Sunday, 10 September 2006

A vast conspiracy against the honest people of Britain

On 7 September 2009, Sunny Hundal’s article, The BNP Doesn't Deserve Political Respect appeared in The Guardian.

This was my reply in the Comments section underneath the article:

"Myth 1: The BNP's arguments can be defeated through rational argument. This argument ignores the reason why most people vote BNP: because they're angry. The idea that they've spent time poring over policy positions of each of the parties and come to a considered decision is nonsensical."
Thus does a pompous, second-generation immigrant consign most people (most BNP voters at least) to the dustbin of angry, unconsidered decision makers.

"The idea the BNP can be defeated via rational arguments and exposing them' is equally deluded."
Never was a truer statement made by a paid up member of the PC Crowd! Irrational arguments, smears, insults and spin worked in the past, why wouldnt they work now?

"As various studies on cognitive behaviour have shown, people are emotionally predisposed to the information they receive. So if they already hate the BNP, then they're likely to receive information exposing the BNP with glee."
Yep. Marxist psychobabble has done a very effective job over the last nine decades. Those who hate the BNP have always been psychologically disinclined to entertain any incontrovertible truth if it emerged from a BNP source, thats for sure.

"Nick Griffin could say whatever he wanted on Question Time, and attempts by Tory, Labour or Lib Dem MPs to expose his lies would be useless."
As a point of interest, Sunny, could you expose some of his lies for me? In detail? It shouldnt be difficult. I mean, folks like you are forever describing the British Nationalist as dishonest so you must surely have a formidable library of deceitful quotation and sentiment expounded by Nationalisms leader, shouldn't you?

"Most BNP supporters are very unlikely to take words by any of the three parties seriously anyway."
True. But then you must admit, the three main parties haven't been all that honest with the British people in recent times, have they, Sunny? Do you remember these?

'Weapons of mass destruction? British jobs for British workers? Education, education, education? Tough on crime; tough on the causes of crime? The prudent Chancellor? A leaner, fitter Britain? This country might be rather swamped by people with a different culture? You‘ve never had it so good? Broad, sunlit uplands? A land fit for heroes?'

I would suggest that most indigenous Brits would, at this late stage, be very unlikely to take words by any of the three parties seriously. How about you, Sunny? Which party would you have us take seriously?

"No one on either side will respond rationally."
There you go again, Sunny! All this British-Asian contempt for the average voter. It really wont do, you know.

"No amount of rational arguments will change that. The only way to affect that would be through emotional arguments."
Patronise, patronise, patronise. The non-native reaps the benefit of political correctness and positive discriminationand and then, once he's suitably advantaged, treats those outside the loop as though they were just a flock of sheeple to be herded, cynically, in whichever direction he wants them to go. Oh no, Sunny, some of us arent going to be too impressed by such a nu-elite idea of democracy.

"Myth 2: Persecution will only feed the BNP's victim mentality... But then, anything less than letting the BNP take over Britain and turn it into a fascist state will feed their victim mentality."
Really? That's news to this non-member.

"The BNP's core support is derived from people who think the entire nation is under the control of a vast conspiracy against the honest people of Britain."
Couldn't have said it better myself, Sunny. Check out the New World Order, the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission; the EU, Common Purpose, the PC Crowd, the Globalists, the Health and Safety Nazis, the Lies of Tony B Liar; the Guardianistas, uppity non-indigenous types patronising the dumbed-down, drugged-up natives etc. etc. etc.

"The 'No Platform' policy isn't a demand to ban the BNP. It is a democratic decision by right-thinking people not to share a platform with fascists."
Even if the Fascist is telling the truth, Sunny? You know, a great many of the ancestors of the present membership of the BNP will have fought against Fascism in WWII. And, of course, a great many more of those who vote for the BNP will, likewise, have ancestors who fought and died fighting the Nazis. Do you think they fought so that, in the words of Margaret Thatcher, their descendants would be 'swamped by people with a different culture?' Do you think that kind of British man would appreciate folks like you sneering at his descendants quite as often as you do?

I remember watching a historical documentary once where this Sikh gentlemen told us that 20 per cent of all of those from the Indian subcontinent who fought in WWII fought on behalf of the Japanese against the British.

I wonder whose side Sunny's ancestors were on?

"No Platform worked quite well in sidelining the BNP in mainstream conversation."
Thus did the Sunny-come-latelies disenfranchise those who now speak for, according to the EU election results, one million Britons.

"It wasn't that long ago that... expressing support for the National Front was something to be proud of. No Platform changed that by actively trying to paint the BNP et al as extremist movements."
'Actively TRYING to paint the BNP et al as extremist movement?' As opposed to describing them accurately, you mean? h yes, that would be your lot, Sunny. Negative spin, disinformation and sear, that's what you folks do best.

