Tuesday, 7 October 2008
The Real Racist Terrorists
Roland Freisler - the model for the Judges appointed under the New Labour Fascist PC State.
Jacqui Smith. Home Secretary. Saying to police officer, " You'd better do as I ****ing say mate or your ****ing career is ****ing ****ed ok ".
Image - Trevor Phillips. Leninist. " With my pen I can kill your career, just as Stalin could once kill millions ".
Image - Ali Dezai. Bent Copper and thug. The only gangster in the UK above the law due to his membership of the Met Police Black Police Officers Association.
There is a race war in British society.
It is run organised cabal of professional gangsters and racial terrorists, and they are all above the law.
This is because they make the law and police the law.
First we have Jacqui Smith. She uses the law to impose political correctness and multi-culturalism on our society. Over 80 % of the British public want no more immigration and a reversal of the policies of multi-culturalism, yet she imposes ever more draconian laws and policies on public services and on the police.
Anyone that opposes her Maoist perpetual PC revolution in the Police are purged or barred from working in the police - such as the BNP and BNP members.
The aim of New Labour was to policitise the police from within by imposing political correctness and by appointing lickspittles like Sir Ian Blair to the senior ranks and by buying off ACPO with pensions, nice shiny medals and lots of gold braid on their uniforms. It worked.
Now the police are social workers and political activists, serving the government not the community.
Once upon a time a group of nasty people called 'The Nazis' banned political parties they didnt like from the police and targeted specific racial groups and prohibited them from joining the police service. Now we Whites are the NEW JEWS in the New Labour Fascist state.
Then we have Trevor Phillips, a man who keeps a bust of lenin on his desk in his office and whose favourite author is Lenin.
This man is one of the most dangerous racial terrorists in our country.
He has the power to impose anti-white racist policies in the workplace - in effect he can impose Communism at will. This is because the race relations acts subvert the fundamental principle of a free society which is that we own our own possessions.
The race relations act force people to employ people they may not want to employ. That means your business is not your own, in effect the race relations laws allow the State to own your property. If you do not do with your property as the State wishes then you are arrsted, prosecuted and fined or even thrown into jail.
This is Communism - and this process is being run by an avowed Leninist. The problem is that most people in this country come into two catergories ;
1) The Thick
2) The Cowards
The Thick are those that suck on the TV TIT every night and believe what they read in their papers and what they see on the news.
The Cowards are those that know what is going on but are too gutless too speak out. As long as they keep making money then they are 'alright jack'.
Tyranny is built with the bricks of these two catergories.
Then we have Ali Dezai and his cabal of thugs and terrorists in the Met Police Black Police Officers Association. These are the modern day equivalent of Al Capones Mob.
They are above the law, and at the same time they enforce the law.
If they do not get what they want such as lowered recruiting standards, an end to disciplinary procedures, more rights than white officers and anti-meritocratic affirmative action programmes in the workplace then they threaten to call a boycott of the Met Police as per recruitment of ethnic minority officers.
In the old days this used to be called 'BLACKMAIL' but it appears now that blackmail is only an offence that can be committed by white police officers.
The MPBPOA is the para-military wing of Political Correctness, who use racial terrorism to forward their aims on a regular basis.
If one of their members is hauled up on a disciplinary charge they just scream 'WACIST' in the media until the officer is removed from the disciplinary procedure, compensated to the tune of thousands of pounds and promoted - even if they are the most bent bastard ever to have worn the uniform of the Met Police.
Then we have the Judges.
Judges like the one who yesterday sentenced Andrew Angus and Marcel Anderson, both 18years old, to just TWO YEARS in prison for murdering 60-year-old Leslie Bones in Barking.
The two teenagers who punched and kicked a punter to death after he refused to stop smoking in an east London betting shop have been jailed for two years.
Andrew Angus and Marcel Anderson, both 18, challenged 60-year-old Leslie Bones when he lit up at the Coral shop in Station Parade, Barking.
CCTV cameras caught Anderson spitting on the partially deaf victim and kicking him in the ribs while Angus punched him to the jaw.
Bones fractured his skull in falling to the floor and suffered a massive brain haemorrhage. He underwent emergency surgery, but died the following day.
His wife, Sylvia, was diagnosed with terminal cancer two months later and died before seeing justice done for her husband.
They were from an ethnic minority background and trotted out the 'he said something racist to me' defence and the Judge, as usual, accepted this as a mitigating factor in their attack on a defenceless 60 year old man.
