Fjordman's latest piece on women just lost him a tremendous amount of support among the intelligentsia on this side of The Pond, and that is unfortunate in these times. That said, he has tremendously good sense on other issues.

Clearly, it is a failure of imagination to believe that one MUST put up with some kind of neo-Nazi racist screed in order to have a sane opinion about violent jihad, and all involved would do well to take the lesson that Robert is gently trying to teach here: we do not need to drag with us the ghosts of evil to revive the breathless good in Europe.

Might be well to remember, too, that the opposite of love isn't hate; love and hate are very close, and sometimes the best of friends can have the hottest arguments.

The opposite of love is apathy, the attitude that it doesn't matter or that somebody else will solve it or that one doesn't, of one's own courage, have to make a stand on behalf of freedom of conscious.

And that kind of self-absorbed apathy, clothed in moral equivalency, is Europe's real problem. That added to that is the screwed thinking of "me and my white skin" is a crying shame. But the most basic problem is apathy in the face of a wave of immigration that, unfortunately, carries with it the seeds of the destruction of a free culture that, much to the detriment of its women (or perhaps because their freedom is so threatening), it is unwilling to accept.

Meanwhile, it heartens me to see a post like Robert's this morning: a voice of sanity and good-will that so clearly separates the wheat from the chaff and holds as possibility the revival of a friendship we might all want to see maintained. It's a terrible waste of valuable time and good minds for this nasty spat to continue.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 7:23 AM

Parties change over time, as their old core move off into other parties that may suit them better. Look at the South, where many of the the "Dixiecrats" moved over to the Republicans

I think the essence of the rift comes from two viewpoints: There are those who think the survival of Europe, as a non-Dhimmi state, is important enough that they are willing to associate with people who have a distasteful past if that's the only visible way to accomplish that goal. And there are those who are willing to let Europe go, if the cost would otherwise be granting legitimacy to racists.

On the positive side, if a large number of good people take over and co-opt a party with a bad past, then the new people in charge will not be the old people that Charles at LGF has a problem with

Posted by: PapaBear at November 15, 2007 7:24 AM

Robert,

I can answer a couple of the points, hopefully to your satisfaction. First, the issue of the alliance with Le Pen and the other groups. The way the European Parliament works, a party or group of parties must hold a minimum number of seats before they're allowed to make statements on the floor or propose votes and motions. Given the way the EU works, the big established parties will all tend to band together in to groups that allow them to dominate the floor and prevent the "minnows" from saying anything, as they usually by themselves have less than the minimum number of seats. You will find that such parties feel it necessary to band together in order to get the right to speak, and they often have to make alliances with people who are, to put it mildly, distasteful. Of course that particular alliance is now dead; VB pulled out of it as part of their effort to answer the criticism their facing, which means they've effectively silenced themselves on the floor of the EU parliament until another alliance can be formed.

Other issues have been addressed in the comments on Fjordman's article at Gates of Vienna, as well as comments elsewhere on that site. The SS soldier, for example:

Paul Belien recently stated on the Atlas interview with Pamela Geller, about that wreath laying cerimony. For an example, Stefan Laureys, one of those SS soldiers buried there, originally went to Finland to fight on the Finnish front against the Soviets, when Finland was fighting for its life. At the time, Germany and the Soviets had a treaty.

Laurey's parents hid Jews from the Nazis, and their son, no anti-Semite, refused to fight on the western front against the Allied forces. He was later shot.

This man deserved a wreath. without proper knowledge about the history of the coutnry in question, all kinds of wrong headed assumptions can be made.

The superficial argument is "they're honouring nazi war dead", but just a little bit of digging reveals that many of the accusations are based on misunderstandings of history or a refusal to actually check the facts.

Where such facts are not known I agree that caution is required, but in many cases the accusations have already been dealt with, without acknowledgment from the accusers. Habeus corpus. Bring the proof and it'll be answered.

Posted by: Archonix at November 15, 2007 7:29 AM

While I am stil working through this issue Gates of Vienna had a good piece a while ago.
The gist was: we are united by what were are not: muslims/islamists. A very sobering thought.

It makes sense.Thanks for your piece, Robert.

Posted by: Gramfan at November 15, 2007 8:02 AM

Archonix...excellent comments!!

Unfortunately the current state of PC in most western(and only western..no one else is that stupid) countries is such that by the time a spotless antijihad group emerges in Europe it will be too late.

If you apply the PC hypercritical(and hypocritical) morality guidelines to WW2 then we would have lost it most certainly by refusing to accept the USSR as an ally. This is quite simple to understand as Stalin was by far the greater murderer of the two (of mostly his own people) and without him and his methods of ruling the USSR, could not possibly have defeated Nazi germany. In addition here, the acceptance of the "lesser evil ally" by the west enabled the material support which sustained the USSR at its darkest period(late 41 to 42).

So while the moral argument is all nice and cleancut, and while I am not and have not ever supported any neonazi group and have been actively proIsrael since adolescence, I fear that we are allowing the ethics to dominate what is fass becoming a battle to the death and that these scruples will be the ruin of the west.

Anyone who denies potential allies in such a war has no concept of the necessities required for winning. Continue in this vein and the defeat of western civilisation and all of its works in ensured.

Posted by: MisIslamist at November 15, 2007 8:03 AM

PapaBear:

There are those who think the survival of Europe, as a non-Dhimmi state, is important enough that they are willing to associate with people who have a distasteful past if that's the only visible way to accomplish that goal.

Clearly, the so-called neo-Nazi parties will have to become more "mainstream" to survive because it is unthinkable that majority opinion could shift way over to the right.

But becoming mainstream should not mean taking either a neutral or a conciliatory stance on Islam. However, the overriding official state-sanctioned doctrine - which is accepted throughout Europe as far as I am aware - is that all cultures, religions and lifestyles are deemed equal. Indeed, minority groups tend to acquire automatic victim status.

Therefore, at the moment, being mainstream entails embracing Islam. The key to solving the Islamic problem is to shake off the absurd assumption that Islam is as benign as, say, Sikhism.

I do not foresee a sea-change in policy towards Islam within the mainstream parties. That would only occur if we had regular 7/7s and Madrids. The insidious rise of Islam continues unchecked - almost under the radar of public perception. Which suggests to me that only by steering the existing nationalistic/patriotic parties - whose members are well aware of the threat - towards increasing inclusivity can the Islamic problem be addressed.

The BNP in particular has a poor image. This is partly due to negative propaganda, but there is no denying that much of the criticism is warranted and there are indeed skeletons in its cupboard. I believe that at grass roots level the party is healthy but that some of those higher up would need to go before it could truly enter the mainstream.

On the positive side, if a large number of good people take over and co-opt a party with a bad past, then the new people in charge will not be the old people that Charles at LGF has a problem with

I couldn't have put it better, PapaBear.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 8:03 AM

I hope that tempers will cool on both sides and we can all continue to work together against the jihad and Islamic supremacism. There are few enough of us as it is.
( Thank you Robert....people needn't to hear that.)

Posted by: storagemanager at November 15, 2007 8:16 AM

The problem is that we are being given FALSE choices and that we are expected to accept them.

When somebody is asinine enough to frame the question in terms of either accepting Nazi racism or letting jihad take over the culture, then I call that a dishonestly-crafted "choice" and ask who it is that is arrogant to tell the rest of us what our choice is and to frame it in this manner.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 8:27 AM

"These posts involved personal attacks on the illustrious Charles Johnson. Charles has been a friend for years and an immense help to Jihad Watch in innumerable ways. I usually don't have time to read the comments here, but I will always remove offensive ones when they're brought to my attention, and these were. So they're gone."

This is fair, since LGF still is useful as a news source and Charles Johnson has contributed to the content of Jihadwatch immensely.

However, his actions during this spat and several postings by intelligent people have led me to believe that not all criticism concerning his methods is without merit. And the cult of personality together with lack of critical discussion in the LGF comments section also support this conclusion.

Posted by: Saatanan Islam at November 15, 2007 8:28 AM

"the illustrious Charles Johnson"?

Oi Vey. The last time I heard the adjective "illustrious" to describe something, it was an aircraft carrier. Or sometimes, a really swanky hotel.

Posted by: jihadwatcher at November 15, 2007 8:33 AM

Archonix made the point I was about to make about the VB in the European parliment. Also GOV have some excellent material on dealing with the allegations against VB.

Watling, I agree with your summary of the BNP, the leadership is definately an issue, they still need to change.

I don't think however we can work together at this point, we have our restrictions, political and PC repression and you have yours, image and purity.

If helping us Europeans means that people like Mr Spencer are compromised by being associated with so called racists then you should not take that risk.

I am hard headed enough to realise that we need to win the argument in the USA to have any chance of victory, while in Europe its gone to far, we are going to be a battleground and it will get desperate regardless of recent changes that seem to indicate a shift in thinking.

And if sound bite thinking and using the lefts lies is part of defining what I stand for so what.

Anyway the strong do what they can and the weak suffer...

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 8:39 AM

Just to give you Americans some perspective on the uphill struggle we in Europe are dealing with, with respect to having antijihadism enter the mainstream:

In Denmark, the only political party addressing the issue of jihad and islamization is Dansk Folkeparti, i.e., the Danish People's Party. The DPP is rooted in Fremskridtspartiet, i.e., the Progress Party, which, although never formally linked to any Nazi groups, did attract a hodge podge of fringe types, ranging from ultralibertarians to general crackpots, as well as quite a few racist/Nazi types. The DPP was formed in the mid-1990s, in an attempt to bring some of the original party's issues into the mainstream, among them an immigration and asylum policy that was spinning out of control.

There is no way that the stated policy of the DPP or its members can be linked with the Nazi ideology, either in the present or in its history. In the absence of any alternatives on the right, the party does attract some of these types, but they are without exception expelled when attention is drawn to their presence. The strongest criticism that could probably be levelled against the DPP is their history of lax control when accepting new members. They were lax, probably aren't anymore, end of story. Claiming that these unfortunate cases reveal the 'true' nature of the DPP is ridiculous, as being part of the coalition that guarantees the majority of mandates for the government in Parliament is their top priority. Rotten apples would jeopardize this crucial parliamentary role, even more so after Tuesday's election which saw the Fogh Rasmussen government reelected with only one mandate over the opposition, among these those of the DPP.

The buzzword in the Danish debate is "house trained." Are the DPP house trained, i.e., can they be accepted as belonging to the mainstream? Clearly the two party government thinks so; however - and this is the point I'm driving at - despite these facts regarding the DPP there is still a widespread perception in the public and among the opposition parties that the DPP are closet Nazis. The list of straw man accusations, graffiti scrawled on party posters (such as swastikas or Hitler moustaches), or misrepresentations of their policy is endless, and probably impossible to counter with factual information.

However, despite a non-stop vilification in the MSM, including the state financed tv, the DPP has been gaining votes in three consecutive elections. It would seem their public base is limited in the 12-15% vote bracket, but so far this has proved remarkably stable in the face of the vilification I described.

Posted by: anti-uffe at November 15, 2007 8:44 AM

The neofascist character of the anti-jihad parties in Europe also keeps many decent people from joining the counterjihad movement, when they otherwise would. This is the great weakness of the argument that, well, there is no one else fighting this fight, so we have to join forces with people we would otherwise regard with distaste...

The ONLY UK party who wants to tackle this problem head-on is the BNP, and however distasteful it is, there are many people who will vote for them at the next UK election, including Jews (whom the BNP hate).

IF there were any viable, non-fascist alternative, they'd win the next election by a landslide. Unfortunately for us, there isn't.

Europe has very few counter-jihad political parties, and from seeing the erosion of our human rights and perceived and real preferential treatment for Muslims in general, we need to pull together or lose the battle completely.

The average Joe on the street in Europe is fed up to the eye teeth with what he perceives are high levels of immigration, job shortages, and with Muslims getting nearly everything they demand, from halal meals in schools (Hindu & Jewish kids don't get their dietary needs met), to an acceptance of wearing the niqab, an acceptance of allowing them to pray 5 times a day at work, and an acceptance of them not selling alcohol in the supermarkets in which they work (where they're employed to do exactly that job), and on top of it, they seem to get preferential treatment when it comes to social housing. The list goes on and on.

The question is how much more can the indigenous people of Europe take, before there are civil disturbances, riots, or civil war?

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 15, 2007 8:46 AM

"But I hope they will eventually address the concerns that have been raised. And until they do, there is nothing unreasonable at all about approaching them with extreme reservation." Posted by Robert

Thank you, Mr. Spencer.

Posted by: Josephine at November 15, 2007 8:51 AM

Robert, that was detailed and precise and immensely clarifying but above all big-hearted. You are a MENSCH.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at November 15, 2007 9:17 AM

I think part of the problem still stems from different understandings of the word "nationalist". A lot of people, especially Americans, see nationalist and think "nazi". Or, at best, national front. They neglect that the nazis were national socialist, they were authoritarian and centralised in their thinking. Nationalism alone does not lead to that sort of thinking. Nationalism alone is simply a preference for preserving national character and institutions, strong borders. You can have your authoritarian nationalists as represented by the BNP, Front Nationale and other parties, who resort to the idea of controlling the lives of people within the nation and the export of undesirables never to return as a means to preserve the national culture, and you can have your liberal nationalists as represented by Vlaams Belang and Sverigedemokraterna, amongst others, who express their nationalism in terms of strong borders, minimal government and individual liberty. That's the key difference. VB and their ilk may well turn out to be racist, but their party policies mitigate that racial element by their very nature because it is only possible to implement any sort of genocidal "solution" if you are in charge of a highly centralised authoritarian state.

A lot of this nationalism must be seen in the frame of the EU and older European politics if it is to be understood correctly. Flemish nationalism is born out of a desire to be free of the anchor of Wallonia, Belgium and the dead hand of the Union over it all. They want to return to the saxon tradition of individual liberty and minimal government, where the Walloons want to retain the more Frankish tradition of a centralised, powerful state. Currently the European perspective is small in that fight but it will grow, as it is the EU that is causing most of the problems we face by centralising state control, preventing nations from controlling their borders and allowing uncontrolled immigration from the Islamic world.

I don't believe that VB has ever said that immigration itself is a problem. The problem is that there is no control over that immigration. There is no means for Belgium to control that immigration because those powers were ceded to the Union under the 1996 Maastricht treaty. This rise of nationalism is a response to that problem, not a response to immigration in general but to the fact that immigration is no longer controlled. Under he Schengen treaty anyone bearing an EU passport can enter any EU member state without so much as a check of their bags. Where they got the passport doesn't matter as long as they hold one, which has lead to the rather unedifying spectacle of thousands of muslims crossing the Mediterranean to Spain and Italy, getting passports and then moving north to England, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. Prior to maastricht they were stuck in Italy and Spain, and usually went home again because there was nothing for them. Now they can just keep going to places that are not prepared to deal with such massive immigrant influxes and which are culturally unable to cope.

A rise of nationalism is the only response to a situation like that, as people within what were formerly sovereign nations try to express their wish to retain their national sovereignty. The choice that has to be made isn't between sitting back to die or being nazis, but between which brand of nationalism will be fostered; authoritarian nationalism (nazism) or liberal nationalism. The former would serve some short term goals, but would cause problems. The latter would solve everyone's problems. It would halt untrammeled islamic immigration, break up the European Union and allow a resurgence of free-market, classic-liberal nations focused on reduction of state power, increased individual liberty and strong borders to defend that liberty.

Attacking parties like VB, who are in favour of that optimal (and admittedly highly optimistic) outcome, will simply give succor to the authoritarian nationalists, the real nazis.

Posted by: Archonix at November 15, 2007 9:21 AM

If the three corners of this stool in the US are JihadWatch/DhimmiWatch, Little Green Footballs, and Gates of Vienna, then we will be o.k. in the end. The cousins at 910group/CVF do a great job as activists, but, as such, they do need to exercise some caution with their relatives across the Pond.

You, Charles, Dymphna and the Baron, and others are doing great work. We need this information, not only to learn ourselves, but to use to help educate others.

I, too, would like to see the vitriol and rhetoric cool a little. We don't need to be slimed by association with skinheads and other nefarious clowns who haven't had a sane, sober, real thought since they were five years old.

Robert, thank you for an excellent, thoughtful piece. Let all of us pull together...so that the jihadis don't get the chance to separate our heads from our shoulders.

Posted by: spinoneone at November 15, 2007 9:27 AM

Robert,

and all JW's if we are ever to defeat the islamists and reveal the true nature of islam we can have no allaince with the the likes of the BNP or other nazi type otganisations.

The islamists and their left/liberals scream racism in order to suppress any criticism of islam.
I and others have been working very hard to involve members of the Indian community in the UK on board. Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists have grim experience of islam, not just abroad but here as well.

http://thehinduvoice.com/blog/2007/11/09/durga-puja-celebrations-is-east-london-attacked/#comments

Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists will not march next to the likes of the BNP.

As trade ties between the UK and India grow the Left/Liberals will have to choose who their allies are.

I have worked with a member of the BNP, they are ignorant scum, it should be remembered that Griffin and several of his goons were photographed with Gaddaffi in Libya, when they were playing the Jewish card to ask for money.
Do we really want to be associated with them ?
There maybe 1.2- 2.2 million moslems in the UK.
However there are 1-2 million gays, alot work in the media, arts and business they are the most successful minority in the UK, same goes for the Indians, very successful, threatened by islam. a few may vote for the BNP but the majority won't.
The BNP does not appeal to women, thats half the UK population
We need to reach out to these people and then lobby the conservatives and Labour from within.

And one last thing
CAN YOU PLEASE CHANGE THIS

Why Jihad Watch?
Because the West is facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy the West and bring it forcibly into the Islamic world -- and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad."

Please replace the word "WEST" with "NON MOSLEMS"
mention India, China and Russia.

It will gain alot of allies.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at November 15, 2007 9:30 AM

"like the Holocaust-denying white supremacist BNP"

Such utter bullshit. I am never coming to this site again. Your a clown Robert Spencer.

Posted by: BlowHammed at November 15, 2007 9:30 AM

Jerusalem Posts:

... including Jews (whom the BNP hate).

What did I say about negative propaganda? Hate is purely subjective, and it is unbecoming of you to ascribe it to others.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 9:38 AM

AI:

Good idea.

Thanks.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at November 15, 2007 9:39 AM

"A free man is one who enjoys the use of his reason, and his faculties; who is neither blinded by passion, nor hindered or driven by oppression, nor deceived by erroneous opinions." — P.J. Proudhon, 1861.

Posted by: Eg at November 15, 2007 9:42 AM

BlowHammed:

I may be a clown indeed, but calling me one does not constitute a counterargument. I wrote about the BNP according to the information I have. If that information is inaccurate, please provide evidence, and if I am wrong, I will retract.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at November 15, 2007 9:42 AM

Robert,

As a BNP supporter, I feel I must speak up for them.

The comments here are a little bit myopic. As the brilliant Fjordman has pointed out time and time again in his essays, jihad is only one of the enemies we europeans are fighting at the moment.

We have the EU, an organisation hell bent on destroying nation states. We have uncontrolled immigration, the greatest population transfer in human history and our culture is being diluted. We also have the injustice of global capitalism, forcing the native people to compete at the lowest end of the age scale to scrape a living.

The BNP is the ONLY party that speaks up for the indiginous population of the United Kingdom. There is much more to the BNP than immigration, indeed, it is their policies on issues such as energy and crime that attracted my support.

I consider myself to be an intelligent, rational and tolerant individual. Were the BNP - and I know people remember the old NF and form a wrong impression - anything like nazis or fascists, I wouldn't support them. As Fjordman rightly says, that's because people like me simply don't like nazis or fascists.

The BNP are denied a platform to speak and debate in public - a fascist tactic and people say we are fascists - yet for those of us fighting against the Islamization of our land and for the survival of our magnificent culture, the BNP are our only hope and I urge readers to visit the BNP website, see what we're about and make your own minds up rather than allowing smear and marxist intimidation to blind you from reality.

I remain your staunch ally against Islamic jihad and thank you for the work you do.

Lionheart.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 15, 2007 9:45 AM

AI:

The change has been made. Thanks again.

Yrs
RS

Posted by: jihadwatch at November 15, 2007 9:45 AM

Hello to you all,

I was banned from LGF for saying these kinds of things:

• What are YOU (meaning LGFers) plan to actually do?
• How about trying to get Islam redefined as a totalitarian political ideology and then deal with it legally? As Muslim then has a choice: leave Islam and become a Westerner or leave the West.
• I usually couch the above as "Islam IS Nazism." Someone said, perhaps Fjordman, "Imagine if Hitler had just a little smarter and couched National Socialism within a religious framework."
• Fjordman, along with Ali Sina, states that Islam cannot be reformed. I totally agree.
• Islam is not only incompatible with Western values, but basic human ones, and is evil.
• What the heck is a "moderate Muslim"?

Now, I ask those gathered here, what of the above is so horrible?

I do not even read LGF any more.

While I have pressed Robert over the years about specifics, he has always been a gentleman and intellectually honest, even kind.

PS: The Center for Vigilant Freedom (www.vigilantfreedom.org is case the link does not work) needs people to help do many different things.

Ethelred

Posted by: Ethelred at November 15, 2007 9:47 AM

Thank you, Mr. Spencer, for your calm, reasoned attitude toward the problem of racial supremacism and its consequences for normal people.
The right-wing parties in Europe, and I know because I live there, are constantly doing foolish things (like putting wreaths on SS graves) because they are racists. Their racism makes them stupid; of course, they have lots of rationalizations (for putting the wreath on this grave rather than that one), but that's not seeing the forest for the trees. It's like a form of blindness.
The problem is pervasive throughout Europe, as best as I can tell. Most anti-jihad people will never ally themselves with this element, and if Europe dies as a result, then that's just too bad for Europe; but you'll have to put the blame for that on the major parties and the racists on the right, not the non-racists who are fighting for our culture against jihad.
It's hard for me as an American to understand how so many in the European right can choose racism over the future of European civilization. Maybe for them being Western is just looking a certain way. That's nothing worth fighting for.
We need to see real "conversion," not just in the official platforms of these people, but also in what they say with their symbols and actions.

Posted by: ppeter at November 15, 2007 9:47 AM

The ONLY UK party who wants to tackle this problem head-on is the BNP, and however distasteful it is, there are many people who will vote for them at the next UK election, including Jews (whom the BNP hate).

I would like to ask you a question Jerusalem posts, if the BNP are so Anti-semitic as you imply, why is it that one of there members who is a Jew has been elected to the Epping District council? Why don't you go to there website and check out what they have to say about the whole affair, you might be surprised. The Website gets 7,000,000 hits a month more than any other of the main British parties. I think that that says a lot about how the ordinary Brit feels. Does that mean that all we Brits are anti-semitic ?

Posted by: Holger Dansker at November 15, 2007 9:53 AM

apostate_islam:

I have worked with a member of the BNP, they are ignorant scum

Sheer bigotry. You're showing your ignorance, my friend, if you think you can label a whole group based on a knowledge of only one member of it. Would you do the same if you met a bad Jew/Eskimo/African? Thought not.

The BNP does not appeal to women

More bigotry. The BNP has several female councillors. I can't be bothered providing the links about BNP women, but Google Sadie Graham, Pat Richardson (Jewish) or Emma Colgate, to name but a few.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 9:56 AM

Thanks, Robert, for this post. In your usual level headed style, you've hit the nail on the head.

Charles Johnson has taken a lot of heat for his principled stand against Nazis and white supremacists. His point is the same as yours, many people on both sides of the pond will not join forces with people who they perceive as having these connections, regardless of the threat. I certainly hope VB and SD make a clean break with their past, they could be valuable allies in the Counterjihad.

I understand how desperate many Europeans feel, they see their culture and freedoms under attack daily by their elites. They see the Islamization of the continent growing with no one standing up to it. They see anyone opposed to the Islamization attacked as right wing extremists and worse. I can undertand their willingness to partner with anyone who is willing to take a stand, but they must understand who they are standing with and the risks.

I will continue to read The Gates of Vienna, Brussels Journal, as well as Little Green Footballs. They all do great work spreading the word of the threat of Islam, just like Jihad Watch. Thanks again for your common sense, Robert.

Posted by: Proud Infidel at November 15, 2007 9:56 AM

Robert

You say you don't support the use of abuse in comments yet AI refers to people as "ignorant scum". As I'm a BNP supporter, AI means me. Yet if I were to say "Hindus/Sikhs/Jews/Socialists etc. are ignorant scum" I trust you would delete my comment without hesitation. And rightly so.

Regards

Lionheart.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 15, 2007 9:59 AM

To RS ...

You have a great sense of humor, but you are not a clown. Yours is more the interesting, incisive, intelligence type that escapes the "clown experts" who are most in need of an education and a mirror with which to find the real clown in the room.

Cheers,
M

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 9:59 AM

I certainly hope VB and SD make a clean break with their past

Ok, I wasn't going to reply to this thread again but I think I have to say this, and please forgive my shouting...

THEY ALREADY HAVE!

VB and SD were both formed to make that very clean break you keep demanding from them. Read in to their history from people who actually know what they're talking about and you'll see that all these demands you're making have already been answered!

And off I go until next time. :)

Posted by: Archonix at November 15, 2007 10:00 AM

> I have worked with a member of the BNP, they are ignorant scum >

A sample of one person is not a viable survey on any level: scientific, sociological, sociographic, psychological, anthropological or interperson. For goodness sake. Engage brain before opening mouth.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 10:12 AM

BNP, racism and anti-Semitism, with thanks to Melanie Phillips:

The troika of bigotry.

An offensive reaction.

Posted by: Shy Guy at November 15, 2007 10:13 AM

Your comments make good sense.

There are a few things I'd like to add:

There is a notable degree of anti-white racism both among the Left and among Islamists in general. But anybody who points this out is apt to be accused of "racism" or "Nazism" or the like.

The problem is that as long as anti-white racism keeps getting a free pass, while other forms of racism are condemned, this has the effect of giving a boost to actual neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the like. That's why respectable people can't afford to ignore any form of racism, no matter who it's directed against.

On another topic, if this is the Fjordman article on women that commenter Morgaan Sinclair is referring to, in my opinion it is a good and well-thought-out article. Anybody who deserts our cause on account of this article was never much of a supporter in the first place.

Posted by: 1389 at November 15, 2007 10:20 AM

This is really sad to watch.

The emphasis here should be the antisemitism and former Nazi affilitions, not of current European political parties, but of ISLAM itself.

Who was the Grand Mufti, Haj Muhammed Amin al-Husseini?

The Mufti and the FührerHitler, The Mufti Of Jerusalem And Modern Islamo Nazism

All of these talented mudslingers should redirect themselves to recasting this "debate" in time for the attention that will come from the New Duranty Times and others eager to exploit the current divisiveness.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at November 15, 2007 10:23 AM

Hitler, The Mufti Of Jerusalem And Modern Islamo Nazism

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at November 15, 2007 10:25 AM

Re: " The problem is that there is no control over that immigration. There is no means for Belgium to control that immigration because those powers were ceded to the Union under the 1996 Maastricht treaty. This rise of nationalism is a response to that problem, not a response to immigration in general but to the fact that immigration is no longer controlled."

Uncontrollled immigration is the white elephant that has lumbered into Europe's living room and isn't being noticed.

Immigration reform is desperately needed throughout Europe. The reform must be accomplished in a way that preserves Europe's democratic institutions and yet doesn't demonize the immigrant population.

Immigration reform is also sorely needed in the U.S.

This is a great topic Robert. I wish I had more time to write.....but I have to leave for work now. I will try to post again on this topic later this evening.

Posted by: Johnathan at November 15, 2007 10:25 AM

SIOE tried to keep party politics out of the war against islamism.

A political party has only one interest which is itself.

The war against islamism is the most important thing in the world at the moment. It overrides everything else.

The only way we can succeed is to bury differences on other matters and work together.

I would ask a question of American anti-Jihad colleagues. Would those of you supporting Vlaams Belang be equally as supportive of a political party with an anti-islamism policy, if the same party also had a separatist policy for New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and California?

There is as much talk about VB on anti-Jihad sites now as anti-Jihadism.

Great for VB, but not so great for anti-Jihadism.

I have nothing against VB, nor am I for it, just as I voice no particular opinion about the Republicans and Democrats in the USA - at least not with my anti-Islamist boots on.

Global anti-Islamism is bigger than domestic politics.

Posted by: Stephen Gash SIOE England at November 15, 2007 10:26 AM

Congratulations Robert, for supporting Charles and taking the only principled position possible in this debate. Hopefully, your buddy Pamela has had some time to ponder the merits of Charles' arguments and has done a re-think.

As I wrote here when the controversy was first unfolding, making common cause with the likes of the BNP and La Pen will be the kiss of death for the counter-jihad.

Folks, appearances and opinions to the contrary, this schism within the counter-jihad is a healthy one. In time, we might look back on this moment as the one in which the counter-Jihad defined itself and became palatable to the Center.

We owe Charles a debt of gratitude.

Posted by: Cornelius at November 15, 2007 10:27 AM

Cornelius, how can you smear the VB and SD with the BNP and Le Pen, have you even looked at VB's replies at www.vigilantfreedom.org, or have you even looded at how the SD was reformed.

The BNP still has a problem with anti-Jewish attitudes in its leadership, while Le Pen is even allying with the Islamics in France, but you can not say the same about VB and SD who are both openly pro-Israel.

Frankly it was stupid to tar these parties with the BNP and Le Pen.

People please note what Archonix said about VB links with certain other parties:

"First, the issue of the alliance with Le Pen and the other groups. The way the European Parliament works, a party or group of parties must hold a minimum number of seats before they're allowed to make statements on the floor or propose votes and motions. Given the way the EU works, the big established parties will all tend to band together in to groups that allow them to dominate the floor and prevent the "minnows" from saying anything, as they usually by themselves have less than the minimum number of seats. You will find that such parties feel it necessary to band together in order to get the right to speak, and they often have to make alliances with people who are, to put it mildly, distasteful. Of course that particular alliance is now dead; VB pulled out of it as part of their effort to answer the criticism their facing, which means they've effectively silenced themselves on the floor of the EU parliament until another alliance can be formed."

The anti-holocaust vote where VB abstained was made by the left into something which tied immigration control to the holocaust and was extremely offensive to the memory of the Jews murdered by Nazi's.

Please read the excellent work at www.vigilantfreedom.org, then we will see if gratitude is really merited?

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 10:41 AM

Neo Nazi's? Where? Is any other group apart from the muslim hordes calling for the extermination of Jews? I recall an SS soldier in the documentary 'Obsession' thinking back how weird it was for the Mufti of Jerusalem being welcomed into Hitler's war machine. I forget his name but he is forgiven and this once SS soldier has seen the errors of his racist ways, I just don't hear any of the groups mentioned above suggesting any such thing as the extermination of the Jewish race. We are far too eager to throw around 'extreme' accusations.
I believe Nick Griffin from the BNP is not a holocaust denier, simply suggesting it's an exaggeration does not make one a holocaust denier. The BNP stance is a neutral approach as nationalists are supposed to be and I commend Nick Griffin for that, his philosophy on Iraq is that the BNP does not seek to impose Western culture on the whole world, let alone introducing democracy in Iraq which has been reiterated by both Fitzgerald and Spencer as an exercise in futility. The reality is that the West meddling in the MidEast is preventing Israel from defending itself and are forever being duped with reassurances of peace talks, a two state solution, when the only solution muslims acknowledge is the final one. For crying out loud, whilst we give aid to Israeli enemies we at the same time call for Israel to restrain from acting in a decisive manner.
We've all come to realize political correctness is stifling our free thought and multiculturalism is proving a dismal failure, so why is it alright to fly a black pride flag but if a white man flies a white pride flag he's labeled a racist, neo-Nazi, or even a neo-fascist? I cannot see anything wrong with wanting to preserve a once great culture like the mother land of Britain, is it a form of fascism to expect immigrants to learn English?
You're correct Robert, this issue has split the anti-jihad movement right through the middle and multicultural Utopian airheads and the ideological debaters who have failed to convince those who matter will be left behind and thrashed in this WAR of civilizations, your way will only see hudna after hudna and the eventual take over...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 10:46 AM

Europe is understandably fighting the demons of i.ts past, and indeed the growth of the Marxist EU can be seen as a direct result of the fear of the kind of nationalism that led to two world wars.

Unfortunately, the EU only lays another massive layer of government between ordinary voters and the makers of policy, who seem, at least from my limited American perspective, to be acting now as a permanent overclass with virtually no ties to the ballot box.

Europe is still fighting the last war; meanwhile the new one is already upon them full scale and they are arguing over terms and definitions--as we do here.

Whatever the case, if a new political party must be formed that directly denounces anti-semitism while clearly identifying the jihadist threat, then PLEASE FORM IT.

Define the enemy first. Then organize the ranks behind that common goal. This is the 21st Century now, and this threat is, in my opinion, potentially far more devastating than even the Nazis.

Posted by: JohnAdams at November 15, 2007 10:59 AM

It surprises me about Robert's unyielding view of the BNP whereas, he is part of the David Horowitz organization, a man who once supported criminal elements like the Black Panthers and who over time, changed his views and saw things differently. If Mr. Horowitz was never "released" of the baggage he carried in his past, then we would never have been the benefactors of his works today. I have read much of the BNP's "recent" philosophy, and although I don't agree with everything they say, I do find their points of view refreshing regarding the Islamic issue, National pride, defense of those who still work for a living and a protection for a wonderful culture and past.

This seems to be a reflection of change that continues to be bashed by "the holier than thous" who know more than what one perceives upon their own observations.

Posted by: Briars at November 15, 2007 11:03 AM

"On another topic, if this is the Fjordman article on women that commenter Morgaan Sinclair is referring to, in my opinion it is a good and well-thought-out article."

I've read the piece, and it included some puerile provocations and could have been more specific in defining the targets of its derogations.

Tempting as it might be (e.g. Hugh on global warming) to write on a breadth of topics, the reality is that after having substantially explored ONE controversial topic (e.g. counter-jihad), the writer becomes type-cast and linked to the parent topic and vice-versa.

Personally, I think Robert does a great job of sticking to the message (though the "Dylan" interview added character dimensionality). Even when defending the Christian faith, he stays on anti-jihad message, and when debating, he does just that, debate, with effort toward finality. His vehicle is less specifically politically sectarian and more inclusive by sticking to the message. Charles, on the other hand, has a seeming need for a continuing arch-nemesis relationship with his daily promotional linkages to the Daily Kos. Many bonus points awarded though for expositions such as the "fauxtography" scandal. I would, however, suggest that he and "Fjordman" work toward improving their focus on the central counter-jihad theme.

In other words, be perfect, like Robert.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at November 15, 2007 11:04 AM

"I have worked with a member of the BNP, they are ignorant scum"

"The right-wing parties in Europe, and I know because I live there, are constantly doing foolish things (like putting wreaths on SS graves) because they are racists."

No comment.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 11:14 AM

"European mainstream parties have completely failed to address the problem of European Islamization -- a problem that of course they have, in many cases, abetted. Hugh and I have both in many separate posts lamented that those mainstream parties"

It seems to me that this "failing to address the problem" ties up with the intent of TPTB to control the world completely. By whatever name it's called, this is what the evidence leads up to. Whetehr it's called the NWO or the Caliphate.

All the leaders of countries are hand in glove with it.

Why else would "forked tongue" Arbusto . be "huggy-buggy" with the ugly arab prince. On fact, the culture, the visage of the islamics are all ugly.

Posted by: allat at November 15, 2007 11:17 AM

JohnAdmas, I totally agree, I would define what we stand for, freedom democracy etc., say what we do not agree with, racism in the case of superiority and hate due to colour of skin or race and then move on and create a movement.

But it seems that some of can say that until we are blue in the face and still get tarred as Neo-Nazi's.

