British National Party

[unlinkedstudent]

So you agree the speech happened but put someone elses interpretation who doesn't even leave a name or credentials but just to say he's a historian. So forget about all the people who heard the speech who have it recorded and understood every word in their native language of the time period

Just listen to a man with no name and follow his lead.

 

WAKE UP

 

Who you addressing the above to? Me?

[sleepychef]

No Koy, read the posts

[KOYAANISQATSI]

So you agree the speech happened but put someone elses interpretation who doesn't even leave a name or credentials but just to say he's a historian.

 

You attack the source or lack of, of the article but absolutely ignore the content, this is not unusual for the defenders of the faith.

It's a catch 22, for no matter what name were to appear as soon as it is realised as something which discredits the given story then the writer would find himself slammed forever more as a dangerous anti semite and any facts are to be disregarded as hate speech.

 

It may not be easy to know who to trust but it's not so hard to know when your being lied to your face with details that could never match up.

So I guess I won't hold up much hope for a reason why a site dedicated to the horror of the holocaust cites the testimony of Moshe Peer while leaving out the parts where he says he was gassed 6 times yet at the same time including quotes from him like this:

Bergen-Belsen was worse than Auschwitz because there people were gassed right away so they didn't suffer a long time

http://www.auschwitz.dk/Bergenbelsen.htm

 

While the mainstream view is there were no gassings in belsen.

So who is lying? If you could just sort out one tiny detail like this for me, it may help me with my recovery from this madness.

[shetlandpeat]

Gibber, y is it when you have an input on this thread it turns to an argument of no bearing towards the BNP today and seems that you invoke others passions to satisfy something you want to do, but not talk about todays relevance of the BNP and similar in our today society.

 

And it stops the debate that JA started. Which some of us are more interested in, cos it affects US TODAY...

 

Thanx for reading.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

For my part I'm done.

Sick to back teeth of it and can't be bothered to defend my position on it against the mind set and belief systems put in place to ignore the obvious.

 

Goad away Gibbs.

Peace out.

[Gibber]

You attack the source or lack of, of the article but absolutely ignore the content, this is not unusual for the defenders of the faith.

It's a catch 22, for no matter what name were to appear as soon as it is realised as something which discredits the given story then the writer would find himself slammed forever more as a dangerous anti semite and any facts are to be disregarded as hate speech.

 

Wrong, history including Holocaust history is being revised all the time by historians using regulated methods of research. If there was evidence for Holocaust denial or even enough grounds for radical reinterpretation of Holocaust events then they would have been published in the mainstream. The revised Auschwitz death toll and discrediting the human soap myth were published because of evidence based research. If the Holocaust didn't happen and there was evidence to prove it, this too would be published, no matter how sensitive the subject.

 

Of course it has to go both ways to be objective; Moshe Peer’s story seems to be false, yet there is eyewitness testimony from witnesses saying that there was a gas chamber at Belsen.

 

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/BergenBelsen/BergenBelsen04.html

 

"Even one of the British liberators, British Army Captain Robert Daniell, recalled fifty years after the war that he had seen "the gas chambers" at Bergen-Belsen."

 

Unless there is new evidence uncovered, Peer and Daniell’s testimonies do not outweigh the evidence from the historical record and the thousands of hours of historian’s research that concludes that Belsen had no gas chamber.

 

Ditto human soap or the other inconsistencies that are found when studying the Holocaust and the inconsistencies that are thrown up when studying any historical event. Mistakes, lies and agendas all play their part but denying the Holocaust based on these and totally dismissing all the evidence, the mountains and mountains of evidence is not research, dismissing this amount of evidence is literally ignoring history.

 

Why do you think the BNP, Stormfront and all the other anti-Semite groups believe the Holocaust didn’t happen? Because of their insightful historical research and passion for the truth or because they are ignoring history to further their race hate?

 

The Holocaust is not a single event that a single fact can prove or disprove. The Holocaust is a myriad of data, places, people, actions and events that converge to one conclusion. Finding a single flaw like the Moshe Peer story, or the lack of a signed order from Hitler cannot disprove the Holocaust because these types of singular atoms of data didn’t prove the Holocaust in the first place.

 

If you are not racially motivated then you’re doing yourself a disservice subscribing to such a flawed methodology as evinced by CODOH, Stormfront and the BNP, if you are racially motivated in the things you say about the Holocaust then perhaps you’ll be seeing Irving down the asylum when the subject and the reactions you get overwhelm you.

[shetlandpeat]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Styles]

The holocaust was never on the scale that is exagerated. What do the BNP have to do with the holocaust anyway?

[unlinkedstudent]

For example, according to one academic, I do not possess ethnicity if I was born in England, am English and I only have ethnicity when I go abroad. Personally, I would argue against this theory and state that everyone has ethnicity.

 

I would tend to agree with you, it sort of implies that you can be denied the right to be called a victim of ethnic persecution if you were a victim of persecution in the country of your birth. Another path to denial on the face of it.

 

"Another path to denial on the face of it" - Denial of what?