The Judges are the facilitators of the racist terrorists that are destroying our society.
They keep them out of jail and refuse to imprison them.
For the White Liberal judge in this case, the death of an old white man was mitigated by the verbal abuse he was said to have muttered.
This is because these Judges are not in the law to uphold the law or defend the victims, they are the Roland Freisler's of the New Labour Fascist State.
These are the foundations of the New Labour PC Fascist State.
The politicians that pass the laws.
The lickpittle parasites of the Servile State that impose the laws.
The jackbooted thugs, terrorists and gangsters of the PC Police force that police the laws.
The Liberal Judges that put the interests of the criminals before the victims.
These are the true racist terrorists in our society. They do not care how many white victims die in order for them to fulfill their goals and agenda of imposing Political Correctness and the Multi-Cultural Concentration Camp Society on our country.
They piss on the British Constitution, our ancient fundamental rights such as free speech, the right to own your own property, the rule of law, the rights of victims and the impartiality of the law.
There are the foundations of a democratic country ;
(a) The rights to freedom of opinion and expression, of thought, conscience and religion, and of peaceful association and assembly;
In Britain today this principle has been contravened by the ban on the BNP from joining the Police and also the criminalisation of free speech.
(b) The right to freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media;
In Britain today this principle has been contravened by a media that is used to propagandise their own controlled political parties and attack those they do not control. The media control democracy, and this is not a democratic system of governance.
(c) The rule of law, including legal protection of citizens' rights, interests and personal security, and fairness in the administration of justice and independence of the judiciary;
The judiciary have been politicised by the judicial appointments systems, the rights of the criminals take precedence over the victims of crime, and the adminsitration of justice has been politicised by the banning of bnp members from the civil service and the CPS.
(d) The right of universal and equal suffrage, as well as free voting procedures and periodic and free elections;
The BNP are denied access to town halls, the media, our meetings are targeted for attacks by thugs and the police do not arrest those thugs and voting fraud is endemic across the country.
(e) The right of political participation, including equal opportunity for all citizens to become candidates;
BNP candidates are harrassed by the police, attacked by thugs and the police do nothing to stop the groups or arrest them, when thugs are arrested for attacking bnp leafleters the courts do not imprison them, the CPS allows illegal leaflets to be issued by third parties in elections and does not prosecute them, voting fraud is endemic, third party groups such as Searchlight are funded by the state and MP's in the Labour Party who then issue illegal leaflets against the BNP in elections.
(f) Transparent and accountable government institutions;
The government institutions are the most corrupt of any European nations.
(g) The right of citizens to choose their governmental system through constitutional or other democratic means;
The democratic mechanisms to elect governments are rigged by the first past the post system to ensure that the majority of the public are denied a voice and governments elected by minorities. The Labour government was voted into power with just 26 % of the total national vote. Minority parties such as the BNP with large voting blocks are denied any representation in the democratic cystem as the first past the post mehcnaism ensures they are denied the right to enter government.
(h) The right to equal access to public service in one's own country;
The BNP are banned from the police and other civil service institutions.
This is the result of the New Labour PC Fascist Regime and its usurpation of our democracy and liberties.
The racial terrorists will destroy our democracy until we get into power, flush the entire system down the toilet of history and save our nations from the racial terrorists, the gangsters and the criminals that now run our nations and enforce our laws.
Posted by Defender of Liberty at 01:51
Labels: ali dezai, liberal judges, met police racism, racial terrorism
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Roland Freisler was an interesting figure and considered to be even more " evil" by the great and good of today than satan himself ...Hitler. Remember he was in the early 20s a marxist who spoke fluent Russian. He originally found Marxism was the way of the future before changing his convictions in 1924 to support its bastard offspring National Socialism. I am sure he felt he was doing what was right and necessary and was an idealist as he sentenced countless victims to death. Rather like the judges in the middle ages who would sentence heretics to death....it was for their own good, the only way to save their soul was to burn them! Still Freisler's innocent victims pale in insignificance before the numbers burnt to death in one nights bombing by Harris s crews!
"Still Freisler's innocent victims pale in insignificance before the numbers burnt to death in one nights bombing by Harris s crews!"
Apart from this being a ridiculously disproportionate comparison, the Germans got what they deserved from Harris, unlike the victims of Freisler. One is a true national hero who served his people the other a psychopathic nazi murderer.