I was joking with one of my friends about this subject and I said

"So when the killing starts, when I am on that barricade in ten years time without a hope in hell with a sword and a flintlock pistol trying to stop my village from being cleansed by Islamics with AK 47's I will watch the skies with trepidation in case American ordinance heads my way for being a white Neo Nazi..."

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 11:18 AM

"Paul Belien recently stated on the Atlas interview with Pamela Geller, about that wreath laying cerimony. For an example, Stefan Laureys, one of those SS soldiers buried there, originally went to Finland to fight on the Finnish front against the Soviets, when Finland was fighting for its life. At the time, Germany and the Soviets had a treaty.
Laurey's parents hid Jews from the Nazis, and their son, no anti-Semite, refused to fight on the western front against the Allied forces. He was later shot.

This man deserved a wreath. without proper knowledge about the history of the coutnry in question, all kinds of wrong headed assumptions can be made.

The superficial argument is "they're honouring nazi war dead", but just a little bit of digging reveals that many of the accusations are based on misunderstandings of history or a refusal to actually check the facts.

Where such facts are not known I agree that caution is required, but in many cases the accusations have already been dealt with, without acknowledgment from the accusers. Habeus corpus. Bring the proof and it'll be answered."

Wow. Posts like this is a pretty good evidence that Charles was/is really spot on.

VB LAID FLOWERS TO SS GRAVE. The obvious judgement here is that they sympathize SS, i.e. the executive arm of Nazi regime. This behaviour is a proof. Care to refute? How THIS was dealt with (without acknowledgment from the accusers)? Why instead of bringing the counter-proof you bring some meaningless nonsense leftist style?

And why, if you really have some real proof, you bring this strange quote? How exactly the fact that one of SS soldiers buried there was an honorable man, who sabotaged their activity, influence the mentioned proof? Is the grave itself dedicated to anti-SS, anti-Nazi German troops? Is it then maintained that the whole purpose of wreath laying cerimony was to celebrate anti-SS activity? And if it is why this obvious objection is not directly stated? Because it sure looks other way, i.e. like a lamest attempt to decieve (as if one is saying that he supports Al-Quaeda and you mentioning that there are anti-AlQuaeda elements within the Al-Quaeda, hoping it will dupe somebody into thinking that he really opposing Al-Quaeda).

Posted by: AlexD at November 15, 2007 11:25 AM

Nazis in Belgium?

Are you going to do a Spring, 1940 or Winter, 1944 Alert?

WWPD? What Would Patton Do?

I'm pretty sure I could work in a "Pentagon always fighting last war" angle, but maybe another time.

Posted by: Beagle at November 15, 2007 11:29 AM

The obvious judgement is that he fought against communism but refused to fight against fellow democrats and he was executed for it, next...

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 11:33 AM

Hi Mr.Spencer

Just a question, an innocent one.
Are white nationalists and neo-nazis capable of using Taqqiya? Or is a genetically, a muslim trait?
I mean, if the Vlaams Belang can change (according to you), why not the Muslim Brotherhood? They also say they're peaceful, and only want the well being of Muslims. They delinked themselves from their violent past, and now they're going mainstream, and they're already the most popular political force in Egypt (Despite Mubarak's machinations).
We'll support the Vlaams Belang, if they denounce Nazism.
We'll support the Muslim Brotherhood, if they denounce terrorism.
We'll support David Duke, if he tells us that he no longer hates jews.
We must support Ahmadenijad's Nuclear Program, because he said it's peaceful and for civil use.

Why not.

Posted by: Gambini at November 15, 2007 11:33 AM

Daffersd:
Take heart, and follow Spencer's example in remaining steadfastly focused on Europe's defining the enemy of Islamic jihad. This is an important point. Even today, in the posts above, RS was enlightened on a key point in definining his mission here, as to not limiting this struggle to that of the West but to include all Non-Muslims worldwide. It is in many ways a new movement, a new consciousness, and it must be liberated from the wars of the past (though not while abandoning the lessons learned from history). I know for a fact that many, many people are waking up to this threat every day. And many are people of color.

Frankly, as an American of European heritage who is adamantly patriotic, I cannot separate thoughts of the country I love from the many people of African, Asian, and Hispanic who contribute to our society. If you begin with a libertarian principle you immediately begin to expose the racists and Islamic supremacists by definition.

Posted by: JohnAdams at November 15, 2007 11:33 AM

Am I the only one who is bored to death with this argument?
Time for all who oppose global islam to get to work.

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 15, 2007 11:36 AM

Desperate times will unfortunatly lead to desperate measures.
Our task is to make sure the situation in the UK doesn't get that desperate.

Below is a link to a wikipedidia article on
John Tyndall, I know wiki isn't reliable but there are other sources of info about Tyndall.
The fact is he was a NAZI, JEW HATER, he used to dress up as hitler.

We all need to bear in mind during this struggle
"WE are know by the company we keep"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tyndall_%28politician%29

We all remember the covert footage of Nick Griffin taken by a BBC team, although I totally disagreed with his prosecution nobody can deny that he reduced the debate on islam during that meeting into a simple racial one.
When he talked about "Right hand pocessions" he talked of the "right hand holding the baseball bat connecting to a whitemans skull" or words to that effect.
Mark Collett has referred to AIDS as a friendly disease, because it kills black people, drug users and gays.

Whether we like it or not the situation in the UK and europe is going to become desperate and nasty one day. I myself know Sikhs who vote BNP...out of desperation thats all.

Hindu and Sikh extremists in link with BNP
http://www.guardian.co.uk/racism/Story/0,,624352,00.html

But let us be under no illusion the BNP will turn on them as well, a few "token" Jews, Hindus, Sikhs doesn't change the nazi nature of the BNP.

Posted by: apostate_islam at November 15, 2007 11:37 AM

Could all those anti-jihadists who support mainstream European political parties please start lobbying those parties about the Islamist threat?

See how far you get before your membership is revoked and you are reported to the police for being a racist, neo-Nazi Islamophobe.

Please comment back here on your progress.

Thank you.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 11:38 AM

I've read alot of the comments in this controversy on both sides. I think the essence of the pro-VB view is that Europe is like a house on fire, and one must act immediately. I have read a number of comments that use this analogy.

But I think the analogy is false. In the burning house, waiting for a few seconds could be the difference between life and death. Europe has more time than that. In fact, Europeans must think things through all the way, if they are to devise a proper plan of action.

If there is no anti-jihad party which isn't nazi, then there are three conceivable reasons:
1) No one has yet formed one yet
2) Most people don't understand jihad yet
3) The mainstream culture wants suicide

Case #1 and #2 are similar. Concerned Europeans should form a party and work on educating the citizenry. You have allies like JW, LGF, etc.

If #3 really is true (as an American, I don't know), then you have to leave for a better place (e.g. the USA).

Posted by: Bearster at November 15, 2007 11:38 AM

watling,

Some people don't seem to get the fact that if you let the government abuse its power on Vlaams Belang, trumping up "racism" as a crime, their next step is "Islamophobia."

Never let it be said nobody tried to warn people.

Hypocrisy and double standards have a way of biting back.

Posted by: Beagle at November 15, 2007 11:45 AM

apostate_islam:

John Tyndall is not around any more but I think your comments about him are correct. I think both Griffin and Collett (plus one or two others) will have to go before the BNP can be seen as a credible alternative.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 11:45 AM

Come'ON folks, they're anti Jiiihad, anti-muslimmm, proo-americAN, and they said they looooove jooos.
Come on, let's forget this and support them.

Dewinter trying to lay flowers on Flemish SS's tombs at Lommel? ooh phluuse, they were trying to honour Flemish nationalists who died for Flanders,

Dewinter being a former VMO member? Lie Lie Lie, Big Lie. ok, let's suppose he was a member of VMO, so what? is he still one?

Karel Dillen Nazi Past? ooooooh, lie lie lie, he did that because he thought Hitler was going to help flemish people to get their independence.

Roeland Raes anti-semitism? Well, he resigned from his post as a vice president of the party

He's still in the party? well, LIE LIE LIE, LEFTIST PLOT.

Bert Eriksson ties to the party? LIE LIE LIE

Xavier Buisseret? LIE LIE LIE

NOW SHUT the EF UP!!! NO MORE QUESTIONS!!!, LIE LIE LIE LIE LIE, I DON'T HEAR YOU, LIE LIE LIE LIE.

;-)

Posted by: Gambini at November 15, 2007 11:51 AM

I'm with LGF on this: if counterjihad ideas are to make further headway among the informed public, in the mainstream parties and, crucially, with other religious minorities, they have to be like Caesar's wife: above suspicion.
The only one of the parties being discussed in this debate that I have a reasonable familiarity with, is the BNP and I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole. They stand at the end of a clearly traceable line of succession (in personnel as well as ideas) going back to Mosley. I think the majority of the population of this country have the same attitude - and always will.

Posted by: wallyUK at November 15, 2007 11:52 AM

If I only knew two things about BNP, I would not touch them with a 10-foot pole:

"I believe Nick Griffin from the BNP is not a holocaust denier, simply suggesting it's an exaggeration does not make one a holocaust denier."

"We also have the injustice of global capitalism, forcing the native people to compete at the lowest end of the age scale to scrape a living."

I don't see any legitemacy to holocaust "minimization". This is the same species as denial, and serves no legitemate purpose.

Such obvious hatred for capitalism reveals the underlying collectivist preference for dictatorship. Let's not forget that Hitler's Nazi party was a socialist party.

Posted by: Bearster at November 15, 2007 11:52 AM

I think many people are missing some essential points.
The US is an "immigrant nation". It was founded and built by immigrants(slaves are a kind of immigrants) from 3 continents. European countries are NOT "immigrant nations"(unless you wanna go back a few thousand years, and unless you wanna go back several more thousand years, the migrants were still from Europe). As a consequence, "race" and ethnicity are naturally gonna be a part of national identity as they are in most countries of the world. There's no way around that.
You might only be fighting jihad, and that's all fine and dandy, but European political parties have other issues to deal with as well, issues that aren't limited to muslims such as immigrant crime. America has problems with illegal immigrants from south of the border, we have problems with legal immigrants and asylumseekers because of our lax immigration and asylum legislation.

I also think people have to be more careful about using labels like "neofascist". I think I've read a few people call Le Pen or Front national "neofascist", I know I've seen Charles Johnson and some "lizards" do it, but an expert on fascism, Roger Griffin, writtes in "International Fascism" that neither Le Pen nor Front National are fascist.

Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 15, 2007 11:54 AM

A few comments from someone who has lived in Europe for 6 years, has a Euro citizenship and children who do too. I am also very much a North American, born and raised on this continent, and delighted to be here. I am probably echoing some comments above, but maybe I can also shed a bit of light. Forgive me for being a bit long winded ...

I see two issues that fuel the LGF vs Brussels Journal battle.

First, and this is certainly not meant as a slur in any sense, C Johnson is, as best I can tell, a techy, not a political thinker. He has built a tremendous blog that has done great things (think Rathergate, for instance) and that will continue to do many more, and he does yeoman's work at aggregating information and news and getting those things broadly disseminated. Again, he is not a political thinker, more of an idealistic libertarian in the American sense (not a bad thing) and like many libertarians, a bit politically naive. He is not a pundit, he is a news aggregator. When news aggregators try to pass themselves off as political thinkers then the waters get murky (think Allahpundit, who thinks he's a pundit too). Again, no slurs intended, just trying to get things straight.

Over at Brussels Journal we find posts (I am referring to posts, not comments) that are provided by people who are quite obviously political thinkers, capable of careful, well informed analysis as well as news aggregation. One can read their posts, and, whether one agrees with a particular post or not, one can learn a great deal and expand one's horizons, at least with respect to the cauldron of European politics and society.

So point one: LGF is a news aggregation blog that is trying to do (somewhat amateurish but entertaining) political analysis. Brussels Journal is an analysis blog. Their battle resembles an argument between the auto mechanic and the engineer who designed the engine, they both have very valid points regarding engine design and maintenance but their points of view are so different that they have trouble communicating.

Second point, there is a profound disconnect between political thought on the two sides of the Atlantic. That is not surprising, since the societies on the two sides of the "pond" are fundamentally different.

America is by its very nature a melting pot. Always has been, and, I hope, always will be. Our whole political raison d'être is founded on ideas (mostly inherited and evolved anglo-saxon ideas of individualism and liberty, I would say). The real glue that holds the society together is ideas, not blood. If the glue were blood, then I would be in bad shape myself. A single nation founded upon a few fundamental and rock solid ideas, that is the beauty of America.

Not all nations of Europe share the same ideas of individual freedom. An Englishman's idea of liberty is not at all the same as a Frenchman's (excuse the generalizations, please), or a Greek's. That is not to criticize any of the above nationalities, vive la différence. Remember, in Europe, the nations came first, democracy is a late-comer in Europe. There are profound differences in the way that different European nations have come to govern themselves and to perceive themselves, and that are rooted in ancient ways of thinking, culture, history, all of which make up identity. One might rejoice in those differences or decry them, but they will not go away. They just won't. The Soviets tried to efface national differences in their own empire and the blowback has not been pretty.

So point two, LGF and Brussels Journal come from fundamentally different political cultures, they are talking right past one another, as best I can tell. LGF looks at Europe and sees lots of warts, but cannot diagnose the malady. It just nows that warts are a "bad thing". Brussels Journal tries to explain the malady but LGF is unfamiliar with the terminology.

One last comment. The nationalistic parties in Europe are struggling with an EU that is trying to impose a simple one size fits all set of ideas on the complex Eurpean mosaic. What some on the western shores of the Atlantic don't understand is that the imposed ideas are very different from the basic democratic concepts of America. The EU is certainly not democratic in its essense, it is much closer to a bureaucratic totalitarian entity (note that I avoided using fascist or nazi as descriptors here) than to a representative democracy.

Therein lies a difference between anit-jihadists in America and in Europe. In America the battle is to protect the essence of the political system and of the free society, to sustain the single set of fundamental ideas that are the underpinnings of the nation. In Europe there is no single set of ideas that bind all the nations. So, the line between defending freedom and defending a "people" can get blurred, especially when viewed from a few thousand miles distance.

Sorry for running on.

Posted by: Minority of One at November 15, 2007 11:57 AM

It's been quite a mess with LGF. The sheer volume has been so overwhelming that it's very difficult to keep up with, unless one has full working hours to deal with it. I don't, and most of us here don't. I'll post a couple of examples below.

Christine Brim of Vigilant Freedom is probably the one person who knows the details best. She's been posting details and documentation at a volume that's probably some 10 X larger than the bits Charles has come up with. A compilation of posts is here:

http://www.vigilantfreedom.org/910blog/2007/11/10/list-of-posts-on-vlaams-belang-and-sweden-democrats/

I can't follow all of this. The stuff I did follow through was fine, though:

One such example was the display of a alongside the (supposedly - I didn't know about this before) supremacist Odin's Cross (variation of Celtic Cross) at a rally. Charles took this as evidence that VB is associated with White Pride (WP) groups.

First thing of note is that the Flemish flag was a different variant than the one used by Vlaams Belang. The flag used by VB is only black on yellow, the one in the photo is a variant with red tongue and claws. Looks like minor stuff, but it is enough to show that it simply wasn't VB doing that rally, it was someone else. Checking the date of the photo and the background, it turned out to be some tiny group not associated to any political party.

Another was that of the supposed Holocaust denial by the Vlaams Belang, where its members of the European Parliament abstained from the vote on a Holocaust memorial resolution. Christine deals with the details (and more) at this CVF post, and the European Parliament has the original Vlaams Belang statement about it online. I'll quote it below, that you don't have to wade through the enormous EP web site to find it. Basically, the resoltion was poison-pilled with a curb on freedom of expression, and Vlaams Belang was one of very few parties to take the risk of stigmata over it in order to stand up for our freedoms.

Yet another item was that of VB participating in the right-wing ITS group in the European Parliament. I was asked my opinion before they entered this, and discouraged it, but being in a group in the European Parliament brings many advantages, including the very fundamental one of even being able to table resolutions, so they joined anyway. Christine in her post above has this link to the list of the 8 ITS resolutions.

In case anyone would request Vlaams Belang to leave this group, it should be clear that it has heavy consequences for their ability to do useful things in the European Parliament. This is a hefty price to pay.

However, it has been paid. Yesterday, the ITS group dissolved. Those of you requesting a cut, be pleased. You got it.

Below is the statement by Philip Claeys regarding the Holocaust resolution that Vlaams Belang abstained from. It makes some very valuable points related to protecting civil liberties, and is highly recommended reading. The points may be subtle, but it shows quite nicely what kind of subversion we're facing from the PC crowd.

Anyone getting scared from a stack of slurs from some American blogger should try to be in a similar party, like the smaller Dansk Folkeparti I'm in. You'll learn to discard all kinds of crap accusations off hand.

Long comment... I think it illustrates just how much work it takes to refute various allegations thrown around. At some point, most people simply tire out and go do something else. Which seems to be what Charles has been aiming for, just to prove himself right to his crowd. Fortunately Christine has done a Herculean work to document what I gathered from personal experience through a couple of years:

The Vlaams Belang folks are fine. Just the kind we need to work with for real influence.

Philip Claeys' statement on the EU Parliament "Holocaust memorial resolution":

We are discussing a resolution on the commemoration of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism and racism. We could have expected a text that pays tribute to the victims of the Holocaust with, in all serenity, an appeal never to forget this gruesome chapter in European history so that this can never be repeated. My party, the Vlaams Belang, could obviously have agreed to a resolution to that effect, together with 99% of the MEPs, but the resolution that is here before us for discussion has not been conceived in that spirit. The horrors of the Second World War have all been disgracefully piled onto one heap along with, and I quote, the rise of extremist and xenophobic parties and growing public acceptance of their views. Paragraph 5 of the resolution literally calls for the current fight against racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism to be set against the background of the Shoah in education.

My party, the Vlaams Belang, is neither extremist nor xenophobic, but the standard politically correct terminology is very much against the current democratic political parties that make a stand for maintaining national identity. The traditional political groups simply want to demonise a number of successful and growing competitors at the expense of the Holocaust victims. This is not only an insult to millions of voters in Europe but, what is worse, these cheap political games trivialise the horrors of totalitarian regimes, including National Socialism. Another worrying aspect is the appeal for, and I quote, a ban on incitement to racial and religious hatred throughout the EU whilst guaranteeing legitimate free speech. According to the traditional groups, there is apparently such a thing as illegitimate free speech which must be stopped at all costs. They seem to forget that freedom of speech only exists if it also applies to political opponents. Aberrations of this kind come as no surprise, given the fact that this resolution was submitted by the Communist group.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 12:00 PM

im a member of the BNP and i dont hate or love jews. basically i love and want to preserve my own country and culture. the only party that is going to do that is the BNP.
maybe some of the higher ups in the party are anti jew but the 6 or 7 people that i leaflet with
think much along the same lines a me

Posted by: baker21 at November 15, 2007 12:00 PM

Congratulations Robert, for supporting Charles and taking the only principled position possible in this debate. Hopefully, your buddy Pamela has had some time to ponder the merits of Charles' arguments and has done a re-think. ... In time, we might look back on this moment as the one in which the counter-Jihad defined itself and became palatable to the Center.

We owe Charles a debt of gratitude.
Posted by: Cornelius

If anyone took a look at a the response to Johnson's slanders over at the CVF, and at numerous other places around the web, one would realize that Johnson's accusations are completely baseless. Anyone who would conduct such a paranoid ideological purge on a website already containing a comment disclaimer, as Johnson has done at LGF, is not much use for any real action. Johnson had ample time to bring up any objections he had to the various parties involved in the counter-jihad conference beforehand. He waited until afterward to begin his smears, which involved Wikipedia entries and old photographs. When he gets out from behind his computer screen and takes some real action, he'll regain some credibility.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 12:01 PM

Mr. Spencer

Smart move....No need to charge up that hill. Some battles are worth fighting and some are not. Lets try to avoid civil wars until there is enough anti-jihadist to have a civil war. Remember the founding father had all sorts of feuds and spats also so no big deal. The USA turned out ok....

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 15, 2007 12:02 PM

Get a grip bearster. There's nothing inherently wrong with questioning history, just as there's nothing inherently wrong with questioning science: Both increase our knowledge and understanding.
I'd rather prefer a holocaust "minimizer" than someone who wants to outlaw discussion of the holocaust...

Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 15, 2007 12:06 PM

This is beyond appalling:

"Meanwhile, in the comments for his post, open supporters of the BNP appear, as well as several former LGF posters banned for racism and/or eliminationist rhetoric"

Is Charles Johnson (pbuh) now arrogating to himself the right to decide what gets said in the comments section of JW? Furthermore, is he suggesting that posters he has banned should now by banned by JW?
Is he now going to decide policy for JW?

I had sympathy for his stance at the start, but his obsession with this has overtaken him and now he has become downright vicious.

Is there no-one whom he will not try to destroy in his witch hunt?

Posted by: Silvester at November 15, 2007 12:07 PM

Many have accused the BNP of jumping on the anti-jihad band wagon, yet, where were all the so called main stream bloggers when the BNP where campaigning against Islam.

BNP where campaigning before 9/11

WHERE AS

Charles Johnson, of LGF was blogging about bicycle racing, programming, web design.

And Robert Spencer did not kick off with Jihad Watch until exactly two years after the below Campaign poster was published

Where were all the other main stream anti-jihadist,s such as Pamela at Atlas Shrugs, Melanie Phillips, Michelle Malkin or Debbie Schlussel.

All the above mentioned people did not get active until after 9/11, including myself, where-as Nick Griffin and the BNP where campaigning before 9/11

Read it all

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/11/jumping-on-bandwagon.html

Posted by: shiva at November 15, 2007 12:11 PM

Minority of One wrote:
"In Europe there is no single set of ideas that bind all the nations."

Actually, there is. It just happens to be buried significantly deeper than the set of American ideas. It's something I've looked into and found that I don't have time to really work in depth with. I am hoping that others will, it's valuable. Here's what sparked my interest:

Rodney Stark in his book The Victory of Reason has a profoundly interesting reinterpretation of European history. While it may be a bit on the polemical side, it raises so many good points, with solid references, that it causes me to reasses the European legacy. And yes, as Robert says in his latest book, it does have everything to do with Christianity...

There are othe authors who have discovered this, like Thomas F. Woods. It's a treasure mine.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 12:11 PM

Minority of One, thank you, the EU is a major part of the problem.

JohnAdams, there is quite a bit of movement in Europe at this point, but its gone to far to prevent it turning nasty at some point. Its really just a question about the scale of the nastiness.

Gambini, go back to LGF, they might think your clever over there...

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 12:12 PM

If you punish holocaust denial/minimization it's a straight path to making "Islamophobia" a crime. Many of us will be pinning our hopes on limitations statutes. It's already happening in the UK. Holocaust denial - absent action to bring on another one - isn't nearly as bad as government charging a host of mental states as crimes. But I'm quickly realizing people don't give a damn about the big picture on this issue.

On this issue every thread is pre-Godwinized. Get the bad Nazis. Any shirkers are Nazi sympathizers.

Posted by: Beagle at November 15, 2007 12:12 PM

shiva

good work, thankyou

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 12:17 PM

Minority of One:

Excellent post! Hopefully your American compatriots will read and digest it and then be less critical about how we are dealing with Islam (or not) over here.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 12:21 PM

Henrik,

Thankyou for raising the ideas of Rodney Stark.

I intended to mention the idea of Christendom, or alternatively, Judeo-Christian Europe in my previous post and neglected to.

The Judeo-Christian heritage might well be the glue that could hold Europe together, unfortunately, it is not very popular to suggest it in Europe at present. At least not in many western European countries. And certainly not at EU headquarters.

Cheers.

Posted by: Minority of One at November 15, 2007 12:21 PM

Everyone

I just got off an airplane and am about to get on another. I do not have time right now to read through these comments and police this comments field. Reading through it quickly, I see a point well taken about the "ignorant scum" comment -- it merited deletion, although now it has been commented upon so much that it would be useless to do so.

A note to the defenders of the BNP: please provide evidence that they are not a Holocaust-denying, white supremacist organization. Saying they're great in other ways, or are the UK's only defenders, doesn't quite do that.

Back to the friendly skies.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at November 15, 2007 12:23 PM

people fail to realise that mass un-enforced immigration has led to the rise in the islamic jihad in europe. this is a fact of life.

even winston churchill was against mass immigration and realised it would affect the UK negatively.

was winston churchill a neo nazi?

http://moderntribalist.blogspot.com/2007/08/winston-churchill-expressed-alarm-about.html

"in 3 February 1954, under the agenda item 'Coloured Workers', Churchill is quoted, with abbreviations, by Cabinet Secretary Sir Norman Brook as saying: 'Problems wh. will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits.'"

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 12:24 PM

Bearster

Engage your brain before you post. I said global capitilism is what we have to fight. This is the constant search for cheap labour - i.e. exploitation - by corporations to make more profit at the expense of indiginous workers who they deem too expensive.

For example, one company in the UK has recently shut down operations and relocated to Poland. Add this to the influx of Polish workers who will work for the minimum wage and you may see what a British worker is up against. (my original post had a typo, should've read wage not age, sorry!)

Quite simply, they cannot compete.

To then draw comparisons with National Socialism from this beggars belief.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 15, 2007 12:24 PM

Robert,

You've always said that the solution to bad speech is more free speech. Please don't start down the road of deleting comments and banning people.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 12:25 PM

dear mr robert spencer

was winston churchill a "neo-nazi" or wjite supremacist because of his comments he made in the 1950's?

this is the same view which the BNP now holds. they are not anti jewish. nor are they anti israel.

http://www.think-israel.org/locke.bnp.html

This is from a jewish israeli web site.

respectfully

leon the pig farmer

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 12:27 PM

Minority of One, I completely agree about the EU. It's part of the problem indeed. Either it needs to be scaled back significantly, like to 15 % of its current resources, or to be abandoned. At the moment it's destroying our national identities, our ability to govern our own countries, and our right to be different.

I know that mentioning the Judeo-Christian foundation of Europe is not quite popular. Honestly, I don't give a damn, it's simply the Right Thing to do. I mention it at every opportunity, and thank everyone else who does it. The Rodney Stark book is a favorite item of mine to give away.

Others will take the work to do the heavy lifting here at some point. Right now, I have other battles that are more urgent and more my field to fight.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 12:31 PM

Hi
I'm American and Jewish and have been reading Little Green Footballs for about five years and Jihadwatch for about 3-4. I'm not offended by what Brussels Journal, Felip Dewinter, Vlaams Belang are up to. It is very very tough in Europe to be anti Jihad. They must do what they gotta do

So I continue to value LGF-Charles Johnson and Jihadwatch. But support all European anti-Jihad efforts including BNP which I omitted

Posted by: dennisw at November 15, 2007 12:32 PM

http://moderntribalist.blogspot.com/2007/08/winston-churchill-expressed-alarm-about.html

read these quotes from winston churchill, same views as the BNP, but different era.

now read this article, its very much showing the BNP in a positive light. note this is a jewish web site.

http://www.think-israel.org/locke.bnp.html

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 12:33 PM

So now a holocaust "minimizer" is a holocaust denier? Give me a break!
I don't think for a minute N.Griffin denies the holocaust but actually refuses to fall for the victim game played by all sorts of people who have fallen victim to the ugly side of humanity. The indigenous Americans, Australians and even the black man sold into slavery play the game, to name a few. It's a means to gain concessions for those too lazy to get over themselves and get a life.
Israel would be in a far better position of defending itself if world leaders left them to manage their own affairs, which is exactly what N.Griffin suggests...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 12:33 PM

"Engage your brain before you post. I said global capitilism is what we have to fight. This is the constant search for cheap labour - i.e. exploitation - by corporations to make more profit at the expense of indiginous workers who they deem too expensive."

"To then draw comparisons with National Socialism from this beggars belief."

And why not? What you saying is a pure socialism. To limit the freedom of capitalists to dispose of their property so that it would benefit the local workers. And then goes typical justification nonsense that it is somehow "exploitation" to prefer one worker to another because his service coast less, and that choosing saving money on cheaper variant means making it "at the expense" of an expensive one.

Posted by: AlexD at November 15, 2007 12:40 PM

Israel would be in a far better position of defending itself if world leaders left them to manage their own affairs, which is exactly what N.Griffin suggests...

Ilana Mercer, who is Jewish, said the same thing. She believes that US aid hinders Israeli economic development, and Condoleeza Rice and the deep thinkers at State certainly aren't helping with their meddling either.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 12:43 PM

Holger Dansker

I would like to ask you a question Jerusalem posts, if the BNP are so Anti-semitic as you imply, why is it that one of there members who is a Jew has been elected to the Epping District council? Why don't you go to there website and check out what they have to say about the whole affair, you might be surprised.

If the BNP want to gain complete acceptance of the majority of peace loving Brits, who are fed up with the jihad threat over here, I suggest you get rid of these racist thugs, clean up your image and woo the British people. See what Searchlight, the anti-racism and anti-fascism magazine have to say about BNP.

We need a non-racist, truthful and fair political party who are ready to tackle the major issues this country has, and not faff about like ALL the current mainstream parties.

UKIP could have pulled it off, if there weren't so much in-fighting and name-calling.

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 15, 2007 12:43 PM

White supremacy is a racist belief that white people are superior to other races. The term is sometimes specifically used to describe a philosophical belief that whites are not only superior to others, but should rule over them.
Now that we have a clear definition of 'white supremacy' please provide evidence that the BNP are a white supremacist organization...

Cordially...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 12:46 PM

Each article that a scientist publishes stands alone. If a scientist publishes a basic law of physics that is correct, and another article with a wrong law, we don't say we won't use the correct basic law and no one can ever.

Sometimes people want to do that. Sometimes they want to use the wrong article and not the right one. Sometimes both are right, and they can't see that. Sometimes both are wrong.

Its better to concentrate on concrete outputs when the inputs are fuzzy. The output of states with Islam in their constitution or laws are documented on this website and LGF. That is documenting output. This is a useful service and one that should be supported.

I applaud the work that Jihad Watch and LGF have done in documenting the outputs of Islamic states and also in general the way of thinking that is embedded in those states. I hope that this can continue.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at November 15, 2007 12:47 PM

Take the banning of people from LGF for talking about deportation.

Charles just said this in the comments talking about this thread and refering to some commentators who were banned for talking about deportation.

"By "innocent" I mean people with families who have lived in the US for years, have no connections to jihad, and will never be a threat to anyone. Do I wish those sorts of people spoke up about the jihadis? Yes, obviously I do -- it's been one of my main themes for years.

But if some "mass deportation" ever took place, it would include those people too, and it would inevitably mean killing many of them, because you can't simply uproot millions of people out of their homes and lives and not expect serious resistance.

I will never support that. It's stupid. It will never happen in this country."

Well some of us when we talk about deportation think that we get rid of the extremists first, good move that one, never understand why real extremists in the UK are still sitting there.

Then we have a good look at the Muslims who insist on Muslim dress and perhaps maybe they are not accepting Western culture. Aftr that it gets kind of difficult, I certainly do not want to deport those who are Muslims in name only.

Now I worked that out on the basis of weakening Islam, by taking the die hards out of the pot, we do that and there is no need to deport the rest, but to talk about deportation in terms of the whole Muslim population is just madness.

This is typial LGF.

Also the point is that the US and Europe are different, the melting pot works better in the USA, but you do have Dearbon..., in Europe, with the EU its destroying what binds us anyway, so what chance is there for creating a melting pot in that environment.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 15, 2007 12:50 PM

I applaud the work that Jihad Watch and LGF have done in documenting the outputs of Islamic states and also in general the way of thinking that is embedded in those states. I hope that this can continue.

Agreed.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 12:50 PM

Minority of One-

Very well said!

Sadly, at LGF there were several commentators who tried to make your same points (and did it in a polite manner), but who were banned anyway.

That's a major issue, I believe, banning people for disagreeing even when the commentators are respectful. I remain very disappointed in CJ for that decision.

One thing I love about this site (even though I don't comment much) is that you can disagree with Robert or Hugh and they will respond with courtesy (and in HF's case, tons of information), even if they doesn't accept your arguments.

CJ and LGF could only benefit from using the Jihadwatch moderator method.

Posted by: treehugger at November 15, 2007 12:53 PM

Jerusalem Posts

searchlight is a neo-marxist far left organisation which supports communism, who incidentally over the course of the 20th century murdered an estimated 90 million of their own people.

racism means a hatred of other races. the BNP have never stated a hatred of another non white race.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 12:56 PM

jerusalem posts

can't you see the irony of your post?

you quote from a pro-communist magazine which supports regimes that have committed genocide from stalin to mao to the khmer rouge.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 1:01 PM

Roberts says the following:

"All want to resist the jihad, all want to save Europe if it can be saved. All are trying to defend what is good in Western civilization, even as they might conceive of that good in different ways."

and this:

"...I hope that tempers will cool on both sides and we can all continue to work together against the jihad and Islamic supremacism. There are few enough of us as it is."

Robert, if by ALL you mean to include Charles Johnson, and I think you do, Charles has a bit of catching up to do.

I wonder, if in the spirit of the call for "ALL to work together against jihad and Islamic supremacism" that would include a call for CJ to halt purging of comments and posters in which he disagrees?

That is a part of this discussion that is being overlooked and was not addressed.

You and CJ are perfectly within rights to control commenting that are in the nature personal attacks. I don't think CJ sees the need for free and open civil discussion about all things related to jihad the way all the other ant-jihad blogs do. Look at BlowHammed's name calling above. Did you automatically ban him? No. He was invited to explain himself and back up his accusations.

CJ has not been so accommodating.

Look at many of the posters that come here, Atlas, and GoV, TBJ, to discuss this issue. They cannot do the same at LGF. They(we) have been banned. CJ made fantastic allegations. Those allegations caused many to become defensive and went over to LGF to discuss this and offer explanations and to engage in a constructive dialog. What did they get?

A muzzle. The same kind of muzzle that you and CJ continually show that are used by jihadists and their apologists in your articles and postings, with reasons on why these tactics ought to be deplored, and for which articles we are all grateful.

CJ has been banning dissenters from his opinion. NOT becuase they have made personal attacks. It is his site, he can do what he wants- but it certainly doesn't engender a sense of working "together to fight against the jihad and Islamic supremcism" when posters taking certain positions are banned.

I am sorry to see that you were dragged into this dispute with yesterday's post. I was tempted, after I saw the first post about LGF, to post myself with the simple message to ask NO ONE at JW try to draw you into it.

But , you offer your position today, and you now have posters like Cornelius bragging that you have taken Charles' side in this debate. I suppose you have if the kerfluffle is only about whether CJ was correct in accusing neo-nazi groups of "hitching a ride" onto the coat-tails if the counter jihad europa organization. But, if the debate includes whether anti-jihadist bloggers are helping the cause and should be encouraged to ban dissenting comments but now ought to band together and engage in a common goal then it would be worthwhile to see you ask CJ to perhaps invite back those whom he has banished and encourage a more open debate policy and stop stiffling discussion just becuase some disagree with his positions.

All anti-jihadists worthy of that description ought to encourage, rather than stifle, every anti-jihad tool worthy of consideration, including immigration restrictions and, immigration-in-reverse, i.e. deportation.

You may think that there is no connection between CJ's position on VB and SD and his banning policy. May be so. But, I read your message as a call for cooperation by all anti-jihadists. It would be in that spirit that CJ should invite all those he banned for merely discussing positions he disagrees to now come back ,if they choose, to talk about these issues again, within rules, of course.

