What are Ukrainian nazis doing in Hong Kong Kong?

Ukrainian Neo-Nazis Help Out at 

Hong Kong Riots, Pan-Democrats 

Defend Them

Free Hong Kong Center tries to pass them off as "Slavic pagans" when their neo-Nazism is a matter of public record as even Bellingcat concurs
https://www.checkpointasia.net/ukrainian-neo-nazis-help-out-at-hong-kong-riots-pan-democrats-defend-them/?fbclid=IwAR3MZAie1sM6r5lG5o0kpma6tCM9RBBOznf8Og3i6DAgUSjLKfpcyVOBC8M

Insomniac Resurrected16 hours ago 778 6

Editor’s note: Bellingcat on Filimonov’s and Maliar’s background as National Socialists. Maliar in fact actually sports swastika tattoos on his skull but even that was not enough for Hong Kong “democrats” to disassociate themselves.

---

After destroying their own country, Ukrainian neonazis from the Azov battalion have relocated to Hong Kong to help destroy that city too:

Earlier this year, an initiative of US Congressmen wanted to designate Azov as a white supremacist terrorist group. What happened? Here we see the neonazis helping out at US inspired and supported riots in HK.

Read my other posts on the Hong Kong Ukraine connection.

Update 1 — 

The Hong Kong rioters tried to claim that these are not really neonazi but rather Slavic pagans, or whatever. [Yeah right, “Slavic pagans” with “Valhala” (ie Germanic) tattoos on their neck.] And claims of Naziism in Ukraine are all but Kremlin propaganda, which is a talking point learned from their American handlers:

UPDATE 2 —

I just realised that the hero of this post Serhii Philimonov was already featured on this blog several months ago when he gave lectures on street protests in Kiev:

These posters are apparently posted around Kiev. It is from a seminar called “The Academy of Street Protests”:

The speakers are nationalists, radical nationalists, for instance Serhiy Filimonov is affiliated with the neonazi “Azov” battalion. And all seem to have gone through the Maidan.

Source: Insomniac Resurrected

https://sputniknews.com/asia/201912021077466396-why-are-ukrainian-neo-nazis-joining-the-hong-kong-protests/?fbclid=IwAR0thM9ScinqU67JJeeirhGrZ2CGESdWFjYZUDBG2MeGDIkx82djA-LJcw4

Opponents of the UN Pact on Migation have been linked with "neo-nazi" groups

I am a usually fair-minded person and I have always supported immigration into this country. I also support the bi-cultural policy and the Treaty of Waitangi.

I have no beef with Muslims either.

However, when it comes from an agenda that seems to to arise from the largely-engineered migrant crisis in Europe I am horrified by the prospect of uncontrolled entry of all comers, something that is happening in Europe and which they want to introduce elsewhere, including into New Zealand.

No country can stand for long the rapid demographic changes that are being foisted upon the inhabitants.

Muslims are not all equal. There are millions of good, well-meaning Muslims but there are also the Sunni, Salafist extremists who are spreading Saudi-backed extremism around the globe.

The Muslims are not the same to those that rule over us. It is the former groups that are making their way all over the world aided and abetted by governments and groups in the West.

I have to ask why,  when they are perhaps the most endangered group, not only in Syria but in the Middle East no Christian refugees have been brought into the country.

Here are a few random thoughts on this...

• We have people already here and they are not being looked after.

• None of these people are criticising Paciific Islanders or are anti-Maori - quite the contrary.They want to look after those who are here

• Where is discussion of the Treaty of Waitangi in public debate these days?

• If these people were really linked to"neo-nazis" they would be talking about throwing out non-white groups.ot one person is saying this!

• Most are concerned about their children and grandchildren and want those who are already here to be looked after.

And here is a video that deals in part with this question and juxtaposes this with a letter I received from Radio New Zealand.

Here is discussion of this from Carol Sakey

Read this: 

Five Eyes spy organisation associates opposition to UN Treatyon on migration to "neo-nazi" groups. 

 

This article which I will not post because they loudly claim copyright rights makes a claim that:

"The Government Communications Security Bureau has linked a campaign against New Zealand signing up to a UN Treaty to neo-Nazi groups based in Austria."

