Web site reproduced Southgate's press release announcing the birth of his 'British New Right' project. He has been a prominent contributor to Southgate's National-Anarchist Internet group. His name has frequently been mentioned alongside Southgate's in the outpourings of those opposed to national-anarchism. He has identified himself in the past as a national-anarchist, and has considerable knowledge of 'paganism',34 Evola and Traditionalism35 -- the classic trademarks of this particular faction. He even has the almost obligatory Satanist connections:
I once let a girl stay with me who had been a prostitute and who was a heroin addict and who was almost entirely dead inside -- but who would sit in the sunlight in the morning with a picture book of puppy dogs and smile in a child-like fashion at them. She was an extreme case -- she once attacked a small child and tried to drink its blood and killed and ate a cat raw because Satan told her to -- but the extreme cases prove the rule.36
Like Southgate, White appears incapable of maintaining a coherent political position for any period of time. He appears to have drifted from being a 'utopian anarchist' to a 'libertarian socialist' to a Marxist to a supporter of the National Alliance, to an opponent of the National Alliance, to a national-anarchist, to a supporter of the World Church of the Creator, to a denigrator of all political movements, to some sort of National Socialist. There was supposed to have been some sort of 'falling out' between White and Southgate during the latter part of 2003 -- White ceased to post on Southgate's national-anarchist Internet list and several articles critical of White appeared in that forum -- however, as recently as late 2004 adverts for Wilcox's Web-ring were appearing on White's Web site and, as we have seen, White has publicized the British New Right venture for Southgate, which seems to suggest that the supposed split is more apparent than real.
White's Web site deals in gossip and appears to spend even more effort in attacking anti-Establishment individuals and groups than in attacking the Establishment itself. In this regard it serves to spread suspicion, disunity and disillusionment in anti-Establishment ranks. Indeed, its tone is very similar to the Red Action Web site and to the British 'anti-fascist' magazine Searchlight, both of which clearly have an agenda of destroying their target groups from within by disillusioning members and setting leaders at each others' throats. The anti-Establishment articles that do appear, together with the very crude anti-Jewish line taken by the site (quite at odds with White's evident intelligence in other fields), seem to be 'hooks' to create a readership among anti-Establishment individuals and to appeal to hardline 'white right' elements -- presumably his principal target. (Infiltrators of 'far-right' groups frequently overdo the anti-Jewish line -- partly because they are anxious to build connections with more 'extreme' individuals and partly because they tend to subscribe to the patently incorrect Establishment dogma that all 'far right' groups are secretly hardcore Nazis and that more moderate noises from such group are merely false propaganda.) That White poses a danger to the very 'far right' movement whose attention he seeks can be observed by a comment on a Web site apparently belonging to the Jewish Defence League (JDL), itself a fairly anti-Establishment Jewish group, which, although ferociously critical of White in many respects, nevertheless concedes that 'he may be taking down various Nazi's [sic] for his own financial and political advantage'.37 An example of this 'taking down' appears to have been his Shopwhite project. This solicited readers to send him their credit card and other personal details in order to purchase items of 'white' interest. Needless to say, the project ceased after only a fairly short period. On 5 September 2003, the following was posted to the White Survival discussion forum:
Now his ShopWhite site has been hacked and all the members' private information included names, home addressess, phone numbers, and credit card numbers have been posted to newsgroups (search for 'ShopWhite' on Google groups). I hope the members remember to cancel their cards, otherwise they will have thousands of dollars of charges on them at the end of the month!38
Accusations that White is working for the intelligence services have come from a variety of sources. He has responded to these and various other, more eccentric, allegations in an article on his Web site. The relevant part of this article reads thus:
Accusation #2: That I have worked as a researcher for the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Response: This accusation is the totally false creation of the mind of Mark Cotterrill, in trying to explain how and why CNN destroyed his poorly conceleaed illegally money-laundering operation known as the American Friends of the British Nationalist Party. Cotterill is absolutely convinced that I secretly worked with Morris Dees and co. to destroy him. This is not true.
My first reference to Cotterill was a passing reference to him in my discussion of the overall corruption of the Buchanan campaign. Later, LSN printed accusations that Cotterill was illegally laundering money and that groups like the SPLC were planning a media and federal law enforcement campaign to destroy him. Cotterill flipped out at what was our warning to him, and accused us (and me) of plotting to destroy him.
