Tag: weapons
In Swedish Farmhouse, A Neo-Nazi Weapons Stockpile -- And Plan To Attack Schools

In Swedish Farmhouse, A Neo-Nazi Weapons Stockpile -- And Plan To Attack Schools

When Swedish police arrested a 25-year-old man at a farmhouse outside of Gothenburg last November, the only official explanation was that he was arrested for “gross preparation for general destruction.” Now the details of what they found inside the house have been released, and it’s chilling: the man, who was active in the neo-Nazi Nordic Resistance Movement (NRM), had stockpiled homemade bombs, semi-automatic weapons and parts manufactured with a 3D printer, as well as a huge cache of ammunition—all while engaging in online discussions about how to target schools for mass shootings.

The farmhouse arsenal was powerfully reminiscent of the case of Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik, who made similar preparations at a rural property over several years prior to his lethal terrorist attack in July 2011 that killed 69 young people at a summer camp and eight people in downtown Oslo when he detonated a truck bomb. Terrorism experts examining the Sweden case say it’s clear evidence that the threat of white-nationalist terrorism continues to spread around the globe.

Contained within the farmhouse near the town of Falköping, as researcher Hugo Kaaman explained, was a weapons stockpile that actually dwarfed Breivik’s, suggesting the intensity of the young man—who has not been publicly identified—in his desire to replicate the white-nationalist hero’s horrific act.

There were 50 tons of ammonium-nitrate fertilizer, the main component in the truck bombs ignited by Breivik and, before him, Oklahoma City mass killer Timothy McVeigh. He had multiple guns of various makes: semiautomatic and single-shot rifles and handguns, as well as multiple ammo magazines, bullet casings, and gunpowder. He also had a number of laser scopes, a bulletproof vest, camouflage clothing, a ballistic helmet, and a 3D printer that investigators believe he manufactured gun parts with.

The man had set up a laboratory in his garage, but investigators also found that he had likely set up a pipe-bomb-making operation on his kitchen table, which had gunpowder on it. And being a devoted neo-Nazi, he also had a full library of far-right literature, as well as manuals on bomb-building and a handbook on armed struggle.

When investigators went through his online activity, they found that the man had searched for posts and discussion threads about using various kinds of bombs, as well as proposals for attacks on schools. They believe, however, that he had not yet settled on a target.

"The suspect has discussed the possibilities of carrying out attacks on a schoolyard, but there is no evidence that any specific school has been selected. It appears as if the suspect has 'got stuck' in the first planning phase," a statement from the Swedish Defense Research Agency read.

The agency also noted that the man had expressed violent fantasies in various online forums, and promoted violent neo-Nazi beliefs, reflecting his membership in the NRM.

Like a number of neo-Nazi terrorist organizations, the Nordic Resistance Movement is a product of Russia-based fascist activism—particularly the now-defunct Iron March forum, originally the brainchild of a Russian neo-Nazi who went by the nom de guerre Slavros, who created Iron March in 2009 as the rebranded online home of the fascist International Third Position forum.

Iron March subsequently gave birth to the American neo-Nazi terrorist organization Atomwaffen Division, a number of whose members have been arrested by federal authorities for various acts of terrorism, as well as the explicitly fascist Patriot Front organization. Its impact has been global, however; among the organizations that emerged from it are the U.K.-based National Action, the Australia-based Antipodean Resistance, and the New Zealand-based Action Zealandia.

NRM’s goal, according to its website, is to create an ethnically pure pan-Nordic nation that would include all Scandinavian nations, and to deport most non-ethnic Northern European residents. To do so, they say they intend to dismantle the “global Zionist elite”.

Although NRM doesn’t explicitly call for violence, its members train in martial arts and knife attacks, and they will eagerly seek out confrontations.

“The Nordic Resistance Movement is a serious threat—members have attacked refugee centers and traveled to train with other Nazi groups over the years,” Heidi Beirich of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism told Daily Kos. “If the U.S. ever designates another group as a Special Terrorist Organization, I would say NRM should be at the top of the list.”

NRM has been involved in a series of incidents in which members violently confronted minority groups and antifascists. In 2016 and 2017, members planted bombs outside a far-left cafe and a refugee center in Gothenburg, the latter of which injured an immigration officer. At a 2016 protest in Finland, an NMR member killed a man by kicking him in the chest, causing him to fall and hit his head.

