|
|
“Vigorous Protests”
“Slay those who insult Islam” and “Europe you will pay. Demolition is on its way”. Wow. We have Nick Griffin warning of terrorists in our midst and he gets an absurd “incitement to hate” trial (in which he is thankfully acquitted). But Muslims promising blood on the streets are seen to be making “vigorous” protests. UPDATE: More pictures found now.
Posted by Phil Peterson on Friday, February 3, 2006 at 05:21 PM in Free Speech, Islam & Islamification, Media Comments:2
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 03, 2006, 05:48 PM | # The consensus is tottering GW. I have been speaking to many people about this and even many Liberals are beginning to question fundamental assumptions about multi-culturalism. This brings to mind the title of one of Churchill’s books on World War II, Gathering Storm. There are interesting times ahead, as the Chinese would say. 3
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 03, 2006, 05:50 PM | # By the way, I wonder if someone noticed the third placard in that picture which is barely visible. It says: Exterminate those (who) slander Islam. I wish someone took more pictures than shown here. There must have been dozens of threatening, deadly, blood-thirsty placards like this. 4
Posted by Matra on February 03, 2006, 06:27 PM | # Lots more pictures at Michelle Malkin’s blog, including the one mentioned by Phil 7
Posted by friedrich braun on February 03, 2006, 06:51 PM | # Depictions of Mohammed Throughout History 8
Posted by onetwothree on February 03, 2006, 07:31 PM | # A similar event has cropped up in relation to Jesus Christ: http://wcbstv.com/local/local_story_033162841.html ...with similar reactions. Or, an angry email, anyway: The writer wasn’t angry at us, but rather about what he’d seen at the current National Black Fine Art Show… ...the writer had big problems with a painting by Harlem artist “Tafa”. It depicts an upside down Christ-like figure with a face strongly resembling Osama Bin Laden… ...While some at the show did recognize the Bin Laden face on the Christ body, we found none who were offended. Instead most defended “Tafa” the artist’s right to speak his mind. 9
Posted by onetwothree on February 03, 2006, 07:38 PM | # Another good one: This is sufficiently sickening that I’ve got to think Reuters is making it that way on purpose: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States backed Muslims on Friday against European newspapers that printed caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad in a move that could help America’s battered image in the Islamic world. Inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States sided with Muslims outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion. “These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims,” State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. “We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable.” American Muslims welcomed the U.S. position, although it stopped short of urging American media not to republish the cartoons that include depicting Mohammad as a terrorist. Cooper said he had no comment as to why the United States chose to pass judgment in a dispute that ostensibly does not involve America. But the United States, which was founded by immigrants fleeing religious persecution, has previously spoken out against publications offensive to believers of other faiths. “Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief,” State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters. The United States, which before the September 11 attacks was criticized for insensitivity to the Islamic culture, has become more attuned to Muslim sensibilities. Accusations last year that U.S. officials desecrated the Koran sparked deadly riots in Asia and heightened that awareness. 10
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 03, 2006, 07:53 PM | # Sickening. Bush’s Administration obviously has no spine. Johnnie Ray will now tell us how Blair and Bush are both “Conservatives” (because they (usually) favour free trade). Joke. 11
Posted by Al Ross on February 03, 2006, 08:22 PM | # The US government contains so many Jewish policymakers that Americanism and political Judaism are becoming indistinguishable. This show of support towards the Islamic World (which, dont forget, includes those virulently anti-Western Muslim residents of the West) is just another typical Israeli-style confidence trick on the part of an American government which, if it acted in the true interests of real Americans, would encourage its print media to emulate the cartoon-reprinting efforts of the European newspapers whilst doing likewise with the Arab press’s comic depictions of Israeli behaviour. 12
Posted by Angela on February 03, 2006, 09:46 PM | #
Coordinated with who, the Danes? Please explain. 13
Posted by Angela on February 04, 2006, 01:49 AM | # Oh, of course with each other. Sorry. Thank you for clearing that up for me. 14
Posted by Angela on February 04, 2006, 02:45 AM | # It’s interesting to contrast the demonstration highlighted above with the BNP situation. Apart from the extremely violent language shown on the placards, and the fact that the participants are able to wear face masks, and that they will not face prosecution for inciting violence, there is a more important message. On the BNP site there is a video of ordinary Englishmen and women calmly chanting “Freedom.” Contrast that with one of the placards above which states “Freedom go to hell.” Above all other differences that divide men, these aims, or rather these profoundly held philosophical views, which themselves informed by a mix of IQ, behavioural genetics, and culture, can never be reconciled. It may be the unfortunate case that individuals holding these contrasting views will never live in peace. Possibly in a Police state, such as the UK is becoming, yes, and for short periods of time. This disagreement over the right to freedom seems to be the final fault-line in a failed multicultural experiment. 15
Posted by john on February 04, 2006, 03:11 AM | # I’m of the firm belief that one should try to look to the positive side of the Islamification of Eurabia, whoops I mean Europe: 16
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 03:30 AM | # Fred, If you are a believing Christian, blasphemy against Islam occurs the moment you refuse to recognise the prophet Mohammed. By your very act of not recognising what they call the true faith, you are engaging in blashemy (as they see it). Furthermore, this is nowhere near the dung and piss on Christ scale. We are talking about cartoons that are engaging in a bit of satire about what Islam has become in the modern world - a religion that produces vicious fanatics who can never understand reason, suicide bombers, “honour” killers, gang rapists etc. The way I see it, these are not the kind of Liberal distortion/blasphemy that piss on Christ was or for that matter even blasphemy on the scale of Satanic Verses (which was a bizarre combination of semi-pornographic innuendo and slander). Lastly, Europeans are producing these cartoons now because Muslims now live in European lands. Their habits, their beliefs and their customs have already had a severe (I would say terrible) impact on our society. I see nothing blasphemous in stating the obvious. If our masters and our rulers will force us to live with them, then we shall see more of these cartoons in the future. 17
Posted by Guessedworker on February 04, 2006, 04:34 AM | # Angela, I agree with all that. I had not realised that today’s “world-wide demonstration” is organised by Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a suitably world-wide political organisation that is seeking to establish The Caliphate and is actually banned in Britain. So why has the London demonstration - organised by Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain - been allowed in the first place? It is well worth a peek around Hizb ut-Tahrir’s website. Among other delights is a response (pdf) to the government/CRE’s call for greater integration. I haven’t read the whole thing, but the abstract states:-
This is fine. They are saying that Muslims can’t integrate. We know it. There is no solution to be got from the government’s drive towards Liberal La-La Land. 18
Posted by Mark Richardson on February 04, 2006, 06:40 AM | # Meanwhile in Sydney a large group of men “of Middle Eastern appearance” have attacked six young people, including a female, at Bondi Beach. The young people have multiple stab wounds and two are seriously injured. More here. 19
Posted by AD on February 04, 2006, 07:24 AM | # ...at Bondi Beach. It was the people from the Bondi area who voiced their ‘disgust’ at what happened in Cronulla the loudest. Their council, half green/half labour(including pig George Newhouse) even refused to put up the Australian flag because of it. The area is rife with anti-Australian journalists, lawyers and related treasonous filth. But now that the ‘marginalised’ western suburbs youth of middle eastern appearance can’t go to ‘redneck’ Cronulla anymore for their dose of beachside shenanigans, they’ve moved 15kms north to ‘progressive’ Bondi. And while i do feel sorry for any innocent victims(if any exist in Bondi), i hope that Bondi residents remember that diversity is strength. 20
Posted by Angela on February 04, 2006, 07:46 AM | # This post brings to mind another hidden cost of multiculturalism, generally ignored I suspect. Its effects on the courting behaviour of young people. For example, the levels of violence now sees in multicultural cities surely must be putting young people off going out with or to meet potential partners. I’ve no doubt parents would want to discourage their kids going to the city and other areas where youths congregate. The Muslim gangs you refer to tend to hang around areas frequented by young white people. Throughout the natural world it’s fond that males of the dominant race mate with females of the subordinate group. Never the other way round. The males of the subordinate group are quickly driven off, or killed by the dominant males. Wolves mating with domestic dogs are such a case. Thus the courting rituals and courting environments of young westerners have been seriously disrupted. 21
Posted by Ian on February 04, 2006, 10:25 AM | # AD, that’s not correct. Bondi Beach residents know all about Lebanese racist violence and, like most residents of Sydney’s eastern suburbs, quietly agreed with the protest by Cronulla residents. Bondi Beach has experienced Lebanese gangs for about 15 years. In 1995 there were pitched battles with police, which resulted in the quiet building of a new police station next to the beach and the erecting of gates on Campbell Parade to prevent drag racing. The NSW opposition leader, Peter Debnam, has Bondi Beach as part of his electorate. That’s why he has been so critical of the NSW government for ethnic branch stacking, and why he is so sure of his facts on this issue. It was probably the police crackdown at Bondi Beach that shifted the Lebs down to Cronulla. That crackdown obviously was not a strict one, for the problem never completely left Bondi. 22