Austrian neo-Nazi groups linked to campaign here against UN compact

This was raised by Iranian-born Green MP, Golriz Ghahraman who "revealed the GCSB’s discovery yesterday saying that a Parliamentary Committee had been briefed on the finding.

According to the artilce Foreign Minister, Winston Peters "confirmed her claim".

"Peters did not name the group, but the Austrian neo-Nazi, Martin Sellner, the leader of the Identitäre Bewegung Österreichs (IBÖ, Identitarian Movement of Austria) played a leading role in the campaign against the Compact there"

Far-Right Leader Martin Sellner Emailed With New Zealand Mosque Shooter MonthsBefore Massacre

They then go on to associate this with the Christchurch mass murderer (and possible patsy), Brenton Tarrant.

"It is not known whether Tarrant was involved in the New Zealand campaign against the pact which appears to have been headlined by an obscure right-wing extremist groups called Right Minds NZ led by Dieuwe de Boer."

I had not heard of Right Minds NZ or Diuewe de Boer so I went looking.

I will leave it up to you to make up your mind whether de Boer is "neo-nazi", "extreme Right' or simply anti-mass migration.

I know what real nazism looks like and I suspect it is not these people - you might need to look to Ukraine for some real nazis, but they have been embraced by western governments and media.

Some of these people are pretty unpleasant and I do not identify with their views but are they what they are being portrayed as?

After looking at everything surrounding the March 15 events in Christchurch I suspect not.

Said Peters, who has previously been attacked for an "anti-immigration" and even "racist" approach as minister has embraced the globalist Pact

“We were never going to stand aside while a bunch of Nazis of a very, very minuscule number in Austria could mount a campaign of disinformation like that and get away with it."

The whole issue of bipartisanship in foreign affairs was correctly raised by the National party:

"National’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Todd McClay told the Committee that National had been concerned about the impact the Compact would have on New Zealand’s ability to undertake its own immigration settings.

He said it was only after he raised that question that Peters obtained the legal opinion."

“I strongly suspect that the "non- binding" nature of the Pact is probably smoke-and-mirrors and once it comes into being the government will fall into line and embrace it as policy.

After all why sign it otherwise.

According to Ghahraman members of the GCSB oversight committee stated:

"The misinformation campaign about the binding nature and the way that the Compact was supposedly designed to interfere with immigration policy domestically, was started by neo-Nazi groups in Europe"

Said Peters:  

"I'm seriously proud of the fact that y despite the huge pressure, and I personally have never seen a campaign like that, and I've had a few crap campaigns against me in the past, but this was the most vicious and I decided we would stick to our guns and out them.

"It didn't deter us."

NZ media coverage

New Zealand votes for UN migration compact after legal advice

Explainer:What is the UN Global Migration Compact that New Zealand could join?

Here is further discussion of this:

Here is a discussion on the UN Pact

UN Compact on Migration

Croaking Cassandra,

5 December, 2018

Various readers have commented in recent weeks on the United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration, due to be signed next week by as many governments as can be mustered in support.   I’d had a quick skim through it and decided not to write about it here, as not only was it a non-binding political declaration, but most of it seemed more relevant to countries dealing with substantial illegal migration (and with migration mainly from very poor or disrupted countries – again, not the main situation in New Zealand).   And, as I pointed out to various readers, who needs the United Nations for immigration policy and practice to cause problems at home.  We have successive New Zealand governments, cheered on by the business and political “elites”, to do that for us.

But when I saw yesterday that the National Party –  as pro-immigration as they come – had indicated that (a) it would not support signing, and (b) it would withdraw from the agreement when it returned to government, I thought I should take another look.  It would, after all, be unusual to find myself in more of a middle-ground position on immigration issues that the National Pary.  Then it emerged that the current government has still not yet decided whether to sign up.   My suspicion remains that National’s stance is more about positioning relative to New Zealand First –  the contest for provincial votes –  than anything of substance.