Eventually, CNN producer Henry Schuster did call me with their story, and I gave him some very vague and general information on the AF-BNP in exchange for hearing all the information he had -- which was already so much more than what I had that to say I contributed anything at all to the story that they didn't already know is ridiculous. What I did do is circulate to Cotterill, Griffin, and others (through back channels and middle-people), information on what CNN was planning to run.
This seriously screwed CNN, who had been working with the SPLC, and the story had to be transfered last-minute to USA Today. CNN later ran their piece separately.
Cotterill brought his misery on himself, by, among other things, refusing to believe my information was good. I have never dealt with the SPLC in any manner, and in fact have quite hostile relations with many of their writers (some of whom have expressed deep personal enmity towards me -- like Kevin Coogan and Michael Reynolds).
Accusation #3: I am under CIA mind control.
Response: Obviously, this is not true. This accusation circulates on some strange discussion boards, and is based on the fact that my father did, actually, work for the CIA (and hated it). I'll go into more detail on this with the next accusation.
Accusation #4: I work for the CIA, law enforcement, FBI, Mossad, et cetera ...
Response: Again, not true.
Amusingly, this accusation started when I was 16, and was first spread by Chuck "Chuck0" Munson, who is one of the only people I have ever observed actually maliciously sabotaging activist projects while pretending to agree with and lead them -- he is the most suspicious individual I know of in the activist scene. Not to go off on him, but he not only regularly writes poison pen letters to everyone from other activists to the major media to the FBI and police, he often recruits other naive activists to write similar letters for him. He is a not-right dude -- and he is ironically militantly defended by some as being a "real activist." I just don't deal with anyone associated with him, as a rule, and let him work, because often he has been the unwitting dupe spreading messages that I have wanted to see propagated, and I like that.
The only "evidence" ever presented for this is that my father did work for the CIA. My father fought as an officer in the Air Force in Vietnam and was awarded a Bronze Star (I think that's what it is) for bravery. After the war he joined NASA, where he designed space shuttles, worked on the Church Committee investigating COINTELPRO, and eventually went on to work for the CIA and Department of Defense. He was the author of several articles and a book on strategic airpower for the Brookinggs Institution in the 1970s. He absolutely hated the CIA, told me never to work in or for the government, and is now retired.
Beyond that, I have never had any links or ties to government agencies (of any government), and have never even been to the CIA. There are a lot of people in the radical world who are disturbed and paranoid and think anyone who disagrees with them politically must of course be working for some agency, because they honestly believe everyone not working for the government agreess with them. Besides saying that these things are prima facae ridiculous, I don't know that any other response can be made.
There is another difficulty with White. We know that one of the main tactics used by the Establishment to neutralize opposition figures is that of bribery. For example, when the Americans invaded Afghanistan to overthrow the Taleban regime there were numerous reports of various warlords being offered large sums of money to switch sides. One ongoing reason for my scepticism about leaders and leaderships is simply the ease with which people can be bought. Can White be bought? It appears that he has already named his price: a humble $250,000. This is what he wrote in an article entitled 'How much would I sell this Website for':
I'm going to make an open offer to the people who are real upset and want to see this website shut down. If you want this website, you can buy it. My selling price starts at $250,000. For that, I will package in assignment of the trademark, assignment of all the copyrights to the published material, the software, the banner ad contracts, and a non-compete that says I will not author material for publication for one year.39
It is not my intention, here, to reach any definite conclusion as to what game Mr White is playing. I merely present the allegations that have been made, together with his rebuttals, and leave my readers to draw their own conclusions (as I have done).
2.7.5.2 The Christian Bouchet connection
I have mentioned above the ITP's documentation of Southgate's connections to Christian Bouchet and their allegation that Bouchet was 'known in France for shopping people to the police'. Like Southgate and White, Bouchet appears to drift from one organization to another, having apparently been expelled from at least two political groups and one Satanist group. That Mr Bouchet appears to have the effect of an agent provocateur, if not the intent of one, might be observed from the behaviour of one Maxime Brunerie. Brunerie was a supporter of Bouchet's organization and was referred to on the Web site of that organization as an 'enthusiastic, determined and serious militant'. On 14 July 2002, Brunerie attempted to assassinate President Chirac. He was apparently being watched: he was immediately wrestled to the ground and arrested.