Posted by Ian on February 04, 2006, 10:58 AM | # Angela, that’s quite perceptive. The Lebanese violence is often associated with attempts to assert dominance over Australian males in the presence of Australian females, by the use of low level harrassment. This can take the form of suggestive remarks or invading personal space with soccer games. Conflict occurs when the Australian males refuse to accept their designated subordinate status. If they complain in peaceful fashion, usually the physical threat is made more direct. If they show no fear or demonstrate the capacity for physical response, the Lebs return with overwhelming force. It’s a distinct and poisonous form of behaviour. And yes it does affect the options for young Australians. Most Sydney parents are aware of areas their children should avoid and why but, to date, this has been sort of cultural knowledge, not written down anywhere. 23
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 04, 2006, 01:21 PM | # Our strength is our diversity. That is all. 24
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 04, 2006, 01:23 PM | # “Slay those who insult Islam”? “Be prepared for the real Holocaust”? I wonder what Polly Toynbee will have to say about this. Something along the lines of “clearly Britain requires MORE multiculturalism”. 25
Posted by Amalek on February 04, 2006, 02:52 PM | # As usual suckers are snorting at the outcome without asking ‘cui bono?’ Denmark, which sent troops to crusade in Iraq against strong local opposition, is one of the most shabbos goy countries in Europe. It trades on its bogus story of how it rescued its Jews from the evil Nazis and leads the EU in ‘cracking down’ on Muslims (of whom there are only 200,000) while ceaselessly co-operating with Mossad. In 2001 a former head of Shin Bet, the Israeli domestic intelligence service, was posted to Copenhagen as Israeli ambassador. He had ostensibly been sacked from SB for failing to prevent Shamir’s assassination*, but he was good enough for Copenhagen. There was an outcry when, shortly beforehand, he gave an interview in which he defended ‘moderate physical pressure’ (i.e. torture) on Palestinian terrorist suspects. An attempt was made to arrest him as a war criminal on his arrival. His tour of duty was brief, but Denmark’s close liaison with Israel has carried on. The newspaper which interviewed Gillon was Jyllands-Posten, publisher of the offending artwork. Its ‘cultural editor’, who commissioned the cartoons, is named Flemming Rose—antecedents unknown. In other words, this affair has certain marks of an opportune Mossad provocation. Just as the awkward fact of democratic election results in Iran, Iraq and Palestine is sinking in, and Americans and Britons are beginning to ask what good we are doing in the Middle East, the ‘Islamofascists’ are riled up by being insulted in the worst way they can imagine. And the televitz displays bearded bands of fanatics shouting the odds to prove that we all need loads of oppressive Homeland Security, plus we must spend a few more trillions of dollars to ‘stay the course’ and defend the dear little Kleptostaat. Then in the second half of the one-two punch, the liberals traipse in behind the neocon warhawks—demanding that more be spent on integrating our precious Islamic fellow-citizens, rather than shipping them out so they pass our troops on the way home. If British Muslims kick off, no doubt we will end up apologising for forcing them to misbehave in the same grovelling manner as the editor-in-chief of J-P: “Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten has published many articles describing the positive aspects of integration, for example in a special supplement entitled The Contributors. It portrayed a number of Muslims who have had success in Denmark. The supplement was rewarded by the EU Commission. “Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten takes exception to symbolic acts suited to demonise specific nationalities, religions and ethnic groups.” *Carmi Gillon has a very dubious record. See http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/6924.htm After his stint in Denmark Gillon became mayor of Mevaseret-Zion, Jerusalem, where he is now in hot water for making pejorative remarks about the handful of deeply disaffected Ethiopian Jews in the area whom Israel flourishes to dumb gentiles as proof that it isn’t really a racist state. 26
Posted by Andrew on February 04, 2006, 03:12 PM | # I suppose some freaky politicians subscribe to the Ideology: “If we bring them to our countries , that will save us money and Aircraft sending Armies to their country”. With such logical thinking like that :- Did any one else go “MMmmmmm”. 27
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 03:14 PM | # Amalek, No matter which way you spin it, I cannot see another religious group reacting this way no matter what the provocation. 28
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 03:20 PM | # The U.N. high commissioner for human rights, former Supreme Court of Canada justice Louise Arbour, replied to the OIC, “I find alarming any behaviors that disregard the beliefs of others.” She launched investigations into “racism” and “disrespect for belief,” and asked for “an official explanation” from the Danish government. However, despite being a professed defender of human rights, she showed no alarm at the OIC’s disregard for the Danes’ belief in and commitment to a free press. I am sure Canadians feel tremedously reassured that this creature once served as a Judge in the highest court of their country. 29
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 04, 2006, 03:23 PM | #
They’d better get out more. I can insult them in ways that are orders of magnitude worse.
One really must be stupid to fall for that silly ploy. If Israel wanted that to work she should’ve exercised tighter control of her Anglophone press. 30
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 04, 2006, 03:35 PM | # Now the towelheads are torching European embassies: 31
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 04:12 PM | # I saw the videon the BBC. They burnt the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus, Syria. 32
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 04, 2006, 05:15 PM | # Is there any streaming video of the Muslim violence online? 34
Posted by Angela on February 04, 2006, 05:59 PM | # It’s pleasing to see the links in support of Danish products on the side bar. A terrific cause and the Danes make nice stuff. However, I’d like to suggest we of European descent get a little more proactive. I’d like to suggest to readers here that we launch a call for a ban on purchasing foods and other items grown, manufactured or owned by Islamic and Middle Eastern interests. This movement would have the potential to grow quickly at this poin in time. What do you think? 35
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 06:02 PM | # This movement would have the potential to grow quickly at this poin in time. What do you think? Nick Griffin must be laughing his guts out at the reversal of fortunes. 36
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 06:07 PM | # While I have read a bit on Islam, I am no expert. Something really weird is going on here. Images of Mohammed have been available online for quite some time. And some of those images are infinitely more blasphemous than those innocuous Danish cartoons. However, we see nothing being said about them. My guess is that it says somewhere in the Koran that the “images” must be produced in “hard” form (such as for example on paper or by way of sculpture) to offend the relevant Koranic passages. Seen from that perspective, the more blasphemous net images floating around by the thousands appear not to have stoked any riots just yet. But may be I am reading too much into these things. It is possible that there is no such distinction. It is perhaps the case that they are simply not aware of them just yet. If they do, it boggles the mind to think what will happen when they do become aware of them. 37
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 06:14 PM | # However, I’d like to suggest we of European descent get a little more proactive. I’d like to suggest to readers here that we launch a call for a ban on purchasing foods and other items grown, manufactured or owned by Islamic and Middle Eastern interests. You cannot boycott this, however. 38
Posted by Andrew on February 04, 2006, 06:24 PM | # Banning Arab crap is a good Idea, But, I think many people do not realize the extent of Cultural Marxism and how it exists in Food preparation in our Lands (West) Some of those Muhammad Drawings are good, people still do have brains and can think and know. 39
Posted by Guessedworker on February 04, 2006, 06:40 PM | # “... people still do have brains ...” And a mean IQ of 100. 40
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 06:48 PM | # Andrew, check the Koran comic book. You will die of laughter. 41
Posted by Matra on February 04, 2006, 06:51 PM | # read labels a lot closer Good advice Andrew. It’s not just halal though. Is This Kosher? by The Ambler. I’m glad to see the list of Danish products. I consume quite a bit of Danish cheese but nothing else on the list. Denmark has long been one of my favourite countries in the world. Friendly people, beautiful women, anti-PC (unlike their Swedish neighbours), and a thorn in the side of the EU empire builders. 42
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 06:53 PM | # Matra, How true. There are probably not a people on this earth more enlightened and more civilized than the Danes. What a wonderful plucky little country. 43
Posted by friedrich braun on February 04, 2006, 06:56 PM | # http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1001/viciousgodquiz.html For the curious: Whose God is More Vicious? Is it the fictional Moslem god called “Allah” or the real Christian God of the Holy Bible? Answer questions correctly to prove you know whose God is more vicious. After taking the quiz, you can find explanations of the correct answers by clicking here 44
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 07:04 PM | # I find Friedrich Braun’s Islamophilia and anti-Christian hatred baffling. At one forum he sputtered in rage as someone took objection to the Nazi promotion of “Positive Christianity”. He rebutted it saying that he was himself a believing Protestant and that accusations of closeted anti-Christian hatred among Nazis is slander. At other times, he refers to the Christian faith as the “Christian contagion”. May I ask what your holy book is my friend? Mein Kampf? 45
Posted by Matra on February 04, 2006, 07:17 PM | # Weren’t some of the leading Nazis sympathetic to the Islamic religion? The Nazis certainly got on well with the Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo. Their Muslim collaborators butchered Serbs like cattle. Not that the Serb-hating Western press bothered telling us that during the recent conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. 46
