• BBC reveals some interesting stats: News gets nearly 250k readers from Facebook every day http://t.co/f0Hhpxn4 9 mins ago
  • Ken Livingstone and recent controversies – a defence, by me http://t.co/KtVmCNES 1 hr ago
  • "Ed Miliband's communication 101" - http://t.co/vTvuIJiv - @richardmorrisuk confirms what I keep saying: Labour has a wonk problem 1 hr ago
  • Some personal anecdotes from yesterday on why International Women's Day is still needed http://t.co/SGjAkaOa as RTed by @lindasgrant 1 hr ago
  • Rahul Dravid is retiring from international cricket. What a terrible start to the day... http://t.co/vLzOBcKZ 2 hrs ago
  • More updates...


  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • Not a race you would want to win


    by Rumbold
    16th April, 2010 at 7:47 am    

    A white supremacist group has boasted about being the most extreme of its kind in Britain:

    Members of the Aryan Strike Force believed groups like the notorious far-right Combat 18 and Blood and Honour did “f*** all” and were more interested in raising money than fighting “scum”.

    Several of the group had been caught and one has already been convicted:

    The shocking revelation emerged during the trial of ex-milkman’s assistant Nicky Davison, 19, who is charged with possessing terrorism manuals.

    Newcastle Crown Court has already heard that the teenager was one of the founders of the Aryan Strike Force, an online far-right group set up by his father, Ian.

    Ian Davison, 41, a former pub DJ, has already admitted six charges related to this case, including producing ricin, one of the world’s deadliest substances.

    And what were they fighting against?

    The aim of the group was to carry out “ops” and overthrow the Government, which it believed had been taken over by the ZOG - the Zionist Occupied Government.

    That’s right, ZOG.


                  Post to del.icio.us


    Filed in: EDL,Race politics






    24 Comments below   |  

    Reactions: Twitter, blogs
    1. pickles

      Blog post:: Not a race you would want to win http://bit.ly/czFriN


    2. Yakoub Islam

      Not a race you would want to win (all about Aryan Strike Force) - Pickled Politics: http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/8328




    1. Golam Murtaza — on 16th April, 2010 at 9:04 am  

      ‘Zog’ sounds like the name of a planet in a 1950s Scifi film.

      Come to think of it, ‘Aryan Strike Force’ sounds a little comic book inspired. Do you think they wore their underpants over their trousers?

    2. cjcjc — on 16th April, 2010 at 9:33 am  

      Ah, the Zionist tentacles again.
      Yvonne Ridley and the SWP must be proud.

    3. soru — on 16th April, 2010 at 9:51 am  

      Can’t even get proper British Nazis any more: just copies of the US militia movement.

    4. Kismet Hardy — on 16th April, 2010 at 9:54 am  

      I think the problem is that they wear black shirts. They should wear white shirts. Then they’d look like sailors and be able square up to scary gay men with shaved heads, bomber jackets and 24-hole DMs on Brighton pier like real men

    5. Shatterface — on 16th April, 2010 at 1:41 pm  

      Apparently Semitic tentacles were glimpsed twitching over the rim of the Eyjafjallajokull volcano the night before it erupted.

      Notice how no Israeli flights have been disrupted?

    6. Shatterface — on 16th April, 2010 at 1:45 pm  

      ‘‘Zog’ sounds like the name of a planet in a 1950s Scifi film.’

      Am I sad for knowing that’s where the puppets Zig and Zag came from?

    7. Dalbir — on 16th April, 2010 at 3:10 pm  

      How comes they always blame everything on ‘the joos’? What is that all about?

    8. Jai — on 16th April, 2010 at 4:07 pm  

      “Aryan” eh ? Are they claiming they trace their ancestry back to ancient Hastinapur or Persepolis ? Perhaps they should enlighten us.

      They may as well start labelling themselves as Cherokee or Han Chinese, given the scale of inaccuracy involved.

    9. Dan Dare — on 16th April, 2010 at 7:20 pm  

      ZOG? In the case of NuLabor ZAG might be more apposite - Zionist Acquired Government.