Lee, I would dearly love to see the day dawn when the bastards you describe in your essay are made to answer for their treason.
well it probably is a ridiculously disproportionate comparison, over 600,000 civilians in western Europe were burned to death by Harris 's men, not so long ago.Freisler wouldnt claim a hundreth of that total. As Harris said in the 1960s being burned to death must have been a horrible way to die, Most of them woman , children and old men. Freisler's victims at least were over 18.
Its very easy to see good/bad and virtue/evil in every case. Sometimes the truth hurts though. Harris may be a hero to you but I am sure he isnt held that way in Dresden.
Please don't insult the intelligence with such a crass argument.
You make one man responsible for 600,000 people yet fail to takle into account that the Nazis - of whom Freisler was a key instrument - murdered over 10 million jews, communists and the mentally and physically diabled.
They also razed Waraw, and, just in case you've forgotten, bombed British cities - London, Portsmouth, Birmingham, Liverpool, Coventry, Manchester etc. Our poeple also burned to death along with innocent civilians in many cities throughout Europe.
The attacks on German cities came in response to their waging of warfare against civilians. It's a bit rich to claim victimhood when they were an aggressor who showed no mercy to the civilians of their enemies.
And remember this: The victims of Freisler could not fight back. When the brave crews of the RAF flew sorties into Germany, they faced heavy flak and suffered serious losses.
How the people of Dresden feel about Harris means nothing to me because I am neither German nor a nazi sympathizer. Harris defended the realm from one of the most evil regimes in human history and that German is not my language is a blessing I for one am thankful for to Harris and his crews - indeed all of the Britsh people who suffered and sacrificed so much to smash nazi germany - for having the courage to fight and preserve our nation from the grip of nazi tyrannts.
Freisler = nazi scum.
Harris = British hero who gave the nazis a taste of their own medicine. A truth that no doubt hurts you.
now lets see. It was the RAF which began the policy of terror bombing in 1940. The policy as supported by Churchill involved the bombing of largely residential areas which would burn easily. Lubeck was a prime example, of no military significance with not an armament factory to be seen. Coventry 700 people killed, centre of Britain's aircraft industry . Dresden 25,000 people killed centre of germany's porcelain industry.
Yes sure the RAF were angels. History is a lot more complicated than you think and maybe its time to think a little bit more deeply instead of relying on the hollywood version. Anyway your great hero Churchill singlehandedly destroyed the British empire and harris will still be known to most of his ex crews as the " butcher".
It's a sad fact of life that in war there can be no real victors. Both the Allies and the Axis suffered terribly as did their citizenry.
We must not lose sight of the fact that WW2 was Total War and therefore the heroes of the day on both sides each helped their own country by developing ways of defeating the enemy and in carrying out the techniques to maximum efficiency.
We should not judge the individuals and their acts of their day from the social, political and cultural persepctive of our own day with its different values and experiences.
But to turn to the point of the article this is another very good and insightful analysis of the rotten heart of Britain and its corrupt institutions.
Mr Barnes has done a good job in ripping through the dross to get to the central reality of tye situation that is described.
It is done with surgical intent and intelligence and also with polemical license that shows nationalists what they must do when the balance of power shifts.
"Over 80 % of the British public want no more immigration and a reversal of the policies of multi-culturalism"
I just wondered if you have a source that would substantiate this claim, Lee?
"now lets see. It was the RAF which began the policy of terror bombing in 1940."
Really? So practice runs in the Spanish civil war didn't happen. Nor did blitzkrieg against the Poles. Nor did the bombing of civilians in Rotterdam. Warsaw was not razed when defeat was the only option and little boys weren't forced to fight to defend Berlin. Nazi Germany was a lovely place dontcha know? Just ask the jews and the gypsies.
Scores at half-time:
Dresden 25,000 people killed
Jews, communists, christians, gypsies, mentally and physcially disabled = TEN FUCKING MILLION YOU DICKHEAD. And guess what? They weren't the centre of anything. Go read what your lovely friends like Mengele did to the mentally ill you fucking tosser.
"The policy as supported by Churchill involved the bombing of largely residential areas which would burn easily."
What like London, Liverpool, Manchester, Rotterdam, Warsaw and oh yes - Moscow, Stalingrad - shall I continue educating you about WWII you clueless retard?
"Yes sure the RAF were angels. History is a lot more complicated than you think..."