The Swedish man arrested for the farmhouse arsenal also has a previous conviction for assault in February 2017 as a result of his NRM activism. At an NRM demonstration in Gothenburg, the man was handing out leaflets when a woman spat in his face. He punched her in the face, causing her to fall to the ground.

“This guy’s track record with them at least led to the police to not sell a shotgun to him,” Beirich observed, “but the prevalence of 3D printed guns among extremists is undermining that strategy. This is a reminder that bombs are quite popular among right-wing extremists as well.”

The incident also is stark evidence that the chain of terrorism fueled by white-nationalist extremism that was initiated by Breivik—who himself was following in the footsteps of killers like McVeigh—continues to mount, notably with the recent mass killing in Buffalo that was inspired by the Christchurch, New Zealand, killer in 2019, who in turn was inspired by Breivik. It also demonstrates the increasing number of arrests of neo-Nazis around the world—including the Austrian man arrested in November 2021 with an arsenal similar to the Swedish man’s—is not simply a coincidence.

“This case is another reminder that far-right extremists are capable of mass violence and if they aren’t tracked and investigated we will get more mass attacks, as we’ve just seen in Buffalo,” said Beirich. “And given the online nature of his postings, once again the web is a key to stopping this violence. As scary as this situation is, it’s sadly becoming par for the course in terms of neo-Nazis and white supremacists. At least in this case, he was arrested before something horrific happened.”

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Stoking Fear At The Root Of America's Deadly Gun Culture

Stoking Fear At The Root Of America's Deadly Gun Culture

Washington (AFP) - It was 1776, the American colonies had just declared their independence from England, and as war raged the founding fathers were deep in debate: should Americans have the right to own firearms as individuals, or just as members of local militia?

Days after 19 children and two teachers were slaughtered in a Texas town, the debate rages on as outsiders wonder why Americans are so wedded to the firearms that stoke such massacres with appalling frequency.

The answer, experts say, lies both in the traditions underpinning the country's winning its freedom from Britain, and most recently, a growing belief among consumers that they need guns for their personal safety.

Over the past two decades -- a period in which more than 200 million guns hit the US market -- the country has shifted from "Gun Culture 1.0," where guns were for sport and hunting, to "Gun Culture 2.0" where many Americans see them as essential to protect their homes and families.

That shift has been driven heavily by advertising by the nearly $20 billion gun industry that has tapped fears of crime and racial upheaval, according to Ryan Busse, a former industry executive.

Recent mass murders "are the byproduct of a gun industry business model designed to profit from increasing hatred, fear, and conspiracy," Busse wrote this week in the online magazine The Bulwark.

Guns And The New Nation

For the men designing the new United States in the 1770s and 1780s, there was no question about gun ownership.

They said the monopoly on guns by the monarchies of Europe and their armies was the very source of oppression that the American colonists were fighting.

James Madison, the "father of the Constitution," cited "the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation."

But he and the other founders understood the issue was complex. The new states did not trust the nascent federal government, and wanted their own laws, and own arms.

They recognized people needed to hunt and protect themselves against wild animals and thieves. But some worried more private guns could just increase frontier lawlessness.

Were private guns essential to protect against tyranny? Couldn't local armed militia fulfill that role? Or would militia become a source of local oppression?

In 1791, a compromise was struck in what has become the most parsed phrase in the Constitution, the Second Amendment guaranteeing gun rights:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

1960s Gun Control

Over the following two centuries, guns became an essential part of American life and myth.

Gun Culture 1.0, as Wake Forest University professor David Yamane describes it, was about guns as critical tools for pioneers hunting game and fending off varmints -- as well as the genocidal conquest of native Americans and the control of slaves.

But by the early 20th century, the increasingly urbanized United States was awash with firearms and experiencing notable levels of gun crime not seen in other countries.

From 1900 to 1964, wrote the late historian Richard Hofstadter, the country recorded more than 265,000 gun homicides, 330,000 suicides, and 139,000 gun accidents.

In reaction to a surge in organized crime violence, in 1934 the federal government banned machine guns and required guns to be registered and taxed.

Individual states added their own controls, like bans on carrying guns in public, openly or concealed.

