Latest JFK Files Expose Martin Luther King as a Communist, Sex Deviant and Fraud

Eric Striker
Daily Stormer
November 5, 2017


Money laundering, communism, white pussy, bisexual orgies, watermelon – welcome to Martin Luther King’s dream!

The latest batch of JFK files has exposed the man of the millennium Himself as exactly everything his critics have for decades alleged. Give Trump some credit, any other president would’ve actively suppressed the release of this internal document.

As we speak, the Judenpresse is scrambling to cover for the media-made Messiah – the second greatest marketing myth after the Holocaust!

So far the only spin they have is that the document is a product of J. Edgar Hoover’s alleged “racism.” Why – if that was the case – were these documents kept secret until now is not answered.

Doesn’t (((((((((Jeff Zucker))))))’s))) CNN believe in the integrity of our 17 intelligence agencies?

Newsweek:

The Trump administration released an FBI document containing allegations about the sexual misconduct of Martin Luther King as part of its declassification of information relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The 1968 document alleges financial improprieties by King’s civil rights organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, attempts to tie King to communist organizations and details a series of claims about King’s multiple alleged affairs.

It is not clear if any of the information in the dossier was verified. It makes no mention of JFK, and the FBI has not disclosed why it was held as part of a cache of documents relating to the Kennedy assassination.

Trump has ordered the National Archive to release all documents relating to the assassination, with the FBI file one of 646 documents from the Kennedy investigation released Friday.

The 20 page file profiles King when he was engaged in his historic campaign for civil rights, and is dated three weeks before his April 4 1968 assassination.

“The course King chooses to follow at this critical time could have momentous impact on the future of race relations in the United States,” the document’s introduction reads. “And for that reason this paper has been prepared to give some insight into the nature of the man himself as well as the nature of his views, goals, objectives, tactics and the reasons therefor.”

A section of the document entitled “King’s Personal Conduct” contains a series of claims about King’s extramarital affairs, including a relationship with folk singer Joan Baez.

The document describes the alleged sex acts King engaged in as “unnatural” and “abnormal,” and details an orgy that took place during workshops King held in Miami, Florida, in February 1968 with funds from the Ford Foundation to train black ministers in leadership.

“Several Negro and white prostitutes were brought in from the Miami area. An all night-sex orgy was held with these prostitutes and some of the delegates in attendance.”

“One room had a large table in it which was filled with whiskey. The two Negro prostitutes were paid $50.00 to put on a sex show for the entertainment of the guests. A variety of sex acts deviating from the normal were observed.”

It goes on to label the African-American civil rights organization King led as a “tax dodge” and describes the alleged communist ties of King’s associates.

Institutional Jewry invented King from scratch, and they calibrated their risk-reward system quite well. Black ministers who were at first attracted to King’s work wound up leaving in disgust after seeing what he was really all about. This left a largely Jewish cabal pulling the strings at SNCC through the power of press and purse.

Of course this information is nothing new. During the zenith of the “Civil Rights movement,” numerous organizations warned America about MLK and his Jews, but there was no G2G (Goy-to-Goy) communication like the internet back then.

Boomer “Martin Luther King was a Republican” types may have been combing through these documents for information on their favorite conspiracy theory.

Instead, they find out the middle aged version of Santa isn’t real and Snape kills Dumbledore!

Hollywood sex scandals, DNC admitting to rigging election, now we see the God-man incarnation of negro moral perfection was actually just a self-interested coon for Zionist forces. Is there something going on in the cosmos, or is this being orchestrated by good guys trying to take back our country?

Papa John’s Pizzas Disgusted with Anti-White NFL, Pulls Ads

Adrian Sol
Daily Stormer
November 2, 2017

 

“Negative consumer sentiment” is a code word for “people are fed up with these monkeys!”

The Negro fatigue caused by this whole NFL fiasco is reaching heights that even I didn’t fully expect. While it was pretty obvious viewership and attendance rates were going to drop more and more, the fact that actual sponsors are pulling out is pretty incredible.

I mean, you’d think these cucked companies would want to hide their raging hatred for these anti-American nig nogs, and continued pouring money into the Negro Felon League just to avoid pissing off the liberals.

But money speaks. And the money is definitely not on the NFL’s side.