Overseas, I was aware that the United States and Australia had decided not to sign, as well as a few eastern European countries – including some places whose democratic credentials are no longer unimpeachable.    But when I went looking, I found this article suggesting the pushback in Europe is spreading.    Austrian and Italy have refused to sign, and governments in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands are under pretty intense pressure (from within).  In Holland, for example

The government ordered a legal analysis of the text last week to ensure that signing it will not entail any legal consequences. The Cabinet finally decided on Thursday that it would support the pact, but would add an extra declaration, a so-called explanation of position, to prevent unintended legal consequences.

So I reread the document, more slowly this time.  I can’t see any substantive need for the document –  it seems more about political rhetoric and framing than anything else –  and have long been deeply sceptical that the United Nations adds any value to anything much.   And, yes, the document has a pro-migration tinge to it (it talks of wanting to “promote” migration) and a rather “globalist” set of presuppositions (including the demonstrably wrong statement –  especially in the context of remote island states – that “no State can address migration alone”).   But that doesn’t mark it out from dozens of pointless international fora and international declarations.    And there is little doubt that the “elite” mindset, in Europe and its offshoots anyway, is mostly pretty strongly pro-immigration.

But it still isn’t clear to me quite what additional damage would be done by signing up to this pointless agreement.   Sure, even “non-binding” agreements will, at times, be used in domestic and international fora as a rhetorical stick to beat governments with if they ever look like stepping out of line with the mainstream.  But those sorts of arguments rarely deflect a government for long if it has domestic public opinion behind it in some direction or another (for good or ill).

There is some questionable economics in the document.  For example

Promote effective skills matching in the national economy by involving local authorities and other relevant stakeholders, particularly the private sector and trade unions, in the analysis of the local labour market, identification of skills gaps, definition of required skills profiles, and evaluation of the efficacy of labour migration policies, in order to ensure market responsive contractual labour mobility through regular pathways.

Or, alternatively, one could just let the market work it out.  When there are incipient skill shortages, wage rates tend to rise.  Same thing happens when, for example, bad weather creates a shortage of spinach or lettuce.    But, daft as the economics is, this stuff is the mindset of politicians and officials adminstering immigration schemes all over the western world. including New Zealand.  Recall that in New Zealand the current government is trying to get more actively involved in this sort of thing.

There are also totally vacuous bits, like the commitment to support and promote the United Nations International Day of Family Remittances.  Just what the world needs: another United Nations “day”.

Perhaps three clauses troubled me a little more.

There was this one

Enable political participation and engagement of migrants in their countries of origin, including in peace and reconciliation processes, in elections and political reforms, such as by establishing voting registries for citizens abroad, and by parliamentary representation, in accordance with national legislation.

I guess I can see what they are probably driving at (diasporas helping the reconstruction of the country of origin after say a protracted civil war). But, normally, we should expect migrants to commit themselves to their new country and its processes and political values and not be creating doubts about where their loyalties lie.  But in a country in which Jian Yang and Raymond Huo are MPs –  while still closely associating themselves with political interests in their country of origin –  and people like Yikun Zhang appears encouraged to play both sides –  it is hard to see how this particular provisions make things here any worse than they already are (around a small handful of our migrants).

And then there was this one

Promote mutual respect for the cultures, traditions and customs of communities of destination and of migrants by exchanging and implementing best practices on integration policies, programmes and activities, including on ways to promote acceptance of diversity and facilitate social cohesion and inclusion.

Which presents the issues as symmetric when they really should be asymmetric: the focus should be on encouraging the assimilation of the migrants, and ensuring their respect for the “cultures, traditions and customs” of the destination community –  just as when you go to someone else’s place for dinner you respect their practices, table manners etc.   One could also argue that encouraging “acceptance of diversity” and facilitating “social cohesion” are two contradictory, often mutually inconsistent, goals.  But again, flakey as all this stuff is, it is the way our bureaucratic and political “leaders” think and act anyway.  If the behaviour is a threat, it is hard to see that the UN agreement would be more of one.

Relatedly

Support multicultural activities through sports, music, arts, culinary festivals, volunteering and other social events that will facilitate mutual understanding and appreciation of migrant cultures and those of destination communities.

Quite what business this is of the UN –  or even of national governments actually – one has to wonder, but there is the “globalist” mindset for you.   And, again, it is pretty much what central and local governments do anyway.  I was interested that “religion” wasn’t on the list

And then, of course, there is Objective 17 (of the 23 in the document) which I have seen people express more serious concern about.