The public was for such controls: Pollster Gallup says that in 1959, 60 percent of Americans supported a complete ban on personal handguns.

The assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, brought a push for strenuous regulation in 1968.

But gunmakers and the increasingly assertive National Rifle Association, citing the Second Amendment, prevented new legislation from doing more than implement an easily circumvented restriction on direct mail-order gun sales.

The Holy Second Amendment

Over the next two decades, the NRA built common cause with Republicans to insist that the Second Amendment was absolute in its protection of gun rights, and that any regulation was an attack on Americans' "freedom."

According to Matthew Lacombe, a Barnard College professor, achieving that involved the NRA creating and advertising a distinct gun-centric ideology and social identity for gun owners.

Gun owners banded together around that ideology, forming a powerful voting bloc, especially in rural areas that Republicans sought to seize from Democrats.

Jessica Dawson, a professor at the West Point military academy, said the NRA made common cause with the religious right, a group that believes in Christianity's primacy in American culture and the constitution.

Drawing "on the New Christian Right's belief in moral decay, distrust of the government, and belief in evil," the NRA leadership "began to use more religiously coded language to elevate the Second Amendment above the restrictions of a secular government," Dawson wrote.

'Self-Defense'

Yet the shift of focus to the Second Amendment did not help gunmakers, who saw flat sales due to the steep decline by the 1990s in hunting and shooting sports.

That paved the way for Gun Culture 2.0 -- when the NRA and the gun industry began telling consumers that they needed personal firearms to protect themselves, according to Busse.

Gun marketing increasingly showed people under attack from rioters and thieves, and hyped the need for personal "tactical" equipment.

The timing paralleled Barack Obama becoming the first African American president and a rise in white nationalism.

"Fifteen years ago, at the behest of the NRA, the firearms industry took a dark turn when it started marketing increasingly aggressive and militaristic guns and tactical gear," Busse wrote.

Meanwhile, many states answered worries about a perceived rise in crime by allowing people to carry guns in public without permits.

In fact, violent crime has trended downward over the past two decades -- though gun-related murders have surged in recent years.

That, said Wake Forest's Yamane, was a key turning point for Gun Culture 2.0, giving a sharp boost to handgun sales, which people of all races bought, amid exaggerated fears of internecine violence.

Since 2009, sales have soared, topping more than 10 million a year since 2013, mainly AR-15-type assault rifles and semi-automatic pistols.

"The majority of gun owners today -- especially new gun owners -- point to self-defense as the primary reason for owning a gun," Yamane wrote.

China To Parade High-Tech Weaponry In Signal Of Strength, And Shop Window

China To Parade High-Tech Weaponry In Signal Of Strength, And Shop Window

By Megha Rajagopalan

BEIJING (Reuters) – From ballistic missiles to fighter jets, China has rolled out a host of high-tech weaponry ahead of a parade next week commemorating victory over Japan in World War Two, in a signal of Beijing’s growing confidence in its military might.

China has poured capital into developing its home-grown weapons industry with an eye toward export markets as it projects greater military power in disputed waters in the South and East China Seas.

Qu Rui, a military official and deputy director of the office organizing the parade, says all the weapons and equipment on show would be Chinese-made, 84 percent shown for the first time. “They represent the new development, new achievements and new images of the building of the Chinese armed forces,” he said at a recent briefing.

Chinese officials have repeatedly said the military parade is not directed at any other country, but diplomats and experts say countries with which Beijing has territorial disputes, including Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, may react with uneasiness to the broad display of military power.

“It’s possible that Japan and Southeast Asian countries will interpret this as a kind of warning to them,” said Xie Yue, a political scientist at Tongji University. “I can’t say whether that’s warranted or not.”

State media has reported that the parade, which involves more than 10 foreign military delegations including Russia, is the first in which China has showed off such a broad array of weapons.

BIGGEST DISPLAY YET

Qu said 12,000 Chinese troops would take part, along with 500 pieces of equipment and nearly 200 aircraft. Air echelons on display will include bombers, fighters and carrier-based aircraft.

Several ballistic missiles – including one that analysts say is capable of reaching a U.S. base in Guam – were spotted during parade rehearsals, Shao Yongling, a senior colonel from the PLA Second Artillery Command College, told the state-owned Global Times newspaper.