Posted by: USorThem at November 15, 2007 1:04 PM

Jerusalem Posts,
So the Auschwitz death camp is now a tourist attraction, much the same as the world trade center site will remain for some time to come with coffee vendors and patriotic paraphernalia on sale. The objection from the BNP on the Auschwitz is well founded on the deplorable means some people stoop to to make a buck...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 1:08 PM

Several years ago a football coach at a very large "football machine" university was advised to hire a very successful local high school coach as a new offensive coordinator. This university was in dire need of help on the offensive side. The now retired college football coach refused because the high school football coach chewed tobacco; at least that is the local mythology. It took three more years for the football machine to seize up and finally fall apart. The coach at the football machine left coaching for good.

Is there a moral to this story? Hell yes. In the not so distant future we may be forced to ignore some of the less attractive stances of those people who could save our lives.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 1:15 PM

To frame the discussion in terms of "either doom or strange bedfellows" is myopic. Several points:

1) Obviously, I think, the most promising way for anti-jihadists is to work from within the MSM, think-tanks, publishers and larger parties. This is not subversion, this is Democracy 101.

2) There are, and will always be, Neonazi are racist elements within these fringe parties. Attempts, even honest ones, to "clense" the pariahs are a waste of energy. The way to go is to use these parties pragmatically, accept their votes, but not their worldview. Reject them, but don't waste time fighting them. You can have is both ways, as the Danish example shows.

3) Don't waste time on regional ideosyncrasies like the Flemish cause, or the Swedish Socialist Model. Belgium and Sweden don't matter, strategically. It's in Britain, France and Germany where this will be played out.

4) This whole discussion - or fallout - is actually totally useful and positive. This sort of discourse is a strength, not a weakness. Silly comments, mud-slinging and daft bashing of opponents is a side-effect that is unfortunate, but was to be expected. The bigger questions, that simpler minds fail to grasp or voice adequately, like the precise delineations between racial, cultural, nativist, behavioural, legalistic, class-based, moral and religious approaches etc. were long overdue to be addressed. This question will not be solved, but it's vital to be fully aware of it.

5) (or 3a) France and Germany, and their discourse, politics and policies, and the preceptible shift thereof are totally neglected, mostly due to language difference. These countries have enough critical mass to sustain a local discourse, which is why they are ignored by the anglophone blogs, unlike Sweden or the Netherlands, say. This is very unfortunate, because much is to be learned here: Both countries, Germany in particular, are - due to historical circumstances - not newcomers to this sort of discussion and so have evolved approaches that are both sophisticated and pragmatic. I fully expect the first steps toward successfully approaching the problem of Muslim Immigartin to originate here. It's not 2002 anymore!

Posted by: Leonid P. B. at November 15, 2007 1:16 PM

Monority of One,

You made some excellent points. Thank you.

Watling,

True Americans like myself are in full support of Europe. I actuality, what is happening there and what the result wil be is simply a prototype of what can and probably will happen here in the US.

Those currently sour on Charles Johnson should not continue to petition Robert. Robert administrates his site as he sees fit, as does Charles. To continue to try to incorporate Robert into the current well-documented rift is counter-productive to the anti-jihadist movement.

Regarding the BNP, Robert has expressed his willingness for those who support the BNP to provide evidence that are contrary to his specific beliefs about them currently and to change his mind.

Well, the floor is open.

Posted by: awake at November 15, 2007 1:17 PM

Robert said:

A note to the defenders of the BNP: please provide evidence that they are not a Holocaust-denying, white supremacist organization.

I hope you enjoyed the in-flight movie. Let me guess: they showed Obsession?

Well, it's tricky to prove a negative, but below are some statements from the BNP web site.

Please refer to:

http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/countering_smears.html

See point (iii), which asks: Do you believe that blacks or other races are inferior?

To which the reply is:

No, we have never claimed any such thing. We simply believe that the different races are different, just as men and women are different, and as such they cannot be directly compared.

See point (viii), which states: Your leader is on record denying the Holocaust ever happened and claiming that Jews control the media – you are clearly an anti-Semitic party.

To which the reply is:

Not at all. Dredging up quotes from 10, 15, 20 years ago is really pathetic and, in a sense, rather fascist. Everyone knows that people’s political philosophies evolve and change as they develop – at least three Labour ministers were previously Communist Party members, for instance - and Nick Griffin has repeatedly stated that he has changed his views since then. The BNP is in no way anti-Semitic nor do we deny the Holocaust. We have many Jewish members and are pleased to have a Jewish councillor in Epping, who is, indeed, the group leader there.

Posted by: watling at November 15, 2007 1:26 PM

I have a fairly long comment concerning VB in the pipeline, awaiting 'First post' approval.

It goes to a couple of the Johnson points, and shows how VB fully respects the crime of the Holocaust, is very careful not to devalue the magnitude of the crime, and completely denounces any Nazi ideology.

It's fine that people go a little 'witchhunting' against neo-Nazis, of course. That's popular any day. But it is, after all, better to throw the charge against people who have Nazi sympathies than against those who do not. Throwing such a serious charge against the wrong people is libel, of course, and is actually punishable.

I don't think Vlaams Belang intends to take Johnson to court, though. They just present the evidence and move on with their daily job, such as seeking independence for Flanders.

I know the Vlaams Belang people personally. Not a trace of extremism, and certainly no cult-like tendencies like we see at LGF. My political party Dansk Folkeparti in Denmark) is quite similar, and we've suffered similar charges of racism, Nazi tendencies and the like. As is the case for Vlaams Belang, these are really weird charges to throw against pro-Israel, Jewish-friendly people with no taste for street violence. But I guess mudslinging is an activity with a reasonable return-on-investment, as the blowback from any false accusations tends to be neglible.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 1:26 PM

awake

the floor has been open since this thread was created.

winston churchill made the same remarks, 1950's, about immigration into the UK which the BNP make today.
is winston churchill a "neo-nazi"?

why is it an israeli web site, a jewish one, promotes the BNP and actually stating that they have moved forward.

even the BNP state that they are pro-israel and have buried their past stance towards israel.

i have provided the links above.

we even have one poster above linking a neo communist web site in his arguments against the BNP.

anti-BNP sentiment is reaching hysteria proportions. next we'll be told that the wicked BNP live under our beds and eat little children if they don't follow the pro-multicultural government policies.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 1:29 PM

Henrik

"mudslinging", i prefer to call the tactics used against european nationalists a "spiritual terror" campaign. Similar tactics are used by the far left. it's a simple and easy way to destroy your enemy.

shriek "racist" and you win! now call that person a "neo-nazi" "racist" and that's it, game over, you have completely destroyed the credibility of your enemy and can move on to win the upper hand in any future argument.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 1:36 PM

"...if a large number of good people take over and co-opt a party with a bad past, then the new people in charge will not be the old people that Charles at LGF has a problem with..."

Why wouldn't jihadis of some stripe make large, surreptitious donations to preserve the leadership of the far-right groups?
And why wouldn't leftists of some stripe infiltrate, as well?

I hope I'm not just being paranoid--it's what I would do if I wanted to preserve weak, far-right, laughing-stock parties.

Posted by: L'Supreemo at November 15, 2007 1:38 PM

leonthepigfarmer

searchlight is a neo-marxist far left organisation which supports communism, who incidentally over the course of the 20th century murdered an estimated 90 million of their own people.

It was started by a group of middle aged, Jewish men from East and North London, who wanted to expose the fact that fscism still existed, long after Oswald Moseley, and the Battle of Cable Street.

They did a very good job then.

They'd all turn over in their graves now to see how their original message has been distorted.

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 15, 2007 1:39 PM

Robert,You've always said that the solution to bad speech is more free speech. Please don't start down the road of deleting comments and banning people.
Posted by: PRCalDude

The enemies of freedom monitor this site for negative comments that can be used to defame RS or JW/DW. RS has to sustain a level of reasonable decorum so as to not give these enemies additional ammunition. Some comments that go over the line, and some people, are deleted, and rightfully so...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 15, 2007 1:43 PM

"Hugh and I have both in many separate posts lamented that those mainstream parties have thus left the field open to neo-fascist and neo-Nazi parties, like the Holocaust-denying white supremacist BNP and Haider's party in Austria, and to noxious characters like LePen in France. Those types have in several European countries become the only ones addressing the issue of jihad and Islamic supremacism".-Robert

I think there are some in the elites of Europe who want fascism and are using Muslims and Jihad to bring that about. The Islamofascist role is in our era is similar to the Communist role of the 1920's-1930's. In the long term the fascists of the 1920's-1930's benefited greatly from the Communist street thug tactics, violence, intimidation, etc.-and many in the elites of that era encouraged the Red terror in order to bring about chaos and fascist dictatorship. All that was necessary to end the placid Wiemar period was a world economic crisis and in a matter of a few years much of Europe was in the grip of the fascists.

In our era, a resolute mainstream party policy that ends Islamicization in Europe would cut the ground from underneath the fascists. Those who want fascism do not want that. Those who want eventual fascist dictatorship need continued Islamicization.

As Socrates noted, the problem with popular government is that its liberties are usually allowed to be abused by licence, licence brings chaos, chaos brings dictatorship. There is a fascist element in Europe's elites that see the growing menace of Islam as a means to that end.

Posted by: Frank at November 15, 2007 1:47 PM

Frank

what fascist parties are you referring to?

have you bothered to read any of the above posts that we have published?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 1:51 PM

"spiritual terror"

That's spot on, actually. This is what goes on.

Now, if you're a good Christian, like Spencer or Belien, it's difficult to also be a racist. All humans are basically created equal unto God - a fact that also spurred the abolishment of slavery in Europe sometime in the 10th-11th century, and again in the 18th-19th. A Buddhist would subscribe to the same basic view. Muslims, OTOH, have proven to differ.

The specter of racism is weird. A decade or two ago in Europe, it was hardly worth a second thought. Now, that curse is thrown around left and right, at every given opportunity. And frequently in connection with Islam, as if Islam was a race, not a religion...

Am looking forward for this sillyness to evaporate so we can address more real issues...

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 1:52 PM

The enemies of freedom monitor this site for negative comments that can be used to defame RS or JW/DW. RS has to sustain a level of reasonable decorum so as to not give these enemies additional ammunition. Some comments that go over the line, and some people, are deleted, and rightfully so...

You can't use unmoderated comments against anyone. There's a disclaimer, and that should be enough. Any use of these comments is guilt-by-association, and is a Stalinist tactic and should be denounced as such.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 1:53 PM

Frank

In our era, a resolute mainstream party policy that ends Islamicization in Europe would cut the ground from underneath the fascists.

We did have the United Kingdom Independence Party, which was founded by Jimmy Goldsmith to repel the influence of Europe and to keep our independence, as well as to keep out the HUGE influx of immigrants.

Sadly, it's fallen apart because of in-fighting.

What's needed is for all the counter-jihad groups and politicians to stick together, because there's strength only in unity.

Right now, the counter-jihadists should allow each other the right to their own, personal views, without trashing each other.

We all have differences of opinion, and we can all reach the same goal, albeit by using different paths to get there.

Whilst everyone is fighting each other, one thing's for sure, that the jihad will win out, because they're united, and even though many of the jihadists have differences of opinion, they won't usually come out and trash each other.

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts at November 15, 2007 1:57 PM

Fascism...

That's something with tight control, scapegoating, vilification and purging of dissidents. Mob rule rather than rule of law, disrespect for private property, and the masses being too scared to stand up against it.

Interestingly, this is similar to some trends taking place in the political life in Europe. The speed of modern media enables slurs and memes to pass around at lightning speed, and we do not yet have the experience - or simply the willingness - to stand back and check the facts - and certainly not if we have something that can cause outrage.

Historical awareness (general, not just about fascist regimes) and respect for private property are, IMHO, the best barriers against fascism and similar ideologies.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 1:59 PM

Jerusalem Posts

What are your opinions to Leonthepigfarmer's links saying that the BNP have changed their position regarding Israel?

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 2:00 PM

Re the BNP. I'd always assumed they were anti-Israel. Here's what the BNP deputy leader, Simon Darby, has to say:

"What they would not have liked however was my insistence that it was about time the whole region began to realise and accept that the Israelis do have a right to exist. Furthermore, whilst this is not really Britain's problem, having said that Israel should be "wiped off the map" it might not be a bad idea to retract this statement before it is too late. The Western world is growing very tired of Islamic crocodile tears and if asked to choose cannot be blamed for siding with a people, who like ourselves, at least worship life rather than death."

So to summarise, he doesn't particularly want to get involved, but if push comes to shove, they'll side with the Israelis.

Seems to compare pretty favourably with most left wingers.

Posted by: Celsius at November 15, 2007 2:07 PM

Seems to compare pretty favourably with most left wingers.

Posted by: Celsius at November 15, 2007 2:07 PM

You completely misunderstand leftist hatred for Israel then, particularly now it has been infected with Islamism.

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 2:10 PM

km, I think you misunderstood my post. I am well aware of the Left's hatred for all thing Israel.

I was making the point, that Simon Darby's views do not appear to be particularly anti-Israel and that is in comparison to the political Left's dislike of Israel.

Hope that clears things up.

Posted by: Celsius at November 15, 2007 2:16 PM

1389

If Fjordman knew anything about IQ tests he would realize that what Baxter et al. of MENSA have been pointing out for years: more than 2/3 of the subjects tested are always men. This will likely change in the years ahead, so the "statistics" he and other HomoNazis—who call most intelligent women who don't ask men for their rights, but just assume they are god-given—are skewed, and most of the men who quote them already know that.

Meanwhile, Fjordman's assertion that Summers at Harvard (my present academic home) went down solely on his comment about women at MIT is also uneducated at best. Summers had already alienated the vast majority of the professors of Arts & Sciences, the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences, the Law School, the Business School, the Forest, the Museums ... and everybody else right down to the kitchen staff ... mostly for firing good people without just cause, long before the flap over women's so-called mathematical intelligence.

Frankly, I think we are in a position where we are going to wait for at least a generation and likely clean-up the way testing is done before we can weed out the gender and cultural biases that have existed in the tests since Binet invented them. There are some. That doesn't mean the tests are worthless, because they are good indicators for advancing health after brain injuries and for spotting kids early who have some learning disabilities we can actually do something about.

But only when the "statistics" of women against men are taken with absolutely viable scientific standards (and that CAN be achieved as Dr. W.C. Schutz proved with the FIRO series). It just hasn't happened yet.

And, we will also have to wait until the acceptance if women as intellectual achievers gets a little further along. There's been IMMENSE progress, certainly.

But most of the women test subjects went well into their 30s before they started really rebelling against the notion that a man will shy away from an intelligent woman and pass her by as a marriage partner. This was certainly drilled into me. When my first test scores came in, everybody from the principal to the local minister agreed they should be kept secret because the would lessen my chances of having a normal social life and of being married ever at all.

Well, I found a dear genius who happened to like smart women and all my men friends do not have this problem.

However, what remained a secret all my mother's life was that she was a genius. That was found out after she had a bad knock on the head at the age of 35 and was tested to see if she had sustained permanent damage. She clocked in around 155. MENSA membership starts at 146. Not bad for a housewife. But, unlike all her brothers, who were tested in the military and elsehwere—with their scores going into the averages—she had no test until she had grown up, married, and had all her kids.

That said, where people went nuts with what Summers is this:

What if women DO turn out, on average, have less of a tendency to enjoy, gravitate towards, and make a career in the sciences? So what? NO MAN SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM AN MIT EDUCATION, WHICH IS WORTH MORE THAN $5 MIL OVER THE COURSE OF A CAREER, because MIT feels they must make room for women. Why? Why must they?

The trick is to make the OPPORTUNITY there for all, from kindergarten up. That is the society's responsibility. Educate equally. Test equally. And then let the chips fall where they may.

Meanwhile, high IQ is actually a negative indicator for success. People of normal intelligence but advanced creativity make more money, do more good, are more often successful CEOs, etc. than the most brilliant among us.

The incidence of Alzheimer's syndrome, ADHD, ADD, and a vast array of neurological problems is much higher among high-IQ men than any other sector of the population, not to mention cluster headaches.

Meanwhile, another look at men finds us the following:

Men commit worldwide 92% of all crime, so much that one member of the Arizona house tried to implement a "male tax" to make men pay for all the damage they do to society.

Worldwide, they are the only real bully factor: women do 83% of the world's work, and they own 3% of the world's wealth. Almost nowhere in the world does a woman get the same health care or food as a man. They are subject to rule of male-dominated religions that entrench unjust laws. They are absolutely chattel in a form of womb slavery that is part of demographic warfare run by men.

The first incidence of "honor" killing occurs in Sumerian culture where a woman's reproductivity was considered the possession of her TRIBE because it was the chief source of WEALTH for the tribe.

In many areas of the world that has not changed.

So arguing the case for men being more intelligent falls on deaf ears around here.

When the testing samples are honest and fair, when the society has run for awhile in a gender-equal fashion and racial-equal fashion, then we may be in a position to know whether there are differences or not.

Bear in mind that the human species has now "maxed". It has grown to the point that its numbers will challenge its ability to feed itself. So Fjordman's implied use of women in an extended demographic war is as ill-advised as it is for the Muslims who will fall on hard times indeed when the salt/ceramic engine that is the hottest thing since sliced bread crashed their putrid little oil market.

The countries with the highest standards of living and the most freedom are the countries (Norway, Iceland, etc.) that have both strict immigration standards and a OVERT program of limiting population growth.

I could go on for days on this subject as it was one of my husband's chief areas of research, but I think you get the picture.

Beware Fjordman's screed on this. I think there is something about this man that hates women.

But I do not think that is true of most men. I don't actually think that most men hate women. Men need women, and men hate needing. And therefore, they try to control them.

And about that, they must grow up.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 2:23 PM

When the testing samples are honest and fair, when the society has run for awhile in a gender-equal fashion and racial-equal fashion, then we may be in a position to know whether there are differences or not.

So you're a utopian?

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 2:28 PM

"You can't use unmoderated comments against anyone. There's a disclaimer, and that should be enough. Any use of these comments is guilt-by-association, and is a Stalinist tactic and should be denounced as such."

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 1:53 PM

Agreed, but that very tactic has and will continue to be employed by the likes of CAIR and their ilk.

It is similar to a trial lawyer spouting out information that was pre-prohibited by the judge. You can strike those statements from the record, but you can not turn back time so that they were not heard by the jury.

Posted by: awake at November 15, 2007 2:29 PM

Wow, MS, such an original analysis ...

Men are primitive boys and must grow up.

I would say you have certainly found a fitting academic home.

Posted by: Minority of One at November 15, 2007 2:31 PM

Cornelius

"Congratulations Robert, for supporting Charles and taking the only principled position possible in this debate. Hopefully, your buddy Pamela has had some time to ponder the merits of Charles' arguments and has done a re-think."

"We owe Charles a debt of gratitude."

Perhaps you are right but then again Charles will owe a debt once the Iraqi democracy project goes down in flames. Don't crow too much....do you think Charles will admit he was wrong about that as well?

Lots of re-thinking dontcha think....

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 15, 2007 2:32 PM

Frankly, I think we are in a position where we are going to wait for at least a generation and likely clean-up the way testing is done before we can weed out the gender and cultural biases that have existed in the tests since Binet invented them. There are some.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 2:32 PM

Robert wrote; '. . . mainstream parties have completely failed to address the problem of European Islamization . . ."

If anyone is hoping that these mainstream parties can be counted on to be the bulwark against Islamization, you have better odds winning a Powerball jackpot. Mainstream parties will continue to fail to address the threat.

Just what is a "mainstream party?" They are the political organizations who are in the business of building consensus and bipartisan efforts. They are also willing to copromise with the Devil. They try to be all things to all people and therefore are nothing to anybody. Their goal is to stay in office and must collect as many votes as possible. They dare not take a stand on anything controversial; they fear offending even one person or losing one vote.

From Margaret Thatcher: "To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects."

Mainstream parties will continue to fail. Extreme theats require extreme action.

Good luck with this "mainstream party" thing.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 2:35 PM

Agreed, but that very tactic has and will continue to be employed by the likes of CAIR and their ilk.

It is similar to a trial lawyer spouting out information that was pre-prohibited by the judge. You can strike those statements from the record, but you can not turn back time so that they were not heard by the jury.
Posted by: awake [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 15, 2007 2:29 PM

The solution is to denounce their tactics and immediately go on the offensive. This is the way to combat their spiritual terror.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 2:35 PM

Celcius,

I understand your point.

If any progress is going to be made a cool rational debate needs to be had about the nationalist parties.

Take Apostate Islam, his invective against BNP members just makes me very suspect. Most of the posts I read from BNP supporters seem well written and coherent.

Do we always keep them at arms length because of past mistakes. The US has a serving senator in the democratic party who was affiliated with the KKK, he has turned round and renounced those positions. Should we not do the same thing for the VB, SD, BNP etc etc?

Can someone here show me/us that the current stand taken by the BNP (ref Israel and national self-determination) is any different to that taken by VB, SD and as such are probably representative of many peoples opinion within the country?

I think Roberts challenge has been met, will he now make a comment?

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 2:38 PM

morgaan sinclair

"The countries with the highest standards of living and the most freedom are the countries (Norway, Iceland, etc.) that have both strict immigration standards and a OVERT program of limiting.."

(so says the UN! according to the UN iran is not producing nuclear weapons.)

have you been to norway?

i have family that have lived there for 10 years.

they have a high standard of living because everyone lives to the same standard. it's a far left nation. the architecture is reminiscent of czech communist welfare housing. the majority of the people drive the same cars, go to the same far left schools and live in tiny tower blocks in welfare style neighbourhoods all over oslo. owning great wealth is looked down upon.
central oslo is brimming with burkah wearing muslims. the pakistani taxi drivers don't pay tax and use the funds for drugs and illegal imported contraband, that's a fact!

the population of norway is 4 million with 20% of that population are immigrants. over 83 000 muslims, that's 1.8% out of a population of only 4 million. You do your maths and then tell me that norway has the strictestt immigration policies!!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 2:39 PM

Leonthepigfarmer-

I don't think fascists parties have any traction-yet, and I don't have any particular one in mind. However, that could change very quickly if we witness another world-wide-economic crisis. Hitler's party grew from a handful to a major force in a matter of four years after 1929. Rip-Van-fascist and Rip-Van-Nazi could rise from their long sleep very quickly in a climate of economic crisis and Islamic menace.

Leon-frankly it's a strong hunch on my part. I have no data to absolutely confirm my hunch. However, I think the Rip-Van-Nazi and Rip-Van-fascist sympathies are still present in Europe's elites. (I think part of the anti-American attitude in Europe is rooted in our ass-kicking of the fascists and busting of the elites by what they still consider as American cowboys. The elites there don't like us.)

Multiculturalism is the reason the European elites give for codling Islamofascism, but I think many want chaos and the rapid growth of fascism. They got that once before after the world-wide-economic crisis began in 1929. It could happen again.

(BTW, remember that the ol-prince-o-wales and many in the 1930's British elites were sympathetic to fascism. They too are still there. Churchill was an outsider and pro-American for that reason.)

Posted by: Frank at November 15, 2007 2:44 PM

Leon ...

It's not the UN that thinks so: it's Freedom House that thinks so, and their parameters aren't bad.

I'm sorry you don't like Norway. I'm sorry that everyone living to the same HIGH standard is a bore for you. I'm sorry that you don't have a purely white society in which to live and that there are Muslims among you. Are those Muslims integrated or not?

Please note that you are not the only Norwegian I know, and that among those I work with and study with they think that their country is a great success, and I think the USA would do well to watch its population matricies and do as well at limited by procreation and immigration as Norway does.

Do you honestly think that Norway is going to let in another 6 million Muslims anytime soon? No.

And how "Leftist" is it? Can you start a business when you want? Can you go to a church if you want to? Can you travel outside the country when you'd like?

With Norway you are hardly talking about the old Soviet Union or Cuba or China. No? Yes?

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 2:46 PM

MS says

Bear in mind that the human species has now "maxed".

Who says?

And gobal warming is going to kill us all anyway right?

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 2:50 PM

i do like norway.
i'm not norweign.
im not for a "pure" white society.

norway doesn't have to let in another 6 million muslims. the muslims that they do have will multiply and soon out birth the norweigan people.

i'd hardly call abu hamza integrated would you?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 2:58 PM

Fascism is an ideology for people who give up controlling their own destiny and project their power on some 'higher entity'.

In countries like Denmark with a vibrant democracy, lots of interest and open disagreement, fascism has the chances of a snowball in Hell. Dansk Folkeparti does take the issue of Islamisation seriously - at internal meetings people are quite worried - but we're still quite far from absolute majority. Vlaams Belang is on a similar line, and happens to be 3 X larger than Dansk Folkeparti.

We're mainstream. We take the problems seriously - which, as another poster noted - makes any extremist tendencies wither, crumble and die. While we're certainly far from out of the woods, 25 seats in parliament (14 %) certainly ain't bad.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 2:58 PM

"And how "Leftist" is it? Can you start a business when you want? Can you go to a church if you want to? Can you travel outside the country when you'd like?

With Norway you are hardly talking about the old Soviet Union or Cuba or China. No? Yes?"

agreed.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 3:01 PM

Leon-

I am often struck by the fact James Madison (correctly) predicted that a Federal Republic over a large expanse (such as ours) was likely to produce a political system that represented a wide range of political interests, and further, that it would produce a system that rejected extremes. That proved true in the economic crisis of the 1930's. Even with massive (25%+) unemployment, 99% of the population stayed with the old standard GOP and Democratic party. Madison was insightful in his prediction. (Also, the mainstream political right in America (Goldwater, Reagan types) don't trust central government. The right here is with Madison. The Right in Europe is authoritarian.)

Though we would like to think Europe is like us, they really do not have such a federal system a la Madison. Their "democratic" systems are much more prone to extremes. I think Rip-Van-Fascism is only asleep there.

Posted by: Frank at November 15, 2007 3:02 PM

You know, some of you don't seem to be able to appreciate what Robert just gave you: the respect your do, without exonerating you for what isn't exonerable.

He doesn't have to answer to you. AND I don't know why you think you get to fight this out on JW when half of you have been banned from LGF and elsewhere and now want to use this site to keep up your nasty little sandbox mud-throwing number.

Handle it offline. You're freeloading at somebody else's expense.

And km ...

RS may answer you, but he doesn't have to. Take it OFFLINE.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 3:03 PM

The neofascist character of the anti-jihad parties in Europe also keeps many decent people from joining the counterjihad movement, when they otherwise would.
...........................

This sort of dynamic is unfortunately hardly new. Remember those who stood against Franco in Spain being labeled "premature anti-fascists"? When I was a child, I found this perplexing. While I could see that a person at the time might well fail to fully realize how grave a threat fascism would become, it seemed clear that it was, at the least, distasteful and troubling right from the very beginning.

Later, I realized that "premature anti-fascist" was a code term for communist sympathizer. There is no doubt that this muddied the waters, and prevented many people of good will from completely condemning fascism, as it might seem they were soft on communimsm. In many ways fascism and communism were little more than murderous rival gangs, in actuality little different in their totalitarianism.

Of course, later the US and Britain did ally with the USSR against the Axis, although it was always an extremely uneasy alliance--and one that was unsurprisingly exploited by the communists at the end of WWII when they took over much of eastern Europe.

I know that many hesitate standing against jihad because they worry about being perceived as racist or intolerant, despite radical Islam's great intolerance and worse.I know I've have been asked how I can stand with anti-Jihadists with whom I disagree--sometimes profoundly--on other matters.

Deciding who to ally with can be extremely difficult, and depends on the nature and degree of disagreement, as well as the immediacy and severity of the common threat. I hope the anti-Jihad forces do not become fragmented over this, because the jihad threat is ugly, and growing.

Posted by: gravenimage at November 15, 2007 3:04 PM

"Their "democratic" systems are much more prone to extremes"

and europe has the history to prove your point.
I agree with your post.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 3:04 PM

graven image

agreed, good post, thanks.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 3:08 PM

And km ...

RS may answer you, but he doesn't have to. Take it OFFLINE.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 3:03 PM

Who made you a moderator on this site MS?

You have made some pretty inane statements and I am asking you to back them up, that is all.

I am sure if RS was to answer me (were I so worthy)he could if he wished. I made a legitimate point and asked a legitimate question, why should you tell me where and when I can do it.

Too much time in the Ivory tower me thinks.

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 3:17 PM

KM, Sinclair was once again the self appointed moderator.

It is nearly impossible to take a discussion to another place unless one of the parties has a blog, home page, or website. Otherwise it would require posting an e-mail address on JW. I have taken discussions to other means, but the other person had a blog. Every type key profile page that I have looked at is blank.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 3:27 PM

km ...

I'm not the moderator. I am expressing the opinion that you guys are USING Robert Spencer and JihadWatch to run your little number -- a number other sites have got sick of and banned you for.

Obviously, I can't MAKE you. I'm not part of JW management AT ALL.

But if it were up to me, you'd be gone now.

There has been case after case of people like you shooting off your mouths and getting Robert blamed from for it.

So, if you can shoot off YOUR mouth and have exactly NO MANNERS in your dealings with Robert -- "challenging" him to respond to you as if he owed it to you, which he doesn't -- then I can certainly express mine.

I think you guys are USING Robert, who was good enough to write what is actually an incredibly clear, reasoned response to a childish, nasty, mean argument.

So I'll say it againg: He doesn't HAVE to answer you. And what you should do, instead of using him, is take this BS offline and stopped showing your backsides all over the place.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 3:28 PM

"The solution is to denounce their tactics and immediately go on the offensive. This is the way to combat their spiritual terror."

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 2:35 PM

Agreed, but that does not undo the incident where Hooper was able to quote a commentator, whose words were quickly removed from the JW forum, on CNN television. Hooper used that platform to attempt to smear and render Robert and JW as a genocidal racist hate site.

Damage done, whether it be right or wrong. I believe that lead to Jeffrey Imm's call to us to assist JW financially for a full-time moderator.

Posted by: awake at November 15, 2007 3:33 PM

So, Pelayo ...

What you're saying then is that if you guys don't want to PAY to get your own website on which to air your dirty laundry, Robert owes it to you to let you do it here?

And you have no moral problem with this ... especially after he had to delete a whole bunch of posts?

Hmmmmmm. Well, at least we know where you're at ... some place between the playpen and the sandbox.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 3:34 PM

Posted by: Jerusalem Posts

See what Searchlight, the anti-racism and anti-fascism magazine have to say about BNP.

What a joke

Gerry Gable (born 1937) is a British Jewish political activist. He was the first editor of the anti-fascist Searchlight magazine in 1962, which he continued editing, with a break of a few years, until 1998

As a youth, Gable was a member of the Young Communist League and the Communist Party of Great Britain, and worked as a runner on the Communist Party's Daily Worker newspaper, leaving after a year to become a Communist Party trade union organizer.

He stood unsuccessfully for the Communist Party on May 10, 1962 at Northfield Ward, Stamford Hill, North London.

Posted by: shiva at November 15, 2007 3:35 PM

leonthepigfarmer-(and Henrick)

Thanks, Leon.

I think guys like Henrick are right about fascism in Denmark. They were were not happy bunnies with the Nazis; the Nazis were also particularly nasty in the Netherlands because they felt the Dutch should agree with them (Aryans and all that crap). However, central and east Europe are a different matter.

Everyone of good-will in Europe should be demanding that Islamofascism and Islam be shown the door by the mainstream parties because Rip-Van-Fascism and Hitler might be right outside the door if they don't show Muslims the door. There should be zero tolerance for Sharia and an absolute zero tolerance to any Muslim who wants to bring the old (demented Saudi style) country with them.

If fascism again comes to Europe, Danes would once again have to put a clothes-pin on their nose as Nazi thugs overrun them. The mainstream must find their voice or else they might have to get clothes-pins for their noses in many parts of Europe. (I hope somebody in the future does not say: "This SOB Frank was right".)

Posted by: Frank at November 15, 2007 3:37 PM

Re: the ongoing discussion of fascism, here and elsewhere, especially what leads people to subjugate themselves to such a political movement ... for those who are not familiar with his writings, may I recommend Eric Hoffer? For example, his The True Believer, and other works.

Caution, reading Hoffer may open a window into your soul ;) Unless, of course, you work in an Ivy League institution in which case you have nothing left to learn.

Cheers.

Posted by: Minority of One at November 15, 2007 3:37 PM

MS

Robert specifically asked for evidence contrary to the claim that the BNP are WN and neo-nazis.

Leonthepigfarmer pulled out some links and I wanted to know what Roberts opinion was?

However you say:

There has been case after case of people like you shooting off your mouths and getting Robert blamed from for it.

How was I shooting off my mouth? What did I say that was so offensive that would get Robert in trouble.

Youre supposed to be an academic and someone who relies on rational debate and free and open exchange of ideas. Heh you could of fooled me.

Besides your changing the subject from my initial post to you is nothing short of intellectual dishonesty.

You claimed the human species has "maxed out" I asked you to clarify whay you meant. It is obvious you cant so you make a whole song and dance about how I am somehow sabotaging JW.

Pretty weak argument MS, if your an example of a modern academic, no wonder academia is so off the mark when it comes to thinking about combating jihadism.

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 3:44 PM

Morgaan Sinclair

Does it matter if 2/3 of the subjects tested are "always" male? Wouldn't depend on the sample-size? Wouldn't it depend on the representativeness of the sample? It's a silly argument that because "2/3 of the subjects are always male" the results are useless.
As for "cultural" and "gender" bias... There are IQ tests where you just have to figure out the mechanics behind changing patterns(these tests only test for "g"). There's nothing "cultural" about that, is there? I'm also pretty sure women can figure out patterns, can't they?
I've actually taken one of those "figure out the changing patterns" IQ tests(a test conducted by mensa). I've also taken some of the IQ tests on tickle.com, the kinda tests where you have understand english, math etc. I'm guessing it's those types of IQ-tests you say hold culture and gender bias. Though I'm not English, my score on those tests were almost identical to the score on the MENSA test. But maybe they're culturally biased towards non-native english speakers...

Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 15, 2007 3:45 PM

shiva

thanks for that info. so far i believe that the communists have murdered around 90 million people, many in extermination camps.
3 british labour party ministers were members of the communist party yet no one would dare state that the labour party has its roots in the murder of 90 million in death camps.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 3:46 PM

OK, Morgaan, The "Morgaan Sinclair" tag on your posts is not red and not underlined. Where is your website?

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 3:46 PM

I support Charles Johnson, Robert Spencer, Jihadwatch, and anyone calling out European fascist parties 100 percent.

Screw Pajamas Media, Fjordman, and ANYONE who stands in ANY WAY with Nazis. You all deserve a fate as horrible as that which the jihadists have earned for themselves.

Piss off and die. That includes the fascist Croatians who occasionally come on this board blasting Serbia.

If you people don't have the BALLS to take back mainstream parties and institute anti-Sharia as part of their platforms, then you are worthless and our cause is worthless. Waiting around on Nazis to "moderate" is as stupid as waiting for Mahmoud Abbas to "moderate".

that is all...

Posted by: Abu Lahab at November 15, 2007 3:47 PM

I attended the conference in Brussels and the counter jihad summit in Copenhagen that preceded it. I had the privilege to meet people who were engaged in the counter jihad struggle from across the varied and culturally diverse European continent and beyond.

In Europe, ordinary people, many of whom have no previous involvement or previous desire to be involved in politics, have stood up and joined this great cause of the twenty first century. We have come together despite the obvious hostility of our own governments because this cause is right and just and because we will never tolerate life under Sharia law.

Thanks to the plan of the EU to Islamise Europe and the powerful media and other interests that they can bring to bear in their cause we are vilified and derided for our patriotism and desire to celebrate the achievements of western civilisation. It does not help when fractures such as this take place that weaken our overall effort.