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 07:20 PM | # Yup. There were Yugoslav Muslims who served in the Wehrmacht and helped in the slaughter of Serbian Christians. 48
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 04, 2006, 07:23 PM | # That should read “Muslims in the Wehrmacht” 50
Posted by friedrich braun on February 04, 2006, 07:53 PM | # I find Friedrich Braun’s Islamophilia and anti-Christian hatred baffling. I’m not an Islamophile and neither am I anti-Christian. I do believe, however, that an alliance between race-conscious Whites and 1.2 billion Muslims should be formed whenever our interests coincides…as they often do on the J.Q. or Revisionism. Further, I do hold that a non-Wahhabite or Salafi (for e.g., Sufi) version of Islam is infinitely preferable to today’s anti-White, weak, effeminate, pro-immigration, philo-Semitic, feminist, Zionist Christianity. The fact that I don’t share your simplistic, foolish, and ignorant hatred of Islam and Muslims doesn’t mean that I’m an “Islamophile.” At one forum he sputtered in rage as someone took objection to the Nazi promotion of “Positive Christianity”. “sputtered in rage”? This is a fabrication, since I’ve always supported “Positive Christianity” over Confessional Lutheranism. I take note that Phil Peterson hasn’t produced a link to those alleged satements. He rebutted it saying that he was himself a believing Protestant and that accusations of closeted anti-Christian hatred among Nazis is slander. I’m not a believing Protestant. [A]ccusations of closeted [?] anti-Christian hatred among Nazis is indeed false. See Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945” the author, by Richard SteigmannGallhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521823714/002-8067933-7268069?v=glance&n=283155
I’m not your friend, little fellow. How old are you? 51
Posted by Al Ross on February 04, 2006, 08:26 PM | # If every Christian ‘holy man’ possessed the same acute awareness of Jewish intentions towards the ‘goyim’ as the Catholic priest, Leonard Feeney exhibited, the West would be considerably better-off. 52
Posted by Lurker on February 04, 2006, 08:39 PM | # FB - any perceived conjunction of our and muslim interests are tenuous at best. When it comes down to it we might tolerate them to stay in their part of the world but the day will come when they want to wipe us out. Deluded left/liberals are right now working away in the belief that their agendas will somehow be advanced by co-operating with islam. We laugh at their delusion. Dont lets join them. 53
Posted by john rackell on February 04, 2006, 09:06 PM | # These cartoons don’t defend free speech, they threaten it by Simon Jenkins
There’s plenty more of this drivel. It’s all about feelings, feelings, nothing but feelings - and the only worthy feelings are those of Muslim immigrants. It’s all perfectly coherent, well written, and it even tips its hat occasionally to the need for freedom of speech, yet it is so perverse and self abnegating of one’s own civilization that I commend it as a perfect product of the multi-cult mindset. Know thine enemy. Much, much worse than berserk moslems. 54
Posted by Matra on February 04, 2006, 09:19 PM | # From Sunday’s Telegraph: Scotland Yard said a decision not to arrest protesters was taken because of public order fears. It confirmed that police had received more than 100 complaints from the public about the protesters’ behaviour. So the law is not enforced when those breaking it might cause a disturbance. 55
Posted by Desmomd Jones on February 04, 2006, 10:16 PM | # October 29, 2003 YOUNG GERMANS EMBRACING ISLAM:
56
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 04, 2006, 10:31 PM | #
It’s disgusting that it’s impossible to shop at a typical grocery store in the U.S. and not come home with bags full of food that had to be bowed and mumbled over by some Rabbi. That really sticks in my craw. 4% of the population, 95% of the food…
I had a Danish housemate in school, before I woke up; I was never fully asleep, and we used to exchange glances in multicultural/lemming company that said a lot. I wish we’d had a good conversation, we probably would’ve surprised the hell out of one another. 57
Posted by Desmomd Jones on February 04, 2006, 10:35 PM | # The Grand Mufti and the Nazi Protectorate of Bosnia-Hercegovina, 1941-1945 by Carl Savich
58
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 04, 2006, 10:37 PM | #
Amen to that. Psychos whose religion insists on setting free zoo animals are far more dangerous than the animals themselves. 59
Posted by john rackell on February 04, 2006, 10:47 PM | # about “Young Germans embracing Islam”
hmmm…a truly underwhelming number if you ask me. Much worse though:
60
Posted by Greg R on February 04, 2006, 11:38 PM | # A couple of NZ papers owned by Australia’s Fairfax (ahem..) group have also reprinted the cartoons. http://smh.com.au/news/world/nz-braces-for-cartoon-fallout/2006/02/05/1139074093234.html 61
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on February 05, 2006, 12:35 AM | # Notice how almost all the placards appear to be done in the same hand-this was a planned,organized exercise in dominance,not a “protest’. 62
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 06:54 AM | # I’m not an Islamophile and neither am I anti-Christian. I guess your positions keep fluctuating like a ping pong ball. This is what you once said:
The fact that I don’t share your simplistic, foolish, and ignorant hatred of Islam and Muslims doesn’t mean that I’m an “Islamophile.” Oh dear. You might as well now report me for “hate speech” like a good leftie. Given the fact that your comments are often dislocated from reality, I should indeed clarify for the benefit of those who are unaware of my posts on this issue in the past. I harbour no ill-will towards Muslims as people. Find one comment anywhere on this blog which contradicts that, instead of making silly libelous comments the way left-liberals do. I approve of the satire of Islam, I do not wish the West to be Islamicized and I believe that Muslims must return to their lands of origin. Further, I harbour no ill-will towards anyone in their land of origin – no matter what their race or religion. That hardly makes me a “Muslim hater”. I focus on the Islamification of the West which is the threat Europe faces now. I do not spend all my time worrying about what happened between 1933 and 1945. Lastly, none of the bloggers here are Christian Zionists so far as I am aware. And I am not even a practicing Christian. I have never agreed with anything that forms part of the Christian Zionist agenda. I opposed the war in Iraq and have written about it countless times. I suggest you had better read before throwing accusations at people. This is a fabrication, since I’ve always supported “Positive Christianity” over Confessional Lutheranism. I said you sputtered in rage at someone accusing the Nazi promotion of “Positive Christianity” as a way of undermining Christianity. The forum where this occurred was Original Dissent. As this was nearly two years ago, the link appears to have gone. The comment was made by a chap who goes by the handle “Texas Dissident”. This is a fabrication, since I’ve always supported “Positive Christianity” over Confessional Lutheranism. I never suggested otherwise. I’m not your friend, little fellow. How old are you? A lot saner and younger than you with a capacity for irony. 63
Posted by friedrich braun on February 05, 2006, 10:51 AM | # Oh dear. You might as well now report me for “hate speech” like a good leftie. Given the fact that your comments are often dislocated from reality, I should indeed clarify for the benefit of those who are unaware of my posts on this issue in the past. OK…my apologies…you LOVE Islam and Muslims! I approve of the satire of Islam, , Since you obviously got your panties in a wad because I linked to Landover Baptist site http://www.landoverbaptist.org/ (a site that scewers Islam AND Christianity)...something tells me that while you “approve of the satire of Islam” you’re not as open-minded when the tables are turned and Christianity is on the receiving end of ...“satire.” I focus on the Islamification of the West which is the threat Europe faces now. I do not spend all my time worrying about what happened between 1933 and 1945. It takes an ignorant teenager not to realize that the West is enduring today the outcome of the decisions it made in 1939-1945. Lastly, none of the bloggers here are Christian Zionists so far as I am aware. And I am not even a practicing Christian. I have never agreed with anything that forms part of the Christian Zionist agenda. I opposed the war in Iraq and have written about it countless times. Would you like a biscuit? I said you sputtered in rage at someone accusing the Nazi promotion of “Positive Christianity” as a way of undermining Christianity. The forum where this occurred was Original Dissent. As this was nearly two years ago, the link appears to have gone. The comment was made by a chap who goes by the handle “Texas Dissident”. The Bible-quoting middlebrow godidiot “Texas Dissident” implied that Positive Christians were opportunists. This is false, of course. Postive Christians were genuine Christians: 90 % of German Lutherans belonged to the Reichkirche (i.e., Positive Christianity)...Confessional Lutherans were always in the minority during the Third Reich; and no one elected Texas Dissident as some Lutheran pope who get’s to pronounce on who’s a “real” Lutheran and who isn’t. A lot saner and younger than you with a capacity for irony. Your sense of “irony” is indeed impressive. I suggest, little teenager, that you read some books before participating in various fora. It should be a requirement to have read at least 50 good books before one is allowed to join a serious blog and exchange with adults. We would all be spared such patent stupidity and ignorance as what follows: Phil Peterson—While I have read a bit on Islam, I am no expert. Something really weird is going on here. One rarely sees so much moronic (yet pretentious) nonsense packed in a single post. 64
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 10:54 AM | # Looks like I touched a raw nerve (or quite a few raw nerves)! (chuckle) 65
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 11:21 AM | # One of the reasons why birth-rates of Whites in the West are in severe decline stems from the fact that Christianity saddled sex with all sorts of moral taboos, which have remained with the post-Christian West even though Christianity is in total free-fall. Indeed. Only a truly learned man such as yourself can believe that western birth-rates are now depressed because of “moral taboos” about sex! (chuckle) May you consider it possible that some more of your deep wisdom could be imparted to us uneducated plebieans, Herr Braun? 66
Posted by Matra on February 05, 2006, 01:31 PM | #
What’s wrong with that? Christianity is the historical religion of every modern civilised Western country. Though there is plenty to criticise in Christianity it is an important part of our heritage. Islam is an Arab religion adopted mostly by European collaborators (e.g., “Bosniaks”) with the Turks. Islam deserves no respect from Europeans. 68