    10. Don — on 16th April, 2010 at 7:26 pm  

      #9

      That is the most intelligent and coherent comment you have made on this site.

    11. Dan Dare — on 16th April, 2010 at 7:30 pm  

      Well thank you Don. Fair warms the cockles does that.

    12. Sunny — on 16th April, 2010 at 10:52 pm  

      Yvonne Ridley and the SWP must be proud.

      Sounds like you dream about Ridley these days cjcjc - you mention her all the time. Want to admit to something?

    13. Dan Dare — on 17th April, 2010 at 12:56 am  

      It seems that Jai is happy to continue on here, in which case the following is offered in response to his queries above.

      Well I think one thing needs to be cleared up straight away. Nick Griffin’s pronouncements on QT regarding indigenousness should not be taken literally. The truth of the matter is that he was poorly briefed and ended up floundering around, making injudicious claims. It incorrect to claim to claim that the re-population of the British Isles commenced 17 kya and it is also incorrect to state to claim that most Britons can claim descent from the autochthonous hunter-gatherers who emerged from the Ice Age refugia and spread over much of western Europe in the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic. Now that Griffin’s claims have been dismissed, let’s look at the actual situation as revealed by contemporary population genetics and forensic archaeology.

      The first evidence for the post-LGM (re-)inhabitation of Britain is now generally held to be the so-called Cresswellian culture, named after Cresswell Crags in Derbyshire, and dated to around 12.5 kya. It is most probable these hunter-gatherer settlers were descended from people who left the Franco-Cantabrian refugium after the ice age. Although not yet proven scientifically, the preponderance of the evidence indicates that they were also the descendants of the Cro-magnon people who populated much of Europe prior to the last ice age. So if we choose to interpret indigenous as meaning ‘first on the scene’, then the UP Creswellians and their descendants are probably the real indigenous Britons, just as negritos are the real indigenous Indians.

      So the question then arises, who are the descendants of the Cresswellians amongst the present native British population? The short answer is that we don’t really know, but it is close to a racing certainty that the Cro-Magnons and the post-glacial western and northern European hunter-gatherers as well as the people who constructed the Mesolithic and early Neolithic megaliths found throughout the region, were all members of the same partilineal lineage, represented by Y-hg I and, in particular sub-group I1a. The rationale for this claim is that I is the only haplogroup still present in western Europe which is known to pre-date the LGM, and is also probably the only Y-haplogroup that originates in Europe itself. About 14% of British males are members of I1, and a further 2-3% are members of the closely related I2b group. Thus, on the basis of first in = indigenous, some 16-17% of British males could make that claim.

      The next wave, or really successive waves, of incomers from the continent took place in the early-to-mid Neolithic, continuing into the bronze and iron ages, and it is this influx which has left the greatest genetic imprint on the British population. Around 70-85% of the male population (depending on the country; less in England, more in Ireland) have the patrilineal ancestry defined by the Y-hg R1b. This influx, which we call today the ‘Celts’ continued on and off for over two thousand years, although Celt is something of a misnomer since many of the so-called ‘Anglo-Saxons’ who migrated from NW Europe between 500BC and 500AD were also R1b. A better term to describe this group as a whole might be Celto-Germanic, since that emphasises their common genetic origin in the Pontic steppe area but delineates their evolved cultures and linguistic differentiation within the greater Indo-European category.

      Along with the R1b Anglo-Saxons also came a significant influx of ‘pre-celto-germanics’, members of Y-hg I2b. These people, like the I1a population of Britain were descendants of the hunter-gatherers who emerged from the Franco-Cantabrian refugium in the late UP. About 4-5% of British males are members of Y-hg I2b

      The next (and last) sizeable (ie measurable) wave of migration occurred in the 8th and 9th century, namely the Viking incursions from Scandinavia principally from what is now Denmark and southern Norway. They brought the northern European patrilineal Y-Hg R1a which, like its central European counterpart R1b, originated in what is now southern Ukraine.