Zero Hedge:

Having unleashed on NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell during the Papa John’s earnings call this morning…

“The NFL has hurt us by not resolving the current debacle to the players’ and owners’ satisfaction,” Schnatter, who serves as the pizza chain’s chairman and chief executive officer, said on a conference call. “NFL leadership has hurt Papa John’s shareholders.”

“Leadership starts at the top, and this is an example of poor leadership,” Schnatter said.

“This should have been nipped in the bud a year and a half ago,” Schnatter said on the call.

Papa John: Official pizza of the alt-right?

He concluded that “like many sponsors, we’re in touch with the NFL. Once the issue is resolved, we’re optimistic the NFL’s best years are ahead.”

It appears Papa John’s founder John Schnatter was serious about that last line… as ESPN’s Darren Rovell reports that “Papa John’s says it has been pulling advertising associated with the NFL.”

While the last few sponsors/advertisers to pull their money from The NFL (here and here) were shrugged off by some, the decision by the major pizza chain – which is a mainstay of almost every commercial break as far as we can remember – will perhaps shock a few more owners.

Papa John’s is deeply rooted in the NFL since it has a deal with the league and 23 of its individual teams, according to Rovell.

So Papa John is a major, long-standing sponsor of the NFL. And yet even they’re panicked about what’s going on, fearing that the toxic feelings towards to sports organization might rub off on them.

This is great.

Getting White Americans to stop worshiping these monkeys is a great victory.

This might be the first time ever in modern history that a major institution is going to be completely destroyed explicitly because of public outrage over their anti-White agenda. The fact that other companies are taking notice and adjusting their policies is a major turning point.

It’s starting to make economic sense to be pro-White, even for these kiked, evil corporations.

USC Prof Stands By His Call For ‘Whiteness and therefore white people’ To Be ‘Destroyed’

The University of Southern California professor who said “whiteness” “must be by any and all means, destroyed,” said Wednesday that he stands behind his statements.

In an email to The College Fix, self-described “black identity extremist” assistant professor Charles H.F. Davis wrote: “Yes, I stand behind my statements against white supremacy, heterosexism and homophobia, and patriarchy as systems of oppression, all of which are both embodied and advanced by the violent and dehumanizing rhetoric and policy decisions of the current President of the United States.”


USC defended Davis’ “right” to express his views.

“Statements made by our faculty members are not endorsed by the University; indeed, we sometimes profoundly disagree with the statements,” they said in a statement to The College Fix. “Nevertheless, we protect their right to express those views. However, USC does not condone violence or threats of violence in any form.”

As The College Fix reports:

Davis told The Fix that he refutes InformationLiberation’s accusation that his Twitter account includes “anti-white hate” and promotes violence against law enforcement, saying it is a “perfect and intentional misrepresentation.” However, the professor did not deny harboring anti-police and anti-whiteness sentiments.

“To be clear, I am decidedly against whiteness as a social and political ideology, which systematically marginalize and disenfranchise people of color from opportunities for societal advancement,” he said. “In addition, I am against the institution of policing, which has historically and continuously enacted racial terror, sexual violence, and economic exploitation against racial minorities, women and LGBTQ communities, and economically disadvantaged working-class people.”

It’s a “perfect and intentional misrepresentation” to say he’s pushing “anti-white hate” – he just hates everything white people have created and wants to see it destroyed because we thrive on “marginalizing and disenfranchising” people of color, understand?

Referring to his background photo on his Twitter account, Davis said he thinks photos that show resistance to police violence are necessary and said the photo of a black woman shooting a pig in a police officer’s uniform “is an intentional political statement.”

Davis said he defines whiteness as an ideology of racial superiority based in racist practices and beliefs and added the concept “is neither synonymous with nor exclusive to white people.” However, he said all white people reap in its benefits and that it must be eradicated because it “allows for both passive and active forms of violence to be enacted upon people of color, many of which result material and potentially fatal consequences.”

Indeed, it takes a high level of wokeness to realize black people can be white supremacists.

Davis is not against white people, he’s just against our very essence – our “whiteness” – which he and Marxist professors much smarter than himself get to arbitrarily define without our input.

Thanks for clearing all that up, Professor.

If you would like to file a complaint against this professor and his anti-white black extremist ideology:

Complaint process

Initial interview

If you feel someone has sexually harassed you, or has discriminated against or harassed you because of your membership in a protected class (such as race, gender, sexual identity, military status, marital status, age, national origin or religion), call our office at (213) 740-5086. We will arrange for an investigator to interview you. Although we encourage you to make an appointment, complaint investigators are frequently available for walk-in appointments as well.