I would urge Mr Johnson to become more flexible and pragmatic. Europe is on the verge of cultural collapse. We have the new 'Reform Treaty' casting the darkest shadow ever experienced in European history over all our lives. The EU seeks to deprive us of both our individual national identities and our collective European identity. Our ability to express ourselves freely is in serious jeopardy.

I myself am willing, if necessary, to sacrifice my life in this cause because I believe that it is better to die than to live with the shame servitude to anyone. I feel that I have put myself at risk by standing up for what I believe, but that risk is worth it. It is also my personal duty to stand up for the efforts of my ancestors and defend their legacy against the betrayal of our current crop of leaders.

It is time to put this disagreeable split behind us. Mr Johnson must realise that the very existence of Europe is at stake and that many of us who are willing to valiantly struggle ahead, despite the odds stacked against us and despite the threat to our liberty and our lives.

We are willing to give the vilified victims of the EU such as Vlaams Belang the benefit of the doubt because we have not real choice. This is not an intellectual exercise but a struggle that will determine not just the fate of nations but the fate of Western civilisation as a whole. If people are not willing to take a few risks then they are in the wrong struggle. They should confine themselves to less risky ventures.

We are now, whether we like it or not, central players in the fate of Western Civilisation. What we do will resonate down the ages and effect the lives of the billions as yet unborn. We have the responsibility to come together as a single united movement. I urge Charles Johnson to step back and reflect. He has made great contributions already, but what he does next will have implications that are of unfathomable importance to the lives of us all.

I think the main reason that Vlaams Belang are so vilified is that they are a direct threat to the future of the European Union and its traitorous Eurabia project. If Belgium breaks up the implications are far greater than the small size of that artificial state would indicate. EU powerbrokers are therefore willing to do what they can to drive a wedge between us. They know that our global movement could thwart their plans.

If Charles Johnson can find the character to step back and take on the stature of a true statesman, and offer Vlaams Belang the opportunity to show their democratic and freedom loving credentials then we can move on and grown in strength. I have met members of Vlaams Belang and believe them to be honourable decent people whose main concern is the welfare of their people who have been treated very badly by the Belgian State and have suffered much.

It is time to end this split and move on together. What do you say?

Posted by: Aeneas at November 15, 2007 3:56 PM

If you people don't have the BALLS to take back mainstream parties and institute anti-Sharia as part of their platforms, then you are worthless and our cause is worthless. Waiting around on Nazis to "moderate" is as stupid as waiting for Mahmoud Abbas to "moderate".

that is all...

Posted by: Abu Lahab at November 15, 2007 3:47 PM

Quite an Ironic statement when you think what happened to DeWinter at the 911 demo in Brussels. What people stateside are failing to recognize is how totalitarian and ultimately destructive the EU is.

Who are you going to support when the bullets and bombs do start going off in Europe Abu, when the Europeans do start fighting back for their independance from EURabian enforced assimilation? Fjordman has made a legitimate point about that, yet you cant see it, you run in here call everyone a Nazi and then scuttle off.

Pathetic!

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 3:57 PM

GREAT COMET OF 1577:

"Perhaps you are right but then again Charles will owe a debt once the Iraqi democracy project goes down in flames. Don't crow too much....do you think Charles will admit he was wrong about that as well?

"Lots of re-thinking dontcha think...."

RESPONSE: Actually, the "Iraqi Democracy Project" is hardly going "down in flames"....except in the mis-guided aspirations of Leftists everywhere.

The situation in Iraq is fluid, but every indication is that the terrorists are being defeated. Time will tell.

While I understand the reasoning of those opposed to the Iraq war, I do find it fascinating that many of them - not only on the left - have invested so much in their opposition that they WANT failure...as a form of validation.

Shame.

Posted by: Cornelius at November 15, 2007 3:57 PM

PRCalDude ...

As you've just noted Asians, I'm assuming you have read The Bell Curve. The theory of The Bell Curve is that Ashkenazy Jews rank 1st in the world for IQ, with the Chinese ranked 1st as a nation.

This practically proves my point: IQ as it is thought of now is no predictor of good or success, as proved by the fact that Chinese culture is a miserable way to live.

Also, The Bell Curve was very hard blacks, but then you notice that of all ethnic groups in the United States the kids who do ABSOLUTELY THE BEST OF ALL are the children of Haitian immigrants.

Why? Well, I went to try to find that out. And what I found was that Haitian parents VALUE education and DEMAND that their kids do well in school. They are convinced that education is the way out of poverty for their children. And they have this in common with some other groups, particularly the Vietnamese.

Earlier in my life I had a neighbor and his family who were refugees from the Vietnam War. He went to work at 6:00 in the morning, his wife at 9:00 after she got the kids off to school. By the time the kids got home from school on the bus he was back home. He spent from 3:00 in the afternoon to 6:00 on the screen porch drilling his kids on English. Within 6 months they spoke fluently. By the time they'd been in this country a year, the kids were completely caught up and you could hardly tell they were born outside the country.

There is a lot that is cultural here. By "culture" I mean many things, in the way an anthropologist uses the term. Does the cultural unit value education? Does the cultural unit believe that women should be educated? Does the unit value intelligence at all (or is it whether you've memorized the Qur'an)?

A lot goes into the ability of a person to test well. For example, it's been absolutely established that if a person drinks grapefruit juice before a test, there is more oxygen in their brain for at least an hour after that, and it can raise your IQ scores about 5%?

Also, poor diet and low exposure to the education in the culture itself can significantly depress tests scores. Kids that have the same basic "smarts" will score lower if they have never travelled, if there have been no museums and science centers and books and education toys in their environment. And that's where poverty comes in. And nutrition is a biggie. If there has been too much soy in the diet in terms of baby formulas, brain function can be significantly lower. Absence of enough protein and vitamins and green, leafy stuff can have a significant impact on the development of intelligence.

And culture is all over these tests. For example, tests given in the South in the 1950s had so many references to Northern industrial culture that they had to be revised. When they were revised for agrarian culture, Southern scores went up and Northern scores went down. Of course they did. Most Northern fourth-graders missed the question: Which of the following does not belong in this group: stag, ewe, gander, stallion. Why? Because the didn't spend any time around animals.

Intelligence is a very complex issue. IQ tests miss all kinds of things that would be consider "feminine" or artistic values, and everybody who tests knows it. They miss all moral values that should be considered a part of a whole human being's intelligence.

IQ is a evaluation of a very thin layer of a wholeness of intelligence, only nine parameters of something far more complex than that. Perhaps the really intelligent person is the one who doesn't think intelligence can be evaluated without a look at imponderables like creativity, imagination, and spirituality.

But, for the moment, the next time you have to be real smart for the next 60 minutes, drink grapefruit juice. It causes your carotid artery to expand just a wee bit, and that means more oxygen to your brain, kiddo!!

Enough of this. I'm outta here.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 4:01 PM

Enough of this. I'm outta here.

Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair at November 15, 2007 4:01 PM

When wrong obfuscate, then run away.

You really are an academic.

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 4:15 PM

When we fight among ourselves we only help our common enemy. I believe it was Churchill, when questioned about his alliance with Stalin, replied that if Hitler invaded Hell, he'd ally with Satan. While I woudn't go that far, we still need every ally we can find in the struggle against the Jihad... even if all our allies aren't saints.

I know very little about the Vlaams Belang but the accusation about them trying to lay flowers on SS graves sounds hollow. For a major political party it just wouldn't make sense and, whatever their personal prejudices, would they really be that stupid.

I suspect that the truth might actually be closer to the "Bitburg Incident" with late President Ronald Reagan who was taken to task by the leftist media when he laid a wreath at the graves of German soldiers, many of whom were SS officers. No one in his right mind would think that Reagan was a closet Nazi.

Both the Left and the mainstream media are quite generous at hurling the "fascist" label at anyone they don't like. Not only so-called "extremists" like the late Rabbi Kahani have been so slandered but politicians ranging from Ayaan Hirsi Ali to Vladimir Putin to Israeli Knesset Member Avigdor Liberman has been so labeled. For that reason alone I usually take the "fascist/neo-nazi" label with a grain of salt.

Posted by: Provoslavni at November 15, 2007 4:18 PM

Enough of this. I'm outta here. Posted by: Morgaan Sinclair

Well, that was the typical leftist spin of IQ and psychometrics.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 15, 2007 4:56 PM

Those SS soldiers had their youth stolen just the same as the muslim youth have today, brainwashed on an ideology of arrogance and belligerence...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 4:56 PM

From the BBC:
GRIFFIN (1998): "I am well aware that the orthodox opinion is that 6 million Jews were gassed and cremated and turned into lampshades. Orthodox opinion also once held that the Earth was flat. I have reached the conclusion that the extermination tale is a mixture of allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie and latter witch-hysteria."

Any questions?
How is this different in ANY WAY from Abbas and his haram bologna?

The only way for VB to get out from under the past, the excuses, obfuscations, druid white power symbols if for them to demonstrate they are not what their critics claim.

They will have their chance. Let's all hope they take it, because there is no room morally for a 'white europe' or a 'white flanders' as the bulwark against the gintsu wielding zarqoids. If that is the case, then Europe will AGAIN, in substituting these Qutbite morons for the communists of the 20's and 30's have simply run to someone who can make the trains run on time, and sold itself, in the end cheaply.

I sincerely, SINCERELY hope VB is what they have been portrayed to be here by their supporters. They will have their chance.

Posted by: epaminondas at November 15, 2007 4:57 PM

"The neofascist character of the anti-jihad parties in Europe (...)"

The sheer ignorance of this statemet...

OK, Europe is complex. There's a lot to learn in each country, and it's easy to get confused.

Italy, for one, actually does have a Fascist party, run by no other than the granddaughter of bad, old Mussolini. Now, Italian politics have been the laughingstock of Europe for 6 decades, and it seems to remain that way. They are elected into parliament - but makes no attempt to 'rule by fear' as traditional fascists did. I'm not sure about their anti-Jihad agenda anyway, and the movement seems weak in Italy, no matter who rules.

Bulgaria and Romania have some similar parties. Bear with them. These countries are heavily underdeveloped and undereducated, and people vote only according to their ability to understand politics and see through demagogues. It takes time, in particular when they only recently (like 20 years ago) got out of the Soviet strain of fascism. A matter of education.

Here in Denmark, where the anti-Jihad movement is strong, we have no fascists worth mentioning. The only official White Pride group dissolved peacefully this summer - simply pulled the plug on itself. There's a small (real small) neo-Nazi party, whose leader is doing time and the rest are shunned by everyone, even hardcore nationalists.

On the other hand, we have a fairly strong and occasionally violent strain of left-wing extremism in Denmark. Some call these 'Red fascists' for their violent street rallies and hooliganism. They have some political parties aligned with them, and that is a problem. But then, they are absolutely without interest in anything anti-Jihad.

Sweden and Germany, on the other hand, where anti-Jihad activities are not so mainstream, have real neo-Nazi movements. They're still shunned by each and every mainstream political party, including SverigesDemokraterne, but they are able to collect enough thugs to create street clashes. I don't think they're connected to anti-Jihad activities, though. Their hatred of Jews and their confused ideas about 'race' cloud their minds heavily. Apart from the awful ideologies they carry, they would hardly have anything useful to contribute. They're thugs, not law specialists.

Belgium is a mess unto itself. At the SIOE demo, some skinheads did appear, a fact featured very prominently on the left-leaning Danish television. But were they Flemish? Were they invited by SOIE? They happened to speak French between themselves. And were not welcomed by the organizers. But then, we can't know for sure, for the police didn't bother arresting them. The officers on duty that day had been called in from Wallonia, and promptly headed for the Flemish politicians, not the skinheads.

Europe is complex. I'm born and raised in Europe (except a couple years in the Middle East), and have a keen interest in history which I keep alive with interesting books. Still, I would not be able to account even reasonably for the history of half of the European countries, particular not in the east. But we did learn from the mistakes of fascist rule.

Sortof. Perhaps we didn't learn properly how to identify it, and the heritage of Soviet fascism hasn't been properly discredited yet. We hope it's still to come, but young generations tend to be seduced by it as they were 30-40-50 years ago.

Wikipedia has some useful references about Fascism, too. In that context, be sure to look up 'Rexism' as well. Which also has some interesting figures about which part of Belgium provided Germany with more volunteers during WWII (hint: It wasn't Flanders...)

In any case, respect for private property, rejection of any kind of political (or 'religious') violence and respect for the rule of law is what matters. Ideally also that people assume responsibility for their own lives and use the tools of democracy - something I always urge people to do. Then fascism has no place to sink its roots.

After this segway, I think it's time to head back to our regular counterJihad agenda :)

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 5:06 PM

Cornelius

"While I understand the reasoning of those opposed to the Iraq war, I do find it fascinating that many of them - not only on the left - have invested so much in their opposition that they WANT failure...as a form of validation."

WANT? It has nothing to do with what I want or what I don't want but instead it is about the facts. Islam is a political ideology that is at odds with democracy. Unless you remove political Islam from equation then you will never have democracy (with rights for all) in Iraq. It is like saying I want to sun to rise in the morning..

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 15, 2007 5:13 PM

I have stated my beliefs concerning courage before. About the Bronze Star holder who was afraid of a "haunted" country road and the differences between physical courage and intellectual courage. I know of a man who had the courage to fly hand-me-down, worn out Texas Air National Guard fighters but somehow, apparently lacks the courage to face verbal criticism.

The most lethal and dangerous weapon now appears to be the words racist and racism. They're killers, and they are used indiscriminately, and these words can split allies.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 5:17 PM

Morgaan Sinclair-

You remind me of my first grade teacher Sister Camile. She was a regular mommy-which is good for 1st grade students.

Though I like your feisty style, I detect some kind of guilt in you re race. A lot of working class (Irish, Italians, Jews, Greeks, Armenians, etc.) don't feel that way. (BTW, if folks such as yourself believe in "affirmative action"-make sure you are the one who is replaced-not guys like me. I want things to be strictly merit.)

In addition, neither of my parents even had a H.S. education-and weren't intersted in education-so why did I learn? Why did I eventually get my college degree?

Morgaan, take your guilt and shove it. But I still like you. I like your feisty nature. It makes you interesting.

Posted by: Frank at November 15, 2007 5:21 PM

Henrik, your posts are very interesting, I hope the Danish effect occurs across the EU.

epaminondas: Please see the links posted by leonthepigfarmer and follow the thread.

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 5:21 PM

"A note to the defenders of the BNP: please provide evidence that they are not a Holocaust-denying, white supremacist organization."

- from Spencer's post above

All due respect Mr. Spencer, but could you please provide evidence that you are not an Islamophobe?

Is it not the worst kind of injustice that someone be forced into proving a negative?

The charges of Anti-Semitism or Racism or Fascism (while thrown about all too frequently and carelessly) are extremely serious and, when levelled, should be backed up by evidence including links and personal observation- failure to do so should be regarded as beyond the pale in any respectible forum of discussion and anyone engaging in such activity should be shunned or worse. The persons and organizations so charged should be afforded ample opportunity to answer these charges; and what's more, that defense should be aknowledged and answered.

This has not been the case in the Little Green Footballs/Vlaams Belang imbroglio.

Being that I first heard of them a couple of weeks ago, I am not a supporter of Vlaams Belang or the Sweden Democrats or a defender of Filip de Winter. As a detached observer, I have seen very serious accusations levelled at this man these organizations both on the front page and in the comments section of Little Green Footballs. After much time spent reading through the various comments threads and analyzing the links provided therein, I judge the paltry circumstantial evidence to be woefully insufficient to substantiate these claims. Furthermore, much of the "evidence" offered up by Johnson and his supporters at LGF has been rebutted or refuted by the websites such as Gates of Vienna, Brussels Journal and Center for Vigilant Freedom. I also note that these rebuttals and refutations have been completely ignored by the people at LGF.

Posted by: november1981 at November 15, 2007 5:25 PM

Anyone else having difficulty posting?

Posted by: km at November 15, 2007 5:26 PM

Here's an official statement from Vlaams Belang regarding the European Parliament Holocaust memorial resolution they abstained from voting on. The basic reason is that the resolution was poison-pilled. The statement also includes an unconditional condemnation of Nazi and other totalitarian ideology, aptly phrased here:

"... these cheap political games trivialise the horrors of totalitarian regimes, including National Socialism."

The complete statement is at the EU Parliament web:

We are discussing a resolution on the commemoration of the Holocaust, anti-Semitism and racism. We could have expected a text that pays tribute to the victims of the Holocaust with, in all serenity, an appeal never to forget this gruesome chapter in European history so that this can never be repeated. My party, the Vlaams Belang, could obviously have agreed to a resolution to that effect, together with 99% of the MEPs, but the resolution that is here before us for discussion has not been conceived in that spirit. The horrors of the Second World War have all been disgracefully piled onto one heap along with, and I quote, the rise of extremist and xenophobic parties and growing public acceptance of their views. Paragraph 5 of the resolution literally calls for the current fight against racism, xenophobia and anti-Semitism to be set against the background of the Shoah in education.

My party, the Vlaams Belang, is neither extremist nor xenophobic, but the standard politically correct terminology is very much against the current democratic political parties that make a stand for maintaining national identity. The traditional political groups simply want to demonise a number of successful and growing competitors at the expense of the Holocaust victims. This is not only an insult to millions of voters in Europe but, what is worse, these cheap political games trivialise the horrors of totalitarian regimes, including National Socialism. Another worrying aspect is the appeal for, and I quote, a ban on incitement to racial and religious hatred throughout the EU whilst guaranteeing legitimate free speech. According to the traditional groups, there is apparently such a thing as illegitimate free speech which must be stopped at all costs. They seem to forget that freedom of speech only exists if it also applies to political opponents. Aberrations of this kind come as no surprise, given the fact that this resolution was submitted by the Communist group.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 5:29 PM

km, I had trouble posting. That's the reason for the long duplicate comment above.

Posted by: Henrik at November 15, 2007 5:42 PM

epindas>>>>>>>>>>.
We're in the 21st century...

http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/countering_smears.html

Your leader is on record denying the Holocaust ever happened and claiming that Jews control the media – you are clearly an anti-Semitic party?

"Not at all. Dredging up quotes from 10, 15, 20 years ago is really pathetic and, in a sense, rather fascist. Everyone knows that people’s political philosophies evolve and change as they develop – at least three Labour ministers were previously Communist Party members, for instance - and Nick Griffin has repeatedly stated that he has changed his views since then. The BNP is in no way anti-Semitic nor do we deny the Holocaust. We have many Jewish members and are pleased to have a Jewish councillor in Epping, who is, indeed, the group leader there."

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 5:52 PM

Had trouble posting seems fine now. I had typositis...
epimondas^^^^^^^^^^^^

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 15, 2007 5:57 PM

I despair at what is happening to Great Britain. This despair has led me to investigate the BNP a little. In Nick Griffin's personal blog a post on November 6th included the following:

Then we have an hour plus of Q&As and debate. The Muslim in traditional garb tries to convince people I’ve taken things out of context, several of the leftists try to sidetrack the debate down the Holocaust road although that does at least allow me to set the record straight and deal with the combination of Wikipedia lies and out-of-context propaganda and to put on record the fact that – while I used to be very angry at (and rude about) the way the left-liberals use the Holocaust as a moral club to silence debate on the key issues of our time – I have never denied the fact that the Nazis murdered huge numbers of Jews in one of the great crimes of a century of terrible inhumanity.

One asks me how my demonisation of Muslims differs from Hitler’s demonisation of the Jews? The answer is simple: The Nazi critique was largely based on a hoax – The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. It was this work of fiction, combined with the fact that the Bolsheviks carrying out mass murder on an unprecedented scale all over Eastern Europe included a disproportionate number of radicalised secular Jews (itself a reaction to Czarist anti-Semitism), that set the scene for the tragedy of European Jewry.

The Koran and Hadith, on the other hand, and their inspiration for hatred, violence and oppression of Unbelievers, are not forgeries. The threat to our civilisation is not a myth but a clear and present danger.

Here's another relevant quote from the same blog:

Here too we talk about various subjects including, again, the woeful failure of Americans to develop even the embryo of an effective political response to the multi-cult, anti-human, globalising treason of their liberal capitalist elite. Yet again, however, I get the feeling that this need not be the case for much longer. This group too have realised that the neo-Nazi crankery and ‘This World is Ours’ racial supremacy nonsense have got to be faced down and driven into gutter of defeat a negativity where they belong.

People change, I know I have. A life long Guardian reading 'liberal lefty' my realisation that Islam was a grave menace altered my views to the extent that, if there were an election tomorrow I would vote BNP.

Posted by: Guardian Apostate at November 15, 2007 6:09 PM

Invasion of the Comment-snatchers?

Word to those with a case to prove against Vlaams Belang:

If you find people to be skeptical of your proofs and unconvinced by your arguments, then go ahead and offer up more proofs and reformulate your arguments and those who are assembled will listen and judge accordingly.

Me, I'm just a caveman. But I understand that at the heart of a free and democratic society is the open and honest exchange of opinions; and for this exchange to be substantive and informing, that dissent should be not only tolerated but encouraged and difference of opinion respected; those who beg to differ or who remain unconvinced should not be bullied and insulted and hounded out of the discussion. But that's me- I'm just a caveman...

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=652695596

Posted by: november1981 at November 15, 2007 6:10 PM

Seconding AI's suggestion about revising the 'mission statement' here.

I have been studying/ re-reading the Jihadwatch archives. Have just read through the postings and discussion of the July 11 2006 jihad bombings in Mumbai/Bombay. It was incredibly moving to read through the comments, seeing the Indian jihadwatch regulars 'taking the floor' so to speak - some of them were in Mumbai itself at the time - and sharing their feelings and thoughts about what was happening in their homeland and their city, while the non-Indian regulars on the comments floor - Americans, Australians, British, Israeli and others - closed in around them in a virtual 'shield wall', offering condolences, analysis, and encouragement.

(One of my favourite posters was/ is Gorkhali, an Indian Gurkha).

On that note - please, if you are lurking here and reading, and you are Singaporean, non-Muslim Malaysian, Thai, Filipino, Ethiopian, Russian, Armenian, Georgian, Greek, Serb, Kenyan, Ethiopian...please, get yourself an internet handle and wade in! Start posting! If your command of English is imperfect, don't worry. We're used to it.

You are needed as an 'anchorperson' for jihad-related stories from your home countries - just as our Indian regulars here, functioned as 'anchormen' during the reporting and discussing of the jihad bombings in Mumbai/ Bombay.

We are all in this together. Islam has declared war upon us all.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 15, 2007 6:15 PM

GREATCOMETOF1577:

"It has nothing to do with what I want or what I don't want but instead it is about the facts. Islam is a political ideology that is at odds with democracy. Unless you remove political Islam from equation then you will never have democracy (with rights for all) in Iraq. It is like saying I want to sun to rise in the morning."

RESPONSE: I understand your point. I've said and written it a million times myself, that Islam is antithetical to human freedom.

But we're dealing with the real world here. The existing Iraqi government - (and that of Afghanistan, Jordan, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia and many other Muslim countries) - is certainly preferable to the Iranian and/or Al Qaeda regime that would replace it if we pack it in prematurely.

Believe it or not, there ARE differences between Muslims, differences that have profound implications for the future of this struggle. Conservative Muslims are preferable to violent radicals; moderate Muslims are preferable to conservatives; secular Muslims are preferable to moderates; Muslim apostates are preferable to secularists.

And so it goes.

The problem of so many here at JW is that the antipathy felt for Islam - (something I certainly share) - blinds them into thinking all Muslims are the same (something I've tried to transcend).

Posted by: Cornelius at November 15, 2007 7:06 PM

AlexD said: And why not? What you saying is a pure socialism. To limit the freedom of capitalists to dispose of their property so that it would benefit the local workers. And then goes typical justification nonsense that it is somehow "exploitation" to prefer one worker to another because his service coast less, and that choosing saving money on cheaper variant means making it "at the expense" of an expensive one.

Here we have a clear example of how a supposed ally against the jihad actually aids those who seek to destroy the west.

Alex D, you sir are a what is termed a "useful idiot". See, the importation of cheap foreign labour, and the exportation of labour isn't about the issues you so casually state, it goes deeper. Try thinking about voting, empowerment of marxists, making the indiginous people unable to compete and placing a huge tax burden on society. It also exploits people who will work for the minimum, it robs other countries of their strongest citizens and it empowers the jihad. Not to mention the dilution of culture and the imposition of minor things like sharia law.

Do you think the nazis would've embraced this? And what happens once you've robbed the indigionous population of their heritage, their culture, their history and their livelihood? Fight alongside the likes of people like you in your ivory towers gob-shiteing to the rest of us who face the consequences? Why the hell should they, you care nothing about them why should they care about you?

God help us if people such as you are on our side against Islam. It's people like you who empower the jihad far more than you aid us.

I cannot believe some of the crap posted on here today and to say I'm disheartened is putting it mildly. I'm gagging myself for what I'd really like to say so I'll sleep on it.

If this is the state of our opposition to jihad and our defence of free speech, then - and please forgive me Mr Spencer - but the west is fucked.

I am so sad now. So very very sad.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 15, 2007 7:30 PM

Morgaan,

I never liked grapefruit juice, but since you inform me that it has the short-term effect of dilating my carotids and bringing more oxygen to my brain, I'm taking up your suggestion and imbibing a glass of the stuff right away!

That's it. I'm outta here.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 7:39 PM

Like, Deus vult, dude!

On with the Counterjihad.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 7:43 PM

How odd, that Counterjihadists have a falling-out among themselves, while Eurocrats enter into dialogue, even accomodation, with the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood. Kinda ironic, don'tcha think?

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 7:51 PM

Over the company they keep, that is.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 7:52 PM

People change, I know I have. A life long Guardian reading 'liberal lefty' my realisation that Islam was a grave menace altered my views to the extent that, if there were an election tomorrow I would vote BNP.

Posted by: Guardian Apostate

ditto from America . Well said. We have no one here to turn to. The intellectual elite are too quick to call them Fascists.

Posted by: Briars at November 15, 2007 8:16 PM

Guardian Apostate

hear hear! good post!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 15, 2007 9:09 PM

I think Robert's impetus for policing this site is to enforce good manners, not to dictate opinion. Reasoned persuasion not coersion.
To keep the focus of JW on its stated purposes, to avoid irrelavancy or ungoverned cacophany. We can leave provocation and cacophany to Islamists and to Leftist hecklers.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 9:48 PM

Correction: cacophony.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 9:51 PM

I've completely averted my eyes on this one. I've refused to read any of it. That's OK, isn't it?

Posted by: Kay at November 15, 2007 10:24 PM

Is it too much for me to expect consistency of opinion from mere human beings? Many people accept the fact that Senator Robert Byrd of 1952 is not the Robert C. Byrd of 1972 and later. I would expect them to genuinely entertain the notion that the leaders of BNP and similar organizations could also change over a twenty year period. Not only was Robert C. Byrd a member of the Ku Klux Klan, but he was a leader and a recruiter.

Of course I am asking that humans behave in a very un-human way.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 15, 2007 11:22 PM

Houston, we have a problem.

Posted by: Wimbledon Womble at November 15, 2007 11:33 PM

PRCalDude ...deleting some posts and banning some people is a function of the JW/DW staff. There are reasons for this.
Perhaps I should have not tried to explain it to you. Possibly Robert, Hugh or Marisol would be better received. If you are on at the same time as any of them, inquire about it. I am sure you will get a satisfactory answer...have a good night...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 16, 2007 12:01 AM

I have been a strong supporter of Israel since the Six Day War forced allegiances. And I recognize the Greco-Roman-Judaeo-Christian contributions to Western Civilization, and the emulation of same in much of the East. However, I cannot write off mistaken individuals who wrongly embraced the fascist ideology, in face of demographic subversion by a real enemy. Enoch Powell's "rivers of blood" speech was proven wrong; while first generation immigrants may not assimilate well, the second generation does. There is only one exception: Muslims. In general, their 2nd generation is worse than the first because they find specious reasoning for Islamofascism in Free World libraries; readers of the New Left Review have nearly 40 years of articles on the Alice in Wonderland alliance between Marxist and Islamist rodents.

We need to fight against Islamic Aggression, while searching out allies from the disaffected classes who stumbled into fascism. The Bnai Br'th uses former Nazis as speakers, because of the insight that they give as to their recruitment to fascism. Why should we treat parlor-fascists who gravitated to the National Front, any different? Most have abandoned anti-semitism and denial of the "rivers of" blood-libel.

Anwar Shayk, ibn-Warraq and others abandoned the Islamic murder machine. Why not allow someone to be an ex-fascist? I assume Spenc-Fitz are aware that Christopher Hitchens once wrote a book with the human-virus, Edward Said. Look at him now. Please end your orthodoxy.

As for LGF, I only go there by proxy because I don't like the cookies that the site puts on my computer.

Posted by: supercargo at November 16, 2007 12:01 AM

a man who once supported criminal elements like the Black Panthers and who over time, changed his views and saw things differently. If Mr. Horowitz was never "released" of the baggage he carried in his past, then we would never have been the benefactors of his works today. Posted above

This is a good point. People do change.

I've been reading this one thread for an hour, totally absorbed but left wondering if we will ever transcend our differences, some of them rather petty in my opinion, and get down to the serious business of uniting, planning strategy, and kicking ass. I've made up my mind about the controversial political factions in question here and it really didn't take too long. I am a staunch supporter of Israel and have the utmost respect and admiration for Jews. I cringe every time I think about the Holocaust and the evil Nazis. Muslims are the biggest threat to Jews and Israel, just as they are the biggest threat to the rest of us, which includes the West and all non-muslim people and nations in the world.

Excluding avowed Jew and Israel haters and white supremacists, I am prepared to ally myself with anyone who wants to tackle the islamic menace and save the West and the rest. THat includes groups that have been smeared and called fascists and Nazis by the far left Eurodhimmis and the EU. If the muslims, who have been wantonly slaughtering each other for almost 1400 years over minor differences in their satanic religion, can ally to fight a common enemy, can't we do the same? God knows we have much more at stake than they ever have.

Posted by: Susanp at November 16, 2007 12:14 AM

Mr. Spencer,

I was disappointed to see this thread come up here at Jihad Watch. It was my hope that you would have seen this whole affair for what it has been and that is egomania personnified.
We are in a war that demands focus, it demands steadfast determination. It does not need childish battles over "You did this, I said that, I'm right, You're wrong."

As one of your commenters stated, I've been reading this one thread for an hour , well multiply that energy by thousands and thousands of counterjihad supporters times four weeks! The net result is the jihadists laughing their butts off at us the entire time and the good old boys at C.A.I.R. high-fiving each other in the boardroom.

Lives have been lost, warriors on our side have lost hope and the innocents have been cheated the past month by the selfish pride of a few.

Posted by: Fight4TheRight at November 16, 2007 1:06 AM

"The BNP is in no way anti-Semitic nor do we deny the Holocaust. We have many Jewish members and are pleased to have a Jewish councillor in Epping, who is, indeed, the group leader there."

I am sick of seeing this same pathetic line trotted out to “prove” that the BNP is not anti-Semitic. For the record, the BNP’s Epping councillor, Patricia Richardson, was born to a Jewish family but does not follow the faith. Her children have not been raised as Jews. She has no contact whatsoever with the Jewish community.

"Today, I hardly think of myself as Jewish," says Patricia. "You could say I am only barely Jewish, through my parentage and through food. I clean my chicken the kosher way, and from time to time I get a craving for gefilte fish or chicken soup, and recently I found a bagel bar in Ilford where they do takeaway cholent. But I never light Fridaynight candles: I regard all candles as a fire hazard, and we celebrate Easter and Christmas, not Passover or Chanukah."

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-9908884-details/Why+I'm+in+the+BNP/article.do

She can be viewed in the same light as the Taliban apologist “revert” Yvonne Ridley. Like Ridley, she is prized for her propaganda value. Like Ridley, she has turned her back on her heritage and on her people and has instead taken up with those who most despise them. She is a moser, plain and simple, as is any other “Jew” that would support the BNP.

Posted by: Matamoros at November 16, 2007 2:10 AM

The take on IQ scores I heard was this: men feature more in the highest and the *lowest* scores, while women cluster more in the average field. Doesn't bother me much, I'm certainly not a genius, just a high-average in most tests I've tried.

More important for this thread is Robert's statement "But there is cultural defense and then there is a white supremacism that is based on some idea of racial superiority and inferiority, and has via Hitler a historical link to genocide."

I play classical music. East Asians are really making strides in this field - probably on average more so than people of European descent (certainly here in New Zealand). I see nothing wrong with this - I *don't care* how much melanin someone has in the skin and hair, or what shape their eyes happen to be. All I care about is that our important cultural values and achievements are maintained.

Posted by: Lili at November 16, 2007 2:10 AM

She can be viewed in the same light as the Taliban apologist “revert” Yvonne Ridley. Like Ridley, she is prized for her propaganda value. Like Ridley, she has turned her back on her heritage and on her people and has instead taken up with those who most despise them. She is a moser, plain and simple, as is any other “Jew” that would support the BNP.

Posted by: Matamoros at November 16, 2007 2:10 AM

I suppose if you were insane one could use that analogy. What about the 'Think Israel' israel article posted above. What about me, I am an Englishman non Jewish who has moved to Israel to work & live because this is the front line against the Jihad, I am arguing for the BNP as I see no credible alternative in the UK. Am I an Yvonne Ridley type?

The issue here metamoros is dealing with global Islam and stopping Europes fall to the Jihadists.

Knee jerk vitriol against legal legitimate political parties, especially ones that have growing grass roots support and have already taken a stand against Islamism and supported Israel just isnt going to cut it. A common misconception is that this isnt a war yet, it is some sort of social issue that will work its self out with the right legislation.

Wake up metamoron, how many more multi-culti enforced rapes, killings, bombs and EU sanctioned suppression of free speech have to occur before you realise this.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 2:31 AM

I quoted someone quoting Robert for this:

"The neofascist character of the anti-jihad parties in Europe ..."

Then called that statement 'Ignorant', not realizing I was implicitly insulting the site owner...

I'm sorry for that. Fortunately, it was only the statement I called ignorant, not the author.

American ignorance of the details in Europe remain a problem, unfortunately. What various US governments have done in the Balkans, in particular, is causing us much trouble. Siding with the neo-fascist Ustasha regime in Croatia against the historially anti-Nazi Serbs was a solid mistake. Tacid support of the Bosnian Jihad warriors another, and the stronghanded support of an independent Kosovo a third one.

Some of my friends, particular in Greece, turn that into anti-American sentiment. I solidly refuse to do that. America is our friend and ally, in spite of any mistakes made. I will keep pointing out the mistakes, then hope the US government will do better next time.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 4:12 AM

From some of the comments I have read, I am not sure everyone in Europe really understands the nature of racial politics in the US. I will grant that there is much I don’t know about EU politics. However, there are a few questions which I believe I may be able to provide perspective on:

Archonix,

“A lot of people, especially Americans, see nationalist and think "nazi".

I certainly don’t see it that way, and most Americans I know (including myself) have strong nationalist beliefs.

Leon,

“was winston churchill a neo nazi?”

"in 3 February 1954, under the agenda item 'Coloured Workers', Churchill is quoted, with abbreviations, by Cabinet Secretary Sir Norman Brook as saying: 'Problems wh. will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits.'"

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

I would not call Churchill a neo-Nazi based on these statements. However, these statements would unequivocally be considered racist in the US today. If Churchill were leader of an EU party today, no US counter-jihad movement could risk associating with him unless he completely repudiated these statements.

Even that would probably not be enough – he would have to do something like meet with Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and convince them that he was no longer racist. He would have to go so far as to get them to state that they believed he was no longer a racist. Even then, having ever been a racist, it is likely that it would always pose a credibility problem for anyone associating with him.

