YOU'RE NEVER ALONE WITH A SCHIZOPHRENIC: PETE WEBB, "THE INDUSTRIALISED CULTURE RESEARCH NETWORK" AND FURTHER INTELLECTUAL DECOMPOSITION NEAR THE UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM

My work on the McGonagall syndrome (a psychosomatic illness that causes sufferers to be overcome with dizziness and sometimes hallucinations when exposed to piss-poor pieces of music) brought forth a curious response from those afflicted with this mental disease over at the Industrialised Culture Research Network Blog Spot (ICRN). This is a pseudo-academic 'discussion' group that Peter Webb contributes to and possibly runs (my guess would be that this loose association consists of two – or possibly less – people). In a recent blog the ICRN claim my text about the McGonagall syndrome: "…represents a clear attack on academic freedom and an attempt to prevent free debate on a controversial topic". That's funny I thought it used humor to make some serious points!

It would be interesting to know what some of Peter Webb's colleagues in the sociology department at the University of Birmingham make of the ICRN's contentions. I suspect Webb and the ICRN might well be unpleasantly surprised by the views of say John Holmwood (author of 'Sociology as professional practice and public discourse' in "Sociological Theory" # 25, 2007, pages 46-66) or Mairtin Mac an Ghaill (author with Chris Haywood of "Gender, Culture and Society: Contemporary Femininities and Masculinities", Macmillan. London 2006). Likewise, I'd love to know whether Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke views my text on the McGonagall syndrome as an 'attack on academic freedom'. Goodrick-Clarke only mentions Tony Wakeford's Sol Invictus fleetingly (page 205) in his book "Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism and the Politics of Identity" (New York University Press, 2003), but he deals with other neo-folk musicians like Michael Moynihan in more detail. Certainly, David Keenan, author of the book "England's Hidden Reverse" (SAF Publishing, London 2003) which covers Wakeford and related acts, has yet to express to me any anxieties that my light hearted explorations of the McGonagall syndrome may curtail his ability to engage in 'free debate on a controversial topic'. Pete Webb and the ICRN strike me as having become somewhat overheated on the subject of neo-folk.

The ICRN claim: "Still, Stewart is not averse to a bit of lying himself", and proceed to claim that I'm fibbing when I suggested as an aside in an interview with Charlotte Cooper that Michel Prigent knew my mother. While this is not a matter of any importance to me, I have good reason to believe what I said to be true, as I explain elsewhere on this site. Even if I am wrong about this matter, it clearly doesn't follow that I've been telling porkie pies, since I believed what I said at the time I said it and as it happens I still do. The fact that Michel Prigent claims my aside about him is a fib proves very little. Prigent could equally well be lying, or he may have merely made a mistake; perhaps he has problems with his memory or is delusional like Peter Webb (I suspect Prigent may be suffering from the Rabbie Burns syndrome, which causes those afflicted to denounce as a police spy almost anyone who produces 'great' art or literature). Regardless of this, there is plenty of evidence around to indicate that Larry O'Hara, Michel Prigent and David Black (all invoked by the ICRN) are not the most reliable of sources.

The ICRN also offer what they bill as "some surprising highlights from his (Stewart Home's) three page introduction to "Above Us the Sun" (a Tony Wakeford lyric book)". But it is really rather hard to see what is at all surprising about the fact that I would play a prank on Tony Wakeford. As I explained in my April 1996 leaflet "Don't Give Up The Day Job" (which has been available online since 1999): "Both Nazi scum and hardcore reformists who aim to channel activism toward electoral politics have serious problems with humour. In his leaflet Stewart Home: The Fascists' Flunkey, (Larry) O'Hara reproduces 'my' introduction to Above Us The Sun as proof of his claim that I sycophantically idolise 'Tony Wakeford as a "genius" and a semi-divine figure'. The introduction to my book The Assault On Culture contains a critique of the notion of 'genius', and anyone familiar with my output knows that I have no time for this absurd construct. Likewise, Wakeford named his band Sol Invictus after the Pagan Mithraic cult, whereas virtually the entire introduction to Above Us The Sun, and not just those parts in quotes, is lifted from the work of the Christian 'philosopher' Søren Kierkegaard. Regardless of this, to describe as 'a genius' the author of lines such as 'don't rebel, you won't be thanked, you'll just be run over by a tank' and 'nothing changes, only gets worse, nothing changes, waiting for a hearse' is so obviously a joke it shouldn't need explaining."