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 02:04 PM | # Fred, that’s an excellent start. I plan to do the same tonight when ordering my groceries online. I think it is also important for bloggers and readers here to wish to do the same to remember the order of priorities when buying Danish products: If you’re buying Danish products specifically to help the Danes in this hour of crisis, buy Cheese and milk products rather than Pork, Ham and Bacon because the latter aren’t sold in the Muslim nations anyway. So the hardest hit product lines will be the Dairy products, biscuits, chocolates etc. That is not to say that someone who wishes to buy Danish Ham, Bacon or Pork should not do so. Only if its a choice between buying Dairy products and Bacon, Ham or Pork, choose the former. Nothing wrong with buying both though. Danish Bacon is quite good too. 69
Posted by Guessedworker on February 05, 2006, 02:42 PM | # Internet Explorer? Gosh, Fred, I never realised you are a pal of Ubernet Gates. Do download Mozilla Firefox as soon as you get the chance, and kick old cheesecake face into touch. Mozilla is light and delicious, and you will never have to worry about Danish Blue again. 70
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 02:54 PM | # I am getting the same message on Firefox. 71
Posted by Matra on February 05, 2006, 03:20 PM | # I saw it at this website. They’ve more pictures up today I haven’t seen elsewhere. Look at the second picture down here. I laughed when I read the inserted caption. 72
Posted by john rackell on February 05, 2006, 04:34 PM | # From Business Online via EUReferendum article linked above (Matra):
It’s amazing when the worthies expound on Nick Griffin they tar him with the far right extremist label yet, when they actually turn to what he says all they can really fault him for is his willingness to speak the truth. It’s clear Griffin isn’t far-right, or extreme: he’s radical - as in really threatening to shake things from the roots up. And that’s why they - the Establishment - hate him. All those BBC folks in their middle class sinecures dictating to the British people what news is fit for them to watch. And then the BNP comes along and threatens the whole lot by avowing to pull the plug on the BBC. And on and on for every vested interest in Britain. 73
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 04:38 PM | # Nick Griffin has just had one of his best weeks here. The establishment has made a fool of itself and they are looking a bit ridiculous. Time for the BNP to cash in on this in time for the council elections. 74
Posted by ben tillman on February 05, 2006, 04:49 PM | # It’s clear Griffin isn’t far-right, or extreme: he’s radical - as in really threatening to shake things from the roots up. And that’s why they - the Establishment - hate him. This has some parallel to the reaction to the American revolution of the 1960’s. Walllace, and to a lesser extent Nixon, represented this same radical and tautologically centrist idea: democracy. Wallace was so radical that the reviled Nixon had to be allowed to win the first time, and—when Wallace wouldn’t go away—Wallace had to be shot the next time around. Thereafter, it was child’s play to orchestrate Nixon’s resignation. 75
Posted by john rackell on February 05, 2006, 04:50 PM | # Well, I hope Nick Griffin has more of Alfred the Great or Churchill in him than Watt Tyler. 76
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 05:33 PM | # Fred, I like the Diversity shirt. A shame I can’t legally buy those wonderful contraptions in this country! 77
Posted by DissidentMan on February 05, 2006, 06:36 PM | # I don’t like the Reagan shirt because it may perpetuate the myth that he ever actually did anything to advance conservatism in America or the world in general, which is something I don’t buy. And for that matter I don’t like the F the French shirt because recent wave of neocon/freeper anti-French sentiment is the result of the top neocons being angry about French non-involvement in their war (e.g. Jonah Goldberg calling the French “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”, as if not getting involved in a costly war that benefits others is cowardice). Even the “Imagine no liberals” T-shirt is mildly objectionable because classical liberalism is fairly inoffensive stuff, even if its not really workable, and those who call themselves liberals today are really just Marxists. Perhaps that they’ve persuaded everyone to call them liberals is indicative of how far they have got. Even the pro-gun stuff I find dubious when I think about it. The road to power these days is through the media. The pen may not have been more powerful than the sword in the past but it is now, especially if we see the pen as a metaphore for any kind of mass communication. I’m by no means anti-gun rights, but I have found that the American gun lobby, like Reagan has done little or nothing to advance conservatism in America or the world. They have wrecklessly affiliated themselves with hunting organisations and hunters and the effect has been morally corrosive since gun rights are now being associated with hunting rather than self-defence and ... “watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants” as Thomas Jefferson put it. Also the pro-GOP t-shirt disturbs me since the GOP has been taken over by neocons. I would hope not to see pro-GOP symbolism anywhere on this blog. So in the end the anti-Che Guvera T-shirt is the only one that I approve of. 78
Posted by friedrich braun on February 05, 2006, 07:18 PM | # With the exception of two, I despise all of those stupid, jingoistic, freeper t-shirts. The one that read F the French is disgusting. What’s wrong with that? Christianity is the historical religion of every modern civilised Western country. Though there is plenty to criticise in Christianity it is an important part of our heritage. Islam is an Arab religion adopted mostly by European collaborators (e.g., “Bosniaks”) with the Turks. Islam deserves no respect from Europeans. Christianiy might have been at some point, in a bygone era “the historical religion of every modern civilised Western country.” However, today Christian Churches (with the possible exception of Orthodoxy) labour against the interests of Whites. The Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, represent the typical Christian clergyman in the West. I submit that Islam is preferable to this brand of noxious Christianity. I won’t even mention it’s pro-immigrationist stance…motivated to a large degree by the desire to fill church pews with (paying) bodies…and who cares if they’re from Haiti or the Ivory Coast? The more the better…open the borders…let them in!... Archbishop labels denial LONDON —The Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor has said that Holocaust Denial is tantamount to “sacrilege” after he issued a message of solidarity to Britain’s Jewish community ahead of of Holocaust Memorial Day, on January 27, 2006. Celebrations of Holocaust Memorial Day, have been somewhat soured for the second year running, by the official non-participation of the Muslim Council of Great Britain at the event[Good for them!], but Cardinal Cormac Murph-O’Connor recently expressed his own happiness at attending the event, and recounted his own impressions after a visit to what remains of the Auschwitz concentration camp. ...
79
Posted by Al Ross on February 05, 2006, 07:59 PM | # When Christianity concerned itself exclusively with matters of the ‘afterlife’, the potential damage to the White racial psyche of which it was capable was somewhat limited. However, since the various competing brands of the product are now vying with one another to promote liberation theology, Jew-veneration, and the unquestioning acceptance of a concept of ‘human race’ instead of human races, it has become clear that Christianity is inimical to the true interests of Whites. 80
Posted by ben tillman on February 05, 2006, 11:56 PM | # The shirts all are targeted at healthy instincts, though abou half reflect the manipulation of those instincts in the wrong direction. Shirts 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 do not say it all, but what they say is healthy. 81
Posted by Matra on February 06, 2006, 12:00 AM | # Friedrich:
We all know that Western Christianity is in bad shape (though as you imply Orthodoxy isn’t too bad) but so is Europe and the white countries in general. That doesn’t mean we should accept our annihilation. Do you seriously believe that the plight of the white man will be enhanced by grovelling to the Third World Arabs and their barbaric and moronic religion known as Islam? I’ve spent enough time studying and working with Arab Muslims to know that any alliance with such people will be done on their terms. Islam and Arab supremacy cannot be separated despite the religion’s universal pretensions. Islam is beyond the pale and anyone sympathetic to it is an enemy of the European peoples.
So once again everything comes down to Nazism. Only a handful of elderly Germans and dumbass teenage Yanks believe that the Slav-slaughtering inbred Austrian loser, Adolf Hitler, was a hero. It’s because of the well-publicised presence of Nazis that only 30 or so Danes showed up at a patriotic anti-Muslim demonstration this weekend, despite something like 80% of Danes opposing compromise with the Islamic world. Nazis killed millions of European Christians in the 1940s and more than sixty years later they are still preventing European solidarity against our enemies. 82
Posted by ben tillman on February 06, 2006, 12:08 AM | # ....it has become clear that Christianity is inimical to the true interests of Whites. And this is all a matter of the gravest of heresies. Christianity is a religion of human sacrifice, but of only one human sacrifice. Those who would require the sacrifice of self for salvation render the Christ’s sacrifice nugatory. 83
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 06, 2006, 01:13 AM | # I am yet to hear from Friedrich how Islam could work in the interests of Europeans. 84
Posted by Andrew on February 06, 2006, 01:36 AM | # You have to give the Queen of Denmark a big kiss; Queen Margaret (?) she has the right Idea, Get them all out of here, yesterday, Yippee, can not see or imagine to hear Queen Elizabeth saying that. 85
Posted by john rackell on February 06, 2006, 02:33 AM | # (if you hadn’t already read about this) Apparently the most offensive cartoons that have riled up the whole of the Muslim world were not part of the original 12 published in Jyllands Posten but were added by a Danish Moslem Akhmad Akkari, and distributed by him on a tour through the Middle East. The whole thing has been orchestrated to put pressure on Denmark and Europe generally to accede to demands for recognizing Sharia - with the help of handwringing dhimmi liberals. Treasonous behavior by the Moslem Danes but you’ve got to hand it to them, they’re playing to win.