To make an appointment call (213) 740-5086 at UPC or (323) 442-2020 at HSC, or email the office at oed@usc.edu. This appointment does not automatically initiate an investigation, but will serve to determine the nature of any concerns, and start the process of determining how best to address those concerns.

USC Prof: ‘Whiteness and therefore whites’ Must Be ‘By Any And All Means, Destroyed’

USC Prof: ‘Whiteness’ Must Be ‘By Any And All Means, Destroyed’

By Chris Menahan

The University of Southern California is employing a self-described “black identity extremist” who says “whiteness” “must be, by any and all means, destroyed.”

Charles H.F. Davis, according to his bio, is an “assistant professor of clinical education at the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California and chief strategy officer and director of research at the USC Race and Equity Center.”

A look at his Twitter profile shows it’s filled with anti-white racial hate and glamorizes the murder of police.

H.F. Davis’s profile features a picture of himself doing a black power salute and his background image is an excerpt from an extremely graphic black panther comic book which shows a black woman threatening to shoot a white “pig” with a gun.

Earlier this year, H.F. Davis said, “whiteness and white supremacy must be, by any and all means, destroyed.”

What does “destroying whiteness” entail? Look no further than H.F. Davis’s tweet praising “white genocide” professor George Ciccariello-Maher.

Ciccariello-Maher said late last year that all he wants “for Christmas” is “white genocide.” Ciccariello-Maher clarified his statement by saying that the massacre of whites during the Haitian revolution “was a good thing indeed.”

“I fully support @ciccmaher’s comments about the Haitian Revolution,” Charles H.F. Davis said in response to the controversy on Twitter.

White women, children and men were massacred wholesale during the brutal Haitian revolution. Mixed race “Mulattos” were also killed in like-kind.

H.F. Davis “fully supports” the statement that “was a good thing indeed.”

He’s repeatedly suggested violence is a legitimate way to fight the white, cis, heterosexist, capitalist, patriarchy:

He praised a black woman who punched a white woman in the face over her speech:

He also fantasized about smashing a white man in the face with a baseball bat, which he evidently felt was hilarious:

H.F. Davis doesn’t just defend violence on Twitter, last week he wrote an article for Insider Higher Ed where he said that punishing protesters for disrupting conservative speakers reinforces “white supremacy.”

As Campus Reform reports:

Charles H.F. Davis, a professor of education at USC, argued in an essay for Inside Higher Ed that punishing protesters contributes to white supremacy because it can unfairly “suppress and criminalize” students, especially in light of protesters’ valiant goals.

For example, Davis argues against punishing students who shouted down a recent Ben Shapiro talk at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, since students were fighting against “racist rhetoric advanced by Shapiro.”

In an interview with Campus Reform, Davis explained that “punishing protesters unfairly criminalizes students,” and that colleges who do so “run the risk of creating an unsafe and threatening environment.”

Davis defines protesters as those who “use disruptive tactics to shut down hate speech as well as those holding signs, protesting outside of speaker venues, and engaged in other forms of resistance against white supremacy.”

Students who protest “are disproportionately students of color and students representing other marginalized groups,” Davis noted. “Issuing a punishment, especially in these cases, is a clear form of criminalization by deeming protest unacceptable,” he added.

Further, while hate speech is protected by the First Amendment, Davis warns that colleges should “resist the constant conflation of hate speech and free speech,” adding that this is justified because hate speech is “violent and invites violence, which should not be allowed on-campus.”

Why is the University of Southern California allowing this hate-preacher to teach students?

Feel free to email and call USC President C. L. Max Nikias:

USC Office of the President
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0012
(213) 740 – 2111
(213) 821 – 1342
president@usc.edu
Instagram

Ask Mr. Nikias if he’s fine with employing a self-described “black identity extremist” who glamorizes the murder of police officers, says he “fully supports” the statement the massacre of white people during the Haitian revolution “was a good thing indeed,” and insists “whiteness” “must be by any and all means, destroyed.”


This article originally appeared on Information Liberation.

Fundamental Transformation

blacks and whites, CANNOT COEXIST.