Having invoked the absurd figures of Prigent, Black and O'Hara, the ICRN moves on to misrepresenting their views: "The principiadialectica article (a magazine and website Prigent and Black are involved with) also has a discussion of Wakeford as being a fascist in the mid eighties period i.e. roughly 1982 – 1987. So it turns out that Herr Heimat (i.e. Stewart Home) was in fact a Death In June, Sol Invictus, Current 93 loving fan who was chastened by people in his political and social milieu enough to make him rethink his position and deny his true musical love…" Anyone who has looked at the material Black, Prigent and O'Hara, have put out about me (including the piece the ICRN cites) will be well aware that they view Wakeford as having been a fascist activist throughout the 1990s (and presumably still view him as such).

Moving on, to describe Black, Prigent and O'Hara, as belonging to my political and social milieu is absurd: O'Hara was (and as far as I know still is) a member of the Green Party, Black was active with Hobgoblin/News & Letters (UK), while Prigent moved from bohemianism to a pro-situ position at some point in the early to mid-seventies. This trio come from quite distinct political milieus, and Unpopular Books highlighted the incongruity of the collaboration between two of them in the April 1996 leaflet "Prigent-O'Hara: A Tale of Two Shitheads" (available online via this site since 1999). Not only do these creeps not belong to my political or social milieu, they don't even belong to the same political milieu as each other. Back in the mid-nineties I commented somewhere about how people from such diverse political backgrounds being able to unite on the basis of their opposition to me was proof of my world-historical significance. Peter Webb and the ICRN taking up the smears of Prigent, Black and O'Hara, adds a dash of post-bolshevism to an already fetid swampoid stew, and thus provides yet more 'proof' of just how unbelievably significant I must be!

As I have made clear elsewhere, I refused to speak to Wakeford during the period I knew he was active in the National Front. In 1991 I was introduced to David Tibet by a friend of mine who'd recently become acquainted with him (their friendship didn't last long). Tibet told me the Fat Man had broken with fascism. I was prepared to accept this after asking Anti-Fascist Action about it too. Soon after this Tibet arranged to meet me in a west end bar, and when I turned up he was in the company of many other people including various anarcho-punk musicians and Wakeford. Later still, when the Fat Man asked me to write an introduction to a book of his dreadful song lyrics, I responded by producing a piece of mock 'praise' mainly lifted (and only lightly adapted) from a Søren Kierkegaard reader, a task that took me no more than fifteen minutes. I didn't even see the unbelievably dumb Wakeford material this travesty was produced to accompany until "Above Us The Sun" was published a little later on in 1994 (not 1996 as the ICRN misleadingly claim; and for the few who care about such things, their page references are out too).

I figured that since Wakeford had apparently put Nazi politics behind him he'd see the funny side of my prank. The fact that the Fat Man failed to spot I'd written a piss-take before he published the introduction is indicative of both hubris and the low level of his literacy skills (some of those who've been close to Wakeford have suggested to me this latter defect is due to laziness rather than an inherent lack of intelligence). I'd found Tony Wakeford's quasi-Bolshevik vanguardism when he was in fifth-rate punk band Crisis (1977-1980) amusing because of the disparity between his apparent intentions and what he actually achieved with Doug Pearce, but this idiocy mutated into an openly proclaimed elitism which I felt needed deflating; and producing a plagiarised introduction to "Above Us The Sun" provided me with a perfect opportunity to do just that. Likewise, I did not take the claims O'Hara, Black and Prigent, made about Wakeford particularly seriously because their attacks on me started with a disprovable smear about a non-existent dedication on a Skrewdriver record (they only switched to attacking me for knowing Wakeford after what they had to say about Ian Stuart Donaldson failed to stick).

In 1999 I was shown material by people who had no connection to Prigent, Black or O'Hara, that appeared to link Wakeford to Anarchist Heretics, an effort by fascists formerly active in the National Front (and more specifically the milieu around Richard Lawson and Troy Southgate) to recruit activists from all parts of the anarchist scene to the far-Right. I did not view the material I was shown as proving conclusively that Wakeford was involved in Anarchist Heretics, but it seemed credible and concerned me. When later that year I wrote an article entitled "We Mean It Man" which dealt extensively with Doug "Doggie Pee" Pearce of Death In June (who by this time was clearly a mystical cretin of the fascist persuasion) I included in footnote 26 of the text the observation: "Wakeford currently fronts a band called Sol Invictus and claims to have abandoned his former political affiliations." When Wakeford came across this footnote in May 2000 he became hysterical, called me and shrieked that my use of the word 'claims' made him look like a fascist. During this phone 'conversation' Wakeford screamed things like: "You've been slagging me off!" A day or two later I wrote Wakeford a letter in response to this abusive call, and as far as I can recall said nothing more about him publicly until October 2005, when having waited more than five years for a reply which - as I expected - Wakeford didn't have the guts to write (the Fat Man is barely literate, so he'd have needed to ask someone to help him put together a coherent answer but that is still no excuse), I put my missive to him online.