On the Sharia angle: Eureferendum 86
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 06, 2006, 03:59 AM | # Do you seriously believe that the plight of the white man will be enhanced by grovelling to the Third World Arabs and their barbaric and moronic religion known as Islam? Basically yes. Much can be learned. Do you consider “the inculcation of selfless behavior and within-group altruism combined with outgroup hostility” moronic? Do you consider the evolution of a strategy to fend off the Christian heresy that is modern secular liberalism barbaric? It matters not whether Hitler is a hero. National Socialism did not depend, per se, on Hitler. Like the Christian world of the Mendicant Friars, it depended on the herosim of collective altruism and exclusion. This is why Islam appealed so to Himmler. KMac writes:
Again KMac:
As for killing Slavs, Eric Margolis writes:
Kagonavich, Yagoda and many othe Soviet officials were Jews. It’s not the Nazis that prevented European solidarity. 87
Posted by Johan Van Vlaams on February 06, 2006, 08:37 AM | # And this is “our” Dyab Abou Jahjah’s reaction - the one who, according to Theo Van Gogh’s last column, said that all Flemish are stupids: http://www.arabeuropean.org/ (click right hand side)
88
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 10:50 AM | # Only a handful of elderly Germans and dumbass teenage Yanks believe that the Slav-slaughtering inbred Austrian loser, Adolf Hitler, was a hero. Your crazed “foath-at-the mouth” hatred is very Jewish…or maybe I should say British?...but I’m repeating myself. Either way it’s very kosher. A historical reminder for all of you children: it was Britain that declared war on Germany and nice vice versa. So it’s pretty hard to pin the decline of the West on Hitler when it was the Brits like your fat, mass-murdering, and alcoholic asshole Churchill who orchestrated the war. 89
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 06, 2006, 11:55 AM | # Right, Friedrich, and it was Hitler who collaborated with the then worst mass murderer in history to carve up Eastern Europe. I don’t think WWII was in the interests of the British Empire, but your apologias for Hitler are becoming tiresome. 90
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 12:27 PM | # No, your one-sided, dishonest, black and white version of history is becoming tiresome. You people have been let lying and calumniating for far too long…with the other side being effectively blocked from responding…either through professional ruin or legal persecution. Stalin had nothing on Churchill in terms of viciousness and mass-murder on a grand scale unparalled in modern history: Mr Friedrich claims the British government set out at the start of the Second World War to destroy as many German cities and kill as many of their inhabitants as possible. Civilian deaths were not collateral damage, he says, but rather the object of the exercise. He argues that Churchill had favoured a strategy of attacking the civilian population centres from the air some 20 years before Hitler ordered such raids http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/11/DTel191102.html
In a secret wartime memorandum recently made public, Winston Churchill told his advisers that he wanted to “drench” Germany with poison gas. Churchill’s July 1944 memo to his chief of staff Gen. Hastings Ismay was reproduced in the August-September 1985 issue of American Heritage magazine. 91
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 06, 2006, 01:37 PM | # Steve, You should read the Kevin Myers piece at the Telegraph.
__________________________________________________ Ben, Care to flesh out that Wallace/Nixon analogy. It sounds interesting. 92
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 06, 2006, 04:15 PM | # “No, your one-sided, dishonest, black and white version of history is becoming tiresome…” You are either addressing me directly, in which case you clearly know nothing about my opinions of World War II (here’s a hint - I take great exception to the idea of siding with, and bankrolling, the worst dictator in Europe against the second worst dictator in Europe), or you are addressing Anglos generally. If the latter is true then I could assent to your argument about “one-sidedness”. “Stalin had nothing on Churchill in terms of viciousness and mass-murder on a grand scale unparalled in modern history…” Right. So Friedrich is channeling Walter Duranty now. You really are nuts, aren’t you? 93
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 06, 2006, 04:21 PM | # Thanks Desmond, but I’m not sure what you are really trying to assist me with. I’ve stated online several times the gigantic folly of allying with the worst mass-murderer in Europe against the second worst and calling it “liberation”. Obviously, the only country that gained anything out of the British Empire’s decision to declare war on Germany was the Soviet Union…and it’s fair to say that Europe is much the worse for it. 94
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 06, 2006, 05:05 PM | #
Seconded. WGAF about being fair or objective under the current conditions? Muslims out. Then we can assess whether we were open-minded or not (a trivial concern). Yeah FB, Islam-for-whites is a wonderful idea; a universalist multiracial dogma from Araby will save us! Sure, like we really need to become the spiritual brothers of however-many millions of Semites there are in the world. 95
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 06, 2006, 05:12 PM | #
The next IE is going to have tabbed browsing. I contest the idea that Bill Gates is a genius, at least at software development. He waited until FF had 20% of the market (at least that’s what I’ve read) to add tabbed browsing to IE? Still, I’m going to try the new IE when it comes out. I’m tiring of FF’s developers’ obsession with bells and whistles at the cost of stability. 96
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 06, 2006, 05:26 PM | # I just Googled FF’s market share and it seems the 20% figure is for Europe (it’s more like 10% in these U.S.). 97
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 06, 2006, 05:32 PM | # The question to ask though Steve is why? Why did Anglo secular Protestant commercialism ally with atheistic communism? What’s the common denominator? You also stated, I am yet to hear from Friedrich how Islam could work in the interests of Europeans. It offers a plan, a group evolutionary strategy, in KMac’s terms. Islam, Judaism, Medieval Chrisitianity and National Socialism utilise[d] the same strategy. The offspring of Christianity, modern secular liberalism is a heresy, the devil incarnate. Christianity and then National Socialism, both group strategies employing a high level group altruism, were destroyed by it. And discussion of the most recent group strategy employed by whites, National Socialism, is constantly and virulently attack and oppressed, even at this site. Geoff Beck, Ben Tillman, James Bowery and Friedrich Braun each stung by its wrath. Interesting, don’t you think? 98
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 06, 2006, 05:43 PM | # Islam is certainly a plan - I’ve heard the Koran described as a constitution for a government. But it isn’t a plan for Europeans. “Why did Anglo secular Protestant commercialism ally with atheistic communism? What’s the common denominator?” The answer is “globalism”. National socialism is a lot of things, but it certainly couldn’t be called “globalist”. 99
Posted by Calvin on February 06, 2006, 05:56 PM | # John, thanks for introducing the story behind the spin. These cartoons are the coproductions of a Jew, Flemming Rose, cultural editor of the Jyllans Posten and associate of fanatical neo-con zionist Jew Daniel Pipes, and Muslim supremacist, Abu Laban. Clear evidence that the Muslims and Zionists intend to fight a war of attrition using White Europeans as cannon-fodder. It’s about time that it sunk into Europeans heads that non-Europeans do not have the innate sense of honor and morality that more highly evolved White people have. Decency and morality are for the decent and moral, for us, not for them. If the Jews and Muslims want a war they can hold it in the Levant. We will supply their troops through reverse immigration. 100
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 06, 2006, 06:17 PM | # The best way to destroy any hope of Europe’s survival would be to turn every Nationalistic party in Europe to pro-Nazi. That’ll do it. You can rest assure the game is over when that happens. The next 10-15 years will throw up a series of political crises which will have the potential to completely undermine the establishment and its worldview, and to destroy the soft liberal consensus in Europe. But this can only happen if there are nationalistic forces capable of channelising the growing resentment among native Europeans towards a political outcome. If they start swinging Hitlerian salutes and walk around wearing swastikas, its game over. They won’t have half a hope in hell of ever getting anywhere near a signficant minority faction in the legislature of any European country. It is such a simple concept that one wonders what is so difficult to understand about it. Instead we get Fredirich here frothing and foaming at the mouth about Churchill and spending every living breath defending the Fuhrer (he has probably been doing this for twnety years and he’s still screeching and shouting). If Friedrich is alive when the last European nations are becoming majority Arab, Herr Braun and his lunatic cousins will be screeching “Heil Hitler!” from the rooftops and arguing with vehemence about Operation Barabossa. May be that is what the BNP needs to do in Britain. Go the Tyndall route - 100 percent total nutbaggery. Give up whatever gains it has made in politics (enough to scare the establishment into concoting a ridiculous trial against him) and go back to the Tyndall days when nationalism was basically a running joke. There are no “evolutionary models” in human life. “Evolutionary models” is bunk. There are political and religious ideas which shape the future of mankind. What the West now needs are political movements that are based on sound ideas that can connect with the Europeans as they now are. Not as they ought to be in some biological experiment. 101