      At this point we can draw a line, since by the time of the creation of England as a unitary nation-state in the early 10th century its genetic profile was established, and would remain essentially unaltered for over a thousand years until the Afro-Asian influx of the last two generations. But what about the Normans, I hear you say. Well, in the first instance, they were very few of them, and they were an admixture of R1a and R1b. Flemish weavers? R1b. Huguenots? R1b. Dutch fen-drainers? R1b.

      So there we have it. Some 95% of British males have a patrilineage which dates back over a thousand years. On the matrilineal side the picture is also one of long term stability following the LGM. Mt-haplogroups present in Britain are also of great antiquity, and some 85% of the population share one of three main haplo-metagroups: HV, UK and TJ. Some of these (H and V) probably derive from the post-LGM re-population by UP hunter-gathers, others such as U5a are of Mesolithic origin, while U3-4/K and JT are of Indo-European origin and appear first during the Neolithic. But whatever the original source, each of these has been present in British Isles for many miillenia.

      Based on the foregoing it is then reasonable to for anyone who is member of Y-Hg I1a, I2b, R1a or Rib and/or Mt-Hg HV, U3-5/K or JT to claim indigenous status. A simple and inexpensive DNA test will easily answer the question either way.

      If all this is too coldly scientific than it should be possible to enlist the good old standbys, the Mk I eyeball and lughole which would I should have thought deliver the correct answer with a 95% confidence level. If something in-between is felt to be more appropriate then the ‘1948 test’ could be applied or, slightly more rigorous, resort could be made to the national registers of birth, marriages and deaths which go back to 1837.

      More than one way to skin a cat, obviously.

      And to return full-circle to the starting point, it’s instructive to note that in its new constitution the BNP has jettisoned all the ice age nonsense and now defines Indigenous Briton as follows:

      “Indigenous British” means together that group of nations and or communities historically indigenous to our British Homeland, being the first and aboriginal peoples of our British Homeland, and which group consists of the English, the Irish, the Ulster Scots, the Scots, and the Welsh racial groups and any sub sects of the same; and which racial groups it is believed by many are referred to as the British and Irish ethnic groups in the ethnic group categories used for the purposes of the 2001 Census for England and Wales;

      …

      For the purpose of our Constitution the phrase “historically indigenous” means those racial groups whose collective, common or shared ancestors are continuously traceable or are bona fide believed by members of such racial groups to be continuously traceable back in the case of:-

      3.1 the Indigenous British, in our British Homeland before the commencement of the time of legal memory;

    14. Farley — on 17th April, 2010 at 1:29 am  

      Priceless. You have some nerve here suggesting you have distaste for the vilification of ‘zionists’ when it is an explicit and unremarkable outlook of Cage Prisoners, the ‘leading human rights’ organisation which so many of you, and Sunny Hundal in particular, have been at pains to defend, to the extent of smearing Gita Sahgal, and pretending not to be aware that Cage Prisoners has any agenda other than defending poor, wrongly detained Muslims.

      You have all been dabbling in the same puddle of anti-semitic shit, and now you stink the same. Well done.

    15. Yakoub — on 17th April, 2010 at 8:37 am  

      General Zod (nearly Zog) is a character in one of the Superman films…

    16. cjcjc — on 17th April, 2010 at 9:54 am  

      Well she is quite manly!

    17. Jai — on 19th April, 2010 at 4:11 pm  

      I am going to cross-post some comments on this thread, since PP’s filter needs to be checked by the editorial team in relation to the “Asian Network – Pt 1” thread.

      ***************************************************

      “Dan Dare”,

      The simple fact of the matter is that the only truly indigenous people of the British Isles, particularly in a “we were here first” sense, are those exclusively descended from the historical group regarded as “Celts” in mainstream British discourse.

      Nobody else who is partially or exclusively descended from Anglo-Saxons, Jutes, Norse Vikings or Normans can accurately make the claim to be “indigenous to the British Isles”, in the same way that absolutely nobody else in India from the Dravidians onwards can make such claims about being “indigenous to India” either.

      Again, regardless of the efforts of your near-exact counterparts in India : the Shiv Sena, the RSS and the Bajrang Dal.

      @Jai – I’m wondering it might be worthwhile splitting out the posts about indigenousness into a separate thread.