“this is the same view which the BNP now holds”

If this is truly the same as the current BNP position, then no one in the US can risk association without providing the left with ammunition to discredit anything we say for eternity. The counter-jihad movement in the US cannot survive ANY ties with racism – it’s that sensitive an issue. That is the reality in the US.

Henrik,

“The specter of racism is weird. A decade or two ago in Europe, it was hardly worth a second thought.”

That’s a great point – it illustrates just how much of a difference there is between current EU and US politics. Racism has been the most sensitive if not the dominant political issue in the US for 150 years or more.

Km, Pelayo,

“Do we always keep them at arms length because of past mistakes. The US has a serving senator in the democratic party who was affiliated with the KKK, he has turned round and renounced those positions. Should we not do the same thing for the VB, SD, BNP etc etc?”

The key point here is that Senator Byrd is a Democrat and there is an absolute double standard that is constantly enforced by the 90% liberal MSM. If Byrd were a Republican I do not believe he would be in office today – his past KKK ties would be too costly. That said, outside of racism or supremacism or anti-semitism, most other changes or mistakes can potentially be forgiven by the public.

Supercargo,

“Anwar Shayk, ibn-Warraq and others abandoned the Islamic murder machine. Why not allow someone to be an ex-fascist?”

Someone like Walid Shoebat gains credibility by directly opposing their former ways, and by making that opposition their primary platform, not just one of many views that have ‘changed’. That said, I have no problem accepting ex-fascists if the evidence supports a true change of heart. However, in the US even an ex-terrorist will find more forgiveness in the populace than an ex-racist, odd as that seems.

With respect to Mr. Griffin, I hope he really has had a change of heart. However, I’m afraid that too many of his past racial statements are viewed as so egregious in the US that forgiveness and acceptance would be un-attainable. Too many simply would not believe he had really changed, and anyone associating with him would be excoriated daily by the left, the MSM and most independents.

Posted by: DreadWolf at November 16, 2007 4:13 AM

Henrik, excellent posts.

As for this debate, initially I was really angry with LGF's attitude which seemed to attack the conference, so reacted rather strongly to it, but then again I have realised that perhaps it has done us a service.

This issue was always there waiting to trip us up, we all know that the left are very skilled at using fascist smear techniques as laid out in Mein Kampf by NATIONAL SOCIALISTS.

So sorting this out is key.

For those that looked at the excellent work linked to by Henrik and who are prepared to open your minds, do you seriously believe that LGF is right to define the VB and SD as Neo-Nazi's.

I keep thinking that we as a movement must be clear on what we stand for and what we do not stand for, I also feel that those holding unacceptable views in the here and now should be marginalised, and to me it is anyone who hates a person or feels superior to another due to race and colour.

Islam is a political ideology with religious trappings, it is not a race, it may be part of the imperialistic system of the Arab people, but that does not mean opposing it makes you a racist.

I oppose Islam, not Muslims, I think that targetted deportation is one of the weapons to weaken Islam. It was interesting seeing Charles point on that issue because even though I know some people who would deport all Muslims I do not agree yet, I say yet because at some point rather than have a truely terrible blood bath that would be the better option, that is because I respect human life.

I do not accept the past statements of people as proof of what they think now, though I do have a big question mark on some of them and one of those people is Nick Griffin. I do know a number of members of the BNP and everyone of them supports Israel, so until I have absolute proof then I give them the benefit of the doubt.

Why do I think that way, because in Europe if you stand up for your culture, freedom of expression and democracy against Islam you are defined as a racist fascist, so who is a real racist fascist? Being defined as such by the left is almost a badge of honor and has almost made the word racist meaningless.

If LGF wants to call me and other Europeans fascists while gloating over the possible fall of Europe then that is their problem, I count them as being like the left.

However because the accusation of racist or fascist is so damaging to people making their voices heard at a higher level, this is where we have an issue, this is the problem for Mr Spencer, we need his voice to be listened to at the very highest level in the US government. This is where it is damaging and I think Charles was trying to say that, but what a strategic error that was, he should have said it privately and before the meeting, but as he did not, then he has reaped what he has sowed.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 4:18 AM

American ignorance of the details in Europe remain a problem, unfortunately. What various US governments have done in the Balkans, in particular, is causing us much trouble. Siding with the neo-fascist Ustasha regime in Croatia against the historially anti-Nazi Serbs was a solid mistake. Tacid support of the Bosnian Jihad warriors another, and the stronghanded support of an independent Kosovo a third one.

Some of my friends, particular in Greece, turn that into anti-American sentiment. I solidly refuse to do that. America is our friend and ally, in spite of any mistakes made. I will keep pointing out the mistakes, then hope the US government will do better next time.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 4:12 AM

I think ignorance is too strong a word my friend, my experience from the states is that many are politically aware but view the world through the American prism of the constitution, a one size fits all policy, if you like.

I too personally see America as our friend, but I am sceptical as to what the American response will be when Europeans start hitting back. IMHO most are thinking in WWII terms, standing armies etc etc. Where as the evidence points to a more almost ganglike warfare of Mobs for control of street blocks. My question is when Mosques and Islamic symbols are attacked by the Europeans what will be the US response? I fear a Balkan's type response. Especially in light of the post from DreadWolf, it appears that the race issue has so clouded American thinking that they would even let Europe fall than prepare to be tarred as some form of WS.

I am just not sure like many others here that we have the time to wait. Many believe that the drop in violence in Iraq is a sign that we are winning against Islamic ideology, I would argue that its more likely those jihadists are winging there way to the rest of the world to institute their urban guerilla warfare attacks in Western cities. How many Beslan's, Madrid, London, Glasgow type attacks will it take for mass retaliation to occur, not many I bet?

My own personal view is when it does happen, for it surely will, is that the blow to Islam is quick and decisive, hopefully the rapidity of the response will so catch the EU of balance that it will crumble and the US wont have time to bomb misunderstood allies.

To paraphrase Babbazee @ LGF 'the time of torches and pitchforks, approacheth'

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 4:43 AM

I do not accept the past statements of people as proof of what they think now, though I do have a big question mark on some of them and one of those people is Nick Griffin. I do know a number of members of the BNP and everyone of them supports Israel, so until I have absolute proof then I give them the benefit of the doubt.

Why do I think that way, because in Europe if you stand up for your culture, freedom of expression and democracy against Islam you are defined as a racist fascist, so who is a real racist fascist? Being defined as such by the left is almost a badge of honor and has almost made the word racist meaningless.

If LGF wants to call me and other Europeans fascists while gloating over the possible fall of Europe then that is their problem, I count them as being like the left.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 4:18 AM

Thats pretty much how I see it and I think your analysis of CJ's position in your last paragraph is fair.

However because the accusation of racist or fascist is so damaging to people making their voices heard at a higher level, this is where we have an issue, this is the problem for Mr Spencer, we need his voice to be listened to at the very highest level in the US government. This is where it is damaging and I think Charles was trying to say that, but what a strategic error that was, he should have said it privately and before the meeting, but as he did not, then he has reaped what he has sowed.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 4:52 AM

meanwhile, the population replacement continues.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=X2P0QDPAJOVYNQFIQMGCFFOAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/11/16/nemi116.xml

Last year, 510,000 foreign migrants came to the UK to stay for at least 12 months, according to the Office for National Statistics. At the same time 400,000 people, more than half of whom were British, emigrated.

Posted by: Minority of One at November 16, 2007 5:00 AM

FromSusanP:"I've been reading this one thread for an hour, totally absorbed"

Me too. Fascinating discussion. Many excellent posts, Km, Daffersd, Henrik, Dreadwolf, Supercargo, Leon, Magnus, et al. My thanks.

Posted by: ewha1 at November 16, 2007 5:08 AM

There are to many people here who are very quick to crucify the BNP for what they said 8 years ago, and say yet fail to say anything about what BNP are doing to-day.

How many of you who criticize Nick Griffin and the BNP are active against islamization, other than making comments here or at LGF.

Well! while the critics of the BNP are struggling to mount the moral high horse, the muslim hordes along with their red fascist minions are gaining more power, and leaving BNP the only group who are prepared to meet the Islamofascists head on.

As I have pointed out earlier, the BNP where campaigning against islamization before 9/11.

Strange that Robert has no problems with former terrorist,s (Shoebat) who have actively made attacks against Israel,that have changed their ways.

So Robert, if a former terrorist can change, why can,t a (questionable)Holocaust-denier change

And it is Robert who is accusing the BNP of being
Holocaust-denying white supremacist,well Robert where is the evidence

Can any-one prove that BNP,s current aim is different to JWer,s aims

And i would like to remind you, Nick Griffin was campaigning before the twin towers. He did not need a 9/11 to wake him up to the perils of islam.

How many of you even knew about islam before 9/11

Just now BNP are doing the right thing, so it should be given credit for that, not slagging them off for what has happened in the past.

http://illustratedpig.blogspot.com/2007/11/jumping-on-bandwagon.html

Posted by: shiva at November 16, 2007 5:09 AM

"I think ignorance is too strong a word my friend ..."

I think it's fitting. 'Ignorance' is different from 'Lack of attention', and can be fixed by getting more knowledge. It's not that damning.

The problem, usually, is getting the right information to the right people on time. That failed miserably in the Balkans. Kohl, fresh from the reunification of Germany, and Clinton, eager to show his zeal in foreign matters, both made serious errors of judgement in matters of a complex country just out of Communist hibernation.

Once you've taken side, it's really difficult to admit mistake and switch. That's something relevant to this tread in the first place. I'll pick a line from Buddhism which actually has a compact strategy for cleaning up after mistakes:

1) Realize and admit that a mistake has been made.

2) Make a clear decision to set it right.

3) Make a clear decision never to commit that mistake again.

4) Do the opposite.

I think that's a viable plan, also in political matters.

For instance, if someone happened to make a statement doubting the number of Holocaust victims, a mere denial is somewhat insufficient. It still leaves a trace of doubt. What really cleans out any doubt would be to memorize the Holocaust - and then stand with the Jews to protect them today.

Interestingly, lots of seemingly repentant radical Islamists fail completely on the fourth item. That's suspicious. They should engage in and approve activities that root out other radical elements, but usually fail to do so, implicitly protecting other radicals.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 5:12 AM

ewha 1,

It is an absorbing discussion I agree. The reason I am posting so much is that I believe this to be the most crucial debate in saving the many peoples and cultures of the Eurasian continent.

Can we reach a consensus on nationalist politics being a viable contender against the Jihad. Fjordman has articulated far better the position of Europe than I ever could and on the whole I agree with his position.

I support 100% the efforts made by those who attended the Antijihad summit, warts an all.

I must get some work done now, but please keep the discusssion going it is vital.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 5:27 AM

"How many of you even knew about islam before 9/11"

:)

I did, and I had heard people say it'd become a serious problem. Even after 9/11 I fully expected our institutions to take care of the problem.

When I began to dive into the stuff in 2004 (EU/Turkey), I had my beliefs seriously shaken up and started reading serious books. "Islam and Terrorism" was the first, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam" the second. Found I'd better get involved and do something useful.

The Muhammad crisis turned that into sheer urgency...

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 5:33 AM

shiva:

Strange that Robert has no problems with former terrorists (Shoebat) who have actively made attacks against Israel, that have changed their ways.

So Robert, if a former terrorist can change, why can't a (questionable) Holocaust-denier change?

Good point. Ed Husain was a jihadist member of Hizb ut-Tahrir who later renounced terrorism. See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/05/02/do0203.xml

Griffin has been demonized for something he said. Husain was once prepared to kill; now he is a respected journalist.

John McVicar - an armed robber once considered the most dangerous man in Britain and who escaped from prison - is also now a respected journalist and writer.

See:

http://www.northeasthistory.co.uk/the_north_east/history/echomemories/durham/405/071205.html

and

http://www.spectator.co.uk/archive/books/19931/crazed-cabbalistic-claptrap---.thtml?SelectedIssueDate=16+March+2002

If we aren't prepared to accept that people can change then there is logically no point letting anyone out of prison. If they can't change they can't be rehabilitated.

We all screw up occasionally, but most of us are willing to change our opinions in the light of experience. What hope would there be for humanity if we did not give people a second chance?

Posted by: watling at November 16, 2007 6:00 AM

Posted by: Henrik

The Muhammad crisis turned that into sheer urgency...

Well for some, it is not so urgent, they seem to think that racism and Holocaust-denial is a greater threat than islam

Posted by: shiva at November 16, 2007 6:01 AM

I agree with km about this debate, it is important to get closure and agreement.

People can not simplisticly say that Nationalism equals racism and fascism, it is a ridiculous position.

As for knowing about Islam pre 9/11, well I started to look into it in 1997 following an incident with a woman in a T-shirt and shorts being verbally abused outside the Regents Street Mosque and the police doing nothing. Though I did know about Islamic conquests etc., due to a love of history.

In 1999 when Clinton lobbed a few cruise missiles at Bin Ladens camp I knew enough to say to my wife, what the hell are the Americans doing, they should take him seriously as he will do something really nasty.

From 1999 to 2001 I was really busy at work so did not have time to study it enough and it was this site that really made me understand Islam, after that I have read the Quran and the hadiths in some detail.

But I was in the USA two weeks after 9/11 and found myself explaining why to am American woman who had lost her daughter during 9/11.

"Because they hate everything that America stands for..."

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 6:15 AM

@Leonid P.B.: You are right! Though I think the Flemish and Swedish stories are indeed very important, it's true that stories from the larger European countries are hardly acknowledged in the Anglosphere.

There are scandalous stories concerning Islam ad dhimmitude in Germany, fiercely discussed in the German blogosphere but never even taken note of in the English one.

The problem is: We constitute linguistic islands, too small to be heard internationally (as the English "lingustic island" is) but too large to feel the need to go outside our own language. The combined German, Austrian and Swiss lingustic island (more than 100 million people) is large enough to be very comfortable, and I think the French and the Spanish ones are as well.

I am the German translator of many of Fjordman's essays and a few by other authors. Translating from English to German is much easier than translating the other way round. I'm able to state my opinion in English and to translate any German article, but unfortunately it's far away from being equally sophisticated and deep as
my German articles. I personally do not know any person who is able AND willing to provide English information about Islam in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

But perhaps there is anybody?

I am willing to translate important issues and I am able to do it correctly concerning the contents but I am not able to do it correctly concerning the diction... I'd need a native speaker to correct my translations.

Posted by: Eisvogel at November 16, 2007 6:24 AM

What an excellent post shiva, thank you.

This nazi slur on the BNP: it hasn't really been thought through has it? Because what do the accusers think would happen if the BNP won an election?

"Right, we've fooled the lot of you, let's build the concentration camps and let's start with the jews, then the blacks, then the..."

Stupidity. The BNP is about nationalism and has absolutely nothing to do with national socialism whatsoever. There is no way people such as myself would give their vote to a party that had national socialist policies. NO WAY. I want my culture, I want my country and I don't want to watch the indiginous population become a minority in their own land. I don't want alien cultures replacing my culture and I most certainly don't want to see minarets and sharia in my homeland.

But the irrational "they're nazis!" borders on the histerical and is wholly without foundation. It is a marxist weapon used to stiffle debate and opposition to the multi-cultural eutopia and their destruction of the west.

We the indiginous Brits now have a voice. The BNP is that voice and it will be heard whether you like it or not. What happened to the native american peoples isn't going to happen to us.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 16, 2007 6:24 AM

On the 11th of September 2007, I was was with a group of seven people who headed from Paris to Brussels for the SIOE demonstration.

Among our group we had ex socialists (myself and others), Jews, Catholics, one Protestant and representative of the MNR (A similar organisation to the Front National) who said that he used to be an anti-semite. He was carted off to the Brussels jail where he met up with FN voters, Vlaams Belang supporters other Jews. The jail was a noisy place but the noisiest were a handful of skinheads who didn't seem to belong to any group. There is no evidence other than they just came to look for a fight. Guess which group ended up on TV.

As an aside, the only International TV channel to give airtime to the organisers was Al Jazeera. And, I believe it was Steven Gash, was not interrupted as he gave his side ofthe story.

The Jewish thing is really a non-issue amongst anti jihadists and LGF has really not thought this one out.

It reminds me of the times I was in the States and people would tell me that the UK was opressing the Irish. It seemed such a bizarre premise that I didn't know where to start in refuting this.

If I were in the UK I would without hesitation vote for the BNP. In France I support Philippe de Villiers. And yes I have friends of colour but that is never enough to fend off accusations of racism. If I were in Belgium, I would vote VB.

My number one hope is that Islam is no longer an existential threat to my civilisation.

Posted by: Sebastien at November 16, 2007 6:29 AM

"The Jewish thing is really a non-issue amongst anti jihadists and LGF has really not thought this one out."

Let me correct that a bit, it has importance. Many anti-Jihadists are explicitly pro-Israel and pay close attention to protecting our Jewish minorities.

Islam, on the other hand, has strong anti-Jewish sentiment built right into their scriptures. If the Quran wasn't considered 'holy', it'd probably be illegal under current British legislation, merely for the anti-Jewish statements it contains.

Standing for the Jews is important in these times. It is a sad detail that the left is letting us down on this. We stand anyway.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 6:46 AM

From KM:"Can we reach a consensus on nationalist politics being a viable contender against the Jihad."

Oh, absolutely agree to that wholeheartedly. There's nothing wrong with nationalism per se.

I do think that Americans, on the whole, simply don't get nationalism when it comes to Europe. It gets quite funny at times. For example Churchill is venerated by many Americans, yet, as both Leon and Dreadwolf have both pointed out, the guy was an old fashioned hard nosed nationalist. To put it very mildly indeed.

From Watling:"If we aren't prepared to accept that people can change then there is logically no point letting anyone out of prison."

Well said. Good posts, Shiva About LGF. Many of LGF's posters' heroes - Hitchens, Steyn and many neo cons- used to be anti US far leftists. Ah well.

From shiva:"How many of you even knew about islam before 9/11"

Slobo tried to warn the world. Way back in 91, while the West was queueing up to watch Rambo 3. Even Mr Tudjman's entourage noted it. "Slobo's Leitmotif" was the term they used to describe Slobo's warnings about the Islamists.

From Sebastian:"It reminds me of the times I was in the States and people would tell me that the UK was opressing the Irish"

I know, it's funny, the ignorance.

From Henrik:"That failed miserably in the Balkans. Kohl, fresh from the reunification of Germany, and Clinton, eager to show his zeal in foreign matters, both made serious errors of judgement in matters of a complex country just out of Communist hibernation."

Yes. The irony was that during the Cold War, Yugoslavia was threatened by the Warsaw Pact. The Soviet Union tried to use the ethnic groups to weaken Yugoslavia. In the end it was NATO which played the minority card. It happened slowly at first - for example, in the meetings between CIA chief - Mr James Woolsey - and his Russian counterpart - Mr Yevgeny Primakov - there was precious little difference.

FromHenrik:Standing for the Jews is important in these times. It is a sad detail that the left is letting us down on this. We stand anyway."

Bravo.

From KM:"Fjordman has articulated far better the position of Europe than I ever could and on the whole I agree with his position."

Yes, I agree about Fjordman. I also think you write with a great deal of clarity too.

I hardly ever read LGF so I can't really contribute anything to the discussion except to note that many of the posters I really like to read on JW had been banned -so it seems- from LGF. I do think that PC has taken root most especially in Canada and the US and perhaps this can be seen in LGF. Anyway, I think that nationalism will be Europe's salvation. Warts and all.

Posted by: ewha1 at November 16, 2007 6:55 AM

Matamoros:

"She can be viewed in the same light as the Taliban apologist “revert” Yvonne Ridley. Like Ridley, she is prized for her propaganda value. Like Ridley, she has turned her back on her heritage and on her people and has instead taken up with those who most despise them. She is a moser, plain and simple, as is any other “Jew” that would support the BNP."

Isn't it a bit ridiculous to be writting something like that on a "thread" that only exist because some Europeans want to "preserve their heritage and their people"? But I guess Jews are somehow a special case?

Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 16, 2007 6:55 AM

From Sheik:"For Johnson, the US is a melting pot, therefore the whole world has to follow the US model. Johnsons standards are for all to follow. He who argues like that understands nothing about Europe, about her culture, the traditions, her peoples and the history of Europe."

Well well said.

Hear hear!!!

Posted by: ewha1 at November 16, 2007 7:06 AM

DanishDynamite, can I be blunt, its a funny thing to say but Jews are a special case to me and I hope to all anti-Jihadists.

I think that another rallying cry from the anti-Jihadists is "NEVER AGAIN", because it is the Islamics who want to kill all of the Jews on Earth and we must do all that we can to prevent that.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 7:06 AM

Eisvogel:

I am willing to translate important issues and I am able to do it correctly concerning the contents but I am not able to do it correctly concerning the diction... I'd need a native speaker to correct my translations.

I am willing to correct your English translations. I shall send an email to the address listed on the Kontakt page of "Acht der Schwerter". Geht das bei Ihnen in Ordnung?

watling

Posted by: watling at November 16, 2007 7:55 AM

Daffersd,

you can be as blunt as you want. Or atleast as blunt as Mr. Spencer will permit.
You are ofcourse also free to view Jews as a special case. I, however, loathe double-standards. There's no reason why you can't use the "Never again!" rallying cry without having to be a "mindless zombie" about it. Just because you support the Jews and don't want another holocaust, doesn't mean you have to hold Jews to a different standard than everyone else. In fact, it would be racist to do so...

Posted by: DanishDynamite at November 16, 2007 8:09 AM

Back to more important matters.

Pat Condell unloads on the MCB, nice:)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ead_1195057244

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 8:10 AM

Great download km

WOW

Posted by: ewha1 at November 16, 2007 8:23 AM

OT this is interesting as well:

Atlas shrugs reports CAIR is going after advertisers that work with talk radio host Michael Savage.

Stop CAIR's attack on free speech.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/11/boycott-officem.html

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 8:30 AM

Thankfully, in America I don't have to live with the opinions I had when I was a college student in the 70's.I remember sitting in (as in Sit In) a University chancellor's office with a VVAW guy who looked suspiciously like John Kerry. I don't remember his name, but he hated rice(the food).

Ever wonder why the media never talks about the Weathermen? I wasn't one, but I can tell you some very important journalists were.

I met a man in Germany in the mid 80's who had been a pilot for the Luftwaffe. This did not stop him from secretly flying Jews to safety. His best friend was an amazing man who had survived the concentration camps along with his wife. He even joked about it.

I also met a woman who taught school in Germany who was worried that the schools were teaching that the Holocaust did not exist. This was in 1986.
Wonder where the kids that were in school then are now?

Posted by: Aunt Bea at November 16, 2007 8:47 AM

"But I guess Jews are somehow a special case?"

The Jews indeed are a special case. The Quran makes them so, and the aggressive Jihad movement executes these commands.

We need to stand by Israel now, or we'll have a disaster later.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 8:49 AM

DanishDynamite, point taken, sorry, only a special case in that we should do right by them and their claim on Israel, not to hold them up as above criticism, I hope that is not being a mindless zombie ;-)

I would not have responded to Matamoros, but that comment was pretty deranged, so I understand your reaction.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 9:07 AM

To state the Jews as a special csase with Islam is a misunderstanding of Islam. Islam hates kuffars - be they Jews, hindus, bhuddists, christians, zoroaastrans, atheists - in short, they hate all non-believers. It is humanity that is a special case and the whole of humanity needs to be spared the horrors of the Islamic death cult.

It isn't just Israel we need to support. India, Thailand, Malaysia, the Phillipines, Sudan, Nigeria and of course, Serbia are just a few of the other states being scourged by Islamists and who desperately need to be freed from them.

The jihad is global and the whole of mankind is threatened by it, not just Israel.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 16, 2007 9:07 AM

Actually, the Italian fascists - in this particular case - has something to do with things. They were part of the ITS group of the European Parliament, which Vlaams Belang also was.

Now, I followed the group from its formation to its demise, and it was merely a technical group, formed to permit the participating parties to do useful things, like propose resolutions etc. It was clearly stated from the beginning that it was not a group of common ideology, and was created merely for technical purposes.

In the guilt-by-association world of Charles Johnson, however, any such technical connection becomes an irrecoverable proof of guilt. Charles desires perfect purity of everyone involved - and apparently is ready to attack anyone who does not live up to his ideals of what 'purity' means.

Applying such methods to European politics is guaranteed to create a big mess...

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 9:10 AM

I agree with Henrik in terms of Islamic aggression they are a special case.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 9:35 AM

Henrik

I'm not really bothered about what is written I am bothered by how Islamists behave. The only special treatment the jews get is being allowed dhimmi status, along with "children of the book".

Islamists are as brutal with other people as they are with jews. Oppression is oppression no matter how much space a single group is given in the Qu'ran. Just ask the mothers of Beslan, bhuddist monks in Thailand and the hindus of India.

I could list many more but I think the point is made. It is the kuffar that is najis and Islamists make that perfectly clear wherever they go.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 16, 2007 9:42 AM

It was the link to the site Islam in Europe in which a woman named Esther proclaimed that although she feared Islam she was even more frightened by the neo-nazi.

Esther's comment reminded me of American celebrity Rosy O'Donell's statement that American Christians are worse than the Taliban.

If defending Western civilization's Judeo-Christain ethics and traditions is now to be considered some form of white supremacy than the counter-jihad movement is in big trouble.

Socialist are in an unholy alliance with Islam and Socialism is the dominate political force in Europe. If anything Esther should fear herself and her fellow travellers for the unholy alliance they have made with Islam.

This is the point Charles Johnson misses.

Posted by: syn at November 16, 2007 9:57 AM

Can you trust the man who quoted this.

"Secular dogma like Nazism is less dangerous than Islamofascism that we see today ... because Islamofascism has a religious twist to it; it says 'God the Almighty ordered you to do this'.... It is trying to grow itself in fifty-five Muslim states. So potentially, you could have a success rate of several Nazi Germanys, if these people get their way.

Or can you trust the the man who said

"Islam Is A Wicked Vicious Faith
You need to look at the KORAN. Don’t believe what the papers say about Islam being a peace loving religion… Believe us, Islam is the biggest threat Britain has ever faced – Read the Koran and you’ll find out the truth"

The first quote is from a former moslem terrorist the second quote is from a nationalist.

Posted by: shiva at November 16, 2007 10:08 AM

Good discussion. I have learned a great deal about BNP, VB et. al. Those of us--especially those of us who are Americans--who are anti-PC must occasionally take our own temperature on that particular disease. Any party that builds its house on liberty, sovereignty, separation of church and state, and color blindness is headed in the right direction, as far as I'm concerned. And as much as we need to learn the lessons of the last war, we also need to stop fighting it. Particularly as there is a new war at hand, in case anybody had not noticed.

If I was English and saw what was happening to my country, I'm sure I would throw down with the BNP, especially given the alternatives which are nil. We have to put ourselves in their shoes. They are in the death throes of a civilization. It's not a civics class.

I think the LGF people are in the right place, but they should remember that freedom is won and preserved by people with muddy boots, not just witty quips.

Posted by: JohnAdams at November 16, 2007 10:27 AM

Shiva, nationalism is fine. You can find stupid nationalists anywhere, anytime - but probably you'll find more stupid socialists :)

The reason nationalism is good is that it act as a barrier against Islamism. If Islamists take root in one country but are expelled from another, within a few years it'll also be clear which of those two countries is doing better.

If, on the other hand, one erases the national borders, removes the power of the national governments and puts pressure on every country to adhere to the same ideological paradigm of political correctness, the power to resist political Islam evaporates.

This is one of the main reasons we have to be so careful about the European Union. It was concieved at a time where expansionist nationalism (note the difference!) had wrecked havoc, and a new model was applied. Now it is showing significant faults in the tast of countering radical Islam, and the model of further EU integration needs to be abandoned. Naïve politicians don't quite understand that yet, though.

Nationalism, in its pure sense, just means that one nation (that is, one group of people with a common identity) has the supreme power to decide what happens in their country. I consider it good.

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 10:29 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXrcOec21U0&feature=PlayList&p=C3F2270ACECC3901&index=3

Posted by: interestinconundrum at November 16, 2007 11:56 AM

"The growing menace of Islam needs to be dealt with decisively. In the UK, the mainstream political parties have yet to address it. So is the answer the British National Party (BNP), the only party to fight on an anti-Muslim platform?

Sadly, one or two commenters at this site seem to think so. Strangely enough, almost without exception, those posters who cheer for the BNP do not actually live in the UK. None has any direct experience or knowledge of the BNP, and their views are taken entirely from the party’s sanitised self-presentation on its website – I will not discredit the New English Review by linking to it; interested readers can google. The ignorance of the posters is matched only by their arrogance and presumption in telling UK citizens what is best for them. If a little learning is a dangerous thing, total ignorance is lethal.

In contrast, those of us with direct experience of the BNP, formerly the National Front, know it for what it is – a neo-Nazi white supremacist party, which does not allow non-white members and whose leader, Nick Griffin, has stated publicly that his white skin is what defines him.

The ideology of Islam – and Islam is much more an ideology than a religion – and that of Fascism are remarkably similar. Never has this similarity been better expressed than by Ibn Warraq, whose article for this edition of New English Review should be required reading. Only one similarity, specific to Britain’s Fascist party, has been left out: taqiyya.

Many readers with knowledge of Islam will be aware of the concept of taqiyya, or lying in the furtherance of Islam. This can take various forms, from signing treaties with no intention of keeping them to selectively quoting the earlier, more peaceful verses of the Koran when speaking to Westerners. The BNP, too, are past masters at the art of taqiyya. They have re-packaged themselves, knowing that if they let the electorate know what they really stood for they would never get in. Griffin co-opted a token Sikh and Jew, in the face of considerable opposition from party members. This is in a bid to present themselves as opposed to Islam the ideology, rather than Muslims, the dark-skinned people. Yet, while no longer advocating forced repatriation of non-whites, they advocate “voluntary” repatriation, which means that a white Muslim such as Yvonne Ridley would stay, but black Christians, atheists, Hindus, Sikhs and apostates would be “encouraged” to leave."

1.
Should the UK be run by a party whose leadership includes holocaust deniers?
2.
Two prominent figures in the counterjihad today are Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq. What would a white supremacist party have to say about them and other apostates, most of whom are not white?
3.
Do you believe everything you read on the BNP website? Why?
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog.cfm/frm/1952

Posted by: Silvester at November 16, 2007 12:18 PM

Henrik: Yes, there's only guilt by association in that argument. One can likewise say that VB was equal to the least non-democratic party in that group. It all depends on what effect you want to have. And Vlaams belang could very well have been the least non-democratic party in that group.

The EU-critical Swedish party Juni-listan was in a party-group with Lega Nord (maybe IND?), but they decided to participate despite a fascist party. They said that otherwise it was a risk that a pure fascist group had been created.

The group don't exist anymore, or? Which group do Vlaams Belang belong to today? (Tricky to pronounce the words at the end of this last sentence? ;-) )

We don’t have to be rude at Charles. We can’t change him, so just let him do what he does. I don’t expect anything interesting from LGF and will continuing to not read his blog (I‘ve read LGF two days now, because of this uninformed attack, that‘s all.)

-

sheik yer'mami: "I don't see any Nazi-movement that threatens my existence"

Is this because they are small? In that case one can cooperate with organized murdering cannibals too, don't you think? Murdering cannibals don't threat our freedom either, do they? (Btw Nazi parties are small in most of Europe, but not NDP in eastern Germany.)

There is at least one good reason to not cooperate with Nazis, Cannibals, BNP, the porn industry, and lots of others. I think normal moral judgement is good here. You will be judged by that too. (If the roof is burning, maybe the porn industry is a good partner too?!? ;-) ) The organizers of the Brussels event did choose to not invite and cooperate with BNP, despite many that say they were pro-Israel (which btw I don't think is correct). (See Gates of Vienna.)

If doubtful parties needs the anti-Jihad movement more than vice versa (Charles‘ “jump on the bandwagon“), and if that's the case the movement will hugely lose in the participation outcome equation (where reputation is one ingredient). So one shall be very cautious. (Another thing is if a country is in crisis and I cast my vote for Cannibals, Frankenstein’s monster, or BNP. That wont hurt me, at least not directly, but I think normal moral judgement shall be used casting votes too. Maybe not even Frankensteins monster will stop islamization; personal courage by politicians and people in more or less influential positions maybe is as important; at least before the monster gets a majority. But the end of democracy in that way I think has to be avoided; parties as racist Vlaams Blok transformed when the party attracted more people, but Nazi parties I don’t think will transform.)

So there are arguments/principles about risks where Charles is right, but his hard fact wasn’t exactly right. I think he used biased misleading information to make up a theory and then attacked a professional arrangement. (There are plenty of possible reasons he did that: Unconsious envy, not being in the center of the anti-Jihad anymore? He was amazed about the scoop potential when he got the SD-material from Expo, who wanted to create disorder in the anti-Jihad movement? He had been worried that Paul Belien was very conservative, and not mainly liberal, and saw a chance to counterstrike conservative influence which had to be stopped? He was only doing what he use to do, namely trying to balance anti-Jihad with attacks on western anti-modern non-liberal [or something] backwardness (so that he'll be a just and clean liberal)? Some combination of these things? None of these thing. The answer isn't interersting!)

For Americans with doubt:
Sverigedemokraterna (SD) is now seen as a legitimate constructive non racist party by a majority of other political parties at local level in municipals where SD has a considerable amount of seats in the local parliament. Until only a few years ago SD was very often labeled "racists" and "Nazis". Their crime was to challenge an immigration politics which led to the highest immigration in Europe. Also the early days racists in the party repeatedly "proved" the accusations in the media (as it did in Charles' post). Today SD in the media got the prefix “hostile to foreigners”, but one TV channel has now decided to drop that. But of course SD shall be watched, which they are.

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 16, 2007 12:34 PM

from the link above by Silvester.

Should the UK be run by a party whose leadership includes holocaust deniers?
Two prominent figures in the counterjihad today are Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ibn Warraq. What would a white supremacist party have to say about them and other apostates, most of whom are not white?
Do you believe everything you read on the BNP website? Why?

Comments (0)

Posted on 6:27 AM by Mary Jackson

Heh!

Read the thread silvester, evidence has been out foward that has refuted those claims.

Simply put the best evidence that those of the newenglishreview, (much as I respect their work), provide are the same worn out marxist links that always point to Searchlight and other such questionable links.

Oh I remember those days of debating with 'Grannyweatherwax', 'Interested' et al who after failing to convince with the usual leftist smear job, would resort to telling us about....

"how you should of heard how some BNP thugs were talking down my local pub. I can even give you the name of the Pub"

to

"Well my boyfriend was the victim of BNP thugs because he was a Joooooooooo"

And then you get the inane argument that the BNP would allow Yvonne Ridley to stay because she is white, where as they would forcefully expel people like Hirsi Ali & Warraq.

They provide no evidence to back up this claim, just trumpet it as fact and expect everyone to just swallow it.

The way I see it is I envisage the BNP trying someone like Ridley with treason for being complicit in the death of British troops by aggravating a 5th column of Islamists from her own country.

I wonder where they see the BNP lauding Ridley?

Their arguments are weak and from the looks of it of marginal opinion.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 12:59 PM

km,

1) No
2) That worries me
3) No, but you can not trust any political party

Interested as Old Peculiar die a wonderful job at Harry's Place debating with wit and skill.

GrannyWesthermax is a really nice person and write some excellent articles on Islam. I trust and like them both and they are not lefties.

The challange for the BNP is simply to debate and convince people like them and they do not have marginal views.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 16, 2007 2:03 PM

km: Speculations isn’t enough. Go read relevant BNP documents on their web site (a research above what Charles use to achieve). Search on Israel, and you find these kind of expressions:

"...especially in America, the Zionist lobby is massively powerful and influential....But also in Britain, if you look at the funding and influence in the Labour Party - again, there's a disproportionate number of Jews involved in that. But that is not to say that either a Jewish conspiracy or that Jews are involved or to blame.""