Placed under the letter to Wakeford on the Stewart Home Society website was another I sent in 1999 to the political grouplet David Black worked with (Hobgoblin/News & Letters), in which I said that: "Black appears to believe that Tony Wakeford is still active in fascist politics. If this is the case it would be helpful if he made any evidence he has more generally available. While… I am critical of the products of Wakeford's music business career, I still consider it worth encouraging individuals who have broken with fascist political groups to maintain such breaks. It is, of course, possible that in Wakeford's case I have been duped and if it can be shown that this is so, then it would be useful to know this in order to do something about it." I got no reply and Black refrained from saying anything useful about Wakeford that I'm aware of until the publication of "The View From the Bates-Home Motel" texts (which in the version I have appear to date from this year – 2008), and even then much of what he said reiterated information I had already placed on my website.

Indeed the credibility of those parts of Black's text that I view as accurate are completely undermined by other material he and Prigent include. To cite an example that isn't part of Black's ongoing attempts to smear me, he says he was briefly acquainted with the Fat Man in 1976 and continues: "he (Wakeford) went off to form the Crisis punk band, which was slightly surprising as his favourite bands had been Pink Floyd and Henry Cow". The first time I saw Crisis (in January 1978, doing their fourth gig and placed bottom of the bill to Sham 69 and Menace among others), Wakeford couldn't even tune his own bass, so there is nothing surprising about the fact he then belonged to a punk rather than a progressive band. His 'musicianship' was too rudimentary for him to do anything other than boogie or three chord thud. Likewise, if Black knew Wakeford in 1976 as he states, then the Fat Man did not go off to form Crisis but instead joined the Status Quo covers band Blackwater; he didn't 'move on/degenerate' to doing punk rock until the following year – 1977.

After my unanswered correspondence with Wakeford and Hobgoblin/News & Letters was placed online more information came my way from a variety of sources (and over several years). Gradually my position on Wakeford solidified into one of political opposition to him as someone who had not – as he falsely claimed – broken with fascism (but I deliberately left all the material I'd placed online about Wakeford up – some of which I view as redundant - so that anyone who was interested would be able to trace how my positions shifted as I acquired new information about him). I now view Wakeford as someone who may be lazy and stupid, but is nonetheless cunning (although obviously outside help from Richard Lawson and others has been a factor in giving this sneak the appearance of being craftier than he actually is).

The ICRN write: "An interview with Wakeford suggests that he is over his fascism in all its different guises and we would go further to say that he has realised the error of past associations with the NF, IONA and Evola and that area of political or philosophical thought. If we're wrong then it is a cover up that Wakeford is doing so well that there is no trace of any fascist activity since IONA." The ICRN's insistence on the actuality of Wakeford's break with fascism is more than a little over-egged considering he only stopped openly selling (via his Tursa website) the fascist Above The Ruins "Songs of the Wolf" release in 2007, and this happened after he was publicly criticized for doing so. There is also a history of Wakeford's activities being picked up and mentioned by the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight both before and well after his alleged break with fascism; with the most recent reference I'm aware of being on page 10 of the "Searchlight Extra" newsletter dated February 2007.

Besides all this, were Peter Webb and the ICRN not delusional, they ought to know their claim that there is no trace of Wakeford being involved in fascist activity since IONA is more than a little misleading, because as I note in the article on the McGonagall syndrome which the ICRN go through the motions (rather than the actuality) of criticising: "Returning to Webb's chapter on neo-folk, he writes: "Tony Wakeford was involved in a webzine called Flux Europa…." (Webb Page 89). Flux Europa is a continuation of the cultural activities of Transeuropa which emerged from the wreckage of National Front 'intellectual' front IONA." And it should go without saying that this cultural front is used to lure the naïve and innocent into more dangerous political waters.