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 06:19 PM | # Right. So Friedrich is channeling Walter Duranty now. You really are nuts, aren’t you? Yes, anyone who questions you Alice of Wonderland version of history is “nuts”. You know, there’s a move from the the totalitarian multiculti elements in the West to have “racism” declared a mental disorder. Undoubtedly to then have the “insane” sufferers incarcerated in mental facilities. By calling me “nuts” for not spouting in unison with you Allied (i.e., British) hate-propaganda and calumnies about “the second worst dictator in Europe” you’re showing yourself to be as much a rigid bigot as those multiculti commissars. It wasn’t Hitler who called Stalin “Uncle Joe” and gave him half of Europe at Potsdam and Yalta it was that fat homicidal maniac Churchill who dreamed of poising tens of millions of If anyone is playing Will Duranty it’s you. Here’s another little something for you to chew on: I’ll The first civilian bombings were done by the British. This was long before the Germans were forced to retaliate. Read on. Here’s something for you to contemplate: The first civilian bombings were done by the British. This was long before the Germans were forced to retaliate. Read on. http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/Churchill/Hitchens_replies.html ..........the British, by their own admission, initiated unrestricted bombing of civilian areas ought to merit for them membership in the select society of “war criminals.” The unbelieving reader need only consult the testimony of the British officials J. M. Spaight and Sir Arthur Harris, for incontrovertible proof of this charge.99 A decision of the British Air Ministry made on May 11, 1940, to attack targets in Western Germany instituted the practice of bombing purely civilian objectives. This “epoch-making event,” as F. J. P. Veale correctly describes it, marked an ominous departure from the rule that hostilities are to be limited to operations against enemy military forces alone.100 Spaight, former Principal Secretary of the Air Ministry, makes the following amazing comment on the decision of May 11, 1940: Quote: Letter to PBS on fraudulent ‘documentary’ about the ‘Blitz’ Dr. A.R. WESSERLE Sirs: Rarely have I come across a television broadcast more vicious in intent and more warped in execution than your recent “Blitz on Britain.” As a survivor of the mass air raid executed against my native city of Prague, Bohemia, on the Christian Holy Day of Palm Sunday, 1945, by the Anglo-American strategic bomber force - a raid that maimed or murdered thousands a few seconds before the conclusion of the Second World War - I say this: 1. There can be no comparison between the brutality of the Anglo-American bomber offensive, on one hand, and the minimality of the German-Italian efforts, on the other. As the commander of the British strategic air offensive, Air Marshal Sir Arthur Harris shows in his Bomber Offensive (Macmillan, New York, 1947) 23 German cities had more than 60 percent of their built-up area destroyed; 46 had half of it destroyed. 31 communities had more than 500 acres obliterated: Berlin, 6427 acres: Hamburg, 6200 acres; Duesseldorf, 2003; Cologne (through air attack), 1994. By contrast, the three favorite targets of the Luftwaffe: London, Plymouth and Coventry, had 600 acres, 400, and just over 100 acres destroyed. 2. Anglo-American strategic bombers, according to official sources of the West German government in 1962, dropped 2,690,000 metric tons of bombs on Continental Europe; 1,350,000 tons were dropped on Germany within its 1937 boundaries; 180,000 tons on Austria and the Balkans; 590,000 tons on France; 370,000 tons on Italy; and 200,000 tons on miscellaneous targets such as Bohemia, Slovakia and Poland. By contrast, Germany dropped a total of 74,172 tons of bombs as well as V-1 and V-2 rockets and “buzz bombs” on Britain - five percent of what the Anglo-Saxons rained down on Germany. The Federal German Government has established the minimum count - not an estimate - of 635,000 German civilians were killed in France, Italy, Rumania, Hungary, Czecheslovakia, and elsewhere. 3. Both Germany and Britain initiated air raids on naval and military targets as of 3 September 1939. However, when the British attacks on port installations in Northern Germany ended in disaster, with a devastating majority of bombers downed - the Battle of the German Bight - Britain switched over to less costly night air raids on civilian targets such as Berlin and the Ruhr industrial region. By contrast, Germany replied in kind only in the winter months of 1940/41, a year later. Observers indubitably British, such as the late Labour Minister Crossman, the scientist and writer C.P. Snow, and the Earl of Birkenhead, have demonstrated that it was not Germany but Britain that, after May, 1940, unleashed an official policy of unrestricted and unlimited raids on civilian populations under its new Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, and his science advisor, Dr. Lindemann. Professor Lindemann, the later Viscount Cherwell, coolly calculated that, by using a force of 10,000 heavy bombers to attack and destroy the 58 largest German cities, one-third of the population of Germany would be “de-housed.” The assumption, of course, also was that out of those 25-27 million homeless at least ten percent - 2.5 to 3 million people - would be killed. On this score alone, Winston Churchill and his advisors deserve to rank among the maddest mass murderers in history. In fact, as West German records show, 131 German towns were hit by heavy strategic raids. Only the courage of the Luftwaffe pilots, the effectiveness of the air defense network and the strength of the fire fighting organization worked together to prevent a bloodbath to the extent envisioned by the Prime Minister. 4. Blood baths did occur when conditions were right. When the Anglo-American bombing policy reached its first grand climax in a raid on Hamburg that stretched over several days and nights in July, 1943, a minimum of 40,000 to 50,000 civilians burned to death. With the defensive power of the Reich worn down in the second half of 1944 and in 1945, the Anglo-Saxons indulged in ever more massive extermination raids against Europe. Communities of little or no military value, even if attacked previously, were now pulverized, preferably under conditions of the utmost horror. Christian holy days, and dates and sites of famous art festivals were select occasions for raids. Many of the most beautiful cities of Europe and the world were systematically pounded into nothingness, often during the last weeks of the war, among them: Wuerzburg, Hildesheim, Darmstadt, Kassel, Nürnberg, Braunschweig. Little Pforzheim in south-west Germany had 17,000 people killed. Dresden, one of the great art centers and in 1945 a refuge for perhaps a million civilians, was decimated with the loss of at least 100,000 souls. Europe from Monte Cassino to Luebeck and Rostock on the Baltic, from Caen and Lisieux in France to Pilsen, Prague, Bruenn, Budapest and Bucharest reeled under the barbaric blows of the bombers. 102
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 06:21 PM | # 5. Nor did the extermination raids stop with Europe. Cigar-chomping General Curtis LeMay demonstrated in. the Far East that record kills could be achieved without resort to atomic weapons. By applying the lessons learned in Europe to the wooden architecture of the Asian mainland and Japan he raised “fire storms” which surpassed even those of Hamburg, n Japanese civilians were killed through bombing. Millions of others fell victim to it, from Mukden, Manchuria, to Rangoon, Burma. It goes without saying that LeMay and his colleagues could not have carried out their campaigns of mass annihilation without the backing of the highest political leaders in the land. In fact, the United States Government had placed orders for the immediate development of four-engined, superheavy, very-long-range bombers (the XB 15, the B-17, the XB 19, the B-24 and the B-29) starting in 1934. Thus, the Roosevelt Administration had begun to lay plans for offensive, strategic, global war back in 1933, the year of its inception. With the later exception of Britain, none of the other “large” powers followed suit: neither France, Italy and Germany, nor Soviet Russia and Japan the latter with extensive holdings in the Pacific. These are sobering facts. PBS, with its record of fine programming, has much to lose if it insists on presenting biassed reports such as “Blitz on Britain” or “UXB.” If you care to tap the unplumbed depths of sentimentality, envy and hatred, start a comic strip. In the meantime, we’ll change channels. Sincerely, Dr. A.R. Wesserle Source: Reprinted from The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 381-384. In addition: “As early as 1953 H.M. Stationary Office published the first volume of a work ‘The Royal Air Force’, 1939-1945 entitled ‘The Fight at Odds’, a book described as “officially commissioned and based throughout on official documents which had been read and approved by the Air Ministry Historical Branch.” The author , Mr. Dennis Richards, states plainly the destruction of oil plants and factories was only a secondary purpose of the British air attacks on Germany which began in May 1940. The primary purpose of these raids was to goad the Germans into undertaking reprisal raids of a similar character on Britain. Such raids would arouse intense indignation in Britain against Germany and so create a war psychosis without which it is impossible to carry on a modern war. Mr Dennis Richards writes: “If the Royal Air Force raided the Ruhr, destroying oil plants with it’s most accurately placed bombs and urban property with those that went astray, the outcry for retalliation against Britain might prove too strong for the German generals to resist. The attack on the Ruhr, in other words, was an informal invitation to the Luftwaffe to bomb London “. p. 122 This passage merely confirmed what Mr. Spaight had so incautiously disclosed in 1944 in his by then forgotten book ‘Bombing Vindicated’. The popular belief that Hitler started unrestricted bombing still persisted and is, in fact, widely held at present day. The third and last phase of the British air offensive against Germany began in March 1942 with the adoption of the Lindemann Plan by the British War Cabinet, and continued until the end of the war in May, 1945. The bombing during this period was not, as the Germans complained, indiscriminate. On the contrary, it was concentrated on working-class houses because, as professor Lindemann maintained, a higher percentage of bloodshed per ton of explosives dropped could be expected from bombing houses built close together, rather than by bombing higher class houses surrounded by gardens.”