Very few people understand what a fundamental transformation has occurred in the USA and EU over the past seventy years. Society has become inverted, meaning that it is the opposite of what it set out to be, simply because we have adopted egalitarianism in its raw form, which is a mental virus that seemingly overcomes all human resistance.

This fundamental transformation involved social engineering which was commanded by the ideology we adopted starting in the Renaissance™ but formalized with The Enlightenment™ where we decided that the human individual was more important than natural order or social order, kicking off centuries of egalitarian thought, or thinking which assumes the equality of all humans so that the individual cannot be excluded or judged.

Most deceived themselves into thinking that the core of an idea could expand so much. In reality, however, related ideas expand to fill all available space and conquer any competing ideas, so the situation more resembled the proverb:

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost;
For want of the shoe, the horse was lost;
For want of the horse, the rider was lost;
For want of the rider, the battle was lost;
For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost;
And all from the want of a horseshoe nail.

We started with a simple idea: instead of giving credit to those of higher social rank, we would treat everyone equally before courts of law. Some cautioned against this because, while you may have some higher rank people who are bad, in general the ranks reflect what each has contributed, and so the productive need to be protected against the rest.

But we inverted that, and instead protected the rest against the productive by removing any positive claims that the productive could make. This gave the advantage to those without any positive claims about past history to make.

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost;

With equality, we suddenly had the notion that people should be treated equally, but this led to a converse assumption: if results differed, it was because of unequal treatment, not unequal aptitudes. Worse, saying anything against this was considered cruel. As a result, we began to consider any outcomes which differed from our expectations to be the result of racism, through the American “disparate impact” doctrine.

These began at first in respect to caste and class, which were the sources of great tension in the UK. Our society was outraged that once, we had aristocrats who were considered above others. In order to gratify our pretense, we began to systematically remove any distinctions between people. At first, this seemed to pacify the herd which felt ready for revolution, but then decay began.

For want of the shoe, the horse was lost;

In order to justify this affirmative action, our society began to work around uncomfortable clashes of difference. It does not matter, in the big accounting, what caused them or what they were. Just let it suffice to say that different ethnic groups are different for a reason, having evolved apart and for different regions and goals, and so incompatibilities arose.

Instead of admitting these, which would require backtracking on both diversity and equality, we lied. We covered up the clashes, hid the bad statistics, re-categorized certain crimes as not-crimes and certain events as non-existent, and basically forged our way until we got to the point where the whole system seemed to be working.

In addition, a gap in wealth persisted, so we adopted a social welfare program for the Other among us so that we could claim to be a fair, generous and equitable state. Instead we simply bankrupted ourselves, but we covered that up, too. In order to make diversity work, we shifted our economy toward a socialist model and taxed everyone more.

Precedent really crushed us here. Once you accept one lie, you must either (1) admit it was a lie or (2) build everything else on the basis of that lie. This is one of those truly binary areas in life. Once we accepted that “all people are equal,” it naturally flowed from that idea that caste was obsolete, diversity was good, socialism was fair and mob rule was intelligent. All unraveled from that point.

For want of the horse, the rider was lost;

This in turn produced problems because the socialist order took from ordinary people in order to subsidize the permanent minority underclass (PMUC). That in turn made people wary of government, which meant that government had to demonstrate its day-to-day relevance and importance in the lives of ordinary people, which in turn made government grow more powerful.

Throughout the next decade, well-meaning government reached into every area of human life, creating rules and people to administer them. Soon government became one of the biggest industries in the land, since a government job meant an end to financial troubles. The government borrowed itself into debt. Since there was no point doing anything else, the people did the same.

At this point, reality had drifted far away. All of the money was monopoly money and when you wanted more, you borrowed it. The social welfare programs that make up nearly 60% of the budget resulted in a massive debt, and any attempt to reduce it would raise cries of “racism” so was immediately discounted.

People began to experience the neo-Communist nature of this society when they accidentally spoke out in some way that contradicted the official explanation of how everything was going well and diversity was our strength. Widely-known truths from fifty years prior became thought-crimes, investigated by the police and ending with firings, massive news coverage, destruction of reputations, loss of home and income, and the shattering of families.

It became mandatory to praise diversity, equality and pluralism (“tolerance”) at every juncture, and those who did not risked having their careers and fortunes destroyed if any complaint surface against them; the only way to fend off these attacks, most of which were spurious and destroyed their targets before the facts came out, was to have a longstanding record of pro-diversity activity.