"There is a significant movement of people online who believe they aren't being told ‘the truth‘... There are the climate-change denialists... and even the Holocaust deniers."
'Holocaust Denial.' Now this would be an interesting subject for debate if we were allowed to debate it without being howled down by the Sunnies. Check this out:

In 1948, a memorial plaque was erected at Auschwitz. This plaque stated that 4,000,000 people died there. However, this was removed in 1990. After a while this was replaced by another that said just 1,500,000 had, in fact, died.

A question for you, Sunny: when the Auschwitz death total was revised downwards by 2.5 million, why was the overall figure not revised down similarly? Why did the powers-that-be leave the six million stat untouched?

It's all gone quiet over there. Hey, Sunny, would you like to call me nasty names for pointing out such inconvenient historical facts? You would? In which case you really ought to be admonishing these as well:

In 1985, Jewish historian, Raul Hilberg, stated that 5,000,000 Jews )not 6,000,000) had died during WWII.

By 1998, however, he was saying that just 2.8 million Jews had died.

In 1989, Jewish historian, Yehuda Bauer, was saying that 1,323,000 Jews had died at Auschwitz. On 22 September 1989, The Jerusalem Post quoted him thus:

"The larger figures have been dismissed for years, it just hasn't reached the public yet."
In his book, The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, the Jewish historian, Professor Norman Finkelstein said:

"The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a 'victim' state, and the most successful ethnic group in the USA has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable benefits accrue to this specious victimhood - in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified."

"My father and mother were survivors... One of my father's lifelong friends was a former inmate with him in Auschwitz… Eventually he became a director of the Israeli Holocaust museum, Yad Vashem. Reluctantly and with genuine disappointment, my father finally admitted that even this man had been corrupted by the Holocaust industry."

"The Holocaust proved to be the perfect weapon for deflecting criticism of Israel."

"The Holocaust may yet turn out to be the greatest robbery in the history of mankind."
Sunny says:

"Question Time is basically a populist shouting match where facts and figures don't have time to get checked."
Well, Sunny, you have all the time in the world to check out what I've just said. I wonder if you will dare to maintain your sanctimonious 'even the holocaust deniers' stance in light of the information I've just introduced?

"BNP pamphlets have repeatedly featured lies in the past. Who will have the research on hand to challenge that?"
Once again, Sunny, could you, who presumably have the 'research' to hand, (otherwise you wouldnt be making such claims, would you?) please point to these deceitful BNP pamphlets?

"And so the BBC will be used to spread lies by a party in thrall to antisemitism, racism, sexism and general conspiracy theory madness."
Personally, Sunny, I'm in thrall to nothing but the warts-and-all truth.
Particularly that which so discomfits characters like you who would have it remain hidden.

"The BBC is giving space to an organisation that itself is anti-democratic, authoritarian and averse to our liberal democratic traditions."
YOUR liberal democratic traditions? Like the one where some animals are less equal than others and don't get to have their say on Question Time? Like the one where, in the land of your parents' birth, the most racist and undemocratic state of affairs imaginable, the Caste system, still applies?

"Why shouldn't it be treated with less support and respect than the other political parties?"
As the top US commentator, Ted Koppel, once said:

"Governments lie. They do it all the time".
Why on earth would I treat the BNP with less respect than those who lie to me all the time? You may not be part of the government, Sunny, but, as sure as God made little green apples, you are part of the system.

And that's not conspiracy theory.

My post was taken down by a Guardian moderator within 30 minutes of its introduction. However, UnionRed did manage a response before it disappeared. This is what he said:

"I'm not going to reproduce any of your offensive racist bull****. Suffice to say that your vile posting speaks volumes about the mindest of the BNP voter. Anyone who doubts this just has to trawl through the BNP website's comments section. Oh, you forgot to mention ZOG and black helicopters in your insane rant.

And then you go on to holocaust denial. Do you call yourself Ironwand because you have a problem? Is that where the fear of foreigners comes from? Are you scared that virile well-endowed ethnics will take the women you couldn't get anyway? You are a disgrace to humanity."
Thus, this particular Guardianista managed to hurl the following foam-flecked insults in just two short paragraphs: 'holocaust denial,' bull****,' 'vile,' 'insane,' 'scared,' 'ZOG,' 'black helicopters,' 'virile well-endowed ethnics,' 'offensive racist,' 'disgrace to humanity.'

This is par for the course, in PC Land. The Antifa types do not like it (the truth) up 'em, I'm afraid. I would hazard a guess that UnionRed is very young. Not at all the type to bother with research. Following the leader, sloganising and padlocking the bedroom door in case mummy wants to know why the bedsprings are creaking would be UnionRed's preferred modus operandi, I reckon.

UnionRed, when you grow up, I suggest you check out the facts before you disappear down the road of stock, Antifa insult. People might start treating you with a tad more respect and affection if you do.

As for the censor who deleted what I had to say, I'd be pretty sure he will know that I was telling a set of extremely verifiable facts. Which, of course, is why he deleted them. There is nothing the Big Brothers and their adolescent pets dislike more than verifiable fact.

No comments:

Post a Comment