103
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 06, 2006, 06:29 PM | # RE: Islam It amuses me no end to see people propose that Islam will be our saviour! Wonderful! Islam is one of the most egalitarian religions on earth (from a racial perspective). There is no concept of “race” in Islam. The only nations that were ever truly “racially conscious” were either Pagan or Christian (or one could argue Judaic). Early 20th century observers of Islam observed that it had the potential to challenge the hegemony of the West because it did not distinguish between races, nations and peoples. The only distinction was between a believer and a non-believer. Therefore, a semite could marry his daughter to a Negro is both were Muslim. And the entire Muslim world is seen as one nation - the “Ummah” (this brings together white Chechens, Arabs, Pakistanis, Indonesians and black Nigerians). The only reason Islamic countries don’t have massive immigration from alien races as we do is because they are essentially basket-cases - with the exception of some Oil rich states and Malaysia. And historically speaking, what races has Islam managed to conserve? Mixing has occured between races wherever Islam has spread. Sudan being the best example of it where the “Arabs” are now darker than American blacks. 104
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 06:38 PM | # And discussion of the most recent group strategy employed by whites, National Socialism, is constantly and virulently attack and oppressed, even at this site. Geoff Beck, Ben Tillman, James Bowery and Friedrich Braun each stung by its wrath. Interesting, don’t you think? Phil Peterson, Steve Edwards, Matra et al. refuse to understand what “wintermute” - a man who can be added to the list of those like Geoff Beck, Ben Tillman, James Bowery, and myself have been viciously attacked and slandered by the above individuals for presenting a revised view of WW II, NS Germany, and Hitler - pointed out (I reproduce his post below): Writers here who believe that we are in a forced choice between “(1) setting the record straight on Hitler; or (2) saving the West” have it completely ass-backwards. Without a massive and ongoing revision of the rather clumsy Holocaust narrative that emerged in the mid-seventies (but not, it will be noted, in the memoirs of those who orchestrated the war, like Churchill), there will be not any WN movement, or saving of the White race. The ball and chain around every White person’s ankle is marked “Hitler”, and when the true story of those years is widely disseminated, things will begin to change, but not before. Any movement towards gentile group association is associated, in the Pavlovian way, with WWII imagery, and until that imagery is properly contextualized, there simply is no way forward. Immigration restriction is an even more stupid waste of time than dressing up as a Nazi; we now need a Race-spanning consciousness of our moment of crisis and the means by which we have been subdued. No revisionist activity needs to have anything to do with “Nazism”, whatever that is. Those here who suggest that defending, explaining, or exposing the various hoaxes that pass for WWII scholarship are “Nazis” or “goons” or just in it for “dress up” can go back to Free Republic, where their comfortable Bush-fronted, Jew-financed worldviews will be treated more respectfully. All attepts by Whites to organzie on the basis of race will be met by unending “holocau$t” propaganda. Nietzche once wrote that Judaism, which he called “the art of concocting holy lies” had reached technical perfection in Christianity. If only! Holocaustianity - an almost complete fabrication based on decontextualized pictures of typhus victims who were prevented from receiving what is by any objective standard heroic levels of care by the Germans (please compare with previous non-German internment experiences in Andersonville and the Boer War) - are now presented as victims of the “gas chambers”, technological terrors every bit as real as Orson Wells’ Martian Tripods, and deployed to much the same effect on American public opinion. Only you can’t go to jail for telling the truth about the Tripods. The piles of dead bodies would not have been dead, without the “British” policy of saturation carpet bombing, which prevented food and medicine from reaching the camps. The Brits were good enough to sell photos of their handiwork to gullible tourists as proof of German beastliness, but the growing body of evidence show them, and the Jews, as World-Historical Liars. 105
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 06:53 PM | # A good thread on the Revisionist Forum: demonizing Islam OK / scrutiny of ‘holocaust’ illegal 106
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 06, 2006, 07:17 PM | # The ball and chain around every White person’s ankle is marked “Hitler”, and when the true story of those years is widely disseminated, things will begin to change, but not before. In other words, if you could convince enough people that the Nazis “only” killed 500,000 Jews (David Irving’s estimate is 300,000 I believe - or that is what I once read Joe Sobran say), suddenly every European will want to become a Nazi and voila! Europe will be saved! I am sorry but that is cartoonish nonsense that ought not to belong in a politically mature discussion. Oh Im sorry, I forgot - we are all children here. Herr Braun is the mature “adult” who has come to “educate us”. Which is why we talk calmly while he screams and shouts on a regular basis (and then says he is being attacked!), screams insults at people and then stomps off when no one listens. 107
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 06, 2006, 07:39 PM | # Geoff Beck, Ben Tillman, James Bowery, and myself have been viciously attacked and slandered by the above individuals Bollocks I have never attacked Ben or James or Geoff. That is absolute utter bollocks. If you are going to make accusations, make those that are not easily refuted here and now. We all have our disagreements. But I dare you to find a thread where I have “attacked” Ben or James or even Geoff for that matter. As usual, your imagination seems to be running away with you. If we really are such an incorrigible bunch of Anglos who won’t listen to you, why do you waste your time here? There is no shortage of places where you could go and bring every discussion down to the same basic argument - the Holocaust. Or may be you cannot. As I noticed even VNN has banned you. So what is the problem there Herr Braun? Is VNN also run by Jews who want to keep this “patriot” out? I don’t get it! 108
Posted by Al Ross on February 06, 2006, 07:55 PM | # Phil Peterson takes Muslim utopianists at their own valuation when he presumes the existence of an egalitarianist racially-blind Ummah. Despite the outbursts of ‘Arab Street’-style Muslim rage against Western targets, nothing outside of international professional Islamist terror groups compares with the internecine strife engendered by Sunni/Shia conflict. The bombing of packed Shia mosques in Pakistan and Iraq during mandatory Friday prayers by Sunni extremists and vice-versa makes Northern Ireland’s religious dichotomy seem like ‘a little local difficulty’, to borrow Harold Macmillan’s phrase. Every year during the Haj season, the letters pages of Malaysia’s English newspapers include disillusoned accounts by Malay pilgrims of their ‘second-class citizen’ level of treatment by their Arab hosts. 109
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 08:17 PM | # So what is the problem there Herr Braun? Is VNN also run by Jews who want to keep this “patriot” out? I don’t get it!
110
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 08:27 PM | # In other words, if you could convince enough people that the Nazis “only” killed 500,000 Jews (David Irving’s estimate is 300,000 I believe - or that is what I once read Joe Sobran say), suddenly every European will want to become a Nazi and voila! Europe will be saved! The 500,000 (or 300,000) figure is as much bunk as the 6 000 000/gaz chamber scientifically impossible nonsense. The absurd claims of the holocau$t industry are only one aspect of WW II hoaxes. 111
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 08:58 PM | # BTW, I’d like to hear how Irving came to that estimate. Since by his own account he finds the holocaust (whater it was) boring, and knows next to nothing about it. 112
Posted by Matra on February 06, 2006, 09:39 PM | # friedrich:
Pleasant stuff.
FDR was horrible but it’s interesting given what the Nazis thought of the handicapped that a rabid defender of Hitler would needlessly single out his disability. Certainly no sign of Christian weakness!