At this point, diversity had become the pro-Party sign of Vaclav Havel’s greengrocer:

The manager of a fruit-and-vegetable shop places in his window, among the onions and carrots, the slogan: “Workers of the world, unite!” Why does he do it? What is he trying to communicate to the world? Is he genuinely enthusiastic about the idea of unity among the workers of the world? Is his enthusiasm so great that he feels an irrepressible impulse to acquaint the public with his ideals? Has he really given more than a moment’s thought to how such a unification might occur and what it would mean?

I think it can safely be assumed that the overwhelming majority of shopkeepers never think about the slogans they put in their windows, nor do they use them to express their real opinions. That poster was delivered to our greengrocer from the enterprise headquarters along with the onions and carrots. He put them all into the window simply because it has been done that way for years, because everyone does it, and because that is the way it has to be. If he were to refuse, there could be trouble. He could be reproached for not having the proper decoration in his window; someone might even accuse him of disloyalty. He does it because these things must be done if one is to get along in life. It is one of the thousands of details that guarantee him a relatively tranquil life “in harmony with society,” as they say.

Obviously the greengrocer is indifferent to the semantic content of the slogan on exhibit; he does not put the slogan in his window from any personal desire to acquaint the public with the ideal it expresses. This, of course, does not mean that his action has no motive or significance at all, or that the slogan communicates nothing to anyone. The slogan is really a sign, and as such it contains a subliminal but very definite message. Verbally, it might be expressed this way: “I, the greengrocer XY, live here and I know what I must do. I behave in the manner expected of me. I can be depended upon and am beyond reproach. I am obedient and therefore I have the right to be left in peace.” This message, of course, has an addressee: it is directed above, to the greengrocer’s superior, and at the same time it is a shield that protects the greengrocer from potential informers. The slogan’s real meaning, therefore, is rooted firmly in the greengrocer’s existence.

At this point, the diversity agenda took on an inertia of its own and essentially rolled over everything else. To succeed, you had to have the right opinions, and in the post affirmative action employment market, this meant that one would not hear a word of dissent. Society had become acephalous (headless) and was careening onward purely on momentum, without any way of checking itself.

For want of the rider, the battle was lost;

Now it was agreed that society must be transformed, and the election of a black president to the most powerful nation on Earth was a guilt-offering and sacrifice to the voracious monster of political correctness. However, this merely intensified feelings because there is no such thing as null bias; one acts in favor of a group at all times, even if it is the group of not having a clear group.

The disgruntled assembled a group of themselves and others with an interest in taking over our civilization, namely ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, angry single women, large corporations, megalomaniac billionaires and media empires. They then summoned a new group, formed of SJWs or “Soviet Jurisdiction Workers,” and SWPLs, which is shorthand for “Stuff White People Like” and refers to white people who draw attention to themselves and show off their presumed inner goodness by being excessively, tritely and painfully politically correct.

At this point, the culture war that had been brewing for a century reached its apex and the revolutionaries clearly won. All of media, entertainment, academia and government was in lock step with the “new” and “innovative” methods of the neo-Communists. No one dared speak out in resistance because their lives would be destroyed.

For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost;

Revolutionary thought has an Achilles Heel: it is essentially a bribe that promises no loss of status for being unrealistic or crass, offers power to be seized from a hierarchy, and beckons with the thought that instead of spending our energy and money on building civilization — which must be done on a regular basis to stave off entropy — we can spend it directly on citizens.

This bribe holds the attention of the crowd as long as the economy is in good shape; when the economy goes sideways, people have less confidence in democracy because it has failed to deliver on its dual promise of prosperity and individualism at a more anarchic level than social order will allow:

In 19 countries, people who say their national economies are in bad shape are less likely to believe representative democracy is good for the country.

In 23 nations, the belief that representative democracy is good is less common among people who think life is worse today than it was 50 years ago. In Spain, for example, just 63% of those who believe life is worse than before consider representative democracy a good thing for their country, compared with 80% who support representative democracy among those who say life is better than it was a half century ago.

Similarly, pessimism about the next generation is related to negative views about representative democracy. In roughly half the nations surveyed those who think today’s children will be worse off financially than their parents are less likely than others to say representative democracy is a good form of government. Among Mexicans who believe the next generation will be worse off, only 52% say representative democracy is good for the country. Backing for government by elected representatives is at 72% among those who say children will be better off than their parents.