 

I've done a bit more digging on the web since my original post. So before anyone decides I'm a racist or the OU were, it turns out that the Race Relations Act was amended in 2003 (and I was studying with OU prior to that):-

 

"For the purposes of the Race Relations Act Jews and Sikhs were considered to be an ethnic group on the basis of their shared history even though Judaism and Sikhism are religions. Other world religions were not, such as Christianity and Islam, because their geographical origins and ancestry were more diverse. New legislation on Religion and belief addressed this anomaly and all religions are now covered by Equality Regulations. (See Policy on Religion and Belief http://www.ncl.ac.uk/diversity/info/belief/index.html"

 

Indeed, it may well be the case that I got confused as we were looking not only at race, ethnicity but also nations and nationalilty.

 

However, in a vain ATTEMPT to get this thread back on track, why do people vote BNP., and if the BNP has a whites only policy, then why are they against Jews and other groups/communities?

 

I, incidentally, would not vote for the BNP. Why do people vote for them? Well, lack of knowledge, lack of respect for others or the lack of respects of others towards those who don't share their cultural/religious beliefs. I think this thread has demonstrated how non-tolerant of an individual's belief people can be.

 

To me, no single religious or cultural group has the right to state that theirs is the only define and right way. We should act as adults and learn from history, whilst at the same time acknowledging that one's perspective on events that we were not necessarily there to witness and have been recorded historically - I'm messing up what I'm trying to say here but in a nutshell, history is just that - HIS STORY. There will always be errors in history, and by that I don't just mean the historical events but also the accuracy of the historical records.

 

Whatever one's cultural/religious/ethnic background, we should all have basic morals. Perhaps if we applied "We learn from each other" and respected each other's viewpoints (not necessarily agreeing with them) then PERHAPS the BNP wouldn't get so many votes.

 

Alas, we don't. We become fixated with past events and won't even entertain anything that goes against the holy grail. Historically (aargh), religions too evolve. But whilst we have groups of whatever persuasion never accepting that other people have a right to their viewpoints, hold the belief that they are wrong because their beliefs are not the same as theirs, and insist on shoving their beliefs down our throats, then the BNP will always get people to vote for them.

 

Simplified matters somewhat? No doubt I have. Waffled? Guilty as charged. Please can we get this thread back to the original debate?!!!

 

No doubt I'm gonna get it in the neck for my posting so I'll whizz off now on me broomstick before someone decides I should be burnt at the stake (again?)

[Gibber]

The definition you posted opens up the possibility of denial of racial or ethnic persecution like the BNP deny the Holocaust is what I meant. I was taking issue with the definition not you or the OU.

[JAStewart]

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45883000/jpg/_45883633_007395510-1.jpg

 

Lol.

[shetlandpeat]

There seems to be a huge amount of envy of for instance, the asians living here..

 

I have also seen it south from here.....

 

It is because of culture that the BNP can be successful.

 

One of my friends south has a tight knit family, they support each other through thick and thin, they are not so tied up with individual wealth but the wealth and well being of the family..

 

I used to see that alot when I went home (to Shetland) but it does not seem as evident..

 

And it seems that families distance themselves from each othe to prove success and some odd pride thing...

 

The BNP play on the weaknesses of a minority of backward thinking folk, and make out that if they were in charge, we all would be better off...

 

Then there is still the shackles of the past, where as folk of a certain age, who lived in a certain area still thought as their forefathers thought, the age of Empire. These then educate their young and so on, but it is slowley being diluted, and occasionally the waters are stirred to muddy them, but alas the concetration is getting less....

 

And this attutude of the type folk in the BNP was highlighted in a Pink Floyd album/film...

 

All you have to do is follow the worms.

[Symbister]

The holocaust was never on the scale that is exagerated. What do the BNP have to do with the holocaust anyway?

 

(a) I don't know what your evidence is for doubting the scale. But there is not the slightest doubt that Nazi ideology involved the denigration, humiliation, exclusion and ultimately liquidation of Jews and indeed anyone who didn't fit the Caucasian heterosexual ideal. To most people, those ideas and their consequences are repellent.

 

( What's the link? The BNP adhere (in their constitution) to the same Caucasian ideal, a position which they are now being forced to reconsider. They have been happy to extend a hand of friendship to racists and holocaust deniers. They believe that Britishness can be defined solely in terms of racial or religious characteristics. They would like non-Caucasians voluntarily to 'go home', even if their great-grandfather was born here; anyone who seriously believes that that would be the limit of their ambitions in government is, I fear, deluding themselves. Support for them is based on a combination of some fear and a lot of ignorance, with a leavening of hatred, precisely the same cocktail that Hitler mixed. Nazi Lite is no more appealing than Nazi.

[EM]

... Nazi ideology ... anyone who didn't fit the Caucasian heterosexual ideal.

...The BNP adhere (in their constitution) to the same Caucasian ideal,

Without disagreeing with the main points you are making, it is worth mentioning that your use of the term Caucasian here highlights the fundamental lunacy of racial theory. Something the NSDAP could never quite agree on, and the BNP clearly haven't a clue about. Most people today seem to believe that Caucasian = Aryan = White. That is probably the BNP view but it is not what the original race theorists claimed. Indeed the Jews are included along with Aryans within the broader grouping Caucasian. Most Indians were also considered Aryan. Clearly few of the BNP would be keen on upholding this aspect of the NSDAP's thinking.

 

As all such categorisation is futile, non-scientific and obnoxious, I think the best term to sum up the targets of such regimes and groups is convenient scapegoats.

[Mattie]

Anyway.. Nick Griffin from the BNP will be starring aside Jack Straw on Question Time... Look forward to it..

Worth buying a tv licence for?