      I have a better idea. Perhaps you should comprehensively answer the following question posed to you in #32 on the other thread :

      I’d like to pick up on a couple of complimentary remarks you made about Hitler on the now-closed thread:

      Please provide full details on further policies and actions authorised by Adolf Hitler which you admire and which the BNP should directly emulate. Since you have publicly made these remarks on a globally-accessible website, presumably it should also not be an issue for the BNP leadership to formally & publicly declare direct inspiration from various aspects of Hitler’s ideology and activities, including the usage of Hitler on campaign posters as per the recent attempts to use Jesus in a similar manner, eg. “What would Hitler do ? Vote BNP”.

      Please feel free to use the relevant German terms from the period too.

    18. Jai — on 19th April, 2010 at 4:14 pm  

      (continued)

      “Dan Dare”,

      And to return full-circle to the starting point, it’s instructive to note that in its new constitution the BNP has jettisoned all the ice age nonsense and now defines Indigenous Briton as follows:

      “Indigenous British” means together that group of nations and or communities historically indigenous to our British Homeland, being the first and aboriginal peoples of our British Homeland, and which group consists of the English, the Irish, the Ulster Scots, the Scots, and the Welsh racial groups and any sub sects of the same; and which racial groups it is believed by many are referred to as the British and Irish ethnic groups in the ethnic group categories used for the purposes of the 2001 Census for England and Wales;
      …
      For the purpose of our Constitution the phrase “historically indigenous” means those racial groups whose collective, common or shared ancestors are continuously traceable or are bona fide believed by members of such racial groups to be continuously traceable back in the case of:-

      3.1 the Indigenous British, in our British Homeland before the commencement of the time of legal memory;

      As you’ve stated yourself on the now-closed thread, assertions about BNP policies from BNP members are worthless unless they “have the Chairman’s thumbprint” on them. This obviously also applies to your own ongoing comments about such matters here on Pickled Politics, unless you are prepared to send a formal written declaration in an email from an authenticated BNP email account to this website’s editorial team via both of the contacts forms here http://www.pickledpolitics.com/contact , as follows :

      “I, [insert full name], formally confirm in writing and on the record that I am officially a member of the BNP, that my statements and assertions on the comments threads of the blog ‘Pickled Politics’ are an accurate representation of the BNP’s political ideology, goals and intentions, and that I have been fully authorised to speak for and represent the BNP on ‘Pickled Politics’ regarding these matters directly by the Chairman of the BNP, Mr Nick Griffin.”

      Unless you do the above, any statements you make here regarding the BNP are worthless; furthermore, failure to do so would also raise questions about the validity of your claims to allegedly be a member of the BNP. For all anyone knows, you could just be someone pretending to be a BNP member and commenting on this blog in an attempt to promote some nefarious agenda geared towards the detriment of the BNP.

    19. Jai — on 19th April, 2010 at 4:19 pm  

      (continued)

      “Dan Dare”,

      And to return full-circle to the starting point, it’s instructive to note that in its new constitution the BNP has jettisoned all the ice age nonsense and now defines Indigenous Briton as follows:

      “Indigenous British” means together that group of nations and or communities historically indigenous to our British Homeland, being the first and aboriginal peoples of our British Homeland, and which group consists of the English, the Irish, the Ulster Scots, the Scots, and the Welsh racial groups and any sub sects of the same; and which racial groups it is believed by many are referred to as the British and Irish ethnic groups in the ethnic group categories used for the purposes of the 2001 Census for England and Wales;
      …
      For the purpose of our Constitution the phrase “historically indigenous” means those racial groups whose collective, common or shared ancestors are continuously traceable or are bona fide believed by members of such racial groups to be continuously traceable back in the case of:-

      3.1 the Indigenous British, in our British Homeland before the commencement of the time of legal memory;

      As you’ve stated yourself on the now-closed thread, assertions about BNP policies from BNP members are worthless unless they “have the Chairman’s thumbprint” on them. This obviously also applies to your own ongoing comments about such matters here on Pickled Politics, unless you are prepared to send a formal written declaration in an email from an authenticated BNP email account to this website’s editorial team via both of the contacts forms here http://www.pickledpolitics.com/contact , as follows :

      “I, [insert full name], formally confirm in writing and on the record that I am officially a member of the BNP, that my statements and assertions on the comments threads of the blog ‘Pickled Politics’ are an accurate representation of the BNP’s political ideology, goals and intentions, and that I have been fully authorised to speak for and represent the BNP on ‘Pickled Politics’ regarding these matters directly by the Chairman of the BNP, Mr Nick Griffin.”