OBJECTIVE 17: Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to shape perceptions of migration

We commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law. We further commit to promote an open and evidence-based public discourse on migration and migrants in partnership with all parts of society, that generates a more realistic, humane and constructive perception in this regard. We also commit to protect freedom of expression in accordance with international law, recognizing that an open and free debate contributes to a comprehensive understanding of all aspects of migration.

If that isn’t muddled I don’t know what is –  let alone, unrealistic (in no conceivable world are “all forms of discrimination” going to be “eliminated”).

The specifics under that Objective include commitments to

Enact, implement or maintain legislation that penalizes hate crimes and aggravated hate crimes

So-called “hate crime” legislation is almost always bad law and bad policy.  Punish assaults or murders or whatever as that: bad and unacceptable acts, regardless of who they are committed against or why.

And this

Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.

Again, muddled at best.  You want to stop any public funding to outlets whose views are “unacceptable”, while having “full respect for the freedom of the media”.   Since I’m not entirely convinced there is a good case for public funding of any media outlets –  and since the publicly-funded outlets in New Zealand are champions of high immigration and all “worthy” leftist causes anyway –  it isn’t clear what difference this might make in New Zealand.    And there seem to be some MPs –  particularly in Labour and the Greens –  who aren’t too keen on allowing free speech on such issues anyway, whether or not we sign up to UN non-binding declarations.

And finally under Objective 17

Engage migrants, political, religious and community leaders, as well as educators and service providers to detect and prevent incidences of intolerance, racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination against migrants and diasporas and support activities in local communities to promote mutual respect, including in the context of electoral campaigns.

All very asymmetric –  nothing at all about engaging with communities that might be uneasy about high immigration, or the immigration of groups with values antithetical to those of the destination community.  Perhaps, in some respects, this commitment troubles me more than most.   “Intolerance” is not an offence (in principle or in law) and it is the perfect right of people to debate –  perhaps especially in election campaigns – the future composition of their society.   A Saudi Wahhabi, a Chinese Communist Party zealot, an American evangelical, and a French secularist are all very different sorts of people. In large numbers, each group transplanted to (say) New Zealand would make a material difference to the society and polity we have here.  Those debates matter –  unless, apparently like the authors of this document –  you regard all differences of culture, politics, religion etc as superficial rather than fundamental.

As I said at the start, there is no obvious need for this document.  And even if there were obvious gaps, the very fact that it is a non-binding political declaration suggests it could meet no substantive need.  But in a New Zealand context, there are policies and practices around immigration that are much more damaging and threatening, particularly to our long-term economic performance, and perhaps in other areas too.  Among them:

• the immigration policies of the National Party
• the immigration policies of the Labour Party
• the immigration policies of the Green Party
• the immigration policies of ACT, and
• the immigration policies of New Zealand First

I think that pretty much covers the spectrum.

There is no conceivable universe in which some international declaration –  or even agreement – around immigration would be more liberal and (in our specific economic circumstances) more damaging than what our political parties have done to us all by themselves.

****

This is an extract from a 2003 discussion of immigration that points to past policy that is in the process of being dismantled without any real public input (rather the contrary) 

New Zealand: The Politicization of Immigration

Contemporary Policy Environment

New Zealand's current immigration policy has several objectives, all of which are designed to produce tangible social and economic benefits for the country. Since the late mid-1980s, the proactive immigration policies of successive governments have sought to:

• Contribute to New Zealand's human resource base by selecting migrants who are able quickly and effectively to match their skills with opportunities in New Zealand. A points-based selection system, similar to those used in Australia and Canada, was introduced in 1991 and is used to achieve this objective.

• Foster the development of strong international linkages by, for example, facilitating the entry of residents and travelers who will contribute to the building of strong economic and social connections with other countries. A system of bilateral visa-waiver agreements with 52 countries in Europe, the Americas, Asia, and Africa contributes to achieving this objective.

• Contribute to the development of a culture of enterprise and innovation by attracting migrants and business visitors with entrepreneurial skills and experience. Specific business migration and talent visa schemes are designed to assist in achieving this objective.