Before lectuting others, you should try and master the subject first. If you know the first basic of warfare it is that those who start it don't dictate how it finishes. Throw a handful of shit, don't complain when it gets slung back at you by the bucket load. The vile nazis asked for it and they got it and along comes a litte pussy like you crying "cos 'snot furr!" Aww, diddums. Shouldn't have been such nasty little nazi bullies in the first place then should you?
In the case of the vile Nazi Germany, thank God, they got exactly what they asked for. Vile racist ayrian suprenmacist scum. While the people of Dresden raised their right arms screaming "sieg heil!" Mengele was busily experiementing with dyestuffs in childrens eyes and messing with the bodies of twins.
That you sympathiise with this scum shows what a dispicable bastard you are. You don't like the legacy the RAF gave you? FUCK OFF TO DRESDEN YOU DISPICABLE NAZI TRAMP. Don't spout nazi propognanda on a pro-BNP site - we know what the game is here you duplicitous wanker - take your nazi game and fuck off.
"Anyway your great hero Churchill single handedly destroyed the British empire and harris will still be known to most of his ex crews as the " butcher"."
MY great hero? Well I am British largely thanks to Winston, just one of many truly great Britons. But the empire wasn't destroyed by him, try looking further westward you simple-minded nazi cretin.
That you sympathize with the nazis raises alarm bells with me. This is a British Nationalist site - we don't need Hollywood nazi sympathisers like you.
Fuck off to the UAF and take your nazi shite with you, we're much better than that.
Lee - fuck me does this anonymous twat need to spell it out in neon? Apologies for the "french" but this lying little tit is on a mission.
Apologies Lee for my angry post last night but I'm deeply suspicious of pro-nazi posts on BNP blogs for obvious reasons. I also hate so called Brits rubbishing the sacrifices of our forefathers.
Maybe this answer will be more fitting:
"now lets see. It was the RAF which began the policy of terror bombing in 1940."
Factually incorrect. The Germans used terror bombing on Warsaw and Rotterdam in 1939 and early 1940.
And also states:
"Dresden 25,000 people killed centre of germany's porcelain industry."
But doesn't mention the 43,000 that died in the London blitz and the 25800 dead of the Warsaw siege 1939.Then we have the dead of Moscow and Stalingrad. I wonder why these don't count as "terror bombings"?
He then accuses:
"History is a lot more complicated than you think..."
Maybe but at least my facts are straight.
Then embarrases his/her self with:
"maybe its time to think a little bit more deeply instead of relying on the hollywood version."
What version are you relying on - the one approved by Herr Goebels perhaps? Certainly sounds like Nazi propoganda to me. Your version isn't factual that's for sure.
Churchll isn't spared from this nazi sympathiser:
"Anyway your great hero Churchill singlehandedly destroyed the British empire"
Really? All by himself? Have you heard of a country called the United States? You really should make an effort to study history more.
"harris will still be known to most of his ex crews as the " butcher".
Then maybe they should read about the following places so they - and you - realise the meaning of the word "buthcer":
Oradeur Sur Glane
The Nazis and their people got exactly what they deserved. They were a brutal, vicious, tyrannical people who sought to stamp on nations with their jackboots and cared not a jot for those they tortured, enslaved and murdered.
There is a reason why the German people today are still deeply ashamed of this diabolical period of their hostory.
There is nothing heroic or honourable about fighting for a regime that pursued a biologically pure Ayrian race and who murdered millions of innocents including children to achieve it.
Not content with that they also conducted some of the worst medical and scientific experiments on human beings. Go study what joy Mengele got from twins. Go study what the nazis did to mentally ill and physically disabled human beings.
That any British person can post pro-nazi diatribes on a BNP site beggars belief. Thank God our forefathers were made of far better stuff than people like you because if they were anything like you, we'd now be speaking German.
If we were biologically pure enough to still be alive that is.
For Chris, and the anoymous one:
Just been reading the collection of hysterical posts. First off, why did Britain (and France) declare war on Nazi Germany, remember it was not Germany that declared war upon us. What was the natural affinity with Poland. A country we had no links with? Is this not like getting into a foreign war? Do you, by insinct Chris, feel that it is right to 'intervene' or impose force on a regime that we may find not to our taste, even when there is no British interest to protect? This is not a barbed question by the way.