      Unless you do the above, any statements you make here regarding the BNP are worthless; furthermore, failure to do so would also raise questions about the validity of your claims to allegedly be a member of the BNP. For all anyone knows, you could just be someone pretending to be a BNP member and commenting on this blog in an attempt to promote some nefarious agenda geared towards the detriment of the BNP.

    20. Jai — on 19th April, 2010 at 4:19 pm  

      Incidentally, I see that our visitors from al-BNP have been busy promoting their delusional 19th century worldview on this website during the weekend, complete with an unhealthy Victorian obsession with “racial purity”, “lineages” and “classifications”. Not to mention the ongoing eugenics-driven efforts to contribute to the balkanisation of mankind by exploiting & distorting science in order to find excuses to splinter it into ever-smaller groups.

      It’s fascinating to observe the death throes of a 200-year-old cult of “monoracialism” which is itself a gross aberration in Britain’s millennia-old history and which was deliberately & duplicitously based on entirely falsified self-serving premises in the first place.

      The matter is compounded by the complete distortion of history, not just focusing on India but even Britain, a direct legacy of 19th century propaganda and historical falsification. Again, it’s not surprising at all where al-BNP is concerned, considering (for example) Nick Griffin’s completely false assertion that the last Ice Age ended “17,000 years ago”. He publicly made this claim on Question Time not once but repeatedly. Whether his claim was based on colossal ignorance (about a scientifically-established fact which is so widely known that it’s the equivalent of being unaware that Saturn possesses rings) or a deliberate lie is a matter of opinion – did he think that nobody would notice, or does he actually think that the millions watching were that stupid ? – but regardless of subsequent attempts to backtrack about the matter, if Nick Griffin and the BNP leadership as a whole can’t be trusted to speak the truth about a simple established fact like that, why should other BNP members or indeed the general public of the United Kingdom as a whole believe anything else they say ?

    21. Jai — on 20th April, 2010 at 11:42 am  

      (continued)

      “Dan Dare”,

      Some responses to your latest comment on the other thread (http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/8316#comment-201084 ). The following post is currently in the filter for that thread, so I am cross-posting it here while we await your response to #18/#19 above.

      Well it really depends on the definition of indigenous. You have chosen to settle on ‘who was here first’ as the one and only true definition, since it suits your political objective.

      Actually that is simply a logical extrapolation of the BNP’s own definition. It is on the basis of “being here first” that you would like to able to claim for people descended from Angles, Saxons, Normans and Norse Vikings greater entitlement than, for example, non-white British citizens, since it suits your own political objective.

      Yet Celts were in Britain long, long before Angles, Saxons, Normans and Norse Vikings, and therefore it stands to reason that the BNP should correspondingly acknowledge that –- again, as a logical extrapolation of the BNP’s own reasoning –- people exclusively descended from Celts have a far, far greater claim to “indigenousness” and the corresponding entitlement than anyone who is descended from the latter groups.

      You would like to be able to claim for recent Afro-Asian entrants the same entitlement as people whose genetic ancestry in these islands stretches back millenia.

      The only people whose genetic ancestry in these islands genuinely stretches back millennia are those exclusively descended from Celts.

      But, unfortunately for your cause, that is not the definition that holds in ‘mainstream British discourse’, by which I mean from the perspective of the great majority of the native population, who would tend to have a more pragmatic interpretation.

      You are no more of a position to unilaterally make assertions about “the perspective of the great majority of the native population” of Britain than Bal Thackeray of the Shiv Sena and his fellow Hindutva ideologues in the RSS and the Bajrang Dal are in any position to unilaterally make accurate assertions about “the perspective of the great majority of the population of India”.