2.7.5.3 The Larry O'Hara connection
The ITP publication Satanism and its Allies mentioned above has the following to say about our 'dear leader':
Of greater consequence, however, is the fact that Mr. Southgate appears to be very friendly with the 'Secret State' researcher, Larry O'Hara. It is to be doubted that this individual is working for the Left [the ITP takes the Left/Right thing seriously -- DM], since he has many of the hallmarks of someone working for the State. But whether it is the Left or the State is really of little consequence -- one is as bad as the other, but it does not stop Mr. Southgate raving about everyone and every group that he does not like to the said Mr. O'Hara. This in itself ought to make people who are in touch with Mr. Southgate wonder whether or not information is being passed on about them.40
Dr Larry O'Hara is an investigative journalist and the author of Turning up the Heat: MI5 after the Cold War. He thus purports to be an authority on the doings of the British security services, which is interesting as it forms a fairly direct link between Southgate and those who move in MI5 circles. He is widely described as an 'expert' on British fascism, apparently his doctoral interest. Like Southgate and White, O'Hara appears to have dedicated considerable amounts of energy to promoting gossip and tittle tattle about anti-Establishment figures (not just those who can be dismissed as fascists -- he appears to have alienated people from quite a variety of political backgrounds), typically fingering them as moles of the 'Secret State'. (This is not to say that his allegations are incorrect -- although some have claimed that they are -- but simply that a pattern is emerging here whereby Southgate and his associates seem to be part of a loose network that tends to spread gossip, suspicion and disillusionment in anti-Establishment ranks.) O'Hara publishes a newsletter entitled Notes from the Borderland. An advertisement for issue 4 offers readers the following:
Keynote article this time is that by Larry O'Hara and David Pegg concerning how the secret state and fascists disrupt the anti-EU movement. If that thought sounds fanciful and irrelevant, think again--it just shows how successful attempts have been (since the Labour Left's 1970s 'Alternative Economic Strategy') to keep anti-capitalist/Green struggles separate from anti-EU ones in the UK (but not Ireland/Denmark). Read all about:
• MI5's operation against James Goldsmith's Referendum Party using a fascist and a South African intelligence asset.
• How the secret state is trying to destroy the UK Independence Party. Dramatis Personae include the Cook Report, Alan Sked, Nigel Farage MEP, Nick Griffin & John Tyndall of the BNP. Also John Grieve, Met Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner. We catch Teflon John's mob bang to rights covering up the theft of UKIP membership lists.
• The real position of supposed anti-fascist organisation Searchlight on the EU, as let slip in a secret document by co-editor Nick Lowles. Read (in his own words) exactly how, speaking of anti-EU groups, he promised "utilising sources inside these organisations, the European Movement will be furnished with information not otherwise easily accessible. The report and drip flow of information will provide your organisation with invaluable ammunition to add to your cause".
• The true extent of fascist infiltration into the anti-EU struggle & what should be done about it.
• The truth behind Norman Tebbit's claim MI6 had infiltrated UKIP. We trace his source, and analyse the operation.
It should be noted that whereas Southgate has admitted having contact with O'Hara he has specifically denied the ITP allegation that he appears to be 'very friendly' with him, vehemently denouncing it as a lie.
2.7.5.4 The Ken McVay connection
Kenneth McVay runs an anti-racist Web site in Canada. Within hours of Southgate publishing his notorious attack on me, that attack was reproduced on McVay's Web site. McVay has close connections with B'nai Brith. Particularly noteworthy is the discrepancy between McVay's version of his career and the version given in a local newspaper. The McVay version has it that he started in the marines, then moved to Canada to provide computer services to fish farmers, then this collapsed and he accepted menial jobs before making a career of giving anti-racist lectures. Eventually he became involved in Internet marketing consultancy work.41 However, there is evidence consonant with the view that much of this might have been fronting something rather more sinister. The cat was apparently let out of the bag by an article in the Toronto Star, dated 22 March 1999, which stated that Ken McVay was ‘a member of the Vancouver police department for 19 years’.42
It might also be worth mentioning that McVay's father worked in military intelligence.43 Given my above reflections on security officials and their children, and given Bill White's interesting comments about his own father, this latter observation makes the otherwise tenuous link with Southgate somewhat more worrying.