Secondly, as regards 'terror' bombing exclusively by both Britain and Germany (and I only include these countries by the way, I am WELL aware of civilian bombings committed by the Luftwaffe upon Holland and Poland, previously). It was not Nazi policy to bomb British cities - they withheld from doing this, until Berlin was bombed by the RAF after September 1940. This led to a retaliation by the Luftwaffe in the 'Blitz', etc. Infact the 'Battle of Britain' was going in the German's favour until Goring decided to turn on British cities - a mistake on the part of Goring and high echelons of the German armed forces.
Thirdly, the status quo of the time, much like before or since this period fought their wars to maintain that 'status quo'. You are very much mistaken if you think WW2 (or indeed WW1) was fought somehow as part of some humanitarian effort or an act of benevolance. - For anoymous one - I don't feel you can belittle the RAF on Area Bombing, they were only following orders. You are incorrect upon the Dresden figure, it would have been at least 100,000 dead. Casualties were counted by bodies found. Many were incinerated, and one must remember that many thousands of fleeing Germans were in the city at the time. On Harris himself, he was not a hero to myself. He was typical of the paper shuffling official who perchanced upon some esteem building power. MANY doubts were expressed (eventually by Churchill) as to his night time carpet bombing. The USAF employed a FAR, FAR more successful campaign of daylight raids which was far, far more accurate in damaging Germany's economy and war-related industry.
Fourthly, with such a distance from this period in time, I think it more conciliatory to acknowledge terrible events committed by both sides of this conflict. To not acknowledge something like some of the Harris' RAF bombing (often it was on historical centres and so on, as well as important economically) as something really quite dreadful and spiteful is being deliberately bluff and hokum. Likewise, anoymous, to bring JUST the RAF (and Harris) into an equation that did not even merit it is also blinkered and apparently agenda based??
Fifthly, contrary to what you think, the Second World War did of course cripple this country - that is without doubt Chris. Could Churchill be part catalyst in this? It left this country not only bankrupt and reliant upon USA but also with a lingering decline in its, among other things, self confidence - which left it ripe for the later "try looking further westward" point made.
Conclude with that it was a sin for European Brother to kill European Brother and there really isn't something as a sacrifice made in war - just pawns in a game, moved and played by the powers that be!
ps. Soviet Union was the real victor of WW2, and if we want to speak of sacrifices, think upon upward of 27 million dead, half of whom were military dead. Though I don't wish to make mute or ill points towards the innocent dead it somewhat pales the 300,000 of British dead. R.I.P
"First off, why did Britain (and France) declare war on Nazi Germany, remember it was not Germany that declared war upon us. What was the natural affinity with Poland. A country we had no links with?"
We didn't declare war because of affinity. After hitler invaded Czechoslovakia, Chamberlain met hitler at Munich, declaring the infamous "peace in our time". When the nazis invaded Poland,it became clear that hitler had no interest in peace and that he had to be stopped. Chamberlain's policy of appeasement lay in tatters along with his reputation.
"It was not Nazi policy to bomb British cities".
But they did. And they made it clear they would bomb civilians. What would they have done to Bitish civilians had sea lion succeeded? Civilians weren't just targeted from the air and British citizens would've faced the same fate as the Dutch, French, Poles, Russians etc.
"This led to a retaliation by the Luftwaffe.."
Retaliation is a bit rich here, they were the aggressors. They got a taste of their own medicine. Can't take it don't give it.
"You are very much mistaken if you think WW2 (or indeed WW1) was fought somehow as part of some humanitarian effort or an act of benevolance"
I never said such but if you think about it, declaring war on a enemy who seeks to invade you is humanitarian in that it protects your own people and nation.
"You are incorrect upon the Dresden figure..."
Figures are not the issue. It is about tactics deployed against civilians, something the nazis did right from the blitzkrieg against Poland. It is also about the biologically pure ideology the nazis held. This is a logical fallacy btw. Comparing numbers of dead to see who was the worst is not what warfare is about. Also, you are only comparing the numbers of dead from bombings, ignoring totally the 10 million or so civilians murdered because of biological impurity.
" To not acknowledge something like some of the Harris' RAF bombing (often it was on historical centres and so on, as well as important economically) as something really quite dreadful and spiteful is being deliberately bluff and hokum."
Misguided moral equivalence, guilt ridden tosh. The nazis razed Warsaw to the ground, they pummelled London, their armies committed diabolical atrocities against civilians wherever the jackboot stamped. They cared nothing for the historical centres of their enemies. What you give you get and sometimes you get it in spades. For what they did I have no sympathy whatsoever. They deserved every single bomb that was dropped on them.
"Fifthly, contrary to what you think, the Second World War did of course cripple this country - that is without doubt Chris."