• Complement skills training and employment strategies by allocating temporary work permits to fill short-term skills shortages. Several initiatives have been adopted to fill skills shortages in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector, especially in recognition of the high level of international competition for skilled labor.

• Reunite the families of New Zealanders and respond to the humanitarian needs of those who have close family connections with residents in New Zealand. The current immigration program allows for 32 percent of the total approvals to be in the family and humanitarian categories.

• Meet New Zealand's obligations as a member of the international community through refugee programs. New Zealand has a long-established annual quota of 750 refugees selected by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for resettlement. Approximately 700 asylum seekers are granted refugee status each year.

• Maintain high levels of social cohesion in a bicultural society that is becoming more diverse in terms of its ethnic composition. New Zealand's immigrant selection system, while non-discriminatory on the basis of source country, is biased towards immigrants who have a good command of the English language, and have educational and professional qualifications that are recognized by New Zealand's Qualifications Authority and professional associations. It is believed that immigrants with these attributes will be able to integrate more effectively into a society that acknowledges a bicultural ideology rooted in the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed between representatives of the indigenous Maori tribes and the British Crown in 1940.

Ukrainian neo-Nazis are trainng neo-Nazis in America

I can remember the reports from VICE in 2014-15 which celebrated the neo-Nazis in Ukraine

Neo-Nazis Are Organizing Secretive Paramilitary Training Across America

The creation of a new social networking platform called “The Base” appears to be an effort to shift Naziism from a divided digital space to physical, violent insurgency.

VICE,

21 November, 2018

A neo-Nazi who goes by the alias Norman Spear has launched a project to unify online fascists and link that vast coalition of individuals into a network training new soldiers for a so-called forthcoming “race war.”

Spear, who claims to be an Iraq and Afghan war veteran, is a self-proclaimed white nationalist with a significant online following. His latest act involves bringing neo-Nazis together, regardless of affiliation and ideology, into a militant fascist umbrella organization. His tool for doing this? A social network he calls “The Base,” which is already organizing across the US and abroad, specifically geared toward partaking in terrorism.

Within the confines of a secure chat room viewed by VICE, Spear and his burgeoning global web of terror cells are networking, creating propaganda, organizing in-person meet-ups, and discussing potential violence or “direct action” against minority groups, especially Jewish and black Americans. An extensive online library contains a trove of manuals with instructions on lone wolf terror-tactics, gunsmithing, data mining, interrogation tactics, counter-surveillance techniques, bomb making, chemical weapons creation, and guerilla warfare.

The network's vetting process serves to funnel committed extremists from around the internet into a group explicitly focused on providing users with terroristic skills, in order to produce real-world violence. Members of The Base have made it clear they’re recruiting applicants with military and explosives backgrounds. And in addition to homemade bombs, members have also begun discussing trying to find unexploded World War II ordnance to make improvised explosive devices.

“I'm all about violence, but I want to gather with people and plan something out,” wrote one user going by the name Rimbaud to the almost 50 other members of the secret network, lamenting that the recent terror attack on a synagogue in Pittsburgh could’ve been more effective. “Maybe some form of bombing, or something a bit more destructive.”

The Base is attracting known extremists from the militant far-right. It counts alleged members of Atomwaffen Division—a violent neo-Nazi terror group linked to several hate crimes, an attempted bombing and a racially motivated killing—and the Eco-Fascist Order (EFO)—a newly minted far-right organization on the radars of terrorism trackers—as part of its growing coalition.

“I think at this point in history everyone should merge to some extent and become one uniform coalition of different branches, the writers/educators, the propagandist, the organizers, and the militants all as one,” one user wrote when discussing having his organization, Volkish, work with the EFO.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is tracking The Base and Spear, militarizing the neo-Nazi movement within the fractious ecosystem of the far-right is something that makes The Base uniquely dangerous, especially in a time when federal authorities are struggling to grapple with far-right terrorism. Earlier this year, the Anti-Defamation League released a report stating that “the number of anti-Semitic incidents was nearly 60 percent higher in 2017 than 2016, the largest single-year increase on record and the second highest number reported since ADL started tracking incident data in the 1970s.” The ADL also said that the majority of extremist-related killings in the last decade were committed by right-wing extremists.

