GOTHENBURG. The SÄPO analyst Ahn-Za Högström is spreading appalling lies about the Nordic Resistance Movement. Lies that are supposed to constitute ”evidence” in the prosecutor’s scandalous trial in Gothenburg. Here we respond to some of the lies.
”Lie” is a strong word that we often associate with politicians, journalists and other wielders of power. But these people often have good linguistic skills, and when they ”lie” they are mostly engaging in deceptive techniques and withholding of truth. I am not referring to bias here, but rather the technique of making the recipient believe a lie by means of various tricks instead of directly lying to him or her. For example, by deliberately withholding relevant information that would have made the recipient realize that the lie is a lie. I personally think that this is the same as lying, but I also understand those who claim this is not the same thing.
Ahn-Za Hagström, a SÄPO analyst, is the type of person who doesn’t concern herself with creating the kind of backdoors that politicians and journalists want. Instead she often engages in outright lying.
The SÄPO analyst is going to be a witness regarding the activities of the Nordic Resistance Movement during the scandalous trial in Gothenburg. She has already sent a memo to the prosecutor that is supposed to act as ”evidence” in the case. This memo contains appalling lies about the Nordic Resistance Movement. The idea is that the Nordic Resistance Movement is going to be described as a criminal organisation that ought to be banned. This must be seen as especially serious since we are talking about a government agency which a lot of people put their trust in (rather than journalists, for example). And also because this is a government agency that actually has real power in this process.
I am going to briefly respond to some of her worst statements. Not all of them are outright lies. Some of them are just deceptive and are withholding the type of relevant information necessary to get a truthful image of what is being described. At the end of the article, you can read her entire annex, which contains a number of other noteworthy allegations and outright lies.
1. The Nordic Resistance Movement ”has access to legal as well as illegal weapons”
If the Nordic Resistance Movement has access to illegal weapons, the Swedish Security Service actually ought to do their job and contact their colleagues in the Swedish Police Authority. The possession of illegal weapons is a crime, and so long as SÄPO is allowing an organisation to possess these, it must mean that the agency in some sense is encouraging criminal activity. Which makes me wonder if the Security Service is a criminal organisation.
2. Protective gear constitutes a ”preparation for violent usage”
This is an example of something more deceptive than an outright lie. Ahn-Za’s idea when she expresses herself this way is to make it seem as if the Nordic Resistance Movement is preparing to use (offensive) violence against others, or that we are looking for violence. In reality the protective gear is justified since we have sometimes been the victims of physical attacks. Not infrequently because the present system (agencies like SÄPO, for instance) is portraying us as criminals and therefore legitimate targets for assailants, including the excessive violence used by their colleagues in the regular police force.
Activists’ protective gear constitutes a preparation for protecting ourselves from the violence of others, to minimize the damages from their attacks. Shields are used to protect ourselves from stone-throwing, glasses to protect ourselves from pepper spray, etc.
I don’t know if Ahn-Za is advocating for us to just take beatings from assailants, or if she thinks that we should just simply put a stop to our legal political activities in order for us not to be portrayed as criminals by a government agency for protecting our constitutional rights?
The Nordic Resistance Movement has rules against offensive violence, which is made clear by the organization’s activist handbook. We are naturally prepared to use violence in self defense if we are attacked, but that is legal. In the same way that it is legal to carry protective gear.
3. The Nordic Resistance Movement depicts some races as ”inferior”, morally inferior and degenerate
For the organization NRM the notion that human beings can be divided into different ”races” is prominent, and also that some of these so-called ”races” are inferior to others and therefore that it is moral, humane and responsible to keep them separate so that the ”higher races” do not ”degenerate”.
Here I would like Ahn-Za to tell us what these races are and where the organization expresses that point of view. In the political program of the Nordic Resistance Movement, Our Path, the following is stated:
Our racial survival and freedom is the absolute most important goal of the Nordic Resistance Movement’s political struggle.
In a purely objective sense, this is about securing the survival of our race because we belong to this race, and in a subjective sense because we primarily care about our own. We are closest to ourselves, just as a family member cares primarily for his own family whether there are better or worse families.
In Our Path it is also stated:
We champion a world of free nations where the races live separately but are still able to cooperate and where every people and every race evolves according to its own preconditions and in harmony with nature.
Nowhere in the program do we express that some are superior/inferior. The only thing we express is that it is moral, humane and responsible to keep the races separate for the sake of all races.