2.7.5.5 The Qasim Khan connection
In the final days before the parting of the ways between Mr Southgate and myself, Southgate was casting around desperately trying to manufacture an ideological basis to justify taking action against us. He evidently found this rather difficult, not least because we advocate a fundamentalist brand of national-anarchism that does not add much to the basics -- to reject us is to reject national-anarchism itself. Nevertheless, in a post to his national-anarchist Internet group on 30 November 2003 Southgate attempted to insinuate that the crucial difference between what he viewed as true national-anarchism and our brand was that we were not racialist enough:
There are thousands of anarchistic variants out there, but the fact that National-Anarchism came about was due to the racial separaist stance of its adherents. We have no problem with other forms of anarchism or other decentralists, we just want to stress that National-Anarchism is an essential racialist phenomenon. That's what makes it different. Anarchism sui generis, perhaps, but Anarchism all the same.44
Judging from some of the follow ups, this remark caused more than a little amusement among others in the group. Nevertheless, the remark is particularly interesting given that, for a long time, and certainly at the time of writing this article (October 2004), Mr Southgate's essentially racialist national-anarchist group has had a Pakistani 'contact' (described as such on Southgate's Web site) by the name of Qasim Khanzada, or Qasim Khan. On his Web site Southgate gives Qasim's e-mail address as
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com.
For a period of time Qasim maintained a Web site entitled jumeirahbeach.com. It took the form, predictably enough, of a discussion board on which participants were invited to discuss politics. It had several interesting features. One was that Southgate had a national-anarchist section of his own. The other was that many of the other participants appeared to be Muslims. Interestingly, the Muslims did not appear to object to having an essentially racialist phenomenon like Mr Southgate in their midst. Naturally, participants were encouraged to give personal details about themselves, and Southgate even posted a photograph, supposedly of himself. A militant anti-American line was taken by most posters, with one token American taking an aggressively pro-US stance (but not objecting to the presence of the national-anarchist section!). There were numerous attempts to encourage participants to express their views on 'terrorism', violence and related matters. In short, it had all the hallmarks of a CIA operation to uncover links between the 'far right' and Islamists, or to identify members of the 'far right' with sympathies towards Al Qaeda. However, nobody really bit and at the time of writing this article the site has been permitted to die.
What is particularly interesting about Qasim, the Islamic national-anarchist, is that the very same contact address that Southgate gives for him leads us to some interesting Usenet posts made by Qasim a couple of years earlier. Here is what he wrote on 26 November 2002:
From:
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com (Qasim Khan)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Want to be Penpals,Friends
Date: 26 Nov 2002 21:58:11 -0800
Organization:
http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <56f536ea.0211262158.47ca9359@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.145.87.125
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1038376691 13600 127.0.0.1 (27 Nov 2002 05:58:11 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Nov 2002 05:58:11 GMT
Dear ....,
Im 27 Male from Pakistan (Karachi City) looking for someone with
Interest in being a pen or epal. My msn messenger id is
vsats@hotmail.com. I used to live in USA and had very good and bad
experiences and I miss the culture very much. Ive started studying
philosophy even thought Im an MS in Comp Science.
Are you someone who like to make friends worldwide, I am for real.
regards
Qasim
It is quite fascinating that this 'national-anarchist' should have found himself missing the culture of the USA. Most genuine national-anarchists are sick to the teeth of US culture and abhor the manner in which US culture is imposed on other peoples. But worse was to follow from Qasim the next day, in a reply to a 15-year-old German schoolgirl who had been looking for penpals:
From:
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com (Qasim Khan)
Newsgroups: soc.penpals
Subject: Re: looking for penpals
Date: 27 Nov 2002 00:41:01 -0800
Organization:
http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <56f536ea.0211270041.65936e88@posting.google.com>
References: <3DBD0D9A.BFFF5482@yahoo.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.145.87.125
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1038386461 26186 127.0.0.1 (27 Nov 2002 08:41:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Nov 2002 08:41:01 GMT
Matze [address deleted] wrote in message news:<3DBD0D9A.BFFF5482@yahoo.de>...
> hi,
>
> i'm a 15 years old german girl and looking for penpals all over the
> world!
> my hobbies are paying piano, doing a lot of sport, and much more!
>
> if you are interrested write to:
weldumdaucherin@yahoo.de
>
> hope to hear from you soon
>
> martina
Dear Martina,
I hope all is well and youre making the best out of what you do. Im a
27 year old Pakistani born living in Karachi, I like fun loving people
and I enjoy the outdoors very much. I have lived in the United States
and enjoyed my self there and same here. I like reading , poetry ,
social sciences. I m a technologist and like to make friends from all
over.