Heidi Beirich, director of SPLC’s Intelligence Project, says The Base's propaganda already poses a major threat to public safety, because it “encourages individuals toward the terroristic so-called ‘lone wolf’ or terror cell-oriented mentality” and leads followers to “prepare themselves to, in fact, become potential threats to public safety.”

When asked about Spear and The Base for this story, the FBI declined to comment. VICE reached out to Spear via email but has not heard back as of the time of publishing.

The Base debuted in June as a way to galvanize “the movement” and “our people,” as Spear explained in a September episode of the podcast The Roper Report. Aside from Spear, it is also endorsed by various white nationalist personalities on social media platforms like Gab and Twitter.

During the podcast, Spear said The Base is designed to unite white nationalists together to prepare for violent insurgency against various targets, including the US government, as part of an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that all Western power is secretly controlled by Jewish stakeholders.

“When you really look at the landscape of the [white power] movement, the majority of it is happening online and that's something that fundamentally needs to change,” Spear said. “[The Base] is focused on meeting and training… We want to build a cadre of trainers across the country.”

On the surface, The Base's online presence is not dissimilar to those of other white supremacist groups or jihadist terror groups like ISIS: it has a sign-up website and an active Twitter account (now shut down) promoting lone wolf tactics and military tradecraft. (It’s worth mentioning the jihadist terror group al-Qaeda's name translates to “the base” in English, although it's unclear if The Base is making that direct nod.) But one thing stands out: The Base's posts are largely designed to promote violent action.

On Twitter it shared images of balaclava-wearing soldiers reading maps, militants holding rifles and carrying out what looks to be military planning, detailed and military-level counter surveillance tactics, and a map of a cartoon human body outlining where best to slash and stab an opponent in self-defense. (In one tweet, The Base wrote: “The best self-defense is a good offensive.”)

In secure chat forums, VICE has seen members of the network designing and workshopping memes to spread as propaganda, placing high importance on the need to infiltrate popular culture with a neo-Nazi agenda. Their main propagandist is a user by the name of Poilu, who produces posters and memes from images the group uploads of themselves, as well as other popular militants. One example was a failed series of memes engineered to venerate Pittsburgh mosque shooter Robert Bowers—their propagandist complained that there wasn’t a high enough resolution image of him on the web.

“The picture is so small I cant use good filters [to be honest],” Poilu wrote as members of the group were creating memes around Bowers.

A photo the user Poilu posted with the propaganda he created.
 

“Unlike the memes of the so-called ‘alt-right,’ propaganda like [The Base promotes] does not depend on popularity to be considered successful; to be successful, this kind of propaganda only need to find its way to single hosts, or carriers, or bring together a small cell of individuals,” said Beirich. “Robert Bowers' recent terror attack at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania demonstrates this.

“The Base clearly hopes to capitalize on powerful social media platforms in order spread this mindset—which is to say, this is virus will only infect a small number of individuals, or carriers, but those carriers could manifest catastrophic violence,” she added.

A Twitter spokesperson says the company forbids the existence of extremist groups on its site. "We prohibit the use of Twitter’s services by violent extremist groups,” they said. “Users may not affiliate with organizations that—whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform—use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes."

The Base's Twitter account became offline sometime after VICE reached out to the company.

When compared to Stormfront message boards and other online neo-Nazi havens, The Base is more curated, a mix of chat server and matchmaking site where group members need to be vetted to get in, and are paired geographically for paramilitary activities. Mentions of the group have appeared in other far-right forums like Fascist Forge (the heir-apparent to the now-defunct Iron March), with one user explicitly claiming he was there to recruit for The Base.

“In the current phase we need to be as covert as possible. But as things accelerate we can become clandestine and then further down the road just right out in the open ideally,” Spear explained to his followers in the chat. “For now we need non-attributable actions but that will still send a message and/or add to acceleration as much as possible.”

While some of the tradecraft discussed on The Base is common in survivalist and separatist circles, the site's members appear to be even more radical, particularly in a number of discussions around explosives usage. In one text exchange, two members discuss advising their European allies on digging up unexploded or unused WWII munitions in Germany, to repurpose as improvised explosive devices similar to those utilized by militant groups like ISIS or the Taliban.