While allegedly 'responding' to a piece in which I go out of my way to make it clear that in my view Peter Webb is NOT a Nazi, but rather a deluded fanboy, the ICRN perversely claims: "Home desperately attempts to deflect attention from his own past by tarring everyone and anyone with the same fascist brush in order to present himself as a doughty anti-fascist fighter." But regardless of how they choose to attack me, it should be clear that I consider the likes of Michal Prigent and David Black to be witless leftists (despite their past associations with Larry O'Hara and Green Anarchist); in Prigent's case I am even prepared to say his heart is in the right place – it is just unfortunate that his brains are in his arsehole

To muddy the waters David Tibet, Doug Pearce and Tony Wakeford, deliberately recruit non-fascists into their bands and a number of those who've played with these groups clearly don't identify with the far-Right (such as one time Death In June bassist Andrea[s] J. and Joolie Wood who has worked with Sol Invictus and Current 93). The mixed political convictions of the supplementary personnel in these bands is also to some extent down to the availability of musicians; there would appear to be a paucity of able fascist bassists – let alone violin and cello players - who are willing to play with them. Likewise, Wakeford in particular has a reputation for being bone idle and recruiting those he meets while they are working with bands run by his friends and acquaintances (I'm told he hates dealing with auditions).

Moving on, what the ICRN configure as my 'past' and allege I am attempting to deflect attention from in the passage quoted above, is in fact well documented on this website and in a large number of publications bearing my name (see for example my May 2000 letter to Tony Wakeford). The ICRN follow this up with the blatant smear: "It is interesting to note that Home, in his article on Wakeford and fascism, names Gary Smith as a member of No Remorse (skinhead far right band) and bass player on some Above the Ruins material, and uses this individual as 'guilt by association' evidence for Wakeford's fascist involvement. Yet it seems that in the mid to late 1980s when Home mixed with the Stoke Newington and Stamford Hill scene in London, Gary Smiths girlfriend used to regularly pop round to Home's house to use the photocopier to copy material for Smith. Should we see this as another example of his own guilt by association that he now `projects' onto others who disagree with him?"

First the ICRN claim I threaten academic freedom, then they resort to smears. It is not me who threatens academic freedom but the pseudo-academic(s) at the ICRN who bring the profession they claim to belong to into disrepute by behaving in this way. On top of which this piece of crap about Nazi buffoon Gary Smith appears designed to make him look good by creating the impression he is capable of holding down a steady relationship (something I'd consider unlikely after reading the description of him in "White Riot: The Violent Story of Combat 18" by Nick Lowles, pages 115-116 – unless the 'romance' in question happened to be with Dry Blackthorn). I've never had a photocopier in my house (who would?), so even if Gary Smith's girlfriend existed and I'd actually allowed her to copy the material in the way described (which had it happened – it didn't - would have been to surreptitiously run off extra copies of everything to pass on to anti-fascist friends, it is at least theoretically possible to set up a copy machine to do this), I wouldn't have been able to do so. It is also curious that the ICRN make no mention of the fact that Gary Smith plays on the first (mini)-album credited to Sol Invictus, made after Wakeford supposedly broke with fascism.

The ICRN whine: "Finally, would-be Gauleiter Home wants us all to take his work oh so seriously and even suggests that people quote him as the 'seal of approval' for `their' own work. His Anarchist Integralism being one work that he wants everyone to quote from as the authoritative source." This claim is not sourced, I'm not an academic but the ICRN claim they are (or s/he is), and so citation should be standard practice for them (strange then that I make far greater use of it). I very much doubt there is a source for this, and if there is it must be dubious because I don't know about it! Or is this a case of the ICRN being a far better authority on my desires than I am myself, and so if they say I want something it must be true, even if I don't know it? The ICRN goes on to whinge that in Anarchist Integralism I fail: "to take account of over 100 years of developments in anarchism, the rise of anarcho-syndicalism and its part in the Spanish Civil War plus the trajectories of anarchism in Britain through a variety of groups ranging from Class War and Direct Action Movement through to the Anarchist Workers Group amongst many others." The argument here rests on creating the completely false impression that I only address nineteenth-century anarchist writings. My text was first published in 1997, so if I was failing to take account of 'over 100 years of developments' my focus would have to be on material published before 1897, whereas I actually devote more space to twentieth-century anarchism than its nineteenth-century forebears.