I never said it wasn't, this is a somewhat ovious observation.
"Could Churchill be part catalyst in this? It left this country not only bankrupt and reliant upon USA but also with a lingering decline in its, among other things, self confidence - which left it ripe for the later "try looking further westward" point made."
The position that Churchill was in was made impossible by the policy of appeasement pursued not just by Chamberlain but as Lee has posted, the media of the time. Churchill had consistenly warned of "The Gathering Storm" and was lambasted as a war monger by the government and the media. When it became obvious that appeasing Herr Hitler was folly, the ensuing war against a then very strong nazi Germany meant the empire was doomed. The debt to the US, the loss of more young men in their prime following on from WWI meant we had neither the money nor the resources to govern the empire. The call for independance from countries who recognised how weak Britain now was naturally followed.
"Conclude with that it was a sin for European Brother to kill European Brother"
Well they always had throughout history. But I don't accept this whatsoever.I am no brother of nazis or Germans - or Italians or Spaniards or Danes or Swedes. I am most definitely not a brother of the french and I am categorically not a European I am British as were my forefathers.
"ps. Soviet Union was the real victor of WW2, and if we want to speak of sacrifices, think upon upward of 27 million dead, half of whom were military dead. Though I don't wish to make mute or ill points towards the innocent dead it somewhat pales the 300,000 of British dead. R.I.P"
Again, the logical fallacy of numbers. Percentage of population is a more important indicator. But the main point is what the nazis were about and that they had to be stopped using whatever it took.
Having studied what the nazis did in the death camps and to what they did to civilians especially in Oradeur means I have no sympathy whatsoever for the bombings inflicted on Dresden, Cologne and Berlin. The experiments conducted against the mentally ill are especially distressing. What annoys me about the holocaust is that it is portrayed as though only the jews suffered. But there were 4 million others who are rarely mentioned. It is a truly horrific period in German history and the shame they feel indicates how evil the nazis were.
Also the real victor was the United States. That they have managed to royally screw up in 70 years what the British achieved in 300 is one of the tragic legacies of WWI.
hopefully just a short post as I don't have much time. But I'd like to address some of your points. Firstly, I am not an apologist for Nazism. I trust that you don't think I am. I agree that that regime was cardinally evil in action and deed to humankind (at least outside warfare) and I write here with such in mind.
*When the nazis invaded Poland,it became clear that hitler had no interest in peace and that he had to be stopped.*
What Hitler especially, other Nazis and probably many of the Prussian Junta (i.e. the Army) wished to achieve was the re-imposition of German territory prior to 1914 - this was, as you know, done with the German speaking areas of Czechoslovakia (the Slovakian part of this country was pretty sympathetic to the Nazis by the way - hence the cynical way the Germans annexed the whole thing after invasion). The situation with Poland was its refusal to allow the 'Corridor' to East Prussia. As you might also know this was German territory pre-1914 too, as was the whole of Poland! Was it 'right' that Germany wished to gain back its former lands, seeing that the Treaty of Versaille 1919 placed very harsh terms upon Germany - all reparations, entire blame for WW1, removal of many of its industry in the Rhineland etc. All this, even if hidden in realpolitik, was considered, even at the time by the old Entente powers as unfair and heavyhanded. Was it, on the surface, immoral for Germany to seek reunifiying her people? Of course the Nazis exploited it - for ends of empire, glory, and, yes, racial hegemony. Most on the topic of this know of the desire for Lebensraum - but importantly this was destined for the EAST up to the Ukraine, and the ideological enemy of the Bolsheviks. This is what I was meaning when I asked if you thought it right to intervene in a FOREIGN war. - you say Hitler 'had to be stopped', yet you don't say why?
In all Hitler's writings or recorded comments, at least what we know of, he was, if anything, an admirer of the British Empire, and expressed admiration for the 'race' that had created it, i.e. Us, the British. Though he did think us somewhat decadent. The point I am making, and I most likely reiterate many of the thoughts of many historians - Hitler did not want a war with Britain, as such he did not *seek to invade* Obviously once the war had started - after the Phoney War, a country has to defend what is a threat. Though the terms of 'aggressor', 'retaliation' and the like become diffuse and muddy.
I take issue on what you say about Nazi doctrine or policy to bomb British CITIES - it was not something they would have done - yes they bombed naval bases, radar and air fields, BUT didnt bomb cities until after September 1940 - in "retaliation" for an RAF raid prior to this. This is not saying they didn't bomb civilians, they did of course - ones they saw as racially inferior such as the Slavs in Warsaw of 1939.