Are you running this blog now? For the record I think the US and Canada should have stayed out. The situation was different for Britain but I can sympathise with those who say would say the country’s balance of power obsession might have been outdated. But there is no reason why we in the Anglo-Saxon world should insist on strict adherence to the German National Socialist interpretation of WWII. Nor is there any reason we should hate “Polaks” as much as you do. Your historical hang-ups regarding your failed Fuhrer are your own. 113
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 10:00 PM | # But there is no reason why we in the Anglo-Saxon world rabid defender of Hitler No one in history has been lied about than Hitler…I’m trying to set the record straight. If that makes hyperventilate, tough. should insist on strict adherence to the German National Socialist interpretation of WWII. And there’s no reason why I should accept your bullshit and demonization. The Anglo-Saxon world has historically been very good at hypocritically committing the worst sort of atrocities while cleverly couching them in the language of “human rights” and “democracy.” 114
Posted by friedrich braun on February 06, 2006, 10:13 PM | # FDR was horrible but it’s interesting given what the Nazis thought of the handicapped that a rabid defender of Hitler would needlessly single out his disability. Certainly no sign of Christian weakness! you’re a real purveyor of all cliches when Hitler is concerned. “what did the Nazis [think] of the Handicapped”, indeed. Goebbels had a deformed leg and wore a brace all his life, somehow nothing happened to him during the Third Reich. 115
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 06, 2006, 11:55 PM | # 116
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 07, 2006, 02:00 AM | # Friedrich, you have either allowed your basic reading/comprehension skills to desert you, or you are engaging in wilful deception. Nowhere did I disagree that Winston Churchill was a thug and a murderer. However, I certainly did take issue with your ridiculous claim that “Stalin had nothing on Churchill in terms of viciousness and mass-murder”. That is an absurd statement, given that Stalin killed at least 20 million people. You should either withdraw that claim, or explain in detail how Churchill killed more people than Stalin. 117
Posted by friedrich braun on February 07, 2006, 08:55 AM | # Desmond Jones, I think you’ll find this enlightening: 118
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 04:13 PM | # A Polak-Yankee moderator got his feelings hurt when I mentioned that Polaks were viewed in Germany as thieves and lazy drunks… and this by the entire political spectrum…that’s just German reality…it’s really not my fault that Polaks behave the way they do in Germany… LOL! You have a knack of making friends wherever you go, don’t you? No wonder after all this ranting, you have ever fewer people agreeing with you than when you first started out! (chuckle) 119
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 04:17 PM | # Steve, I worry about Friedrich’s blood pressure. I’ve never met someone as easily irritable and/or excitable. 120
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 07, 2006, 05:19 PM | # Friedrich is a madman. Highly intelligent, yes. But utterly bonkers. 121
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 05:54 PM | # Phil Peterson takes Muslim utopianists at their own valuation when he presumes the existence of an egalitarianist racially-blind Ummah. Despite the outbursts of ‘Arab Street’-style Muslim rage against Western targets, nothing outside of international professional Islamist terror groups compares with the internecine strife engendered by Sunni/Shia conflict. The bombing of packed Shia mosques in Pakistan and Iraq during mandatory Friday prayers by Sunni extremists and vice-versa makes Northern Ireland’s religious dichotomy seem like ‘a little local difficulty’, to borrow Harold Macmillan’s phrase. Every year during the Haj season, the letters pages of Malaysia’s English newspapers include disillusoned accounts by Malay pilgrims of their ‘second-class citizen’ level of treatment by their Arab hosts. Al, the Shia in Iraq are Arab, in Iran they are Persian. Race is not the divider between Shia and Sunni. But you seem to be agreeing with me in that last sentence. The simple fact is that a universalist religion cannot ever preserve a race. Islam is universalist and it seeks global domination. If you look at the pictures of the London protests, you will find (relatively) light skinned Arab/Turkic Muslims with brown Pakistanis and also black African Muslims protesting. It is of course a fact that the Arabs are deeply divided among themselves. But this holds no hope for us in terms of racial preseveration because the tribes are also mixed. So you have this Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia who is obviously black with the rest of the Royals who are descended from bedouin Arabs. And I am sure the prince has plenty of light skinned Arab women as his wives. So I hope the pro-Nazi “geniuses” who lecture us here stop singing praises to Islam as a great racialist hope. It is utter bollocks. 122
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 05:57 PM | # Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia with James Earl Jones Judge for yourself 123
Posted by Desmond Jones on February 07, 2006, 06:09 PM | # It is interesting to note that the BNP, those ‘channelising’ the nationalistic fervour of white Britons received 0.71% of the total vote in the UK General Election, May 2005 and the Nazi sympathizing Freedom Party became the second largest party in Austria, winning 27 percent of the vote on October 3, 1999. They subsequently dropped to 10.1% in 2002 after the Austrian Conservative Party had shifted hard right and invoked immigration reform. It matters not if all of Europe embraces the Nazis, it only matters that the German and Austrian people, heed Haider’s advice, vis-a-vis the Austrian Waffen SS veterans:
It’s the old story about the two campers and the bear. One camper stopped to put his runners on and the other said, “Those won’t make you faster than the bear!” “I don’t need to be faster than the bear,” he replied. “I just need to be faster than you.” 124
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 06:18 PM | # Desmond, Austria is unqiue and in many ways it is the exception that proves the rule. A party with similar leanings would get nowhere in Britain where anti-Nazi sentiment is very high (across all age groups but particularly among the older generation that grew up in the shadow of the war). As far as the BNP’s vote goes, the BNP won close to 5 percent of the vote in the seats that it contested. It did not contest all seats because for a small party in the UK, the first past the post system can be brutal financially. If we had proportional representation in Britain as they have in Austria, the BNP would have got 5-6 percent. It seems to me that even though you live in an Anglo country (I am assuming you actually live in Canada), you seem to be oblivious to the prejudices of the people. There is probably nothing worse in an Ango nation than to be called a Nazi. The word “racist” is losing its sting because of political correctness. But “Nazi” is still the deadliest thing there is. To embrace it is utter folly (leaving aside my own abhorrence for Nazism). 125
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 06:21 PM | # Anyway, here is Nick Griffin on the BNP severing its links with all the Nazi elements and why. 126
Posted by Steve Edwards on February 07, 2006, 06:27 PM | # “To embrace (nazism) is utter folly”. Indeed, rank stupidity in any Anglo-Saxon majority country. But don’t worry - Friedrich has worked out how to synthesise Nazism with Islam. That’ll save Europe for sure! 127
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 06:43 PM | # Actually there is one other point to make: The Nazis never actually won a majority of the German vote. The 1933 election did not produce an outright electoral victory for the Nazis. So if they couldn’t win an outright majority of the vote in 1933, what chance do they have winning even 20 percent now? 128
Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 06:56 PM | # BTW, I’d like to hear how Irving came to that estimate. Since by his own account he finds the holocaust (whater it was) boring, and knows next to nothing about it. Is this a joke? Are you saying now that David Irving is peddling a Zionist approved story about the Holocaust? So tell us Friedrich, how many Jews died during WWII? Zero??? Millions of people died in Europe but not a single Jew died? Is that your latest claim? 129
Posted by friedrich braun on February 07, 2006, 07:36 PM | # Outside of disease and legal executions of terrorists/partisans, of which many were Jews, I would say maybe a few thousand. This allows for some reprisal shootings, which I assume (but cannot find credible evidence for) occurred as they do in every war. However, the Germans were extremely restrained vs. the unrestrained mass murder policies of the “Allies”. It’s interesting since Jews as a group suffered far less deaths than other groups. 130
Posted by Al Ross on February 07, 2006, 07:59 PM | # Phil Also I believe that those commentators who question Friedrich Braun’s sanity are much mistaken and should consider the baleful recent history of such labelling of political dissidents. 131
Posted by friedrich braun on February 07, 2006, 08:05 PM | # Phil, you bore me. First, if you really want to learn about Revisionism do your homework…(again, you don’t know what you’re talking about)...because I won’t do it for you. Secondly, Germany, unlike Britain, had a proportional electoral system with a cornucopia of political parties. It’s impossible to get a majority in such a political setting. Still, the National Socialist newcomers beat all of the old establishment/system parties and even had twice as many votes as the party that came in second. Not bad. But why do you care, Phil? (I’m exiting this thread.) 132
Posted by . on April 14, 2009, 01:19 PM | # Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 10:54 AM | # Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on February 06, 2006, 09:05 PM | # Posted by Phil Peterson on February 06, 2006, 10:29 PM | # Posted by Phil Peterson on February 07, 2006, 09:54 PM | # Posted by Phil Peterson on February 05, 2006, 10:54 AM | # - George Bernard Shaw I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion for from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today. - George Bernard Shaw
133
Posted by . on April 14, 2009, 01:30 PM | # Freedom of conscience is guaranteed by the Holy Qur’an itself. It states:
Next entry: Losing home Previous entry: Ethanol update: Something for the peak oil freaks to think about |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Robert Reis commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 04:07 AM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/09/12, 12:27 AM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 11:18 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:51 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:28 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) Mary commented in entry 'Anti-white ideology is like anti-biotic overuse' on 02/08/12, 09:24 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 09:04 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 08:15 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 08:09 PM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:52 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:48 PM. (go) (view) jamesUK commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 07:36 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 07:10 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:49 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:45 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:27 PM. (go) (view) marloe commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:21 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:17 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:08 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:07 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:03 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 05:53 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 05:51 PM. (go) (view) dc commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 05:13 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:55 PM. (go) (view) MP commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:43 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:31 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:07 PM. (go) (view) Wild Bill commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:02 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 03:47 PM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 03:24 PM. (go) (view) dosto commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 02:40 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 02:36 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
)
Posted by Guessedworker on February 03, 2006, 05:45 PM | #
If a BNP rally behaved like that it would be batten-charged by the MultiCult Met.
The Establishment makes itself ridiculous by tolerating this naked contempt and aggression on the streets. What moral virtue is it that attaches to an unruly Moslem but does not and, apparently, cannot attach to a race-conscious English patriot speaking to an orderly private meeting of other race-conscious English patriots?