      In fact, you and your alleged colleagues at the BNP are no more of a position to unilaterally act as self-appointed spokesmen for “indigenous British” people than Anjem Choudary is in a position to unilaterally act as a self-appointed spokesman for Britain’s Muslim population. And yet you unwittingly continue to reinforce the BNP’s intrinsic similarity to Al-Muhajiroun with every single thing you say and do on this blog.

      I suspect that ‘mainstream Indian discourse’ would have a similar perspective on what constitutes an indigenous Indian.

      The only genuinely indigenous Indians are those descended from what you termed “Negritos”.

      And the only people in India who think otherwise, irrespective of your plucked-out-of-thin-air “suspicion”, are predominantly-ostracised fringe organisations such as the Shiv Sena, the RSS and the Bajrang Dal. Once again, they are of course your near-exact counterparts in India, and are reviled, rejected and ridiculed by the vast majority of India’s 1 billion+ population.

      You seem to have a habit of making reckless assertions and then being unable to support them when challenged.

      The Indian government would certainly seem to concur, since it will issue ‘Persons of Indian Origin’ certificates and ‘Overseas Citizenship of India’ status to anyone who meets the necessary criteria of ‘Indian-ness’, based principally on ancestry.

      More accurately, it refers to anyone who was born in a territory that became part of India after 1947 or who has at least one Indian parent. In fact, spouses of PIOs are also entitled to be issued with PIO certificates, irrespective of their own ethnicity.

      All of which is a very far cry indeed from the BNP’s own fixation with “genetic ancestry stretching back millennia.”

      I believe if you look back at the earlier thread, and read a little more attentively, you might discern that what you are characterising as ‘complimentary remarks’ about Hitler were in fact citations from the historical record. I don’t propose to discuss the Third Reich with you

      I doubt most of your target audience would be interested in ploughing through a thread consisting of nearly 500 comments in order to extract the relevant information. For the benefit of this website’s wider readership, please expand on the specific policies originating in Hitler and the Third Reich which the BNP should adopt and publicly declare inspiration from, again using the requisite historical German terms as and when required.

      a historical illiterate

      “Psychological projection” at its finest.

      But, if it’s complimentary remarks about Herr Hitler that you are after, then I will leave you with the words of Winston Churchill.

      … Those who have met Hitler face to face in public, business, or on social terms, have found a highly competent, cool, well-informed functionary with an agreeable manner, a discerning smile, and few have been unaffected by a subtle personal magnetism. Nor is this impression merely the dazzle of power. He exerted it on his companions at every stage in his struggle, even when his fortunes were in the lowest depths …. One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations. [WSC writing in September 1937]

      If the BNP leadership feels that Hitler has been unfairly misrepresented, the forthcoming public release of the BNP’s new General Election manifesto (presumably in the presence of the media) would be the perfect opportunity to set the record straight once and for all. In fact, that’s exactly what Nick Griffin should do, and he should also make sure that he quotes the complimentary remarks about Hitler above by Churchill verbatim and in full, including an emphatic reference to both the source and the year in which they were written.

      Don’t you agree ?

    22. Jai — on 20th April, 2010 at 10:41 pm  

      (continued)

      “Dan Dare”,

      Some responses to your latest comment on the other thread (http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/8316#comment-201084 ). The following post is currently in the filter for that thread, so I am cross-posting it here while we await your response to #18/#19 above.

      Well it really depends on the definition of indigenous. You have chosen to settle on ‘who was here first’ as the one and only true definition, since it suits your political objective.

      Actually that is simply a logical extrapolation of the BNP’s own definition. It is on the basis of “being here first” that you would like to able to claim for people descended from Angles, Saxons, Normans and Norse Vikings greater entitlement than, for example, non-white British citizens, since it suits your own political objective.