This is very much similar, if I may indulge you, of Bomber Harris command in the Middle East during the Palestinian Arab revolt of 1936 with his "one 250 lb. or 500 lb. bomb in each village that speaks out of turn" would satisfactorily solve the problem.
Incidentally, the bombing of Rotterdam, was an 'accident'. As obscene as that may sound to you and myself. It was an order that was NOT countermanded in time.
When we speak of 'figures' ("figures are not important")and the 'fallacy' you claim that what we may or may not read into it as warranting to be thought of as a lesser or greater evil, you do it yourself however with mentioning 10 million etc. The mistake here is confusing the 'Final Solution' with WW2 itself and how it was conducted. I do not believe that the reason why WW2 was fought was to commit the 'Final Solution'. Likewise it is a mistake to think that without WW2 the 'Final Solution' would have not happened - it would have of course, only in Greater Germany alone and not the East as well. It is best to seperate the two, at least when we examine how the Anglo/German war was fought. Again this comes back to the motives to start it on the part of Britain/France? Back to that old Status Quo again!
*Misguided moral equivalence, guilt ridden tosh.*
No I do not think this a fair appraisal nor critique of what I was saying. My 'morality' is absolute here Chris, it becomes relative when we argue that something is more or less justified when committed on similarly 'innocent' citizens. If bombing can be rightly criticised for bombing one set of civilians then how does it transpire that it is to be condoned for bombing another set of civilians. This is relative morality! It is not 'guilt' either, what have I to feel guilty about? It is about consistency of thought, use of language and morality. I originally used the word, conciliatory, given the time elapsed since this eon destroying war. I still think it is appropriate to use it for innocents.
As a similar model, would it not be applicable to say the British people collectively deserve all they get in terms of the seeds they sow for their own destruction with all the catasphopes that exist now and certainly lie ahead given that they ALWAYS vote for the Tories and Labour that are the manure for those seeds! The Germans of course had no recourse for voting after about 1936. :I may like to point out that I am not comparing the 'powers' that be of the last 30 years in Britain with the 3rd Reich of the 1930s and 40s - though some may disagree of course:-)
*loss of more young men in their prime following on from WWI meant we had neither the money nor the resources to govern the empire. The call for independance from countries who recognised how weak Britain now was naturally followed.*
Yes I completely agree Chris, it is obvious but it leads back to the reason for originally declaring war on Germany? What interests did we fear loosing? I refer you to my point about Status Quo - it is more important than you think. Historically Britain has never desired a strong power on the continent, it was a prime cause for the many little outbreaks during the Napoleonic era (1801-1815) occasionally incited by Britain especially after 1805 to shit stir as much as possible with supplying weapons and aid to the first monarch to be tempted.By the time of 1939 Britain had its very own and successful empire of course. By insisting to fight WW2, Churchill inspired or not, Britain lost what it had - bad choice at the roulette wheel?
You entirely get my point about European Brothers wrong!!! I do not mean literally, if anything I probably mean racially, at least North Europeans. You seem to be, may I say letting of the hook those powers that be, that status quo, which has misaligned and mis-ruled Europe (the common people at least) for at least 100 years now. All those sons, fathers, brothers that have died for the game or shenagins of pawn movers - and the elites.
*Percentage of population is a more important indicator.*
True, though even doing it this way the Soviet Union/East/Germany was the main area of warfare and reason for WW2, hence its Fire of Dante like casualty figures. I'll take you through it: population of Britain 52 million - 300,000 dead. Soviet Union 210 million, 27 million dead. Far greater percentage is Russian. The invasion of Soviet Union and the creation of Lebensraum was the prime cause of Hitler motives - this had nothing to do with Britain?! Most likely, knowing thoroughly the German/Soviet war 1941-45 It would have likely ended a stalemate - with 2 dictorial tyrannical superpowers knocking 7 types of human liquid out of each other, and so by exhausting themselves, economically, politically, spiritually and humanly.
You say the Nazis
*had to be stopped using whatever it took*
Why? Does this translate into the modern world now? Should we pick on any dictator nowadays, irrespective of how powerful they are? Does this conflict with the idea of not getting involved with foreign wars that concern us not? Though, I will say, in hindsight, it was a good thing that the Nazis were were wiped out utterly in 1945, yet this doesn't address anything made in points here. I am not saying it wise of this country to have started and fought WW2. I could say, for modern equivalent that no more Saddam in Iraq is a positive thing, though I didn't/don't agree with the US/UK invasion (for different reasons of course that we all know about).