When the neo-Communist years came, away went the wealth. The currency fell in value; people noticed that real wages had been stagnant for a long time; taxes, including the new 0bamacare tax, savaged the middle classes; sexual tension reached an apex of false rape accusations; people had nothing in common because every interaction was highly politicized, and so soon we saw the future of America: the destruction of its population, everyone lonely and enslaved to pointless jobs while living in apartments that, if you scratched off the facades, were decidedly Soviet in their layout.

And all from the want of a horseshoe nail.

And so we come down to the cause of it all: the proliferation of people who both do not understand what is needed to have civilization and are stunted enough in self-actualization to be individualists, a condition the ancients called hubris. This was legitimized by The Renaissance™ and The Enlightenment,™ both of which shifted focus from natural law, divine hierarchy and social order to the glory of the human individual.

Our only useful metaphor for this process is obesity. When we are prosperous and have more than enough food, we get fat unless we take conscious steps to avoid that process. In the West, our wealth allowed a vast breeding program of those who are naturally “drones” as Plato calls them, or people oriented toward a mentality of parasitic dependency.

At first, it did not seem that it would unravel so fast or go down this dark path. But humans suffer for their big brains which allow them to rationalize, and in so doing, to alter their knowledge of what is true in order to make it fit a human narrative. This causes inversion of our thinking, which is then mirrored when society inverts the meaning of words and ideas by filtering out what contradicts the human narrative.

We see also that the differences between “types” of Leftism are inconsequential. They share the same philosophy and, more importantly, the belief that everything else is a means-to-the-end of achieving that condition, such that we are all expendable. Leftism starts with the idea of equality, an addicting mental virus, and as it grows in power, it becomes closer to full Communism, even if it hides that fact behind decentralized structures as used in neo-Communist states across the West.

When all is a means-to-an-end, we engage in “social engineering” which really means the destruction of anything which does not fit the narrative so that the narrative can be converted into ideology and used to control the masses. This only happens when equality has already taken over, so that mass opinion can be used as a substitute for fact or logic, and then the takeover is complete.

At some point, humanity will have to face the fact that all of our best intentions are destructive, and that what matters is a cold logical look at how to adapt and what has worked in the past. Then, we can broach the qualitative dimension, and choose the methods and principles which worked best in the past, avoiding the spiral of decline in which we now find ourselves.

Swedish Politicians Call for Army to be Deployed to No Go Zones to Keep Peace

Swedish Politicians Call for Army to be Deployed to No Go Zones to Keep Peace
Twenty members of the Moderate Party in Sweden have proposed the government deploys the armed forces in some of the country’s most dangerous no-go zones to combat “gang violence”.

Moderate Party politician Mikael Cederbratt made the proposal this week saying: “The situation in our areas of exclusion has deteriorated. The gangs have taken over and the police have had to retreat. Swedish law no longer applies there.”

Cederbratt was backed up by 19 other Moderate party members who signed a motion to deploy members of the Swedish armed forces in the heavily migrant populated Stockholm suburbs of Hallunda-Norsborg, Tensta, Rinkeby, and Husby Botkyrka Direct reports.

“It is absolutely necessary to do something, because these gangs are like cancerous tumours in our country, and it is urgent. My absolute belief is that we, the nation of Sweden, must declare war on criminal gangs,” Cederbratt said.

“It is the responsibility of the state to maintain the law, especially the police. But the police today do not have the numerical ability to maintain public order,” he added.

In certain no-go zones, police have been brutally attacked, some of which has even been caught on video. In Rinkeby, police have been trying to build a new, more secure police station for months but have been unable to find building contractors due to the danger of working in the area.

Cederbratt said that the military could take on police functions in the areas. “For example, a police bus and a night in Norsborg could be manned by four to five soldiers led by a police inspector,” he said.

“Military police are perfect. We also have a group of UN military unions who have learned this kind of work in very difficult situations abroad. If they receive supplementary education, they can work very well under the guidance of a police officer in Sweden.”

The situation for Swedish police has become dire with Swedish National Police Commissioner Dan Eliasson begging for help from the government earlier this year.

The threats to the police have also begun to increase after a police station was bombed earlier this week in Helsingborg with authorities refusing to rule out potential terrorist links.