The Second Artillery Force, the nuclear force, is set to display seven types of missiles including conventional and nuclear models, the official Xinhua news agency reported, citing unnamed military sources. “The scale and number of missiles will surpass any previous outing,” the source told Xinhua.

The parade will also involve modern tanks and missile-launchers, state media has reported. An upgraded long-range bomber will also be on display, flying in formation over Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on Thursday, a leading pilot of the formation told Xinhua.

The latest version of the J-15 aircraft carrier-based fighter jet has also been seen in rehearsals, Beijing-based air defense expert Fu Qianshao told the Global Times. Medium-sized early warning and control aircraft, used for surveillance and other missions, will lead ten formations at the parade.

A formation of military helicopters flew over Beijing during a parade rehearsal last weekend as tanks rolled through parts of the capital.

Sino-Japan relations have long been affected by what China sees as Japan’s failure to atone for its occupation of parts of China before and during the war. Western and Chinese historians estimate millions of Chinese civilians were killed.

Jack Midgley, a defense expert at Deloitte, said next week’s parade was not necessarily meant to send a message to the West or other countries in the region.

“It’s to demonstrate China has achieved first-world status with its military, and to display its products for foreign buyers,” he said, adding much of the weaponry will already be familiar to foreign military analysts and intelligence services.

(Reporting by Megha Rajagopalan; Editing by Ian Geoghegan)

Photo: Paramilitary policemen and members of a gun salute team fire cannons during a training session for a military parade to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of the World War Two, at a military base in Beijing, China, August 1, 2015. China will hold the parade on September 3, Picture taken August 1, 2015. (REUTERS/Stringer)

Can States Slow The Flow Of Military Equipment To Police?

Can States Slow The Flow Of Military Equipment To Police?

By Jake Grovum, Stateline.org (TNS)

WASHINGTON — Police in Minneapolis-St. Paul trained military-grade launchers and used flash bang and tear gas grenades on protesters at the 2008 Republican National Convention. The Richland County, S.C., Sheriff’s Department got an armored personnel carrier to help fight drug and gambling crime. And Ohio State University police acquired a 19-ton armored truck that can withstand mine blasts.

These are just a few examples of the growing militarization of police in America. It’s been ongoing for more than a decade, but rarely grabbed the nation’s attention until civil unrest erupted in Ferguson, Missouri, last August after the killing of Michael Brown, an unarmed black teenager shot by a white police officer.

Now, eight months after the confrontations in Ferguson between heavily armed police and protesters, lawmakers in more than a half-dozen states are trying to rein in the militarization of their own police forces. They point to Ferguson and say they want to prevent similar highly weaponized responses in their states.

The legislative response — backed by Democrats and Republicans, in red states and blue states — is a reaction to what one sponsor of such a bill calls the “law enforcement-industrial complex,” a play on the “military-industrial complex” term first used by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

“You get these pictures that just shock the conscience,” said Republican state Senator Branden Petersen of Minnesota, referring to news footage of heavily armed police patrolling streets or carrying out sting operations. His bill would bar law enforcement in the state from accepting gear that’s “designed to primarily have a military purpose or offensive capability.”

But Petersen and those backing similar efforts in other states — they’ve come up in California, Connecticut, Indiana, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Tennessee, and Vermont — face an uphill climb, partly because of the way law enforcement acquires the gear.

The equipment flows through a Pentagon surplus operation known as the 1033 Program, which makes available gear that the military no longer wants. Local agencies — including state and local police, and others such as natural resources departments — make requests through a designated state coordinator, who with Defense Department officials, has final say. There’s no federal requirement for state or local lawmaker approval or oversight, and any gear distributed is free of charge. About $5.4 billion worth has been distributed since the program began in 1997.

The program is a key source of tactical equipment, along with clothing (everything from parkas to mittens), office supplies, exercise equipment, and appliances. Police say it’s invaluable in providing supplies they cannot afford and gear that can save officers’ lives.

But others call it a shadowy program that lacks oversight and lets police request anything they want, regardless of whether they need it. Some say it even tramples the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the U.S. military from operating on American soil.

As Petersen put it: “The 1033 Program is a workaround.”

One reason the reaction to images of militarized police in Ferguson has reverberated in other states is the 1033 Program has been an equal-opportunity distributor, sending equipment all over the country to satisfy law enforcement requests.