That there are individual members of the organization who might agree with Ahn-Za Hagström’s allegations does not change the fact that the organization itself does not express this view.
4. The Nordic Resistance Movement believes race ”permeates everything a person does”
No, but it permeates most things. We have never said that the race permeates everything. However, culture is not created by coincidence, but primarily arises as an expression of the inherent racial soul of a people. Environment and upbringing of course also play a part, which is something we have stressed on numerous occasions. Also in the podcast “Leader’s Perspective” (Ledarperspektiv), where the official views of the organization are presented.
5. The leadership holds the organization together ”by talking about revolution and armed struggle”
We speak of a revolution, yes – armed struggle, no. These are not synonyms. Could a revolution manifest itself in armed struggle later on? Sure, but that is not what we talk about.
But it is fully legal to theoretically advocate armed struggle and even executions of diffuse political enemies, no matter what. It is fully legal for communists to advocate for the murder of all capitalists on behalf of the working class. It is illegal to agitate in such a way against what the law defines as ”minorities”, on the other hand.
6. The Nordic Resistance Movement is provocative by challenging the norms of society
[…] a portion of the activities of the NRM are made of up of challenging, testing and provoking the limits of the legislation as well as the norms of society. This is not uncommonly done with hints to the organization’s capacity for violence in recent years and – when that doesn’t work – a martyrdom that can be used for recruiting sympathisers.
Challenging the norms of society is of course also legal and even something that is promoted in society. It is seen as something positive, worthy of praise and even a particularly democratic right – almost an obligation – to be critical of norms and challenging and provoking things like gender norms, for example.
Thus it seems that, according to SÄPO, it is only wrong to be critical against politically correct norms.
7. The Nordic Resistance Movement is characterized by the ”race war” and ”xenophobia”
In a general way the Swedish white power setting is generally – and the NRM especially – characterized by three different aims or orientations. Except for the so-called ”race war” these are xenophobia and the political project, where the latter is about the actual seizure of power and the creation of a Nordic realm as the end goal.
Note that Ahn-Za writes ”the so-called ’race war’”, as if it is an expression that we ourselves use. We don’t. ”Race war” could naturally end up becoming the final consequence of mass immigration and the ongoing population replacement, but what we are striving for is the actual seizure of power and the creation of a Nordic realm as the end goal.
The same goes for xenophobia. This newspeak term, whose meaning is questionable, is something we don’t use ourselves and something that, depending on its meaning, is something we very doubtfully get behind.
8. The Nordic Resistance Movement has the ”ability to commit crimes that could fall under the current terror legislation”
Awat Hamasalih acquired the ability to commit terror crimes in Finland by owning a knife, and in some cases terrorists have displayed the ability to commit terror crimes with the help of a car or truck. Ahn-Za Hagström is not outright lying, but manipulating. Basically everybody who could afford to buy a knife for a couple of hundred kronor evidently has the ability to commit a terror crime. It is thus obviously not illegal to have this ability. It is however illegal to commit and plan terror crimes, and in that case Ahn-Za ought to try to prove that is what the Nordic Resistance Movement is trying to do. She would not be able to do this, however, since it is not a part of our activities in any way.
9. ”Terrorism as a means of communication”
Concerning those who are going to be recruited, it could be argued to them that terrorism and extremism are also a means of communication, and that weapons, the use of violence and the glorification of violence both affects and attracts followers.
The sentence above seems to be mechanistically inserted in a paragraph that isn’t really about terrorism. It doesn’t exactly inspire trust when an agency in what is supposed to be a nation of laws is blaming legal political organizations for ”terrorism” without explaining why. Who are the people that are going to be recruited? What constitutes terrorism? In what way does this terrorism work as a means of communication?
It could not reasonably be that the use of violence and glorification of violence constitute terrorism in and of themselves. In that case all hooligans would be considered terrorists, which I doubt.
10. ”Scoring system used to reward criminal activities”
The organization also uses a kind of scoring/reward system for different types of activities. That in turn also means that the activities, the criminal ones as well as the advocating ones, are documented in different ways by the person or persons who have performed them.
We finish off the article with an outright lie from Ahn-Za Högström. There isn’t and never has been any scoring/reward system for having performed criminal activities.
If Ahn-Za Högström is rewarded/praised internally for having been a false witness under oath, we can draw the conclusion that the scoring/reward system for rewarding criminal activities is found in the Security Service.
SÄPO’s statement against the Nordic Resistance Movement [Swedish]: Göteborgs TR B 3046-18 Aktbil 263