      Yet Celts were in Britain long, long before Angles, Saxons, Normans and Norse Vikings, and therefore it stands to reason that the BNP should correspondingly acknowledge that –- again, as a logical extrapolation of the BNP’s own reasoning –- people exclusively descended from Celts have a far, far greater claim to “indigenousness” and the corresponding entitlement than anyone who is descended from the latter groups.

      You would like to be able to claim for recent Afro-Asian entrants the same entitlement as people whose genetic ancestry in these islands stretches back millenia.

      The only people whose genetic ancestry in these islands genuinely stretches back millennia are those exclusively descended from Celts.

      But, unfortunately for your cause, that is not the definition that holds in ‘mainstream British discourse’, by which I mean from the perspective of the great majority of the native population, who would tend to have a more pragmatic interpretation.

      You are no more of a position to unilaterally make assertions about “the perspective of the great majority of the native population” of Britain than Bal Thackeray of the Shiv Sena and his fellow Hindutva ideologues in the RSS and the Bajrang Dal are in any position to unilaterally make accurate assertions about “the perspective of the great majority of the population of India”.

      In fact, you and your alleged colleagues at the BNP are no more of a position to unilaterally act as self-appointed spokesmen for “indigenous British” people than Anjem Choudary is in a position to unilaterally act as a self-appointed spokesman for Britain’s Muslim population. And yet you unwittingly continue to reinforce the BNP’s intrinsic similarity to Al-Muhajiroun with every single thing you say and do on this blog.

      I suspect that ‘mainstream Indian discourse’ would have a similar perspective on what constitutes an indigenous Indian.

      The only genuinely indigenous Indians are those descended from what you termed “Negritos”.

      And the only people in India who think otherwise, irrespective of your plucked-out-of-thin-air “suspicion”, are predominantly-ostracised fringe organisations such as the Shiv Sena, the RSS and the Bajrang Dal. Once again, they are of course your near-exact counterparts in India, and are reviled, rejected and ridiculed by the vast majority of India’s 1 billion+ population.

      You seem to have a habit of making reckless assertions and then being unable to support them when challenged.

      The Indian government would certainly seem to concur, since it will issue ‘Persons of Indian Origin’ certificates and ‘Overseas Citizenship of India’ status to anyone who meets the necessary criteria of ‘Indian-ness’, based principally on ancestry.

      More accurately, it refers to anyone who was born in a territory that became part of India after 1947 or who has at least one Indian parent. In fact, spouses of PIOs are also entitled to be issued with PIO certificates, irrespective of their own ethnicity.

      All of which is a very far cry indeed from the BNP’s own fixation with “genetic ancestry stretching back millennia.”

      I believe if you look back at the earlier thread, and read a little more attentively, you might discern that what you are characterising as ‘complimentary remarks’ about Hitler were in fact citations from the historical record. I don’t propose to discuss the Third Reich with you

      I doubt most of your target audience would be interested in ploughing through a thread consisting of nearly 500 comments in order to extract the relevant information. For the benefit of this website’s wider readership, please expand on the specific policies originating in Hitler and the Third Reich which the BNP should adopt and publicly declare inspiration from, again using the requisite historical German terms as and when required.

      I don’t propose to discuss the Third Reich with you since debating such such matters with a historical illiterate

      “Psychological projection” at its finest.

      But, if it’s complimentary remarks about Herr Hitler that you are after, then I will leave you with the words of Winston Churchill.

      … Those who have met Hitler face to face in public, business, or on social terms, have found a highly competent, cool, well-informed functionary with an agreeable manner, a discerning smile, and few have been unaffected by a subtle personal magnetism. Nor is this impression merely the dazzle of power. He exerted it on his companions at every stage in his struggle, even when his fortunes were in the lowest depths …. One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations. [WSC writing in September 1937]

      If the BNP leadership feels that Hitler has been unfairly misrepresented, the forthcoming public release of the BNP’s new General Election manifesto (presumably in the presence of the media) would be the perfect opportunity to set the record straight once and for all. In fact, that’s exactly what Nick Griffin should do, and he should also make sure that he quotes the complimentary remarks about Hitler above by Churchill verbatim and in full, including an emphatic reference to both the source and the year in which they were written.

      Don’t you agree ?

    Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.