There are texts I guess VB never has been close to even 10-20 years ago, and of course not SD either.

BNP are against all capitalism. They obviously still are anti-Zionist National Socialists. Griffin now write about a two state solution in Middle east, but what does that really change? Different Nazi groups has promoted BNP just a few years ago. I don't think they have changed that much. I don't know if they can change, but if they will mobilize ordinary British people against mass immigration and Islam, maybe... But I can't see that they will be crowded with intelligent people, so... I think it would be better to start a new party or try to change existing parties in UK... Okay, this is very theoretical, this comment, but I really think this now (but wont blame any worried brit voting/promoting BNP).

SD was founded on anti immigration and a softer nationalism. VB is more problematic, but seems to have transformed into an acceptable party. (Maybe nationalism and cultural conservatism make liberals as Hirsi Ali and Bawer to attack VB? One Swedish liberal said to me that belief in a state of nation was Nazism; that it made me a Nazist; these liberals..... intolerant calls for "tolerance" a.k.a. no law; funny though that forced tolerance needs forced radical laws for "a new tolerant order" ... against tradition).

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 16, 2007 2:06 PM

Correction: "state of nation" shall be: national state.

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 16, 2007 2:17 PM

The BNP constitution
SECTION 2: MEMBERSHIP
2) The indigenous British ethnic groups deriving from the class of `Indigenous Caucasian' consist of members of: i) The Anglo-Saxon Folk Community; ii) The Celtic Scottish Folk Community; iii) The Scots-Northern Irish Folk Community; iv) The Celtic Welsh Folk Community; v) The Celtic Irish Folk Community; vi) The Celtic Cornish Folk Community; vii) The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic Folk Community; viii) The Celtic-Norse Folk Community; ix) The Anglo-Saxon-Norse Folk Community; x) The Anglo-Saxon-Indigenous European Folk Community; xi) Members of these ethnic groups who reside either within or outside Europe but ethnically derive from them.

3) Membership of the party shall be open only to those who are 16 years of age or over and whose ethnic origin is listed within Sub-section 2

In there own fascist words, if your not white, you’re not welcome!
Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”?

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 2:21 PM

Over six years of analytical research and the daily reporting of jihad activity, the optimistic push to reform islam through a common sense approach of awakening the ignorant masses to the abhorrent nature of islam has regretfully fallen on deaf ears, the attempt to dismantle a culture that thrives on its submission to a barbaric sharia law giving power to savage dictators is what muslims want. Why else do they move from their hellholes only to subvert the host nation they so gleefully move too? The connection between terrorism and islam is crystal clear except for the majority of politicians and journalists who refuse to acknowledge it. For over six years we have been banging our heads against a brick wall repeating the same kind of acts around the world motivated by the same ideology all to no avail. As our own culture warps and mutates to make way for this horrible alien creed it is only natural that political parties will form to defend a way of life that has created a fantastic lifestyle we have been privileged to live in. If we cannot change islam, and it appears we cannot, then surely we must defend our own 'proud' culture rather than continuing on this path of appeasement and ultimate capitulation. Bring on the political revolution before the inevitable civil war begins...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 16, 2007 2:29 PM

Bar you might call it Fascist, I would call it pragmatic thinking in the face imminent cultural collapse.

Read Fjordmans essays and think about his question he posed to CJ of LGF.

I am paraphraing here.

"Do the indiginous meaning traditionally white populations of Europe have the right to self determination and defence in reponse to the Eurabian onslaught."

I think they do and what I see happening with all the nationalist parties is some sort of resistance occuring. Will it be succesful, I am not sure, but I am not going to disparage their attempts to do so, especially when many of their arguments seem reasonable to me.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 2:49 PM

In there own fascist words, if your not white, you’re not welcome! Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”? Posted by: Bar [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 16, 2007 2:21 PM

This is a standard drive-by smear. To equate the BNP with Nazis is completely idiotic. There are a multitude of identity politics groups in Britain for Pakistanis, Sikhs, Polish, you name it, that didn't get a shred of denunciation from you as "Nazi" groups, but ethnically British do the same, you immediately anathematize. Pretty telling.

You don't have to agree with the BNP or support their ideas about ethnicity. That's fine. But to resort to Stalinist name calling makes me question what side you're actually on.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 2:51 PM

Let's take a look at the agenda of Sikh ethnic lobbyists in Britain:

* Ensure fair representation for Sikhs in the establishment
* Provide funding for Sikh organisations
* Help promote the Sikh identity and language
* Provide funding for Sikh schools
* Help preserve Sikh heritage
* Help protect Sikhs' human rights
* Help bring about self-determination for the Sikh nation
* Rescind the ban on the International Sikh Youth Federation which was outlawed as a terrorist organisation

Are these Sikhs crypto-Nazis as well as the BNP?

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 2:57 PM

You don't have to agree with the BNP or support their ideas about ethnicity. That's fine. But to resort to Stalinist name calling makes me question what side you're actually on.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 2:51 PM

Agreed, its a classic tactic for shutting down debate.

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 2:59 PM

So what about the Anti-Fascists,and Autonoms

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iupbxsHGlAA&feature=related

And lets not forget Stop the Islamization Denmark (SIOD) had organized a protest in Copenhagen.

On their way to the protest the organizers were brutally attacked, apparently not by Muslims but by left-wing radical anarchists.

The same groups which are attacking SD in Sweden and BNP members in the UK.

Posted by: shiva at November 16, 2007 3:33 PM

"Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”?"

That's what he said, along with 'socialist'.

I think 'nationalist' was unduely discredited, as he was rabidly expansionist, too, which the nationalist movements in Europe certainly aren't.

For some oddball reason, 'socialist' wasn't properly discredited, though...

Posted by: Henrik at November 16, 2007 4:37 PM

The restrictions on membership to the BNP, as pointed out in the comment by Bar above, are unacceptable; and I understand from reading a comment by Baron Boddisey over at Gates of Vienna, that for precisely this reason, they were not invited to the ContraJihad conference in Brussells.

I think the bottom line here is this: when you involve yourself in any type of activism you're going to rub shoulders with people of all stripes and colors-some of whom are extreme, some unseemly and some downright nefarious. However you move forward with the group you have and with the knowledge that changes will be made as circumstances evolve over time.

For instance; here in the US, widespread popular concern over unchecked illegal immigration has blossomed into a full-grown movement with groups such as the Minuteman having already sent activists to the US-Mexico Border to protest against the tide of illegal entries. Of course, the vast majority of Americans who are now or will be involved in this struggle are well-intentioned citizens acting out of concern for the integrity of this nation and its future stability. And it's a fact that some people involved simply hate Mexicans. This in not a reason to disengage or shy away from activism or even expressing an opinion on this matter for fear of being associated with extremists or being tarred by charges of racism. It is for the good people to take the reigns of this movement and sideline the extremists- not vice versa.

In the movie My Best Fiend, film-maker Werner Herzog tells of an evening spent with Klaus Kinski and some German theatre critic. At some point during dinner, the critic, speaking about Kinski's role in a recent play, described his performance as "excellent". Hearing this, Kinski's eyes went wide with rage- he threw his plate across the room, overturned the table and kicked away a chair and screamed:

"I was not... "excellent"!!

"I was... stupendous!!! MONUMENTAL!!!!!!!"

And so likewise was the recent(and one hopes-first annual) ContraJihad Conference in Brussells- not merely excellent, but stupendous... monumental!

Although it seems to have been somewhat sidelined by other issues(actually, just one other issue)
this was an event that brought together participants of different nationalities and different faiths representing concerned men and women from all four corners of the globe in an effort to focus energy and intellect towards the struggle against the single greatest threat to liberty and peace of our times. The time has come when bloggers become activists, activists become fighters, and mere mortal men and women become heroes in this struggle that will escalate into something more perilous more quickly than probably most of us foresee.

As they say: you go to war with the army you have. The group of men and women who were assembled in Brussells is an excellent start; and, for now, nothing I've heard about any of the participants has caused me to think otherwise.

The foundations for a sort of Haramintern International, or simply Haramintern, have been laid.

And distinctions have been made. Some people have responded to the call and have cast a wide net; choosing to form a broad alliance with others now deemed allies and come what may- and in the future of course, today's fellow travellers may part and new alliances formed as circumstances evolve and new facts come to light. This is good.

Others have chosen to withdraw in to fortress this or castle that; and have cut all ties for fear of dubious allies and entangling alliances. To fight their own fight. And that's fine.

And their are other struggles besides the one great one- there are lesser Good Fights.

But then, there are rat-trappers and there are hunters- and I know what's in my sights.

Cheers to all and may fight a good fight.

Posted by: november1981 at November 16, 2007 4:41 PM

PRCalDude
My apologies for not including everything under the sun, but this treads topic was not about Sikhs or Pakistanis, so it goes without saying that I would not include them in my post!
I do not support racism in any form.

“Stalinist name calling” what the heck is that supposed to mean? Nothing but meaningless magniloquence I suppose.

Hitler also ran on a political nationalist Anglo-Saxon platform with the same “all our problems are caused by the non-Anglo-Saxons” BS, so I clearly see the connection, even if you can not.

I don’t give a rats behind whose side you think I’m on, I certainly would never be on the BNP side, nor do I support all the chicken little commentators here who are always screaming, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, if we don’t act now and change the American Constitution to exclude all Moslem rights in general we are surely doomed.

KM
If the shoe fits,

Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

racism: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

Wear it.

I, as an American believe that the American Constitution with its “equal protection under the law” clause is paramount to any ethnicity, NO double standards allowed!

I am not attempting to stop any debate, Re-read my post, its right from the BNP constitution, only white European’s are allowed to be members. So what could there possibly be to debate?

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 4:55 PM

I am not attempting to stop any debate, Re-read my post, its right from the BNP constitution, only white European’s are allowed to be members. So what could there possibly be to debate?

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 4:55 PM

Again I refer you to Fjordmans essays.

This will be the last post from me on this thread, but I leave with this OT for those that are interested and into science.

'A simple theory of Everything'

Reality its all just a Joooo plot I tell ya!

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0770

Bwahahahahahahahaha

Posted by: km at November 16, 2007 5:06 PM

Bar -- Thank you for posting that info re. the BNP's racial requirements for membership. I wasn't aware of it.

Posted by: Josephine at November 16, 2007 5:07 PM

PRCalDude My apologies for not including everything under the sun, but this treads topic was not about Sikhs or Pakistanis, so it goes without saying that I would not include them in my post! I do not support racism in any form.

You just don't seem to mind the myriad identity politics groups for non-whites, which is an inconsistency amongst certain people on the right. If you want to somehow campaign to ban identity politics altogether, that would be consistent. I don't see you doing that though. You're objecting only when white people get into the identity politics business.

I'm not suggesting that you support racism, I'm just suggesting that you simply don't mind as long as it's not coming from whites.

“Stalinist name calling” what the heck is that supposed to mean? Nothing but meaningless magniloquence I suppose.

Hitler also ran on a political nationalist Anglo-Saxon platform with the same “all our problems are caused by the non-Anglo-Saxons” BS, so I clearly see the connection, even if you can not.

I'm afraid your imagining this parallel between the BNP's stated platform and Hitler's.

“Stalinist name calling” what the heck is that supposed to mean? Nothing but meaningless magniloquence I suppose.

What I meant was your attempts to demonize people who disagree with you (i.e. the BNP) as Nazis.

I don’t give a rats behind whose side you think I’m on, I certainly would never be on the BNP side, nor do I support all the chicken little commentators here who are always screaming, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, if we don’t act now and change the American Constitution to exclude all Moslem rights in general we are surely doomed.

As far as I know, the American Constitution doesn't allow its citizens to pursue an implementation of replacing the federal government with an Islamic one, and our laws with shari'ah.

It's funny that you should mention commentors as "chicken little" when you're on here opining with the rest of us.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 5:50 PM

"I, as an American believe that the American Constitution with its “equal protection under the law” clause is paramount to any ethnicity, NO double standards allowed!"

if you hadn't noticed but the BNP is a british democratic party, the fourth largest party in the UK, which I may add, plays no part in American politics. So I wouldn't let it worry your weekend.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 5:56 PM

PRCalDude My apologies for not including everything under the sun, but this treads topic was not about Sikhs or Pakistanis, so it goes without saying that I would not include them in my post! I do not support racism in any form.

You just don't seem to mind the myriad identity politics groups for non-whites, which is an inconsistency amongst certain people on the right. If you want to somehow campaign to ban identity politics altogether, that would be consistent. I don't see you doing that though. You're objecting only when white people get into the identity politics business.

I'm not suggesting that you support racism, I'm just suggesting that you simply don't mind as long as it's not coming from whites.

“Stalinist name calling” what the heck is that supposed to mean? Nothing but meaningless magniloquence I suppose.

Hitler also ran on a political nationalist Anglo-Saxon platform with the same “all our problems are caused by the non-Anglo-Saxons” BS, so I clearly see the connection, even if you can not.

I'm afraid your imagining this parallel between the BNP's stated platform and Hitler's.

“Stalinist name calling” what the heck is that supposed to mean? Nothing but meaningless magniloquence I suppose.

What I meant was your attempts to demonize people who disagree with you (i.e. the BNP) as Nazis.

I don’t give a rats behind whose side you think I’m on, I certainly would never be on the BNP side, nor do I support all the chicken little commentators here who are always screaming, the sky is falling, the sky is falling, if we don’t act now and change the American Constitution to exclude all Moslem rights in general we are surely doomed.

As far as I know, the American Constitution doesn't allow its citizens to pursue an implementation of replacing the federal government with an Islamic one, and our laws with shari'ah.

It's funny that you should mention commentors as "chicken little" when you're on here opining with the rest of us.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 6:10 PM

Bar:

Your hipocrisy sickens me, your ignorance makes me want to vomit.

Who the hell do you think you are to tell us, the British people how we should feel about our culture? You, a person from a country with no culture, you who aren't even a native of your own land you can tell us what is and isn't racist? No way, sort out your own house before you condemn ours because let's be frank, the US is stinking the globe out with its disastrous, misguided foreign policy. What the British built over 300 years your band of idiots have destroyed in just 70.

Unlike you, we British have a long proud history, a history being distorted, smeared, rubbished by people who seek to elevate alien cultures above our own. We are being displaced by mass immigration and we are being taxed to high heaven to pay for it. We have hindu groups, sikh groups, ISLAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda, we are instantly vilified in the left-wing marxist media and labelled "nazis". An orwellian thought control mechanism that causes ignorant fools to almost hiper-ventilate in their eagerness to show what good little puppies they are with a pay-off that their cosy little marxist multi-cult sham is prevented from critical analysis in free, open debate. I don't know what Amercians are like but when I see free speech denied to a group of people who don't quite agree with what is being spoon-fed them, I get a tad suspicious.

You and people like you are marxists. You are so shit-scared of PC you are wholly bilind and ignorant to what is going on in Europe and in MY COUNTRY, to MY PEOPLE, TO OUR LAND, a land my forefathers shed blood for.

I'll tell you this much: if my family could see what is happening to Britain right now, NOT ONE OF THEM would've shed their blood to defend it.

Thank God for the BNP, without them we would be routed - the dream of the marxist/socialist/liberal filth poisoning our society.

Tell you what: Read Fjordman and educate yourself, he is the one who can explain this whole sorry chapter in European history far far better than I - indeed anyone - and that includes Americans, no matter how good or popular their blogs are.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 16, 2007 6:41 PM

PRCalDude:

I'm just suggesting that you simply don't mind as long as it's not coming from whites.

Where did I say that? Please provide direct proof of my saying that.

I myself, if I were a Brit would qualify for BNP membership! Read: a big white guy.

The BNP demonizes themselfs by their own words, contained within their constitution, they surely don’t need my help.

I agree, the US constitution does not allow Shari’ah law, yet there are lots of commentary from posters on this site, maybe not this tread, that disagree. So I threw that in for extra measure.

Leon the other white meat farmer:
I know, but apparently context is not a concern of yours.

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 6:56 PM

Lionheart, we Americans ain't natives? My ancestors were in Virginia in 1690. Every country has historical skeletons in the closet. Shall we explore the British closet?

My ancestors came from England, we might be distant cousins (Thornhill, Moore, Brooks, Bayless, Simmons, Cannon, Bowers, and others), and your rant about Americans is embarrassing and infuriating.

And

I am not defending Mr Bar.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 16, 2007 7:09 PM

" We have hindu groups, sikh groups, ISLAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda, we are instantly vilified in the left-wing marxist media and labelled "nazis""

hear hear, this needed to be said and soon the whole nation of Great Britain will be shouting this out from every council estate and leafy suburb as one very loud ancient voice!

NO MORE, UP THE RESISTANCE!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 7:21 PM

Where did I say that? Please provide direct proof of my saying that.

You didn't say it. It's just evident by your disproportionate outrage against the BNP. You seem to think that just because they want to defend people who are ethnically British, they're somehow secretly trying to usher in a Fourth Reich, even after BNP members have specifically condemned such thing.

The new Nazis are the Muslims. Let's move on.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 7:24 PM

Where did I say that? Please provide direct proof of my saying that.

You didn't say it. It's just evident by your disproportionate outrage against the BNP. You seem to think that just because they want to defend people who are ethnically British, they're somehow secretly trying to usher in a Fourth Reich, even after BNP members have specifically condemned such thing.

I might add that if you were devote the same amount of energy to criticizing the various other identity politics groups out there as you do the BNP, you'd scarcely have time to say anything about the BNP. The BNP is one lonely political group out of many, and the only one thus far to take jihad seriously. Your hyperbole on this issue is frankly condemning you.

The new Nazis are the Muslims. Let's move on.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 7:28 PM

Cornelius

Houston we have a problem...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=27943_Yon-_Come_Home#comments

My only major problem with littlegreenfootballs is how they fall for this nonsense. The left wing MSM falls for it in Israel but Mr. Yon and Charles Johnson fall for it in Iraq....nice.

Also be sure to check out the comments section..

Lambs to the slaughter...

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at November 16, 2007 7:32 PM

There are literally hundreds of ethnic only organisations in Britain. For example there's The Black Police Association; Black Londoners Forum; Operation Black Vote and The Federation of Black Housing Associations to name but a few. There's one organisation that exists to protect and promote the interests of the native, ethnic English. The fact that the Ethnic English or British are light skinned is an accident of geography and no more.

The BNP's economic policies are loosley based on those of the Japanese and so can hardly be described as anti-capatalistic. They would more accurately be described as anti-globalist.

Their stated desire is to spread democracy down to the lowest level of local government possible. Hardly a position favoured by Nazi's. Whatever the BNP are they are not 'white supremacists' or 'Nazi's'. They are a nationalist party attempting to protect the distinct cultural heritage of these isands. Believe me that heritage is disappearing fast in many parts of the country.

Finally on the subject of Sikhs, Islam and the BNP I give you this extremely interesting video.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5313967073906592014&hl=en-GB

Posted by: Guardian Apostate at November 16, 2007 7:34 PM

Sheik

I understand Europe is not the melting pot the US is, but the golden rule should still apply.

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 8:02 PM

Lionheart
So vomit already and then maybe you came explain where my hypocrisy lies?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you are not indigenous to your county either, are you not aware that the Romans started the UK? Perhaps you missed that TV program?

How does me being a “native” have any aspect on my ability to determine what’s racist and what’s not?

Remember America (which has no culture) is the county that departed from the UK and started the greatest county this world has ever seen, and only because we did not like the British form of government, so we fixed it!

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 8:14 PM

So vomit already and then maybe you came explain where my hypocrisy lies?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you are not indigenous to your county either, are you not aware that the Romans started the UK? Perhaps you missed that TV program?

How does me being a “native” have any aspect on my ability to determine what’s racist and what’s not?

Remember America (which has no culture) is the county that departed from the UK and started the greatest county this world has ever seen, and only because we did not like the British form of government, so we fixed it!
Posted by: Bar

I've gotta hand it to you, you've probably provided the best motivation to vote BNP thus far on this thread.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 8:25 PM

"I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you are not indigenous to your county either, are you not aware that the Romans started the UK? Perhaps you missed that TV program?"

Is this what they teach young children in US schools?

HAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 8:33 PM

leon the other white meat farmer:
Are not some of the oldest buildings in the UK, Roman bath houses?
Dating from 47 A.D
Yeah, incredible that they really teach history, I guess something the UK doesn’t.

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 8:46 PM

Dude

stonehenge was a built hundreds of years, if not a thousand years before the romans.

in fact the first structure was wood, built by the beaker people.

i lived in lincoln, a roman city called lindum, there is prehistoric structures there way before the romans invaded these shores.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 8:50 PM

the UK was started in 1800AD, the romans invaded england, well it wasn't even called england but it was a nation of small tribes. the romans never invaded "scotland" nor "wales".
the UK did not exist.

Here this may help

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

and finally, i do not hold anything against you, this is a political discussion, i regard you as an ally in this fight against the marxists and jihadists.
but we can argue politely?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 8:56 PM

Lionheart:

“We have hindu groups, sikh groups, IS-FUCKING-LAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda, we are instantly vilified in the left-wing marxist media and labelled "Nazis”

At last! Finally we glimpse the TRUE face of the BNP. Its supporters couldn’t give a damn about anti-Islamism - that’s just a convenient hook to hang all their other hatreds on. The BNP is a white supremacist hate party, steeped in anti-Semitism and loathing for anyone who it deems “different” - blacks, Jews, homosexuals, Hindus, Sikhs, and foreigners of every kind. Anyone who is critical of its view is a “Marxist” or a “lefto-fascist”. Its agenda would turn Britain into a parody of South Africa under apartheid, where whites have the upper hand and those “non Indigenous Caucasians” who are not forced out are reduced to second-class citizenship.

This idea runs contrary to everything that Jihadwatch - and indeed the whole counter jihad - stands for. How can we support Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Pamela Geller, Michelle Malkin, Ali Sina, David Horowitz, or Melanie Phillips, while giving space to people who would label these true anti-jihadists as either sinister Zionist manipulators or inferior citizens?

I’m not an LGF-er, but Charles Johnson has it dead right regarding these Nazis. They will poison the counter jihad message as sure as anything. Two years ago you’d hardly see any neo-Nazis on here. Now we are flooded with them. They are using the boards at Jihadwatch, and the other counter jihad sites, to spread their own message. Read some of the posts above, views that have appeared in previous threads too. What a great image they must present to the casual visitor - comments excusing Holocaust denial, demonising minorities, and espousing white supremacist rhetoric. I wonder how many first-time visitors have glanced at the comments pages, read a few rants from our resident neo-Nazis, and dismissed Jihadwatch - and possibly the whole counterjihad - as simply another front for speading racial hatred?

Jihadwatch does not need neo-Nazis. But these neo-Nazis need Jihadwatch. Posting their propaganda here gives their message a wider, mainstream audience, and the support that is implied (I know that it's not given) by their posts appearing here lends them credibility and respectability.

Robert, you have made your position re: political extremists very clear time and again on here. These Nazis, however, couldn’t give a damn. Not for you or your team, not for the image of Jihadwatch, not for anything beside using your site to advance their cause. I urge you take a leaf out of Charles Johnson’s book, and flush these leeches back down the Stormfront sewer where they belong.

Posted by: Matamoros at November 16, 2007 9:29 PM

leon the other white meat farmer:
I consider you as ally also.

Yeah, I guess we can ague politely, except I must warn you of the fact that I like to drink this dam “Newcastle” beer, so I may be overly aggressive, it’s the beer from England, which is way better then American beer. I can drink this stuff like water! And just so you know, I love the other white meat, North Carolina style for this Californian with a red pepper vinegar sauce

And I now understand as an American I my see things differently then you. Yet at the same time I think the golden rule should still prevail

Posted by: Bar at November 16, 2007 9:34 PM

At last! Finally we glimpse the TRUE face of the BNP. Its supporters couldn’t give a damn about anti-Islamism - that’s just a convenient hook to hang all their other hatreds on. The BNP is a white supremacist hate party, steeped in anti-Semitism and loathing for anyone who it deems “different” - blacks, Jews, homosexuals, Hindus, Sikhs, and foreigners of every kind. Anyone who is critical of its view is a “Marxist” or a “lefto-fascist”. Its agenda would turn Britain into a parody of South Africa under apartheid, where whites have the upper hand and those “non Indigenous Caucasians” who are not forced out are reduced to second-class citizenship.

He was pointing out the double standard of those who are villifying the BNP for practicing identity politics. Everyone is allowed theirs but the ethnically British.

Maybe you're not worth responding to. Anyone who would equate the BNP with the Nazi party in the 1930s is just practicing what Hitler called "spiritual terror."

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 16, 2007 9:44 PM

seriously, the BNP only come up in topic when RS makes a point in calling us neo-nazis! this thread for example.

if RS or jihadwatch never mentioned nationalist organisations then you probably wouldn't hear about the BNP. how can you seriously publish a post stating that the BNP are "neo-nazis", then go jump on a plane and expect everyone to talk about muslims are bad etc and not stick up for "our lads"?

i think that the jihadwatch team and RS needs to think about this before they post.

it's like kicking in a house guests front door, calling them a fascist and then when they respond telling them that they are bringing the house into disrespect for mentioning "neo-nazis".

if you are so against the BNP etc then simply delete all posts, including this thread entitled "Vlaams Belang, Charles Johnson, and all that" and never mention the british national party ever again!!!

(hope i wrote that respectfully?)

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 9:53 PM

bar

my newcastle brown ale posts were removed? i was trying to lighten the subject. oh well.

they were funny though, but not jihadist evil bnp subject matter so i guess thats why they were deleted? or brian blessed works for admin?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 16, 2007 10:16 PM

You, a person from a country with no culture, you who aren't even a native of your own land you can tell us what is and isn't racist Posted by Lionheart

Hey, I loved your post and feel your pain so I'll forgive your unkind comments about my beloved America. And need I remind you that we do so have "culture"; have you forgotten about McDonalds?

One more thing---you're copping the islamic mantra when you accuse us of not being natives of our own country. My ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War and I'm much more of a native and true American than any muslim immigrant will ever be. I regret the way the native American Indians were treated by my mostly British predecessors but I can't change history and people were especially intolerant and cruel back then, weren't they, even "native" Englishmen. Do you consider Anglo Australians non-natives too? How about New Zealanders?

I'm on your side; immigration should not marginalize a nation's indigenous people and it certainly appears that the British people are becoming aliens and second-class citizens in their own country.

Posted by: Susanp at November 17, 2007 2:25 AM

"The EU-critical Swedish party Juni-listan"

Actually, it's Danish. Stout, left-wing fellows. We can work with these people.

"was in a party-group with Lega Nord (maybe IND?)"
"The group don't exist anymore, or?"

If it was the ITS (I don't recall exactly), yes it's gone a few days ago.

"Which group do Vlaams Belang belong to today?"

None, a fact that costs them resources and influence.

I used to play (last year) a EU-Parliament simulation game (http://www.BeMEP.eu), where I studied the charters of the groups in quite some detail, and opted without hesitation for the UEN group. Then I found that my real political party Dansk Folkeparti belongs to that group, but that Vlaams Belang doesn't. I found that puzzling and asked around. It turned out that the right-wing extremist smears around VB had some UEN-members up in arms and therefore were afraid to let them in.

These smears have real consequences. I'm hoping that VB will now be invited to the UEN group. They belong there.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 3:22 AM

Posted by: Josephine

Bar -- Thank you for posting that info re. the BNP's racial requirements for membership. I wasn't aware of it.

The cake under the cherry should be looked at because the cherry could be the poison pill that many seemed to have swallowed.

The State as a mechanism of the nation is defined in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States 1933 Article 1.

This treaty defines a 'State' as requiring ;

1) A Permanent population

2) A defined territory

3) A government

4) A capacity to enter into relations with other states.

The British Constitutional Nation State has possessed these features since the creation of the English Nation in the 10th Century with the signing of the Magna Carta, from which it derives, and is therefore one of the oldest continuous constitutional nation states in the world.

The primary component of any Nation State is its people, this being its permanent indigenous population.

The permanent population of any state are the indigenous people and the indigenous community of that nation who historically formed the nation and the state itself. These people are the Natural Citizens of the State.

The indigenous people create the State and the State derives its authority only from it representing the interests of the indigenous People.

A permanent indigenous population is not composed of transient migrants, refugees, naturalised subjects or guest workers utilising modern global transit systems to enter and exit nation states at will.

The permanent population and citizenry of Britain are solely those people who are descendants of the indigenous Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and closely assimilated Northern European population of the British National Community whose ancestors first created the British State at the time of the Act of Settlement 1701, and whose ancestors fought for their rights as enacted in Magna Carta and the Bill Of Rights.

They alone are the Natural Citizens of the British Constitutional Nation State and National Community who possess Constitutional Rights as well as individual civil liberties and civil rights.

The BNP strives restore power to the people and end the tyranny of the minorities.

The following are the anti-thesis of the Constitutional State as these are minorities exercising power over the majority for the benefit of minorities:-

The corrupt political parties and their corporate backers and the QUANGO state structures they have created ;

The ethnic minority pressure groups - the CRE and the Race Relations Industry

The international immigrant criminal gangs

The Muslim Political lobby groups that want Sharia law in the UK

Politically correct Media and BBC, Channel 4 etc

The Judges and the Attorney General, ACPO, CPS, DPP etc

The EU and UN - supra-national institutions.

The banks and financial institutions - WTO and World Bank

The oil companies and energy corporations

The Far Left intellectuals and academics who espouse universal rights based on internationalism

The Reactionary Capitalist elite that espouse globalism and international capitalism

All of the above have undermined our democratic society.

The right of the State in the past to delegate power to foreign institutions such as the EU and UN also means the State in the name of the People has the right to repatriate those powers whenever it wishes. This is the basis of the sovereignty of Parliament itself.

The right of the State to include foreign peoples as citizens of the State in the past also means the State has the power to change the legal status of those foreign peoples as citizens of the State if required by circumstance relating to their wrongdoings or by a free vote of the people themselves.

The State is also responsible for educating the individual about their rights and liberties and hence ensures the liberty of the individual and the community itself.

If the State did not educate the individual about the constitution then they would have no rights, for they and the community would remain ignorant of the fact that such rights even existed.

Any nation that has open borders cannot be an Open Society.

The fact that the British nation state has millions of illegal immigrants in the country means we cannot operate or exist as an Open Society.

Any nation that seeks to save the world merely ends up betraying its own people.

In Modern Britain we cannot live in an Open Society as we have allowed millions of illegal immigrants, bogus refugees, foreign criminals and other illegal entrants in the country that threaten national security.

People do not live in an Open Society if they live in fear of suicide bombers, foreign criminals, immigrants colonising their areas and terrorists. The basis of an Open Society is predicated on the freedom from fear.

The presence of the terrorists in the nation allows the Liberal Fascists to pass ever more laws that destroy the basis of the Open Society. The Politicians are as dangerous to liberty as the Terrorists.

Both laws and bombs kill liberty.

Only by the State removing those illegal entrants and terrorists that threaten the people can the threat from the politicians be removed.

An Open Society can only exist in nations that control their borders and rigorously police who comes in and out of the country and who also prohibit foreign religious groups and alien ethnic groups from organising to challenge the demographic, cultural and social, economic, political supremacy of Every Open Society must resist all those forces that threaten the constitutional structure and settlement of the State.

Political freedom and civil liberties in an open society depend upon nationalist policies and a strong constitutional state structure. If the intellectual elite in any society is obsessed only with the rights of individuals or aliens then it is an Ideological Open Society as opposed to a Functional Open Society. We support an National Community as opposed to an Open Society. An Open Society in a nation existing under the dominion of globalisation is neither free, nor a community nor a society. The indigenous people are deracinated and relegated to the status of economic units merely squatting on the land. Community is transformed into colonies of immigrants and Society is replaced with wage slavery and the black economy.

The nation is not free when terrorists roam the streets and the government pass ever more laws to remove our civil rights and liberties.

The National Community is concerned with using the mechanisms of the State, government and the Market in as minimal manner as possible to ensure the ancestral rights and individual liberties of the families and individuals that form the micro-communities of the Nation are protected and promoted both from internal threats and external aggressors.

A National Community is based on defending and securing the organic realities of the nation as opposed to internationalist ideological constructs. The National Community is concerned with securing the borders of the nation state, protecting the national environment, removing illegal aliens and illegal entrants, making sure people have decent homes, adequate health care, schools, that helps the old the disabled and the poor and that seeks to secure the civil rights and the civil liberties of the British people above all others.

The National Community is based on the organic reality of the people and the environment of the nation both being dependent upon the other for survival. It recognises the importance and validity of the physical laws that govern human societies and seeks to live within the sustainable natural limits of its own environment. It ensures the citizens and subjects of the nation reap real social and economic benefits as opposed to the hollow 'intellectual ' benefits of living in poverty in an Ideological Open Society that invites the world to live within its borders.

In the Ideological Open Society the concept of universal rights is more important than Community Rights.

In the Ideological Open Society if 200 million Chinese fled to Britain and claimed refugees status, then each of them would have the exact same Citizenship rights as those Britons whose ancestors have resided here for thousands of years. Even though the influx of aliens would destroy Britain both socially and environmentally and destroy all the civil rights and liberties of those of us already living in Britain, the proponents of the Ideological Open Society would still allow them to stay and bestow upon them full British Citizenship status.

The Social Contract that forms the functional basis of the National Community also demands the power of the State to secure and perpetuate its own existence. The fundamental rules that the British State exists to protect are non-negotiable rules, they are the constitutional core of the Nation state itself and form the framework of governance and society itself. Human dignity exists in modern societies only through a strong State that exists only to serve the interests and secure the interests of the British people themselves and the British national community.

In the modern globalised system citizenship is determined not by birth or by the State but by economics, ideology and international dynamics ranging from civil wars to climate change.

Unless the indigenous peoples of the British nation are given Constitutional Rights that recognise the importance of our rights as a Community and that allow them to repatriate their sovereign power from all supra-national political, religious, economic and corporate elites and end the dynamic of de-nationalisation then they will eventually be dispossessed of their own country.

This process of the de-nationalisation threatens the very existence of the United Kingdom as an ethnic, cultural, political, economic and social unity of the British nation itself. Therefore the State must become the mechanism that ensures that Constitutional Rights are protected and Natural Citizens empowered to reverse this process. De-Nationalisation must be followed by Re-Nationalisation.

In the British Constitutional State the laws and rights that apply to the Natural Citizens include the constitutional laws of the UK. The People are the Guardians of Liberty. They should be able to claim direct rights relating to the Constitution in public law cases against the government and to defend themselves in legal cases using the constitution.

Why should Britons lose their right to free speech and the right to enjoy their own property because of politically correct Race Relations Laws designed to silence debate on mass immigration into Britain.

Why should we lose our right to criticize Islamic fundamentalism just because Islamic terrorists are bombing British cities and Saudi Arabian oil billionaires are supping in Downing Street with the Prime Minister ?

We must enact and empower Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights and restore total power to the British Constitution.

We must also restore Unrestricted Free Speech. We must restore our traditional constitutional liberties.

Natural Citizens also in the future should have to agree by referendum to any laws that change the constitutional nature or structures of the British State. Natural Citizens will have Constitutional Civil Rights and these will be Direct Claim Rights against the government. They will be able to use the Constitution against the government and the laws of transient political parties in government in civil and criminal cases eg in Race Relations Acts that limit free speech, that say they cannot discriminate against people, that limit their right to use their property as they wish.

The liberties of our ancestors are our sacred heritage.

Those whose ancestors were the creators of the State, are the masters of the State. It is only in their best interests that the government must act at all times. The State and the government are merely mechanisms for the preservation and promotion of the interests of the people that created them. Their function is to serve the society that gives them form. Through the Constitutional State the Naturalised Citizen becomes the Guardians of liberty for all the people. The Naturalised Citizen depends on the Natural Citizen to monitor, defend and protect society from all internal tyrants whether in Ermine, suits, uniforms or a wearing Crown.