One wonders how much of "Anarchist Integralism" the ICRN have read (a couple of paragraphs?), because – to give one example – they claim I take no account of Class War, who are mentioned in the main text and merit the following in a footnote:

"The article 'Politicians Are All Wankers' by anonymous in Class War #72 (August/September 1996, p. 2) announcing the formation of the Anti-Election Alliance was particularly hilarious: 'London Class War is pleased to announce that we are helping to set up, along with the Anarchist Communist Federation and Green Anarchist, the Anti-Election Alliance (AEA). Long term readers of Class War may remember the coverage we gave to the last AEA, which ended in a 1500 strong march being shepherded through central London by 2500 police (figures Police Review)...' Long term readers of Class War will also remember that there was a time when CW used to rant against CND wankers who allowed the cops to shepherd demonstrators around London like sheep. Times change and the now defunct Class War destroyed itself over unsubstantiated allegations about a Leeds member run in the Green Anarchist newspaper 'Attention! This Is A Genuine Security Alert' by Larry O'Hara, Green Anarchist #38, Summer 1995, p. 12-14 - rather than confront the political differences that separated the warring fractions. After this, the politically illiterate rump (London CW) not only linked up with the eco-fascist GA, it also boasted about the cops shepherding its supporters around London like a bunch of sheep! Towards the end, even the mass media ceased treating Class War as a serious threat to the dominant social order. See, for example, 'Want to Smash The State? Call A Plumber' by Rob Yates in The Observer of 16/3/97 (Review section, p. 1 & 4)."

Oops but I shouldn't have quoted that because I'm not the authoritive (sic) source for anything, even the content of my own writing, the ICRN is (in its dreams)! This is not even the first time low grade rhetorical tricks about 'development' have been employed by the ICRN/Peter Webb 'axis'. In an interview with Tony Wakeford dated as being conducted in September 2007 (but certainly not made public until 2008), one finds the following:

"PW (Pete Webb) When people look at Tursa from the outside and don't know about the development of it and Tony's development they may look at someone like Richard Moult and ask questions about him e.g. where has he come from, he had links to an organisation that were (sic) on the extreme edges of Satanism and National Socialism, does he still have those ideas? He is not here himself so he can't talk about it but how would you describe that relationship?"

To say that Moult 'had links' to an organization 'on the extreme edges of Satanism and National Socialism' downplays the matter to the point of distortion. Moult was (and it appears still is despite his denials) the leader of the Order of Nine Angles. In "White Riot: The Violent Story of Combat 18" (Milo Books, Bury 2001, p 186-7.), Nick Lowles writes:

"In mid-March 1998, Myatt met this author in a pub in the Shropshire farming town of Craven Arms to deny allegations that he was a Satanist. Arriving in his customary Barbour jacket, flat cap and corduroys, the ginger bearded nazi claimed to have only briefly flirted with 'the occult' some twenty-five years before. He denied any connection to the Order of Nine Angles (ONA) but was forced to admit that he had opened four P. O. boxes from which the cult had operated between 1983 and 1994. 'I only opened them as a favour for a friend,' he lamely commented. When pressed with evidence that his own political writings had been distributed from these addresses, he said that the box was shared by a friend whose identity he had promised to keep secret. Myatt was also forced to concede that NSM (National Socialist Movement) supporter Richard Moult was 'Christos Beest', the new leader of ONA, and that he was actually living with Moult and his partner."

The problem Webb and the ICRN won't address is that most Nazi Satanists including Myatt and Wakeford, are inveterate liars. It is not possible to take their claims on these matters at face value. According to Wakeford, in his interview with Webb, he was introduced to Moult by Current 93 (.i.e. David Michael Bunting AKA David Tibet) and then discovered his new collaborator was a notorious Nazi Satanist in the following fashion:

"I said `Richard I've got something to tell you' and he said `well I've got something to tell you too'. I said `do you know about my past' and he said `oh yes I know all about your past, don't worry about it'. He then said `do you know the group the Order of the Nine Angles' and I thought `oh my god, of course I know, David bloody Myatt!'. For me all of that is way beyond the pale, whatever he has been involved in whether it has been far right politics, magic or Islamic stuff the underlying core of it has been a virulent anti-Semitism. For me that is just too much and I would never have any sympathy with any of that shit,.. So I thought okay, fair enough, if this is genuinely in the past then let's keep working but I know that this will cause a load of shit and people will use it to stir things up… I have been through some really shameful, horrible things in my life so it would be the height of hypocrisy for me to not treat him with respect when he says he has turned his back on those ideas. But of course, if I was looking at it from the outside then I would think look at these connections, but I genuinely didn't know at the time and now we have resolved all of that. If I was part of some underground occult movement trying to pervert our pop kids then I think I would go about it in a slightly more undercover way."