*The experiments conducted against the mentally ill are especially distressing.*
Of course they were, as was the euthanasia of them, though the subject of at least some of these experiments were of course German. If we agree they were all innocent-the mentally ill that is, how can you in the same breath declare to have 'no sympathy' for those civilians killed in area bombing of German cities - it is relative morality Chris? I personally think that the innocent victims (I'd include children, women, old folk, and even extend it to the simple soldier infact) of all sides should be granted some understanding - I certainly wouldn't say that because they were German (babies for heart-string effect) they DESERVED it!?
*the shame they feel indicates how evil the nazis were.*
Yes and no. I'll presume you mean modern Germans without any personal experience of the War. Yes they(Nazis) were utterly evil engineers, the worst by any measure in history. The 'shame'. well, I tend to think of it as the usual way of white liberal kind (the usual enemy of us all) to denigrate and usurp a nation of Europe and the West. Much like how us (British and Yank) whiteys must feel somewhat guilty about slavery. Although like most Germans had nothing to do with the Holocaust, other than the 90 years old living in Paraguay, we living(British) had nothing to do with slavery and all the other ills that have been done in history. I guess you get the analogy here Chris? Funny enough, this liberal divide and rule tactic sadly works for most.
I am with you on your point about the Jews.
*What annoys me about the holocaust is that it is portrayed as though only the jews suffered.*
This is true, it may be trite of me to say that it is a highly successful 'business' enterprise, to prolong such historical suffering and torment of the Jews with each successive generation that comes along. This is so we question not, and have sympathy aplenty.
It is easier, as I think I said before, not to mix the Holocaust with the war that Britain fought against the Nazis. They are NOT connected. This is why I originally posted as drawing like with like with what the Nazis did had no bearing on how Britain fought the war (why, for what etc?)
With your last point about USA:
*royally screw up in 70 years what the British achieved in 300 is one of the tragic legacies of WWI.*
I agree - though that is luck rather than judgement. Ultimately it was the British ruling elite (status quo again) who screwed up what the COMMON PEOPLE of these islands had created in the previous 300 years by hook or crook and by adopting to fight a foreign war in 1939.
Excellent post but as it's very lengthy I will condense my reply to make fully clear my stance.
The point about Chamberlain is very important. The appeasers - the majority then - had been shown to be categorically in the wrong, that they had made a monumental error of judgement in not stopping Hitler sooner. The attack on Poland showed the nazis could not be trusted. They would've come for us, witout question, the prize too tempting and again, the model for biological purity with the English rose as the mother another goal of the nazis.
The problem was that the nazis were getting stronger and stronger. We had to arm and we had to go to war, the alternative would've been suicidal. That's what finished Chamberlain - a disgraced PM buried at night - and brought Churchill back from the wilderness.
By the way you have the retaliation bombing wrong. The Germans attacked "industrial targets" in Liverpool and Birmingham in August 1940 and also dropped bombs on east london in the same month which prompted the RAF to bomb Berlin. This humiliated Hitler who in fury, ordered night and day bombing of london - the bliz - for 57 days and nights. Some retaliaton.
These innocent citizens you speak of. These are the same citizens who knew what was happening to the jews and did nothing. The same citizens who saw jews battered and dragged from their homes, who saw them herded like cattle onto trains and who also had death camps on their doorsteps and did nothing.
The citizens of Germany - in the main - knew what was going on. Even before the war, they saw the shops marked with the star of david and jews forced to wear it. They bear their share of reponsibility for what went on and as far as I'm concerned, they deserved what they got.
Also you only focus on bombings but as I stated, the SS and the Werhmacht committed many atrocities against innocent civilians too.
Looking back in hindsight and making moral judgements is all well and good but I believe Britain had to take the action it took and that although that action cost us dearly, I am satisfied it was the right thing to do.
I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on that, but I'll state Churchill's famous devastating rebuke to Chamberlain that totally humiliated and finished this weak, failed appeaser:
"You had a choice between honour and dishonour. You choose dishonour and you will have war."
Don't forget that Churchill had warned for years that the nazis were building a war machine.
I've just realised that there is a very interesting comparison to make between the appeasers of the nazis and the appeasers of Islam.
Post a Comment