The British constitution is the foundation of the Social Contract. For those with Natural Citizenship the British constitution is a living process, an active set of principals that can be claimed directly against the State itself in a court of law if the State is itself changing any of its own historical structures, rules, precedents and processes either directly through Parliament in the form of laws or indirectly such as through the activities of semi autonomous regulatory processes of the international and national economic, political, social and cultural systems. The role of the indigenous people in the Social Contract is to ensure the State is acting in accord with the interests of the people. Only by the people remaining loyal to the State and defending the Constitution can the People defeat the threat of internationalism.

Where the State has exercised its legislative authority in the past to alter the constitution of the UK without seeking the opinion of the Natural Citizens in the form of REFERENDA , then such laws are inherently null and void. They have to agree to any laws that change the constitutional nature or structures of the British State.

The failure of the State to give its indigenous citizens their Constitutional Claim Rights in the past to fairly challenge the laws passed by the politicians in the past thereby nullifies the existence of all present laws passed to the detriment of the people and the nation. Whenever a law in the past has changeds a constitutional rule then express permission for this change must have been given by the Natural Citizens via a referenda run according to equal access to the media and funded by the government. If that did not happen, then that law today has no legal basis.

That's is why we must also regulate the power of the media to ensure that they cannot campaign for specific political parties because of their own sectarian financial interests or causes antithetical to the national interest or the interests of the Natural Citizens. The failure of the British political system to make the Constitution an active principal for its citizens to challenge laws on a par with the right of Parliamentarians to pass laws means the laws that have been passed by the politicians do not derive their authority from the People.

The ultimate authority for the legitimacy of all laws is not the state, the government or the politicians - IT IS THE PEOPLE.

The right of the people to challenge the laws of the politicians is the basis of democracy. In the party political system the politicians are either the instruments of sectarian social interests, ideology or capital, they are not the defenders of liberty or the constitution.

No ESTABLISHMENT politician goes into politics to defend the British constitution or the civil rights of the people, they are chasing pensions, directorships, honours and titles.

They use their governmental power to create laws as an instrument of those that fund them and support them, such as the trade unions and big business.The State is not safe in the hands of the politicians without a constitutional checking mechanism, in their hands the torch of freedom becomes the firebrand of tyranny. Naturalised Subjects should have the same civil liberties as the Natural Citizens and they can also claim their rights to use the ECHR and HRA 1998 to stop the government unlawfully interfering with their civil liberties and freedoms to do all that which is not prohibited by law.

Natural Citizenship is held solely by the indigenous peoples as defined under the concept of Jus Sanguinus. They should hold Passports with English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish and Anglo-Irish or as Indigenous British.

Naturalised Subject status is Jus Solis status. This applies to all immigrants. They are subjects of the government under the protection of the Crown.

They have to abide by the rules of the Social Contract both with the Natural Citizens and as regards their duties to the State.

The social contract with all those Naturalised Subjects that were allowed to enter the UK was predicated on certain fundamentals ;

1 ) That they accepted under the British constitutional system that it was the British politicians that invited them and that if they wished the British people and the politicians they elect would always have the right on our democratic system to ask them to leave. Also that they did not come here to become colonists as opposed to subjects or seek to organise to impose their culture or ways on us and our society. The rights of the indigenous majority are the basis of our national Democracy.

2) That they did not break the law when in the country and that they remained as lawful subjects of the State. That they must obey the law or leave.

3) That they did not assist the enemies of the British State or be involved in terrorism or supporting terrorism in any way.

4) That they entered the country lawfully and did not assist others to enter the country illegally.

5) That they did not organise politically to impose their religion or culture on the British state and British society. This Land is our Land.

6) That they pledged exclusive loyalty to the British nation and people before their loyalty to their religion or country of birth.

7) That they pledged to conform to our ancestral constitution, culture, traditions and way of life in our land.

8) That they would not use the political or legal systems to undermine the constitutional structure of the British State or seek to use the law, religion or politics to undermine the constitutional structure of the British state.

9) That they would not use their liberties to threaten liberty itself and our society.

10) That they owed their exclusive loyalty to the British people and Nation and not any ideological, national or theological third party.

11) That they understand that Democracy is the rule of the majority. The rule of minorities is the anti-thesis of democracy.

Those immigrants and Naturalised Subjects that have breached or exploited these rules are in breach of their citizenship rights and therefore are liable for deportation and removal from the country in the name of National Security and returned to their ancestral lands under the principle of Lex Sanguinis and the Right of Return as defined under the Leges Sanguinis laws of those nations they came from.

John lee Barnes

Now is this racist.

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 3:55 AM

I said I was leaving this thread but I feel compelled to point out a few caveats from the ongoing discussion that are germaine to the whole debate and in the process highlight the methods of a provocateur

Metamoron has decided to contribute to the discussion by quoting Lionheart and using this as a method to attack his intentions and those of the BNP.

Lionheart:

“We have hindu groups, sikh groups, IS-FUCKING-LAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda, we are instantly vilified in the left-wing marxist media and labelled "Nazis”

Whereas a quick search of the thread shows the correct sentance to be.

Unlike you, we British have a long proud history, a history being distorted, smeared, rubbished by people who seek to elevate alien cultures above our own. We are being displaced by mass immigration and we are being taxed to high heaven to pay for it. We have hindu groups, sikh groups, ISLAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda, we are instantly vilified in the left-wing marxist media and labelled "nazis".

Posted by: Lionheart at November 16, 2007 6:41 PM

Unless a comment has been deleted, what we see here is a seruptitious manipulation of words straight from the Marxist rule book.

Moron the goes onto say....

At last! Finally we glimpse the TRUE face of the BNP. Its supporters couldn’t give a damn about anti-Islamism - that’s just a convenient hook to hang all their other hatreds on.

It is you Moron that has shown your true face, your true agenda. Your clouding of the debate is a something that needs to be addressed and those outside of the UK particularly the US need to fully understand who and what we are dealing with here.

It is a sure thing that organized leftist groups in Britain including the Government will be monitoring these discussions with there own nefarious agendas. One of the most outrageous of these is the no-platform policy instituted against the BNP.

Moron I believe is following this agenda, he is here saying the right things about Islam, the commonal (even left leaning mulit-cultized) Brit can recognize the problem of Islam. But the current EU supporting main powers have tight and totalitarian grip on the populace paticularly communication, information and controlling the narative even through to manipulation of blogs as important as this.

The BNP is a white supremacist hate party, steeped in anti-Semitism and loathing for anyone who it deems “different” - blacks, Jews, homosexuals, Hindus, Sikhs, and foreigners of every kind. Anyone who is critical of its view is a “Marxist” or a “lefto-fascist”. Its agenda would turn Britain into a parody of South Africa under apartheid, where whites have the upper hand and those “non Indigenous Caucasians” who are not forced out are reduced to second-class citizenship.

Really now I just watched a video on this thread of the BNP working with Sikh groups, did I just imagine that moron. And where exactly do you see that the “non Indigenous Caucasians” who are not forced out are reduced to second-class citizenship.

You just imply it and people here are supoosed to accept it as fact. You then go on to say...

This idea runs contrary to everything that Jihadwatch - and indeed the whole counter jihad - stands for. How can we support Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Pamela Geller, Michelle Malkin, Ali Sina, David Horowitz, or Melanie Phillips, while giving space to people who would label these true anti-jihadists as either sinister Zionist manipulators or inferior citizens?

I think you will find that at its core JW is about the promoting of freedom of consciounce and speech and reistance to anything that would inhibit that. Take your point about how can we support for example David Horowitz someone who associated with the Black panthers or what about even Walid shoebat a former Pali-jihadist. The reason people like myself are able to support fully these people is because of what they say and do now not what they did. Hence any rational actor can look at the BNP and say ok I am prepared to hear what they say.

Heres some more drivel from Mororn.....

I’m not an LGF-er, but Charles Johnson has it dead right regarding these Nazis. They will poison the counter jihad message as sure as anything. Two years ago you’d hardly see any neo-Nazis on here. Now we are flooded with them.

Where are these neo-nazis Moron I dont see anyone here calling for the reintroduction of National socialism, or the next Reich. I see a lot of people worried about the effects of uncontrolled migration and the subsequent spread of Islamism into culturally incompatible areas. So when you say....

They are using the boards at Jihadwatch, and the other counter jihad sites, to spread their own message. Read some of the posts above, views that have appeared in previous threads too. What a great image they must present to the casual visitor - comments excusing Holocaust denial, demonising minorities, and espousing white supremacist rhetoric. I wonder how many first-time visitors have glanced at the comments pages, read a few rants from our resident neo-Nazis, and dismissed Jihadwatch - and possibly the whole counterjihad - as simply another front for speading racial hatred?

I am going to counter, it is Morons like you who make this site look bad, you are the one throwing neo-Nazi slurs round here like a monkey smearing its own faeces on the cage walls, yet it is you who is acting most like a Nazi.

Jihadwatch does not need neo-Nazis. But these neo-Nazis need Jihadwatch. Posting their propaganda here gives their message a wider, mainstream audience, and the support that is implied (I know that it's not given) by their posts appearing here lends them credibility and respectability.

Precisely, now hopefully I wont have to tell you where your coat is.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 3:59 AM

"Where are these neo-nazis?"

Czech Republic had some of them holding a street brawl recently.

I don't think they have any association with anti-Jihad activities. As David Horowitz documents at Terrorism Awareness Project, they probably wouldn't be inclined to have any.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 4:23 AM

Henrik, I know, but the point I was trying to make is I dont see people on this forum acting like nazis, but Morons shit flinging tries to make it look like there is.

He/She/It is way more dangerous to RS & JW than people who want to talk about legitimate and legal political parties that have renounced their former positions, who have been delibrately misrepresented and are actively fighting Islamism.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 5:07 AM

KM:

My sincere thanks for your response to Moron, word perfect. Ineteresting to see that he'd like RS to silence us. And he has the neck to call others "nazis". I guess mirrors are in short supply in that household.

Bar and Susanp - Let me make something clear: I love America OK? The point I was trying to make - maybe failing to make - was that Americans like bar and moron are fine calling us nazis because of how we feel about our nation and our culture. Yet we could turn it on you and accuse you of the same and you would rightly feel resentful and that we don't understand. If we played the nazi card against you because of what happened to the native american indian you would feel that you were being unfairly treated. Now at least you know how we Brits feel when I and people who share my patriotism are called "nazis".

Another aspect to draw from this is that I don't want uncontrolled immigration to do to the native British what it did to the native Americans throughtout the Americas. Not blaming with this, it was a long time ago but I don't want to see Brits become a minority in their own land. A land that is theirs by right, built from the hard labour and sweat of our forefathers, a land they fought and defended at high cost of blood and life, a land and people that gave the world so much. It belongs to the native British BY RIGHT.

And bar, please do a little bit of basic research about Britain, your post about the forming of Britain really was comical.

For what is happening to my land - and to other nations in Europe - I stand full square with the BNP against the marxists, islamists and global capitalists who are leading us down the path to destruction.

And I'm damn proud to stand with them.

I'm going to leave the debate now, but can I say thank you for what has been a spirited, at times heated but for the large part civil debate, and I've learned a lot from it. And thanks also to Robert for allowing us to speak.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 17, 2007 5:12 AM

Km, I was actually substantiating your point by pointing out where the neo-Nazis can be found. Now anyone here eager to bunk some Nazi skull have a real lead to follow. And it's away from this blog, physically and ideologically - as documented by the David Horowitz link I included.

Of course I doubt that any of these cybermud-slingers have the courage to seek out the real Nazis and confront them...

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 5:57 AM

Lionheart, it was the least I could do.

You said:

For what is happening to my land - and to other nations in Europe - I stand full square with the BNP against the marxists, islamists and global capitalists who are leading us down the path to destruction.

And I'm damn proud to stand with them.

Britain needs more people like you.

Henrik, sorry I misunderstood your comment, I agree with your statement:

Of course I doubt that any of these cybermud-slingers have the courage to seek out the real Nazis and confront them...

Truer words words were never said.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 6:24 AM

Thankyou KM for high-lighting Morons comment

Jihadwatch does not need neo-Nazis. But these neo-Nazis need Jihadwatch. Posting their propaganda here gives their message a wider, mainstream audience, and the support that is implied (I know that it's not given) by their posts appearing here lends them credibility and respectability.

The BNP where campaigning against Islamization long before Jihad Watch,LGF,and most of the other mainstream anti-jihad site ever existed.

I’m not an LGF-er, but Charles Johnson has it dead right regarding these Nazis. They will poison the counter jihad message as sure as anything. Two years ago you’d hardly see any neo-Nazis on here. Now we are flooded with them.

And

They are using the boards at Jihadwatch, and the other counter jihad sites, to spread their own message.

I do not recall moron posting here 2-3 years ago, where-as Km, SusanP, Sheik yer mami (Terminator)and myself are all long time posters here, and Jihad Watch has not been diminished with our presence

It seems that Moron becomes hyper active only when there is a BNP bashing thread in progress

Moron are you one of Search Lights Red Fascist minions, who along with the islamonazis a bigger threat than the BNP will ever be

--------------------------------------------------

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

I think that the jihadwatch team and RS needs to think about this before they post.

I noticed the Jihad Watch team and RS where very quiet about Nick Griffins trial.

I also notice that the Jihad Watch team and RS have been very quiet on this thread.

It one thing to load the gun, and another to fire the bullet.

Nick Griffins has stood in a court of Law fighting Islamization, yet did not receive any coverage from the Jihad Watch team only condemnation for their past history of 10,15,20,years ago.

Nick Griffins is not stupid, he is fully aware that should he revert back to his racist and Holocaust-denying white supremacist days then he will lose a lot of support and waste more than 10 years hard work of making the BNP a respectable party

We should Judge griffins on what he is doing now and give him the same respect as what is poured over former terrorists and murders.

Just Know what Nick Griffin is doing in England is just as valid as Robert Spencer is doing, The only difference is, RS is meeting head on with books, while Griffin is fighting with politics, and I find it very depressing that the Jihad Watch team are undermining the tremendous work that Griffin and BNP are doing.It is also very dishearting to see how LGF/JW and a host of American Anti Jihad Main Stream sites are undermining the efforts of BNP SD and VB, especially when they do not have any-thing like these parties in America.

Also Roberts remark concerning is very repugnant in light the the violence that is being used against BNP, SD and VB and any other group that is active against islamization, and this violence does not come from the muslims but from the various anti-fascist groups, edged on by such publications as Search-light and Expo, who are supported by the goverments that are striving for a Eurorabia

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 6:32 AM

PRCalDude's point below has some validity:

"You just don't seem to mind the myriad identity politics groups for non-whites, which is an inconsistency amongst certain people on the right. If you want to somehow campaign to ban identity politics altogether, that would be consistent. I don't see you doing that though. You're objecting only when white people get into the identity politics business."

Because the unique history of the US - from slavery, our only civil war, atrocities of the KKK, the immoral "separate but equal" policies - includes such a long history of minority oppression by whites, we do have views on identity politics as he describes. That's just the way it is, and most of us recognize the logical inconsistency.

I am absolutely opposed to racism or supremacism in any form, but I will not judge anyone for supporting SD, VB, BNP or whomever in their own country. Your country is different, your history is different, your current situation is different and you must do what is necessary to survive. However, if your party's platform contains elements of ethnic advocacy, especially "white" advocacy, you cannot expect much support from Americans. It is not because we are culturally or morally superior (we aren’t); it is because, due to our history, such ideologies are simply incompatible with American society and American politics.

I would also add that LGF has been a leader in the counter-jihad movement for years now, and is critical to success in the US. I didn't see how this rift started, but similar to Robert's comments, it mostly makes me sad. Charles is very cautious of the wrong associations by necessity, and I hope most will recognize this. We all have one thing in common though: we're among the few who recognize that Islamist supremacism is an existential threat to our way of life and must be dealt with. I hope some day we will all get together to celebrate victory.

Posted by: DreadWolf at November 17, 2007 6:59 AM

Bar (2:21 16 Nov): "Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”?"

This is the most stupid statement which try to debunk all pro-national state people as Nazis (and it is sad to see it here ans it is sadly normal in the comment field on LGF).

I've been called a Nazi by definition in Sweden, just because I prefer the national state as a political and natural cultural (culture and law areconnected) entity.

Shame on you Bar!

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 7:02 AM

PRCalDude (November 16, 2:51): "To equate the BNP with Nazis is completely idiotic."

Eh. Individual SD-members did that to me not too long ago. They are etnic racists and has been quite much against Jews. They are obviously hardcore socialists (read their documents on capitalism), so National Socialists are obviously close to what they are.

BNP was in an election a few years ago also openly supported by ("other") British Nazi organizations.

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 7:16 AM

Shiva, it was my pleasure shining the light of truth on his behavior.

To tell you the truth though I think you make a bit of a moot comment. I am not sure RS or JW are obliged to endorse political parties in the sense of giving percieved support, as you seem to insist.

Their role is to inform and educate about Islam and provide a forum where exchange of ideas can take place. JW has in no way tried to stop this debate. And as a result I believe there has been a positive change. I pretty much agreed with the rest of your post, it was well put.

Dreadwolf makes a really important point as well, the histories of the US and Europe are very different and so this has to be taken into account when discussing these issues. My take is the response of pretty much everyone involved has been one of over reaction for now (accept RS he seems to have taken his time to consider the problem and has said exactly what needed to be said), but I think we will see movements on both sides towards common ground.

The shouting on the US side looks shrill and potentially misinformed, the skeletons on the Euro-nationalist side have to be fully cleaned out. And the only way to do that is to keep talking.

Thats it.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 7:34 AM

Bar: "I, as an American believe that the American Constitution with its “equal protection under the law” clause is paramount to any ethnicity, NO double standards allowed!"

You live in "America", yes. That's US. A state.

I agree comletely on your view on BNP and on the US constitution you quote here. But you seems a bit eager to call Europeans who believe in the national state, and thus are nationalists, as fascists or even Hitler

You sit safe on the American continent in the US and connect any nationalism to fascism, or even Hitler ideology. Isn't that ignorant? In Sweden we have 100 000 immigrant a year now, and quite soon every second citixen in the Swedens third biggest city will have foreign background; a city which got increasingly problems were police, fire brigades, or ambulance service hardly work anymore because of the violence.

But at the same time NO POLITICIANS QUESTION THE IMMIGRATION POLITICS! I'm sure that a speech on the immigration issue by Newt Gingrish in Sweden would be attacked as extermely racist!

I'm pro-national state and think that cultural (=law) preservation isn't a shameful thing; I probably vote the still small, only 3.5 percent non-racist nationalist party SD the next election. When I try ro argue for this loads of right-liberals calls me a fascist, just as you tried to call nationalists Hitler-connected.

Remember that the very good US-constitution you quote is a constitution for a (federal) *state*!

It's easy to pick on Europeans, isn't it?

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 7:41 AM

"the skeletons on the Euro-nationalist side have to be fully cleaned out."

What skeletons? Charles Johnson has been beating every bush he could set his eyes on, and found nothing significant. Still he keeps hammering on the Vlaams Belang, one of the best of the European nationalist parties.

Charles should go after Italian Fasicsts, German neo-Nazis, Swedish Karl XII skinheads etc. instead. People we wouldn't touch with a flagpole.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 7:55 AM

What skeletons? Charles Johnson has been beating every bush he could set his eyes on, and found nothing significant. Still he keeps hammering on the Vlaams Belang, one of the best of the European nationalist parties.

Agreed but I still think that the parties in question have to be seen to be actively making policy enactments and speeches which keep dispelling the continuous allegations. Of course they must also stand by their principles.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 8:02 AM

BTW, here's what the (tiny) neo-Nazi group in Belgium thinks of Vlaams Belang:

There are some very small nazi groups in Belgium, but they hate us. They say we are the accomplices of international jewry and that we betrayed nationalism in return for jewish money, that we kowtow for international Zionism, and so on.

The whole interview is great. It goes through a lot of details of Belgium, of contacts with Le Pen (whom DeWinther blasts for anti-Jewish sentiment), and much more:

DeWinther interview at CVF

It is well worth reading, not least for non-Europeans, to get an understanding of European politics and just how stupid guilt-by-association is.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 8:14 AM

Bar:"Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”?"

Rolls eyes

The irony is that I'm pretty sure that Bar isn't aware that she's actually using typical Holocaust denier logic here.

Neo Nazis will point out that Hitler was just like any nationalist politician of Europe, circa mid 20th Century. You know, just like Churchill or countless other politicians of the era.

It's classic Holocaust denier stuff.

They won't actually go out and say the Holocaust never happened. Too obvious. They'll simply say that Hitler was no different from say, De Gaulle. Or the NAZIs are no different than say, the British Conservative party of the 1930's and 40's.

Come come Bar

Posted by: ewha1 at November 17, 2007 8:17 AM

Km, you can do like me: Be part of it.

When I found questionable material about VB, I was annoyed and sent it to my VB friends for comments. They replied not only with comments, also with extensive documentation, which is now posted at CVF.

Now, those are my friends, the people I know about. They happen to be in the Charles Johnson crosshairs, and after re-checking the facts, and writing about it, I guess that so am I. This is what I feel is the Right Thing to do.

The other parties in question I can say preciously little about. I don't have any contacts and can't request comments directly from relevant people.

But making unspecific allegations against all the parties mentioned is smoke. Digging into the details and determining specific items that needs to be adressed is constructive.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 8:24 AM

"Wasn’t Hitler also a “nationalist”?

He *claimed* that he was. However, well in power and started to eat up neighbouring countries, that was an obvious tool of deception.

Nazism was radically expansionist, very different from classical European nationalism, which tends to be a bit isolationist.

Hitler was also a 'socialist' by his own declaration, too. Credible..?

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 8:28 AM

From km:
'A simple theory of Everything'
Reality its all just a Joooo plot I tell ya!
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0770
Bwahahahahahahahaha

But, as we now know: ‘All modern discoveries are by Muslim scientists’… even discoveries by Joooos… wow… the plot thickens.

Mwuahah Mwuahahahah Mwuahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha

Posted by: RalphInfidel at November 17, 2007 9:14 AM

I was wondering if anyone would checkout that link, I am not sure Garrett Lisi is Jewish but looking at his figures, I bet Jewish mystics are doing cartwheels.

For those that didnt check or stopped at the first page I encourage you to just scroll through the paper and look at the figures. They are beautiful and claim to describe the fundmental nature of matter and the universe.

Surfer dude is next Einstein.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.0770

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 9:50 AM

Dreadwolf (November 17, 2007 6:59 AM):

I mainly agreed on your comment, especially that Europa end America are different. But you made some important mistakes too.

"I am absolutely opposed to racism or supremacism in any form, but I will not judge anyone for supporting SD, VB, BNP or whomever in their own country."

This sentence implies that these three parties has something to do with "racism or supremacism". Thus it imply that SD and VB has to do something with "racism or supremacism". I would say you are very much wrong (and also Charles of course).

"Charles is very cautious of the wrong associations by necessity, and I hope most will recognize this.

Now I did recognize that Charles translated material from Expo, and that's it. I would never describe that as something "very cautious". It's actually the oposite, and it's non-interresting old propaganda-material. Charles said that Tommy Funebo -- who (maybe bitter) left SD when the party many years ago cleaned up the last suspected of any contacts with racists and since then has blogged about things as Nazi stuff (reported on NDP in the German election), negative comments on SD and to ban the religion Islam -- is a more trueful witness on SD than the others in SD, including many new members (among them lots of immigrants), is surrealistic. I can't see much logic, but lots of lack of knowledge as Charles did many mistakes, as e.g. the "Engelbrekt" connected to the German luftwaffe (*lol*). (Engelbrekt was a freedom figher, and is a symbol for the Swedish right conservative movment.)

I see Charles as a joke, and he believed in the material from Expo. I guess the LGF member Tomaxx, who translated the stuff was included in this. But this Tomaxx wouldn't vote right he said in a LGF comment. Also has said that reduced immigration in order to prevent culture is racism.

That's it. SD is not more radical on immigration than the Republican Party is, and SD is an anti-immigration party, with a bit messy "youth" though.

If Charles -- running a blog known by 0.01 persent of the population? -- is a leader in the anti Jihad movement, why wasn't he on the summit? Oh, racist or supremacist SD and VB of course!

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 10:06 AM

I agree with matamoros (November 16, 2007 9:29 PM): "Charles Johnson has it dead right regarding these Nazis. They will poison the counter jihad message as sure as anything"

It was totally correct by Charles if he had been right on SD and VB (that they are semi-Nazis). I'm sure he's not correct about SD, and he has for sure published propaganda against the now a day quite liberal nationalist party VB.

Charles isn't important, but the suggestion Spencer have, to watch these participants carefully, may be a good idea. But that isn't the same as to react on any propaganda against these parties -- as LGF did.

Let's just go on and don't panic about further anti-VB and anti-SD propaganda at LGF. If that activity (a Dewinter-LePen-photo from a funeral today e.g.) makes CJ happy, that's just fine.

-

Robert Spencer:

I've noticed some signatures which strongly and without hesitation promotes the racist party BNP. The ones I've noticed are shiva, Guardian Apostate, Lionheart, and leonthepigfarmer.

Som comments are racist propaganda too. I really think that you, Robert, shall consider to block these signatures!

The over-representation of BNP-racists here are actually enormous, and this is clearly a potential threat. If, when they are blocked, these racism propagandists complains that the freedom of expression is broken nothing can be more easy to just ignore.

I think it's true that the anti-Islamisation movement don't need any racists but the racists needs the movement. Charles are perfectly right there!

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 10:27 AM

Posted by: km

I think we will see movements on both sides towards common ground.

I very much hope so.

To tell you the truth though I think you make a bit of a moot comment. I am not sure RS or JW are obliged to endorse political parties in the sense of giving percieved support, as you seem to insist.

You are quite right, JW is not obliged to endorse any political party. Yet Roberts remark can be very easily translated as a condemnation, which morons and Red Fascists can use as an endorsement to flame people who are seriously engaging the islamic threat.

Their role is to inform and educate about Islam and provide a forum where exchange of ideas can take place. JW has in no way tried to stop this debate.

This you are very correct in, but I have to add that Robert, the JW team and many commentators have done a tremendous job.

I do not know how many Americans are really aware of what is happening in Europe. Are they aware of the disturbances and havoc that UAL, AFL and all the other leftist autonoms are creating on behalf of the islamo,s

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 10:42 AM

Robert Spencer:

I've noticed some signatures which strongly and without hesitation promotes the racist party BNP. The ones I've noticed are shiva, Guardian Apostate, Lionheart, and leonthepigfarmer.

Dear oh dear.......

Give it a rest, what have they explicitly said that would deserve a banning?

Why not ban matamoros, he delibriatly misquoted Lionheart in an attempt to smear him?

Oh thats right you agree with him.

After what you said here...

PRCalDude (November 16, 2:51): "To equate the BNP with Nazis is completely idiotic."

Eh. Individual SD-members did that to me not too long ago.

To me it sounds like they might have been right.

You make a lot of sense a lot of the time magnus but please IMHO that was uncalled for.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 10:47 AM

I think Robert's disclaimer, as well as sensible counterarguments, are much better than banning.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 10:50 AM

km

"Why not ban matamoros, he delibriatly misquoted Lionheart in an attempt to smear him?"

Lionheart's original quote was changed by the moderator, km, both in his post and leon's subsequent post lauding his remarks. If either had any honesty they would admit this. The unchanged original appears in my post just as I cut and pasted it. I have never falsified or misquoted anything on here - the truth about the BNP is so condemning that there is never a need to.

Posted by: Matamoros at November 17, 2007 11:14 AM

It has the ring of truth to it so I am prepared to maybe believe what you say on that one particular point, but I will see if the moderator or Lionheart responds.

The rest of what I wrote about you though is still valid.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 11:54 AM

"Assalamu alaikum" Magnus

I hope your grand children never don the Ihram and perform Tawaf al-Wada.

Ar du dum i huvud med dina dumma snack !

Yes I do support Griffin and Co when they are the only people who can tell the truth about Islam, and are the only people who are speaking out about the horrors of Keigley where 12-13 year old school girls are being drugged and raped by muslims.

It was at his speech about the Keigley child rapes that the red fascist filmed, and the footage was used against him at his trial.

The main stream parties in the UK are using fascist tactics to suppress freedom of speech and allowing terrorists into the country so as they can remain in power.

Yes I will support the BNP who where the only ones who where informing the public the horrors of Kriss Donald long before the MSM jumped on the case, the same with Charlene Downes, who was chopped up and served as kebabs,which was taboo until after th court case.

The same can be said for Sweden, where only the extreme right where telling the truth about the 4 Somalia,s who where sentenced for gang rape, the same can be said about Daniel Wickstrom. Even FOMI NU where so engrossed with political correctness the where very quiet about these cases.

As long as the European Governments are supporting Islamic regimes the I cast my vote with the BNP

As long as the British Goverment is selling out Serbia I will support the BNP

The moment BNP reverts back to Nazism then I will withdraw my support

Once again I hope your grand children never don the Ihram and perform Tawaf al-Wada.

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 12:38 PM

Metamoron:

Maybe the mods removed the expletive but you still omitted - and failed to comment on - the opening sentence. I didn't notice it had been changed by mods, an honest mistake on my part but you still misrepresented what I had written.

To Magnus Anderson and people like him: Not one of you has responded to any of the issues I have raised, namely the out of control immigration to Europe and globalisation, both of which feed the third, growing Islamization. Rather than listen to what is actually going on in Europe, which means listening to arguments against the multicultural eutopia, a fantasy that is destroying Europe, you cling to fantasy like a child to comfort blanket. Unable to face the reality that multiculturalism is seriousy flawed, you resort to the lowest most dispicable tactic so beloved of marxists, fascists and of course, Islamists: Ban the opposition and stiffle debate.

In doing so, you completely fail to see that you have more in common with nazis than the BNP, VB or SD. You are the useful idiots of the marxists and you are too bloated with your own self-righteousness to see it.

You are the very people who abuse the freedom our forefathers fought and died for, several members of my own family included. You don't like what we say? Then hey, why not take a leaf out of Robert Spencer's book: Prove us wrong through rational debate. That's his challenge to the mad mullahs is it not?

Isn't it absolutely amazing that the Islamists use the same "ban them" tactic - through the UN and through the EU so any criticism of Islam is prevented and criminalized - on sites such as Jihad Watch and yet the people who claim to be defending freedom have no hesitation in using this totalitarian gutter tactic themselves?

There is nothing and by nothing I mean nothing - not religion, not democracy, not science, not politics and most certainly not Islam and multiculturalism that is such a sacred cow it is beyond questioning and critical analysis.

That you are so desperate to ban us from speaking tells me you want to ban us because you are frightened of the truth we speak. Well we've had enough of being gagged, of being bullied, of being intimidated, and of being betrayed for wanting to defend our values and our culture from an onslaught that is taking place without our consent.

We will be heard. No Islamic jihadists, no left wing thugs and no middle-calss liberal fops living in their ivory towers well away from the horrors multiculturalism is inflicting on our people who are watching their communities die will silence us. And you know what? The people living in those broken communities who hear us speak will judge us on what we say.

The freedom to speak, especially to challenge those who govern us, is the legacy the greatest generation left to us. Those who seek to remove it from those who dare to use it are nothing more than the very people they claim to oppose.

I repeat: Fjordman articlulates the nightmare Europe is now in because of huge immigration, the EU, globalization and Islam. These are the very issues the BNP are campaigning on (and many more such as reduced dependancy on oil) and I urge all readers of this site to read as many Fjordman articles as you can. Here's a couple of links:

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/

http://chromatism.net/fjordman/fjordmanfiles.htm

GoV also have many of his articles on their site.

We're in real trouble over here and referring to us as nazis because we want to stop what's being done to us without our approval is crass stupidity.

OK, enough from me, please read the Fjorman articles and let's get this war against Islam won.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 17, 2007 1:14 PM

What the supporters of the BNP don’t realize is,

the likes of Robert Spencer and Michelle Malkin are not welcome, because they just aren’t white enough. That I find absolutely abhorring.

So why would open BNP supporters use Mr Spencer’s web site in an attempt to drum up support for a party that openly excludes him and all other non-whites, even if they are anti-jihad?
Very sad and very foolish.

Posted by: Bar at November 17, 2007 1:19 PM

Wow--I've never seen such a long thread while I've been posting here. I am disappointed when an interesting one dries up. Not so here; must be powered by the Energizer Bunny.

I don't thing Robert's opinions on this site, being opinions, are definitive or the final word.
His actions, though, are, given the circumstances of the time. He takes his stand in the interests of the stated purposes of this site.

Deletions and bannings are unfortunate, but necessary sometimes--hindsight proves it.

Not everyone who comes here posts in good faith or for transparent reasons--take, for example, "Rev. Jim 'Nutter'" in his various guises--PLEASE! Or recall the notable case of the post signed "Barry Ladin," purposely planted, we think.

On with the Counterjihad. Deus vult!

Posted by: John C at November 17, 2007 1:22 PM

Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention that "camel" jokes are frowned on here. Still try to slip one by now and then. Don't know anything about "brown ale" jokes, though.

Posted by: John C at November 17, 2007 2:03 PM

What the supporters of the BNP don’t realize is, the likes of Robert Spencer and Michelle Malkin are not welcome, because they just aren’t white enough. That I find absolutely abhorring.

Posted by: Bar at November 17, 2007 1:19 PM

How do you work that out? Please see the following link. Then tell me whats wrong with your statement.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article703310.ece

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 2:31 PM

We, us, the filthy infidels, are in the process of losing the counter jihad fight. Will we guarantee that loss because we refuse to support a political party because it does not meet our hair spliting ideals? The BNP may have that racist past and the fringe racist membership. As an American I can only judge by the comments here and the links to BNP sources provided by our British cousins.

British citizens must make an judgement. Determine which parties are the ones who are most likely to be successful in reducing the Islamist threat and support them. If the only one is the BNP, it would be foolish to abandon them because they do not meet your criteria of non-racist, sinless activities. It this point in the struggle, I am not prepared to reject any help because that help may come from someone who is not perfect.

I gather that the BNP is not a homogeneous collection of racists and neo-Nazis. Assemble as many allies as you can; it's your England.

Posted by: Pelayo at November 17, 2007 3:06 PM

KM

Read the BNP constitution, section 2: membership.
I am sure that will clear up your confusion.

Posted by: Bar at November 17, 2007 3:10 PM

I have read it Bar why dont you tell me why I am confused.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 3:15 PM

KM

Perhaps you don’t understand that Robert Spencer and Michelle Malkin are not white and thus are not allowed to be members of that party and if they did join in the jihad fight with those types, they would only discredit themselves.

Now from the link you provided

Workers at the party's headquarters spent yesterday fielding angry calls from members who refused to accept Mr Gawad's candidacy on race grounds, "even when it was explained that he was not a Pakistani or a Muslim"...... In 2004 Nick Griffin, the BNP's leader, tried to force through rule changes allowing non-whites to join the BNP. He backed down after widespread opposition.

See, whites only, which severely limits those who could ally with you.

Posted by: Bar at November 17, 2007 3:50 PM

Bar, that's a serious argument against the BNP.

I've always considered them marginal at best, and am glad they were barred from attending the CounterJihad summit.

Boy, am I tired of racism. 20 years ago we didn't have to deal with this at all, 10 years ago it was a minor irritation. Now the charge of racism all too often stands between us and the useful things we need to do.

Racism is so plain stupid I never thought I'd even have to say exactly this.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 4:01 PM

"Energizer Bunny" is an American pop cultural allusion--but then, of course, we don't have anything that passes for culture [au contraire].