If Webb and the ICRN believe Wakeford on this then they'll believe anything! After all one can find in Searchlight (November 1997, pages 6-7) the article "Rocking For Satan", which not only exposed Wakeford and his fellow Sol Invictus founder member Ian Read as the leading Nazi Satanists on the British rock scene, it links their activities to those of cat strangling fascist weirdo David Myatt. Likewise, since Wakeford claims he wants nothing to do with extreme anti-Semitism he also needs to explain why he's spent nearly a quarter of a century working closely with Richard Lawson who as editor of "Britain First" did so much to revive overt anti-Semitism in the National Front during the 1970s (see the other referenced material about Wakeford and Lawson on this site). If Webb and the ICRN want to understand the 'development' of these people, then they need to get it into their skulls that at the core of the neo-folk movement is a faction of fascist activists who decided that for public relations purposes they'd like to look more respectable as they waged a far-Right war of position within the culture industry. Wakeford's words about Moult are a damage limitation exercise, the matter of their collaboration was being raised by individuals who are more critical of the neo-folk subculture than the IRCN, and before Peter Webb asked his incredibly supportive question about it in this embarrassingly snug interview (for example, the observation "Myatt acolyte Richard Moult contributed the art work to Wakeford's "Into The Woods" album" is a line from a text added to this website's main page about Anthony Charles Wakeford on 4 July 2007 - and now moved here).

I presume the reason the author(s) of the ICRN smear piece did not sign it is because if he/she/they did so it might badly damage the careerist academic ambitions he/she/they harbour – and possibly also because he/she/they are ashamed of themselves for producing it. He/she/they write: "Last year, Home posted an anonymous article on the Metamute website. This appears to have triggered a violent assault on a member of the audience at the Boyd Rice show…" While I have written articles hosted on other parts of the Metamute site, I have never written or posted anything more than comments in the Metamute 'News & Analysis' section which hosted this piece; indeed the text referred to here ("Fascist Bands at Slimelight") is listed at the top of the page as being posted by Anthony (of Metamute). Anthony further clarified this in the comments section because the authorship of the piece was being completely misrepresented by some of those making pro-neo-folk comments.

The ICRN present no evidence to demonstrate any connection between the "Fascist Bands at Slimelight" article and an alleged violent assault. With regard to this Anthony notes in his comment: ""As the person who originally posted the text to the site I'd like to further clarify a few things… The text does not incite violence in any way and I would not have posted it here if it did." It should also be noted that when challenged in this forum, a pro-neo-folk cretin who presented himself as an expert on the alleged assault admitted: "I dont know who attacked my girlfriend it could have had something to do with you the antifa or just a plain couple of drunken goons!!!" Or the assault may not have happened, clearly those involved in the neo-folk subculture who invoked this alleged incident wanted to obscure the fact they were attending a 'performance' by the one time public face of the Nazi American Front, and that the individual in question (Boyd Rice) had also been jailed for domestic violence. Incidentally, Tony Wakeford has also provided 'musical' backing for Rice on various occasions.

Finally, the ICRN show themselves to be as delusional as Peter Webb (but then this is not particularly surprising considering the closeness of their 'relationship') when they write: "we suspect that Home and his masters remain intent not just on criticising and exposing problematic views but ultimately on criminalising an entire swathe of neofolk and industrial activity." Since I'm not in a position to criminalize anything, it is quite clear who this/these conspiracy nut(s) believe to be my 'masters' (although it should go without saying that I don't actually have any 'masters'). What next, are the ICRN going to claim I eat babies? At least I don't sacrifice animals or worship scum like Hitler, unlike some of the Nazi Satanists Pete Webb and the ICRN are crazed enough to defend.

Stewart Home, 28 July 2008.

I don't link to slime, but assuming the ICRN haven't become so embarrassed by their text that they've removed or altered it, a web search should enable those who wish to view it to do so.

Earlier piece about Pete Webb

Tony Wakeford of Sol Invictus is still a Fascist Creep

Tony Wakeford with a little Boyd Rice and Fascism

We Mean It Man: Punk Rock & Anti-Racism or, Death In June not mysterious

The Sound of Sadism: Whitehouse & the 'New' 'British' Art (post-aesthetic fascism)

Skrewdriver (chapter from book on punk rock Cranked Up Really High)

I Love A Man In A Uniform: From Fetish To Fashion & Back Again

Why I Believe My Mother Knew Michel Prigent (refutation of Prigent & Black)

Music

Light Journalism & Humour