“Wouldn't use those in a traditional method since they are most likely unstable and instead use them in the way the Vietnamese did as IEDs and grenades using a newly constructed method of ignition via another small amount of explosive, but that is all I'll go into that due to obvious reasons,” said one user.

After the Pittsburgh terror attack, members discussed their support for the killer and ways to escalate neo-Nazi violence with similar actions.

“I agree with violence,” said the user ‘Poilu’ to Rimbaud. “But especially against any Jew. They have been killing us for how long(?)”

“None of them are innocent,” replies Rimbaud.

In another exchange between a number of individuals discussing their desire to commit attacks against Jewish and black Americans, a user named Grimoire touted the value of his combat experience to the cause by claiming to have killed civilians as a serviceman on a tour in Afghanistan.

“I know what it’s like to kill women and children,” he said. “Being a squad machine gunner in Afghanistan I just sprayed belts of lead at targets, and there were dead women and children in circumstances, sometimes it'd be a kid that started shooting at us in the first place.”

In another exchange, Grimoire tried to direct the conversation towards explosives making.

“Let's talk about pipe bombs,” he said after a discussion on climate change. Another user replied: “Nature can suck my dick. Pipe bombs are much more interesting and relaxant topic but that's just asking for feds lmao." Members of The Base often refer to having conversations elsewhere, to avoid open text chats on things that could garner a federal crime—like bomb making.

While discussion around violence is freewheeling, members of The Base are cautioned to keep any planning for attacks to offline meet-ups. This is similar to the Atomwaffen Division playbook, which has already produced real-world violence by promoting guerrilla war against the state and what it deems “the system”—a term Spear often invokes online. Key to this is what Atomwaffen Division has dubbed “Hate Camp,” or paramilitary training like what The Base proposes.

Amarnath Amarasingam, a noted terrorism expert and senior research fellow at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, says the type of collaboration encouraged by Spear and The Base is a familiar sign of escalation among militant organizations.

“This is absolutely a serious concern,” Amarasingam told VICE. “Terror groups historically have found cause to cooperate for tactical and logistical reasons, even when they know that they have specific ideological differences. They recognize, though, that the overall cause is one they share and that sharing the limited resources they have is in their vested interest."

A photo The Base posted of a purported Finnish member of the group.

The application form on The Base website includes questions as to what neo-Nazi or pro-white group potential members represent, and what their “military” and “Science & Engineering Training” experience has been. It accepts applications with pseudonyms or aliases, but does ask for the individual’s race and gender.

A potential recruit would submit the application form via a Wordpress site, which is then vetted by The Base. If accepted, the user will be invited onto a chat server operated by Riot—an open source operating system used for secure messaging. Users can also be directly invited into the Riot server by an existing member. From this chat server, the recruit will be vetted once more.

In The Base's private chat, users will see eight channels: A main discussion room known as Imperium, in addition to small dedicated channels for self-defense, books, music, activity reports, trainers, survivalism, and the user's locale.

A link at the top of the Library page brings a user to a megaupload link filled with pdf copies of books. Within this digital archive there are 20 sections, including: guerrilla warfare tactics, gunsmithing literature, survival tactics, military tradecraft, and weapons handling. Within those sections are downloadable manuals, some with as few as three (tradecraft), and others with as many as 28 (gunsmithing). Perhaps the most disturbing is the weapons section, which features manuals on how to create explosives and chemical weapons. These aren’t all homemade; they’ve been pulled from gunsmithing magazines, military handbooks, online blogs, and so on—the source material is as varied as the subject matter.

“Chemicals that kill you in 30 seconds or less (or your next book is free),” reads a tagline on the front of the 198 page book.

A screenshot of the library of The Base.

The eighth channel is tied to each user's specific region, and from here users can direct message and organize meet-ups and training. Each region has a dedicated trainer who will teach military tradecraft to their fellow Nazis—the trainers are appointed based on their skill sets and what they can teach their regional comrades.