Lionheart'

I think your manner is rough and blunt.

I think trans-Atlantic cultural differences are coming into play here. I don't like multiculturalism either, least of all for its excesses. Yet, given the American experience, I am not hostile to genuine pluralism or assimilation. I wonder if, as a nationalist (lower case 'n') Briton, your idea of a fellow citizen, of someone "like I am" differs markedly from my own corresponding ideas. That' the rub.

"Nativism" has a very negative historical connotion here, and rightly so; as in, for example, the part in played in denying fugitives from the Holocaust a ready haven in America.

Posted by: John C at November 17, 2007 4:09 PM

That's the rub.

Posted by: John C at November 17, 2007 4:11 PM

Posted by Bar"mey"

What the supporters of the BNP don’t realize is, the likes of Robert Spencer and Michelle Malkin are not welcome, because they just aren’t white enough. That I find absolutely abhorring.

What are you, are you an infiltrator from UAF, as you dont seem to have much to say against islamization, yet you are doing your utmost to condemn folks who are working very active against islamization,

Are you one of the fools that tried to get Simone Clarke, the BNP ballerina fired, accusing her of being a racist despite the fact that she has been living with Yat-Sen Chang, a Cuban dancer.

It would be a good idea for Robert Spencer and other counter jihadist,s to look into the anti fascist groups that are spreading propaganda about BNP and it will not take much effort to see who the real Nazi,s are

In many case this groups support the Palestinian cause, and regard skum such as Che Guevara as heroes

In Europe the is a long history of the red facists autonoms supporting terror organization, such as Baader Meinhof and Bleckingegade Gang.

One only has to look at photos the anti BNP rabble and see how they don the Palestinian scarf.

The biggest threat is not the BNP, it is the red facists who are doing the islamists, dirty work, not only in England but in Denmark, Norway and Sweden

Check out the website Indy Media, its a meeting place and info center for all the leftist nazi,s

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 4:17 PM

They still ran the candidate, so you argument is false Bar, sorry.

Quote the first part of the story.

THERE was turmoil among the rank and file of the British National Party yesterday after a Greek Armenian was selected as a BNP candidate for the local elections.
The party, which is preparing for its biggest-ever electoral campaign, has chosen Sharif Abdel Gawad to fight Bowling and Bakerend ward in Bradford. It describes Mr Gawad as a “totally assimilated Greek Armenian” whose grandfather, an Armenian Christian, claimed asylum in Britain.

Im sorry but the WS & NN charges just look false to me.

Posted by: km at November 17, 2007 4:20 PM

Posted by: Bar

Workers at the party's headquarters spent yesterday fielding angry calls from members who refused to accept Mr Gawad's candidacy on race grounds, "even when it was explained that he was not a Pakistani or a Muslim"...... In 2004 Nick Griffin, the BNP's leader, tried to force through rule changes allowing non-whites to join the BNP. He backed down after widespread opposition.

Why did you not quote what followed right after te above quote

Last night a spokesman said that members who refused to accept Mr Gawad’s candidacy had no place in the party.

Let me repeat

BNP spokesman Phil Edwards countered the criticisms, saying that those members who refuse to accept candidacy of Gawad had no place in the party.

And here is a photo

http://www.bnp.org.uk/news_detail.php?newsId=854

So I reckon Robert Spencer would also have a good chance to join the BNP

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 4:45 PM

"The biggest threat is not the BNP, it is the red facists who are doing the islamists, dirty work, not only in England but in Denmark, Norway and Sweden"

I second this. Better look at what these people are doing. One thing is they're attacking is the respect for private property. That has significant implications, well, everywhere.

Their instigation of street riots have been a quite severe problem in Denmark this year. It also taps the police of resources, leading to less efficient police work all over Denmark.

It's destabilizing.

Posted by: Henrik at November 17, 2007 4:47 PM

And I think Robert will be shown more respect than he has shown to Nick Griffin.

Posted by: shiva at November 17, 2007 4:52 PM

Archonix:

"Paul Belien recently stated on the Atlas interview with Pamela Geller, about that wreath laying cerimony. For an example, Stefan Laureys, one of those SS soldiers buried there, originally went to Finland to fight on the Finnish front against the Soviets, when Finland was fighting for its life. At the time, Germany and the Soviets had a treaty.

Laurey's parents hid Jews from the Nazis, and their son, no anti-Semite, refused to fight on the western front against the Allied forces. He was later shot.

This man deserved a wreath. without proper knowledge about the history of the coutnry in question, all kinds of wrong headed assumptions can be made."

I haven't heard the interview so allow me to ask some questions. So the wreath-laying was for Stefan Laureys only, or person like him serving in the Waffen SS, and public statements were made to that effect? It would be unfortunate otherwise to honour a person simultaneously with the Waffen SS, who is otherwise associated with episodes such as the Ouradour sur Glane massacre, Jochen Peipers slaughtering of American POWs, wouldn't it? I believe it was found to be, as being the armed branch of the SS, a criminal organization by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal. Correct me if I am wrong. Wouldn't you say they could have chosen (and perhaps even should have chosen) a less ambiguous moment to honour Stefan Laureys? Or what was really honoured?

Posted by: Polemicist at November 17, 2007 5:17 PM

admin

please can you put a message up to state that my alcohol related joke was not racist nor had any negative racial connotations, the one that you deleted due to my inking an brewery which serves dreadful beer. was that why you deleted it? just want to clear this up before everyone thinks that i placed a racist joke and it was deleted by admin.

thankyou.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 6:36 PM

John C:

"Lionheart, I think your manner is rough and blunt. I think trans-Atlantic cultural differences are coming into play here."

John C, it’s not just trans-Atlantic cultural differences. The BNP are equal opportunity haters, and anti-American rhetoric plays just as well with its supporters as anti-immigrant talk. On its website you will find many negative references to the US. At the last UK national polls, its election literature featured this moonbat statement:

“American imperialists, the Zionist lobby, the neo-con movement and the US's British puppets in the Labour and Tory parties to drag us into a ‘Clash of Civilisations' with the Islamic world.”- BNP General Election Manifesto May 2005.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/candidates2005/manifesto/manf16.htm

Note the date of this statement: May 2005. Almost four years after 9/11. After Bali, after Madrid, and after countless calls for jihad against the West by Islamist hate preachers, here is the BNP claiming that it is America and “the Jews” leading the world into a war with Islam, instead of the other way round.

The BNP also promotes the view that global terrorism is simply a construct to allow the US to land grab the world’s oil supplies.

“Strange is it not that the places where "terrorism" abounds are precisely those places which have bountiful amounts of crude! Perhaps Uncle Sam will descend on Africa's largest oilfields to protect the Nigerian infrastructure from "terrorism".

http://www.bnp.org.uk/peakoil/apocalypse.htm

Its 2005 manifesto underlined its view that the Iraq war was a big US / Jewish plot for oil and conquest:

“We will also withdraw all British troops with immediate effect from Iraq. We will never again involve British troops in any more American 'wars for oil' or neo-con adventures on behalf of the Zionist government of Israel.”

Don’t take it personal. As I said, the BNP are equal opportunity haters. Americans, Jews (sorry, “Zionists“), blacks, Asians, Polish immigrants - we’re all fair game.

The party doesn’t hate all Americans, of course. David Duke, the notorious US anti-Semite, pro-Islamist and former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, is a long-term personal friend and ally of Nick Griffin.

Indeed, the BNP website even carries Stormfront founder Don Black’s disgusting article attacking the “Zionist” Michael Chertoff, then US Assistant Attorney General, for his role in prosecuting and imprisoning Duke.

I won't post the grossly anti-Semitic slur from it that I was going to because it will appear in search engines. But follow the link below, and you'll see the BNP website openly promoting the same “Jews were behind 9/11” crap pedalled by the Islamists and their sympathisers.

http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/davidduke_battle.htm

(The above link also offers BNP website visitors the chance to buy David Duke's book My Awakening which it describes as “brilliant”.)

Posted by: Matamoros at November 17, 2007 6:57 PM

http://byrd.senate.gov/

He used to be in the KKK, he's a US democrat senator.

Why didn't you point him out?

the democrats started the KKK.

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-KKK%20Terrorist%20Arm%20of%20the%20Democrat%20Party&tp_preview=true

"History shows that the Ku Klux Klan was the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party. This ugly fact about the Democrat Party is detailed in the book, A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1990) by Dr. Eric Foner, the renown liberal historian "

oh and the pope used to be in the SS. i guess you could've called him a real "neo-nazi".

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 7:43 PM

I personally don't see why the BNP wouldn't allow non-British in. I think the identity politics double standards with respect to whites has got to go, but I personally don't understand why the BNP wouldn't want the votes and membership of non-whites and non-British. They're not likely to be enough to upset the demographic composition of the party, and if somebody is with you on your platform, it's just as good as if they're in your same ethnic group. Just my $.02.

Those statements on Zionism and stuff have got to go also, but there is a lot of evidence that America's foreign policy is abysmal, as Robert has documented here many times.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 17, 2007 7:44 PM

Metamoron:

Are you saying your country is pure?

Hey get this:

Tell us what Dubya did with the Saudi royal family just after 9/11?

Your, ahem, "security services" KNEW about Islamic threats BEFORE 9/11 - what happened dude?

Iraq. Duh.

Sudan. Duh. Somalia. Duh.

The UN - without doubt the most obnoxious collection of anti-semites in the world today. Where are they based? And the US says - jack shit.

Kosovo. "Dubya Avenue?" "Blow me Bill Boulevard"? Hey, thanks yankess we've got an Islamic state in our own backyard now THANKS TO YOUR POLICTIANS KISSING SAUDI ASS. Are bells sounding yet you ignorant moron because they should be - oh, there's more...

Israel. Faces terrorists everyday. Faces hostile nations who openly state ON US SOIL c/o UN that they want to destroy it, eradicate it from the map. Drive the jews into the sea. And yet Condi says? And yet Pelosi says? "we'll kiss HAMAS ass because we're oil whores". Both of your main parties are fellating the Islamists and YOU FUCKING DARE accuse others. "No Israel, don't fight these people, there has to be a two state solution" - what a load of disgusting bollocks. You lot would sell your own mothers if it suited your purpose. Especially Oil now you can't produce your own eh?

Your country is now an abomination, a leech sucking the life out of humanity for its energy needs and for global capitalism. Your country - more than any other - is the lifeblood of Islam. The bedrock of your country is Oil, without it your country is bankrupt and because you can't produce your own energy needs anymore it betrays the foundations upon which it was founded and bends over backwards to avoid offending the worst human beings who walk the planet, the ones who killed 3000 US citizens in a single cowardly strike. Still, so long as the US has oil, what's 3000 citizens eh?

And you call the people of other nations "nazis"? You, a citizen from a contry whose politicians will jump into bed with anyone who provides what they want, nazis and islamists included? Mind you, from a nation who so lovingly embraced the dispicable war criminal - but gifted rocket scientist - Werner Von Braun so it could win the space race, such a love of fascists shouldn't come as a surprise.

Physician heal thyself.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 17, 2007 8:08 PM

Your country is now an abomination, a leech sucking the life out of humanity for its energy needs and for global capitalism. Your country - more than any other - is the lifeblood of Islam. The bedrock of your country is Oil, without it your country is bankrupt and because you can't produce your own energy needs anymore it betrays the foundations upon which it was founded and bends over backwards to avoid offending the worst human beings who walk the planet, the ones who killed 3000 US citizens in a single cowardly strike. Still, so long as the US has oil, what's 3000 citizens eh?

Whoa. Have a drink, man.

I dunno if oil is really that much of a motivation. It is claimed to be, but even if a country refused to sell oil to us, we could still get it, as Israel does.

Our government is certainly off the rails, no question about it. We've been in bed with the Saudis since roughly the 1970s. You should read, "Sleeping with the Devil," by Robert Baer. It's a real eye-opener.

Posted by: PRCalDude at November 17, 2007 8:17 PM

Lionheart

i think matamoros is a london eastender! He's from the good jewish community.

I would've let matamoros tell you himself, but it would be better coming from me, rather than receiving a massive damming response from mr matamoros.

it may have been my previous post about the KKK and the democrats which had thrown you.

apologies if it did.

leon the other white meat.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 8:23 PM

Lionheart:

"Metamoron: Are you saying your country is pure?"

Lionheart, my country is Britain. Although, as a Jew, I know that I'm considered by the BNP to be an alien in my own home. As veteran BNP "thinker" John Bean advised members in this June 2006 article:

“The master key to a sensible attitude towards the Jews is this: treat them like any other foreign people.”

http://www.bnp.org.uk/articles/judeo_obsession.htm

But please don't think that this is the reason that I oppose the BNP. I'd still be against them if I were Christian, secular or even fervent atheist. I'm not opposed to the BNP because of my religion. I'm opposed to them for the same reason that I'm opposed to Islamism - because I'm a human being.

Thank you, however, for illustrating my point about rampant knee-jerk anti-Americanism among BNP supporters.

Posted by: Matamoros at November 17, 2007 8:34 PM

"We remain well-aware that subversive Jews exist, that Jews have a characteristic style of (materialistic and scheming, like Karl Marx and George Soros) subversion, and we remain committed to fighting them, when this is really the case "

this seriously sounds like something borat would say.

they actually published this crap? in 2006?

omg.

this is circa 1930's jewish paranoia. written in 2006.

i'm ashamed that they would print this verbal diarrhea.

"The fact that some Jews really are villains, who have done us harm, makes this very tempting, because there is always real evidence of Jewish wrong-doing available, even if it doesn't prove that all Jews are wrong-doers."

this article makes me cringe. it's time that the BNP purges themselves big time, enter mainstream. any more articles like this then i will stop my support. this is just sad.

"As ethnonationalists ourselves, we accept their right to do so on two conditions: first, that they accept that our right to protect our identity is as valid as their right to protect theirs, and second, that they do not protect their identity in a manner that harms us."

since when has the jewish people in the UK ever harmed the british? the jewish people have been in england for centuries for goodness sake!

god all mighty they suffered massive slaughter in england during hte crusades, especially in my old home town of lincoln, and then they suffered in WW2.

i'm pretty confused at this point. i keep re reading this article and it makes no sense to me, it's just cranky paranoid crap.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 8:50 PM

"i'm pretty confused at this point. i keep re reading this article and it makes no sense to me, it's just cranky paranoid crap." Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

Leon -- For me, the problem isn't just that they print that stuff, it's that they really think that way.

I've got Jewish cousins in England. And you're right: their family (at least the one whose ancestors we share) has been there at least 210 years.

If, after 210 years of being good, productive, law-abiding citizens, they are not fully British...

Posted by: Josephine at November 17, 2007 9:18 PM

" and most enemy Jews of our time have been fanatical secularists like Karl Marx."

was karl marx a practicing orthodox jew when he wrote the communist manifesto?

"An atheist as an adult, Marx was raised as a Lutheran, his father having converted when Marx was a child in order to escape discrimination by the Prussian state. Marx himself has been accused of being an antisemite. Although most critical scholars today tend to reject this argument,[23] there is a wide spectrum of opinion regarding Marx's antisemitism. In particular, Shlomo Avineri's article on Karl Marx's attitudes towards Jews begins with the statement, "That Karl Marx was an inveterate antisemite is today considered a commonplace which is hardly ever questioned".[11] In addition, political psychologist William H. Blanchard notes in his analysis of Marx's On the Jewish question that Marx's antisemitism was "well known".[24]
[edit]"

so marx doesn't consider himself as a "jew". but the BNP does?

i am totally confused.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 9:38 PM

" and most enemy Jews of our time have been fanatical secularists like Karl Marx."

was karl marx a practicing orthodox jew when he wrote the communist manifesto?

"An atheist as an adult, Marx was raised as a Lutheran, his father having converted when Marx was a child in order to escape discrimination by the Prussian state. Marx himself has been accused of being an antisemite. Although most critical scholars today tend to reject this argument,[23] there is a wide spectrum of opinion regarding Marx's antisemitism. In particular, Shlomo Avineri's article on Karl Marx's attitudes towards Jews begins with the statement, "That Karl Marx was an inveterate antisemite is today considered a commonplace which is hardly ever questioned".[11] In addition, political psychologist William H. Blanchard notes in his analysis of Marx's On the Jewish question that Marx's antisemitism was "well known".[24]
[edit]"

so marx doesn't consider himself as a "jew". but the BNP does?

i am totally confused.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 9:39 PM

so the british jews are not really british? even though they have lived there for 210 years?

any rank and file BNP leaders reading this, you gotta purge this crap. the guy that wrote this needs to be sacked, publicly.

i would never vote for a party that has this ideology as the heart and soul of their manifesto.

this is cranky, circa 1930's paranoid fascist ideology.

this is probably the worst thing that i have read and i would say it is akin to the same logic of jihadist islamic ideology.

i am able to defend most things that the BNP have written but, not this, this is a very low point for me. this guy needs to be fired.

"They are different from us, and sometimes our friends and sometimes our enemies, at different historical moments, but they are neither intrinsically evil nor always the enemy."

WTF???

"Nationalists will also find much to agree with in the writings of Sir Alfred Sherman, now in his mid-eighties. Born the son of a Jewish immigrant in East London , he was a Communist in early life. It took him a decade 'before I realised what a cheat and liar Stalin was'. He became a right-wing Conservative, a co-founder of the Centre for Policy Studies, and a force behind Margaret Thatcher. For twenty years, he has consistently strongly opposed the immigration open door policy and has been a critic of the multiculturalism and the Islamic threat.

Also recall the wonderful 'Peter Simple' (Michael Wharton), the master of satire who exposed the sham of multiculturalism and the Marxist penetration of the establishment for nearly 50 years in his column in the Daily Telegraph until his death at 92 earlier this year. His real name was Michael Bernard Nathan and he was of German-Jewish origin. Nick Griffin and I both had the pleasure of corresponding with him in his latter years."

"the master key to a sensible attitude towards the Jews is this: treat them like any other foreign people ."

the "wonderful peter simple" is a foreigner? after all he's helped the BNP out? that's nice for him.

I think that John Bean is a crank. he could be the reason that the BNP don't sit well in british politics, get rid of this freak.

i hate to be banging a drum against the BNP tonight but, god this is such a bad article, if anyone can help me understand this that would be great but, oh my god, this ideology has no place in our struggle.

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 17, 2007 10:31 PM

Lionheart at November 17, 2007 1:14 PM:

"Not one of you has responded to any of the issues I have raised, namely the out of control immigration"

I write about that topic all the time. More than most others. You obvioully don't check thing before you do your public relation job, which oviously isn't better than taqqya from MPACUK and CAIR.

"to Europe

It's important to remain state control I think, and things can go very wrong but mustn't do that. Therefore it isn't a first priority to me.

"and globalisation"

I'm pro globalization, because I prefer liberal politics and don't mind to interrelate with people of other skin color. I'm a depraved non-racist, you know. But I'm not for unregulated economy at every cost -- e.g. I don't want Dubai to buy Stockholm exchange market.

", both of which feed the third, growing Islamization."

Europe has Eurabia, but it's still up to each country to resist a large Muslim immigration. It's late now, but I wouldn't (and this is not to make weak researchers on LGF happy) organize with those who write (Quote you, Lionheart):

"We have hindu groups, sikh groups, ISLAMIC groups, black this, asian that, gay this, lesbian the other and yet anytime the indiginous population seeks to defend or promote its own agenda"

This outcry can makes some sense and would be solved with politics and an immmigration rate that can assimilate (God, if only the immigration was say 1/5 of that today!). But I can't see what the black agenda is? BNP are racists. They don't allow black/colored people to be members. You're for sure a racist too.

I agree there is problems, and you can refer to Fjordman. Sometimes he seems to reapeating himself too much, just as propaganda works (and some ppl in SD use to do the same repeat I think). To much facts how bad immigration are and too little analysis, but he are also targeting real problems well. You r work here is for BNP. Why can't you participate in anti-Jihad without being represented by the racist (see above) party BNP? Isn't the fight worth that engagement? If you do so and behave, talk and act like a non-racist, the movement will be thankful -- "simply" (not possible of course) become a non racist and roll up the sleves.

BNP participation will of course totally damage the movement and will therefore not be realized. Quite stupid of you going on here asking for it.

-

Shiva: "I hope your grand children never don the Ihram and perform Tawaf al-Wada."

Not my children but several children in my closest family are black. Will BNP be good for them?

"Ar du dum i huvud med dina dumma snack!"

Barnes "Natural Citizens" combined with the race politics in the membership rules, as well as comments here from Lionheart and leonthepigfarmer proves that you BNP-apologists prefer to judge people after skin color. That makes me sick.

I think the movement needs to spread knowledge among all people, and can't afford to lose credibility on an organization not long ago promoted by Nazis. So go fight your war for a Britain where ppl are not allowed to freely interact with other nations. You know the movement here is an international movement, and according to John lee Barnes, which you quoted, no such globalized activities are, really, allowed.

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 17, 2007 11:14 PM

magnus

"Barnes "Natural Citizens" combined with the race politics in the membership rules, as well as comments here from Lionheart and leonthepigfarmer proves that you BNP-apologists prefer to judge people after skin color"

i never judge people on skin colour.

this site is really getting pretty cranky from all sides.

we have a bnp link that makes hte BNP look like jewish obsessed conspiracists and we have folk that seem to think that all BNP supporters are KKK closet nazis.

if this is how we're gonna spend our time, arguing over skin colour and UAF tactics then i'm out of here. slander and name calling is just pathethic. all hte pro british nationalists or "nazis" as you call us have argued our case and still you slander, slur, name call dont listen to our arguments then this thread should just be closed down.

magnus, you probably are a really sensitive great person but dude, you gotta read our arguments and treat us like fellow human beings.
i have never judged anyone on their skin colour.

can you not see the irony that the majority of muslims in the UK are pakistani and just by posting anything negative about a pakistani muslim they wil take this as racist and put you in the same p[pigeon hole as a "neo-nazi" a "fascist" the same way that you are doing to us!

please, chill out. no one has called for the 4th reich, no one is screaming "white power". didn't you read my critique of that BNP article, didnt you read my expressed horror that i found an article written by the BNP which i find slightly sickening and i disagree with?

but still, hey i judge everyone by the "color" of their skin.

and i'm a neo nazi.

whats the frigging point arguing. if you are not going to listen?

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at November 18, 2007 12:05 AM

Leon,

I'm quite satisfied that you're no racist or antisemite. Still wouldn't know anything about brown ale, though; never imbibe the stuff.

Clarification about the Pope, he was a boy then; Hitler Youth enrollment was compulsory--note, that's not the S.S.

Posted by: John C at November 18, 2007 1:18 AM

"so marx doesn't consider himself as a "jew". but the BNP does?"

Well, so does SIAD. One of the reasons I don't like being around those peopled.

Posted by: Henrik at November 18, 2007 1:51 AM

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

If this is what you are referring ten you should also look a little farther down

We are utterly opposed to attempts by American imperialists, the Zionist lobby, the neo-con movement and the US's British puppets in the Labour and Tory parties to drag us into a ‘Clash of Civilisations' with the Islamic world.

i am totally confused.

We insist on our right to resist and reverse the Islamification of Britain, and to oppose the ‘Eurabia' project of the French and Italian liberal elites. But we also uphold the right of the people of the Islamic world to resist the attempts by the political elite to democratise or Westernise the Middle East.

Sound Logical to me

Posted by: shiva at November 18, 2007 3:05 AM

"Barnes "Natural Citizens" combined with the race politics in the membership rules, as well as comments here from Lionheart and leonthepigfarmer proves that you BNP-apologists prefer to judge people after skin color"

Judge people by their colour, ho ho. You assume to much

I am married for the last 12 years with an Indonesian.

Not my children but several children in my closest family are black. Will BNP be good for them?

Any chance they happen to be also muslim

Posted by: shiva at November 18, 2007 4:09 AM

Magnus

So go fight your war for a Britain where ppl are not allowed to freely interact with other nations

At present England enjoys the freedom of speech, and just recently Nick Griffin won a court case, where free speech was being curtailed

Now in Sweden you have a Counter Jihad Forum (FOMI Nu) that is like a toothless dog, due to it complyng to political correctness and Fascist Social Democratic laws

Well the BNP are taking up the fight where as in Sweden the Swedes paralyzed by laws such as

Brottsbalken, 16 kap. 8§ wrote:

Den som i uttalande eller i annat meddelande som sprids hotar eller uttrycker missaktning för folkgrupp eller annan sådan grupp av personer med anspelning på ras, hudfärg, nationellt eller etniskt ursprung, trosbekännelse eller sexuell läggning, döms för hets mot folkgrupp till fängelse i högst två år eller om brottet är ringa, till böter.

A law that make it a criminal offense to insult among other things Islam.

Jo vist dar finns mycket skumt med Moder Svea

You know the movement here is an international movement

Jihad watch is not a movement,it is a platform where people can have their say about islamization. Also it is a platform where Mr can promote his books, which not give a tremendous insight to Islam but is also a source of income for Mr Spencer.

I do not see Jihad Watch organizing rallies or publishing anti jihad posters, I do not see Jihad Watch activists.

What I do see is Mr Spencer traveling around giving talks, and i doudt very much he does them for no fees or expense

So Magnus do not hype your self that Jihad watch is a movement.

It is not

Up until now Mr Spencer still has not made a comment after accusing the BNP of being neo-fascist and neo-Nazi parties. No links,no source of credible information, isnt it up to the accuser to bring for the evidence

Is is Roberts evidence also from the same as Charles Johnson's

Posted by: shiva at November 18, 2007 6:03 AM

PRcaldude thanks for the book tip and I will read it. Another good read is "The End of Oil" which makes it clear the US is fighting these wars to establish a presence in the ME so they can control the oil. And if it is so easy for the US to get oil from elsewhere, why isn't it doing it now instead of financing the very people who are trying to destroy it? Why is there such a heavy US military presence over there?

Magnus: The nation state isn't a priority? God almighty. How very marxist of you. You're in good company though, the EU feel the same way. And in two years they'll achieve this. Without a mandate from the European people of course.

As for me being a racist, you must've missed my comment about people being welcome to come to the UK - in small numbers mind - so long as they speak English and fully embrace and adopt British culture and abandon all others. I also stand with Israel and I've taken a lot of flak (read violence) for correcting left wing nazis about their Palestinian lie.

You go on about racism. Well you tell me why, if multiculturalism is so good, that the government and the media have to deceive to promote it. Why is "positive discrimination" not a nazi or a racist policy? Seems to me that when such things are against the indiginous population such things are perfectly OK, somehow we deserve it.

Why is multiculturalism a one-way street? The west is being swamped by immigration and its culture is dying. But Africa, the ME, Asia - they'll all keep their cultures and the indiginous populations will be by far the majority. Japan would be a very good example of this.

It is quite clear to me that nazism and racism can only be commited by the BNP. Other groups and countries are doing far worse but there's always an excuse. I gave examples of how US administrations have aided and abetted nazis and muslims and how they have screwed up royally in many countries and I get called "an amercian hater". Which I most definitely am not. But you call me and my fellow BNP supporters "ignorant scum", "fascists", nazis" and suddenly your rules of hating don't apply to you. You can have a go at us because we're haters, and when we point out the skeletons in your closet, well we're haters again.

And I echo what both Leon and shiva have said: the minute the BNP show any signs of nazi/racist ideology by promoting hatred and suppression towards any other human beings, my support will be withdrawn instantly.

I'm tired of this now. We have our voice and we'll speak to peolpe about our manifesto. If they support us they'll vote for us. If not, fine, it's their choice but we will have our say as is our right.

That is called democracy. Something the marxists and the Islamists will do their utmost to destroy.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 18, 2007 6:12 AM

OK, VB and SD have got their house in order, it seems that the BNP is yet to do so, and have some serious issues.

As I said I know some people who joined the BNP and they are not racist as far as I can see, so I hope that they make the transformation, its seems that this battle is in process now.

Posted by: Daffersd at November 18, 2007 6:41 AM

"Magnus: The nation state isn't a priority? How very marxist of you."

I didn't wrote that. I wrote that "It's important to remain state control I think, and things can go very wrong but mustn't do that." (International trade and and private banks are important and have together with national states worked well for hundreds of years. I guess I'm lost in hell in your world.)

Also you neglect my answers and thus debate as an anti-democrat, but when you attacked black and asian as a race conspiracy -- assumingly opposed to the whites -- you proved you are a poor racist.

"You're in good company though, the EU feel the same way."

Does EU feel we need international trade which we had for several hundred years with national states intact and well working. that? Okay. We need EU, but EU no more expanding in power.

Posted by: magnus andersson at November 18, 2007 7:43 AM

Attacking islam for six years has proven astonishingly fruitless yet when someone stands up to defend their heritage and culture in light of their nation transforming into an islamic cesspool, a bunch of leftist loonies hell bent on a multicultural Utopia come out with ridiculous abuse. Congratulations JW and LGF for painting the picture more clearly, you stand for nothing...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at November 18, 2007 8:04 AM

Magnut,

You wrote "the nation state isn't a first priority to me". Well it is a first priority to me and other Brits. It is our identity and culture and we'd like to keep it OK?

Who said International trade and private banks weren't important? Straw man. Ridiculous.

Where have I said there is a black and asian conspiracy? As you seem to have a comprehension disorder, I'll repeat what I said: There are groups - e.g. MCB, Black Police officers association, Gay rights movements, left wing activist movements - AFA, feminist groups and many, many more - yet when the indiginous population form a group to speak up for their interests, suddenly the race card is played. And if groups such as the black police officers assoc. aren't opposed to whites how come these groups don't include whites? In fact, in multicult eutopia, how come they exist in the first place? But such groups are never branded racists by people like you are they? Maybe that's because you're a hipocrite?

And there you go, right on cue with your racists slur. Dispicable.

We British had international trade before the EU thank you. We didn't need it then and we don't need it now. The French, the Dutch and the Danes feel the same way about their nations and voted against it. But there is no "no vote" with the EU totalitarian marxists is there? At least they had a chance to vote, we British are having our sovereignty handed over to unelected representatives without the people's approval.

The EU is also as corrupt as corrupt can be, the finances are shocking (no accounts validated for years) and the lack of accountability is a disgrace. It is also in alliance with muslims states, the very states who are financing the jihad against us.

That you support and defend the EU tells me you're marxist. That you wanted to ban people from speaking tells me you're a fascist and I'm done with you and your gutter tactics.

Posted by: Lionheart at November 18, 2007 8:15 AM

"The EU is also as corrupt as corrupt can be, the finances are shocking (no accounts validated for years) and the lack of accountability is a disgrace."

True. It's now 13th year in a row they can't get any respectable accounting firm to sign their books.

There's just too many irregularities in the cash flow. That's the way it easily goes in an organisation not held accountable for earning the money that sustains it :(

Posted by: Henrik at November 18, 2007 8:47 AM

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

i hate to be banging a drum against the BNP tonight but, god this is such a bad article, if anyone can help me understand this that would be great but, oh my god, this ideology has no place in our struggle.

Sorry in my last post I picked on the wrong article
Now I have found the right one, and read it several times, I find it positive towards the Jews

treat them like any other foreign people

This above quote can intone racism when it is cherry picked, but if you read the rest of the article John Bean has a lot to say that puts the Jews in a positive light

The master key to a sensible attitude towards the Jews is this: treat them like any other foreign people . They are different from us, and sometimes our friends and sometimes our enemies, at different historical moments, but they are neither intrinsically evil nor always the enemy.

Other aspects of Jewish religion sometimes found objectionable mainly concern the desire of the Jews to keep themselves separate, with a distinct ethnic identity, while living in foreign nations. As ethnonationalists ourselves, we accept their right to do so on two conditions: first, that they accept that our right to protect our identity is as valid as their right to protect theirs, and second, that they do not protect their identity in a manner that harms us.

In particular, British Jews must not undermine their status as persons assimilated to our nation, i.e. ethnically different, strictly speaking, but sufficiently similar that this difference is too small to give legitimate grounds for offense. British Jews have a long history of being better assimilated, and more loyal, than Jews in other countries, like Russia and the USA , and it is good for us, and good for them, that they should stay this way.

The same logic entails that there is no factual basis for anti-Semitism, i.e. the belief that Jews are intrinsically our enemy. The worst one can truthfully say of the Jews is that they are intrinsically opportunistic. To survive in other people's countries for 2,000 years, they obviously have to be. But this doesn't make them intrinsically bad; only people who will, like anyone else, pursue their self-interest according to the circumstances of the time. We shouldn't surrender to their pursuit of self-interest . We should, naturally, pursue our own, but in a calm and rational way in the same manner as we deal with other foreign societies, without hatred, mythology, or hostile intent.

Sounds reasonable to me

The idea that all Jews are evil is simply not supported by real evidence, and contradicted by the many Jews who have done us good

THE JUDEO-OBSESSIVE
1. The idea all Jews are evil.

2. The idea everything Jews do is evil.

3. The idea all our problems come from the Jews.

The idea that all our problems come from the Jews is perhaps the most dangerous, because it blinds one to these problems' real origin, making it impossible to fight them effectively.

Judeo- obsessives go blind to things like the nation-liquidating propensities of modern capitalism. After all, the capitalists aren't to blame - the Jews are! People who are congenitally naïve about the treacherousness of capitalism, like American followers of David Duke, are particularly prone to this.

Now the final word from Nick Griffin

But there’s another reason for Jewish over-representation in all sorts of intellectual movements, which has no connection with ethno-centrism at all: On average, Jews are the cleverest people on the planet. Someone had to be, after all, and a people who have been selectively bred for intelligence by internal choice and external pressure for nearly two thousand years were always more likely to be brighter than groups which valued brawn more than brains.

Another thing

It is interesting that in Europe there are political parties that are now fighting Islamization while in Amerika the there is sweet Fanny Adams, the Amerikans have failed miserably even to establish a viable Counter-Jihadi organisation. The Amerikans have freedoms, opportunities and resources that we European Counter-Jihadists can only dream of.

What we do see is two of the major America main stream blogs using Red Fascist propaganda to bitch slap the only parties that are meeting islamization face to face.

And its disheartening that to major US of Amerika bloggers vilify legitimate /legal European political parties.

It would be better to give weight and incentives,so they can distance themselves from there murky pasts

Posted by: shiva at November 18, 2007 9:38 AM

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer

i hate to be banging a drum against the BNP tonight but, god this is such a bad article, if anyone can help me understand this that would be great but, oh my god, this ideology has no place in our struggle.

Sorry in my last post I picked on the wrong article
Now I have found the right one, and read it several times, I find it positive towards the Jews

treat them like any other foreign people

This above quote can intone racism when it is cherry picked, but if you read the rest of the article John Bean has a lot to say that puts the Jews in a positive light

The master key to a sensible attitude towards the Jews is this: treat them like any other foreign people . They are different from us, and sometimes our friends and sometimes our enemies, at different historical moments, but they are neither intrinsically evil nor always the enemy.

Other aspects of Jewish religion sometimes found objectionable mainly concern the desire of the Jews to keep themselves separate, with a distinct ethnic identity, while living in foreign nations. As ethnonationalists ourselves, we accept their right to do so on two conditions: first, that they accept that our right to protect our identity is as valid as their right to protect theirs, and second, that they do not protect their identity in a manner that harms us.

In particular, British Jews must not undermine their status as persons assimilated to our nation, i.e. ethnically different, strictly speaking, but sufficiently similar that this difference is too small to give legitimate grounds for offense. British Jews have a long history of being better assimilated, and more loyal, than Jews in other countries, like Russia and the USA , and it is good for us, and good for them, that they should stay this way.

The same logic entails that there is no factual basis for anti-Semitism, i.e. the belief that Jews are intrinsically our enemy. The worst one can truthfully say of