Qasim
One wonders how Southgate reconciles his view of national-anarchism as an essentially racialist phenomenon with the fact that his 27-year-old Pakistani 'contact' was attempting to initiate a relationship with a 15-year-old German schoolgirl. (Note also Qasim's subtle shift, in the space of one day, from a philosophy student to a technologist.) Some 12 minutes before replying to this young lady Qasim had made the following comments:
From:
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com (Qasim Khan)
Newsgroups: soc.penpals
Subject: Looking for single woman
Date: 27 Nov 2002 00:29:30 -0800
Organization:
http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <56f536ea.0211270029.3836b05c@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.145.87.125
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1038385770 25252 127.0.0.1 (27 Nov 2002 08:29:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Nov 2002 08:29:30 GMT
27 years old dynamic eductaed I am , likes of philosophy,reading
having fun and passioatte 6.1" tall technologist seeking woman for
marriage. Divorced and simgle again I am from Pakistan. A good person
of any ethnicity and class will go with an ample level of intellect
,loving caring and charming. Never did I know marriage would end but
shit happens and I am only human. I used to ilve in texas now in
Karachi pakistan.
Again, one wonders how Mr Southgate would reconcile his view of national-anarchism as an essentially racialist phenomenon with his Pakistani 'contact' soliciting marriage from females of 'any ethnicity'. One further notes how now Qasim merely 'likes' philosophy (and has added 'having fun and passionate' [sic] to his interests), and that his aims had, in the space of a few hours, progressed from acquiring a penfriend to acquiring a second wife.
These three Usenet posts certainly raise interesting questions about the sincerity of Qasim and of Southgate, but subsequent Qasim Usenet posts are even more damning. First, a fairly innocuous post dated 27 December 2003 shows us Qasim in the process of changing his e-mail address from
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com to
corporation_666@yahoo.com, and acquring the nickname of ~TRUTH 666 ~. This post contains the new address and nickname in the headers but the old details in the body (which simply reposts material he found elsewhere on the Internet):
From:
corporation_666@yahoo.com (~TRUTH 666~)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,soc.culture.usa,talk.politics,talk.politics.theory,alt.dear.whitehouse
Subject: If this is freedom, what exactly is Dictatorship?...
Date: 27 Dec 2003 12:26:07 -0800
Organization:
http://groups.google.com
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <51061492.0312271226.7b89e89b@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.217.177.124
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1072556768 31651 127.0.0.1 (27 Dec 2003 20:26:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 20:26:08 +0000 (UTC)
If this is freedom, what exactly is dictatorship?...
Qasim KZ
qasim@jumeirahbeach.com
12/27/03: (ICH): Let me see if I have this right. In the United States of America:
1. The president now has the unrestricted power to declare war against
a country that has not attacked the United States, wreaking death and
destruction on both sides of the conflict.
2. The president now has the unrestricted power to round up unlimited
numbers of American citizens within the United States and incarcerate
them in military brigs or concentration camps for the rest of their
lives and keep them from ever again communicating with friends,
families, and attorneys, simply on the president's certification that
the incarcerated Americans are "terrorists," as he has done with Jose
Padilla and Yaser Esam Hamdi.
3. The president now has the unrestricted power to seize American
citizens abroad and remove them to its military base in Cuba, where
they can be kept for the rest of their lives and kept from ever again
communicating with friends, family, and attorneys, solely on the basis
of his certification that the imprisoned Americans are "terrorists," as
he initially did with Yaser Esam Hamdi.
4. The president now has the unrestricted power to kill American
citizens abroad solely on the basis of his certification that the
killed Americans are "terrorists," as he did to Ahmed Hijazi, the
American who was killed with a U.S.-fired missile in Yemen.
Pardon me for asking the following two indelicate questions:
First, if all this is freedom, what exactly is dictatorship?...
Second, after the Iraqi people are freed from dictatorship, would it be
asking too much to do the same for the American people through the
adoption of the following two amendments to the U.S. Constitution:
"The Congress shall have the power to declare war, and this time we
really do mean it." "No person shall be denied life, liberty, or
property without due process of law, and this time we really do mean
it."
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...le5426.htm
The use of '666' in the new address and in the nickname is, of course, significant given my foregoing observations about the ubiquitous Satanist connections. One is left wondering whether Qasim has converted from Islam to Satanism even faster than Southgate converted from Catholicism to Odinism . . .
Likewise, one is inclined to wonder what those who regard Southgate as some sort of white racialist would make of Qasim's views of the murderous skunk Nelson Mandela:
From:
corporation_666@yahoo.com (~TRUTH 666~)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics,alt.politics.usa,alt.society.liberalism,alt.military
Subject: Cheney and Mandela: Reconciling The Truth about Cheney's Vote
Date: 19 Jan 2004 09:51:20 -0800
Organization:
http://groups.google.com
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <51061492.0401190951.63abde1c@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.217.177.65
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1074534681 18893 127.0.0.1 (19 Jan 2004 17:51:21 GMT)
X-Complaints-T...