VICE has seen evidence of physical meet-ups among those in the chat network, such as photos of members together or descriptions of training. While the group is still in its nascency, Spear has written that there are several “long term IRL projects” The Base is working on, including a secure communication network of HAM radios and “communal bug out locations."

Chat logs say regional meet-ups are regular and encouraged (the numbers fluctuate per region) and, as Spear explains, “must be related to survivalism, personal self-defense, camping, hiking, bushcraft, off-grid living, operational tradecraft, [and/or] small unit tactics.” Spear has indicated national and global meet-ups have and will occur. “We've had a few meet-ups already and others are being planned for the near future,” he wrote. According to the secret chat network, the next is tentatively planned for January, but the location has yet to be announced to the group.

Spear runs a monthly contest within The Base encouraging meet-ups and the “region with the most IRL activity each month wins” an unknown prize. The meetings must “involve at least 2 members of The Base network” and have some sort of photographic evidence. Spear recommends members to first meet in public and allow their relationship to build trust and grow.

Two members of The Base posted this photo to the chat network, showing themselves meeting in person to train. A day later, The Base posted this photo to their social media accounts.

While The Base seems to be capitalizing on a growing wave of violent white supremacist movements in North America and Europe, its popularity is intrinsically linked to that of Norman Spear, whose real identity is unknown.

Spear activated his Twitter account @normanspear1 in November 2016, and quickly became a fixture of far-right social media circles, garnering a brief mentioning in an article by the SPLC in April. He recently scrubbed any existence of his accounts on Gab and Twitter, but the latter account was similar to The Base account: inciting white nationalist and neo-Nazis to action and preaching military tradecraft, hand-to-hand combat and organizing operations.

Before The Base, Spear authored a trove of videos entitled “Guerrilla Warfare Theory” (originally uploaded to YouTube, now archived on the main video platform for the far-right, BitChute), which VICE reviewed, outlining various hit and run tactics for small insurgent units against a larger power.

Spear and The Base quickly found support online from the militant, neo-Nazi community.

“Although I'm not a member, I fully endorse what the @TheBase_1 is out to accomplish. You have my support,” posted the now-defunct Twitter account @WallcroftAWD, which reportedly belonged to high-profile Atomwaffen Division member Grayson Denton.

The Base has appeared on other parts of the white supremacist web. A site called “Darkest Hour”—which had a considerable following on Gab—promotes The Base as a place where you can receive survivalist tradecraft and “legal paramilitary CQB (close quarter combat), and tactical firearms training, aimed specifically at young White Nationalist and National Socialist men.”

In several posts on Twitter, other neo-Nazis in a variety of separate communities encourage others to join The Base. “You seem like a good man of action,” a Finnish member of The Base named Jussi tells another Twitter Nazi. “Check out @TheBase_1 for more like minded people like you or me.”

A screenshot of The Base's contact page.

“Recent data regarding terror attacks and hate incidents in the US evidences that, one, an audience of carriers for The Base’s instructive-style of propaganda is out there and, two, the small size of that audience only compounds its threat,” Beirich explained. “This is because individuals and small-cells are often tougher to spot, predict and thwart (relative to extremist organizations with larger physical and digital footprints) before they can carry out an act of violence.”

“So-called ‘lone wolves,’ whether single individuals or small cells, comprise only six percent of US offenders but are responsible for 25 percent of terrorism-related violence,” she added. “Right-wing terrorism comprises 35 percent of US terror-attacks since 2010. Compare that to the 2000s, when terror-attacks from the far-right comprised just six percent of hate crimes in the US’s ten largest cities.”

Despite the attention they’ve received within their general community, several Twitter users have accused the organization of being “the feds.”

“You guys should really be encouraging individual defense and making an organization on the DL. advertising like that is very sus, no offense,” reads one tweet directed at The Base.

The odds that a law enforcement agency is operating a group as biased towards violent action as The Base seem low. More likely, The Base marks the latest evolution towards Spear’s anti-statist, pro-white goal of organized guerrilla war against world governments. As he explained when he was a guest on the podcast for the Darkest Hour site earlier this year: “We don’t need to convert or transform every weak-willed white person into a great Aryan warrior in order for us to win. We just need to unite the best of us who are willing to fight to do what’s necessary."