A Stateline analysis of 1033 Program data shows that the 50 states hold nearly $1.7 billion worth of equipment, an average of nearly $34 million per state. Per capita, equipment values held by states range from less than $1 for Alaska, Pennsylvania, and Hawaii to more than $14 for Alabama, Florida, New Mexico, and Tennessee.

The type of gear the states have also varies widely. Alaska law enforcement, for example, has 165 rifles and almost $170,000 in night vision equipment, among other items.

But law enforcement in Florida, has 47 mine-resistant vehicles, 36 grenade launchers, and more than 7,540 rifles. In Texas, there are 73 mine-resistant vehicles and a $24.3 million aircraft. In Tennessee, there are 31 mine-resistant vehicles and seven grenade launchers. North Carolina has 16 helicopters and 22 grenade launchers.

The steady flow of gear has made the program popular among law enforcement, some of which say it’s necessary to combat criminals who have access to ever-more-powerful weaponry.

“Our chiefs used the program to obtain both practical and tactical equipment. They called it a really vital resource for acquiring vital public safety tools especially in a time of tight budgets,” said Andy Skoogman of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association.

He said police have found ways to repurpose battlefield gear, including armored vehicles, for civilian law enforcement needs.

“Those vehicles have been used to transport citizens, officers, and equipment when the roads are closed due to snow, flooding, and severe weather,” Skoogman said. “This program has really helped acquire key equipment.”

National police groups sound similar notes.

“This equipment has undoubtedly improved the safety of our nation’s law enforcement officers and enhanced their abilities to protect citizens and communities from harm,” Yost Zakhary, then-president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, said in a statement last year as criticism of the program mounted. “I have seen firsthand the life-saving benefit of the 1033 program.”

The Pentagon also defends the program. “Ninety-five percent of the property that is transferred to local law enforcement through this program is not tactical,” Pentagon press secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby said last August. “It’s not weapons. It’s shelving, office equipment, communications gear, that kind of thing — furniture. I think it’s important to keep this thing in perspective.”

None of that has stymied the push to reform the program. Last year, President Barack Obama’s administration released a review, which called for more local engagement and transparency, better federal coordination, and additional training requirements.

That’s the tack many state lawmakers have taken in proposing bills to change the program. New Jersey became the first state to do so earlier this month, when Republican Governor Chris Christie signed a bill increasing local oversight of the 1033 Program after it passed unanimously in both legislative chambers. (Christie vetoed a separate bill that would have given the state’s attorney general oversight of the program.)

In California, a bill introduced would also give local governments a say over what law enforcement can receive. In Tennessee, a bipartisan bill would limit the type of offensive weapons law enforcement can receive. Another bill there would provide more local control.

Some bills simply aim for transparency. A bill in Montana, sponsored by Republican Representative Nicholas Schwaderer, would require local authorities to notify citizens of any request for equipment — even a Facebook post would satisfy the requirement.

The Montana bill also would bar some types of equipment. But Schwaderer said the reporting requirement as “the most helpful part of this bill,” which is his top legislative priority this session. He said he’s alarmed by the way some agencies have amassed gear in the last decade without input from the public.

“This foundation sets a massive precedent in Montana and the country as to what kind of society we want to have,” Schwaderer said of his bill. “If you get to the point where you need a grenade launcher, we’ve got the National Guard.”

Whether any other state follows New Jersey’s lead in changing the program this year is uncertain. Some sponsors admit they face tough opposition from law enforcement officials and lawmakers who support them.

There’s little interstate coordination among lawmakers pushing the measures, although groups like the 10th Amendment Center, a think tank focused on limited government and states’ rights, have tracked some of the bills, and the American Civil Liberties Union has fought the militarization of police departments for years.

Some localities already have taken steps to pare down or roll back military weapons and equipment. In Minneapolis, the police department stopped bringing it in several years ago, and is trying to return or destroy what it still has.

And because of Ferguson, some citizens’ groups say they are more aware of how their police departments have been transformed and of the possible dangers an overly militarized police force poses.

As Anthony Newby, director of the Minneapolis-based Neighborhoods Organizing for Change, put it: “Ferguson really shed light on the fact that we are really just one or two decisions away from being in that position. It was just a reminder for us to really track it, and see if there’s a way to stop that from ever being an issue.”